Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983 05-12 PCP Planning Commission Information Sheet Application Nos. 83010, 83017 Applicant: Rod Bernu Location: 69th Avenue and York Place Request: Site and Building Plan; Preliminary Plat This matter relating to the Earle Brown Farm Townhouses at 69th Avenue and York Place was first reviewed by the Planning Commission at its March 17, 1983 meeting. At that time, the Commission tabled the matter because it was unwilling to grant the . full density credit allowable under the ordinance for 26 new townhouse units. A revised plan for 24 new units (a density credit for 3 units) was submitted at the April 28, 1983 meeting. After receiving extensive comment at both meetings, the Commission informed the developer at the April 28th meeting that no density credit would be granted and tabled the application until a plan with no more than 21 new units was submitted. The applicant has submitted a new plan with 21 new townhouse units. The two four- unit buildings opposite the southerly existing building have been replaced by a five-unit building clustered with the three four-unit buildings on the east side of the property (see copy o.f plan attached) . This opens up a different green space opposite the existing southerly quad home. The plan designates this area for a future tennis court or recreation area. (A tennis court would apparently encroach into the 15' buffer strip adjacent to the single-family homes south of the project. We cannot recommend approval of such a facility in this location) . The new plan provides for 21 guest parking stalls. The landscaping has been relocated and is still fairly generous. Regarding the preliminary plat, we have discussed the questions over the City's right to approve a replat of Earle Brown Farm Townhouses briefly with the City Attorney. He has assured us that the City may approve a replat of the common area and two existing vacant lots . He acknowledges that a privately pursued lawsuit by the eight existing townhouse owners may prevent the filing of such a replat. However, he advises that the Planning Commission and City Council should not intervene in this civil dispute, but should process the replat as though there were no dispute, based solely on the requirements of City ordinances . Based on those requirements, the proposed plat and site and building plan are accept- able and approval is recommended, subject to the following conditions : For Application No. 83010: 1 . Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements in the area of new construction. 5-12-83 -1- Application Nos. 83010, 83017 continued 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 6. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 7. The building plans shall be certified by a registered Minnesota architect prior to the issuance of building permits. For Application No. 83017: 1 . The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The final plat shall be filed at the County prior to the issuance of building permits. 5-12-83 -2- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83019 Applicant : Charles Brooks (Manager , Q Petroleum) Location: 1505 - 69th Avenue North Request : Special Use Permit The applicant requests special use permit approval to install a 1 ,000 gallon propane tank for propane sales at the Q Petroleum station, 1505 69th Avenue North. The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded by the Humboldt Square Apartments on the south and west , by 69th Avenue North on the north, and by Humboldt Avenue North on the east . There is a gas station across Humboldt and a 7 Eleven store and service station across 69th Avenue North. The sale of fuels is a special use in the C2 zoning district and the tank must be screened in accordance with Section 35-412 of the Zoning Ordinance . The applicant has submitted a brief letter in which he states that the availability of propane will add to the convenience of his customers . He also states that Q Petroleum personnel will be trained in all safety requirements and that , since the station is open 24 hours per day, the tank can be observed at all times . The propane will be used to fill small tanks and provide fuel for vehicles . People will drop tanks off to be filled up and return later. The applicant has also submitted a site drawing showing the location of the tank at the northeast corner of the site and the relocation of four parkin- stalls , necessitated by the installation of the tank. He has also submitted a drawing of the metal screen enclosure . The tank enclosure is 7 ' x 18 ' and is open above for ventilation. There is also an attached 4 ' x 5 ' stainless steel cabinet , from which the propane will actually be dispensed. The main enclosure will have two gates to allow access to the tank and there will be two feet of clearance on either side of the tank within the enclosure . The enclosure will be five feet hi-h which is all that is necessary to provide effective screening. (City ordinance requires 6 ' , but we see no reason for the extra height in this case . ) The enclosure will be painted a baked on enamel , either beige to match the building or brown, as preferred by the Planning Commission and City Council . Regarding the standards for a special use permit , staff see no reason to deny the special use permit so long as safety standards are adhered to and effective screening is provided . Approval is , therefore , recom- mended subject to at least the following conditions : 1 . The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is nontransferable. 2 . The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes , ordinances , and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. Building; plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits . 5-12-83 -1- Application No. 83019 continued 4. The provision ventilation around the tank as well as safety procedures to be taken shall be reviewed by the Fire Marshal prior to the issuance of permits . 5 . The enclosure is for 'the purpose of screening the fuel tank and shall not have any signs affixed to it other than directional or warning signs specifically approved by the Building Official . 5-12-83 -2- Planning Commission information Sheet Application No. 83020 Applicant : U D Contracting (Gary Uhde) Location: 72nd Circle Request : Amendment to Site and Building Plan The applicant requests approval of an amendment to the site and building plan approval of Plat 5 of The' Island Ponds at Unity Avenue North and 72nd Circle. The amendment is to allow a change in the building plan from a two-storey unit to a one-storey unit within the lots along 72nd Circle . The units along Unity Avenue North would continue to be two-storey (split level ) . No changes are proposed in the site , grading, landscaping or utility plans or in the plat . The .land in question is zoned R3 and is bounded by The Ponds (Plats 1-4) on the south, by apartments within Brooklyn Park on the west , by the rental section of The Ponds on the north, and by Creek Villas Townhouses on the east . The existing units are 24 ' x 44 ' or 22 ' x 46 ' per level . with a two-car garage and unfinished rooms on the lower level . The new units are 24 ' x 46 ' on one level with a 10 ' 8" x 19 ' 9" single-car garage . The finished living space of the old unit is between 924 sq. ft . and 11.00 sq. The new units will have 893 sq. ft . of finished living space . The exist- ing units have a base price of about $60 ,000. The new units will have a base price of about $50,000. Mr . Uhde states in a letter (attached) that it would take too long to complete the project if he must wait for enough people who qualify for a Yb0,000 unit . More people can qualify for the less expensive unit and the project can, therefore , be completed sooner . . The one-storey units are only proposed within the 72nd Circle cul-de-sac and will not be built along Unity Avenue North. For the sake of con- tinuity, the units along Unity will be the existing split-level design. The exterior treatment of the units will be along the same lines as the existing units with 3 ' brick walls on the front elevation and vertical masonite siding on the sides and rear . In all forthrightness , the City has little latitude to deny the amend- ment so long as the units are still townhouses and , therefore permitted in the R3 zone . Plat 5 is a separate homeowners association from Plats 1-4 at The Ponds . Mr . Uhde has stated that he wishes to have a good working relationship with the existing Homeowners Association, but the existing Association has no real veto power over the design of units in the new association. As Mr . Uhde states in his letter , it is in the interest of all parties that the project be completed in as timely a manner as possible . The Board of Directors of the existing Association have , in fact , conveyed their approval o.f the proposed units in a letter to the City (attached) . In light of the above , we feel that the plans are basically in order and approval is recommended , subject to at least the following conditions : 1 . Buildng plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits . 5-1.2-83 -1- Application No . 83020 continued 2 . The new building plan is limited to lots abutting 72nd Circle . 3 . Plan approval is subject to all conditions pertaining to the original plan approval for Plat 5 under Appli- cation No. 79031 . 5-12-83 -2- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83021 Applicant: Diane Uright Location: 4408 - 69th Avenue North Request: Special Use Permit The applicant requests special use permit approval to operate a boarding care home for mentally ill adults in the four-plex located at 4408 - 69th Avenue North. The property is zoned R4 and is bounded by single-family homes on the west and north, by a Nobil Oil gas station on the east, and by 69th Avenue North on the south (the Post Office is across 69th from the four-plex) . Boarding care homes are special uses in the R4 zoning district. The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which she explains that most mentally ill individuals in Hennepin County, that are unable to live independently or with family members , live in one of the 750 beds available in board and care of lodging facilities in Minneapolis. There is , she states, a lack of residential facilities in their own communities and the result has been a mental 'health ghetto which separates the mentally ill individual from family, friends , and community. Mrs. Wright includes with the letter a Program Summary Sheet, Target Population information and a description of Program Services (attached) . She points out that the facility must meet regulations of a number of public agencies and that operation of the facility would involve: Special Use Permit (City) Board and Lodge License (State) Food and Beverage License (City) DPIJ Rule 36 , Category II (County) Vulnerable Adults Act (State) Compliance with State and Local Fire and Health Ordinances Purchase of Service Contract (Hennepin County) The facility would house eighteen residents (sleeping two to a bedroom) . The build- ing presently has four two-bedroom units at 750 sq. ft. There will be two common living rooms , a recreational room and a single kitchen and dining area. The kitchens in the two upstairs units will be converted to offices for counseling, etc. She notes that most of the residents will not have automobiles and that the parking lot has ample space for staff parking. She concludes her letter by stating that she has been administrating and implementing residential treatment programs for seven years . She expresses a strong commitment to the development of services for and protecting the rights of mentally ill adults . She also seeks input from the com- munity and the neighborhood. In the Program Summary, Mrs. Wright explains that the target population would consist of "chronically mentally ill adults over the age of 21 with severe or persistent mental or emotional disorders which severely limit their functioning capabilities relative to primary aspects of daily living. Low functioning (IQ 70 or above) are accepted. Clients must be able to monitor and administer their own medications. A referred client with a history of aggression towards self or others , of suicidal attempts within the past six months, and/or chemical dependency will not be con- sidered for placement." The program attempts to provide a supportive environment to enable the clients to learn to set goals , to live independently, to develop personal , mental and physical self-awareness , and self-esteem and motivation. Staff for the facility would be two and one-half staff to eighteen residents during weekdays . Nights and weekends , the ratio is one staff person to eighteen residents . The key positions include: Administrator/Program Director, A.C.S.W-, M.ental Health 5-12-83 -1- Application No. 83021 continued Counselor, M.S .W. , Mental Health Workers , Q.A. and A.A. with experience. All staff members meet or exceed qualifications as defined by Department of Public Welfare Rule 36. The facility would provide numerous services to the residents, including: case management, crisis services, independent living skills services, motivation and re- ,lotivation, recreation and leisure, socialization, support group, social services, vocational and other services . The Commission is referred to the applicant's submittal for a further clarification of these services. City staff would be less than candid if we did not recognize that there is likely to be some concern within the neighborhood over the proposed facility. The City presently has three or four facilities for either the mentally retarded or troubled youth. None are located within the Northwest Neighborhood and none have generated complaints from the surrounding neighborhood once they are in operation. There are no facilities within Brooklyn Center that provide board and care for mentally ill adults. In light of the fact that most such facilities are concentrated in the poorer neighborhoods of Mlinneapolis, the Minneapolis City Council has recently adopted an ordinance limiting the population of board and care residential facilities to 1% of the neighborhood population in which the facility(ies) is(are) located. As a result, some residential care facilities are now moving out to suburban locations. Concerns have also been expressed by one of the existing tenants regarding the hard- ship of moving out. Such a concern is real , but does not seem related to the standards for a special use permit. We recommend that a condition of approval require adequate time for existing tenants to move out. According to Section 35-220 of the Zoning Ordinance, special use permits may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following standards are met: a) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. b) The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. c) The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district: d) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. e) The special use shall , in all other respects , conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. Staff's judgment is that the above standards do appear to be met in the present case. The proposed use enhances the general welfare by providing a necessary service to mentally ill adults, many of whom are from this area. We recognize that the proposed use may present some risk to public health, safety and comfort (we don't see any risk to morals) , but this risk does not seem unacceptable, particularly in light of the fact that persons with any history of violence toward themselves or others will not be admitted to the facility. 5-12-83 _2_ Application No. 83021 continued The proposed use should not impair the normal use or enjoyment of surrounding property- It may be alleged by some that property values would decline, but our estimate is that any effect on property values would be imperceptible if the facility operates within the regulations established by the,State and the conditions of the special use permit. As to impeding the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property, it should be noted that there is no vacant property in this immediate area. There is land zoned commercial (Cl ) along Brooklyn Boulevard between 69th Avenue North and 70th Avenue North and this area could convert to a commercial use. Also, the Comprehensive Plan envisions the entire block of land bounded by 69th on the south, by Lee Avenue North on the west and Brooklyn Boulevard on the east, as an area to accommodate possible retail development in the future. Such redevelopment does not seem at all imminent and the proposed special use would not create any greater impediment to such a conversion than a regular four-plex or the single- family homes which are also located on the block. Finally, the proposed use seems to present no traffic problems . The applicant actually intends to make use of the existing parking lot more for a recreation area than for parking. We have a site plan which shows the present parking lot has only 6 stalls , rather than the 8 that are normally required for a four-plex. There may be room to add two more additional stalls in front of the four-plex. Mrs. Wright does not anticipate more than one visitor at a time. The Planning Commission may wish to explore with the applicant whether these two additional stalls should be put in. In conclusion, staff feelthat the proposed use is a use which is comprehended in the Zoning Ordinance for the R4 zoning district. As such, we feel the City should accommodate the proposed residential care facility somewhere within the City with appropriate conditions. The proposed location is as good as any we are aware of. We, therefore, recommend approval of the special use permit subject to at least the following conditions : 1 . The permit is issued -to the applicant as operator of the facility and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable state and local codes, ordinances , and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. Existing tenants shall receive a minimum of 60 days notice prior to the date they are expected to vacate the premises. 4. The permit authorizes the boarding of not more than 18 mentally ill adults with no past history of violence, toward themselves or others and/or chemical dependency. Any change to increase the clientele residing in the facility or to include previously violent or chemically dependent individuals will require amendment of the special use permit by the City Council . 5. Unless accompanying the entire clientele in an excursion off revises , there shall be at least one qualified mental health 5-12-83 or er on e premises at all times. -3- --.. Application No. 83021 continued 6. A copy of the current State Board and Lodge License shall be kept on file with the City. 7. Any structural , plumbing or mechanical modifications to the existing building shall be subject to review and approval by the Building Official (and the City Sanitarian where appropriate) with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 8. The special use permit shall be reviewed within one year from the date of Council approval to examine the history, if any, of complaints or police actions relating to the facility. 5-12-83 -4- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application Nos. 83010, 83017 Applicant: Rod Bernu Location: 69th Avenue and York Place Request: Site and Building Plan; Preliminary Plat This matter relating to the Earle Brown Farm Townhouses at 69th Avenue and York Place was first reviewed by the Planning Commission at its March 17, 1983 meeting. At that time, the Commission tabled the matter because it was unwilling to grant the full density credit allowable under the ordinance for 26 new townhouse units. A revised plan for 24 new units (a density credit for 3 units) was submitted at the April 28, 1983 meeting. After receiving extensive comment at both meetings, the Commission informed the developer at the April 28th meeting that no density credit would be granted and tabled the application until -a plan with no more than 21 new units was submitted. The applicant has submitted a new plan with 21 new townhouse units . The two four- unit buildings opposite the southerly existing building have been replaced by a five-unit building clustered with the three four-unit buildings on the east side of the property (see copy o.f plan attached) . This opens up a different green space opposite the existing southerly quad home. The plan designates this area for a future tennis court or recreation area. (A tennis court would apparently encroach into the 15' buffer strip adjacent to the single-family homes south of the project. We cannot recommend approval of such a facility in this location) . The new plan provides for 21 guest parking stalls. The landscaping has been relocated and is still fairly generous . Regarding the preliminary plat, we have discussed the questions over the City's right to approve a replat of Earle Brown Farm Townhouses briefly with the City Attorney. He has assured us that the City may approve a replat of the common area and two existing vacant lots. He acknowledges that a privately pursued lawsuit by the eight existing townhouse owners may prevent the filing of such a replat. However, he advises that the Planning Commission and City Council should not intervene in this civil dispute, but should process the replat as though there were no dispute, based solely on the requirements of City ordinances . Based on those requirements, the proposed plat and site and building plan are accept- able and approval is recommended, subject to the following conditions: For Application No. 83010: 1 . Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits . 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements in the area of new construction. 5-12-83 -1- Application Nos. 83010, 83017 continued 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 6. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 7. The building plans shall be certified by a registered Minnesota architect prior to the issuance of building permits. For Application No. 83017: 1 . The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The final plat shall be filed at the County prior to the issuance of building permits. 5-12-83 -2-