HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-018 - 615 66th Ave FULL PACKETLl City of Brooklyn Center
Planning Commission Application
''aUA l�l
[date Received Application No.:� �
Please Print Clearly or IvDe
Address/Street Location of Property 615 66th Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN
Legal Description of Property Regal Read Development 2nd Addition. Lot #2, Block 1
Owner Terry Moses Phone No. 651-633-5730
Address 1776 Maple Lane, Roseville, MN 55113
Applicant McDonald's Corporation Phone No. 952-884-4355
Address 1650 West 82nd Street, STE. 900, Bloomington, MN 55431
Type of Request: F1 Rezoning 11 Variance 11 Special Use Permit
I n Subdivision Approval
Fx] Other: Amendment to PUD
1-1 Site & Building Plan Approval
Description of Request: Crown Brawley, L.L.C. and McDonald' s Corporation
are making a request to amend the PUD and development agreement to
allow for a quick service restaurant on Lot 2, Block 1 of Regal
Road Development Second Addition.
Application Fee $ 700.00 Acct No. 10100-4403 Receipt No.
The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center,
within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing statement, the actual costs incurred by the
City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the
processing of the application. Such costs will be in addition to the application fee described herein.
Withdrawal of the application will not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to
withdrawal.
f
Applicant (Please Print) !/ )� 1/ f� '� Applicants Signature
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Dates of P. C. Consideration: ' - -00,k
Approved Denied f . this day of „ , {:, - 20 Cij, , subject to the
following conditions: r
CITY C01INCH ACTION
Dates of Council Consideration:
Approved Denied this
amendment:
-/3-C,-w�
day of
a -
Chairman
20 , with the following
/._ 9 -03 A'/-p// �a f / b ✓I 01 1 —_. Clerk
MC®Onald's
January 9, 2003
Mayor Mryna Kragness
and City Council Members
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
McDonald's Corporation
1650 West 82nd Street
Suite 900
Bloomington, MN 55431-1442
952/884-4355
Fax: 952/885-4755
Re: 615 — 66th Avenue North (Lot 2, Block 1, Regal Road Development 2nd Addition)
Application Nos. 2002-018 and 2002-019
To Mayor Kragness and Council Members:
This letter shall serve to provide our notice to withdraw our application for the
development of a McDonald's restaurant at 615 — 661h Avenue North, Brooklyn Center,
Minnesota.
Accordingly, we request that our Application in the above -referenced matters be
withdrawn from consideration by the City. If there is any unused money, please forward
it to my attention. Thank you.
McDONALD'S CORPORATION
Lisa L. Diehl, CCIM, CPM
Real Estate Representative
CONSENT
The undersigned, as the fee owner of the subject property, consents to the request for
action made above.
CROWN B WLEY, LLC
B Terry D004ses, its Chief Manager
cc. Marc Kruger
Terry Moses
Ron Warren
Application Filed on 11-14-02
City Council Action Should Be
Taken By 01-13-03 (60 Days)
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 2002-018 And 2002-019
Applicant: McDonald's Corporation
Location: Southeast Corner of 66th and Camden Avenues North
Request: Planned Unit Development Amendment and Development Plan Approval
The applicant, McDonald's Corporation, is seeking a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
amendment under Planning Commission Application 2002-018 to modify the original Planned
Unit Development approval and agreement for this area to be allowed to construct an otherwise
non -permitted convenience food restaurant at the southeast corner of 66th and Camden Avenues
North. They also seek development plan (or site and building plan) approval under Planning
Commission Application No. 2002-019 for an approximate 4,300 sq. ft., 90 seat McDonald's
restaurant on this site which is addressed 615 66t Avenue North. The property in question is
zoned PUD/C-2 (Planned Unit Development/Commerce) and is bounded on the no by 66th
Avenue with R-3 (Multiple Family Residence — Townhomes) zoned property containing the
Georgetown and Riverwood townhomes along with C-2 (Commerce) zoned property containing
the Riverwood Dental Center and Holiday' Station on the opposite side of the street; on the east
by C-2 zoned property containing the SuperAmerica station; on the south by PUD/C-2 zoned
property containing the Regal Theater; and on the west by Camden Avenue with R-5 (Multiple
Family Residence) zoned property containing the Melrose Gates Apartments on the opposite site
of the street.
Convenience food restaurants such as proposed by the applicant are prohibited from locating in
this PUD/C-2 zone based on the conditions and findings made at the time the City approved the
Planned Unit Development rezoning for the Regal theater and surrounding property.
Furthermore, the underlying C-2 zone which provides the regulations governing uses and
structures within the PUD, prohibits convenience food restaurants from abutting an R-1, R-2 or
R-3 zoning district including abutment at a street line, such as the abutment that exists along the
north side of 66th Avenue.
A Planned Unit Development rezoning from C-2 to PUD/C-2 and development plan approval for
a 20 screen, 85,240 sq. ft. Regal Theater was approved by the City Council under Resolution No.
98-133 on July 27, 1998. Attached for the Commission's review is a copy of that resolution
containing various findings, considerations and conditions of approval for that proposal. The
land rezoned consisted of the Regal Theater site and two restaurant sites along Camden Avenue,
one to the north of the theater, the other to the south of the theater, which were identified and
referred to during this process as "pad site 2" and "pad site 3" respectively. (Note: Pad site 2
eventually became the site currently under consideration following the filing of the final plat for
12-12-02
Page 1
all of the property in the PUD.) A PUD amendment for an alternate storm water detention plan
was subsequently approved by the City Council on September 28, 1998, after Planning
Commission review and recommendation. These approvals became the Planned Unit
Development for the Regal Theater and surrounding property. Condition No. 16 of City Council
Resolution No. 98-133 states "the applicant has agreed and the City acknowledges that it will not
allow the development of `pad site 2' and `pad site 3' as a fast food/convenience food restaurant,
a gasoline service station/convenience store, car wash, pawn shop or check cashing operation and
the development agreement will acknowledge this restriction or limitation on the future use of
the property."
This condition was agreed to by the developers and the owner of the restaurant sites, Mr. Terry
Moses of Crown Brawley, LLC. This condition was considered an integral part of the decision to
rezone the property and allow the development of the theater. Even though "pad site 2" could
not be used for a convenience food restaurant given the underlying C-2 zone, which prohibits
such abutment with R-3 property, the City wanted to assure that there would be no dispute about
future unacceptable land uses for both "pad site 2" and "pad site 3". Among other things, the
traffic analysis prepared and presented at the time of the PUD rezoning, did not comprehend
convenience food restaurant but rather sit down restaurants, which have different traffic
generations, particularly with respect to PM peak hour traffic rates, which were of concern
because of theater traffic generation. Minutes from a number of meetings held during the time of
the Planning Commission and City Council review indicate that this was a significant factor and
the parties assured the City that this was anacceptable condition or limitation for future
development.
As the Commission is aware, the PUD process involves a rezoning of land to the PUD
designation followed by an alpha numeric designation of the underlying zoning district. This
underlying zoning district provides the regulations governing uses and structures within the
Planned Unit Development. The rules and regulations governing the district (in this case C-2)
apply to the development proposal unless the City determines that another standard or use would
be appropriate given mitigating circumstances that are offset by the plans submitted by the
developer. One of the purposes of the PUD district is to give the City Council the needed
flexibility in addressing development and redevelopment problems.
Regulations governing uses and structures may be modified by conditions ultimately imposed by
the City Council on the development plans. The PUD process, including amendments such as
this, involves a rezoning of land and, therefore, is subject to meeting the City's rezoning
evaluation policy and review guidelines that are contained in Section 35-208 of the City's Zoning
Ordinance. Also, proposals and amendments must be consistent with Section 35-355 of the
City's Zoning Ordinance, which addresses Planned Unit Developments. Attached for the
Commission's review are copies of Section 35-208 and 35-355 of the City's Zoning Ordinance
for review. As mentioned previously, the City Council adopted a resolution approving the
overall PUD for the Regal Theater development and surrounding property. Thai resolution
contained the various findings and considerations necessary for approving that PUD and also
contained the restriction on convenience food restaurants as well as other uses on the surrounding
12-12-02
Page 2
property. Any approval of this PUD amendment should acknowledge compatibility with the
policy and review guidelines of the previously mentioned Section 35-208 and also the provisions
of Section 35-355 of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed amendment must be consistent and
compatible with surrounding land uses in the area. The proposed amendment should be offset by
factors related to the development. Also, the overall development must be a reasonable use of
the property and be considered to be in the best interests of the community.
The applicant has submitted a full set of development plans and is seeking site and building plan
approval for the McDonald's restaurant. We will review their plans in more detail following
review of their PUD amendment request.
Mr. Terry Moses of Crown Brawley, LLC, owner of the two restaurant sites adjacent to the Regal
Theater has submitted written comments in support of the amendment to allow convenience food
restaurants on the sites where they were prohibited under the PUD approval. He explains that he
agreed with the prohibition when it was enacted four years ago. He claims there has been very
little interest in the site primarily because of the size of the site and only McDonald's has come
forward with an offer for the property. He indicates that the immediate area, because of its high
traffic and easy access, has evolved into a convenience retail location. He points out that the
Regal Cinema has not generated the vehicle traffic that was originally feared and he anticipates
that many McDonald's customers would be existing SuperAmerica and Subway customers
thereby holding the increase in traffic down. He states another advantage is that the proposed use
would share the existing driveway with SuperAmerica and Subway, making a change in traffic
patterns less likely. He notes that commercial properties should be positioned close to freeways
and through ways to keep traffic from residential area and still allow easy access for local
residents. He indicates that there is a demand for quick serve restaurants, however, there is a
distinct shortage of suitable sites. He also notes that McDonald's analysis shows this to be a
good site for their business.
The written comments make no mention of the extent to which efforts have been made to market
the property for sit down or non -convenience food restaurants. Inquiries have been made to the
City about these potential sites and these parties have been referred to the owner of the property
after discussion regarding the Planned Unit Development conditions. If the site is indeed too
small for such development as indicated in the written comments, perhaps accommodations
could be made under the PUD process to make a desired restaurant development workable.
Furthermore, the creation and size of these sites was determined by the owner of the property at
the time of the Regal Theater development and assurances were given that they would be suitable
for sit down restaurants. To abandon the restriction on convenience food restaurants, as well as
the other prohibited uses, should be done only if it is justifiable based on the rezoning evaluation
policy and review guidelines and such a recommendation should be consistent with the
provisions of Section 35-355 regarding Planned Unit Developments. It seems that the only
justification put forth thus far to allow such a use is that McDonald's is willing and able to
develop the site and that they think it is a good site for their business. Their building plans do
not seem to mitigate, or offset, the negative aspects of having a convenience food restaurant
directly across the street from R-3 zoned property. Where other PUD's have had property line
12-12-02
Page 3
abutment with residential property such as the recent SA project at 57th and Logan Avenues
North, an 8 ft. high solid opaque screen fence, landscaping and a buffer strip were established.
The applicant's plan calls for nothing in the way of plan mitigation; in fact they propose a less
than 15 ft. green strip along the 66th Avenue right of way across from the R-3 zoned property.
The policy guidelines ask questions such as is there a clear and public need or benefit? Is the
proposed zoning consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classifications? Can
all permitted uses be contemplated for development of the subject property? Will the property
bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning district? Is the
property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district? Is the proposal
warranted by comprehensive planning — the lack of developable land in the proposed zoning
district or the best interest of the community? And finally does the proposal demonstrate merit
beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? It does not seem that there is
a clear and public need or benefit in changing the conditions of the PUD that prohibit certain
types of uses that are considered inappropriate for this development. It is believed that the
proposed amendment is not compatible with surrounding land uses, that non -convenience food
restaurants or other appropriate uses could be developed on the property given time and an
adequate marketing plan. This proposal seems only to benefit the interests of the owner or the
developer of the property. Based on these factors, it is not believed that this proposed PUD
amendment to allow convenience food restaurants in this PUD is consistent with the rezoning
evaluation policy and review guidelines. Also, we do not believe it is compatible with the
standards, purposes and intent of the PUD section of the ordinance and it only seems to be in the
interest of the owner of the land and not necessarily of the best interests of the community.
The applicant, under Planning Commission Application No. 2002-019, has submitted a site and
building plan proposal in hopes that the City will amend the Planned Unit Development to allow
a convenience food restaurant. The plan calls for an approximate 4,304 sq. ft., 90 seat
McDonald's restaurant on a 1.28 acre site.
The only access to the site is a shared access off 66th Avenue with the SuperAmerica to the east.
The building would be situated to the southwest comer of the site with parking for 63 vehicles,
including three handicapped, on the north site of the building. A drive up lane would be located
on the westerly side of the building with the pick up windows on the south side. Vehicles would
move in a counter clockwise fashion around the building for the drive up facility. As mentioned
previously, the plan calls for a less than 15 ft. green strip in portions of the 66th Avenue green
strip. The plan indicates 90 seats and 16 employees at the maximum shift requiring a total of 53
parking spaces. The shared access is a cross access agreement that has been in existence for
some time. The only access to the site would be off of 661h Avenue. No other access on Camden
or across the Regal Theater site is allowed
12-12-02
Page 4
The applicant has provided grading, drainage and utility plans which are being reviewed by the
City Engineer. A retention pond was constructed on the Regal Theater site to accommodate
drainage for this entire area. The drainage plan seems to indicate that the site will connect to
storm sewer in 66"' and Camden Avenues rather than being directed to the retention pond. These
are matters that would need to be addressed by the City Engineer. Water and sanitary sewer
would be connected to existing utilities in Camden Avenue North.
B-612 curb and gutter is required around all driving and parking areas and is indicated on the
plan.
The applicant has submitted a landscape plan in response to the landscape point system utilized
by the Planning Commission to evaluate such plans. This 1.28 acre site requires a total of 102.4
points rather than the 62.5 landscape points indicated on the plan. The applicant proposes to
provide 138 landscape points per the point schedule. They propose five shade trees (Patmore
Ash and River Birch), 11 coniferous trees (Austrian Pine), 14 ornamental trees (Spring Snow
Crab and Japanese Tree Lilac) and 56 shrubs (Dwarf Burning Bush, Gro-Low Sumac, Goldflame
Spirea, Goldmound Spirea, Andora Compact Juniper and Scandia Juniper). The shade trees are
located along islands separating this site from the SuperAmerica site to the east. The coniferous
trees are located in the north green strip along with River Birch and the Spring Snow Crab.
Austrian Pine and Spring Snow Crab are also located at the southwesterly portion of the site.
The shrubbery would be located primarily to the west portion of the building next to the drive up
land and dumpster enclosure as well as at the southeast corner of the building.
Landscaping would seem appropriate given the variety and points proposed.
The applicant has submitted building elevations showing the exterior of the McDonald's
building. The exterior finish would be primarily brick veneer with a soldier course of block
around the lower portion of the building. The colors are indicated as "to be determined". A red
standing seam metal roof, or mansard type treatment is shown around the exterior of three of the
sides of the building. To be consistent with other approvals, the mansard treatment should be
carried around the backside of the building as well. The building elevations show a trash
enclosure of the same material as the building with solid gates.
The applicant has also submitted a lighting plan, which appears to be consistent with the lighting
standards contained in the City Ordinances. General concern is that all lighting be shielded and
directed downward on the site to avoid glare.
12-12-02
Page 5
A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have appeared in the Brooklyn Center Sun/Post
and have also been sent to neighboring property owners.
For a number of years rezoning applications considered by the Planning Commission were
referred to the respective Neighborhood Advisory Group for input and comment. In this case, it
would be the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group. State statutes, however, require the City
to respond to zoning applications within 60 days of the date a properly submitted application has
been filed with the City. This application was filed on November 14, 2002. Due to zoning
requirements for notice and publication, this application needs to be submitted approximately
four weeks prior to the Planning Commission's public hearing. The clock, however, begins at
the date the application is properly filed. Therefore, the zoning decision must be made by the
City Council no later than January 13, 2003. Almost 30 days of the required 60 day time frame
will have expired before the Commission's public hearing has even held. This requirement
makes it almost impossible for the City to hold the Neighborhood Advisory Group meetings that
they normally have had.
The Planning Commission has instituted a new procedure because it still wishes to receive
Neighborhood Advisory Group input with respect to these PUD applications and amendments.
We have invited the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group members to the public hearing and
are encouraging their comments and participation at the meeting. A staff report will be delivered
to the advisory group members at the same time that it is delivered to the Planning Commission.
Hopefully, they will have an opportunity to review the matter and make comments to the
Commission at Thursday evening's meeting.
It is recommended that the Planned Unit Development amendment submitted by McDonald's
Corporation be denied on the basis that it is not consistent with the rezoning evaluation policy
and review guidelines as well as not being consistent with Section 35-355 of the City Ordinances
regarding Planned Unit Developments. A draft resolution recommending denial of the Planned
Unit Development will be prepared. The site and building application (No. 2002-019) also
should be denied on the basis that it is inconsistent with the conditions of the original Planned
Unit Development, which prohibits convenience food restaurants within this PUD.
12-12-02
Page 6
Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 98-133
RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDING DISPOSITION OF
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 98015 SUBMITTED BY
CENTRES GROUP BROOKLYN CENTER, LTD.
WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 98015 submitted by Centres
Group Brooklyn Center, LTD. proposes rezoning from C-2 (Commerce) to PUD/C-2 of 730,192
sq. ft. (16.76 acres) area of land that is bounded on the north by 66th Avenue and the Super
America site; on the east by TH252; on the south by Interstate 694; and on the west by Camden
Avenue; and
WHEREAS, this proposal comprehends the rezoning of the above mentioned
property and site and building plan approval for an 85,240 sq. ft., 4,592 seat, 20 screen theater
on a proposed 13.09 acre site and the creation of two other sites, one that is 71,693 sq. ft. in area
and the other 88,186 sq. ft. in area for future commercial development, most likely restaurant
•r
uses; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on June
25, 1998, when a staff report and public testimony regarding the rezoning and site and building
plan were received and the Planning Commission continued the public hearing and referred the
P g
application to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment; and
WHEREAS, the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group met to consider this
matter on July 7, 1998, at the City Hall and recommended approval of this planned unit
development proposal; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission resumed consideration of this matter on July
16, 1998, received an additional staff report and took further testimony during a continued public
hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No.
98015 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 98-3 on July 16, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered Application No. 98015 at its July 27,
1998 meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the rezoning and site and building plan
request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in
Section 35-208 of the City's Zoning. Ordinance, the provisions of the Planned Unit Development
1
City Council Resolution No. 98-133
.. �w
ordinance contained in Section 35-355, the City's Comprehensive Plan, and the Planning
Commission's recommendation contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 98-3.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center that Application No. 98015 submitted by Centres Group Brooklyn Center, LTD.
be approved in light of the following considerations;
1. The rezoning and planned unit development proposal are compatible with the standards,
purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section of the City's Zoning
Ordinance.
2. The rezoning and planned unit development proposal will allow for the utilization
of the land in question in a manner which is compatible with, complimentary to
and of comparable intensity to adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on
surrounding land.
3. The utilization of the property as proposed under the rezoning and planned unit
development proposal will conform with City ordinance standards with the
exception of the parking requirement for theaters which requires one parking space
for every three seats within the theater complex. Variation from the Zoning
Ordinance to allow a parking formula of one parking space for every four theater
seats is justified on the basis of the development plan submitted and the operational
differences on parking demand that a multiplex theater of this size has which
allows the ability to stagger starting times within the theater complex to lessen or
spread out the demand for parking over a greater period of time. The applicants
have also provided a parking analysis that indicates national norms, local norms,
parking- generation, and local parking studies all conclude that the standard of one
parking space for every four seats is a reasonable standard to apply to this
proposed theater complex.
4. The rezoning and planned unit development proposal are considered compatible
with the recommendations of the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the
City.
5. The rezoning and planned unit development appear to be a good utilization of the
property under consideration and the future potential uses of two adjacent
properties for commercial restaurant sites is also a good long range use of the
existing land and can be considered an asset to the community.
2
City Council Resolution No. 98-133
6. In light of the above considerations, it is believed that the guidelines for Evaluating
rezonings and contained in Section 35-208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance are met
and that the proposal is, therefore, in the best interests of the community.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center
to approve Application No. 98015 subject to the following conditions and considerations:
1. The 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 and utility plans aresubject 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 based on cost estimates shall be submitted prior to the issuance of
building permits to assure completion of all approved site improvements.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or on ground mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The buildings are to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to
meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in
accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to
facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City
Ordinances.
8. 13612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas.
9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and
utility service lines prior to release of the performance guarantee.
10. The property owner shall enter into an easement agreement for maintenance and
inspection of utility and storm drainage systems, prior to the issuance of permits.
11. All work performed and materials used for construction of utilities shall conform
to the City of Brooklyn Center standard specifications and details.
3
City Council Resolution No. 98-133
12. Approval of this application is subject to the applicant complying with all of the
requirements and regulations of the West Mississippi Watershed Management
Commission with respect to this site. The storm drainage system shall be
acceptable to the Watershed Management Commission and the applicant shall
comply with any conditions imposed by that body prior to the issuance of building
permits for this project.
13. Ponding areas required as part of the storm drainage plan shall be protected by
approved easement. The easement document shall be executed and filed with
Hennepin County prior to the issuance of building permits.
14. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Brooklyn
Center to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to the issuance of
building permits. Said agreement shall acknowledge a parking ratio of one parking
space for every four seats in the multiplex theater and shall acknowledge all
conditions of approval and assure compliance with development plans submitted
by the applicant.
15. The area identified on the site plan as "pad site 2" and "pad site 3" shall be seeded
in a manner to allow appropriate maintenance of this property pending future
development. Future development of this area is subject to amendment to this
planned unit development.
16. The applicant has agreed and the City acknowledges that it will not allow the
development of "pad site 2" and "pad site 3" as a fast food/convenience food
restaurant, a gasoline service station/convenience store, car wash, pawn shop or
check cashing operation and the development agreement will acknowledge this
restriction or limitation on the future use of the property.
17. The construction and cost of all traffic control improvements related to 66th and
Camden Avenues due to the project shall be the responsibility of the applicant
including, but not limited to, traffic signal, median extension, traffic control
structures, and any necessary right-of-way. This shall be acknowledged in the
development agreement.
18. Vehicle access between the theater parcel and the proposed Lot 3, Block 1, Regal
Road Development Addition and between the theater parcel and the Super America
property is prohibited. The applicant shall provide a physical barrier, acceptable
to the City, to prevent such cross access.
C!
c `
City Council Resolution No. 98-133
July 27 1998
Date M or
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Kathleen Carmod?nd upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Myrna Kragness, Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, Kay Lasman, and Robert Peppe;
and the following voted against the same: none,
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
5
11/14/2002 16:41 FAX 6514930752 Terry Moses -) Ron Warren 10002
Crown Brawley LLC
1776 Maple Lane
Roseville, MN 55113
Planning Commission
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Re: Lot 2 Block 1 Regal Road Development 2°d Addition (615 — 66' Ave N)
Dear Commissioners:.
We agreed in 1998 that the ideal use would be for sit-down restaurants and
therefore agreed that this site is not approved for fast-food restaurants, gas stations, gun
shops, pawn shops, and the like. During the last four years that we've been trying to
market the property most of the interest has been from convenience food restaurants, with
very little interest from any others. The main reason the sit-down restaurants have passed
on it is because of it size being a little too small. No one has come forward with an actual
offer, except for McDonald's, which we believe is a proposal that can be supported.
The immediate area, because of its high traffic and easy access, has naturally
evolved into a convenience retail location, the most recent developments being the
Holiday Station Store and the Regal Cinema. Since the proposed use is consistent with
its adjacent uses, it would not be considered "spot zoning."
Regal Cinema has not generated the vehicular traffic that was originally feared,
and it we anticipate that many of the McDonald's customers would be existing
Superamerica and Subway customers, thereby holding the increase in traffic down.
Another advantage over a typical site is that the proposed use would share the existing
driveway with Superamerica and Subway, making a change in traffic patterns less likely.
Ideally, commercial properties should be positioned as close to freeways and through-
ways as possible to keep the commuter traffic from going through residential areas to
reach therm, and to still allow easy access for local residents. As the demand for quick
service has grown so have quick serve restaurants, however there is a distinct shortage of
suitable sites.
So, since the subject site is next to a through -way, and McDonald's' analysis
shows it to be good for their business, the remaining determinate, we believe, should be
whether it serves a broad public need. We believe that the best place to start that
determination is with nearby residents.
Sincerely,
Terry D. J. Moses
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 12, 2002
TO: Ron Warren, Planning and Zoning Specialist
FROM: Scott Brink, Acting City Engineer
SUBJECT: Proposed McDonald's Restaurant Location
66' Avenue North at Camden Avenue
The City of Brooklyn Center has received a request to consider allowing the construction of a
McDonald's restaurant (4300 sq. ft., 90 seat) at the southeast corner of the intersection of 66`h
Avenue North and Camden Avenue North.
I have reviewed plans prepared by McDonald's and Loucks Associates dated November 12,
2002. My comments at this time regarding the proposed site development are as follows:
Traffic
Access to the site would be allowed only from the shared driveway access with Super America
(SA) along the south side of 66'. This shared driveway access also lines up directly across
from a driveway along the north side of 66`' that serves the Holiday Service Station. The
aligned driveways are essentially located at a median break that extends from Camden to T.H.
252.
I do have a concern regarding the adequacy of the shared driveway and median break area to
safely accommodate all traffic with the addition of the McDonald's. Included is a concern
regarding the left turn movement from westbound 66"' into the SA/McDonald's driveway and
the ability of the westbound left turn lane to provide enough stacking space during peak hour
periods.
As you may recall, traffic studies were conducted in this area by S.E.H. 5-6 years ago.
However, at the time the Planned Unit Development for Regal Theaters was approved, this
particular parcel was not designated or approved for this type of use. I have therefore
contacted S.E.H. to re -review and comment with regards to this change in use, and will pass
on those comments as they become available.
Review Comments - Camden/661/Proposed McDonald's
Utilities
Planning and development of the Regal Theater site considered the parcel of property where
the McDonald's is proposed, including provisions for future drainage and utilities as follows:
Drainage - As part of the PUD and site plan approval for Regal Theaters, a review and
approval of the West Mississippi River Watershed was included. A storm water detention
pond was constructed east of the theater, and was designed to include drainage from the
proposed McDonald's site. A 15-inch diameter storm sewer pipe was extended to the site to
pick-up this additional drainage, and terminates on the south property line, approximately 50
west of the east property line. The McDonald's site grading plan should therefore be revised
to route drainage accordingly to this location, rather that directly to Camden and 66`h as shown.
Utilities - as part of the Regal Theater development, upgrades to the City's sanitary sewer and
water infrastructure were also performed, including the reconstruction of sanitary sewer and
extension of water main across the east side of the proposed McDonald's site. In other words,
sanitary sewer (8") and water (6") mains are located in the driveway and easement area
between the site and Super America. It is, recommended that water and sewer services be
extended from this location, rather than from Camden Avenue as shown. This would also
eliminate the disruption and expense of excavating into the new street (Camden), and closing
traffic.
These are my comments at this time. Additional comments will be provided as necessary
should this application continue to move forward.
Review Comments - Camdenl66hlProposed McDonald's
To: Brooklyn Center Planning Commission
From: Thomas C.Kouri, Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group Representative
Date: December 11, 2002
RE: Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group member response to Application No. 2002-018
by McDonald's Corporation for Dec. 12, 2002 public hearing
City of Brooklyn Center Planning Commission,
I am unable to attend the December 12, 2002 public hearing, but would like to provide my input
to the public hearing. Please share and use this input as appropriate at the hearing.
I have reviewed the McDonald's application and ask that the application be denied for the
following reasons:
1. The proposed development is not compatible with current zoning and does not offer
compelling benefits to support a rezoning. The availability and proximity of multiple fast
food restaurants within two miles, and the availability of three fast food establishments within
approximately a one block radius (Subway, SuperAmerica and Holiday) do not demonstrate a
lack of a service that would significantly enhance the benefits to residents.
2. Representatives for Regal Theaters presented to the Riverwood Neighborhood at one of its
public meetings prior to the construction of the theater. At that time, representatives stated
that Regal wanted sit-down restaurants that would enhance the experience of the theater-
attender. Fast food restaurants were specifically mentioned as not desired. I believe that this
logic still applies today.
3. The proposed development of a fast food establishment will negatively impact the quality of
life of neighborhood residents. The rate of growth of property values will likely decrease,
thus reducing tax revenue for the City. It is highly likely that there will be traffic slowdowns
on 66`h Avenue due to the ingress and egress of vehicular traffic to the proposed restaurant
occurs.
4. The current zoning and 1998 PUD agreement continue to make sense for the area. Nothing
has been presented to demonstrate a long-term environmental benefit for rezoning to allow a
fast food establishment to be a better use of the site. Zoning should only be changed if it
would be a better use of the land or if the current zoning is not workable. The lack of a buyer
due to a limited marketing campaign or an economic downturn should never be a reason to
change zoning.
5. In summary, the negatives of approving this application far outweigh any benefit and I
strongly advocate that the application be denied for the good of the City of Brooklyn Center
and its residents.
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas C. Kouri, 6416 Willow Lane ��