Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972 03-16 PCP r CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Study Meeting March 16, 1972 1. Call- So-Order: 8:00 P.M. 2. Roll Call: 3. Approval Of Minutes: March 2, 1932 4. Harvin Gordon 5. Proposed Amendments Off-Street Parking 4Progo.SeCS� 1%'�i?C�'iTc Y %� 7:f--S�.GeE'i: si :TIC1 3ci Me%iber introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: • PJAANWNG COMMISSION RESOLUTION O. WHEREAS, the business community within the City continues to prosper as overall City growth and development approaches maturity; and WHEREAS, business success is observed to be often expressed by desires to expand mazer business enterprises; and WHEREAS, a major obstacle in the expansion of businesses consists of the inability of specific enterprises in essentially built-up areas to meet expanded off-street parking requirements on the principal use sites and WHEREAS, in such instances, it is desirable to provide for accessory parking in off--site locations with certain assurancest NMI, THEREFORE., IT IS R.ECOMENDED BY THE, PLANNXNG C0bMSSIOK OF' THZ CITY OF BROOIGYN CENTER that Chapter 35 of the City Zoning Ordinances shall be amended by adding thereto the following sections. • Section 1. Section 35-313 is hereby amended by adding thereto: 3 fib;___ Accessory-street parking not located on the same property with the Principal use. -°- - - - Section 2% Section 35--314 is hereby amended by adding thereto- 3 fib) Accessory off-s' e`et parking not located on the same property €�if-.h_tche rinei al use. Section 3: Section 35-315 is hereby amended by adding thereto„ 2. Special 7ses (a) Accessory off-_streeting parkin!a not located on the same property with the principal use. Section 4; Section 35--316 is hereby amended by adding there*_'o 3. Special Uses - Ja) Accessory off-street parking riot located on the same property, with the principal rase. • Planning Coraunissaon Resolut.-Lon. 14o. Page 2 Section 5: Section 35-320 is hereby amended by adding thereto: • 3. S1ecial Uses (a) Accespory off-street parking not located on the sam_I aroperty with the principal use. Section 6: Section 35-321 is hereby amended by adding theretos 3. Special Uses (a) Accessory off-street parking not located on the same property with the principal use. Section 7: Section 35-322 is hereby amended by adding thereto: 3. (k) Accessory off-street parking not located on the same property, w:Lth the principal use. Section S: Section 35-330 is hereby amended by adding thereto: 3. _ (e) Accessory off-street parking not located on the same proffer-„y with the principal use. Section 9: Section 35-331 is hereby amended by adding thereto: • 3. (c) Accessory off-street parking not located on the same property with the principal use._ Section 10: Section 35-701 (3) is hereby amended to read as followsa 3. Spaces accessory to uses located in a business or industrial district shall be on the same lot as the uses served unless a special use E!trmit authorizes accessory off-street parkin- not located on the sameeropefty with the principal use. Parking spaces so authorized off-site shall not be credited toward parking requirements unless__ the off-site property is legally encumbered for parking accesso to fhe j2rincipgl use thr u h deed restriction or covenant. -.-__---__ i • PRANNING CO1:� 1SSI©N INFO IATION SiMET do Applicant.- Marviel Gordon Location: South Side I94 at Lee Avenue North • 'Description of Request: Land Use Study BACKGROUND: . Rezoning of this property from Rl to R3 was denied by the City Council February 28, 1972. The applicant is suggesting that condominium single family attached dwellings at R-1 density is an appropriate use of the subject property. The definition for this use might be: Condominium Single Family Attached Dwellings - Two or more dwelling units horizontally attached in a linear arrangement, with the separate dwelling units within the building separated from each other by a wall or walls extending from foundation to roof. Each individually owned single family attached dwelling unit shall be 'Located on a separate tract of land and shall share ownership responsibility for a common open space. This concept has some merit in that it would enhance subdivision design flexibility and make it possible to develop odd shaped parcels of land that are not well located. The subject pm perty is a case in point the only present alternative consists of erecting a number of single family detached dwellings in a linear fashion along a narraal frontage road facing a freeway. Attention should be devoted to the following factors: 1. Would the construction of condominium single family attached dwellings in an Ri district serve the interests of the City? Can the existing zoning ordinance be interpreted to accept condominium single family attached dwellings in an R1 district?