The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC86047 - 12/11/86 - 6100 Brooklyn BlvdPLANNING COMMISSION FILE CHECKLIST File Purge Date: FILE INFORMATION Planning Commission Application Number: 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 Agendas: Planning Commission Office Minutes: Planning Commission ��,� ��H 7 City Vault Minutes: City Council City Vault Document Type Number Location Resolutions: Planning Commission City Vault Resolutions: City Council �-y 7 --Y9 City Vault Ordinances: City Council City Vault CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION i Application No. 86047 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 6100 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center Legal Description of Property Lot 1, Block 1*, Arthur Treacher' s Addition Owner Centen, Inc. Address _Philadelphia Phone No. Applicant Crown CoCo, Inc. Address 319 Ulysses Street N.E. , Mpls. , MN 55413 Phone No. 612-331-9344 Type of Request: Rezoning Subdivision Approval Variance $ 5 0.0 0 - Site b Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request: Request a variance of six parking paces. From 35 maces to 29 spaces. The applicant requests processin of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen ?15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment, 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 shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal. rown CoCo, Inc. Fee $ 50.00 obert P. Mack, Pres. Appl i cant* s7i gnature Receipt No. 72840 Date: _ November 2 6 , 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: m //-r6 �J Approved Denied 111� this day of 19� subject to the following conditions: --------------------------------------- --------- CITY COUNCIL ACTION Dates of Council Consideration:�� 1 Approved Denied this Cday of ..�. cy 19 ", with the following amendment: P/I Form No. 18 (over please) e Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86047 Applicant: Crown Coco, Inc. Location: 6100 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Variance The applicant requests a variance from Section 35-704 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow construction of a 4,000 sq. ft. convenience store with fewer than the required number of parking stalls (27 rather than 35). The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded by Burger King on the north, by an 18 unit apartment development on the east and land belonging to that complex on the south, and by Brooklyn Boulevard on the west. The site in question is the site of the old Arthur Treacher's restaurant. Applicant's Case The applicant's representative, Mr. John Finley, has submitted a single letter addressing the standards for a variance and for a special use permit for the gas station aspect of the proposed use. The comments related to the parking variance point out that many of the patrons of the convenience store will, in essence, park at the gas pumps. (In, fact, seven stalls are credited at the pump islands.) Mr. Finley states that the required 35 parking stalls would, because of the configuration of the land, create internal congestion on the site. He states that customers rarely pull into regular parking spaces at such an establishment. Mr. Finley states that the shape of the parcel (pie -shaped) is unique. He concludes by stating that the variance will be an asset to the public rather than a detriment. Staff Analysis Based on the standards contained in Section 35-240 (attached), staff do not believe that a parking variance can be granted in this case. The only "hardship" in this situation appears to be that the applicant cannot put as much building on the property as he would like. The existing building is to be demolished and the site will be clear for a new development. The size and shape of the parcel can support a 3,000 sq. ft. convenience store and gas pumps under the current parking formula. This is as large a convenience store as has been built in Brooklyn Cente and, therefore, does not seem to be an unreasonable limitation. The present retail parking formula has been under study for over a year, but no change has been adopted to this point. As long as the present ordinance is in effect, it must serve as the standard for parking at existing and proposed retail developments. Based on that standard, the proposed plan is deficient because of too much building or too many gas pumps. These are not circumstances that arise from the land, but from the applicant's desired use. The circumstances in this case are not particularly unique. The pie -shaped (really a trapezoid) parcel is fairly common on Brooklyn Boulevard. While such a shape might create some minor difficulties, a deficiency of eight (8) parking stalls is not minor and is not explained by the shape of the parcel. That is, the extent of the proposed variance is not justified by the shape of the parcel. The convenience store/gas station at the southwest corner of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard is on a similar shaped parcel, but met parking requirements. With respect to standard (c) , the hardship of not being able to have an extra 1,000 sq. ft. of retail space or a second set of gas pumps derives from the applicant's objectives, not from the land itself. Finally, as to whether the granting of the variance would be detrimental to the public welfare, staff would respond on two levels. In terms of the general public 12-11-86 -1- -{ Application No. 86047 continued using the station, it may well be that 27 stalls ( including 7 at the pumps) would be adequate. That number of stalls would be consistent with the alternate formula recommended to the City Council. However, on the level of property developers, the proposed variance would be quite inequitable since it would adopt a lesser parking standard for this case only. (Note: an ordinance amendment would grant development potential equally to all.) We feel such a variance would grant an unfair competitive advantage to this parcel rather than make up for some inherent disadvantage. Recommendation On the basis of the foregoing analysis, we do not believe that the standards for a variance are met in this case. Accordingly, we recommend that the application be denied, citing the following reasons: 1. The inability to build a 4,000 sq. ft. convenience store with two gas pump islands is not deemed to be a hardship worked on the applicant. Reasonable use of the land is possible within the parking constraints of the City's Zoning Ordinance. 2. The shape of the parcel ( trapezoid) is not particularly unique on Brooklyn Boulevard. The difficulty presented by this shaped parcel do not warrant a variance of eight (8) parking stalls. 3. The parcel of land is to be cleared for development under the applicant's proposal. Maximum flexibility, therefore, exists to design the site to meet ordinance requirements. The applicant's difficulties result from his own objectives and not the condition of the parcel of land. 4. The granting of the variance would be unfair to other similar developments which have complied with ordinance parking requirements since it would confer a special benefit on this parcel only. 12-11-86 -2-