Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC78002 - 1/26/78 - 6100 Summit DrivePLANNING COMMISSION FILE CHECKLIST iz File Purge Date: e/9S FILE INFORMATION Planning Commission Application Number: 78002 PROPERTY INFORMATION Zoning: PLAN REFERENCE Note: If a plan was found in the file during the purge process, it was pulled for consolidation of all plans. Identified below are the types of plans, if any, that were consolidated. • Site Plans • Building Plans • Other: '� /andscaPe� 9.-ac(Iny 'P/0-5 FILE REFERENCE Note: The following documents were purged when this project file became inactive. We have recorded the information necessary to retrieve the documents. Document Tvpe Date Range Location Agendas: Planning Commission Office Minutes: Planning Commission Minutes: City Council Document Type Resolutions: Planning Commission Resolutions: City Council 1124/78 f8blec1, City Vault Z/9/ 78 2127/7B, 2�B�B2 City Vault 9ja2/8` Number Location City Vault City Vault Ordinances: City Council City Vault r . Street Location of Property CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION ZONING APPLICATION Application No. 78002 Please Print Clearly or Type 6100 Summit Drive North Legal Description of Property Outlot A, Twin Cities Interchange Park Owner Consolidated Financial Corporation Address 6100 Summit Drive North Phone No. 61Z-561-7350 Applicant Summit State Bank of Richfield Address 6500 Nicollet Avenue, Richfield, Minnesota Phone No. 61Z-866-0031 Type of Request: Rezoning Variance Subdivision Approval Site & Bldg. Plan Approval X Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Special Use Permit to operate a remote banking facility pursuant to legislation adopted in 1976. Fee $ Z5. 00 Su 't State B of Richfield Receipt No. 47484 BY , k- -- Applicant's Signature Vice Pres December 14 1977 Date PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: �� � Approved Denied this day of ing conditions: 19 , subject to the follow- /-712�r - --- Chairman -------------------------------------------- — -- CITY COUNCIL ACTION Dates of Council Consideration: Approved Denied this —,G— day of19 % with the following amendment: J Clerk P/I Form No. 18 (over please) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 78002 Applicant: Summit State Bank of Richfield Location: 6100 Summit Drive Request: Special Use Permit This item was reviewed at the January 26, 1978 meeting and was tabled to allow the submission of additional plans,and to allow the applicant the opportunity to develop further information regarding the deferment of certain site improvements. The proposal comprehends the establishment of a remote banking facility in the nonconforming Earle Brown Farm administration building. This commercial use -is a special use in the Industrial Park zone. At the public hearing, matters which were discussed included the upgrading of the site to accommodate the proposed use which experience indicates could be a very intense activity; the upgrading of the building to conform with applicable code requirements relative to handicapped access and proper exiting; the provision for appropriate fire protection systems; and the installation of required City utilities. The applicant indicated that the proposed facility was "temporary" in the context that, as it would prove successful in this location, it was expected that the facility would be relocated to a commercial office building or other commercial development nearby. The owner of the property, B.C.I.P., Inc. whb,is affiliated. with the applicant, also indicated a concern that future development plans for this area may impact on this immediate site and, therefore, in consideration of these items, it was suggested that permanent site improvements such as concrete curb and gutter, underground irrigation systems, storm sewer, and full standard paving of roadways and driveways be deferred for a definite period of time. We have reviewed this matter further and have reviewed previous actions by the City Council on other developments where certain permanent site improvements were deferred in consideration of possible future development in an immediate area which would either eliminate the need for,or would require the alteration of these permanent site improvements. It is our recommendation that the various improvements could be deferred for..up to two years s.ui jest to :cer_tai.n conditions which we have cited below,and subject to the understanding that temporary improve- ments such as rolled bituminous curbing be provided. Another issue that was raised, especially in light of the fact that this is a special use, was whether an automatic fire extinguishing system should be installed in the building. The area of the building would require that such a system be in- stalled if this were new construction as per the City Fire Prevention Ordinance. The Ordinance does not speak to retroactive application of the requirement; however, there have been several examples in recent years involving industrial and restaurant -type buildings where upon major remodeling, or major change of occupancy,such a system has been required and installed. The applicant in this case contends that installation of such a system in this particular building is not desirable from an aesthetic standpoint since the pipes and sprinkler heads would be exposed, and it has been contended that there would be physical difficulties in retrofitting such a system in an older building such as this one. 2-9-78 Application 78002 continued Reference was made to a case in 1975 (Application No. 75037) where City Council during a similar consideration of an existing building at County Road 10 and Xerxes Avenue North, allowed the installation of a detection system in lieu of a fire sprinkling system. The building had been acquired by Twin City Federal Savings and Loan, and it was determined that because of the nature of the construction of the building, it would be infeasible to install a wet extinguishing system. The applicant in this case has indicated a willingness to install a sophi.sti:cated smoke and heat detection system as approved by the Building Official which would be connected to the central alarm station in the same manner as a fire sprinkling system. It is our opinion that there has been a precedent for this in instances where it is clearly shown it is infeasible to install an automatic fare extin- guishing system; and that, since the ordinance does not specifically call for the retroactive application of the standard extinguishing system, the determination here is one of policy regarding a special use for a particular building, and it is not one of a variance from a general ordinance requirement. We will be prepared to review the revised plans in detail and to discuss the above matters. Approval would be subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The Special Use Permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. The subject property and adjacent parcels will be resubdivided, through platting or registered land survey, as approved by the City Engineer,to assure that the commercial activity including the main building and all accessory uses are contained entirely within a single lot or tract; and said resubdivision shall be completed within 90 days of the date of the issuance of the special use permit. 4. Installation of required site improvements including concrete curb and gutter around all driving and parkings areas; ordinance standard paving of driving and parking areas; and underground lawn sprinkling system may be deferred for a period of up to two years from date of issuance of the special use permit in consideration of the future development pending for this area and subject to the following: a. Notwithstanding the above, the City Council may require the installation of permanent improvements at any earlier time if deemed necessary based upon the observed levels of the intensity of the use and the maintenance of the temporary improvements described below. Application No. 78002 continued b. During the interim period, temporary bituminous rolled curbing will be installed as approved by the City Engineer and indicated on the approved plans. c. At the end of the two year deferral period, or upon the determination of the subject commercial special use at this location, the need for such improvements will be reviewed by the City, taking into account the use of the property and the possible developments which may have occurred in the adjacent and immediate area. 5. A Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure completion of the required site improvements, both temporary and permanent; and this agreement shall be in force until it is determined the improvements have been satisfactorily completed, or are deemed unnecessary as described above. 6. The building shall be equipped throughout with a smoke and/or heat detection system as approved by the City, and said system shall be connected to.a central alarm system in a manner described in Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 7. The property shall be supplied prior to occupancy with available City utilities,and utility plans and drainage plans shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 8. Building plans are subject to approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 78002 Applicant: Summit State Bank of Richfield Location: 6100 Summit Drive Request: Special Use Permit A law called the "Bank Detached Facility Law" which took effect last August, allows banks to establish remote banking facilities. The Summit State Bank of Richfield is owned by the ownership of Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Inc. which is proposing to establish such a remote banking facility in the Earle Brown Farm Administration Building. We have enclosed for your background, a letter December 14, 1977 from Mr. Roger Newstrum to the Building Official, and a letter dated January 17, 1978 from Mr. Richard 011ila to the Director of Planning and Inspection explaining this facility. As you may know, Mr. Newstrum is the President of Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Inc., and he is also the Vice President of the Summit State Bank of Richfield. Mr. 011ila is a Vice President of the Summit State Bank of Richfield as well. The initial letter resulted from a phone call by the Building Official upon discovery that certain work had already been accomplished within the building without permits to establish the remote facility. We directed a letter to Mr. Newstrum explaining the Zoning Ordinance requirements and some of our concerns about the use of this building on this particular property, and a copy of our letter to Mr. Newstrum dated December 20, 1977 is also enclosed. You might note that the law distinguishes between remote banking facilities or detached banking facilities as proposed here, from branch banks. As we understand it, the differences are minute, and for all practical purposes the proposal is to establish a banking outlet on the Earle Brown Farm. A public hearing has been scheduled. The proposed use is a special use in the I-1 District, and we would recommend the Commission review the special use permit criteria listed in Section 35-220 of the Zoning Ordinance. In addition, there are four specific special use standards that apply to commercial uses in the Industrial Park, and they are found in Section 35-330 (3) (f). This request must be evaluated within the context of these criteria. Our concerns center not so much on the standards and compatiblity of the use with other Industrial Park uses, but rather tfig(center upon the physical nature of the use and the significance of the impact of that use upon this portion of the Farm. We have reviewed in detail with the architect for the Farm, our concerns as to physical site improvements as well as certain modifications of the building, and it is expected that most of those items will be reflected on revised plans. However, the extent of the work is such that it is doubtful the complete site and building plan will be ready for final action by the Commission at this meeting. We would suggest that the Commission review the basic site plans submitted and discuss the proposed use asking pertinent questions of the applicant. The recom- mended action at this time would be to table the matter until the regular February meeting where it is expected complete plans would be available. Application No. 78002 continued Key considerations at this point include: 1. Conversion of the old nonconforming Administration Building to an active public commercial use. 2. In a similar vein, an introduction of active commercial uses into the farmstead area. 3. The need for provision of public utilities including water and sanitary sewer (none of the existing farmstead buildings are connected to City utilities at this time). 4. The necessary building code and City Ordinance related modifi- cations of the structure, including a second exitway from the second floor and installation of an automatic fire extinguishing system throughout the building. 5. Clarifying the property descriptions in this area which contain several tracts and parcels through replatting or a new registered land survey. 6. Consideration of future development in this area including future improvements to the bank, such as a remote teller facility. We will be prepared to discuss these items in further detail at the meeting. 1-26-78 December 20, 1977 Mr. Roger F. Newstrum, Vice President Summit State Bank Richfield, MN c/o B. C. I. P. Inc. 6100 Summit Drive Re: Proposed Remote Banking Facility Dear Roger: I have had the opportunity to review the letter you submitted to Will Dahn regarding the proposed remote facility for the Summit She Bank of Richfield in the Earle Brown Farm Administration Building. It appears from information rewived by Will Dahn that certain work has already occurred on those premises, without permits, and It appears from your letter that a substantial amount of planning and legal process has occurred to gain approval of such a remote facility, at iaast by State auth"Ity. You are corm ct in your letter that banking activity is a special use in the I-1 zoning diet t which includes that project. I discussed this with Janis Blumentals 1 st week, and I gave him the application and check you submitted with your letter because additional data is needed to support a special use application in this case. I have outlined below the information and documents necessary for review of this matter by the Planning Commission and City Council. I would first, like to direct your attention to the zoning ordinance provisions for certain commercial special uses in the I-1 district. (Section 35-KO) (3) (f), and to the Zoning Ordinance standards for special use permit which apply to all special use requests (Section 35-220) (2). Your proposal will be evaluated in terms of the various standards and ct teria therein and our appraisal of the proposed use in this particular site,,already raises a number of concerns. As you know, the entire Earle Brown Farmstead, including the administration build- ing, is a nonconforming use in this zoning district. When Mr. Gustafson and B.C.I.P. took over the operation of the farm, it was deemed appropriate, within the existing zoning and under today's zoning, that on -site land development, leasing and sales office was approprfate.as the area developed - such development to eventually include the redevelopment of the farmstead itself, under applicable zoning, or the formal preservation of the Farm for historical purposes. The specific uses permitted in the structure include the personal and corporate develop- ment offices of Mr. Gustafson and Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Inc., as well as facilities for an "in-house" architect. Mr. Roger F. Newstrum Page 2 December 20, 1977 One concern at this point then, is the feasibility and permissAbility of establish- ing a use such as that suggested in this nonconforming structure. The zo Ing of the property is I-1 (Industrial Park) and therefore, subject to careful evaluation of the proposed use against the cited standards and criteria, it is conceivable that another use could be permitted. Should a finding be made that the proposed qse is an acceptable special use, at least on a temporary basis as you imply in your letter, then our concerns become directed to the physical compliance of the property and the builaing with applicable codes and ordinances. One basic consideration, which I believe Jim Merila has discussed with you, is the lack of municipal water and sewer to the Earle Brown Farmstead including the subject building, despite the availability of such utilities in adjacent streets. Full connection to said utilities would be a fundamental recommendation on our part should the Planning Commission and City Council find that the use of the Farmstead bu ings can be expanded to include new commercial activities. Other concerns include the necessary* upgrading of the site, to provide proper parking and access for the total use of the building. The provision for proper access would include minimum design driveway access out to the public street. It will also be necessary to clearly determine the building meets minimum code re- quirements for all of the uses in the structure, especially with respect to provisions for handicapped access, Proper exiting, and pubtic facilities. tjtere are the basic concerns which come to mind at this point and upon review of the 1`14lowing documentation we will be prepared to relate to any additional concerns that may arise. 1. A current certified survey of at least the south area of the Farmstead. This should reflect all existing conditions including streets and public utility locations. 2. A site plan based on the above indicating the proposed improve- ments to achieve minimal compliance with the various site improvement standards of the Zoning Ordinance, and the provision for connection to public utilities. 3. An accurate floor plan of the entire building, showing existing conditions and indicating proposed remodeling. This plan should be prepared by an architect,.and should reflect the necessary modifications to achieve minimal code compliance with respect to exiting, accees, public facilities and other features as determined by the Building Offitial. 4. A written summary, expending upon the information you provided in your letter, explaining the nature of the proposed use as well as the existing uses within the building. This summary should describe t the proposal within the standards and criteria mentioned above. Mr. Roger F. News trum Page 3 December 20, 1977 This review procedure is necessary since the proposal represents an apparent determination that the Earle Brown Farmstead itself is at the point of redevelop- ment and upgrading. The present use is "grandfathered" to the extent that int1ft- duction of new and more intense uses require conformance with applicable codes and ordinances through either conversion or replacement. We are prepared to review the above information as it is presented, and to consult with you or your representatives as to the necessary doc@*%ts and improvements for the City Council review. Thank you for your latter. Sincerely, Blair Tremere Director of Planning and Inspection BT:mlg cc: City Engineer James Merila cc: Building Official Will Dahn cc: File summit state bank December 14, 1977 Mr. W. J. Dahn, Building Official City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Dear Will: Under authority granted by the 1976 Legislature each bank in Minnesota is permitted, subject to certain restrictions and limitations, to operate no more than two "remote facilities" for the purpose of providing banking services to the public. The Summit State Bank of Richfield has made ap- plication to the regulatory authorities for permission to open such a remote facility in Brooklyn Center on the Earle Brown Farm, and authority has been granted by the State, and we expect approval from the Federal Reserve Board momentarily. It is our present plan to utilize the administration building on the Farm to open the facility, using the first floor of the building for banking services and operating the industrial park from the second floor. It is possible to establish this facility in this building with a minimum amount of expense, but we are open to the possibility that the facility will be moved at some later date to an office building or to a location in the proposed shopping center surrounding LaBelle's. After our recent telephone conversation regarding the banking facility, I find that the Farm administration building is located in the I-1 zone which would require a Special Use Permit for the operation of the bank in that location, and we will make application for such a use immediately. You are, of course, familiar with the administration building, the adjacent parking facilities and the immediate availability of additional land for parking and a future drive-in facility if it should be determined that the bank will remain at this location. We anticipate that the bank initially would employ not more than three people and would be open from 9:00 a. m. until 3:00 p, m. with Saturday operations RICHFIELD-BLOOMINGTON, 6500 NICOLLET AVENUE, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 • TELEPHONE 685-0031 Mr. Will Dahn, Building Official December 14, 1977 Page two from 9:00 a. m. until noon. These are the hours which the Richfield facility is presently open to the public, and we would anticipate starting with similar hours and adjusting them, depending on public demand at this location. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely yours, S 't State Bank of Richfield RoFer F. Newstrum Vice President RFN:he s .�� Summit State Bank of Richfield January 17, 1978 Blair Tremere Director of Planning and Inspection City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Re: Proposed Remote Banking Facility Dear Blair, The Summit State Bank of Richfield plans to utilize the administration building on the Earl Brown Farm as a remote facility for the purpose of providing banking services to the public. The remote facility will offer all of the services that a commercial bank can offer with the exception of granting commercial or installment loans. The definition of a bank detached facility is as follows: BANK DETACHED FACILITY LAW - AMENDMENTS (Chapter 378,M.S. 47.51-47.55) Effective August 1, 1977 The act amends Minnesota's detached facility law by permitting a state or national bank to operate two detached facilities (one additional if the bank is already operating one) which can be located: (1) anywhere within a municipality in which the bank's principal office is located; or (2) 5,000 feet from bank's principal office, notwith- standing municipal boundaries; or (3) 25 miles from the bank's principal office in a municipality which does not have a bank, or within a municipality which has a bank provided the community has a population of more than 10,000 persons, according to the latest U.S. census (1970). 6500 NICOLLET AVENUE • RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 • (612) 866-0031 Summit State Bank of Richfield A detached facility may be placed in a banked community of less than 10,000 if all banks having principal office in that community have consented in writing to the es- tablishment of such a facility. A detached facility which performs authorized banking services may be stationary, automated remote controlled teller facility, or stationary unmanned cash dispensing or receiving device, a designated area located within the premises of any existing commercial or business establishment, or permanent structure serving as a drive-in or walk-up facility, or both, with one or more teller windows. Any structure or stationary mechanical device serving as a drive-in or walk-up facility which is located within 150 feet of the bank's main office is deemed to be an "extension of the main banking house" and not a detached facility. The services which may be performed at a detached faci- lity are limited to: opening accounts, issuing drafts, money orders and traveler's checks, accepting loan ap- plications, cashing checks or orders to pay, as well as receiving deposits or payments payable at the bank. At the present time there will not be a drive-in facility. One, however, is planned in the future. The banking hours would be similar to our main office hours, with plans to adjust them depending on public demand at this location. The remote facility will be located on the first floor of the administration building and operation for the industrial park will be on part of the first and all of the second floor. We are open to the possibility that the facility will be moved at some later date to an office building, or to a location in the proposed shopping center surrounding LaBelles. We anticipate that the bank initially would employ anywhere from three to five people. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, ,U114 1). QW1, Summit State Bank Richard J. 011ila Vice President RJO : kc of Richfield 6500 NICOLLET AVENUE • RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 • (612) 866-0031 To APpj,)cp-,"oioAj ERRLE BRown FARM C0MMERC1RLGinDUSTR1RLPRRK 6100 SUMMIT DRIVE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55430 PHONE 561-7350 March 29, 1578 Mr. Blair Tremere City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Dear Blair: In accordance with our conversation and my letter dated March 20, 1978, we have had the well water tested and the results of the test are en- cl os ed . Cordially, L. A. Beisner vice President/Director of Development LAB:hes ?m& &54 W44t6mae 14613 KARYL DRIVE HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55345 It 935-3556 L R. van Arsdele, Rogiowed /niesskmal Mpimw Brooklyn Center Industrial Park ,:larch '181 1978 6100 Summit Drive N. Minneapolis, Minn. 55430 REPORT OF WATER ANALYSIS Lab #3 07 received from you Mla rc h ^ % 1978 w Olaboratory reports these analytical result:, determined on a sample ( , t&�y/yi ) on V11F,ll hater from address above Coliform group) Nitrate nitrogen - Absent - 0.0 ppm These results indicate that this well is free of contamination and the analysis meets the standards set by the FHA: and the VA. Anelytical lelsore" WeNr eaalysis rag**►s Ttr'yN CITY VIA.TrF CLINIC 12 J . R , v ar Arsdale 17.1 Parts/Milliee equals 1.0 gram/gallen Consulting **pin**r 11011M Maw chesnicels