Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968 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 4, 1968 The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:37 P.M. Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Adrian Dorenfeld, Paul Ditter, Henry Bogucki, and Vernon Ausen were present. Also present were C. E. VanEeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. The first application to be considered was No. 67068 submitted by Mr. William Gallien, requesting a variance to permit subdivision of the existing lot at 5320 Colfax Avenue North into two substandard residential building sites. Mr. Gallien was present and explained to the Commission that the present lot, of which his home occupies the northern half, consists of a lot with 126 feet of street frontage and 110 feet in depth, and that it was his desire to subdivide the lot into two equal portions, each with 63 feet of street frontage, or about 6930 square feet of area in each. He commented further that the lot so subdivided would be similar to the majority of lots in the vicinity, and in fact would be larger than some nearby properties. The Commission discussed the requested subdivision at length, examining its past view of the area south of 55th Avenue as an area which would be suitable for redevelopment to duplex usage in the future and which had been recommended for R2 (duplex) zoning in the new zoning ordinance. In addition, the Commission related this request to the past history of lot division variance requests, and found that there had been some divisions which were substandard in width but still maintained the area requirement of 9500 square feet per residential building site. The comment was then made that variances had been approved in the recent past for building on substandard lots, but these occasions were found to be related to the provisions of Section 35-601 where existing platted lots could be used for construction, and did not relate directly to the present application as those were not requests for division but rather for use of divided property already in existence. Also discussed was the effect of such division upon the ultimate redevelop- ment of the area, in that the redevelopment period was extended with the addition of new structures in the area. Mr. Jensen commented that he personally would view this application differently if the property were entirely vacant and could easily be put to duplex use, but since it was occupied on one portion by a single family home, that the division would apparently be in line with the rest of the development in the area. At the conclusion of discussion, Mr. Ausen moved the following: Although it is not the Commission's desire to recommend a change in the general requirement of 9500 square feet of land area for a mid-block single family dwelling building site, the Commission does recognize that the area south of 55th Avenue and east of Humboldt Avenue has been a substandard area of the City as far as single family lot 236 t7 -2- sizes are concerned, which recognition has been reflected by past approvals of the Commission relating to variances to permit construction on already platted substandard lots. In permitting construction on previously existing lots, the Commission is quided by Section 35-601 of the City's Ordinances, which applies a criteria of 70/ of the lot size ordinarily required to a substandard lot in question. The Commission finds that given the nature of this area south of 55th Avenue, the comparison of this proposed division to the "70/ standard" of Section 35-601 is not illogical, but would warn that the Commission would look differently upon appli- cations which would consist of two vacant lots under a single ownership or a single vacant lot which meets the standards of the existing ordinance for a duplex dwelling, and would consider a denial of such a request to be appropriate. The Commission also takes note of the fact that the applicant has expressed his willingness to accept a second utilities assessment on the additional lot if the division is approved by the City Council. The motion was duly seconded by member Grosshans, and the following voted in favor: Ditter, Ausen, Jensen, Grosshans; and the following voted against: Bogucki; not voting was Dorenfeld. Motion carried. Mr. Bogucki commented that he felt that the City should not be a party to the continued creation of substandard lots within the City, and that this specific approval Greats a dangerous precedent for future applications of this type. Mr. Dorenfeld commented that he was unable to come to a decisive conclusion from the facts presented. The next application to be considered was Yo. 67069 submitted by Brooklyn Center Evangelical Free Church, requesting approval of site and building plans involving an addition to the existing church at 6830 Quail Avenue North. Rev. Christianson and two representatives of the congregation were available for questions relating to the plans. In the ensuing discussion of the plans, a primary concern of the Commission was determination of the appro- priate screening for the church' s expanded parking lot against the adjacent single family residential properties to the east and south, including an analysis of the existing fencing on adjacent properties which is of differing types, and the existing "hedgerow" of bushes along the east property line. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans for the Brooklyn Center Evangelical Free Church property at 6830 Quail Avenue North be approved, with the following conditions and stipulations: 1) although the Commission recognizes the existence of a hedgerow along the east property line of the church property, it is recommended that an opaque fence a minimum of four feet in height shall be installed along the east and south property lines of the church property, except where fencing exists on an adjacent property which serves to screen the church' s parking area; 238 1 -3- 2) drainage and grading plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 3) building plans are subject to the approval of the Building Inspector with regard to applicable building codes; 4) a performance agreement and performance bond shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation of site improvements as delineated on the plans or required by ordinance, with the amount to be determined by the City Manager. Motion carried unanimously. Application No. 67071 submitted by American Construction Company was next heard, which application requested approval of site and building plans for the property at 6535 Lyndale Avenue North. Tha Commission discussed at length with the applicant the site design for the proposed commercial use, that of a sales and service outlet for the Rockwell Manu- facturing Company, which site plans indicated a somewhat unusual future land division of the property, which is now a portion of a larger lot owned by the Shell Oil Company. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Dorenfeld, to table Application No. 67071 until the Commission's meeting of January 25th to allow the applicant time to revise the site plan submitted to the Commission for the property at 6535 Lyndale Avenue North. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 67072 submitted by Miles Construction Company, requesting approval of the site and building plans for a proposed apartment for a portion of the Horbal property between 69th and 70th Avenue North to the west of Humboldt Avenue, which property has been designated as Lot 3, of Block 1 of a preliminary plat of Horbal Addition which will soon be before the Commission and Council. Discussion of the proposal of the developer to construct 50 units on the site as delineated capable of holding 49-plus units by ordinance began, with three alternatives being set out for the developer: 1) cut back the number of units to 49 from 50, and, as the developer had suggested, revise the plans to include a recreation room in the building; 2) apply for a variance, although its success could not be determined at this point; 3) since the property has as yet not been sub- divided, that he move the future lot line northward to incorporate sufficient land in the lot to accommodate a 50 unit building he proposes to build. 240 -4- Following discussion of the plans submitted, accompanied by comments related to the plans from the City Staff, the following action was taken. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted by Miles Construction Company in conjunction with Application No. 67072 be approved, with the following stipulations and conditions: 1) the site plan submitted shall be reviewed with the City administrative and engineering staff for conformance with the City' s ordinances, and nor direction by the engineering staff to the applicant with regard to grading, drainage and utilities plans with special emphasis being given to the installation of concrete curbing on the perimeterof all parking and driving areas, and that recommendations from the staff be made to the City Council at the time of its reviewal of the plans; 2) the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector' s approval with regard to applicable building codes; 3) the final approval of the site and building plans be withheld pending recording of a plat subdividing the property into proper lots; 4) the Commission is not at this point considering any variance as to the number of units to be permitted on the property; 5) a performance agreement and performance bond shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation of site improvements as delineated on the plans or required by ordinance, with the amount to be determined by the City Manager. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission then commenced a continued discussion of the minimum size for a townhouse development, which discussion had commenced at the Commission' s meeting of December 28, 1967. Following a lengthy discussion of the matter, Mr. Ausen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMNiISSION RESOLUTION NO. 68-1 RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE MINIMUM SIZE OF A TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the City Council, at its meeting of December 11, 1967, requested that the Planning Commission review the question of what minimum land size is necessary for a town- house development; pursuant to that directive, the Planning Commission discussed at length the question of townhouse development size at its meetings of December 28, 1967, and January 4, 1968. 1 1 1 243 -5- NOTI, THEREFORE, THE COMMISSION MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS : 1. The Commission can find no basis for recommendation of a bsic minimum size for a townhouse development except that it should be large enough not to be construed as spot zoning. It is quite likely, in fact, that there is no single figure which could be established to be a universal standard to fit all situations, as the desirable minimum size for any specific townhouse development is based on adjacent 'Land uses, traffic, economic and aesthetic considerations which will vary with individual projects, and would relate also to the mode of operation of the development, be it condominium or rental. 2. The Commission recognizes that the request for its opinion relating to the minimum size of a townhouse development arises out of an Appli- cation under consideration by the Council (No. 67052) requesting rezoning to the R-3 Townhouse classification for approximately 412 acres of property. The Commission firmly believes that the proposed townhouse zoning is appropriate for the parcel in question, as the property abuts another large tract of land zoned R-3 and lies between R-1 and I-2 zoned properties, thereby providing proper transition between the two zones according to the planning principles which the Commission espouses. In making this finding, the Commission does not find substantial reason to attach great importance to the dual ownership of the total area recommended for townhouse zoning in this vicinity, rather viewing the contiguous townhouse properties as one, which total property would seem to be sufficient acreage for a townhouse development by any standard of minimum size which might be established. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Grosshans, and upon a vote being taken, the following voted in favor thereof: Ditter, Grosshans, Jensen, Dorenfeld, and Ausen; voting against was Bogucki; whereupon said Resolution was declared passed and adopted. Mr. Bogucki commented that his opposition to the fore- going resolution was based on his opinion that a minimum figure must be set for townhouse developments, and that 8 acres should be that minimum figure. He further pointed out, however, that in this specific case, more than 8 acres was available for development, for in addition to the approximately 42 acres contained on the Kauffmann project, there are approximately 20 acres immediately adjacent which must be considered as a portion of the total townhouse development in the area. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:50 P.M. Chairma Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota January 25, 1968 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, Commissioners Adrian Dorenfeld, Henry Bogucki, and Helmer Engstrom were present. Commissioner Paul Ditter arrived during discussion of the first application, at 8:15 P.M. Also present were C. E. Van Eeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. The first item of business to be discussed was Application No. 67071 submitted by American Construction Company, requesting approval of the site and building plans of a proposed commercial building at 6535 Lyndale Avenue North. Mr. Jensen reviewed the past action of the Commission on the application at the January 4th meeting, noting that the Commission had expressed concern with the site design for the proposed commercial use, especially the shape of the parcel of property involved, and had tabled action on the application until this evening to allow the applicant sufficient time to revise the site plan submitted. The staff advised the Commission that during the interim between the two meetings, the applicant had discussed possible changes in the site design with the City staff, and the discussions had terminated with three proposals, which were then explained to the Commission by the Staff and the applicant. Mr. Van Eeckhout pointed out that there are two advantages to the site with a "leg" to 66th Avenue; there would be better circulation at the rear of the building, and there would be better circulation onto and from the site with access to both 66th Avenue and Lyndale service road. It was also pointed out that since the distance between the Shell Service Station site and the beginning of the curve on 66th Avenue to the west is limited, the location of curb cuts becomes more critical. It could turn out that a curb cut at this location could be jointly used by the development to the West. It is also possible that a more efficient overall development could be derived by placing a joint use curb cut westerly of the presently proposed site at the time of the development of the remaining vacant property. The Commission then discussed the alternatives with the developer and the staff, coming to a concensus that a better subdivision and site layout would be had if the property line were to be extended directly westward creating a rectangle approximately 76 feet in width and 280 feet in length. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted by American Construction Company for the property at 6535 Lyndale Avenue North (Part of Lot 2, Block 1, Shell's Brooklyn Center Addition) be approved with the following conditions and stipulations: 1) perimeter curbing shall be installed on the north, east and south sides of the property, with paving and drainage of the site to be subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 1 1 1 •- r -2- 2) the building plans are subject to the final review of the Building Inspector for conformance with the City's building codes; 3) there is no freestanding sign approval being considered in this approval; 4) a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation of site improvements on the property; 5) the shape of the site being recommended is (approximately) 76 feet in north-south dimension by (approximately) 280 feet east-west dimension, with a revised site plan incorporating this area to be prepared and submitted to the City Council. Further, that the concensus of the Planning Commission is that the rectangular site being recommended is a better site than the previously proposed "L-shaped" lot in that such an L-shaped parcel would be precedent setting and would likely lead to gerrymandering of other property in other areas of the City. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 66012 submitted by John Horbal, requesting approval of the preliminary plat of "Horbal Addition" , consisting of the property lying between 69th and 71st Avenue North to the west of Humboldt Avenue. The Secretary explained to the Commission that the application had been submitted early in 1966 along with a request by Mr. Horbal for rezoning of a portion of the property to commercial and apartment zoning classifications. Following the successful rezoning of the property in 1966, the preliminary plat laic dormant for some time, finally being prepared in accordance with the zoning lines established by the City Council, and only now being presented to the City for approval. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that the preliminary plat of "Horbal Addition" be approved as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission discussed the possibility of a second seminar-type meeting at which representatives of the drive- in restaurant business could be present to give their views on municipal regulation of their type of business. The concensus was that the target date for this meeting should be the Commission's March study meeting. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Dorenfeld, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10;00 P.M. 1 Chai a 076 1 10 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota February 1, 1968 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 Vernon Ausen, Adrian Dorenfeld, and Henry Bogucki were present. Also present were staff members C. E. Van Eeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. The first application to be considered was No. 68002 submitted by Darrel Farr, requesting approval of the site and building plans of an apartment development on future Lot 1, Block 1, Twin Lake North Addition, which property is generally bounded by County Road No. 10, Major Avenue extended, Kylawn M Park, and the west City limits. Mr. Farr and Mr. Ralph Wagner of Dolan Engineering were present to discuss the plans with the Commission. The staff discussed the plans with the Commission, pointing out minor engineering details relating to access to County Road No. 10 which would be worked out on the staff level with the developer. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted by Darrell Farr in conjunction with Application No. 68002 be approved, but with the following stipulations and conditions : 1) the building plans are subject to the final approval of the Building Inspector with respect to applicable building codes; 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 developer to the City to guarantee the installation of the site improvements shown on the site plans; 4) no signery is being approved for the development; 5) interior poured-in-place concrete curbing delineating parking and driving areas shall be installed through- out the development; 6) the lot line between the future Lots 1 and 2 of Twin Lake North Addition shall be revised to provide a minimum of a 10 foot setback for the apartment buildings from the future lot line. Voting in favor of the motion were Jensen, Bogucki, and Dorenfeld. Not voting was Ausen, who stated that he objected to the provision of access from the property only toward County Road 10, rather favoring a combination of access from this apartment development and the future townhouse development to the east both to County Road 10, and additional access to 592 Avenue North or streets to the north of Kylawn Park. Motion carried. 108 1099 -2- The next application to be considered was No. 68001 sub- mitted by Voigt and Fourre' Architects on behalf of St. Alphonsus Church, requesting approval of the site and building plans of an addition to the existing church building in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of 70th and Halifax Avenues North. The plans were inspected by the Commission and discussion commenced relating to a deficiency in parking spaces shown on the plan of approximately 150 car spaces and the lack of a landscaping plan for the property. (The Secretary pointed out that the applicant had expressed a desire not to be committed to a landscaping plan at this time.) Also questioned was the provision for lighting in the parking areas. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to table Appli- cation No. 68001 insofar as there are deficiencies in the plan with regard to parking, screening, and landscaping, and a lack of details with regard to future lighting of the site. Motion carried unanimously. M Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ausen, to approve the 2f� minutes of the regular meetings of December 7, 1967 and January 4, 1968; and the special meetings of November 30 and December 28, 1967, and January 25, 1968. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to table Appli- cation No. 67070 submitted by Gordon Christianson to allow the Commission time to continue its study of the question of building setbacks in residential areas. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ausen, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. airman 1 €i 79 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota February 29, 1968 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, Commissioners Robert Grosshans, Henry Bogucki, Paul Ditter, and Helmer Engstrom were present. Mr. Ausen arrived later in the meeting at approximately 8:45 P.M. as noted below. Also - present were C. E. VanEeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. The first item to be discussed was Application No. 68001 submitted by St. Alphonsus Church, requesting approval of site T14" and building plans of an addition to the existing church M building at 70th and Halifax Avenue North. Father Broker of St. Alphonsus and Dan Fourre' of Voight & Fourre' Architects were present to present the plans to the Commission. A L discussion of revisions which had been made to the plans since the tabling action of February 1st ensued, with changes to the parking areas to comply with the requirement of 490 parking spaces for the 1470 person seating capacity being noted. Father Broker made the suggestion that a small portion of this required parking be shifted to another location on the site so as to maintain as large a play area as possible adjacent to the church's school. Curbing and drainage of the parking and driving areas was also discussed, as was the development of screening along the north side of the north parking lot, which had not been indicated on the plans. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the site and building plans submitted by St. Alphonsus Church, with the following stipulations and conditions: 1. Sufficient parking space for 490 vehicles be pro- vided on the church property in accordance with the dimensional standards of the City, such parking areas to be substantially as shown on the plans submitted, with option left to the church of moving approximately 13 spaces adjacent to the school to a location to the west of the north parking lot. 2. Screening of a type conforming to the City's standards (dense vegetation, fence, or wall, 4 to 6 feet in height) shall be installed along the north property line of the property from Halifax Avenue westward to the west side of the northerly parking lot. 3. Interior poured-in-place concrete curbing shall be installed along the new parking and driving areas to the south and east of the church as shown on the plans. 4. The building plans are subject to the approval of the Building Inspector with respect to applicable building codes. Voting in favor of the motion were bitter, Bogucki, Jensen, and Engstrom. Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously. NO 1 1 -2- Mr. Ausen arrived at this point in the meeting, at approximately 8:45 P.M. The remainder of the meeting was spent in discussion of setbacks in single family residential areas, involving a historical review of the subject, the existing regulations, and the changing needs and desires of the people as reflected by the increasing number of variances being requested. Although the discussion involved all types of setbacks, its primary emphasis was on sideyard setbacks, with the other setbacks to be discussed at a subsequent meeting. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, that the following is the Commission's consensus of opinion with respect to sideyard setbacks for garages: 1. the sideyard setback of a garage should be sufficient `,a,, to permit maintenance of the garage from the property M on which it is built, and also permit foot access M to the rear of the property for the resident or emergency personnel - both of these criteria can be satisfied as well by a 3 foot wall-to property line minimum (with no less than 2 feet from any roof or wall extension to the property line) ; 2. requiring a greater or lesser sideyard setback for a garage dependent upon its proximity to the house on the property appears to provide no benefit related to the health, safety, or welfare of the community - if the garage is appropriate at 3 feet from the property line when it is 20 feet or more to the rear of the house, it is appropriate at other locations along the side lot line as well - further, if safety is a factor with relation to the 8 foot minimum distance of detached garages from the house, it is suggested that the Building Code is a more appropriate way to provide protection than a prohibition in the Zoning Ordinance; Therefore, it is recommended to the City Council that appro- priate revisions be made to the forthcoming Zoning Ordinance to alter the minimum sideyard setback requirement for garages in single family areas to permit a wall to property line setback of 3 feet, with no portion of the garage structure to be closer than two feet to the property line. Voting in favor of the motion were Jensen, Grosshans, Ausen, Engstrom, Ditter and Bogucki; voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Cha rm 122 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota March 7, 1968 The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:38 P.M. Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Helmer Engstrom, Paul Ditter, Henry Bogucki, and Vernon Ausen were present. Staff members present were C. E. Van Eeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. The first application to be considered was No. 67070 submitted by Gordon Christiansen, requesting a variance from Section 35-401 to permit the construction of an attached garage/ patio combination to be built 30 feet from the front (street) property line and approximately 4'6" from the side property line of his property at 3019 Nash Road. Mr. Christiansen was present, and explained to the Commission that his lot is pie-shaped, with a curving street to its front, giving him problems in constructing an attached garage which would fit onto the property while conforming to the City's ordinance. In addition, he noted that the design he proposed was the only way he could build without having his present side door exiting through the future garage. Mr. Jensen explained to Mr. Christiansen that this application had not been considered at the January 4th mooting, and had been tabled at the February 1st meeting, in order that the Commission might study the subject at its study meeting. He further explained to Mr. Christiansen that the Commission had studied the matter of setbacks at its February 29th meeting, and had come to an opinion on the subject of sideyard setbacks but not front yard setbacks, and that if Mr. Christiansen desired immediate action on the application, it could be taken this evening, but that in all fairness, it might be better if it could be deferred until after the next study meeting of the Commission. Mr. Christiansen explained that he was in no hurry to construct the garage and that he would be quite happy to have the matter tabled for an additional month. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Engstrom, to table Application 67070 with the concurrence of the applicant, to allow for further study of the subject of setbacks on the part of the Commission. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68003 sub- mitted by Sears Roebuck, requesting special use permission to allow outdoor sales from April 1, 1968 to July 1, 1968, to the west of its store at Brookdale. Mr. Ed Schlicting of Sears was present to discuss the application with the Commission. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that special use permission be granted to Sears Roebuck - Brookdale, to allow a retail sales operation involving outdoor storage within a fenced area on the west side of the Sears store from April 1, 1968 to July 1, 1968, inasmuch as previous permission to Sears Roebuck has adherred to the standards for special use permits and it is expected that the use this year would also adher to those standards. Motion carried unanimously. ^�r, -2- The next application to be considered was No. 68004 submitted by the Shell Oil Company requesting approval of site and building plans for a service station use and special use permission for the operation of a service station at 6245 Osseo Road, which property is presently occupied by a Shell Oil Service Station. The applicant, Mr. Paul Scheel of Shell Oil Company, was present to represent the application, as was the operator of the present station, Mr. Dale Koenig. Mr. Scheel explained the intention of the Shell Oil Company to revamp the station property by the demolition of a good portion of the station building, retaining only the walls of the building to which an additional bay would be added along with brick fascia and a different roof, so that the finished station would appear to be one of the Shell Oil Company's "ranch style" service stations. The Commission, in reviewing the site plans submitted, inquired of the applicant where the parking for the service station use would be located, where the trailers on the property would be relocated and where were the greenstrips ordinarily required on service station properties. Mr. Ausen commented at this point that it seemed unreasonable to require of Shell Oil Company that they adhere to requirements for greenstrips which were not required at the time when the service station was initially located on the property,,,* Some discussion of this point ensued, with no general consensus being developed. A consensus did develop, however, relating to the fact that the site plans did not include enough detail, esp©cially the pzvvisiona for the parking of the rental trailers on the site and the parking spaces required by the ordinance for the service station i-elf, Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Bogucki, to table Appli- cation No. GTO. 04 submitted by Shell Oil Company until the Commission's meeting of April 4, 1968, to permit the applicant to revise his site plans to include greater detail as to the future operation of the service station by delineating the uses for various areas of the site. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68006 sub- mitted by Lowry Realty Company on behalf of the owners of property between Interstate 94 and 65'� Avenue North to the east side of Osseo Road, and the two properties to the south of 65'L, Avenue North also on the east side of Osseo Road, requesting rezoning from the present R1 (single family residence) to B2 (regional business) zoning classification. Mr. Rockstad of Lowry Realty introduced Mr. Sieverson of Mobil Oil Company and Mr. West of the P.D.Q. Market Corporation, noting that each of these men represented a company which wished to be located on the property for which commercial zoning was being requested. He submitted a conceptual site plan of the (proposed) Mobil Oil and the P.D.Q. , and asked each of these gentlemen to comment on their portion of their proposal. Following their comments, Mr. Ausen noted that the five properties to the north of 65h Avenue were projected to be used for an Embers Restaurant and some other, as yet undetermined, use. Mr. Jensen read letters from Pearson Bros. and Roger and Roy Peterson, owners of property who had been notified of the hearing. Following the reading of these letters, comments were solicited from the floor. The Commission then discussed the proposed rezoning at some length with respect to the principles contained in the Comprehensive Plan, especially the principles relating to the Osseo Road Goals. *if the adherence to this requirement would result in a substantial expense to the developer in relocating the pump islands or building.0 C 1 1 1 47 -3- close the public hearing on Motion by Ausen, seconded by Bogucki, to/ Application No. 68006 submitted by Lowry Realty and take the matter under advisement for action at a future meeting, with the proviso that those notified of this hearing shall be notified of the action of the Commission on the application. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. James Taplin, Architect, and Mr. Rosenbaum of Federal Lumber Company, presented Application No. 68008 requesting approval of site and building plans for an addition to a commercial-industrial building at 4810 Lilac Drive (the former Foote Lumber Company property) . The Commission examined the plans submitted, taking special note of the unique circumstances surrounding the property, being on a dead end 30 foot service drive in opposition to a normal city street, and the difficulty of classifying this use as to parking. The concensus arrived at by.. the Commission was that this use should be considered under the parking classification "uses not covered by this list" , and that the approximately 31 parking spaces available on the site plan should satisfy the parking requirements of the zoning ordinance until such time as the use of the property is changeC. If -this occurs, there would be an .over abundance of land to be utilized for additional parking space. Mr. Ausen raised the subject of the existing roof sign on the Foote Lumber building, questioning Mr. Rosenbaum as to whether this would be removed upon Federal Lumber's locating i.n the building. Mr. Rosenbaum advised that he would, of course, be willing to attempt to satisfy or conform to the wishes of the City in regard to signing, but as that the sign is already in existence, he would like to make use of it, perhaps until the France Avenue interchange is completed, to determine what effect the interchange would have on the visibility of the Federal Lumber property. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted in conjunction with Application No. 68008 be approved as submitted, with the following stipulations and conditions: 1. the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector's approval with regard to applicable building codes; 2. poured-in-place concrete curbing shall be installed along the perimeter of all parking and driving areas except in those areas adjacent to the chain link fencing on the site. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68009 sub- mitted by Michael Mueller of Taco Towne of America, requesting a variance from Section 35-330 to permit erection of a free- standing sign on the existing freestanding sign standard of the Lynn Brook Shopping Center. Mr. Mueller and Mr. Doepke, the operator of the Taco Town Restaurant at 6219 Osseo Road, were present to discuss the application with the Commission. A �) =E-, s -4- The Commission reviewed the request in relation to the provisions of the January 5, 1967 Draft sign ordinance, noting that the 160 square feet proposed would be permissable for the 20,000 plus floor area of the Center. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the request contained in Application No. 68009, and a 160 square foot sign area be permitted on the Lynn Brook Center sign, with the sign not to exceed the previously approved 20 feet in height, pro- vided that the owner of the Center, M & E Realty, submit a letter to the Council giving its approval to the sign change. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68010 sub- mitted by Velie Motor Company, requesting approval of site and building plans of a commercial development to be located at 6700 Osseo Road. Mssrs. Charles Velie, Jr. and Richard Schoen, his architect, were present to discuss the plans with the Commission. Mr. Schoen and Mr. Velie gave a brief presentation of the concept underlying the development plans and model shown to the Commission, pointing out the unique characteristics which this automobile dealership would have in relation to other dealerships in this area, especially the concept of an adminis- trative office building completely separate from the vehicle repair building. Following this presentation, the coinmission Y�:viewEd ttie plans in detail, with a lengthy discussion ensuing, relating primarily to the site improvements proposed, and also a short discussion of the proposed signing to be installed on the wall of the administration building on the site, which resulted in the consensus that this must be considered as wall signing of a building rather than a freestanding sign. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans for a commercial development submitted by Velie Motor Company for the property at 6700 Osseo Road be approved, with the following conditions and stipulations: 1. with regard to the fencing and screening of the residential properties to the east, the Commission finds that the screening proposed for the four developed residential lots immediately to the east provides proper screening between this use and the residential uses, but with relation to its abutment to undeveloped residential property to the north, screening other than as shown on the plans should not be required to be installed at this time, but should be installed at the request of the City at such time that residential development occurs on the vacant property to the east; 2. prior to submission of the plans to the City Council, a planting schedule should be prepared to describe the vegetation shown on the plans submitted; 3. the curbing on the site shall be of a continuous concrete poured-in-place type, except those areas contemplated for a future 2nd stage construction; cal v f'-r� -5- 4. The City of Brooklyn Center shall reserve the right to require the re-r,,es ign of the entrance to and from Osseo Road in the event that the present layout should prove to be a traffic hazard or otherwise unsuitable; 5. no freestanding signery is being approved at this time; 6. the building plans are subject to the final approval of the Building Inspector with respect to applicable building codes; 7. the developer or his engineer shall submit utilities and drainage plans that are satisfactory to the City Engineer; 8) a performance agreement and performance bond shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation of the site improvements delineated on the plans, with the amount of such bond to be determined by the City Manager. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Jensen announced that Applications 68005, 68007, and 66091 had been deleted from the evening's Agenda. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to table Alpli_ cations 68011 and 68012 until the April 4th meeting, as the applicants are not present. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to approve the minutes of the meetings of February 1st and 29th, 1968. Motion carried unanimously. liot:ion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 12:07 A.M. Chairm n L� Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota April 4, 1968 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 Paul Ditter, Helmer Engstrom, Adrian Dorenfeld, Hoary Bogucki, and Vernon Ausen were present. Staff members present were C. E. Van Eeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ditter, to approve the Minutes of the meetings of March 7th and 28th, 1968, with the following corrections to the minutes of March 7th: Page 2 - a sentence in the first paragraph to read "Mr. Ausen commented at this point that it seemed unreasonable to require of Shell Oil Company that they adhere to the requirement of the green strips which were not required at the time the service station was initially located on the property, if the adherence to this requirement would result in a substantial expense to the developer in relocating pump islands or building. " Page 3 - in the first paragraph, "Motion by Ausen, seconded by Bogukci, to close the public hearing on Application No. 68006. . ." . Motion carried unanimously. The first item of regular business to be discussed was Application No. 68004 submitted by Shell Oil Company, which had been tabled at the March 7th meeting to allow the applicant to further refine his plans. The application, consisting of a request for a special use permit for the operation of a service station and approval of site and building plans for the service station use at 6245 Osseo Road, was represented by Mr. Paul Scheel of Shell Oil Company. Mr. Jensen pointed out that one of the prime questions raised at the previous meeting discussing this subject was whether or not the normally required greenstrip should be imposed along the Osseo Road, given the fact that a service station had been operated on the propertyfor a number of years, and that a greenstrip requirement was not made originally. A lengthy discussion ensued on this point, with a polling of the Commission resulting in the opinion that it would not be reasonable to require the 15 foot greenstrip to be installed on the Osseo Road, inasmuch as this would require relocation of the building and/or the pump islands, entailing a great deal of expense. The other features shown on the proposed site plan were discussed, and the Commission again urged that Shell Oil attempt to gain control over the 11 foot strip of land to the west of the station so that the station site could have access onto Ewing Lane. T� �,. -2- Motion by Ditter, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted by Shell Oil Company for the service station property at 6245 Osseo Road be approved, and special use permission for the new station affirmed, with the following stipulations and conditions: 1) the Commission acknowledges that the ordinary require- ment of a 15 foot landscaped area is not being imposed upon this property where it abuts the Osseo Road along its east property line, based on the fact that the use now occupying the property was not required to install such a greenstrip upon its initial location on this site, and that to require this landscaped area now would impose an unreasonable cost either in location of the building and/or pump islands which are already in place; however, the existing situation wherein the paved surface on the service station site extends beyond the property line and up to the curb line of Osseo Road shall be altered, with a concrete poured- in-place curb delineating the private and public properties, with a concrete sidewalk to be installed in lieu of the greenstrip, between this curb on the property line and the curb along the traveled surface of the Osseo Road; 2) the Commission takes note of the intention of Shell Oil Company, as expressed by Mr. Scheel, to extend the existing rail fence along the scuth property line of the station site between the Osseo Road and Ewing Lane, (but not closer than 15 feet from either the east or west property lines) within the landscaped area shown on the plans; 3) the perimeter curbing on the site shall be of a six inch concrete poured-in-place type except along the west property line where the pre-cast curbing is permitted until such time as access onto Ewing Lane is achieved, at which time the western portion of the property shall also be delineated with poured-in- place concrete curbing; 4) the building plans are subject to the approval of the Building Inspector with respect to applicable building codes; 5) a performance agreement and performance bond, in an amount to be determined by the City Manager, shall be submitted by Shell Oil Company to guarantee the site improvements delineated on the plans submitted or required by this approval. Voting in favor of the motion were Dorenfeld, Engstrom, Jensen, Grosshans, Bogucki and Ditter; not voting was Ausen, who stated that he is a steady customer at this service station. Motion carried. The next application to be considered was No. 68014 submitted by Rodney Bernu and Darrel Farr requesting rezoning of the pro- perty at 5901 Osseo Road from R-1 to R-B. Mr. Bernu was present, 1 1 1 -3- and explained to the Commission that if the rezoning were successful, he intended to build an office building on the pro- perty, hopefully with a coordinated parking plan utilizing joint parking with the Cross of Glory Church, as provided for in the City's ordinances. The Commission examined the proposed rezoning in light of the Comprehensive Plan recommendation for apartment or office uses on the property between 581th Avenue and the Cross of Glory Church, and the zoning recommendation of the Commission that the property be put into a service/office zoning classification. One of the Commissioners asked Mr. Bernu whether he had attempted to acquire any property south of the "Miller Greenhouse Property", at 5901 Osseo Road, to which Mr. Bernu replied that he had some interest in it and that if the present property developed as he though i;:: would, he could very well be developing property to the south in the future. Some discussion also centered around the joint use parking concept of the ordinance, with the advantage of reducing the total amount of parking area and making more efficient use of such areas versus the theory of having each use completely independent and self-sustaining. Motion by Bcgucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to close the public hearing on Application No. 68014. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to Application No. 68014, and the property at 5901 Osseo Road be rezoned to the R-B (Residence-Business) zoning classification, recognizing that the rezoning of one parcel may appear to be spot zoning, but that it in fact is not, as it is in accord with the use recom- mended in the Comprehensive Plan. Voting in favor of the motion were Ditter, Bogucki, Grosshans, Jensen, Engstrom, and Dorenfeld; not voting was Ausen, who stated that as long as the adoption of the new zoning ordinance was so close at hand, and the recommendation for zoning this property was to a C-1 Service/ Office zoning classification, that the requested rezoning should be accomplished by the Comprehensive Rezoning. Motion carried. (Mr. Ausen left the meeting during the discussion of the next item.) The nex-t'-- application to be considered was No. 68005 sub- mitted by the P.B.C. Medical-Dental Center, requesting approval of site and building plans for an addition to the building and a variance to permit a lesser number of parking spaces than required for the commercial use. Mr. Erickson, representing P.B.C. , reviewed certain statistics he had developed for the Commission with regard to the expected parking needs for the occupants of the clinic after the proposed addition, noting that it would be practically inconceiveable that all of the 111 spaces shown on the site plan would be occupied at any one time, and that the maximum imaginable would slightly under 100. Following Mr. Erickson's review of the situation, Mr. Jensen commented that the issue was apparently not one of a variance which would necessitate a hardship, but rather a questioning of the logic and reasonability of the ordinance's parking require- ��C 1 1 1 -4- ments for this type of use. Several of the members of the Commission raised questions relating to comments made by Mr. Erickson about the number of professional and non-professional workers and the intensity of use of the present and proposed clinic. Following the gathering of comments from those notified of the hearing, member Dorenfeld moved, and member Engstrom seconded that Application No. 68005 submitted by the P.B.C. Medical-Dental Center be tabled and the application taken under advisement for further study, with the proviso that those notified of the hearing should be notified of the recommendation made on this application by the Commission to the Council and the expected date of the Council review. Voting in favor of the motion were Bogucki, Grosshans, Jensen, Engstrom, and Dorenfeld; voting against was Ditter. Motion carried. Application No. 68007 by Phillips Oil Company, requesting a variance from Section 35-340 to permit erection of a free- standing sign on the service station property at 6850 Osseo Road was next heard. A representative of Signcrafters, on behalf of Phillips Oil, explained to the Commission that the requested sign would be a removal of the present freestanding sign on the corner of the property and the relocation of the sign atop the column at the end of the station's canopy. He stated that he understood the Commission's recommended sign size would be 24 feet in height and that he could accomplish this maximum of 24 foot height with the six foot sign he proposed to move. There was some discussion on the part of the Commission as to what the exact height of the existing column and canopy is and also whether this would be construed as a freestanding sign, a roof sign, or some other type of sign. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to table Appli- cation No. 68007 submitted by Phillips Oil Company in order that the applicant might bring in further information on the sizes and heights of the freestanding sign and station canopy. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Roger Nordell of Firestone Tire and Rubber Company next presented Application No. 68012 requesting a variance to permit erection of a freestanding sign on the property at 5445 Xerxes Avenue North. The Commission reviewed the request in light of its recommended sign ordinance, and in light of the Council's pre- vious approval for a freestanding sign on the Goodyear property immediately adjacent, taking note of the comparable sizes of the Goodyear and Firestone buildings. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68012 submitted by Fire- stone Tire and Rubber Company be approved and a variance from Section 35-330 granted to permit the erection of a freestanding sign on the property at 5445 Xerxes Avenue, such approval being conditioned upon the following: 1) the total height of the sign shall not exceed 22'-2 feet above finished floor grade of the building on the property; 1 1 1 �,. -5- 2) the total area of the sign shall not exceed 120 square .feet (as requested by the applicant) as measured by the City's standard method; 3) the sign shall have a minimum vertical clearance of eight feet; 4) no part of the sign shall project beyond the property on which the sign is located. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Nordell then presented the final site and building plans of the proposed Firestone retail sales/automotive service center to be constructed on the property at 5445 Xerxes Avenue. Mr. Van Eeckhout recommended several minor changes to the driveway design which were acceptable to the applicant. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the final site and building plans submitted by Firestone Tire and Rubber Company for the property at 5445 Xerxes Avenue North with the following conditions: 1) the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector's approval with respect to applicable building codes; 2) utilities, drainage, and driveway design 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 to the City to guarantee the site improvements delineated on the plans; 4) six inch concrete poured-in-place curbing shall be installed on the perimeter of all parking and driving areas. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission next heard Application No. 68015 submitted by Shopper's City, being a request for a special use permission to permit a "garden store" operation on the Shopper's City parking lot at 3600 - 63rd Avenue North. Mr. Holmin of Shopper's City explained that the request was the same as last year, with the garden store to be a double garage building on the parking area in front of the store, to ope-rate until July 15, 1968, with the garage then to be returned to the north side of Shopper's City's property. Following a brief discussion of the Shopper's City operation, member Engstrom moved, and member Grosshans seconded, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the "garden store special use on the Shopper's City property as requested in Application No. 68015 until July 15, 1968, with the garden store building to be removed to the north side of the property on or before that date. Motion carried unanimously. QJi1 1 1 1 -6- Representatives of Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home for the Aged next presented the site and building plans for an addition to the nursing home at 5401 - 69th Avenue. The staff pointed out several minor corrections to be made on the site plan concerning curbing and driveway radii which were acceptable to the applicant. Mr. Van Eeckhout also pointed out that a water assessment will be forthcoming on the property which had not previously been made. The Commission discussed the proposed screening of the parking lot on the nursing home property, noting that evergreen planting was proposed. The applicants commented that a chain link type fencing presently exists along the property line and that they would be happy to install slats in the chain link fencing if the Commission would desire it, but regardless of whether these slats were installed in the fencing, the ever- green shrubbery would be installed to enhance the area. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the site and building plans for the addition to the Maranatha Home for the Aged at 5401 - 69th Avenue as requested in Application No. 68016, with the following conditions: 1) opaque screening (the installation of slats in the existing chain link fence being acceptable) shall be installed along the east property line in those areas where the parking lot abuts the residential properties, in addition to the shrubbery as designated on the site plan; 2) the curbing delineated on the plans shall be of a six inch poured-in-place concrete type; 3) the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector's approval as to applicable building codes; 4) utilities, drainage, and driveway design are subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 5) a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the site improve- ments delineated on the plans. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 67045 requesting (in part) a variance to permit erection of a freestanding sign on the property at 5440 Osseo Road, Mssrs. Wiggins and Kilberg of Big Boy Restaurants exhibited a design of the proposed sign to the Commission,which sign was determined to be approximately 175 square feet in area and 25 feet in height. Mr.. Kilberg commented that this sign was quite different than their usual sign in that it had been simplified to bring the size down to satisfy the Brooklyn Center's needs. Various members of the Commission commented that this type of use was of the "drive-in" type and should be considered under the pro- vision of the draft sign ordinance allowing a 24 foot high, 250 square foot sign. Mr. Kilberg pointed out that they would 21 -7- :Like to get a minimum of 10 feet beneath the sign to avoid breakage by persons walking by and that this would be difficult with the design proposed, but if the Commission required a 24 foot maximum rather than 25 proposed, the messages could be squeezed together to conform. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to a freestanding sign on the property at 5440 Osseo Road, as requested by B & G Realty in Application No. 67045, with the following conditions: 1) The total height of the sign shall not exceed 24 feet in height abolle curb level of Osseo Road adjacent to the sign's location; 2) tha total area of the sign shall not exceed 175 TI" square feet as measured by the City's standard ;r method L� 3) the sign shall have a minimum vertical clearance of eight feet; 4) no part of the sign shall project beyond the property on which the sign is located. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to table Appli-- ca,.ion No. 68013 submitted by Hoinedale Builders. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ditter, to table Appli- cation No. 68011 submitted by the Shell Oil Station at 69th and Humboldt Avenues, Howard Olson-operator, as the applicant is not present. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Grosshans, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 12:00 P.M. C Chaarm 1 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Iennepin and State of Minnesota April 25, 1968 The Planning Commission met in special session and was called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:39 P.M. Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Commissioners Vernon Ausen, Paul Ditter, Henry Bogucki, and Helmer Engstrom were present. Also present was Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Corx-ni s s ion. The first item to be discussed was Application No. 68013 submitted by Norman Chazin of Homedale Builders, requesting approval of the preliminary plat of "Northland Estates 4th Addition" , a proposed single family residential subdivision on the east side of Humboldt Aver_r.e between 70th and 73rd Avenues North. A discussion commenced between Mr. Chazin and the Commission concerning the relation of the proposed plat for development into single family usage in relation to the Comprehensive Plan. It was noted that the Comprehensive Plan had contemplated that this property would be us;ad for two story multiple dwellings, in an attempt to provide for a reduction in the number of curb cuts along Humboldt Avenue in the future, when Humboldt would become a heavily traveled roadway. Further, however, the proposed zoning which had come about after public hearings on the Plan and Comprehensive Rezoning had been for R2 (duplex) usage of the property, providing a compromise solution of the problem of the curb cuts between single family type use and multiple type use. The Commission discussed again the possible alternative types of uses for this strip of land; single family, duplexes, townhouse, 2 story apartments, to which Mr. Chazin commented that his original idea in developing the property had been that the "strip" nature of the property ,,.could lend itself to a series of townhouse units. The Commission then examined th` likely number of curb cuts onto Humboldt Avenue which would result from the alternative types of development, and also the possibility that it if were developed into single family as now proposed by Mr. Chazin, whether the new residents themselves would install "turn- arounds" on their property so that they would enter the street frontwards in their vehicles. The final concensus of the Commission was that the reduction in the number of curb cuts to be gained by duplexes over single family type development would be minimal, and that townhouse uses might also be difficult to design onto the property. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that the preliminary plat of "Northland Estates 4th Addition" as submitted with Application No. 66013, be approved, with the acknowledgement of the slight dimensional and areal deficiencies on Lot 1 of Block 2 of the proposed subdivision. Voting in favor of the motion were Jensen, Ausen, and Engstrom; voting against were Ditter and Bogucki. Motion carried. 27 -2- The next item of business to be discussed was Application No. 67035 submitted by Norman Chazin of Homedale Builders, requesting approval of site and building plans of an apartment development in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of 65th and Humboldt Avenues North. (Lot 1, Block 1, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition) . The Commission noted that this application had received preliminary plan approval from the Commission on July 6, 1967, and from the Council on July 24, 1967, with the finalized plans being submitted only recently. Lotion by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council ti:at the site and building plans for an apart- ment development on Lot 1, Block 1, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition, as requested in Application No. 67035 by Norman Chazin of Homedale Builders, be approved, with the following stipulation3 and conditions: 1. the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector's final approval with respect to appli- cable building codes; 2. the drainage and utility_ plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 3. the perimeter of all parking and driving areas shall be delineated with six inch poured-in-place concrete curbing (as described on the plans submitted) ; 4. a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the site improvements described on the plans or as required by this approval. Motion carried unanimously. The next item of discussion was Application No. 68006 submitted by Lowry Realty, requesting rezoning from Rl to B2 of the properties generally bounded by France Avenue, 652 Avenue, Trunk Highway No. 152, and Interstate No. 94; and also the first two properties lying south of 652 Avenue on the east side of T.H. 152. The application had been tabled following the public hearing on March 7th so further review of the rezoning request could be made in light of the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission reviewed a draft resolution relating to the application of Lowry Realty, following which member Engstrom moved the following resolution: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTTON 140. 68-2 RESOLUTION REGARDING APPLICATION NO. 68006 SUBMITTED BY LOWRY REALTY COMPANY WHEREAS, Lowry Realty Co. (on behalf of the owners of the property) has submitted Application No. 68006 requesting /' -3- rezoning from R-1 (Single Fanily Residence) to B-2 (Regional Business) for certain properties lying on the east side of the Osseo Road to the south of Interstate No. 94; and WHEREAS, as a result of Application No. 680OG by Lowry Realty, the Commission finds it necessary and desirable to respond to this Application with a statement of policy which would further elaborate on the concept of "planned develop- ment areas" as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan for prop- erties in this vicinity; and NOW, THEREFORE, the Commission finds that two features of the Plan especially relate to the requested rezoning; the Osseo Road Development Goals and the Planned Development Area concept. The following Plan recommendation relate directly to the property contained in this Application, as well as to the nearby properties on the west side of the Osseo Road. Page 73 of the Plan - "Permit the area between 65th and France Avenues to eventually charge as a unit, to a higher type land use such as multiple family housing or public uses. When this occurs, France Avenue at Osseo Road should be closed." Page 78 of the Plan - "Establish the areas along Osseo Road (shown on the Plan map in dashed outline) which are now vacant or subject to future change to a "higher" land use, as planned development districts. These areas would be permitted to be developed or redeveloped only if the owner or developer does so as a "p-ackage" as opposed to individual lots and only if an appropriate use is proposed - possible apartments, public and semi-public buildings, or certain commercial services such as a clinic, professional office, etc. The reason for restricting the type of development is well stated in the preceding section on Osseo Road Development Goals. " These statements are especially significant, as they temper and further define the general comment made in the Osseo Road Development Goals that the area adjacent to the freeway inter- change should be allowed to develop into regional and/or retail land uses. Within the past year, Bermel-Smaby Realty Company requested a rezoning of the southern part of the area between 65th and 652 Avenues with the stated intention of acquiring the two publicly held land remnants for the development of an office building on the property. In examining the rezoning request, the Planning Commission found that this type of usage met the general philosophy of changed land use for the Osseo Road, although it did not encompass the entire area suggested for planned development, as the landowners of the intervening property to 652 Avenue did not join in the request for rezoning, and in any event, the Bermel-Smaby Company had no use for additional land. The Commission discussed the desired change to be incorporated in a future development of this area, that of closing 652 Avenue and the provision of a service drive to serve the office-type uses, with access to the 65th Avenue intersection. It was stressed to Bermel-Smaby and the other property owners that in subsequent plan approvals, the Commission would be concerned with the provision of such an access with C� 1 i 1 -4- coordination of development on the entire property between 65th and 652 Avenues. The instant Application for rezoning by Lowry Realty contains the request •that the properties on the east side of the Osseo Road (north of the Bermel-Smaby property) be put into a retail commercial zoning classification. This is in opposition to the philosophy described above, at least for that portion of the property to the south of 652 Avenue, which were placed in the "planned development" category of the Comprehensive Plan. The properties to the north of 652 Avenue were not contained in this category, although in the future, this designation may be extended to them as well. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Commission reiterates the philosophy contained in the Comprehensive Plan, that the levelopment of those properties to the south of Interstate #94 should be directed toward multiple dwelling, service-office, or public uses. It is the recommendation of the Commission that the request for rezoning to the B-2 (Regional Business) zoning classification contained in Application No. 68006 be denied by the City Council. The motion for the adoption of the resolution was duly seconded by member Paul Ditter and upon a vote being taken, all voted in favor thereof, whereupon said resolution was adopted. Mr. Jensen asked the Secretary to mail out the notices of the Commission's action on this application as was promised at the public hearing together with the date on which the City Council would review this application and the Commission's recommendation thereon. The Commission next discussed Application No. 68005, being an application by the P.B.C. Medical-Dental Center for approval of site and building plans of an addition to the existing building on the property, and a variance from Section 35-704 to permit a lesser number of parking spaces than required for the commercial use. The application had been tabled at the April 4th Commission meeting to permit further discussion at this study meeting of the factors involved. The Secretary presented information from several other suburban communities relating to parking requirements for office type uses. The Commission then reviewed the present and proposed P.B.C. operation, and the operation of other medical dental centers with which it was familiar. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted in conjunction with Application No. 68005 concerning an addition to the P.B.C. Medical-Dental Center not be approved, in that the plans do not satisfy the requirements of the zoning ordinance with respect to the required number of parking spaces, and inasmuch as the Commission cannot recommend approval of a variance or a change to the parking standard of 1 per 150 square feet of gross floor area for this type of use, ems., 9 �3''�' �� . -5- the Commission feels the packing requirement as applied to this particular use is just and proper. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ditter, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:20 P.M. Chairm �7 1 1 1 Ez z 35 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Eennnpin and State of Minnesota May 2, 1968 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 Adrian Dorenfeld, Helm•ar Engstrom, Vernon Ausen, and Henry Bogucki were present. Also present were C. E. VanEeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. The first item of business to be considered was Application No. 67070 submitted by Mr. Gordon Christiansen, requesting a variance from the front and sideyard setbacks of the zoning ordinance to permit an attached garage to be constructed on the property at 3019 Nash Road. The application had been tabled on two previous occasions with the consent of the applicant to allow the Commission to continue its study of setbacks in residential areas. The Secretary explained to the Commission that he had contacted Mr. Christiansen by phone, and that Mr. Christiansen would not be able to attend this meeting, but had asked that the Commission proceed in taking action on the application in his absence. Mr. Jensen read a letter from Mr. Christiansen's neighbor to the south, Wesley Reavely, stating no objection to the proposed variance. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend to the City Council that the requester': variance to -Four and one half feet sideyard setback and a 30 foot frontyard setback on the property at 3019 Nash Road be approved as requested in Application No.67070, in that the Commission has given a great deal of discussion to the subject of setbacks in single family residential areas and recommended (in its February 29th minutes) that the sideyard setback for a garage should be reduced from the present 5 feet to 3 feet, (wall to property line distance, with no less than two feet from any roof or wall extension of the garage to the property line) . Further, although the Commission has not yet concluded its discussion of frontyard setbacks in residential areas, the concensus has been arrived at that the Commission will be recommending a change in these frontyard setbacks to at least 30 feet, which would satisfy the immediate needs of this applicant. The Commission will continue to study the frontyard setbacks to further refine and define the concept, but in the meantime, the request contained in this Application does fit the Commission's present concensus on the matter. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68017 submitted by Gale Pierce, requesting a rezoning from R1 to R-B for the property at 5960 Osseo Road. Mr. Pierce and Mr. McCullagh, his attorney, were present to discuss the matter with the Commission. Mr. McCullagh explained to the Cormissi.on that Mr. Pierce owned the property at 5960 Osseo Road and wished to have it rezoned to the office zoning classification so that he could establish 36 1 1 37 -t- his (Fireside Realty) real estate office on this location. He noted also that Mr. Pierce held the listings on the two parcels immediately south and would have applied for rezoning for them also, but had not had time to apply for that zoning along with the zoning on this lot. In any event, he stated, a future purchaser of those two parcels would be independent of Mr. Pierce, and might have some other type of office in mind. The Commission discussed the matter with the applicant, informing him of the Commission's planning view of the area as contained in the Comprehensive Plan, which is to encourage the redevelopment of the entire block rather than a parcel by parcel development, so as to avoid haphazard development and create circulation problems in the area. Mr. Jensen pointed out that the area in question had been proposed by the Commission to go into multiple dwelling usage, and that this concept had been carried through by the Council in the proposed zoning map with only a slight change as to density of the multiple dwelling usage. Further, however, he stated that the Commission had generally considered multiple dwelling usage and office usage to be approximately equal in intensity, and that the Conxiission probably had no great objection to an office usage of the block. Mr. McCullagh commented that he felt the proposed R-4 multiple dwelling zoning for the property was not really the best, as it would leave a gap in the "pattern" of office zoning proposed for other properties in the area. Mr. Jensen coma--rented that in light of the Council' s public informatior_1 meetings on zoning for the City, perhaps it would be better to defer the item until after those meetings so that the Commission could determine whether the Council still intended to follow through with the multiple dwelling zoning of the area. Upon a call for comments from the audience, Mr. Van DeVelde, owner of the southern half of this block, commented that he had no objection to the office zoning. No others were present to give comments with relation to the hearing. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Engstrom, to close the public hearing on Application No. 68017. Motion carried uannimously. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Bogucki, to table Appli- cation No. 68017 and take the matter under advisement, with the approval of the applicant, to be considered by the Commission during the month of June. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68018 sub- mitted by Glad and Miller Construction Company requesting rezoning from R1 to R5 of the property bounded by Lakeside Avenue, Highway No. 100 and Twin Lake. Present and representing Glad and Miller Construction Company were its attorney, Mr. Karl Herman, who introduced Mr. Malcolm Glad and Mr. Alfred Miller, the principals of the Company. Mr. Herman gave a general description of the property as it now exists as a public beach and pro- ceeded to explain that his clients wished to have R5 multiple dwelling zoning to construct a complex of approximately 126 dwelling units. He commented that he was aware of the pro- visions of the Plan and the proposed zoning which would continue this as a recreational type area, but s;:ated that proposed apartment development would be a proper addition to the City 1 1 1 �9L -3- in terms of providing this necessary type of living unit, providing an identifying feature at the border of the City, enhancing the City's -tax base, and following the guideline of placing multiple dwellings adjacent to highway areas. In line with the community's desire for open space usage of the property, the applicants indicated that the beach could be maintained in a public manner as it has been for a number of years, and in fact, depending on the design of the development, a slightly larger area than now exists might be maintained in the future. Following the presentation by Mr. Herman, comments were solicited from those persons notified of the hearing, including Mr. Nichols of 4812 Lakeview, who acted as spo7keman for the majority of the persons present and asked for denial of the application. Questions were raised by the persons notified as to the playground and park plans of the City, utilities, traffic, and so on. Following the gathering of comments from the applicants and those present, Member Bogucki moved and Member Grosshans seconded that the public hearing on Application No. 68018 be closed. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Jensen commented that the Commission is faced with a number of questions to be answered, and suggested to the Commission that further study be put into the matter before a decision is rendered. Mr. Ausen stated that comments from the Park and Recreation Commission relating to the park development plans for the Twin Lake area would be appropriate at this time. .motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to table Appli- cation No. 68018 submitted by Glad and Miller Construction Com- pany for further study, with a request to the Park and Recreation Commission for a report relating to park land needs for the Twin Lake area. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Jensen then called for consideration of Application No. 68019 submit-ed by Darrel Farr, requesting rezoning from R1 to R5 of the property at the northeast corner of the intersection of 65th and Willow Lane between Willow Lane and the Mississippi River. Mr. Jensen commented that a call had been received from Mr. Farr's attorney advising the Commission that Mr. Farr was in New York and would be unable to attend the meeting this evening. Mr. Jensen commented that as there had been sufficient notice of the time and date of the public hearing and as other persons had been notified and had come to the hearing, that the hearing should commence. Comments were at this time gathered from those in attendance who have been notified of the hearing. Following the gathering of comments, Mr. Jensen pointed out that Mr. Farr, on past occasions, had stated that it would be difficult to develop the property for the uses permitted in the zone, and he asked whether conditions had changed in the area since the time of the two previous applications for rezoning submitted by Mr. Farr in 1963 and 1965. Comments from the floor were to the effect that no change in conditions had taken place in the Last several years. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, that the public hearing on Application No. 68019 be closed. Motion carried unanimously. 80 1 1 1 -4- Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that Application LTo. 68019, submitted by Darrel Farr, requesting rezoning fro-n R1 to R5 for the property described as Lot 1, Block 1, Farr's First Addition, be denied, in that the proposed rezoning is not consistent with the Comprehensive Planning for the area. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission then considered Application No. 67005, sub- mitted on behalf of Shell Oil Company, requesting rezoning from R1 and RB to B2; and special use permission including plan approval for a service station use on the property at the southeast corner of the intersection of France Avenue and Highv,ay No. 100. The Secretary reviewed the history of the application, with its reconunended denial by the Planning Commissic> , and the denial by the City Council, resulting in initiation of legal proceedings against the City by the owners, Noncan Chazin and Isolda Gilles, and the Shell Oil Company. It was pointed out to the CozxAssion that the City had entered into a Stipulation to dismiss the pending law suit. The Secretary then submitted a proposed draft resolution to the Commission relating to the approval of the proposed service station use on the property, in accordance with the Stipulation. A lengthy discussion of the application ensued. Member Vernon Ausen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoptions PLANNING C0£24ISSIGN RESOLUTION NO� 68-3 resolution Regarding Appli- cation No. 67005 WHEREAS, in February of 1967, Application No. 67005 was submitted by Mr. Bruce Hasselberg (agent for Shell Oil Company) requesting rezoning to B-2 (Regional Business) and special use permission to permit the construction and operation of an auto- mobile service station on the property known as Parcel 2910 of Section 10, and Tract A of R.L.S . No. 1082; and WHEREAS, the Application was heard by the Planning Com.-nissiol- at its meeting of March 2, 1967, and was recommended by the Commission to the Council for denial at that time; and WHEREAS, the Application was subsequently heard by the City Council at a series of meetings between March 6th and June 12th, 1967, with a denial of the Application by the Council on June 12th; and WHEREAS, subsequent to the Council's denial, a Summons and Complaint were served on the City on behalf of Norman and Myra Chazin, Isolda Gilles, and the Shell Oil Company, relating to Application No. 67005, requesting that the District Court reverse the City's action with regard to the proposed service station use; and WHEREAS, following discovery proceedings initiated by the Plaintiffs, the City Council determined to enter into a Stipulatic- of Dismissal of the impending suit, with the provision that the Plaintiffs would be granted the necessary zoning and special permission to establish a service station on the property; and 32 1 �3 -5- WHEREAS, Application No. 67005 is now before the Planning Commission for its review„ in light of the aforesaid Stipulation; and WHERE, the Comanission, assuming that the City Council will grant the proper zoning for this property as stated in the Stipu- lation, has reviewed the plans and specifications submitted in accordance with the special use and plan approval sections of the City's Ordinances, and hereby recom°nends approval of the plans and issuance of special use permission for a service station on this property, but with the following stipulations and conditions: 1. an opaque fence or wall be installed along the south property line of the station site, such fence or wall to be 6 feet in height, extending no closer to the France Avenue ric;Trit-of-way line than 15 feet, and extending westward from France to a point at least 150 feet therefrom; 2. the shrubbery indicated on the site plan be designated in a landscaping schedule as to type, size, number, and location; 3 . the freestanding sign proposed for the property shall be no larger than 90 square feet in area (poilit-to- point perimeter measuremen-L-) and 24 feet in height above finished floor grade of the building; 4. the plans and construction are subject to the Building Inspector's approval as to applicable building codes; 5. a performance agreement and performance bond or escrow (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation and initial maintenance of the site features designated on the plans, or as required herein; 6. the two parcels presently making up the site shall be incorporated into a single parcel of record prior to the issuance of building permits. The resolution was duly seconded by member Robert Grosshans, and upon a vote being taken, the following voted in favor thereof: Jensen, Grosshans, Ausen, and Engstrom; and the following voted against: Bogucki and Dorenfeld; whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to table Appli- cations No. 68007 and 68011, as the applicants are not present and have not been heard from. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Cha:rma ; ! 1 1 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County Hennepin and State of Minnesota June 6, 1968 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 Paul Ditter, Henry Bogucki, and Vernon Ausen were present. Also present were C.E. Van Eeckhout, and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, to approve the minutes of the regular meetings of April 4th and May 2nd, and the special meeting of April 25th. Motion carried unanimously. The first item of business to be discussed was Application No. 68020 submitted by Jack Arvidson, requesting approval of the preliminary subdivision design of a Registered Land Survey of property between woodbine Lane and 73rd Avenue North to the west of Humboldt Avenue. Mr. Arvidson was present and explained his desire to divide the property into three building sites, one corner lot at both woodbine Lane and 73rd Avenue intersections with Humboldt Avenue and an additional lot between the two corner lots. The Staff pointed out to the Commission that regardless of the subdivision of this property, be it into two lots of three lots, the east- west dimension of the corner lots would be substandard in relation to the 90 feel: required, having 86 feet after an additional 3 foot road dedication. In addition, the Staff explained to the Commission that a further variance would be necessary for the mid-block lot, in that its 86 foot depth would be less than the 110 feet minimum lot depth set out in the subdivision ordinance. It was pointed out that all three lots, however, would exceed the minimum area requirements for single lots. A discussion ensued relative to the possibility of combining this property with adjacent property. Mr. Arvidson explained that he had talked briefly to the property owner to the west and that perhaps some land would be for sale, but this was not a certainty. Also, the future of the remaining property between Humboldt Avenue and Knox Avenue was discussed with note being made of the future large lot subdivisions likely to occur and the question of whether some type of land use other than Rl would more appropriately be placed on these properties. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that the preliminary subdivision (Registered Land Survey) submitted by Jack Arvidson in conjunction with Application No. 68020 be approved, acknowledging the 86 foot width of the two corner lots in the subdivision and the 86 foot depth of the interior lot, and including the dedication of an additional 3 feet: (to total 33 feet) for Humboldt Avenue. Voting in favor of the motion were Ausen, Jensen, Grosshans, and Ditter. Voting against. was Bogucki. Motion carried. 1 -2- Mr. Bogucki commented for the record that his objection to this subdivision was related to the apparent lack of an attempt to bring the owners of the land in the vicinity together to arrive at an overall, logical subdivision pattern. The next application to be considered was Application No. 68025 submitted by Gingold-Pink Architects on behalf of the owner of the property at 6901 Humboldt Avenue, requesting approval of the site and building plans of a commercial building. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the site and building plans submitted in conjunction with Application No. 68025, with the following stipulations and conditions: 1. the six foot high redwood screen fence along the north property line shall extend from a point 10 feet from the easterly property line westerly to the west property line; but the fence that would ordinarily be required along the westerly property line need not be built at this time, if a performance bond to guarantee its installation at the time of construction on the lots west shall be submitted; 2. the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector's approval as to applicable building codes; 3. the drainage and utilities plans are subject to the City Engineer's approval; 4. this approval does not include approval of a free- standing sign except as to location as shown on the site plan;, 5. a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation of the site improvements designated on the plans. Motion carried unanimously. The next item of business to be discussed was Application No. 68026 submitted by Rodney Bernu, requesting approval of the site and building plans; of a commercial building on the property at 5901 Osseo Road. The Secretary pointed out that the property had recently been zoned to the Cl (Service/Office) classification, and that the Cl classification limited the height of structures to two stories. In light of the fact that the Planning Commissio and Council had generally considered the R5 and Cl uses to be interchangeable, with the R5 uses permitted to be three stories and Cl permitted to be two stories, the plans had been sub- mitted with a building which could possibly be construed to be two and a half stories in the front and three stories in the rear. A 'Lengthy discussion ensued as to whether this structure was a three story structure, a 2' story structure; whether it should be lowered slightly to conform to the two stories 1 1 1 -3- in front and three stories in the back; whether the "two stories" and "three stories" meant that there could be a two or three story building plus a basement area; whether the story limitation was from grade level, and if so, what grade, etc. Mr. Ausen commented that the attorney should probably comment as to what the "story" limitations really mean. The general consensus of the Commission was that if the two and one half or three story buildings were acceptable in the R5 zones similarly situated to the Cl zones, that the Cl zones should probably also permit two and one half or three story, but since that is not the case at this time, that the plans should comply with the present Cl requirements. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted in conjunction with Application No. 68026 be approved for the property at 5901 Osseo Road, with the following stipulations and conditions: 1. the plans shall be revised so that the face of the building (on Osseo Road) would be two stories in height to comply with the two story limitation in the Cl zone, but that there may be three stories on the west side of the building; 2. the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector's approval as to applicable building codes; 3. the drainage and utilities plans are subject to the City Engineer's approval; 4. a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted -to the City to guarantee the installation of the site improvements designated on the plans. Motion carried unanimously. Application No. 68024 submitted by American Construction Company was next heard. The Commission reviewed the site and building plans for a proposed commercial building for the property at 4816 - 68th Avenue North, such building to be used by the Rockwell Manufacturing Company as a sales and office building. The Commission took note of the proposed joint use easement for driveway purposes to be used by the present owner of the property, Lecon Properties, and the future owner. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the site and building plans submitted with Application No. 68024, with the following stipulations and conditions : 1 that the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector's approval as to applicable building codes; 2. utilities and drainage plans are subject to the approval of thJe City Engineer; 100 -4- 3. a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the site improvements as designated on the plans submitted. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68027, requesting approval of the site and building plans of a pro- posed apartment building at 6737 Humboldt Avenue North, as submitted by Dr. Irving Herman, owner of the property. The Secretary reviewed for the Commission the history of the property, concerning a previous denial of a special use request to build a total of 22 units on the property rather than the 18 units permitted by the density standards of the City. The Commission was informed that the applicant had proceeded according to the conception that 18 units could be accommodated on the property according to the R5 density standards. It was explained further, that this property had, in the past, dedicated 30 feet for Humboldt Avenue, but since that time it had become the policy of the City to acquire 35 feet, so if this had been a platting request, an additional five feet of street right-of-way would be required. However, since this property is already a separate parcel and does not require subdivision, the requirement of an additional five feet might not be possible; further, such a dedication would lower the area of the property to 48,240 square feet less than the 48,600 squ7,re feet required for 18 units. It was the concensus that the matter of additional roadway would be left to the City Council to determine. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted with Application No. 68027 be approved with the following stipulations and conditions: 1. the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector's approval as to applicable building codes; 2. the utilities and drainage plans are subject to the 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 to the City to guarantee the the site improvements as designated on the plans submitted; 4. trees shown on the site plan shall be of a hardwood species other than elm. Motion carried unanimously. Application No. 68,018 submitted by Glad and Miller Construction Company, which had been tabled at the Commission's meeting of May 4th, was next discussed. Mssrs. Webber, Miller and Herman were present to answer questions if asked, as were several residents of the area, including their spokesman, a ',1 u -5- Mr. Nichols. (Mr. Bogucki left the meeting at 10:45 P.M. and returned at 11:45 P.M., during the discussion of this appli- cation.) A lengthy discussion of this requested rezoning to R5 (Multiple Residence) ensued, with the Commission reviewing the information which had been gathered at the previous public hearing, and also asking questions of those present to gain additional information. One of the main issues discussed with respect to the proposed rezoning was the provision of proper access for a higher density usage of the property, with the cutting through of Azelia Avenue being one of the prime topics. Also discussed was the response of the Park and Recreation Commission to the desirability or necessity of acquiring the beach property (with the negative answer of the Park and Recreation Commission being noted) and the future acquisition plans of the City for lake shore on Twin Lakes. The applicants commented that they would be quite willing to enter into a binding agreement, if acceptable to the City, that if the State of Minnesota did not provide proper access to this property upon the closing of access to Highway 100, that the applicants themselves would acquire such an access towards Lakebreeze Avenue. The attorney for the applicant, Mr. Herman, commented that the agreement could stipulate that the owners of this property would pay the total cost of condemnation and installation of the segment of Azelia Avenue which would have to be cut through between the present stub of Azelia and Lakeside Avenue. Several of the Commissioners commented that it would be a better situation to have the access now rather than at some questionable time in the future. Also discussed was the possibility of R3 or R4 development in place of R5; the applicants stated however, that they would have no interest in R3 development and were not fully familiar with the R4 type of development. Subsequent to this discussion, member Grosshans moved and member Ditter seconded to recommend to the City Council that the rezoning to R5 (Multiple Residence) as requested in Application No. 68018 be denied, due to the fact that although the Commission is not particularly opposed to a higher type of use for this property, the access which would be in existence upon the closing of Highway 100 access is not proper and suffi- cient access for this type of higher use; further, the Commission cannot be put in the position of accepting direct access onto Highway 100 even until it is closed, as such access for this higher density use would be dangerous both to the residents and the general public using the highway. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that the preliminary plat of "Shell's Brooklyn Center 2nd Addition" as submitted in conjunction with Appli- cation No. 68021 by Norman and Myra Chazin be approved. Voting in favor of the motion were Ausen, Jensen, and Grosshans, not voting were Ditter and Bogucki; motion carried. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Ditter, to close the public hearing on Application No. 68022 submitted by Charles Velie, Jr. and table the application for further consideration of the preliminary plat of "Velie Addition" . Motion carried unanimously. 105 -6- Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the preliminary plat of "Ryden's 4th Addition" as submitted by Ethel Magnuson in conjunction with Application No. 68023. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer explained to the Commission that a letter had been received from the SunRay-DX Oil Company requesting an extension of the effective time for their special use permit for a service station at 65th and Humboldt Avenue, as had been approved in conjunction with Application No. 67038. Mr. Van Eeckhout explained that it was neither in the interest of the City nor of the Oil Company to construct the service station at this time, as the final grades had not been set for 65th Avenue to the west of Humboldt Avenue, Since the special use permission was to expire on August 21, 1968, the Oil Company had requested an extension of one year on the special use permission. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to the City Council that approval of the special use permission originally granted to the SunRay D-X Company under Application No. 67038 for a service station at 65th and Humboldt Avenue to be effective for an additional year, until August 21, 1969. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission discussed the date of its next regular meeting, as the normal date on which the meeting would be held would fall on July 4th. A concensus was reached that the next regular meeting would take place on the date of the June study meeting, on June 27th. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Grosshans, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 12:30 A.M. Chai n cos 1 1 137 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota June 27, 1968 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, Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Vernon Ausen and Helmer Engstrom were present. Also present were C. E. Van Eeckhout, and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of June 6th. Motion carried unanimously. The first item of business to be discussed was Application No. 68029 submitted by Northwestern Bell Telephone Company, requesting approval of site and building plans of an addition to the present building on the property at 1101 - 65th Avenue North. The Commission discussed the proposed expansion with Mr. Norman Olson of Bell Telephone, who explained that the expansion was intended to provide for additional electrical relay equip- ment. He pointed out that the present office and testing use of the building would also continue as in the past. In respoiisc to a question of whether this building would become unusable to Bell Telephone, Mr. Olson stated this would be highly unlikely. The Commission then expressed concern that the property be capable of being used for another purpose, such as an office use, should the telephone company cease to need the facility, with primary concern being for adequate parking for such changed use. A cursory examination indicated that sufficient parking would be available, although a substantial site revision would be necessary. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the site and building plans submitted by Northwestern Bell Telephone Company in conunction with Application No. 68029 on the property at 1101 - 65th Avenue, with the following stipulations and conditions: 1) that poured-in-place concrete curbing be installed on the perimeter of the parking area and along the driveway; 2) the driveway width shall be not less than 24 feet. Further, the Commission takes note that the property seems to be of sufficient size to accommodate sufficient parking for a different use should the telephone company cease to own the property in the future. Motion carried unanimously. 188 141 -2- The next application to be considered was No. 68017 sub- mitted by Gale Pierce, requesting rezoning of the property at 5960 Osseo Road from R-1 to R-B. The Secretary reviewed for the Commission the past tabling of this application pending the outcome of the Comprehensive Rezoning which had been in progress at the time when this application was made. It was noted that the Comprehensive Rezoning had since taken place and had accomp lished a rezoning to Cl (Service/Office) of this property and that the requested rezoning from R1 to RB had thus become redundant. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68017 be denied, inasmuch as the property at 5960 Osseo Road has already been zoned to a Cl zoning classification to accommodate the office use as pro- posed by Mr. Pierce. Motion carried unanimously. The next item to be discussed was Application No. 68022 submitted by Charles Velie on behalf of Velie Motor Company, requesting approval of the preliminary plat of "Velie Addition" at the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Highway 152 and Interstate 94. It was noted that the public hearing on the application had been held on June 6th, and that the matter had been tabled. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the preliminary plat of "Velie Addition" . Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Engstrom, to re-table Application No. 68011 submitted by Howard Olson of the Shell Oil Station at 1505 - 69th Avenue North until the meeting of July 18th, as the applicant is not present at this meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ausen, to re-table Appli- cation No. 68007 submitted by Sicjncrafter's on behalf of Phillips Oil Company at 6850 Osseo Road until the meeting of July 18th, as the applicant is not present at this meeting. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68028 sub- mitted by Miles Fiterman (of Miles Construction Company) req,jesting a rezoning from B-3 (General Business) to R-5 (Multiple Family Residence) of the property in the southeasterly quadrant of the intersection of Camden Avenue and 66th Avenues. Mssrs. Mattinen, Erickson, and Lyon appeared on behalf of the application for Mr. Fit erman. it was noted that the pro- perty had been rezoned from the B-3 zoning classification to a C-2 classification by the City Council subsequent to the sub- mission of this application, but that the R-5 zone being requested was in existence both prior to and after the Compre- hensive Zoning. The applicants discussed the rezoning with the 142 139 -3- Commission explaining that their intent was to construct a multiple dwelling in accordance with the density standards of the City on the property, the design of such multiple dwelling to be similar to the Company's forthcoming project at 60.th and Humboldt. The applicant stated that they thoughtthe area was suited to the multiple dwelling usuage and that it would be in the form of a transition such as is used in normal zoning practice. The Commission discussed the concept of the Comprehensive Plan for this area, that of retaining this property in a commercial classification for specialty type uses, and that the insertion of multiple residence zoning might have a detrimental effect on the future development of this area for future commercial purposes. As there were no other persons present to comment on the application, Member Ausen moved and member Engstrom seconded that the public hearing be closed on Application No. 68028. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that the rezoning to R-5 (Multiple Family Residence_ as requested in Application No. 68028 by Miles Fiterman be denied, in that the requested rezoning would not be consistent with the long range planning concept of this area as a commercial rather than residential area. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission then entered into a discussion of the elapsed special use permits as described in the June 6th agenda, and in addition, the subject of special use permits in general. A discussion relative to the issuance of special use permits for home occupations ensued, with the general consensus being that it would seem reasonable to limit special home occupations by time so that reviewal could be made of them periodically and the opportunity for a public hearing made at such time so that home occupations which might be detrimental would not continue forever. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that consideration be given to the inclusion in the zoning ordinance of a provisions relating to special home occupations, of the following nature. "Section 35-220. SPECIAL USE PERMITS. . . . 6. Expiration of special use permits for special home occupations in all residential areas. When a special use permit for a special home occupation has been issued pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance, and an expiration date or earlier expiration date has not been specified, such permit shall expire 3 years from the date of approval of the special use, unless extended by the City Council following review of the use by the Planning Commission and Council. 140 1 143 -4- Special use permits for special home occupations Which were granted pursuant to the provisions of a prior ordinance shall expire 3 years from the effective date of this ordinance amendment, unless an earlier date of expiration was specified in the original approval of the special use. Approximately one month prior to the date of expiration of a special home occupation, the zoning official shall determine through contact with the operator of the use as to whether the person wishes the use to be continued. Should the answer be in the affirmative, the zoning official shall place the item on the Agenda of the Planning Commission for the purpose of holding a public hearing as is held with a new special use, to determine if detrimental effects of the special use in question have evidencedthemselves during the period the use has been in operation. The procedure to be followed in respect to the extension of a special use shall be the same as that used during the initial application for such uses. '! Motion carried unanimously. The discussion of special uses in general continued, especially as the special use relates to service station retail uses. It was pointed out that Section 35-800 and 35-801 pro- vided for administrative permits for certain types of special events, and that machine-contained activities might be con- sidered to be permitted under the C-2 classification as "incidental items" for sale at a service station. The Staff was asked to review the Sections of the new zoning ordinance, especially Section 35-800, to see if a provision could be developed which would provide for administrative approval for sales of miscellaneous items for machines outside the primary building. The Commission then took action on a number of special use permits with time limits fixed on them at the time of their approval. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that the special use permission granted by the Council on November 8, 1965, (Application No. 65084) be amended to permit a single ice machine to be used on the property at 6245 Osseo Road for an additional 2 years, until November 8, 1969. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to the City Council that the special use permission granted by the Council on November 14, 1966, (Application No. 66076) be amended to permit the operation of the beauty shop special home occupation at 6325 Osseo Road for an additional 2 years, until November 14, 1969. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that the special use permission granted by the Council on March 6, 1967, (Application No. 67007) be amended to permit the rental of trailers on the property at 6044 Osseo Road for an additional 2 years, until March 6, 1970. Motion carried unanimously. 147 -5- Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that the special use permission granted by the Council on May 16, 1966, (Application No. 66031) be amended to permit the use of a metal building as a newspaper carrier pickup station on the property at 6830 Osseo Road for an additional 2 years, until May 16, 1970. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that the special use permission granted by the Council on July 6, 1965, (Application No. 65045) be amended to permit the operation of the beauty shop special home occupation at 6200 Osseo Road for an additional 3 years, until July 6, 1971. Motion carried unanimously. The date of the next meeting of the Commission was set for July 18, 1968, inasmuch as the date of the meeting would other- wise fall on July 4th. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:05 P.M. Chairma 148 79 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota July 18, 1968 The Planning Commission met in special session and was called to order by its Chairman, Robert Jensen, at 7:43 P.M. Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Commissioners Henry Bogucki, Paul Ditter, and Helmer Engstrom were present. Also present were C. E. Van Eeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. The first items to be discussed were Applications No. 68033 and 68034, submitted by the Camden Park Church of the Nazarene, requesting approval of the preliminary plat of "Nazarene Addition" , and special use permission and plan approvals for construction and operation of a church on property within the plat, on the south side of 73rd Avenue between Lyndale and Camden Avenues. Mssrs. Bloom and MacMillan of the Nazarene Church were present to discuss the applications, and Mr. Benedict, owner of part of the property involved, was also present. The proposed subdivision of property for the church and sur- rounding area were first discussed with the Commission, with the Staff explaining a number of changes which had occurred in the proposed subdivision since its original conception. These changes involved the "squaring-off" of the parcel to be used for the church, and the convers:,.on of part of the former church site into additional residential parcels. It was pointed out to the Commission that the changes had been made in consultation with the Staff, in an attempt to avoid further fragmentation of properties in the area, in the hope that by leaving a greater depth of land between Lyndale and the church site, that a better development of that property could be achieved in the future. The Commission then examined the plans of the proposed church structure and its site plans, with note being taken of its access to the future collector 73rd Avenue, and the relation of the church site to future surrounding development. Some discussion of utilities and future street patterns in the area also ensued. The plans submitted indicated site planning toward a possible explansion to a 300 seat church, although the immediate plans would envisage about 165 seating capacity. Comment was made regarding the use of concrete block for the church, with another church in the City along Interstate 94 being referred to by Mr. MacMillan as an example of the type of architecture to be used in this case. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the preliminary plat of "Nazarene Addition" , as requested in Application No. 68033, amended to reflect a 10-lot subdivision; one lot for the church use, and 9 lots for residential purposes. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to Application No. 68034, 180 1 1 131 -2- requesting special use permission to construct and operate a church in an R1 zone, and approval of site and building plans for said church, inasmuch as the proposed church development meets the criteria for the issuance of special use permits for such purpose. This approval, however, is contingent upon the following stipulations and conditions: 1. screen fencing, in accordance with the standards of the zoning ordinance, shall be installed by the church upon the development of the residential properties on the west, south, and east; 2. poured-in-place concrete curbing shall be installed on the perimeter of parking and driving areas as shown on the plans submitted; 3. drainage and utilities plans shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 4. building plans are subject to the final approval of the Building Inspector; 5. a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation of the site improvements designated on the plans sub- mitted and approved. Motion carried unanimously. The next item to be heard was Application No. 68032, sub- mitted by King's Academy, requesting special use permission to use the (former church) property at 6120 Xerxes Avenue as a private Christian day school. Mr. and Mrs. Laurel Zipf, representing King's Academy, were present. Mr. Zipf explained that King's Academy would operate a day school in the church building as it presently exists. Future plans envisage an expansion of the building and a remodeling of the sanctuary area, but no substantial changes at present. He noted that the former congregation of the church, much reduced from its former size, would be permitted by King's to use the building for religious services. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that special use permission be granted to King's Academy to operate a private school in and on the property at 6120 Xerxes Avenue as requested in Application No. 68032. Motion carried unanimously. Application No. 68036, requesting special use permission to use a single family dwelling at 7110 Noble Avenue as a "youth house", was next heard. Mr. Ronald Kronen, a Trustee of the applicant, Brooklyn Methodist Church, was present to represent the application. Mr. Kronen explained to the Commission the youth house concept which the church wished to apply to this property, as a gathering and study place near, but not a physical part of, the Brooklyn Methodist Church across Noble 1 1 1 -3- Avenue from the house. He explained that non-members of the Church would be using the facility only as guests of the members, and that the house would be for the 14 to 22 age group. Upon construction of the new Brooklyn Methodist Church within the next three years he noted, the two homes (one the youth house the other being occupied by the assistant pastor) would be removed to make way for the church's parking lot. Some questions were raised by the Commission regarding poss- ible traffic generation by this use, and the ability of the church to cope with problems which might arise. Mr. Kronen responded that with the assistant pastor living next door and adult supervision available, no problems should arise. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68036 be approved, and special use permission to use the house at 7110 Noble Avenue for a youth activities building be given to the Brooklyn Methodist Church, with the provision that the special use permission be reviewable in two years ' time to determine if it should continue. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68031, sub- mitted by Harold Jorgenson, requesting a variance from Section 35-400 to permit a lesser front yard setback than the 35 feet required for the even-numbered properties at 4506 through 4526 Kathrene Drive. Mr. Jorgenson was present, as was the property owner abutting one of the properties in question, residing at 6325 Lee Avenue. Mr. Jorgenson made reference to poor soil conditions on a number of the properties, as well as design possibilities which would be enhanced by a lesser setback than the 35 feet now required by the ordinance. He stated that the lesser setback to be granted could be to 30 feet, and that he would probably produce a staggered effect along the street, as the homes are to be custom built designs. The Chairman explained to Mr. Jorgeneson that the Commission had been reviewing the matter of residential setbacks, and that it would seem appropriate to continue this matter for discussion at its next study meeting. The abutting property owner who was present stated that he had no real objection to lesser setbacks, as long as the difference between the property next door and his was not too great. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to table Appli- cation No. 68031 for further review at the Commission's next study meeting, with the concurrence of the applicant, and with a recommendation to be passed on to the Council for its consider- ation at its meeting of August 5th. Motion carried unanimously. The next item of business was Application No. 68030, sub- mitted by Farrell's Ice Cream Parlour Restaurants (Caritas Inc.) requesting approval of site and building plans for a Farrell's restaurant in the Brookdale periphery at 5524 Osseo Road. Mr. James Hopf, who will be the manager, and Mr. Bill Estebo, the architect, were present. Mr. Hopf described the Farrell 's 184 -4- operation, some of its history, and with Mr. Estebo's aid, the proposed plans for the Brookdale store. The Commission reviewed the plans submitted, as well as the freestanding sign proposed, with discussion of the size of sign to be permitted by the Council's proposed graph of sign sizes. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to Application No. 68038, including site and building plans for a commercial building on the property at 5524 Osseo Road, and a variance for a freestanding sign on the property, with the following stipulations and conditions: 1. the freestanding sign to be permitted shall not exceed 155 square feet in area, and 24Z feet in height above finished floor grade of the building; 2. drainage and utilities plans shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 3. building plans are subject to the final approval of the Building Inspector; 4. a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation of the site improvements designated on the plans submitted and approved. Motion carried unanimously. The next Application to be considered was No. 68035 sub- mitted by Brookdale Chrysler/Plymouth (Chrysler Motors Corporation) requesting approval of site and building plans for an addition of site and building to the existing vehicle sales operation, and special use permission for the sale of motor vehicles on the expanded location, at 6121 Osseo Road. Mssrs. Michael Robins and James Christy were present to represent the appli- cation, as were David Shrock of Chrysler Motors, Don Wright, architect, and a representative of Steber lighting company. Mr. Robins described the proposed site and building addition, including revisions to lighting, fencing, the used car sales office, and the installation of a 20 foot high backdrop wall to screen display lighting from residential areas to the west. Mssrs. Tacheny and Jurgensen, owners of property abutting the dealership, commented on past lighting and noise problems between the dealership and the adjacent residential properties. Mr. Tacheny noted that a year and a half had been spent in getting the lighting adjusted so that it was not objectionable, and that if there is some problem with the new lighting, that it not take as long to correct as did the original lighting. Both men asked that the west door to the garage be closed at a reasonable hour at night, such as 10 P.M., and that the proposed illumination level for the landscaped strip around the dealer- ship seemed to be a good idea. Mr. Robins stated that the new site design would alleviate the traffic congestion problems which had evidence themselves on the site, now that easy access from 62nd Avenue was available. He expressed interest in the possible widening and curbing of 62nd, and was told to submit a request for same to the City Engineer. 186 1 1_?7 -5- Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to Application No. 68035, requesting approval of site and building plans and special use permission for the vehicle sales operation of Brookdale Chrysler/ Plymouth at 6121 Osseo Road, inasmuch as the proposed development of the property meets the standards for the issuance for such a purpose if developed as shown on the plans submitted. This approval, however, is contingenet upon the following: 1. drainage and utilities plans shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 2. building plans are subject to the final approval of the Building Inspector; 3. a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation of the site improvements designated on the plans submitted and approved. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Bogucki stated for the Council 's consideration that he would suggest that the Council direct the Staff to study the Brookdale Chrysler/Plymouth facility and its surrounding area to determine the logic and feasibility of having the access from the dealership directly onto the Osseo Road closed, now that adequate access has been developed to the dealership from 62nd Avenue. The final item of regular business was Application No. 68007 submitted by Signcrafters on behalf of Phillips Oil at 6830 Osseo Road, requesting a variance to permit erection of a "freestanding" sign, in this case a removal of the existing freestanding sign from a pylon at the corner to a location atop the canopy's support member. Jack Lawrence of Signcrafter's discussed the request with the Commission. The Commission discussed the Commission's versus the Council's proposed signing regulations; the question of freestanding, canopy, and roof signs; and the question of what regulations would finally be enacted for signing. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council thatApplication No. 68007 be denied. Voting in favor were Engstrom, Bogucki, and Ditter; voting against was Jensen; motion carried. Member Henry Bogucki introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 68-4 RESOLUTION REGARDING APPLICATION FOR GRANT TO AM-UIRE OPEN SPACE IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER WHEREAS, on November 7, 1966, the Brooklyn Center Village Council adopted a comprehensive plan for the (then) Village; and 128 ,r -6- WHEREAS, Chapter 670, Section 6, Laws of Minnesota 1965 require that, following the certification of the comprehensive plan to the (then) Village Council by the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission shall review all proposals for the acquisition of lands by the Village to insure compliance with said plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council proposes to acquire fee title to the following listed parcels of land, and to hold and preserve said lands for open-space uses; to wit: Parcel 1. Part of Outlot I, Plat 90068, Hennepin County Parcel 1-A. Part of Outlot H, Plat 90068, Hennepin County Parcel 2. Lots 1-6, 8-12, 14-22, 24-29 and 31-34 (all inclusive) , Plat 90070, Hennepin County Parcel 3. Parcel 2325, Plat 89102, Hennepin County Parcel 4. Parcel 917, Plat 89695, Hennepin County Parcel 4-A. Part of Tract A and all of Tract V, Plat 89695, Hennepin County Parcel 5. Parcel 8300, Plat 89699, Hennepin County Parcel 5-A Part of Parcel 212, Plat 89010, Hennepin County Parcel 5-B. Part of Parcel 204, Plat 89010, Hennepin County Parcel 6. Part of Parcel 330, Plat 89010, Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, a number of the aforementioned parcels are proposed for immediate development for residential and industrial uses which would remove the possibility of their acquisition for open-space use at a reasonable cost; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed acquisition and has compared the same with the comprehensive plan: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center that the acquisition of the lands listed above for open-space purposes is in conformance with the comprehensive plan for the City of Brooklyn Center, and that said acquisition is essential for the realization of the community open-space goals. cc Date Clyairm n Planni"Co fission ATTEST: Secretary-Planning Commission The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Helmer Engstrom, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Robert Jensen, Paul Ditter, Helmer Engstrom, Henry Bogucki; and the following voted against the same: none; whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:40 P.M. C ai an 126 1 189 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota August 1, 1968 The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans at 7:40 P.M. Roll Call: Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissions Vernon Ausen, Helmer Engstrom, Paul Ditter and Henry Bogucki were present. Chairman Jensen arrived later in the meeting, at 8:55 P,M. Also present were C. E. VanEeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. The Secretary informed the Commission that Application No. 68040 (Bar-Ett Investment Co.) and Application No. 68042 (Boutells) had been deleted from the agenda at the request of the applicants. The first item of business to be considered was Application No. 68039 submitted by European Health Spa-Brookdale, requesting approval of site and building plans of a commercial building on the property at 2920 County Road 10. Mr. Leonard Rice of European Health Spa was present to discuss the plans with the Commission, In reviewing the plans submitted, the Commission questioned the setback of the building along the north line at a 10 foot distance rather than 40 feet which would be required for a rear setback. The Staff explained to the Commission that in this unique situation with frontage on the lot on two streets (Northway Drive and County Road 10) ; and with the remainder of the lots in this block being corner lots which would be permitted to use their interior lot lines as side lot lines with 10 foot setbacks, it was felt by the Staff in reviewing the plans that the 10 foot setback was appropriate. The Commission then proceeded to discuss the various interpre- tations which could be given to allowing a 10 foot setback in this case. Although the concensus of the Commission was that the 10 foot setback for the building would not be inappropriate in this case, there was some concern that it might be used in a detrimental manner in some other situation and suggested that the Staff review other properties in the City to see if this could be applied in such a manner. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ausen, to pass on Application No. 68039 submitted by European Health Spa without recommendation, for although the plans would be sufficient in other respects, there is a concern by the Commission with the "rear setback" along the north property line, for several reasons: a) there seems to be no good, solid criterian to determine what is a front, side, or rear yard setback, or at least there is a difference of opinion within the Commission as to how this shall be done; b) the property appears to have "frontage" on both Northway Drive and County Road 10; c) the Commission is concerned with interpretation in this case with regard to the possibility of setting a precedent which would require a similar interpretation in some other case, for example, along the Osseo Road, 'w 1 1 n� -2- although in this particular case if the Council sees fit to interpret that this setback is proper in light of the ordinance, that the Commission would have no objection and sees no detrimental affect to the 10 foot setback. Motion carried unanimously. The next item of business was Application No. 68041 sub- mitted by Nordling and Welter requesting approval of site and building plans of an apartment development on the property bounded by Bryant, 66th, and Camden Avenues and Interstate No. 94. Mr. Ken Nordling and Mr. Gus Welter were present to exhibit the plans. Mr. Jensen arrived during the discussion of the plans. The Staff explained to the Commission that the plans being submitted incorporate 65th Avenue between Bryant and Camden Avenues and that the applicants have requested vacation of the 65th section therein as a street (with the retention of a utilities easement) and that a plat to this effect would be submitted to the Commission at the next meeting. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the site and building plans of an apartment development as requested in Application No. 68041 by Nordling and Welter, with the following stipulations and conditions: 1) the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector's final approval with respect to applicable building codes; 2) drainage and utilities 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 to the City to guarantee the installation of the site improvements as shown on the plans sub- mitted and approved or as required by ordinance; 4) the property shall be re-platted into a single parcel, including appropriate road dedications along Bryant and Camden Avenues. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was a request by Macey Sign Company (for Pontiac of Brookdale) , No. 68043, requesting a variance to permit erection of a freestanding sign on the property at 6801 Osseo Road. Mr. Lowell Broin, manager of Pontiac of Brookdale, was present to discuss the request for a freestanding sign with the Commission. He produced a rendering of the proposed sign to be erected at the 68th and Osseo Road intersection, and related this to dimensional drawings which had been submitted showing the possible variation in height which could be made to the sign, depending on the approval which the Commission and City Council would give. The Commission took note of the fact that although permission could be given for such a sign if the City were operating under the Council 's proposed draft, the Commission's previously recommended sign ordinance would limit the height of this sign to 20 feet, 188 -3- and that there appeared to be a completely different view on signing on the part of the Council than that which the Commission had had during its development of the sign ordinance. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Bogucki, to table Application No. 68043 submitted by Macey Sign Company to enable the Commission to meet with the City Council to discuss the pro= posed sign ordinance with reference to the subject of free- standing signs in order to exchange views, as there seems to be a great difference in the Council's developing sign ordinance from that originally proposed by the Planning Commission on January 5, 1967. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the preliminary plat of "Chrysler Motors Corporation 2nd Addition" at 62nd and Osseo Road, as requested in Application No. 68037, with the further recommendation that a walkway easement along the west property line of the proposed plat be dedicated to the City if the question of legal liability for persons using the easement can be worked out between the City and Chrysler Corporation. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the preliminary plat of "Jessie's Addition" lying south and west of 71st and Humboldt Avenues North, as requested in Application No. 68038. Motion carried unanimously. The next item of business was Application No. 68031 sub- mitted by Harold Jorgenson requesting a variance from Section 35-400 to permit a lesser front yard setback than the 35 feet required for properties between 4506 and 4526 Kathrene Drive. The application had been tabled at the Commission's July 18th meeting so that the Commission could have a chance to discuss the matter of residential setbacks at a study meeting prior to making its recommendation for the Council 's consideration on August 5th. The Commission entered into a discussion of the subject of residential setbacks, weighing the pros and cons of reducing the setbacks throughout the City, or for portions there- of, or for the instant application only. The concensus of the Commission appeared that if a change in the setback standards to the ordinance is to be made, that it should not be made as a result of individual approvals by variance but rather should be a change to the ordinance itself, and that if a change in the ordinance is to be recommended to the Council, that it will take more time for study. Motion by Jensen, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68031 submitted by Harold Jorgenson requesting a variance on setback for several properties on Kathrene Drive be denied, inasmuch as the application does not satisfy the standards set out for variances in the zoning ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. VZT 1 1 1 � , -4- The Commission next discussed the subject of a Zoning Ordinance amendment pending before the Council. Mr. Jensen explained to the Commission that certain members of the Commission had expressed concern about the proposed ordinance amendment after its first reading by the Council, and Mr. Jensen in turn had requested that the item not have a second reading until the Commission had had an opportunity to comment thereon. The pertinent sections of the proposed ordinance amendment related to building heights in Cl office zones and screening requirements for parking and loading areas. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Jensen, recommend to the City Council that the wording be changed in the proposed ordinance amendment to permit buildings in the Cl zoning classification to be 3 stories in height, as a recognition of the relative interchangaibility of the R5 and C1 zones. If, in addition to the 3 story height, basements for such uses as vehicle parking are desired, the recommendation of the Commission is that such basements be completely subgrade, so that a three and a half story effect is not produced in these two zones. If changes are deemed necessary in the other class- ifications to clarify this point, it is recommended that they be made. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Jensen, to recommend to the City Council that Section 3 of the proposed ordinance amendment relating to screening of parking and loading areas be deleted from the present amendment to allow for further study by the Planning Commission on this matter, as the proposed amendment appears to have far-reaching affects for many types of uses for which the section may not have been intended. Motion carried unanimously. The last item of business to be discussed was Application No. 68011 submitted by Howard Olson, operator of the Shell Oil Station at 1505 - 69th Avenue North. Mr. Olson was not in attendance, but had been contacted on several ocassions asking him to appear. Inasmuch as the application had been tabled at a number of the Commission's meetings, the consensus was that action should be taken so that the matter could be pre- sented to the City Council. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68011 submitted by Howard Olson of Shell Oil at 1505 - 69th Avenue North be denied, inasmuch as the Commission feels that the rental of trucks from the service station property would be detrimental to the adjacent properties, and since there is a lack of information as to the rental of trailers on the site, the Commission feels that approval should not be granted. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Jensen, seconded by Ditter, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 12:18 A.M. Ch an Oil 1 1 1 �; 253 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota September 5, 1968 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 Helmer Engstrom and Vernon Ausen were present. Also present were C. E. Van Eeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to approve the minute: of the regular meetings of June 6 and August 1, and the special meeting of July 18, 1968. Motion carried unanimously. The first application to be considered by the Commission was No. 68046 submitted by Mrs. Andrew Boyer, requesting approval of the preliminary plat of a Registered Land Survey for the property bounded generally by 60th, Bryant, 59th and Colfax Avenues. Mrs. Boyer was present to answer questions of the Commission. The Staff commented on the sufficiency of this proposed subdivision, noting that the corner lots in the proposed sub- division were substandard in width according to the present ordinance requiring 90 foot wide corner lots, but were in accord with the majority of the surrounding properties which had been platted during the period when 75 foot corner lots were required. In addition, it was recommended by the Staff to the Commission that deeds for the portions of property lying within 59th and 60th Avenue be given to the City and that an easement document for drainage and utilities purposes be submitted to the City for the property along the common property line between Bryant and Colfax Avenues. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ausen, to reccnmend to the City Council that approval be granted to the preliminary plat of the Registered Land Survey submitted by Mrs. Andrew Boyer in conjunction with Application No. 68046, acknowledging the corner lots ' substandard width, but with the following stipulations : 1) Tracts B and S of the proposed subdivision shall be deeded to the City for street purposes; 2) an easement for drainage and utilities purposes shall be given to the City along the common rear lot line of the properties (between Bryant and Colfax Avenues) . Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68044 submitted by Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Inc. , requesting approval of the preliminary plat of a Registered Land Survey for that property generally bounded by Interstate No. 94, State Highway 100, and Shingle Creek. Mr. Roger Newstrom of B. C. I. P. was present to discuss the subdivision with the Commission. 254 -2- Following a lengthy discussion of the future development of the industrial park, the following action was taken. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that the preliminary plat of the Registered Land Survey submitted by B.C.I.P. , Inc. , in conjunction with Application No. 68044, be approved, with the condition that a deed to Tract G of the proposed Registered Land Survey be submitted to the City for street purposes. Voting in favor of the motion were Jensen, Grosshans, and Engstrom; not voting was Ausen. Motion carried. Application No. 68048 submitted by Darrel Farr, requesting approval of site and building plans of a commercial building at 5831 Osseo Road, was next heard. Mr. Farr presented the plans to the Commission, commenting on the initial desire of the future owner of the building, Dr. Mattison, to have a larger building with rental space in it, which idea was dropped due to high land costs of adjoining land. The Commission discussed with Mr. Farr the future possibility of his acquiring additional Cl properties in the vicinity, and suggested the possibility of using the condominium ownership concept. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the site and building plans for a commercial building as requested in Application No. 68048, with the following conditions: 1) a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the site improvements shown on the plans; 2) the plans are subject to the Building Inspector's approval with respect to applicable building codes; 3) the drainage and utilities plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 4) although screening as required by the City Ordinances is not shown on the site plans submitted, such screening shall be required in accordance with the regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Rosenbloom and Mr. Lubov next presented the revised site and building plans for the Federal Lumber Company property at 4810 Lilac Drive, in conjunction with Application No. 68008 The Secretary noted to the Commission that the plans for the property had been approved earlier in the year, but that additional buildings had been proposed on the property and a revised site plan is now being submitted. The Commission then discussed the plans with the applicants. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the site and buildings plans for the Federal Lumber property at 4810 Lilac Drive, in conjunction with Application No. 68008, with the condition that the the conditions of plan approval set out by the City Council on March 25, 1968, shall apply to these revised site and building plans. Motion carried unanimously. 1 1 1 -3- Application No. 68045 submitted by Nordling and Welter was next heard. The application requested approval of the preliminary plat of "Nordling-Welter Addition" , which property is bounded by 66th, Camden, Interstate #94 and Bryant Avenue. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that approval be granted to the preliminary plat of "Nordling-Welter Addition" with the following conditions: 1) a 15 foot drainage and utilities easement shall be provided along the south edge of the subdivision, adjacent to the Interstate 94 right-of-way; 2) a 60 foot utilities easement shall be retained in the right-of-way of old 65th Avenue North, assuming the vacation of 65th Avenue between Camden and Bryant Avenues as indicated by the plat and as indicated in a letter from the applicants requesting such vacation. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to table Applications 68043 by Macey Sign Company and 68047 by Northbrook Shopping Center, both applications relating to freestanding signery, in order that the Commission might receive the latest revision to the proposed sign ordinance as prepared by the City Council so that this further information might be applied to the applications. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:05 P.M. Chairm n 258 1 2 37 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota September 26, 1968 The Planning Commission met in special session in the cafetorium of the Brooklyn Center High School at 65th and Humboldt Avenues, at 10:50 P.M. , subsequent to the posting of a notice to that effect at the usual place of meeting at the City Hall. Roll Calls Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice-Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Adrian Dorenfeld, Helmer Engstrom, Vernon Ausen, Henry Bogucki, and Paul Ditter were present. Also present were C.E. Van Eeckhout and Richard Cihoski, Secretary to the Commission. The Commission reviewed the preliminary plats of three proposed Registered Land Surveys submitted by Dayton Development Company, under Applications 68049, 68050 and 68051. The pro- posed subdivisions consisted, respectively, of a division for the European Health Spa property, the future Super Valu site at the northwest corner of Xerxes Avenue and County Road ##10 and the future Movie Theater site at the southwest corner of County Road ##10 and Highway #100. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that the preliminary plat of a registered land survey as submitted by Dayton Development company in conjunction with Application No. 68049 be approved as submitted. Voting in favor were Ditter, Bogucki, Crosshans, Jensen, Ausen and Engstrom. Mr. Dorenfeld abstained. Motion carried. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that the preliminary plat of a registered land survey as submitted by Dayton Development Company in conjunntion with Application No. 68050 be approved as submitted, with the proviso that the extension of Northway Drive be deeded to the City as a public street. Voting in favor were Ditter, Bogucki, Gross- hans, Jensen, Ausen, and Engstrom. Mr. Dorenfeld abstained. Motion carried. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that the preliminary plat of a registered land survey as submitted by Dayton Development Company in conjunction with Application No. 68051 be approved as submitted. Voting in favor were Ditter, Bogucki, Grosshans, Jensen, Ausen, and Engstrom. Mr. Dorenfeld abstained. Motion carried. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimousl The meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M. Chai a 288 1 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning ConutAssion in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota October 3, 1968 The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 7:37 P.M. Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Paul Ditter, Vernon Ausen, and Helmer Engstrom were present. Commissioners Dorenfeld and Bogucki arrived later in the meeting, at 7:38 and 7:52 P.M. respectively, as noted below. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Grosshans, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of September 5th and the special meeting of September 26th. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Dorenfeld arrived just after the passage of the previous motion. M 2ty The first application to be considered was No. 68047 sub- C.7 mitted by Northbrook Shopping Center, requesting a variance to L.? permit the erection (raising) of a freestanding sign on the Center's property at the intersection of 57th Avenue and Highway #100. Mr. Ronald Blake, representing the Center, explained the desire of the Company to raise the present 32 foot high sign to a height of 40 feet, due to the effect of the change in elevation caused by the proposed bridge construction over Highway 100. He stated that innumerable requests had been made by the tenants of the Center for additional identification, due to the fact that many customers had difficulty in finding their way from the highway to the shopping cneter, especially when traveling south- ward on the highway. He compared the situation now existing with the previous Iten Chevrolet visibility problem caused by the presence of a freeway overpass. In response to a question from the Commission, Mr. Blake explained that the 8 foot raising elevation had been determined by the structural capacity of the existing sign, and that a raising of the sign to more than eight feet would require changes to the sign structure, which they did not wish to make. Mr. Ditter made the comment that the additional sign height might in fact not aid the Center, as the off ramp for traffic heading south on Highway 100 was several blocks away from the sign and that the drivers probably would not see the sign in time to turn off onto the on ramp. Mr. Jensen commented that the situation does seem similar to the Iten Chevrolet case, but that the question of whether the highway department changed its plan would seem pertinent to this application. A concensus of the Commission developed that it would be in the best interest of the application to defer action to allow the Commission an opportunity to go into the field to determine what signing solution would be best for the property and the community as a whole. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Engstrom, to close the public hearing on Application No. 68047 submitted by Northbrook Shopping Center, and take the matter under advisement pending a meeting at the site in the very near future. Motion carried unanimously, including Mr. Bogucki, who had arrived during the discussion of the Application. 262 -2- The next application to be considered was No. 68052 sub- mitted by Embretson and Woody Construction Company, requesting rezoning from C2 to R5 of the property lying on the east side of Humboldt Avenue (generally) between 67th and 69th Avenues, part of the Hi Crest Square commercial area. Mr. Ray McKenna, the president of Hi Crest Square, Inc. , presented himself to the Commission and explained the past, present, and supposed future ownership of the property con- tained within the 12 acre commercial node at the southeast corner of the intersection of 69th and Humboldt. He explained that the instant application had been made by other officers of the corporation. At this point, Mr. Stanley Sopcyzk, representative for Mr. Woody, appeared and commented on the proposed application for rezoning to multiple dwelling which he had made on behalf of Mr. Woody. Mr. Sopcyzk explained past attempts to develop the area commercially and related the commercial potential of the area to existing commercial developments at Northbrook and M Brookdale, and potential commercial developments in the L� Brooklyn Center industrial Park, or in Brooklyn Park near 77th C3 �7 Avenue. V The Commission reviewed items contained in the file which had been submitted by Mr. Sopcyzk in conjunction with this application and in conjunction with previous proposals which he had made to the Staff for commercial development of the area. Several members of the Commission commented to the effect that if the City determines that there is or will be a need for commercial activity within this neighborhood, that the City has a responsibility in its planning to protect and set aside such an area from present development to guarantee it for the future. Further, since the City has completed its planning study which indicated a neighborhood commercial center for this 12 acre parcel, it would seem that the burden of proof is now somewhat on the applicants to show that the zoning (or a portion thereof) is incorrect. Mssrs. Dorenfeld and Engstrom commented to the effect that if the concept of the R5 zoning along Humboldt Avenue is incorrect, this application should be denied even though the Commission might agree with the applicants that a lesser amount of commercial activity might serve the neighborhood adequately. Several members of the Commission observed that if, in fact, a commercial area should be constricted, it would seem more logical that the area adjacent to Humboldt would be commercial and the easterly area towards Emerson Avenue should be multiple residential, rather than the reverse, as is proposed by this application. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ditter, to close the public hearing on Application No. 68052. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68052 submitted by Embretson and Woody Construction Company be denied, in that the petition, if granted, would likely lead to a taking away of all. the commercially zoned property in the area because a rezoning to R5 on the east side of Humboldt would shortly be followed by a request for such rezoning of the remaining commercial property to its east, leaving only the two small commercial parcels adjacent to the Pure Oil Station as proposed in this instant application for rezoning. Motion carried unanimously. In a commentary to the applicant, some of the Commission members expressed an interest in further information supporting the statements of the applicants with respect to the lessening of the commercial land in this area and in a layout for a proposed smaller commercial development along Humboldt Avenue. Application No. 68053 submitted by Strand Construction Company was next heard, such application requesting a variance to construct an attached garage with a setback of 30 feet rather than the 35 feet required by ordinance on the property at 5931 June Avenue. Mr. Humble, owner of the property, was present to represent the application. Mr. Jensen read letters from the two abutting neighbors to Mr. Humble's property stating no objection to the proposed setback variance. He then called on comments from persons present, hearing from one of the abutting neighbors, and then proceeded to explain the Commission's past discussion of setbacks. Mr. Ausen commented that he did not really consider M that this would be a variance situation, in that the standards for granting such a variance are just not present; if, in fact, t=3 the 30 feet is correct, then it should be accomplished by an U ordinance change. A lengthy discussion by the Commission ensued, with the general concensus that the Commission sympathized with the desire of this applicant, and with other persons, to have a lesser street setback, but that the Commission had not drafted a proposed ordinance amendment and neither had the Council expressed interest in seeing such an amendment adopted. Motion by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ditter, that the Planning Commission feels that it is desirable to have variations in setbacks in residential areas within the City of Brooklyn Center, and that to accomplish this, the Commission feels that the setback for attached garages should be permitted to be at a lesser setback than the house itself. Therefore, the Planning Commission is passing the matter of Application No. 68053 on to the City Council without a recommendation, with notice to the Council that a recommended revision to the setback require- ments will be sent to the Council in the near future, with, at a minimum, a recommendation of a setback of 30 feet be adopted for attached garages. The Commission urges the Council, however, to consider the request contained in Application No. 58053 in light of the fact that this recommendation will be forthcoming, in the hope that the construction desired by the applicant can be commenced. The Planning Commission would have no alternative, if a recommendation on the application were made, than to deny the application based on the variance str-�xadards. although the Commission is in sympathy with the principle underlying the requested variance. Motion carried unanimously. Application No. 68057 submitted by Brooklyn Center Assemblies of God Church was next heard. The Application requested approval of site and building plans for an addition to the church at 6018 Xerxes Avenue North. Rev. LaVang and the Church's architect. Dwight Churchill, were present to discuss the plans with the Commission. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans of the addition to the church at 6018 Xerxes Avenue as requested in Application No. 68057 be approved, as submitted, with the following conditions and stipulations: 266 -4- 1) utilities and drainage plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 2) building plans are subject to the approval of the Building Inspector with respect to applicable building codes; 3) a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the site improvements shown on the approved plans. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68054 sub- mitted by Brooklyn Center Development Corporation, requesting rezoning from I-1 to R-5 of the property lying on either side of James Avenue between 67th and 69th Avenues. Mssrs. Newstrom and Lien of Brooklyn Center Development Corporation/Brooklyn Center Industrial Development were present to discuss the pro- posed multiple residential development which would occur if the rezoning request were granted by the City. A lengthy discussion of the ramifications of this rezoning and the projected plans for the development of the Farm area ensued, with the Commission questioning the developers as to what their future plans for rezoning were. A lengthy diacussion ensued on the part of the Commission with respect to this zoning and possible future development of the Farm. Mr. Ausen observed that, although the giving of short recommendations to the Council in the matter of zoning appeals might be appropriate on the part of the Commission, in a case such as a rezoning which could have far- reaching effects on the accomplishment of the Comprehensive Plan, that perhaps the Commission should submit longer reports examining all factors involved, so as to better inform the Council of the Commission's view toward community development. Other members of the Commission agreed with this concept, and a consensus was that the matter should probably be tabled to allow the administrative staff to prepare a research study of the subject, with the following possible subjects being examined and reported on to the Commissions a) the effect of this zoning on other possible rezoning both within the Farm area and on properties adjacent thereto, including an attorney' s opinion on the ramifications of rezonings either in conformance or not in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; b) alternative tax bases for the various uses for the Farm area, such as industrial vs. commercial vs. multiple dwelling, and so on; c) non-economic considerations such as having more citizens in the community rather than potential jobs in the community which would signify the difference between additional residential construction vs. commercial or industrial construction. d) traffic generation, including numbers and likely patterns of generation and circulation; 268 -5- e) a suggestion that a color-coded map of the whole area be developed, including areas surrounding the Farm, perhaps the entire City, indicating population densities and/or units per acre to give an idea of ,possible future commercial needs for such population, this matter being related somewhat to this rezoning request and also to a request earlier in the evening related to the commercial property at the southeast corner of 69th and Humboldt; f) other factors which might be related to the community's development. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to close the public hearing on Application No. 68054 by Brooklyn Center Develop- ment Corporation and take the matter under advisement for further study as outlined above, hopefully with the matter to be resolved at the Commission' s next regular meeting. The next application to be considered was No. 68055 submitted by Chrysler Realty Corporation, requesting approval of site and building plans of a commercial building and a special use permit to operate a motor vehicle dealership on the property at 6800 Osseo Road. Mssrs. David Schrock, attorney for Chrysler Corporation and Don Wright, architect on the project, explained the plans to the Commission, following which the Commission asked questions of the applicants. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that the special use permission to operate a motor vehicle dealership and the site and }wilding plans in conjunction therewith be approved for the proposed Dodge dealer- ship at 6800 Osseo Road, as requested in Application No. 68055, with the following conditions and stipulations: 1) no approval of signs is included in this application, as the applicants have concurred with the Commission that signery can be deferred pending the adoption of the new sign ordinance; 2) a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation of the site improvements as shown in the approved plans and specifications; 3) utilities and drainage plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 4) building plans are subject to the approval of the Building Inspector as to applicable building codes; 5) the property involved in the application shall be replatted into a single parcel. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission then considered Application No. 68056 sub- mitted by Joseph Kennedy requesting a variance from Section 15-104 to permit subdivision of land without a plat into two substandard lots, the property involved being at 5447 Bryant Avenue. Mr. Kennedy was present and explained the proposed OL6 C"2 CTi CAD b -6- division to the Commission. The Commission discussed the matter, noting that the surrounding area was developed predom- inantly in substandard sized lots (in relation to the present zoning ordinance) and briefly discussing the possibility of a special zoning district for this neighborhood which would permit smaller residential lots. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that a variance be granted to permit division of this parcel into two lots, but that the lots be 64 feet in width and 135 feet in depth rather than excluding the westerly 7 feet of the north lot as had been proposed by the applicant to avoid having a division with a narrow sliver of land attached to the south lot, as the provision for a drivtway cross-use can as easily be accomplished by a cross-eas, re.nt between the two parties. Voting in favor were Ditter, Bogucki, Grosshans, Jensen, Ausen and Engstrom. Not voting was Dorenfeld. Motion carried. The last items to be considered by the Commission consisted of Applications No. 66030 (amended) ; 68058; and 68059; all re- lated to the proposed Superamerica service station/retail center to be located at the southwest corner of the intexcection of 57th and Logan Avenues (5657 Logan Avenue) . Mssrs. Hogenson and Hamren were present to represent Superamerica Stations, Inc. The Secretary explained the circumstances by which the old Application No. 66030 was being returned to the Commission and the existence of two new Applications, Nos. 68058 (site and building plan approval) and 68059 (variance for freestanding signery. The Commission examined the plans being submitted, including changes thereto recommended by the Staff, which changes were agreed with by Mr. Hogenson of Superamerica. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshams to recommend to the City Council, that special use permission be granted to Super- america Stations Inc. , as requested in Application No. 66030 (amended) for the property at 5657 Logan Avenue North, taking due cognizance of the reasoning of the District Court in the case of "Donald 24ason,et.al. vs. the City of Brooklyn Center" (File No. 633465) . Voting in favor of the motion were Dorenfeld, Engstrom, Ausen, Jensen, Grosshans, and Ditter. Voting against was Bogucki. Motion carried. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that the site and building plans submitted by Superamerica Stations Inc. in conjunction with Application No. 68058 be approved, with changes as noted on the plans, and/or wi : the following stipulations and conditions : 1) a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manger) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the installation and initial maintenance of the site details contained in the approved plan; 2) a utilities and drainage plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the City Engineer; 3) the building plans are subject to the Building Inspector's approval with respect to applicable building codes; L"2 Ut rr`� , '�.,, -7- 4) the five foot high basketweave fence along the south property line shall be revised to be six feet in height, and the fence shall extend to a point 10 feet distant from the Logan Avenue right-of- way line rather than the 15 feet previously shown on the plans; 5) additional deciduous and evergreen trees shall be provided along the south and east sides of the property, in the manner shown in the site plan as altered by the Commission; 6) this approval does not apply to any signs proposed for the property, said signs to be subject to the provisions of the forthcoming sign ordinance. Voting in favor of the motion were Dorenfeld, Engstrom, Ausen, Jensen, Grosshans, and Ditter, Voting against was Bogucki. Motion carried. Mr. Jensen commented to the applicant that should the new sign ordinance not be adopted in the very near future, the Ccnimission would then review the matter of the sign requested for this property. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Engstrom, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 12:30 A.M. Chairman t7 L CA vJ i A r 8 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota October 31, 1968 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 Helmer Engstrom and Henry Bogucki were present. Commissioners Vern Ausen and Paul Ditter came into the meeting later. Also present were D. G. Poss, C. E. Van Eeckhout and J. R. Murphey. The first item of business to be discussed was Application No. 68054 submitted by Brooklyn Center Development Corporation, requesting rezoning from I-1 to R-5 of the property lying on M either side of James Avenue North between 67th and 69th Avenues. The public hearing on this application was held October 3, 1968, .3 after which the matter was set over for further consideration. V Mr. Poss gave a report and an analysis of a study that has recently been completed which points out certain tax revenue advantages that can be gained by the different types of land use zoning. The Commission, after reviewing the revised site layout for the development, agreed that Application No. 68054 shall be placed on the agenda for the regular meeting November 7, 1968. A proposed revision to Application No. 67012 submitted by Center Development Company was next heard, such application requesting approval of final site and grading plans for the Four Courts Apartment Complex located at Xerxes Avenue and Northway Drive. Norman Chazin, owner of the project, explained that due to poor soil conditions in the center section of the project, it is necessary to omit the proposed lagoon and change some of the grade levels. Motion by Bogucki and seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that the revision to Application No. 67012 submitted by Center Development Company be approved permitting the applicant to omit the lagoon and create a landscaped open area in its place. The final grading and drainage shall be subject to the requirements of the City Engineer. Motion carried unanimously. The date for the November study meeting falls on Thanks- giving Day, therefore the Commission agreed that the meeting shall be held on November 26, 1968, at 7:30 P.M. All members are to be notified of the change. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Bogucki to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:45 P.M. Chairm n r» Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota November 7, 1968 The Planning Commission met in regular 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 Vern Ausen, Henry Bogucki and Paul Ditter were present. Also present were D. G. Poss, C. E. Can Eeckhout and J. R. Murphey. Motion by Ditter,seconded by Bogucki to approve the minutes of the regular. meeting of October 3rd, the study meeting of October 31st, and the special meeting of November 2nd. Motion carried unanimously. 1C� The first item of business to be discussed was Appli- cation No. 68054 submitted by Brooklyn Center Development Corporation, requesting rezoning from I-1 to R-5 of the prop- ert y lying on either side of James Avenue between 67th and 69th Avenues. Mssrs. Newstrom and Lien were present to represent the application. The public hearing on Application No. 68054 was held by the Planning Commission on October 3, 1968, after which the request was tabled for further consideration. Mr. Lien submitted a revised site plan and explained that the land surrounding the proposed apartment buildings will be contoured to relieve the present flat terrain. He also stated that every effort would be made to create a pleasing atmosphere for apartment house living. Motion by Grosshans and seconded by Ditter to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68054 submitted by Brooklyn Center Development Corporation for rezoning be approved as follows : 1. Section 35-1200 Industrial Park District (I-1) shall be amended by deleting therefrom Outlots A and Be Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition. 2. Section 35-1140 Multiple Residence District (R-5) shall be amended by adding thereto Outlots A and B, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition. Voting in favor of the motion: Grosshans, Ditter, Bogucki and Jensen. Not voting: Ausen. Motion carried. Chairman Robert Jensen instructed the Secretary to notify the School Board for School District No. 286 that the recommendation for rezoning will be considered by the City Council Monday, November 25, 1968. The next application to be considered was No. 68060 sub- mitted by Lee Berg requesting a Special Use Permit to store and rent trailers at 6901 Osseo Road. The applicant, Lee Berg, was present and explained to the Commission that trailer 411 1 4 4 " -2- rental is profitable to the service station operator and provides a needed service to the neighborhood. Notices were sent to 15 property owners all within 150 feet but no one appeared to speak for or against the petition. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ausen to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68060 submitted by Lee Berg be approved and a Special Use Permit issued for the storage and rental of trailers at the Pure Oil Station, 6901 Osseo Road, provided: 1. There shall be no additional signs or advertisement of the special use. 2. The premit shall be reviewed at the end of one year to consider the effect of the rental activity M on the station site. Ll'� t:3 v 3. Parking of trailers shall be confined to the West and North sides of the lot. 4. The maximum number of trailers on the lot shall be limited to 8. Voting in favor of the motion: Bogucki, Ausen, Ditter and Jensen. Not voting: Grosshans. Motion carried. The next application to be considered was No. 68061 submitted by Luther Magelssen requesting a variance to permit construction of an addition to his garage. Mr. Magelssen was present to represent the application and explained that he wished to build a 20 ' x 24 garage addition instead of 24" x 24 ' as shown in the request. Mr. Magelssen also stated that winter parking creates a problem for his extra car and storage for his boat and a 20 ' x 241 addition to the existing 16 ' x 22 ' garage would be needed to provide such storage. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, - to table appli- cation No. 68061 for further study including review of Section 35-310 of the Zoning Ordinance which regulates the size of accessory buildings in residential districts. Motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was No. 68063 sub- mitted by Mildred Grosser requesting approval of the pre- liminary plat of the "Grosser Addition" . Mildred Grosser was present to represent the application. Notices were sent to 11 property owners with F.A. Nelson and O.H. Wilda appearing in support of the petition and R.L. Perry opposed. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68063 be denied. Bogucki stated that his reason for the denial is because the location of the proposed plat is one of our best neighborhoods having some of the finest homes anywhere and the creation of substandard lots would tend to invite the construction of less desirable dwellings. Ditter concurred with Bogucki's statement. Voting in favor of the motion: Bogucki, Ditter and Grosshans. Voting against the motion: Ausen and Jensen. Motion carried. 24 96-) -3- The next application to be considered was No. 68064 submitted by Bar-Ett Construction Company. Mr. Robert Tombers was present to represent the application. Motion by Ditter, seconded by Bogucki to recommend to the Citv Council that the site and building plans of the proposed 58 unit apartment as requested in Application No. 68064 be approved with the following conditions and stipulations: 1. utility and drainage plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 2. building plans are subject to the approval of the Building Inspector with respect to applicable building codes; 3. a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the site improvements shown on the approved plans; U 4. the property shall be combined into a single parcel either by platting or by registered land survey; 5. the driveway at the Southwest corner shall be omitted, no access to 70th Avenue will be permitted; 6, the parking and driving areas along the South side of the site shall be effectively screened from the dwellings on the South side of 70th Avenue by a 6 foot high opaque wall or fence. Motion carried unanimously. Application No. 68065 requesting approval of a revised parking plan at 6045 Osseo Road was withdrawn by the appli- cant, Twila Donley. The reason for the withdrawal was to allow time to have the plan reworked by a professional land planner or surveyor. Submittal at a later date will be permitted without any additional filing fee. Application No. 68061 for a Special Use Permit to store and rent trailers at 5001 Drew Avenue was cancelled at the request of the applicant, Wayne Schwartz. The application had been processed and all notices sent before the request for withdrawal was received so notices of cancellation were required. Now, therefore, no refund shall be made in this instance. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans to adjourn. Motion carried and the meeting was adjourned at 11:50 P.M. l�J Ch i an Minutes of Lthe Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennevin and State of Minnesota November 2, 1968 The Planning Commission met in special session on the Northbrook Shopping Center property and was called to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 10:00 A.M. Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Vice Chairman Robert Grosshans, Commissioners Vern Ausen, Helmer Engstrom and Paul Ditter were present. Also present were Ronald Blake and Elof Norberg, representing the applicant, and Jean Murphey, Commission Secretary. The purpose of the special meeting was for observation Cl:) of the conditions surrounding the Northbrook Center identifi- M cation sign and consideration of Application No. 68047 requesting; approval to increase the height of the sign. V The Commission viewed the sign from several directions and at varying distances noting that the base of the sign is below the elevation of the adjacent ground level and is not clearly visible above the bridge over Highway #100 nor can it be clearly seen over some of the bridge ramps. The total sign height permitted by the proposed sign ordinance is 32 feet above the first floor level of the principle building. Motion by Vern Ausen and seconded by Helmer Engstrom to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68047 sub- mitted by Titan Group, Inc. , be approved and permission granted to increase the total height of the sign from 32 feet to 39 feet. The increase in height will leave the sign less than 32 feet in height measured from the grade level of the east bound ramp connecting 57th Avenue with Highway ##100 and slightly more than 32 feet in height measured from the grade level of 57th Avenue adjacent to the sign. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Grosshans and seconded by Ditter to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. la f Chai n Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Rsrn_« nin and State of Minnesota December 5, 1968 The Planning Commission met in regular 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 Vern Ausen, Helmer Engstrom, Paul Ditter and Henry Bogucki were present. Also present were D. G. Poss, C. E. VanEeckhout, J. R. Murphey and R. L. Haarman. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of November 7, 1968. The study meeting scheduled for November 26, 1968, was cancelled at the direction of the Chairman. The first item of business to be discussed was Application No. 68067 submitted by Richard Rockstad requesting rezoning of Lot 2, Block 1, Center Brook Addition, from R-2 to C-1 and rezoning of Lot 3, Block 1, Center Brook Addition, from R-4 to C-1. Richard Rockstad and Drs. Christenson and Pihlstrom w-2re present to represent the application. A petition signed by 16 property owners and a letter from an individual, all of whom are residents within 250 feet of the subject property, was introduced. The petition and letter requested the Commission's denial of the rezoning for the pro- tection of the existing residential neighborhood. All the owners of property within 250 feet having been notified of the time and place of the pu':)lic hearing and those owners present having been heard, Commissioner Bogucki made a motion, seconded by Ausen, that the public hearing be closed and the rezoning request ti-lcen under advisement. Motion carried unanimously. Following further discussion of the application, the following action was taken by the Commission. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that application No. 68067 be denied and that a resolution be framed later in the meeting for the purpose of setting forth the reasons as discussed. Voting in favor of the motion: Loguc'ci, Engstrom, Grosshans, and Jensen; voting against the motion: Ditter; not voting: Ausen. Motion carried. The reason given by Ditter for his "no" vote on the motion for denial is that he feels that the proposed C-1 zoning is compatible with the area and is proper for the property and that, in his opinion, the C-1 and R-4 zones are interchangeable. The next application to be considered was No. 68068 sub- mitted by Tony P.ndzimaz requesting approval of a preliminary plat of Bing's Addition. Orville Legare was present to represent the petition for the owner. The City Manager explained to the Commission that sewer and water lines to serve the property have been installed and most of the street wor'c finished. The proposed Flatting conforms to development guide plans for the area and mee;:s the requirements of the platting ordinance. �7 c3 ! r`_.� -2- Motion by Ditter, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68068 for platting of Diicg's Addition be approved subject to the provisions of the platting ordinance and provided there are no substandard lots in the development. Motion carried unanimously. The next applications to be considered were No. 6069 and No. 68070 submitted by the North Central Theatres Company requesting a special use permit and plan approval for a motion picture theatre to be located in the Brookdale Shopping Center. Mssrs. Henry Greene, Architect, George Aurelius, owner, and John Abbott, agent for Dayton Development Company, were present to represent the applications. The City manager explained to the Commission that the plans as submitted are deficient in grading and drainage pro- visions, traffic provisions, and that justification for the proposed joint use parking has not been adequately exhibited. Mr. Greene expressed a feeling that all of the technical problems can be resolved to the satisfaction of the City. Mr. Abbott submitted a written report intended to show the reasoning for the narking arrangements, and copies of a :.'effort by International Council of Shopping Centers on theatres located in shopping centers which states that in centers with adequate parking to support the retail use, there are r4Aatively fei-; conflicts between movie-goers and shoppers since the use peaks do not coincide. Following discussion of the application and examination of the plans submitted, the following ac-ion was taken. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Grosshans, to table Application No. 68069 requesting a special use permit and Application No. 68070 recyacsting plan approval until December 19, 1968, in order to permit the applicant to provide additional information. Motion carried Ltnanimoasli;. The next a.pplicaL-ion -to be considered was an amendment of No. 67072 submitted by Miles Construction Company, requesting approval of a rearrangement of the site plan to permit construction of two (2) twelve (12) stall parking garages at 7015 Humboldt Avenue North. Motion by Dit-ter, seconded by Bogucki, to recommend to the City Council t1nat tho revision to the site plans requested in Application No. 67072 be approved with the following conditions: 1. utility and drainage plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer. ; 2. building plans are subject to the approval of the Building Inspector with respect to applicable building codes; 3. the provisions or the original performance agree- ment and bond for the project shall include the revisions. Motion carried unanimously. 184 -3_ 185 The next application to be considered was No. 68065 sub- mitted by Twila Donley requesting approval of a revised parking layout at 6045 Osseo Road. Motion by Engstrom, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68065 be approved as follows: 1. the perimeters of all driving and parking areas shall be bounded by a cast inplace concrete curb; 2. the driving and parking areas shall be improved with a minimum of 2 inches of hot mixed paver laid bituminous mat over an approved base; 3. the drainage plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Motion carried unanimously. The next anplication to be considered was No. 68061 sub- mitted by Luther Magelssen requesting a variance to permit construction of an addition to his present garage. Notices were sent to the property owners within 150 feet and a public hearing was held by the Commission on November 7, 1968, after which the application was tabled for further study. Following discussion of the application, the following action was taken. Motion by Bogucki, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68061 does not meet the standards for variance set forth in Section 35-240 and the applicant did not demonstrate that the qualifications for a variance had been met and therefore the application should be denied. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Dogucki, seconded by Engstrom, that the date for the next study meeting shall be changed to December 19, 1968. Motion carried unanimously. As required by the motion for denial of Application No. 68067, the following resolution setting forth the Cor.-nission's reasoning is being made a part of that recommendation and is forwarded to the City Council for consideration. RESOLUTION REGA.POING APPLICATION NO. 68067 WHEREAS, an application has been submitted requesting rezoning of that certain property listed in Application No. 68067 ; NOW, THERLFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. The introduction of a commercial classification in this vicinity would tend to promote similar, if not more intense commercial encroachment north- ward along Osseo Road contrary to the Osseo Road goals enunciated in the Comprehensive Plan. 186 1 -4- 2. Although R-4 and R-5 and C-1 classifications have in some instances been referred to and applied as being"interchangeable" , they are "interchangeable" only in the common characteristic that they provide equally good transition or buffer features. In the case at hand, by virtue of the absence of sufficient land to constitute a viable development area of C-1 uses, the requested C-1 rezoning is out of harmony with the "residential" predominance in the vicinity and would therefore constitute a form of "spot" zoning. 3. The application for rezoning to C-1 should not be approved. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ditter, to adjourn. Motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 12:30 A.M. r Chairm n 228 Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission in the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota December 19, 1968 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 Vern Ausen and Helmer Engstrom were present. Also present were D. G. Poss, C. E. VanEeckhout, Robert Haarman and J. R. Murphey. The first item of business to be considered was Applications No. 68069 and 68070 submitted by the North Central Theatres Company requesting a special use permit and plan approval for a motion picture theatre to be located in the Brookdale Shopping Center. Mssrs. George Aurelius, owner, and Jon Abbott, agent for Dayton Development Company, were present to represent the applications. The City Manager presented an overview of North Central Theatre's applications and indicated to the Commission that revised building and site plans, as previously requested, now meet City requirements and are recommended for approval by { the Commission. x Notices were sent to all property owners within 150 feet and a public hearing was held by the Commission on December 5, 196 ' after which the applications were tabled. i The applicant has submitted reports intended to justify the future use of joint parking facilities and copies of easement grants and agreements have been placed on file in which the Minnesota Amusement Company is required to provide one parking stall on its own land for each five (5) theatre seats and Dayton Development Company will provide on its land a number of parking stalls equalling the number on the theatre site. Following discussion of the applications, the following actions were taken. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Ausen, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68069 for a special use permit be approved. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68070 for site and building plans be approved as follows: 1. the drainage, grading and utility connection plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 2. building plans are subject to the approval of the Building Inspector with respect to applicable building codes; 3. a performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to the City to guarantee the site improvements as designated on the plans submitted; 4. the land owner shall enter into a water and sewer main and fire hydrant maintenance and inspection agreement with the City, which agreement shall grant the City the right to enter the development to accomplish maintenance, inspections or repairs that are in the public interest. Motion carried unanimously. �a� _.�,— -2- The next application to be considered was No. 68072 submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center requesting approval of a prelim- inary plat of the Library Terrace. The City Manager indicated that at the direction of the City Council, a plat has been prepared which combines all of the parcels of land upon which the library is located into one single tract. This platting will provide an improved legal description which will be used in transferring title to Hennepin County and vacating part of Northport Drive. The Brooklyn Center City Library is scheduled to be turned over to the Hennepin County Library system and will eventually become one of three regional libraries in Hennepin County. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Engstrom, to recommend to the City Council, approval of Application No. 68072, the preliminary plat of Library Terrace Addition. Motion carried unanimously. The next item to be considered was Application No. 68081 submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center requesting approval of a proposed Registered Land Survey. The property involved is Tracts A, B, C, and D, Twin Cities Interchange Park, and is located along Shingle Creek between Interstate Highway No. 94 and 69th Avenue North. The City Manager explained to the Commission that the subdivision is part of the land that is being acquired by the City for future building sites and permanent open space develop- ment. Motion by Ausen, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 68081 be approved. Motion carried unanimously. At this time, the City Manager discussed possible develop- ments within the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park area and the concept of density credits related to multiple dwellings. Using a map of Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, he illustrated that up. to 340 dwelling units of credit could be rationalized on the basis of land contiguous to multiple districts being conveyed to the public for open space purposes. It was the consensus of the Commission that when a developer conveys land for public open space purposes, and when the land might otherwise be privately retained and used to meet ordinance density provisions, a density allowance may be considered, depending upon the site plan design. The Commission agreed that this concept should be framed, if possible, for incorporation in the zoning ordinance in the reasonably near future. The Planning Commission then discussed the City' s proposed sign ordinance and a sub-committee, including Members Ausen, Bogucki and Grosshans, was appointed by Chairman Jensen to draft a resolution recommending to the City Council an amendment to the proposed sign ordinance that would make it more restrictive. Motion by Grosshans, seconded by Bogucki, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously and the meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Chairm 1 1 1