Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970 03-05 PCM Minutes of the Proceedings of the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota March 5, 1970 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 Henry Bogucki, Robert Grosshans, Paul Ditter, and Adrian Dorenfeld were present. Also present were James Merila and Robert Haarman. Following a brief discussion of the minutes with Commissioner Bogucki, a motion was made by Bogucki, seconded by Grosshans, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of February 5, 1970, and the minutes of the study meeting of February 25, 1970, as submitted. The motion carried unanimously. The first item of business was Planning Commission Appli- cation No. 70002 submitted by Arrow Developers, Inc. , requesting rezoning from O1 to Rl a vacant parcel commonly described as lying south of Eckberg Drive extended and west of the properties on the west side of East Twin Lake Boulevard. Following its introduction by the Secretary, discussion of the application among the Commissioners centered on: 1. The best use of the land area involed; and 2. Comprehensive Plan recommendations to "reserve the pennisula at the northeast end of Twin Lake for permanent open space use. . . ". Mr. Terrance Fruth, an attorney representing the applicant, indicated that the land area would be best used for residential development unless it was to be obtained for public use, and further, it was his opinion that the City was without the power to zone a classification such as Ol without just compen- sation to the land owner. Chairman Jensen stated that the Comprehensive Plan together with the prezent O1 zoning classifi- cation indicates the City's intent to acquire the property. Attorney Fruth then replied that he was aware of the City's intent to acquire the land under a recently approved grant from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, but that because that there was no guarantee the City would acquire the land under said grant, his client would proceed to request rezoning of the land in order to exhaust their administrative remedies. Chairman Jensen opened the public hearing and heard from one resident who had no objection to the rezoning from O1 to the R1 classification. Motion was made by Bogucki, seconded by Dorenfeld, to close the public hearing and take Application No. 70002 requesting rezoning under advisement, referring it to the Southwest Neighborhoos Committee. The motion carried unanimously. At this time, Chairman Jensen entertained discussion of Application No. 70001 submitted by Arrow Developers, Inc. , re- questing preliminary plat approval for the same vacant land area. The application had been introduced and a public hearing i 1 1 -2- held on February 5, 1970, by the Planning Commission at which time the application was tabled and taken under advisement. Attorney Terrance Fruth, representing the application, cited a section of the subdivision ordinance requiring the Planning Commission to make its report to the City Council on ox before the second regular meeting of the Commission. Following a discussion of the application among the Commissioners, the staff and the applicant, a motion was made by Bogucki, to request an opinion from the City Attorney on the question of platting or rezoning and which possibly should be considered first. The motion failed for lack of a second. The motion was made by Dorenfeld, seconded by Grosshans, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 70001 be denied for the following reasons: 1. At a previous meeting of the Planning Commission, at which time the public hearing was held on this preliminary plat, the applicant acknowledged certain informational deficiencies requiring additional engineering studies and the applicants have made no attempt to provide that information. 2. With respect to the preliminary plat itself, there are certain design deficiencies such as : a. typical cross-section of proposed improve- ments upon proposed streets are missing; b. location, size and approximate grading of proposed sewer lines and water mains are not indicated; and c. building setback lines are not shown. The motion recommending denial carried unanimously. The next item of business to be considered was Planning Commission Application No. 70008 submitted by Boran Builders requesting a variance from the required 25 foot sideyard set- back on corner lots. The variance request is for an 18' side- yard setback at 5160 Drew Avenue North. Following its introduction by the Secretary who stated that the sideyard of the subject property abuts on a dead- end stub of 52nd Avenue North extended, a motion was made by Ditter, seconded by Dorenfeld, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 70008 requesting a variance from 25 ' to 18' on the sideyard setback requirement at 5160 Drew Avenue North be approved for the following reason: 52nd Avenue North extended and abutting the property is not a throughway street and therefore the imposition of the street setback requirement would create a hardship to this specific property. The motion carried unanimously. The next application to be considered was Application No. 70009 submitted by Roy Busse requesting a variance from Section 35-400 of the City Ordinance which requires a 75 foot lot width. The subject lot is located at 5329 James Avenue North. i 1 1 -3- Following its introduction by the Secretary who stated that a similar variance was granted in 1959 to the contiguous lot just south of the subject property, a motion was made by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 70009 requesting a variance from the required 75 foot lot width be approved for the following reasons: 1. Because this vacant lot lies between two developed residential lots, a hardship exists in that there is no chance for a combination of land parcels which could create a standard size lot; 2. The fifty foot lot size is compatable with the neighborhood lot sizes, particularly to the south; 3. A precedent exists within the Humboldt Addition for granting similar variances to the minimum lot width. The motion carried unanimously. The next item of business to be considered was Application No. 70005 submitted by Shell Oil Company requesting site and building plan approval for a storage room addition to an existing Shell Oil Service Station at 1505 - 69th Avenue North. In introducing the application, the Secretary stated that the storage room addition would be approximately 310 square feet; it would be added to the rear of the existing station; and construction would be of building materials similar to the original Shell Station. Motion was made by Bogucki, seconded by Ditter, to recom- mend to the City Council that Application No. 70005 requesting site and building plan approval for a storage room addition be approved with the following conditions : 1. the area behind the station be cleared of junked cars, trash, tires and other debris prior to the issuance of the building permit; 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 site clean up and continued maintenance and upkeep (said bond will be of an on-going nature) . Following a brief discussion, a motion was made by Grosshans, to amend the motion by striking out the first condition. The motion failed for lack of a second. Voting for the main motion were: Bogucki, Jensen, Ditter, and Dorenfeld. Voting against: none. Not voting: Grosshans. (Commissioner Grosshans felt that the issuance of a building permit should not be contingent upon a prior clean up of the area.) The motion carried. The next application to be considered was No. 70006 sub- mitted by Shell Oil Company requesting site and building plan approval for a new ranch style service station to be built on the site of the present station at 63rd and Osseo Road. Shell 1 1 r -4- Oil Company is also requesting a variance from Section 35-414 which requires that no two driveways will be within 50 feet of one another. Following its introduction by the Secretary, and after a lengthy discussion with the staff and the applicant, a motion was made by Dorenfeld, seconded by Bogucki, to close the public hearing. The motion carried unanimously. A motion was made by Bogucki, seconded by Grosshans, to table Application No. 70006 at the request of the applicant so that the site plan can be re-drawn in conformance with the recommendations made by the Planning Commission and the City Engineer. Motion carried unanimously. The remainder of the meeting consisted of a discussion by the Commission of various planning subjects under their consideration. Motion was made by Dorenfeld, seconded by Ditter, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously. Adjournment came at 10:35 P.M. Gii Chairma 1 1 1