Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-011 Inf Sh 7051 Brooklyn Boulevard Application Filed on 9-30-04 City Council Action Should Be Taken By 11-29-04 (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 2004-011 Applicant: ATS & R, Inc. (On Behalf of Osseo Area Schools) Location: Southwest Quadrant of Brooklyn Boulevard and 71st Avenue North Request: Rezoning The applicant ATS & R, Inc. on behalf of Osseo Area Schools (ISD 279) is requesting rezoning from R-1 (One Family Residence), R-2 (Two Family Residence) and R-4 (Multiple Family Residence) to C-1 (Service/Office) of a proposed 3.63 acre site located at the southwest quadrant of Brooklyn Boulevard and 71st Avenue North. The parcel will be created through a replatting of this area (See Planning Commission No. 2004-010) by combining the northeast portion of the Willow Lane School site along with two vacant multiple residential parcels (R-2 and R-4) immediately to the north. The proposed new lot would abut Brooklyn Boulevard and 71st Avenue North. The property in question is bounded on the north by 71st Avenue; on the east by Brooklyn Boulevard and the Willow Lane Apartments (zoned R-5); on the south by R-1 zoned lane that is Willow Lane Park; and on the west by R-1 zoned property for the Willow Lane School and single family homes facing 71st Avenue North. BACKGROUND The Osseo School District has for some time been searching for a new location for their adult education program that is being displaced by a redevelopment project in Brooklyn Park. The School District has recently acquired two abutting vacant parcels of land (Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Center Brook Addition) located adjacent to and northerly of their Willow Lane Early Childhood Center (formerly Willow Lane Elementary School). Lot 2 is currently zoned R-2 (Two Family Residence), is .34 acres and is a corner lot abutting 71st Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. Lot 3 is currently zoned R-4 (Multiple Family Residence), is .64 acres, and is an interior lot fronting on Brooklyn Boulevard between Lot 2 and the School District site. Their plan is to divide off a portion of the Willow Lane property and combine it with the two newly acquired lots to create a 3.63 acre parcel of land to house their adult education facility. The School District has also been discussing a joint use of a proposed building on the site with an area non-profit service group (CEAP), which might include some day care facilities as well as other services. The newly created lot would be created through a replat (Application No. 2004-010) and would include Lots 2 and 3, the Willow Lane Earle Childhood Center property and all of the Willow Lane Park property owned by the City. They also are seeking site and building plan approval and a special use permit (Planning Commission Application No. 2004-012) for a 48,600 sq. ft. three story service/office building to be constructed in two phases to house their adult education facility and the service/office occupancy for CEAP. Educational uses including post secondary schools, business schools, trade schools and the like, but excluding public and private elementary and secondary schools (K-12) are allowed special uses in the C-1 zoning district. Service office uses are permitted uses in the C-1 zone as well (see Section 35-320, Subdivisions 1-3, attached). This is why the applicant is seeking the rezoning of the proposed new parcel to C-1. A C-1 parcel of land supporting an allowable service/office use is required to have a minimum of 150 ft. of frontage and, if located abutting a major thoroughfare such as Brooklyn Boulevard, have a minimum lot area of one acre. The proposed new lot will have approximately 510 ft. of frontage on Brooklyn Boulevard and will be 3.63 acres in area. GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING REZONINGS All rezoning applications are reviewed in light of the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines contained in Section 35-208 of the city’s zoning ordinance (attached). The Planning Commission must review the proposal in light of the Policy and Review Guidelines. The policy states that zoning classifications must be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and must not constitute “spot zoning”, which is defined as a zoning decision which discriminates in favor of a particular land owner and does not relate to the Comprehensive Plan or accepted planning principals. Each rezoning proposal must be considered on its merits and measured against the City’s policy and against the various guidelines, which have been established for rezoning review. The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which they comment specifically on each of the guidelines contained in Section 35-208. The following is a listing of the guideline, the applicant’s comments and staff response to each of the guidelines: Is there a clear public need or benefit? The applicant indicates that their proposed new facility on the proposed rezoned land has programs that are directed towards residents that need assistance with language skills, completing a high school education, and developing work skills. They note that approximately 20 percent of the customers using these services live within walking distance of the proposed site. Approximately 15 percent of the Willow Lane Early Childhood Center customers are also customers of services proposed for the facility. The staff would note that the proposed rezoning is necessary to accommodate the facility proposed by the School District. Adult education uses are allowed generally within the commercial zones (C-1 and C-2). A distinction is made in the zoning ordinance between elementary and secondary educational uses and other educational uses. Elementary and secondary educational uses are not allowed in commercial zoning districts generally because of the need for open space such as playground and recreational facilities. In order for the School District to provide adult education and similar facilities, they need to find commercially zoned land. The acquired two parcels combined with the excess land from the old Willow Lane School site accommodate this need. It can, therefore, be argued that by providing the necessary zoning to accommodate the school’s need for an adult education facility is meeting a public need and providing a public benefit. Is the proposed zoning consistent and compatible with the surrounding land use classifications? The applicant indicates that the proposed C-1 district would be compatible with other service/office properties located along Brooklyn Boulevard. We would generally concur with the applicant’s comments about the compatibility with surrounding land uses. The Willow Lane Early Childhood Center and Willow Lane Park are located on R-1 zoned property and are allowable institutional and recreational uses in this zoning district. The Willow Lane Apartments, which is zoned R-5, will abut the new proposed rezoned land. Single family residential homes would be located to the west of the facility. On the opposite side of Brooklyn Boulevard are commercial service/office uses and an off site parking lot for a church. The plan presented later by the applicant will show that they can meet the requirements of the C-1 zone. Of even more significance is the compatibility of the proposed C-1 zoning designation with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan with respect to redevelopment along Brooklyn Boulevard recommends eliminating inappropriate single family uses along Brooklyn Boulevard and replacing them with either commercial and service/office uses on sites that are large enough to provide adequate circulation and good site design or high and medium density residential uses. The two vacant multi residentially zoned parcels and the excess school district property, although not containing single family residential uses, can be considered infill redevelopment of the nature suggested for commercial redevelopment along Brooklyn Boulevard. The two multi residential sites, one being R-2 and the other being R-4 would, for all practical purposes, need to be combined into a single multi residential lot for some kind of development. This would mean rezoning one to R-2 or the other to R-4 to accommodate a unified multi residential development. The site would be approximately once acre in area and could accommodate at the maximum a multi residential development of approximately 12 units. This is not a highly desirable type of redevelopment for this area. A service/office commercial redevelopment would seem to be more appropriate and coupled with excess school district property makes an appropriate service/office site. The Comprehensive Plan further sites this area as a possible mid-density residential development if incorporated into a larger redevelopment area. The Brooklyn Boulevard Amenities Study of 1994 cited two possible development concepts for this area, one of which indicated the two parcels in question for a commercial service/office use. It is, therefore, believed that the proposal for a C-1 rezoning of this area is consistent with an compatible with not only surrounding land uses but the City’s Comprehensive Plan as well. Can all proposed uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the subject property? The applicant notes that the anticipated uses are allowed or permitted in the C-1 district and they also note the possibility of a non-profit childcare facility being a part of the project at a later date. We would note that all of the uses comprehended in the C-1 zoning district can be contemplated for development on this site and be compatible with surrounding land use classifications. The more specific proposal presented by the School District can also be accommodated within the proposed zoning change. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in this area since the subject property was zoned? The applicants note that along Brooklyn Boulevard there have been a number of office, service and retail developments. They note that there has been an effort to move single family and small multi family residential properties away from Brooklyn Boulevard and that their proposal is consistent with that goal. We would concur with the comments and again note the Comprehensive Plan general guideline for eliminating single family residential uses along Brooklyn Boulevard and to infill with service/office commercial particularly and some mid and high density residential uses in appropriate locations. There have been some rezoning applications, particularly with respect to Planned Unit Developments at the northeast corner of Brooklyn Boulevard and 69th Avenue and the Brookdale Mitsubishi redevelopment site along Brooklyn Boulevard to the north. These have accommodated commercial developments and expansion of commercial uses in the area as part of redevelopment projects. It is anticipated that in the future more rezoning proposals particularly along Brooklyn Boulevard will come forward. As long as these proposals prove consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, it is believed that the City should accommodate the proposed classification changes. In the case of City initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? The applicants indicate that this is not a City initiated rezoning proposal. We would comment that although it is not a City initiated rezoning proposal but rather a School District initiated proposal that a broad public purpose may be considered evident in the rezoning request in that it will accommodate a needed expansion of School District services. Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning district? Again, the applicant responds with a yes to this question. We would comment that the proposed School District facility will have to conform to all applicable zoning requirements of the proposed C-1 zoning district. It appears, as will be shown later with the development plans, that this guideline can be met as well. Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district with respect to size, configuration, topography or location? The applicant notes that sites on Brooklyn Boulevard are not suitable for residential development. They also point out that the intended density for the existing multi family residential zoning would require multiple access points to Brooklyn Boulevard. They point out as well that locating single family residential units along Brooklyn Boulevard is not desirable and this location is a good location for their proposed use. We would note that the two lots recently acquired by the School District that are zoned multi residential (R-2 and R-4) can be considered generally unsuited for multi residential development purposes. To be developed separately, one as a two family dwelling and the other as an approximate 8 unit story and a half apartment do not seem feasible. Even if developed, separate accesses to the sites would be needed to accommodate the uses. This is not a desirable proposition for the County in terms of access to Brooklyn Boulevard. The combination of the site and, as will be shown later with the development proposal, a shared access with the Willow Lane Apartments to the south means one access point will service this area. This is more desirable from the County’s perspective for access points on Brooklyn Boulevard. Multiple family residential development is not the most desirable redevelopment possibilities from the City’s perspective. A service/office use seems much more appropriate. The size, configuration, location and access arrangement proposed with this combination and rezoning of the site seems to be the best possible configuration for the redevelopment of the vacant property. Will the rezoning result in an expansion of a zoning district warranted by: 1. Comprehensive Planning; 2. Lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district, or; 3. The best interest of the community? The applicant notes that the rezoning of these lots to C-1 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and other properties along Brooklyn Boulevard. They further note that the location of the project works well for them and the visibility on Brooklyn Boulevard is a positive as well as proximity to bus routes. We would concur with the applicant’s comments and note that the proposed rezoning appears to be in the best interests of the community. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, which calls for service/office commercial infill or mid-density or high-density residential infill along Brooklyn Boulevard. With respect to the lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district, there is little developable land in the city other than such vacant parcels as those in question. Multi family residential uses are considered to be plentiful within the city and the City’s practice has not been to rezone property for that particular use. The City has encouraged C-1 or service/office developments along Brooklyn Boulevard for many years and this proposed zoning would be consistent with this philosophy. The proposed zoning would allow for the rational use of the land in question and does appear to be in the best interest of the community. Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? The applicant notes that the service provided by this project to the community should have a positive effect on the quality of life. We would comment that we believe this proposal does demonstrate merit beyond just the interests of an individual owner by providing public benefits with the expanded school district facility. In as much as the proposal furthers valid zoning objectives, it also demonstrates merit beyond just the interests of the School District. The Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines also note that the City policy is that zoning classifications must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and rezoning proposals must not constitute “spot zoning” defined as a zoning decision that discriminates in favor of a particular land owner and does not relate to the Comprehensive Plan or accepted planning principles. We find no significant conflicts with this policy as noted above in our review of the guidelines for rezonings. This proposal is, we believe, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is also consistent with good planning principles with the proposed use being consistent and compatible with existing surrounding land uses. We find no conflict with the proposal in this regard. PROCEDURE It has been the City’s practice with respect to zoning applications for the Planning Commission to refer them to Neighborhood Advisory Groups for additional review and comment. Mandates in the State Statute require the City to complete reviews within 60 days and to give applicants an answer within that time frame. Because of the notice requirements for publication and public notice, we require applications to be submitted four weeks prior to their review by the Planning Commission. The clock, however, begins on the date the application is accepted. Therefore, the zoning decision must be made by the City Council no later than November 29, 2004. Almost 30 days of the required 60 day time frame will have expired before the Planning Commission’s pubic hearing is even held. This requirement makes it difficult for the City to hold the Neighborhood Advisory Group meetings we normally have. The Planning Commission instituted a procedure because it still wishes to receive Neighborhood Advisory Group input with respect to these rezoning applications. We have invited the Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group members to the Planning Commission meeting and are encouraging their comments and participation. A staff report will be delivered to the Neighborhood Advisory Group members at the same time that it is delivered to the Planning Commission members. Hopefully, they will have an opportunity to review the matter and to make comments at Thursday evening’s meeting. It should be noted that representatives of the Osseo School District have met with neighboring property owners with regard to their proposal to rezone and provide an adult education facility on the subject property. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent to surrounding property owners and a notice of the Planning Commission’s consideration of this request has also appeared in the Brooklyn Center Sun/Post. RECOMMENDATION We believe this application is in order and would recommend approval of the rezoning acknowledging its consistency with the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines contained in the zoning ordinance. Attached for the Commission’s review is a draft Planning Commission Resolution regarding the recommended disposition of Application No. 2004-011 submitted by ATS & R, Inc. on behalf of Osseo Area Schools. Page 7 10-28-04