HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970 05-21 PCM Minutes of the Proceedings of the
Planning Commission of the City of
Brooklyn Center In the County of
Hennepin and State of Minnesota
May 21, 1970
The Planning Commission met in special session and was called
to order by Chairman Robert Jensen at 8:39 P.M.
Roll Call: Chairman Robert Jensen, Commissioners Karl Schuller,
Paul hitter, and Charles Nichols. Also present were : James Merila,
D. G. Poss, and B. E. Peterson.
Motion was made by Commissioner Ditter and seconded by
Commissioner Nichols toapprove the minutes of the April 30, 1970
study meeting as amended and the regular meeting of May 7, 1970 as
submitted. The motion carried unanimously.
The first item of business was Application No. 70020 submitted
by Brooklyn Center Industrial Park for preliminary plat review of
part of outlot C and outlot F, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition.
Following its introduction by the secretary, there was a
discussion with the representative of the applicant, Steve Krogness,
and City Engineer James Merila and the City Manager relative to the
need to provide access through Lot 1, Block 1 to the east. During
this discussion Commissioner Robert Grosshans arrived at 8:48 P.M.
The City Manager recommended that east-west James Avenue be changed
to a numbered street, 67th Avenue . Motion was made by Ditter
and seconded by Nichols to recommend to the City Council approval
of Application No. 70020 requesting preliminary plat of part of
outlot C and outlot F of Twin Cities Inerchange Park Addition.
approved with the following condition. -:
1. That Lot 1 of 31oc?: 1 be changed to an outlot or that
a 60' access easement be provided across the property.
2. That east-west Jaries Avenue be designated as 67th Avenue.
Voting for.-the motion were : Robert Jensen, Karl Schuller, Charles
Nichols, and Paul Ditter, Voting against: none . Not voting:
Robert Grosshans . (Commissioner Grosshans did not vote for this
application because he was not at the May 7, 1970 meeting.
The next item of business was Application 11o. 70022 submitted
;y Holiday Ins, Motel requesting a special use permit for the
operation of a *Hotel.
Following its introduction by the secretary, it was explained
tl:iat It would also be desirable to acknowledge that this special use
permit would also cover live entertainmen-_ as defined by Section.
35-322.3 (d) . Following a brief discussion a motion was made by
Char'--s Nichols and seconded by Karl Schuller to recommend approval
of .Application: Pao. 70022 requesting a spec°ial use permit for the
construction an6 operation of a motel in a C2 zone and also
acknowledge that this special use permit covers live entertainment
as listed in Section 35-322.3 (d) , The motion carried unanimously-.
The next, :item cif, business war, '.replication No.. 70019 submitted
by Holiday Inn Morel requesting site and building plan approval of
a 155 unit mote:1.. 'j-1-luding a commercial area containing, a dining
roon, two banquen: rooms an(i a cocht-aii lounge.
"he Application was inn-roduced by the secretary, who commented
that the Planning Commission tentatively approved the concept of
the Holiday Inn Motel at i`.s May 7, 1970 meeting. During review
of the site and building plans the City'-Manager commented that the
detailed general, mechanical and electrical plans will be submitted
for staff review at a latter date. Commissioners Schuller and
Nichols expressed their concern fob the need for additional plantings
along Humboldt Avenue with a representative of the applicants
Architect Don Perrenoud. Mr. Perrenoud suggested that there might
be a problem in maintaining these additional plantings but he
expressed no objections to addtional plantings on the easterly and
southerly perimeters. The applicatnt also concurred in deleting
certain parking spaces to include "T" shaped concrete driveway
islands and to provide for additional parking previously eliminated
at "the westerly perimeter.
Potion by Paul Ditter and seconded by Karl. Schuller to recommend
to the City Council that Application No. 70019 requesting tits: and
building plan approval of 155 unit motel including the commercial
area be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to the approval of the Building
Inspector with respect to applicable building codes;
2. utility and drainage plans are subject to the approval of
the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit
3. installation of "T" shaped concrete driveway islands;
4. that the ingress and egress entrances be widened to
30 feet at the street and tapered to 24 feet;
5. installation of a fire sprinkler system in the
commercial area;
6. that additional parking spaces (6) be provided on the
western boundary and a deletion of parking spaces be shown
in front in order to accomodate a "T" shaped concrete
driveway islands;
7. 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 improvements
as designated on the plans submitted;
8. provided a landscape planting schedule showing additional
plantings on the easterly and southerly perimeters.
Vot-ing for the mot-on were: Pzebert Jensen, Karl Schuller, Charles
Nichols and Paul Ditter. Voting against were : none. Not voting:
Itabert Grosshans. Commi.ssiorn r Grosshans did not vote because he
did not attend the May 7, 1970 Planning Commission meeting.
The next application to be considered was Application No.
70024 submitted by Holiday Inn Motels requesting sign variance on
the permitted area and height of a freestanding sign. Following its
introduction of the application by the secretary, who explained to
the Co.-emission that the applicant wishes to install their "great
ss.gn" which is 43 feet 4 inches high and contains over 900 sq. ft.
of area by the ordinances calculation methoa. At this time the
City Manager. read , letter to the Commission_ that was addressed to
him from Charles E. Novel., Holiday Inns Assistant Vice President: and
Director of Outdoor Advertising for Holiday inn's, Inc. Commissioner
Nichols commented chat he thought Mr. Novels letter to the City
Manager was intimi3a-t-ing and that hl"- arguments were not valid since
there is a nation-wida concern for visual problems along interstate
systems. Chair,-,,-an Je neen called upon a representative of the
applicant, Mr. Don Pe.rrQnoud, who ccmmented to the Commission that
Holiday Inn business depend.; on overnight patrons for their sou+cce
of income. Also it is important that the Holiday Inn sign be seen
-2-
from some distance on the freeway so potential customers can make a
decision in time to use the interchange. The City Manager
responded to a Commissioner's question L:hat this sign could not
possibly be high enough to be observed by westbound traffic and that
4t will only be seen by the east bound Freeway traffic. Chairman
Jensen commented that the Planning Commission should begin to
examine the need to possibly establish freeway zones which are
presently not comprehended in our zoning ordinance . Chairman Jensen
then proceeded to poll each of the Commissioners relative to the
subject application. Commissioner Grosshans expressed that there
might be a need to study freeway oriented business requirements
which are presently not comprehended by the zoning :ordinance.
Conanicsioner Schuller -igrecd, but stated twat the proposed Holiday
inn sign is too large in his opinion. .-Ccrnissioner Nichols objected
to the subject application and would not be in favor of granting
a variance . Commissioner Ditter expressed the opinion 'that he felt
the sign ordinance makes adequate provision for business identifica-
tion. The City Manager commented that possibly after a review of
existing freeway oriented businessess in the Metropolitan Area
that the Planning Commission may want to study the need for a €raeway
zone.
Motion by Charles Nichols and seconded by Karl Schuller to
table Applieation No. 70024 submitted by Holiday inn Motels,
requesting a sign variance, and take it under advisement until Mid-
July to allow staff and commission members time to study the
general matter of Freeway oriented business identification. The
motion carried uanimously.
Chairman Jensen asked Mr. Don Parrenoud what Holiday Inn"I'
construction procedures were. Mr. Perrenoud responded that generally
Holiday Inn erects the sign before the building.
The next application to be considered was Application No. 70021
submitted by Brooklyn Center Development, Inc. requesting a variance
setback and site and building plan approval for two industrial
speculative buildings.
Following its introduction by the secretary, who explained that
the applicant is requesting a variance from Section 35-413 to
permit building setback of 58 feet from an Rl zone, approximately
3 acres, presently owned by Berean Evangelical Free Church, 6625
Humboldt Avenue North, and partially occupied on the eastern three
acres. The site and building plans are for two 112 x 427 foot
industrial speculative buildings simiUr to the present two
speculative building (Application No. 69008) approved by the City
Council on March 10, 1969. Following a brief discussion with
repyasentatives of the Berean Evangelical Free Church and the
applicant, Steve Krogness, it was the consensus of the Planning
Commission that imposition of the setback requirement would create
a hardship by handicapping the best use of the industrial property
and that the situation is relatively unique in that the abutting R-1
property was designated as R-1 primarly berau se of the instituional
use on the eastern portion thereof, and not with intentions that
homes would ever be constructed on the parcel.
Motion by Cnnuiiisiioner Nichols and seconded by Commissioner
Grosshans to recommend to the City Council that Application No.
70021 requesting a variance from Section 35-413 for a building
setback of 58 feet from an R-1 zone and site and building plan
approval for two industrial speculative buildings be approved subject
to the following conditions:
1. Approval. of a variance from Section 35-413 to permit
building setback of 58 feet from an .8-1 zone;
1
1
1
2. Building plans are subject to the approval of the Building
Inspector with respect to applitcable building codes;
3. A performance agreement and performance bond (in an amount
to be determined by the CityManager) shall be submitted
to the City to quarantee site improvements as designated
of plans submitted;
4. Utility and drainage plans are subject to the approval of
the City Engineer;
5. Instal'aLion of underground sprinkler syztems;
6. That all roof vents and mechanical equipment on the roof
be screened;
7. That the applicant show on the site and building plans
a masonary wall at the west end between the two
speculative buildings.
The motion carried uanimously.
It was the consensus of the Commissioners present to establish
next Thursday, May 28, 1970, as a Planning Commission study meeting
to review the comprehensive plan and the walkway networks from.
the neighborhood committees.
Motion by Commissioner Nichols and seconded by Commissioner
Schuller to adjovrn. The Planning Commission adjourned at
11:17 P.M.
Chairma
-4-