Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC75044 - 12/11/75 - 6417 Brooklyn BlvdN-46INING COMMISSION FILE CPL..:KLIST File Purge Date: FILE INFORMATION Project Number: SPc CL/.sc, PROPERTY INFORMATION ' </°��Z_fP�� �;, 6y3 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 Tyg_e Date Ranae Location Agendas: Planning Commission Office Minutes: Planning Commission , City Vault Minutes: City Council City Vault Document TY2e Number Location Resolutions: Planning Commission City Vault Resolutions: City Council City Vault Ordinances: City Council City Vault COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY FILES CHECKLIST CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION ZONING APPLICATION Application No. Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property �p /l 7 vn/ t� Legal Description of Property-'-' Lp e, 2,g/ A �,u 75044 Owner / /%i �� 1,) E n1So n/ Address 7-20tin/ 1-Vi7 Phone No. S3S-r� 9lon Applicant G,�Era,e Va� /.L'�yso�✓ Address y Al �1 YID Phone No. Z, Q Type of Request: X Rezoning Variance Subdivision Approval Site & Bldg. Plan Approval Special Use Permit Other: Description of Request:,--�ea-S�Lu-7i�P�s�D/AL i -L Ll---I C- E 67,f-fle- y ADD/%/0/V qJ-- 7 f� �Z -V/C, Fee $ %S-c-e Receipt No. p A' lica t s Signature Date PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: Approved ✓ Denied this day of 19 ing conditions: 'ap F0� 13e� n �o� N4oD AOd�� 4/LaoP 1 P� , subject to the follow- airman ----------------- ------------------------r-------- CITY COUNCIL. ACTION Dates of Council Consideration: Approved k----`Denied this day of >�, tZA 19 176 , with the following amendment: Clerk P/I Form No. 18 (over please) Tennis Court The City Manager introduced the next item of business, that Lighting of a resolution approving a tennis court lighting agreement Agreement with Brooklyn Center High School. He stated that $7,500 was appropriated in the 1976 budget for financing 50% of the cost of installing tennis court lighting at the Brooklyn Center High School. He explained that discussions with the Brooklyn Center School Superintendent indicate that the total cost for the lighting will exceed the original estimate and be between $15,000 and $17,000. He further explained that the pro- posed agreement would limit the amount of the City's expenditure to $7,500 with the school district being responsible for the excess and he inquired if that represented the Council intention when adopting the budget in September. A brief discussion ensued relative to the proposed lighting agreement. Following the discussion it was the consensus of the Council that there be further deliberation on the pos- sibility of funding an. additional amount once the final costs for the tennis court lighting are determined. RESOLUTION Member Maurice Britts introduced the following resolution NO. 76-44 and .moved its adoption; RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO BROOKLYN CENTER SCHOOL DISTRICT AGREEMENT REGARDING TENNIS COURTS LIGHTING PROJECT AT 65TH AVENUE NORTH AND DUPONT AVENUE NORTH The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof, Philip Cohen, Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Robert Jensen; and the following voted against the same; none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Planning Commission The City Manager introduced the next item of business on Application No. 75044 the agenda, that of Planning Commission Application No. (Dr. Gregory Swenson) 75044: ;submitted by Dr. Gregory Swenson. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Planning Commission Application No. 75044 and the Planning Commission action at their December 11 , 1975 and Febnaary 26, 1976 meetings. He stated that the appli- cant proposed to rezone, from R-5 to C-1 , the approximate 56,000 square foot property located at 6417 Brooklyn Boulevard. He explained that the applicant is one of the owners of the Brook Park Dental Clinic located northerly of the subject property at 65th and Brooklyn Boulevard. He stated that the ultimate intent of the action is to provide additional. off -rite parking for the Dental Clinic, and that the applicant had submitted a letter of intent to remove the existing dwelling and detached garage no later than June 1 , 1976. He further stated that the proposed rezoning had been reviewed by the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group, which had recommended approval of the request following several discussion sessions. He proceeded to review a transparency of the subject property showing the location of the vacant, nonconforming dwelling that is to be removed. He also reviewed a survey of the entire triangular piece of property, noting the 260 foot frontage and the 470 foot portion of the land that abuts other properties. -3- 3-8-76 3 brief discussion ensued as to the proposed rezoning with —.che Director of Planning and Inspection explaining that in order for the applicant to use this site for off -site parking, the property must be rezoned the same as that of the Dental Clinic, C-1. Mayor Cohen recognized the applicant, Dr. Gregory Swenson, who had nothing further to add to the application. Council man Fignar questioned Dr. Swenson as to what is the existing parking at the Dental Clinic. The applicant responded that there are presently 38 parking spaces at the Clinic and that it is their intention to have 20 additional employee parking spaces on the subject property. Councilman Kuefler inquired as to the applicant's intention to fence the subject property. Dr. Swenson responded that there are no plans to fence the property at this time. Mayor Cohen opened the meeting to notified property owners. It was noted that no one spoke relating to the application. Following further discussion there was a motion by Council- man Britts and seconded by Councilman Fignar to approve Planning Commission Application No. 75044, submitted by Dr. Gregory Swenson, noting the applicant's letter of intent to remove the vacant dwelling and accessory building; and subject to the condition that the property be replatted into a common parcel. Voting in favor were; Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Jensen. Voting against. none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Council recessed at 8:35 p.m. and resumed at 9.00 P.M. The City Manager introduced the next item of business, that of Planning Commission Application No. 76001 submitted by Allan Jones, 5425 Oliver Avenue North, and stated that the application had been deferred from the February 23, 1976 Council meeting at the request of the applicant. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Planning Commission Application No. 76001 and the Planning Commission action at the February 12, 1976 meeting. He stated that the applicant was seeking a variance from Section 35-400, which requires a minimum 40 foot rear yard setback in order to construct an addition tc his house which would encroach into the rear yard. He explained that based upon the certified lot survey and plans submitted by the applicant, it has been determined that the encroachment into the rear yard would be approximately 10 to 1.4 feet. He stated that the applicant had been informed of the standards for variance and that he has submitted a letter to the file responding in part to those standards. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded to review a transparency showing the location and configuration of the applicant's nonrectangular lot and the location of the existing dwelling and detached garage which conform with ordinance standards. He noted that the Planning Commission recommended denial of the application on the basis that the standards for a variance are not clearly met, particularly with respect to uniqueness and hardship, and further, that altering estab- lished yard setback standards by variance procedure was not considered appropriate. Public Hearing Action Approving Planning Commission Application No. 75044 (Dr. Gregory Swenson) Recess Planning Commission Application No. 76001 (Allan Jones) 3-8--76 -4- 1_1�Aa.JIN6 ak-IL*,ISS/0-� /AAJCfTFS Chairperson Pro tem Scott stated that a public hear- ing ha.d been scheduled and she noted that none of the notified property owners were present. She recog- nizedMr. Richard Handy, 7230 Morgan Avenue North, who explained -that he appeared as a concerned citizen and -not in -his official capacity as a Brooklyn Center Police Officer. He stated his concerns as to the location of the facility in relation to the Brookdale Security Office; the type of games and devices whitih would be present; the visibility of the manager on the premises; smoking and drinking policies; the youthful age of the customers; and the cost of the ..activities. He referenced many of his remarks to previous experience the City had with another facility -located in a strip shopping center. Chairperson Pro tem Scott recognized Mr. Pink, who sponded to Mr. Handy's concerns by reiterating the management policies, the provisions for security, and he noted the substantial differences between recrea- tion center facilities in strip shopping centers and those located in shopping malls. Recommend Approval of Following further discussion there was a motion by Application No. 76012 Commissioner Jacobson seconded by Commissioner Horan (Advance Carter Company) to recommend approval of Application No. 7601.2, sub- mitted by Advance Carter Company subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit shall be issued to the applicant as operator of the facility and shall be nontransferable. 2. The use is subject to all applicable ordinance provisions, including special licensing re9u.0--P-- ments, and violation thereof shall be ground:: for revocation of the special use permit, 3. House rules and hours of local curfew regula- tions shall be clearly posted in the estab- lishment and rigorously enforced. 4,. The special use permit shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission one year from date of issuance. 5, Provision shall be made for bicycle parking racks located in a. manner approved by the Department of Planning and Inspection. The motion passed unanimously. Application No. 75044 The next item was consideration of Application No, (Dr, Swenson) 75044 submitted by Dr. Gregory Swenson. The item was introduced by the Secretary who stated the applica- tion was to rezone, from R-5 to C-1, the approximate 56,000 square foot property at 6417 Brooklyn Boulevard which is one lot removed to the south from the Brook Park Dental Clinic, and which now contains a vacant nonconforming dwelling. He stated the item was first heard at the December 11, 1975 meeting at which time it was tabled to permit re- view and comment by the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group. He stated the group had recommended approval of the request following several discussion sessions. Chairperson Pro tem Scott recognized the applicant and Mr. Wayne Tauer, who represented the applicant's engineering survey firm. -3- 2/26/76 I A brief discussion ensued relative to cu.rbcuts and the removal of the existing.structures. -Dr. Swenson recalled that he had submitted a.letter to the file stating that the existing dwelling and garage would be removed -by June 1,1976, and that it was his 'in- tent to apply for a special_use.permit to allow off -site accessory parking. The Secretary responded -to several questions re- garding the planning of the area -and -stated the re- quest had merit -in terms of -long -run -development. He explained.the entire southwest quadrant of 65th and Brooklyn Boulevard had been comprehended as R-5 in recognition of -the existing apartments now known as "Unicorn Apartments". -He stated, however, that due to separate ownerships, the apartment complex had not expanded into the -other areas and no new apartment developments had been -proposed; -He stated that several-years-ago-the-.City:had-rezoned the corner parcel -to C-1, which is new -the -site of the Brook Park Dental Clinic -and -that -the subject property and the -adjacent -parcel -remained R-5. He stated that at -such -time -the -smaller parcel at 6421 Brooklyn Boulevard, -northerly of the subject propert y was cleared of its nonconforming house and garage, there would be merit -in -rezoning that piece to C-1 as well. He -explained that -rezoning the parcel to C-1 at -this time would only aggravate the noncon- forming use situation and -briefly -commented as to the ramifications with respect to the Sign Ordinance. He stated the resident of-6421-Brooklyn Boulevard had indicated that he wished to continue to reside on the property and conduct his approved special home occupation. Following further discussion there was a motion by Commissioner Horan seconded by Commissioner Pierce to recommend approval -of Application No-. 75044, submitted by Dr. Gregory Swenson, noting the applicant's letter of intent to remove the vacant dwelling and accessory building; and subject to the condition that the property be replatted into a common parcel. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting recessed at 9:45 p.m. and resumed at 10:00 p.m. The Secretary explained that Application No. 75045 would only be treated -as -an -informational -item since the applicant, Brooklyn Center -Industrial -Park, Incor- porated, had requested that the -item not be acted upon at this time. The Secretary and Director of Public Works reviewed the traffic study for the Earle Brown Farm, prepared by Bather, Ringrose, and Wolsfeld, and an extensive dis- cussion ensued as to the planning ramifications. The Secretary -commented that one of the -conclusions which could be drawn from the analysis was that addi- tional commercial major development of the Farm, particularly office buildings, could have severe rami- fications on the -traffic -capacity of the south area of the Farm, -He explained that -at the present time, the ordinance control of commercial -development density on C-2 land was -the capacity of -on -site parking. He explained with respect to the-I-1 zoned property, such commercial -uses required a special use permit and each development could be evaluated -with respect to its effect on adjacent and -other -land uses within the I-1 district generally. 2/26/76 -4- Recommend Approval of Application No. 75044 (Dr, Swenson) Recess Application Nc. 75045 (Brooklyn Center .lndustr3a' Park, Inc.) MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION DECEMBER 11, 1975 CITY HALL Call to Order The Planning Commission met in regular session and $ was called to order at 8:00 p.m. by Chairman Carl Gross. Roll Call Chairman Gross, Commissioners Foreman, Engdahl, Horan, Pierce and Jacobson. Also present were Director of Public Works James Merila and Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere. Application No. 75044 Following the Chairman's explanation, the first (Dr. G. Swenson) item of business was consideration of Planning Commission Application No. 75044--.bmitted by Dr. Gregory Swenson. The item was introduced by the Secretary who stated the applicant proposes to rezone, from R-5 to C-1, the approximate 56,000 square foot property located at 6417 Brooklyn Blvd. He explained the applicant is one of the owner's of the Brook Park Dental Clinic located northerly of the subject property at 65th and Brooklyn Blvd. He stated the ultimate intent of the action is to provide additional off -site parking for the dental clinic. He commented that off -site accessory parking requires the same (C-1) or higher zoning. The Secretary stated the applicant had submitted a letter of intent to remove the existing dwelling and detached garage no later than June 1, 1976. Chairman Gross recognized Dr. Swenson and a discussion ensued as to the parking needs of the dental clinic. He stated the additional parking off -site would be primarily for employees so that more spaces on the clinic site would be available to patients. He stated that the increase in business, as well as an anticipated increase in the number of dentists, generated the need for additional parking. Dr. Swenson also commented that there were no immediate plans for develop- ment on the subject property bes..des the parking. Chairman Gross commented that while the intent might be for additional parking, it should be recognized that, once property is rezoned, it is subject to any of the permitted uses in that particular district. He asked the Secretary to review the various permitted uses and the Secretary emphasized that the C-1 district was service/office in nature and did not include retail uses. Chairman Gross announced that a public hearing had been scheduled and recognized the residents of 6325 and 6341 Halifax Drive. Both residents stated their concern with the possible ramification upon the neighboring residential properties should a proposed development on the subject property result in fencing which would orient pedestrian traffic through the area, possibly across their yards. They commented that there is pedestrian traffic from the Marlin Park area on Indiana Avenue through the subject property to Brooklyn Blvd. The Secretary briefly reviewed the ordinance require- ments for screening and fencing and stated that those specific matters could be reviewed in detail at the special use permit hearing. He suggested that perhaps pedestrian traffic could be greatly reduced, if not completely stopped, by effectively fencing the various yards along Halifax Drive. Following further discussion, Chairman Gross noted that none of the other notified property owners were present. Motion by Commissioner Foreman and seconded by Com- missioner Pierce to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary read a letter submitted by the District 5 Office of the State Highway Department and submitted it to the file. The letter stated the general concern of the Highway Department that, in recognition of the high intensity traffic and arterial character of Brooklyn Blvd., the City should give (2,_,e considera- tion to restricting, as much as possible, high intensity uses with access directly onto Brooklyn Blvd. The Director of Public Works commented as to the High- way Department concerns and stated that it could be estimated C-1 type traffic be approximately 10% to 15% higher than R-5 which was the zoning of the subject property, but he emphasized that C-2 zoning would be approximately 75% higher than the R-5. He noted that the State Highway Department, as well as the City staff, traditionally look at the traffic generation and potential conflicts with respect to optimum possible development of parcels such as this. Chairman Gross reviewed the letter in the file sub- mitted by the applicant as to the removal of the house and garage and inquired as to the timing of the parking lot installation. The applicant responded that he hoped to have the parking lot installed as soon as weather would permit in the spring, and that the improvement might precede the removal of the structures by a month or two. The Secretary noted the house had suffered minor fire damage and was not occupied. Following further discussion, there was a motion by Commissioner Foreman and seconded by Commis- sioner Jacobson to table Planning Commission Application No. 75044 and to refer the matter to the West Central, Neighborhood Advisory Group--.)r %c-. '., w and input, pr.e:fe.r_.z'bly at a January meeting. The motion passed unanimously. Close Hearing Table Application No. 75044 and Refer to Neighborhood Advisory Group 12-11-75 -2- Application No. Applicant: Location: Request: PLANNING COMMISSION INFORMATION SHEET 75044 Dr_ Gregory Swenson 6417 Brooklyn Boulevard Rezoning The application was first heard at the December 11, 1975 meeting when it was tabled to permit review and comment by the West Central Neighborhood Advisory Group. The request is to rezone, from R-5 (23-2-3 story apartments) to C-1 (service/office) the approximate 56,000 square feet property which is one lot removed from the Brook Park Dental Clinic and which now contains a vacant nonconforming dwelling. The Group has recommended approval of the request, following several sessions where the circumstances were reviewed. Notices have again been sent to neighboring property owners. �- The applicant has submitted a letter of intent to remove the structures this year. It is the applicant's desire to obtain a special use permit for accessory off -site parking for the clinic. Approval should include the requirement that the property be re - platted into a common tract. Ca'S Z . l 4 Ai LA t � � Appp GATIO rr quo t>� GARDEN CITLI H o o L.. � t: � t z bq.2018 a C� IPA 1nAR« N 4` ?ARK 35'I '(j SH4PpECiS VpIVE 63tQ b3i 8 �o i &A S "r 5 TA. �3Rv A VE.NuE b ; f4 PLATMING3 COMMISSION MFORKATION SHEET Application No. 75044 Appiicant: Dr. Gregory Swenrcn Location: 6417 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Rezoning The applicant proposes to rezone the 66,188 sq.ft. property from R�-5 (23o - 5 story mul tiple dv �llings) to C-1 (Service -Office). The applicant is one of the owners of the Brook Park Dental Clinic, one lot rersvved to the north.. he ul t irate intent is to provide additional parking on this site for the dental clinic. Off --site accessory parking requires the sanr4 (C-1) or higher zoning; thaws, the application. .the applicant has submi t tfl�d a letter of intent to reiueve than existing duelling and garage by June 1, 1976. The adjacent R-5 parcel to the north, 6421 Brooklyn Boulevard is not included at this tir,re. It is the site of a a•aonconfornin,g single family hoa,le Which the owner wishes to retain. Rezoning of that: parcel is not reco=iended until thO vacation of the parcel and redevelopulen% is proposed. We will be prepared to co►ntrert further as to the basis for the request and planning ramifications. A public hearing has been scheduled. The established procedure is to refer Wipe natter to the Neighborhood (West cen.tral) Advisory Group for review and cora,pnt.