HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971 07-15 PCP CIV( OF BROOKLYN MMER
pjj�,NkjjjT, COMISSION AND
OMM OF APIVEALS AGEMDA
Study Meeting
July 15, 1971
1. Call to order% 8:00 P
20 Roll Ce.11-
t_-
3. Chairman's Explanation: The )?I,anning Cmmission and the
Eoard of Appeals and Adjustments
an advisory body. In. the mat'sers
concerned in these hearings, the
Board makes a recommendation to the
City council. The city council
makes all final decisions on these
Pa a t'f'--e r 8.
4. old Business:
A. i�Ti.'U:Lam 71021
ReGulution deirying lot area
• and lot width variance
D. Merlin Vtest '71022
pence height variance
'New Bus'
Iness,
A. Viewcon, Inc. "111025
plan ap- pro-val
6. r;iscussiaa items-,
A. West _,-:_2,ntra1 weighborhood Report
B. S:-',gn Subc-ommittee Report,-.
C. Camden Aven"e Roadway
RESOLUTION lit)
• RESOLUi-I&OR PBCOMMENDING DENIAL OFF PLRMUMG
DMIS"'3110M 14PPLICKWON NO, "11021
W-RFMAS& on July 1, 1971, the Planning commission reviewed a
petition submitted by William Holmberg requesting a 15 foot loi:
Width variance an(" a 2,275 square foot lot area variance for a
property, zoned R2 located at 5302 c7irard Avenue North; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the applicant to construct a
duplex on the property in q;aestion; and
TMO.WREM, it is recognized by the Commission that the intent-
Of R2 zoning in the Southeast Neighborhood is to provide low
density multi-fatuily living units on parcels of adequate size to
support such densities : and
WHEREAS, it is ascertained that the property in question :1-s
substandard in nature and consequently does not satisfy the
standards and criteria set forth by the Zoning ordinance for
duplex development; and
WHEREAS, it is ascertained that a goal of the Comprf-�hensive
Plar, for the Southeast Neighborhood is to provide low density
multi-family living units in speciflied areas; and
WHEREAS, it is promulgated by the Comprehensive Plan thF;t
duplexes should be pennitted where lot- sizes are more suitable
for duplex then single faimily housing; and
TtMEREAS, it is further ascertained that it is not the intent
of the Comprehensive P-3.an to de--.7elop substandard parcels of land
for duplex dwellings, but rather to encourage the combining of
such parcels to provide sufficient land areas for develoorient.:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMM.1- SSION OF
THE C_= OF BR00FJ_,YM CE-MMR to recotamend to the City Council doniz,l
of Planning Commission Application No. 71021 because it is incon-
sistent with t'.he goals of the compr�hensive 'Plan, :inconsistent
with. the pro-visions of -he Zoning Ordinance, and would serve as
a detriment to the health, safety and welfare of proT�rty ovine.--s
in the immediate vicinity, of the proposed development.
•
PLAR1174ING COMISSION IMORMATI •N SHEET
Application Wo. 71025
Applicant z Viewcon, Inc.
Description of Request: Site and building plan approval
BACKGROUIM-
The applicant is requesting site and building plan approval
for a 6 story, 55,000 square foot office building to be
-Located on a 3.6 acre tract of land bounded on the north
and west b
y Worth-way Drive, on the south by County Road "0,
and on the east by Shingle Creek.
The ground floor level of the facility will coAsist of
vehicular parking and an employee amenity area with
levels two through six consisting of 52,000 square feet
of floor area to be utilized for general office use.
AE Y S I S AM I T6 WYM 1,T.A.1"10 N-
• It should be noted that the Zoning Orfinance requires
275 parking spaces VA-Uch are being provided on the plans
submitted. However, ft-ring preliminary discussion with
the staff, the applicant indicated a desire to utilize
approximately '60,000 square feet of the building for a
medical and dented clinic use. This use (medical and
dental) has relevance in regard to parking recruirements
since it would generate a need for 25 to 30 additional
stalls which are not available on the site unless *in house,
parking or a ramp is proviJed. Conseq
.?ieatly, the applicant
has d,,opjped the .-Wea of a medical and dental clinic, but
the case, in poin-- :Ls thal: should the use cn,.-nngs,' the
Coramiss-z"on. and Council should be able to exercise some
perogatives.. Therefore, it is str°,�,ngly recommendeJ that
a special condition of plan approval should be that the
owner of the fac.U...ty must provide sufficient on site
parking in accordance with the type of activit-Y being
conducted in the building and that those parking require-
ments ;Fre 1--o be deter TLined by pertinent provisions of th,;-
Zoning Ordinance,
Since ",--he property is zoned C-2, it- is fellt that su-ch a
plan approval condition would provide the City maximum
• 'Alexibil-ity to insure proper parking on the site should
the nature and character of the proposed use change at a
future, date.
I
•
Planning Commission information Sheet
• Application No. 71.025
Page 2
It is also suggested that the following plan approval
conditions should be specifically referred to in addition
to the parking and usual. conditions
1. That all driving isles be delineated with in-place
concrete curbing.
2. That the building be sprinklered with an automatic
internal. sprinkling system.
30 That all areas designated as green space shall
Dave an underground sprinkler system.
114 'T"hat all final building specifications shall be
drawn under the supervision of and signed by a
registered structural engineer.
s
f
I
�7
g k
s; 1
h
o t
Coa � ' ! a
SO
• r '�L'.' St "•� V
"" �'�y y��A'L �n"a+a...�..varz,�auea�uix.Q:[rcae�mnaraa. tt�essuxws-:..uro.s+r.+wms�mt�.,sxancads .9� 61 �}
.«���:�o-sw.s .xr+:.ssm,as....-:rrevx.'f f• 'fir+r.+•;�:>-gvacm!& v.,c:S:4era PFws f�r, � Surkn�
w9.�a.v%af mn, ne man .Vw_evit�ircn ur;, '�
aat�na� +
. �wu•-.,.,,•, �x.a-�.rerver.,...s.�8sn a1,:.'tPOtm�u�`ayrar+xne•lxrat.exnaa�ea�wayss�a�sa.Lr�arrrR'+.s.•......�z..m3+x*a..+e..,yf
o+.m•..ker.+nrs.sx•�wa�;y
e.
r
t
S