The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1970 12-03 PCP C17Y OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNXNG COMMISSION AGENDA 1',ttegular Meeting December 3, 1970 Call to orders B-00 PrtM, 2 . Poll Call,- 3. Approval of M.inutqqs' Special Study Meeting of october 26, 1970 Requier kleeting of November 5. 1970 4 , ,L.hairmanl's Explanatior-- The Planning Comission is an advisory 0. S f.,.In �_te of t�ie Colym, 'issior unctions body. C is to hoI6 Public hearings. in the matters concerned in these heariigs - th.e Commission wzkes reconmendatioms to the City Council . "the City 0-)until makes all final decisions on these mattersp 5. �4'ev) Business Application No. P Ernst, Jane Ernst for White Castle Re cawing ing 70061 Site and lyaild-i-nq plan a.pPr,,-,•va7, 70060 61� Staff communications", 7 . A • PLAMING CAMEISSIoN IMPOPHATION SHEET • Application No. 70060 Applicants Ernst, Lane and Ernst (White Castle Systems, Inc.) Type of Request: Rezoning of Lots 4 and 5, Block 2, Lanes Brooklyn Center Addition, from RO to C-2. We property is commonly described as 6911 and 6919 June Avenue North. BAaMPOUND: The applicant is requesting permission to rezone the subject parcels to facilitate a need for additional parking for a proposed White Castle Restaurant and an existing superette located on sites adjacent to the parcels in question. REMMMENDATION: The parcels in question are adjacent to C-2 zoning on the • ncrtheast, east and south at its property lines. it abutts Pvl zones on the northwest and on the west at June Avenue North (refer to enclosed map) . In view of the existing C-2 zoning on three sides ,of the parcels, a street providing a buffer to F"1 property east of June Avenue (except the northeast corner) and ordinance considerations in regard to screening of parking areas, it appears that the requested change way be a logical extensLon of commercial zoning. if the zoning change were to be made, it is recommended that the lots inclusive of the two develogments (Lots 4, 5o 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11) be re-platted into two parcels. p • kPa . Aw r1 w ..,,.•..c ..msra�-a�..zrcxia.^�.^�caueaas:xtsbi4�'aPV.X SS.s�E»+bias a;.'�i"s_3T:'1�"x,�'°"y�`,--'�'�EY.i'1��"t+�k��,rm '�!R'.r1:CN. '.1L6yYK5�'i�tiv3ar'.=L+f�"�EY�Y;�E/:;3e+aF"ax?0!3+vs�.V�'?YS,;.r,51_.i::r�uriE'BCi�"�',luE;�i:uF�.ssst'�:AdA-� .a �.rat+A'r+.sza..w�owr'.�re.:nmw+�_�+.lh�m9�: 3+ ..vsn_;Lf.:^,•E'�.'SiR�.Mt.'4>4Lr;�lttiY4!it?YI�l4✓..ff37�[•! R9P•,:lA?•M�ili:3.2s'T+4:Ae?S'M'� �� :Ll.,q. :��4 So 6'6 •. `4 `+ Ytk 9tl� � fir„ �t6�! -,,. `'� •� �� \ \��. .vo. ��"� f:r J°� '` �{� � ``q+ -.sue {; .•-.n.dM �� .v �/'�` t N -� 0. A�" �'i.\ ..` `�h, �;` '. .�w c' vim. eucww.. .we.m..w-•..c....., a: 4, B Pot c+ Ih ON W •.^ y + day{ ...._ fS�S _... r. . • .:.„..ar:::.;�avrai l:a..',.ri±II..x ..:..:Ntc,':'Y✓r'"ss...tae,�. :.i._.Y:..f:.ru..��r.:w.. ' SRC 4iFE':.+l.f.t5."".S 33R:wa5�'afLR Application Nko� 70061 • Applic-Int-, Ernst, Lane & Ernst White Castle Systems, Tnc. .ype of Request-. Site and building plan approval for xw,ots 4e 5, 6, 7,8, 9,, 10 and Block 2, Lane' s Brooklyn yn Center .,Addition. commonly described as 6911 - 6919 June Avenue, 4300-02 - 69th Avenue and 6900 - 6906 Brooklyn Boulevard, BACKGROURV The applicant is requesting site and building 3. _ plan approval for a White Castie Restaurant to be located at 69th and Br,onklyn Boulevard and site plan approval for an existing building (Rog and Jim"s Food Mart) that is north of, and adjacent to, -the proposed IN'hite Castle site,. `rhe s.-Ite-s are belnkg developed separately. -7-lo-viever, because the property is lin a single ownership and because the sites have problems of a similar nature, for •ujx,p(-7ses of total site coc�rdination and review, the plans are being considered • concurrently. The plans as subraitted are In order for the most part; however, special considered should. be given r-o the follo-wdrag-, 1) The access onto June Avenues as pronosed for the White castle 2 A proposed wood fence in lieu of a wall on. the White Castle site; mlhite Castle proposal for Pa fence at the north Property line while the property to the North bas r3roposed a barrier of vegetation (trees) ; 4) -Nd underground sprinkler system shown on. the Ernst, .X&ane & Ernsi.,, site; 5) 1f111he accc-ss onto June Avenue as proposed for the Frast, Lane & Ernst site. 6) Limiting egress front both sites ';or traffic that wculd be moving onto Brooklyn Boulevard :.i-n a southerly direction. RECCMILMMATION: • The staff, in bringing forth a recommendation ,in regard to this application, has addressed itself to factors that can be Characterized as: (1) General site conditions, and (2) ingress and egress . and traffic circulation. 1) General Site Considerations it is recommended that the screening devices on these sites should be of a similar character in both constz:u-::tion and durability. White Castle Systems has proposed a wooden fence to be located at the east property line while Ernst, Lane and Ernst has proposed a wall in the same vicinity. The Planning Commission and city Council have, in past actions, recognized a wall of brick and mortar construction (Re: Shopper's City, Davies Water Equipment, Srodlkdale Chrayler Plymouth, Burger King) as a desirable screening device between conunercial and residential development. it is recommended that the applicant be encouraged to construct a brick or decw:ativ(a block wall because of aesthetic consideration that should be given to the Rl property to the east and the lasting • durability of this type of construction. The applicant have proposed two different types of separation devices between their driving and parking areas. White castle has proposed a wooden fence while Ernst, Lane & Ernst has proposed vegetation (Scottish pine trees) to accomplish this separation. It is suggested that sudh separation devices can be effectively utilized to "soften" the effects of large expanses of parking and driving areas and it is recoimuended that the separation device be of the same character and construction as the screening device on June Avenue Morth. Ernst, Lane & Ernst has not shown an underground sprinkler system on their site. The sprinkler system is an ordinan--e requirement and it is recommended that the requirement be complied with. 2) i� ngressr Tess and Circulation a. Broo3.1 n Boulevard • The proposed ingress and egress to the White Castle and Ernst, Lane & Ernst site is acceptable with certain qualifications, Egress from the proposed access on Brooklyn Boulevard will be quite satisfactory for those desiring to proceed northbound. Fo-" those going southbound, it will be necessary for them to cross -two lanes of traffic and then use the left turn lane to merge with traffic proceeding southbound. The proximity of the access location t-o the intersection of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard does not allow sufficient distance to satisfactorily make this maneuver. This movement should therefore be inhibited by proper traffic signs (Right Turn only) . b. White Castle Re quest for ID-irect. Access to 69th Avenue Traffic intending to proceed south on Brooklyn Boulevard could use the sia ,nalized intersection at 69th and Broohlyn Boulevard and obtain egv.ess by way of 69th Avenue North access located at the White cast-le property line. It is suggested that direct 69th Avenue North accesa will create problems as traffic on 69th Avenue Morth increases, Essentially, there may be a congestive effe--t at the signals which may block- the intersection for short • periods of time. c. White Castle Request for Access to June Avenue it is suggested that this proposal, in its present location at the northeast portion of the 'White Castle site, may have some undesirable effects- Essentially, appears that vehicles heading southbound with as 69th Avenue North destination could utilize the White Castle property as a short cut to avoid the intersection of 69th and Bro6klyn Boulevard. This should be a concern of the, applicant (Wbj-te Castle) for obvious reasons, but beyond that consideration, it can be viewed as a traffic hazard that should be avoided if- at all po:3sible. Another consideration in regard to this access is the des irabiliti'7 tff of encouraging commercial raic to utilize t local sreets of a residential character. it would appear that a curb cut on June Avenue it properly located, assu-ting there :ould be increased noise and traffic, could diminish the residential character of the Jure Avenue neighborhood. • _g In the case of White Castle, it should be pointed • out that it will be a 24 hour operation with volumes of traffic that will ,probably exceed existing developxnens:.s. Thus, location of curb cuts, if any, should be Considered in view of the type and intensity of the land use. d. Ernst, Lane s, Ernst Request for .Access to 69th Avenue North via ,Tune Avenue The access to June Avenue from the Ernst, Lane & 3rnst parcel. is desirable if southbound movements from Bro6clyn Boulevard access location is to be discouraged. in the case of this access, it may be proper because there is no other ingress and egress points other tha:i Brooklyn Boulevard. A June Avenue access would allow proper traffic circulation within the parcel while at the same time providing an access point for southboundl traffic. However, as is the case with the June Avenua curb cut requested by IThite Castle, there is the question of the desirability of commercial traffic utilizing local residential streets. e. June Avenue Access not LeMested the Applicant In the event that it would be determined that the }proposed curb cuts at 69th Avenue North or June Avenue are not acceptable, it is suggested that curb cut at June Avenue +/- 50 feet from the 69th Avenue North rory line may be ' reasonable alternative. The applicants have not acquiesced to such circulation and alignment because it would require an opening between the pariz ag areas on both sites. It is the contention of each that the developments are unique unto themselves and should be considered separately in regard to parking and access provisions. Powever, for the purpose of traffic control and circulation, it would appear that the curb cut on ,tuna Avenue at this point (assuming there is no direct access to 69th Avenue North) would somewhat diminish the con-4estive probability at. 6 9th and Brooklyn Boulevard because of the greater distance between the curb cut: and the inters.rtion. It is recognized that this curb cut would put ccm;:aercial traffic on June avenue, but because of its proximity ---o the intersection_ of June and 69th Avenue Worth, the adven•. o:: northbound traffic utilizing ,Tune Avenue would be somtawhat diminished. abjAn to also ej§ nj dole noWnsagat maod T a Sd U�w K Aal duo • 2alizAve wanow jidsdasq 10w v6A MOM 2c) ad Hoods ynz of mama dxun so aoivwol sudi" -Mu buss Wei to YSTSWUL but SqY1 ada 10 y"kv M1 01 Mi w2fhocl aasown 000DIS Saw Sdo n ansael BOG anw'_;4"?al Ad"A1 1.00 lot NQUY mesons as q&b1v0wq Mott Smaw A&i' as ravewou .01113y '' i.8now TH, nj WSW 13M poka!"10" wHISSR 1007awman MesUe 021105 : 000 01w vonovT SwT w Ninon aws= AM is ajon "Ian ..711 ) fail bolvappue a! j! Sidwyan"s 000 sy" -0-1 MCI! one! OF -AV nowevs wnc� too PrAW1.0111 dwDe 0j 5scep"spaw out evv", an 111upex Know 0 002SOV., nas r1nomqSovea Iseqq, llvav "z ps""Smae AL •ON A�Aov wnv�K LARD W, 'E;'.i :-- now jad nwslz it JAIV Eld.j set! A-12ro "7n InA S�jv A), 4 �pp II {311 r+ "nN+x+e SJ'S`�xY7fi!"ALBS. �k�'e'l"�FrH C.4lS:3?"r4':?7 1+',""WP::Svd:Si'4SY'F�7'3 '+u i�sA:i:"9f:1et.FF��L'ah =h t't: 3�Aa1. "':1F.C>i°F:;t5 9'.{!4 A�/N.S'$F.R'T.' •'tM ::x:ta"•1r°iiSe'.n:H9Yi,".3R'k1F^k1`t"'1lf�L�117CN1.: #1 nT+R'RNO;!+tA-M- >:W,W�vse+afv�W�'�^+. wo lalK or, AI ��,W+.aw-..e�:^sc t�^ [u � .� :�2Si"'k":,: axYAaE1Y`fd�'fNSfY3,�'�wails�y ��5a.w.•axar isru�:am++y�:�ea�. .w.• 'fit I�'"° � ��."•.` t'NYS"A@ FN'BQ13M�11�:'YARYIf'G+tfi..�la'y �, .t \ �i1O1°"� 9 -:<t-�mi+ao.oa.wse�us+�owx:'aoravaua. S � �� w t 4 6' �z f.� '• $v ' ,�6 Y z,.vm.mss,►a«:t+-swcanm_ �' a^.. � '�k• t➢ a 9�:'�' ark 'k'y�y $' r ¢�"��".� � .u*"�...:��- ,�pyfY'�y+iB•k,} �re..m:a.. ^a.+ccv,r.. ,.n.,:a.9'aA6i .•+w..msae x.r s.....nswe�.k.w leS,xJ.W Mx.:^.�aFSn!::'8�. 8, ..,;;:. ..;.x:.s+:c. vrev«..,�.;., s..a�...n,.xx...b...s,...,,,,� �:y.±:ra+t:•.xr>:x.ara+wrvrE K.^�+.:.m>a�..wr,inn...x.,.._.,,..:;a�w<,.........�a,::« {h �i k