Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014 10-16 PCPPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER October 16, 2014 1. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 PM 2. ROLL CALL 3. CHAIRPERSON'S EXPLANATION The Planning Commission is an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – September 11, 2014 Meeting 5. PLANNING APPLICATION ITEMS (none) a) City of Brooklyn Center, MN Planning App. No. 2014-015 Property Addresses: 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway PUBLIC HEARING – Consideration of a Special Use Permit to allow for the grading and placement of fill material in the Floodway District of Shingle Creek for the expressed purpose of creating a new flood-protection berm in Centennial Park. - Motion to Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-16 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS (planning staff may provide verbal updates to the Commissioners as necessary) 7. ADJOURNMENT PC Minutes - Page 1 09-11-14 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 11, 2014 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Burfeind at 7:08 p.m. ROLL CALL Chair Scott Burfeind, Commissioners Randy Christensen, Benjamin Freedman, Katy Harstad, Stephen Schonning, and Rochelle Sweeney were present. Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission Tim Benetti and Director of Business & Development Gary Eitel. Commissioner Carlos Morgan was absent. CHAIR’S EXPLANATION Chair Burfeind explained the Planning Commission’s role as an advisory body. One of the Commission’s functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – JULY 31, 2014 There was a motion by Commissioner Schonning, seconded by Commissioner Christensen to approve the minutes of the July 31, 2014 meeting as submitted. The motion passed. There were no PLANNING APPLICATION ITEMS to review or consider. DISCUSSION ITEMS – verbal updates by Planning Staff of various studies, projects, and proposals. a) Regal Theater Center Planned Unit Development – Potential PUD Amendment for new commercial use. Staff indicated the vacant PUD/C2 (Planned Unit Development/Commerce) zoned lot, consisting of 1.6 acres and located immediately south of the Regal Theatre development, is being considered as a high-end, indoor only self-storage facility user. Staff noted that “Storage facilities” are not specifically allowed or identified under the C2 District uses, and all outdoor storage is strictly prohibited in this same zone. Plans however, call for the possible development of a 3-4 story, climate controlled, high security indoor storage facility, with limited parking spaces. The developer would need to make application for PUD Amendment and Site Plan to allow the use on this site, with an allowance for reduced or shared parking with the theatre site. General comments and concerns from the Commissioners ranged from the expected height of the new building; and a concern with allowing a use that is not permitted in this commercial district. PC Minutes - Page 2 09-11-14 Staff indicated the developers have finished two new buildings in the metro area; one in Bloomington and the other in Plymouth, and they are working on their third in Golden Valley. Planning staff informed the Commission that a planning application may be brought forward sometime in late October or November. b) HWY 252 Corridor Study Staff communicated that the HWY 252 Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC), consisting of members representing the City of Brooklyn Center, City of Brooklyn Park, MnDOT, Metro Transit and the group’s consultants from WSB Engineering, have been meeting regularly over the last 15 months to study, assess, identify and determine problem areas, design solutions, and formulate recommendations of improving the transportation issues that currently exist within this corridor. The last two meetings were focused on determining new interchange design concepts or ideas at the city’s own 66th Avenue and HWY 252 intersection. Benetti indicated that this intersection gets bogged-down at peak travel demand times throughout the day, which causes major delays and potential turning conflicts for vehicles. These delays are also experienced in other areas and different intersections. City staff and TAC members will be meeting in the next month to review new concepts and hopefully have a chance to present these back to the Planning Commission at a later date. The consultants intend to hold a second open house meeting sometime in early or mid-November 2014. c) Howe Site – 4821 Xerxes Avenue N. Planning Staff provided an update on recent meeting with Mr. Paul Hyde, Hyde Development Company, along with Hennepin County Environmental Services and Minnesota Dept. of Economic and Employment Division (DEED) on additional grants to help with site clean-up costs. Mr. Hyde has a very short window to complete the clean- up, as per Minnesota Dept. of Agriculture agreements. Mr. Hyde is attempting to secure additional funding from the Met Council; and hopefully begin the clean-up by the first of October 2014. A new building may be in place by next year. d) Statewide Health Improvement Program (SHIP) Grant through Hennepin County Staff reported that a select number of city staff from the planning department, city engineering, parks and recreation, and police department is working with Hennepin County officials and consultants on the Hennepin County Active Living Technical Planning Assistance and Community Engagement Project. The Committee is tasked with helping to identify and promote certain active living goals and objectives, and provide opportunities to Brooklyn Center residents to live more active lives by integrating walking and biking into their daily routines. Staff also requested if a planning commissioner would be interested in serving on the task force, to contact Gary or Tim and we will ensure to extend an invite to the next meeting. PC Minutes - Page 3 09-11-14 e) Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Staff reported the acquiring and removing of properties along the corridor continues; and we are also seeking and discussing new redevelopment opportunities within this area. City is finalizing the work to remove the former Cars with Heart site; and informed the Commission of the potential acquisition by the City of 6301 Brooklyn Blvd. Staff also presented an overhead of the 55th Avenue and Brooklyn Blvd. intersection, near the Northport Elementary School entrance drive and former North Memorial Clinic property of 5415 Brooklyn Blvd. Staff informed the commissioners that Dr. Duane Orn has approached city planners with the opportunity to possibly acquire his old clinic property, along with the two adjacent properties to the south, 5407 and 5401 Brooklyn Blvd. The acquisition and removal of these properties would facilitate the new intersection change that was called for under the 2012 Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Study. No agreements or purchase prices have been made at this time, but opportunity to negotiate and close on these properties may occur in the near future. f) Opportunity Site (Brookdale Square Mall/Brookdale Ford) Redevelopment Plans Staff reported that we met with two separate developers interested in developing the Opportunity Site in the central commerce district area. One developer is interested in developing high end or market rate housing, while the other is primarily interested in senior care and other housing opportunities. Staff reported on the personal tour the city planners and city manager took at “The Residences at the COR” (Center of Ramsey) project in Ramsey, MN, which is situated immediately west of the Ramsey City Hall. This 4 level, 230 unit apartment and townhome buildings has an attached public parking garage; and direct access to the Northstar Commuter Rail line and station. Staff anticipates more updates in the near future on the removal of the old Brookdale Square mall buildings, along with the old Brookdale 8 theatre and Miracle Empowerment Center. g) Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) –Rulemaking Staff indicated that the 30+ cities that are participating in this rulemaking met last month to review the new, draft changes to the Mississippi River corridor area. Due to high demands, the request for comments period was extended to the end of September to allow more cities to review and comment. Planning staff anticipates providing an updated presentation sometime at the late October or November meetings. h) Two Rivers Gas Station upgrades Planning staff provided an updated site plan that was received the same day [of the planning commission meeting] which details the closing of the two access points nearest the intersection of 69th Avenue and Humboldt Avenue; and the new exterior improvements to the outer building. Staff reported that a building permit was also submitted and is currently in review. PC Minutes - Page 4 09-11-14 OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Freedman, seconded by Commissioner Schonning to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. ________________________________ Chair Recorded and transcribed by: Tim Benetti Secretary to the Planning Commission ________________ SUP –City of BC PC 10/16/14 Page 1 Planning Commission Report Meeting Date: October 16, 2014 Application No. 2014-015 Applicant: The City of Brooklyn Center Location: 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Request: Special Use Permit for Grading and Placement of Fill Material in Floodway District of Shingle Creek INTRODUCTION Pursuant to City Code Section 35-2140, Subpart 3.f, the City of Brooklyn Center is requesting consideration and approval of a Special Use Permit to allow for the grading and placement of fill material within the established Floodway District along Shingle Creek. This fill will be used to install a new berm between Shingle Creek and the softball fields within Centennial Park. Review of this special use permit application requires a public hearing. Notices of this hearing were mailed to the adjacent properties within 150-feet of the subject site; along with an official notice to the commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources. BACKGROUND The project site is generally located west of the City Hall/Community Center, and immediately east of the Shingle Creek waterway channel (see location/aerial map below). The city intends to install a low-level (6” to 1-ft. high) floodway berm, approximately 3-ft. wide on top with a 3:1 slope off each side. The berm will be installed along the outer perimeter (fence-line) of the fields. The berm is intended to alleviate flooding of the fields during the spring melt-off periods and occasional high water levels experienced from the adjacent Shingle Creek water corridor. • Application Filed: 09/23/14 • Review Period (60-day) Deadline: N/A • Extension Declared: N/A • Extended Review Period Deadline: N/A ________________ SUP –City of BC PC 10/16/14 Page 2 Due to the location and natural waterway of Shingle Creek, most of Centennial Park and the surrounding city-owned lands are subject to a large floodplain boundary overlay. A large portion of the park and majority of the ball fields are covered under the established (mapped) floodplain boundaries of the city. These floodplain boundaries are determined and established under the city’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps, dated September 2, 2004. These maps are used to determine potential floodplain impacts to adjacent properties, and regulate certain land uses and development standards within these districts. City Code Section 35-2100 relates to the city’s Flood Plain Management section. Within this ordinance, the city has identified three separate floodplain boundaries: 1) Floodway District; 2) Flood Fringe District; and 3) General Flood Plain District. The Floodway District are typically the area(s) immediately adjacent to a natural waterway feature, and are subject to periodic flooding and retention of excess water caused by large rainfall events and/or spring ice/snow melts in the region. This Floodway area is shown in the “red” hatching in the diagram below. The Flood Fringe Districts are those areas typically adjacent to floodways, and are commonly referred to as the “100-Year Floodplain”. These flood fringe/100-year areas are typically areas that may incur some flooding events, but are limited to 1% chance of flooding each year or an abnormal rainfall event. This area is shown in purple in the diagram above. The General Floodplain District is commonly referred to as the “500-year floodplain” areas, and are typically adjacent to the Fringe/100-year Floodplains. These areas typically experience flooding or impacts at 0.2% chance in a year or an event. These areas are noted in tan color. ________________ SUP –City of BC PC 10/16/14 Page 3 According to the City Engineers, over 20-years ago the ball diamonds and surrounding areas were graded or modeled based on the measured Shingle Creek ordinary water level/elevation of 841.5 feet. Starting from the creek channel and working eastward towards the fields, the slope of this area was intended to be a gradual (and unnoticeable) incline up to the graveled infields. Updated elevation readings however, indicate some areas of the outfield areas have slightly sunk, and are now measuring below this original 841.5-ft. elevation. The berm is meant to provide a small stop-gap measure or structure to temporarily hold back excess floodwaters away from the lower elevated ball diamond areas. Engineering determined the berm would be a much more cost effective and suitable alternative than bringing in large amounts of fill material to raise the levels of the outfield areas. STANDARDS FOR FLOODWAY DISTRICT The standards for the Floodway District are found under City Code Sect. 35-2140. The permitted uses in these areas are fairly limited, from general farming, parking areas, lawns, gardens, and parks and recreational fields. Under this section, the “placement of fill” is only allowed by means of a special use permit. This same section also provides specific “Standards for Floodway Special Uses”, which are noted as follows (relevant to this berm project only): 4. Standards for Floodway Special Uses a. All Uses. No structure (temporary or permanent), fill (including fill for roads and levees), deposit, obstruction, storage of materials, or equipment, or other uses may be allowed as a Special Use that will cause any increase in the stage of the 100-year or regional flood or any obstruction of flood flows or increase in flow velocity, or cause an increase in flood damages in the reach or reaches affected. b. All floodway Special Uses shall be subject to the procedures and standards contained in Section 35-2190.4 of this ordinance. c. The special use shall be permissible in the underlying zoning district if one exists. d. Fill 1) Fill, dredge spoil and all other similar materials deposited or stored in the flood plain shall be protected from erosion by vegetative cover, mulching, riprap or other acceptable method. 2) Dredge spoil sites and sand and gravel operations shall not be allowed in floodway unless a long-term site development plan is submitted which includes an erosion/sedimentation prevention element to the plan. 3) As an alternative, and consistent with Subsection 2 immediately above, dredge spoil disposal and sand and gravel operations may allow temporary, on-site storage of fill or other materials which ________________ SUP –City of BC PC 10/16/14 Page 4 would have caused an increase to the stage of the 100-year or regional flood but only after the City has received an appropriate plan which assures the removal of the materials from the floodway based upon the flood warning time available. The Special Use Permit must be title registered with the property in the Office of the County Recorder. g. Structural Works for Flood Control that will change the course, current or cross section of protected wetlands or public waters shall be subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statute, Chapter 103G. Community-wide structural works for flood control intended to remove areas from the regulatory flood plain shall not be allowed in the floodway. h. A levee, dike or floodwall constructed in the floodway shall not cause an increase to the 100-year or regional flood and the technical analysis must assume equal conveyance or storage loss on both sides of a stream. COMPLIANCE FOR STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS As noted previously, all floodway special uses shall be subject to the procedures and standards contained in Section 35-2190.4 of this ordinance. This specific section/subpart is attached as Exhibit-A to this planning report. The factors however, upon which the decision of the City Council shall be based, are noted as follows: 1) The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments. 2) The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of others or they may block bridges, culverts or other hydraulic structures. 3) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these systems to prevent disease, contamination, and unsanitary conditions. 4) The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner. 5) The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community. 6) The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location. 7) The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the proposed use. 8) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development anticipated in the foreseeable future. ________________ SUP –City of BC PC 10/16/14 Page 5 9) The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and flood plain management program for the area. 10) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles. 11) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site. 12) Such other factors which are relevant to the purposes of this Ordinance. ANALYSIS & FINDINGS of SPECIAL USE PERMIT As part of the analysis formulated under this special use permit application and report, the following responses and findings to the above-noted factors are being presented for Planning Commission consideration: 1) The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments. Response: Staff does not believe the placement of fill to create this small, 3-foot wide flood-protection berm system will create a dangerous situation to life and properties, either upstream or downstream of this Shingle Creek channel system, nor negatively impact the surrounding or immediate properties in this area. The City will provide compensatory storage areas as necessary (and as required) by the watershed district and city ordinance. There does not appear to be any evidence or findings which may lead to increased flood heights or velocities caused by this fill encroachment. The full engineering and design of this berm structure by the City Engineer will ensure this berm does not create any negative issues or impacts upon completion of this project. 2) The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of others or they may block bridges, culverts or other hydraulic structures. Response: Staff does not believe there will be any danger of materials swept downstream or onto other lands, as this project will be properly protected during the installation and construction of the berm by means of silt-fencing and other erosion control measures. Should any materials be accidentally swept away (say during a large rainfall event), the city has resources to immediately address or mitigate the damages or remove any materials or obstructions. The berm will be vegetated with certain plant materials that should help stabilize and maintain the integrity of the berm, including times of high water impacts. 3) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these systems to prevent disease, contamination, and unsanitary conditions. Response: This project will have no effect upon the city water supply and/or sanitation systems in the city. ________________ SUP –City of BC PC 10/16/14 Page 6 4) The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner. Response: Staff believes this new flood-berm will help alleviate or reduce flood impacts upon the city owned lands and ball fields, and the impacts will be further reduced to off-site owners by means of providing compensatory storage areas along the outer boundaries of the berm structure. 5) The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community. Response: This new floodplain berm will help alleviate, reduce or prevent the continual flooding and water damaged to these ball diamonds caused almost each year by the spring melt-off and rainfall events typically received or experienced in this area. The fields have consistently been inundated or unplayable for periods of long time, due to the proximity of the creek, the lower field elevations, and high water tables in this area. Flooding has caused the relocation of games and cancellation of the city’s annual Dudley Softball Tournament, which is a very prestigious and recognized tournament that attracts many teams throughout the US and other countries. This tournament is an important economic generator for the city; and this berm should help provide added protection measures during the early spring periods, and help keep the fields open and playable for this important recreational event and for the other recreational teams from local residents. The berm will allow city staff to begin spring maintenance and clean-up as needed earlier than normal, and help reduce or eliminate the added costs of restoring or repairing flood damaged areas. 6) The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location. Response: the berm is necessary to be placed along the outer edge of the ball diamond (outfield fence line) and creek channel due to this being the most logical placement of the berm. The berm will provide a small means of diverting the water away from the ball diamonds and redirecting the water back into the creek channel and wetland areas. A large section of open space and wetland area will be unaffected by this berm. 7) The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the proposed use. Response: The shape and outline of the Shingle Creek channel and the sharp bend at this location may contribute to increased flooding impacts in this area. Flood waters typically flow from the north to south, and this water typically jumps the banks at this location and directly impacts these lower elevated play fields. The berm is specifically meant to provide an easier and cost-effective alternative that is not available on this site. As noted previously, the berm is meant to provide a low-lying stop-gap measure or structure to temporarily hold back excess floodwaters near these areas. It was determined that the berm would be a much more cost effective and suitable alternative than brining in large amount of fill material to raise the levels of the outfield areas. ________________ SUP –City of BC PC 10/16/14 Page 7 8) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development anticipated in the foreseeable future. Response: the berm is designed to be compatible with the existing use as it will be placed outside of the useable areas of the ball diamonds, and does not impact any other recreational or passive uses or areas within the park, such as the trails. The development of this site will remain a city park and recreational play field, so no major changes or different land use plans are called for in the foreseeable future. 9) The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and flood plain management program for the area. Response: The City’s floodplain ordinance provides the procedures and steps the city must follow in order to obtain this special use permit. The City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies certain goals and policy statements that address the city’s efforts in dealing with local water and stormwater management practices: Goal 1 To minimize public capital and maintenance expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and rates for stormwater runoff. Policy 1.1: Preserve existing storage capacities of protected waters, wetlands and natural water courses. Policy 1.5: Implement cost effective and efficient methods of stormwater management to limit public expenditures. Goal 2 To provide a reasonable level of stormwater flood protection within the City of Brooklyn Center to limit potential flood damage. Policy 2.1: Prohibit encroachment that will reduce the storage capacity of floodplains, unless mitigating action is undertaken. Staff believes this new berm meets these goals and complies with these specific policy statements. 10) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles. Response: Centennial Park has adequate access to most areas of the park. There should be little if any need to access this area where the berm is to be installed, unless there is a need for maintenance or repairs. There should be no impacts or limitations to access by city or emergency vehicles. 11) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site. ________________ SUP –City of BC PC 10/16/14 Page 8 Response: the City Engineers states the small scale of the berm, once it has been fully vegetated and established upon completion, should have little if any effect upon the expected heights, water velocities or sediment transport caused by this low-level berm. The City is having the local Shingle Creek Watershed review and comment on the proposed plans of this berm, and this report or findings are planned to be presented to the City after the preparation of this planning report. Staff intends to have more information, including any findings or recommendations presented for the Planning Commission at the public hearing. 12) Such other factors which are relevant to the purposes of this Ordinance. Response: Staff believes there are no other factors or issues to comprehend on this project. As part of this public hearing and processing of this special use permit, the City is required to notify the commissioner of the Dept. of Natural Resources. This notice was sent Sept. 25, 2014, which meets (exceeds) the minimum 10-days prior to the public hearing, as required by city ordinance. As of the preparation of this report, no replies or return comments have been received by the DNR commissioner (nor any DNR staff or representative). Provided no comments are received from the commissioner before the public hearing, staff will assume the DNR has no concerns or issues with the city proceeding on this berm/flood- protection project. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution No. 2015-16, which provides findings and conditions of approval of a Special Use Permit to the City of Brooklyn Center, which would allow the grading and placement of fill to complete a new flood-protection berm in the Floodway District. The conditions are noted as follows: 1. Grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 2. The areas of disturbance in and around the berm area shall be restored to its pre- existing natural environment, and the berm shall be provided with approved vegetative cover to ensure stability and prevent erosion of fill material into Shingle Creek. 3. Appropriate erosion and sediment control devices shall be provided on site during construction as approved by the Engineering Department and the applicant shall obtain an NPDES construction site erosion control permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency prior to disturbing the site. 4. An as-built survey must be completed upon installation of the new berm, and the Special Use Permit must be title registered with the property in the Office of the County Recorder. EXHIBIT-A SECTION 35-2190.4. Special Uses The City Council shall hear and decide applications for Special Uses permissible under this Ordinance. Applications shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Inspections who shall forward the application to the Planning Commission for consideration. a. Hearings. Upon filing with the Planning and Inspection Department an application for a Special Use Permit, the Director of Planning and Inspection shall submit by mail to the Commissioner of Natural Resources a copy of the application for proposed Special Use sufficiently in advance so that the Commissioner will receive at least ten (10) day notice of the hearing. b. Decisions. The City Council shall arrive at a decision on a Special Use within 48 days of a recommendation by the Planning Commission. In granting a Special Use Permit, the City Council shall prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards, in addition to those specified in Section 35-2190.4f, which are in conformity with the purposes of this Ordinance. Violations of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the Special Use Permit is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Ordinance punishable under Section 35-2210. A copy of all decisions granting Special Use Permits shall be forwarded by mail to the Commissioner of Natural Resources within ten (10) days of such action. c. Procedures to be followed by the City Council in Passing on Special Use Permit Applications Within all Flood Plain Districts. 1) Require the applicant to furnish such of the following information and additional information as deemed necessary by the City Council for determining the suitability of the particular site for the proposed use. a) Five Sets of Plans drawn to scale showing the nature, location, dimensions, and elevation of the lot, existing or proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, flood-proofing measures, and the relationship of the above to the location of the stream channel. b) Specifications for building construction and materials, flood- proofing, filling, dredging, grading, channel improvement, storage of materials, water supply and sanitary facilities. 2) Transmit one copy of the information described in subsection 1) to a designated engineer or other expert person or agency for technical assistance, where necessary, in evaluating the proposed project in relation to flood heights and velocities, the seriousness of flood damage to the use, the adequacy of the plans for protection, and other technical matters. 3) Based upon the technical evaluation of the designated engineer or expert, the City Council shall determine the specific flood hazard at the site and evaluate the suitability of the proposed use in relation to the flood hazard. d. Factors Upon Which the Decision of the City Council Shall Be Based. In passing upon Special Use Permit applications, the City Council shall consider all relevant factors specified in other sections of this Ordinance, and: 1) The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments. 2) The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of others or they may block bridges, culverts or other hydraulic structures. 3) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these systems to prevent disease, contamination, and unsanitary conditions. 4) The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner. 5) The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community. 6) The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location. 7) The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the proposed use. 8) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development anticipated in the foreseeable future. 9) The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and flood plain management program for the area. 10) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles. 11) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site. 12) Such other factors which are relevant to the purposes of this Ordinance. e. Time for Acting on Application. The City Council shall act on an application in the manner described above within 48 days from receiving a recommendation from the Planning Commission on the application, except that where additional information is required pursuant to Section 35-2190.4d of this Ordinance, the City Council shall render a written decision within 30 days from the receipt of such additional information. f. Conditions Attached to Special Use Permits. Upon consideration of the factors listed above and the purpose of this Ordinance, the City Council shall attach such conditions to the granting of Special Use Permits as it deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of this Ordinance. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1) Modification of waste treatment and water supply facilities. 2) Limitations on period of use, occupancy, and operation. 3) Imposition of operational controls, sureties, and deed restrictions. 4) Requirements for construction of channel modifications, compensatory storage, dikes, levees, and other protective measures. 5) Flood-proofing measures, in accordance with the State Building Code and this Ordinance. The applicant shall submit a plan or document certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the flood-proofing measures are consistent with the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation and associated flood factors for the particular area. Commissioner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014-16 RESOLUTION REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2014-015 SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE GRADING AND PLACEMENT OF FILL MATERIAL IN THE FLOODWAY DISTRICT , LOCATED IN CENTENNIAL PARK AT 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (“City”) and pursuant to City Code Section City Code Section 35-2140, Subpart 3.f, has submitted Planning Commission Application No. 2014-015, requesting a Special Use Permit to allow the grading and placement of fill material in the Floodway District of Centennial Park at 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway; and WHEREAS, this area of Centennial Park where the City intends to place this fill material is located in the established Floodway District boundaries identified in the City’s own Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps, Map No. 27053C0204-E, dated September 2, 2004, and which area and land uses are subject to City Code Section 35-2140 and all related ordinances under Floodplain Management Section 35-2100; and WHEREAS, this special use permit would authorize the City to place fill material necessary for the installation of a low-lying, 3-foot wide earthen berm within the open space area between the Shingle Creek waterway channel and the Centennial Park softball fields, for the expressed purposes of a low-level flood protection berm system, to help reduce or alleviate flood water damage to these public recreational ball fields and area; and WHEREAS, as required by City Code Section 35-2190; Subpart 4.b, the City has officially notified the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources of this proposed berm project, and no comments or objections have been received by the Commissioner or his representatives; and WHEREAS, on October 16, 2014, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing, whereby a staff report and public testimony regarding the special use permit were received and noted for the record; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Special Use Permit request, and in light of all testimony received, and reviewing and considering the guidelines and standards for evaluating this special use permit as contained in City Code Section 35-2190; Subpart 4.d, that this special use permit meets the general standards and factors for issuing or approving said special use permit, and generally complies with the goals and objectives of the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center does hereby recommend to the City Council, that Planning Application No. 2014-015, a special use permit submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, be approved based upon the following conditions: : 1. Grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 2. The areas of disturbance in and around the berm area shall be restored to its pre-existing natural environment, and the berm shall be provided with approved vegetative cover to ensure stability and prevent erosion of fill material into Shingle Creek. 3. Appropriate erosion and sediment control devices shall be provided on site during construction as approved by the Engineering Department and the applicant shall obtain an NPDES construction site erosion control permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency prior to disturbing the site. 4. An as-built survey must be completed upon installation of the new berm, and the Special Use Permit must be title registered with the property in the Office of the County Recorder. October 16, 2014 Date Chair ATTEST: Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Chair , Commissioners , , , and . and the following voted against the same: None whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. HENNEPIN CO.LIBRARY &GOVERNMENT SERVICE CENTER CENTENNIALPARK CityHall CommunityCenter CREEK S H I N G L E 6260 6264 6268 6300 22 63006301 63066305 63126309 6318 63246319 6330 2700 6325 6336 63312601 2607 6400 64066401 2600 64122606 2612 6407 64186413260126072613 2619 6501 6301 2600260626122618 2624 2101 22 6301 6221 6125 6200 6050 6050 2222226030 6100 6254 SHINGLECREEK SUMMIT SHINGLE CREEK SHINGLECREEK PKWYTO EB I694 OHENRY BROOKLYN 64TH 65TH SHINGLE CREEK WB I94 TO SHINGLE CREEK PKWY S H I N G L ECREEK P K W YTO W B I 9 4 INTERSTATE 94INTERSTATE 694INTERSTATE 94 EB I94 TOSHINGLECREEK PKWY FREEWAY BROOKLYN CENTER CENTENNIAL PARK6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY 0 400 800200Feet Legend FLOOD ZONES ZONE AE (F LOOD WAY) ZONE AE (100-YR FP w/ BASE FLOOD ELEVS.) ZONE A (100-YR F P w/o BASE F LOOD ELEVS.) ZONE X (500 YR FP or 0.2% ANN. C HANC E FLOOD HAZARD) ZONE X (OUTSIDE F LOOD PLAIN ) HENNEPIN CO.LIBRARY &GOVERNMENT SERVICE CENTER CENTENNIALPARK CityHall CommunityCenter SHINGLE CREEK CREEK S H I N G L E 6218 6224 6228 62326223 623662296240 62442800 2806 6248 6252624928012807 6260271228002806 2812 62646261 626862652713 6300 27192801 2807 22 630063012706271263062800 2806 6305 6312630927012707 27132719 2725 63182801280763246319633027002706271227186325272428002806633663312601260726136400270127072713 27192801 64066401260064122606 2612 64072618270027062712 27182800 6418641326012607 6405 26132619262527012707 271327192801 6501 6301 26002606 261226182624 6415 2630 270027062712 27182800 6445 2101 2300 2100 2400 2050 2000 1800 2500 2200 2741 22 2701 2550 6601 6601 2590 22 6300 6250 22 6301 6221 6125 6200 590159005901 5906590759065907 5900 5913225913 5912 5901225919 225925 22 5918 59245919 225931 5915 22 22 5930 2259375936 5910 5927 59425943 5937 59485949 5939 600060016000 5930 600660076006 22 22226012 5925 6000 22 6050 22 22 22603022 5951 6100 6254 6160 JOHN MARTIN SUMMIT SHINGLE CREEK S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y T O W B I 9 4 FREEWAY WB I94 TO SHINGLE CREEK PKWY 60TH MUMFORD INTERSTATE 94 UPTON VINCENT BROOKLYN NASH INTERSTATE 94 EB I94 TO SHINGLE CREEK PKWY 63RD SHINGLECREEK PKWYTO EB I694 E A R L E B R O W N E B I 9 4 T O S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y OHENRY SHINGLE CREEK 64TH EARLE BROWN 65TH INTERSTATE 694 2718 59425948 PARKWAY SHINGLE CREEK PKWY TO SB I94 CENTENNIAL PARK / CITY HALL / COMMUNITY CENTER6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY 0 600 1,200300Feet