Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC63089 - 12/5/63 - 5045 France Ave. NF_.,,..4ING COMMISSION FILE C,,..._. File Purge Date: 65%q5 FILE INFORMATION Project Number: �3oe9 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 12/5/4-3, "12.3/fo3 Minutes: City Council Document Type Number Resolutions: Planning Commission Resolutions: City Council Ordinances: City Council City Vault City Vault Location City Vault City Vault City Vault COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY FILES CHECKLIST VILUGE OF BROVELYN CENTER t63089 zoniotinnlication Street Location of Property 5o45 France Ave- Nnrth Legal Description of Property North 292' of Easy ens' Pnrrnl ens; Sec. 1.0 Owner: Name Tri-State Land Co, Address Soo Line Bpi,1d;ng Applicant: Name __ Fiddress Phone Type of Request: Rezoning ________Special Use Permit --T-Variance _______Subdivision Approval Other Description of Request Variance on side yard setback from 100' to 25' and variance on floor area ratiotoland area from .4 to .6. 9 S Reason for Reques PJOTE - Sketch of proposed property and structure to be dravin on back of this form or attached. Fee: None t Rec'd. Published On Pl. Comm Agenda rl Comm. Faction On Council Rcenda Council Postponement Council Faction Blda. Dent. Notified A)nlicant Notified P1 Comm Postponement (E,.)licant (Date) Recommendations of Village Officials Any matting any comments shot: sign and date. Use additional sheet : comments if necessary attach hereto. Please draw or attach sketch of proposed structure sh0lJillg the following: 1. Indicate North 1 6. Dimensions of proposed structure 2. Location on lot. 7. Proposed set -backs 3. Adjacent street names a. State zoning in force in area con 4. Location set-bacl.s and use of adjacent existing buildings 5. Distances between any proposed structures and structures on adjacent property. (To Be Filled in By Planning Commission) PLIMNING COl';1MISSI0P1 REC01'.ZiENDE.TIONS On the y 1 da of - 6±1-19 G'- the action requested in the foregoing petition was approved ( ) disapproved ( ) subject to the following conditions: Chairman � '1� dzA COUNCIL RECOP�;f.ENDFxx I ONS 19 �. F,pproved Denied, by the Council this day of Approved with following amendment. (sec } VILLAGE OF i4ROOKL..YN CAE IER Application No, 63089 Zoning Application tQt_„ 5hee Streew Location of Property F A W r'h Legal Description of property N. 292e of E, 405' of Parcel 203, Sec, 10 Caner: Name �.,���,�,� ����A�i Address Soo Line Su i Ia Phone Applicant ADDRESS Nq„_,,._„�_„r,,,_ Type of Request: —,----;:ezon?ng Special Use Permit _ X —Variance Subdivision Approval Descriptiox of Request 'variance on side yard setback from 100' to 25' and Variance asf floor arez: ratio to land area from 4 to .6, and variance on parking from 88 spaces to 26 spaces. Reason for request Spw Engineers Remarks nsufficient parki2 fox potential mar3uAactzariti$ use, Building inspectors Remarks App.icants Sketch Filed YES .Agetids Sketch Attached Sewer Available Water Available Street Access y YES TES No comment Note: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be dratus can ba�k of this form orattached. FE'E'� N©n£ applicant Tri—State Land ...___,,.�....,�..,�...._ rate , I _qA—A. < ....�., - O A K -� l 37#70 Z;e —3 - 13I?z9 38� 38'l5 3�9 It mo T o P FN "J LANDSCAPED SUFFER ' �`NCL05rfD TRUCK TR DOCK ARC l 70 OOO Sq,LQ � J !7 sl rf AREA 71 ACR..--S /18j 260 sy. 4 ..some . �' d z W Q Ln ON ' 3AV 3ON 78 A J 12663 PETITION TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER VILLAGE COUNCIL We, the undersigned home owners and tax payers in Brooklyn Center, petition our Village Council for consideration on the proposed variance from the existing or- dinance covering "buffer" or setback requirements. First, we believe that the proposed use of the land is very good; the warehouse proposal conforms to zoning requirements of the village and, realistically, we as property owners abutting or adjacent to industrial property are satisfied. Where we believe any potential problem exists is in the grant -Mg of the variances asked for by Tri-State Land Company and approved Thursday, December 5th, by the Planning Commission of the Village. The ordinancesnow in force are being waived by the Planning Commission in the interests of what must be construed as expediency. This is the major point of any contention about variances --not merely this one, but of aLl previous, pre- sent and future requests. Since the very recent episode involving many of the undersigned and another area of this same land parcel, Major Erickson, other members of the council as well as members of the Planning Commission laid great stress on the protection of the property owners in this neighborhood through the "buffer" zone requirement of 100 feet setback. This we accepted in good faith and were comfor-;ed by such assur- ances. It therefore seems capricious that at this time --only three months later that the ordinance is being ignored. We are understandably perplexed. There is no hardship to consider in the case of the potential buyer; he is merely being asked to abide by the code which was established for the mutual protection of all property owners. Rules, regulations, laws, statutes and ordinances and common sense tell us that the common interest must at all times be observed. In the past other property owners and developers have had to :Live up to the Village requirements and it is, in our opinion, a disservice to all of these people to grant exceptions which are expedient and economic in nature. Further, it is a precedent for future Planning Commissions and Councils, developers and contractors to cite in the granting of similar requests for variances. Also, it is very con- cceivable that the difference betweenm25 feet and 100 feet in setback for the proposed building could mean the difference between saleability and non -saleability of the abutting properties. Thus, we petition the council to honor the ordinances of our Village. We do this in the belief that any firm which decides in favor of this land will do so beaeuse it is a sound business proposition for them and will not seek preferential treat- ment from the Planning Commit Sion, the Council or any one elsel RespIctfully submitted Name Address )iu, i % Name Address y1 r-''-QJ�,^M s �( Z cl - �r Cl L� 9 ofa