Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC80023 - 8/14/80 - Shingle Creek Pkwy & County Road 10v PLANNING COYMUSSION FILE CHECKLIST File Purge Date: LAO 9L FILE INFORMATION Planning Commission Application No. 80023 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: 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 Type Date Range Location Agenda Cover Sheet: Planning Commission Agenda Book Minutes: Planning Commission 8%ter/8o 8181,6a City Vault Minutes: City Council q/a/go0 ����go City Vault Resolutions: Planning Commission City Vault Resolutions: City Council City Vault Ordinances: City Council City Vault Historical Photographs: Planning Commission City Archieve ....0 1. L CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION ZONING APPLICATION Application No. 80023 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property Shingle Creek Parkway and County Road 10 Legal Description of Property (See Attached Document) Owner Commercial Partners, Inc. 3784 Fabian y Address Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone No. 415/494-8282 Applicant Korsunsky Krank Erickson Architects, Inc. 555 Shelard ower, 600 SouthCounty Road Address Minneapolis, MN 55426 Phone No. 546-5381 Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance Site & Bldg. Plan Approval X Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Special Use Permit for Theater on site of proposed Brookdale Shopping Center. Fee $ 25.00 Receipt No. 53328 June 26, 1980 Date PLANNING-COMMISSIONN RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: r Approved Denied this day of 19 subject to the follow- ing cond`tions: CITY COUNCIL ACTION Dates of Council Consideration: Approved Denied this _ tc day of amendment: airman 19 8d, with the following P/I Form No. 18 (over please) er CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with filing the appl ci atior required documents must be consistent with ordinance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted): 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site improvements and a supporting financial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Acceptable financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Department of Planning and Inspection. P/I Form No. 19 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 80023 Applicant: Korsunsky, Krank Architects/Commercial Partners/United Artists Theater Location: Shingle Creek Parkway north of Brookdale Ford Request: Special Use Permit This application was tabled by the Commission at its August 14, 1980 meeting pending the completion of plans for the accompanying site plan. Those plans are now fairly complete. As a result of the revised plan, it is our judgment that Standard (d) regarding ingress and egress has been satisfied. Standards (c) and (e) have not been viewed as real issues in this application since most of the surrounding property is already developed and conformance to regulations is on -going. With respect to Standards (a) and (b) regarding public benefit from the proposed special use and noninjury to property values, we have expressed some skepticism in past reports. The prospect of these benefits and injuries are ultimately a judgment to be made by the Planning Commission and the City Council. While questions arise concerning the demand for an additional eight screens (2045 seats) in this area and the possibility of failure, it would not be proper to base a denial of the special use permit on disagreements over a prospective market. Only if definite injuries are perceived to be associated with the proposed use should the permit be denied. It would certainly be difficult to deny that some public benefit derives from movie theaters per se considering that existing theaters are regularly and well attended. It would also be our judgment that the proposed theater location is far preferable to many other C2 properties in the City. Therefore, assuming the applicant pursues the implementation of his latest plan, approval of the special use permit should be subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator of the facility and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. Site plan approval for tha theater building is comprehended under approval of Planning Commission Application No. 80022 and the applicant is responsible for compliance with all applicable conditions and restrictions of that application. . . . --'- Information Sheet ' planning Commission partners 80023 on/Commercial a Creek parkway Application No• Krank, Erickso east of Shingle Korsunsky, dale Ford, Applicant: North of Brook Location: Special Use permit icture Request: and operate a motion P to build of Cinema I -IV, permit west This application requests a special use Pof grookdale west entire re site applicant req located north Creek ment of the and The aPP property and east of Shingledevelop is Zoned C2 theater on the P, gell, the plan for the in question south of Northwester unction with The property in conjunct ort #80022• that district. is submitted in rep s ecial uses in which which is discussed are P (attached) motion picture theaters from the applicantComparing this letter it. it to be 1g80, staff, received,a special Use perm we found On duly 17, Standards for a Sp also attached) we seemed to purported to address the Special Use The applic permit is granted unless there are letter with the Standards fora P cial use p found in the re than restatement os those standards• ion after presume ►n resumpt only be granted This is not a P perm may Em hasis added presume in the letter that the a special use p reasons to deny it. " clear that p standards dre met p Ordinance, which stipulatesust the opposite. demonstration b evidence that all of the T e presumption of the or finance is j 1 (United Artists) a draft information ethe(specla�) applicant wjustifiably result from applying We conveyed to the applggp we received a second letter spelling out various concerns which on August 8, use standards to the proposed use. applicant which did attempt to address the concerns expressed in the from the app a dence, the a nts expressed draft information sheet. While not supported by r9 by the applicant would seem to have merit. Nelecan nspursuituof validzoning additional concerns may be raised with the app 9 objectives. , 1. The age of most movie-goers is 15-30 years. is is an W group whose population has just peaked as a result baby boO'M-era children having reached this age range. The lation of -this age group will drop dramatically in coming yea as has be experienced by school districts with declining llments, 2. As this age group shrinks, so may the market the rs caterer The proposed theater will add eight screens to th five exi�g in this immediate area. Thus, a smaller market wi have to be split by 13 screens instead of five. 3. It seems logical to conclude from these projectiYons that even if the new theater draws from a slightly larger area (which has not been established), the "entertainment huh'' envisioned by the applicant may not be s very heal#hy one. Demand for theater space may decline lading to loVer rental rates chargeable to operators and as a resul t lower property values and less maintenance of the theaters. These questions are valid concerns of the Planning Commission in its effort apply the Zoning Ordinance effectively to potential special use developments. It is certainly true that restriction of business competition is not a valid zoning objective. However, the prevention of blight and the encouragement of development in the community which meets the public's needs are valid zoning objectives as indicated by the standards. Courts have generally ruled that restriction df business competition is permissable if, and only if, it is a by-product of a 8-14-80 Application No. 80023 continued valid zoning action and is not the primary aim itself. We would recommend that the Planning Commission pursue reasonable questions and concerns regarding the proposed use before making its recommendation to the City Council. As this application is dependent on the action relating to Application No. 80022, it is recommended that this application also be tabled until the direction given by the City Council is satisfied. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent. 8-14-80 -2- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 80023 Applicant: Krosunsky, Krank, Erickson on behalf of United Artists Location: Shingle Creek Parkway Request: Special Use Permit The applicant requests special use permit approval to construct an eight -screen, 2045 seat movie theater at the southeast corner of the Charlson property, immedi- ately west of Cinema I, II, III, IV. Aspects of the site and building plan for the theater were reviewed in the staff report for Application No. 80022. We have requested a letter from the applicant addressing the Standards for a Special Use Permit. Both the letter and the ordinance standards are attached for your review. As can readily be seen, the letter of the applicant in no substantive way addresses the Standards for a Special Use Permit. Simply because there are two other theaters in the area does not ensure that this theater should be approved. We remain skeptical on the following points: Standard (a). Will the public welfare be enhanced by eight more movie screens in an area that already has five? What kind of move se will be shown? Will there be movies for all groups of Brooklyn Center residents? Standard b . Will the eight screen theater have the effect of devaluing the Cinema I, II, III, IV property or will it expand and enhance an existing market of movie-goers to this area? Could there be any negative effect on the office properties in the vicinity (Northwestern Bell, A.F.I.A., and State Farm)? Standard c). We would agree that the theater should not impede the norm- and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the C2 district. Standard d . We do not believe the proposed site plan minimizes traffic congestion in the public streets. It is staff's opinion that a public street along the north side of the Charlson property would best serve to channel traffic in an orderly manner to and from the theater. Standard (e). Conformance to applicable regulations would be an on -going can ition of the special use permit should this appli- cation be approved. In light of the lack of information supplied by the applicant regarding the Standards for a Special Use Permit, staff cannot recommend approval of this appli- cation at this time. If the Commission is satisfied after questioning the appli- cant that the permit should be issued, we will be prepared to suggest conditions at Thursday's meeting. It is also recommended that this application not be approved until the issue of access to the site has been resolved. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices to owners of surrounding property have been sent. 7-24-80 — ,qA-&ZZ ,y STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF THE BOARD STH FLOOR, METRO SQUARE 7TH AND ROBERT STREETS SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 BOARD OF ARCHITECTURE, ENGINEERING, LAND SURVEYING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE March 12, 1981 Mr. W. J. Dahn Building Official City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Dear Mr. Da hn, PHONE: 296-2388 This is in response to your inquiry of March 5, 1981 requesting information concerning regulations governing registration stamps. The specific instance cited in your letter involved the certification of all plans to include archi- tectural, structural, mechanical and electrical engineering documents by one Angelo F. Corva for a proposed theater building comprised of eight separate auditoria within the building. This practice is a violation of the Rules and Regulations governing the operations of the Board. I will cite the pertinent statute and the implementing rule for your information. Minn. Stat. 1980, Sect. 326. 12, Subd. 3 states, in part "Certified signature. Each plan, specification, plat, report, or other document which sections 326. 02 to 326. 15 require be prepared by a licensed architect, licensed engineer, licensed land surveyor or licensed landscape architect shall bear the signature of the person preparing it, or the signature of the person under whose direct supervision it was prepared. Each signature shall be accompanied by a certification that the signer is licensed under Sections 326.02 to 326. 15, by the person's license number,,;-.�.� and by the date on which the signature was affixed... "�� '` _. Board Rule 4MCAR Sect. 7.018A states "The certification and signature on plans, specifications, plaii,q,, i i'; Mrark 14 ; reports, etc., is mandatory, as provided by Minn. Stat. Sect.", 326. 12, subd 3. A person in direct supervision of work as referred to in the foregoing subdivision is construed to mean the person whose professional skill and judgment are embodied in the document signed, and who assumes responsibility for the accuracy and adequacy thereof, " AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 55 Mr. W. J. Dahn -2- March 12, 1981 Board Rule 4MCAR Sect. 7.018C states that "The certification by each of the professions responsible for the preparation of bound specifications, reports, or other documents shall be shown on the title sheet or first sheets. The certification by each of the professions responsible for the preparation of plans or plats shall be shown on each sheet of the set of plans, or each plat. " The foregoing clearly states the requirement that an architect must prepare and certify the architectural plans and specifications and that structural engineering plans must be prepared and certified by a structural engineer. Electrical and mechanical engineering documents must be prepared and certified by licensed electrical and mechanical engineers, respectively. I am informing Mr. Corva that he is in violation of our Rules relating to certi- fication and asking that he provide the Board with assurances that he will comply with our requirements in the future. Thank you for your concern and cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions regarding my explanation, please call me at 296-2388. Best wishes. LET:ca cc: E. A. S6vik, FAIA Merwin W. Peterson Sincerely, / Lowell E. Torseth Executive Secretary STATE OF MINNESOTA�." OFFICE OF THE BOARD STH FLOOR, METRO SQUARE 7TH AND ROBERT STREETS SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101 BOARD OF ARCHITECTURE, ENGINEERING, LAND SURVEYING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE March 12, 1981 Mr. Angelo F. Corva Angelo Francis Corva and Associates 159 Great Neck Road Great Neck, New York 11021 Dear Mr. Corva, PHONE: 296-2388 The Board has received information from the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota indicating that you certified all architectural, structural engineering, mechanical engineering, and electrical engineering plans for a 24, 600 square foot theater building comprised of eight separate auditoria proposed for construction in Brooklyn Center. Minnesota law requires that the design professional that pre- pares plans and specifications or who directly supervises the preparation of those plans must certify the documents. This means that the architect prepares and certifies architectural plans, a licensed structural engineer prepares and certifies structural plans, a licensed mechanical engineer prepares and certifies mechanical plans, and a licensed electrical engineer prepares and certifies electrical plans. Further, Board rules require that the appropriate design pro- fessionals certify the title page of the specifications to cover that portion of the specifications prepared by them. Following are quoted applicable sections of the Statutes and Board Rules relative to certification for your information. Minn. Stat. Sect. 326. 12, Subd. 3, states, in part, that "Certified signature. Each plan, specification, plat, report, or other document which sections 326. 02 to 326. 15 require be prepared by a licensed architect, licensed engineer, licensed land surveyor or licensed landscape architect shall bear the signature of the person preparing it, or the signature of the person under whose direct supervision it was prepared. Each signature shall be accompanied by a certification that the signer is licensed under Sections 326.02 to 326. 15, by the person's license number, and by the date on which the signature was affixed..." 4-�•4 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Mr. Angelo F. Corva -2- March 12, 1981 Board Rule 4MCAR Sect. 7.018A states "The certification and signature on plans, specifications, plats, reports, etc., is mandatory, as provided by Minn. Stat. Sect. 326. 12, subd 3. A person in direct supervision of work as referred to in the foregoing subdivision is construed to mean the person whose professional skill and judgment are embodied in the document signed, and who assumes responsibility for the accuracy and adequacy thereof." Board Rule 4MCAR Sect. 7.018C states that "The certification by each of the professions responsible for the preparation of bound specifications, reports, or other documents shall be shown on the title sheet or first sheets. The certification by each of the professions responsible for the preparation of plans or plats shall be shown on each sheet of the set of plans, or each plat. " The foregoing quoted material clearly states the requirements for certification. We request that you inform the Board that you understand the requirements for the certification of plans and specifications and that you will ensure compliance with those requirements for future projects designed for construction in Minnesota. If you have any questions relative to these requirements, please advise. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter of our concern. f LET:ca cc: E. A. Sdvik, FAIR W. J. Da hit ._-- Merwin W. Peterson Sincerely, ltul,Ltat Lowell E. Tor seth Executive Secretary March 5, 1981 Mr. Lowell E. Torseth, Exec. Sec. Board of Architects, Engineers & Surveyors Metro Square Building - 5th Floor St. Paul, MN 55101 Dear Mr. Torseth, As a matter of inquiry, please advise what the regulations are governing registration stamps on construction plans. Namely, is it permissible for a Registered Architect to place his registration and approval on structural, mechanical, and electrical plans in addition to the architectural plans? I have a 24,600 sq. ft. proposed theater building consisting of eight (8) separate auditoriums within the building, designed by Mr. Angelo Francis Corva & Associates, 159 Great Neck Road, Great Neck, New York - 11021, which has all plans certified by Mr. Angelo Corva - #13759. Please advise if this practice is now permissible. It is my under- standing this has not been permissible in the past. Respectfully, W. Z. Dahn Building Official WJD/lm cc: P. C. #80022