Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 11, 2000CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40TH AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS~ MN $5421-$878 (612) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. TUESDAY, July 11, 2000 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 590 N.E. 40TH AVENUE IHEMB£R$ Tom tTamsde//, C~ai~ Kevin Hanaon Ted Ye/~e Step~en VI. Jo~nso# Roll Call Minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of June 6, 2000. New Business: A. Public Hearing Conditional Use Permit Case//2000-0717 B. Public Hearing Variance Case//2000-0718 C. Site Plan Review Case//2000-0719 Olive Tree Deli 3700 Central Ave. rd.. Columbia Heights, Mn. Danny R. Hunter 4328 N.E. 2"" Street Columbia Heights, Mn. Mike Juaire RE: 315 N.E. 44th Ave. and 4417 University Ave. 4. Staff Reports. 5. Adjourn. THE CITY Of COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Case: 2000-0717 Page: 1 Case #: Owner: Address: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE JULY 11, 2000 PUBLIC HEARING 2000-0717 GENERAL INFORMATION Olive Tree Grocery and Deli 3700 Central Avenue NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 (763) 782-9900 Parcel Address: 3700 Central Avenue NE Zoning: RB Retail Business District Comprehensive Plan: C - Commercial Zoning North: RB South: Minneapolis East: RB West: R-3 Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: Applicant: Same Land Use North: Commercial South: Minneapolis East: Residential West: Residential BACKGROUND Explanation qf Request: The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review to allow for the current Olive Tree Grocery and Deli at the address above to provide seating as a restaurant at the current site. Information on the menu items and additional hours of operation have not yet been provided. They are proposing 24 seats for dining. Case Histo~_ : Nothing on file. ANALYSIS Surrounding Proper~ : The surrounding property to the north and east is zoned as RB and is used commercially. The Case: 2000-0717 Page: 2 property to the west is zoned as R-3 and is used residentially. The property to the south is in Minneapolis. Technical Review: According to Section 9.112(2) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance, a Conditional Use Permit is required if the proposed use contains a restaurant, caf6, tea room, bar, prepared food outlets subject to Section 9.116(15) and Prepared Food Delivery Establishments as such establishments are defined in Section 9.103(63). The applicant is not proposing any physical changes to the exterior of the building. However, there will be some interior modifications necessary to establish seating for twenty-four (24) persons. These improvements are subject to review and approval by the Building Official, Fire Department, and the Anoka County Health Department. Minimum Yard and Density Requirements are as such: The "F.A.R" (floor-area-ratio) within the "CBD" District shall not exceed 1.0. This requirement appears to be met after staffreview. Lots shall have a minimum frontage of forty (40) feet. This lot has approximately one hundred twelve (112) feet of frontage. This frontage meets ordinance requirements. Front Yard setback shall be fifteen (15) feet. The structure is not in compliance, but the structure is a legal non-conforming building. The rear yard setback shall be ten (10) feet, with the existing structure meeting this requirement. No side yard setback required. Lot width required is fifty (50) feet. The lot width is one hundred twelve (112) f~et. No structure shall exceed three stories or thirty-five (35) feet in height. No exterior changes are planned. Building is in compliance. The Zoning Ordinance requires that restaurants provide at least one space for each three seats based on capacity design per each thirty-five (35) square feet of gross floor area. According to the floor plan, there are 24 seats proposed for restaurant use. Note that the proposed parking lot configuration identifies 23+ spaces on-site, one of which is handicap accessible. The floor plan submitted meets zoning requirements as determined by staff. However, the site plan submitted showing the parking lot layout will need to be adjusted to allow for a sidewalk adjacent to the building. The front parking lot stalls shown on the site plan submitted need to be adjusted to allow for curbing and sidewalk access to the building. However, by reducing the available amount of parking space for sidewalk and pedestrian access, the vehicle access lane is also reduced to less than twenty (20) feet. There is currently no requirement in the zoning ordinance referring to a minimum access lane width. This could be problematic for large vehicles pulling in and out of the proposed spaces. Case: 2000-0717 Page: 3 Landscaping of 200 square feet is also required for off-street parking areas that accommodate twenty-one (21) spaces or more. This landscaping could be provided if the parking stalls closest to Central Avenue were removed from the plan. This adjustment would still appear to provide for enough stalls to meet requirements. The facilities for off-street loading are required to maintain a twenty-foot distance from centerline of the alley to first floor foundation. The loading space proposed meets and exceeds this requirement. However, the loading space needs to be adjusted to meet the minimum 12 by 25 foot loading space requirement. The site plan appears to be able to accommodate this adjustment, but one space would need to be widened. Solid waste material is required to be so located and fenced as to be removed from public view and shall be kept in an enclosed building or properly contained in a closed container for such purposes. Compliance with Ci~_ Comprehensive Plan: The City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for commercial use. One goal of the Land Use and Redevelopment Plan is to improve the commercial viability of the Central Avenue corridor while protecting nearby residential neighborhoods, and the plan promotes the rehabilitation of existing development land within the City. The proposal will not negatively impact any nearby residential areas and will be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. The positive aspects of this proposal are as follows: 1. The proposal is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan and minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance are being met. 2. Providing restaurant seating would be an appropriate use and complementary to existing business and the RB. The negative aspects of this proposal are as follows: 1. There do not appear to be any negative aspects to this proposal provided the applicant complies with the required conditions. CONCLUSION Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow the current Olive Tree Grocery and Deli at 3700 Central Avenue NE, to provide seating as a restaurant at the current site. Recommended Motion: Move to recommend City Council approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow the Olive Tree Grocery and Deli to provide seating as a restaurant, subject to the following conditions: 1. All required state and local codes, permits, licenses and inspections will be met and in full Case: 2000-0717 Page: 4 compliance. 2. All screening requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for fencing and dumpster enclosure shall be in compliance. 3. Parking lot site plan shall be resubmitted and be in substantial compliance with the Zoning Ordinance before restaurant seating is allowed, including handicap parking stall. 4. Landscaping of 200 square feet needs to be incorporated into the revised site plan. 5. Loading areas shall meet ordinance requirements and be accessible. Attachments: Area Map; Completed application form; site plan; floor plan; public notice H:\Tim's files~2000 P&Z Comm~2000-0717OliveTreeCUP CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Application For: Rezoning Variance Privacy Fence Conditional Use Permit Subdivision Approval Site Plan Approval Other Application Date: Case No; jO£9O 1. Street Address of Subject Property.' 2700 2. Legal Description of Subject Property: Applicant: Description of Request: e ZoninR: Applicable City Ordinance Number Present Zoning. Present Use Reason for I~equest~ ////~ Section Proposed Zoning Proposed Use 8. Exhibits Submitted (maps, diagrams, etc.) Acknowledgment and SiKnature: The undersigned hereby represents upon all of the penalties of law, for the purpose of inducing the City of Columbia Heights to take the action herein requested, that all statements herein are true and that all work herein mentioned will be done in accordance with the Ordinances of the City of Columbia Heights and the laws of the State of ~inne~...~~~ ~ Signature of Applicant: Date: /-J~dP C~ Taken By: .... 76.3 2,4 i i5,59 Cate: C5/C6¢0C ":me: 8:,35:04 78' Sidewalk 60' 112' Sidewalk handicap van accessible parking Sidewalk Sidewalk Kuiper Specialties, Inc. Marv Kuiper cell 799-2672 fax 763-241-1559 office 763-241-9593 Client: Olive Tree 3700 Central Avenue NE Minneapolis, MN Store Garbage 763 2,:,I 1559 .]un 06 O0 08:32a Cate: 05/06/,30 Time: 8:35:04 AM and Lois Kuiper- Olive Tree Grocery and Deli 3700 Central Avenue NE I ?63-24 -9593 Page 3 of 3 po1 ,, !:; C TY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ,.%.%%o. Stephan Jo~on 590 40TH AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421-3878 (612) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 DanialShatluck PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Planning and Zoning Commission will conduct a public hearing in the City Council Chambers of City Hall, 590 N.E. 40th Avenue, at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 11, 2000. The order of business is as follows: A request for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review to allow the current Olive Tree Grocery and Deli at 3700 Central Avenue N.E. to provide seating as a restaurant at the current site. The Retail Business Section of the Zoning Ordinance requires a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a restaurant, cafe, tea room, bar, prepared food outlets subject to Section 9.116(15) and Prepared Food Delivery Establishments as such establishments are defined in Section 9.103(63). Notice is hereby given that all persons having an interest will be given an opportunity to be heard. For questions, you may contact Ken Anderson, Acting City Planner, at 763-706-3672. Planning and Zoning Commission CiTY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Walt Fehst City Manager kp The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its services, programs or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all City of Columbia Heights' services, programs and activities. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 706-3611, to make arrangements. (TDD/706-3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only.) THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS OOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORtUniTY EMPLOYER Case: 2000-0718 Page: 1 Case #: Owner: Address: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE JULY 11, 2000 PUBLIC HEARING 2000-0718 GENERAL INFORMATION Danny Ross Hunter 4328 2nd Street NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 (612) 789-7974 Parcel Address: 4328 2nd St. NE Zoning: R-2, One and Two Family Residential District Comprehensive Plan: LDR - Low Density Residential Zoning North: R-2 South: R-2 East: R-2 West: R-2 Applicant: Same Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: Land Use North: Residential South: Residential East: Residential West: Residential BACKGROUND Explanation o_f Request: The applicant requests a .4 foot side yard setback variance to allow for the construction of a second story addition and a 12 foot by 24 foot addition onto the rear of the house at the address above. Section 9.108(4) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance requires that any part of a principal structure maintain a minimum five (5) foot setback from the side yard property line. This request is to allow for the new addition to encroach .4 feet into the five (5) foot setback. Case Histo~: Staff is not aware of any pertinent zoning cases on the lot or similar variance type requests in the surrounding area. Case: 2000-0718 Page: 2 ANALYSIS Surrounding Property: The surrounding property to the north, south, east and west is zoned R-2, One and Two Family Residential District and is used residentially. There are three lots across the alley fronting on Main Street, and just south of this property which are zoned as R-3. Gauvitte Park also abuts the residential properties to the east. Technical Review: According to Section 9.108(4) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance, a variance is required for this addition in that it would encroach .4 feet into the five (5) foot required side yard setback area. The Minimum Yard requirements are listed below. No structural building shall exceed three stories or 35 feet which ever is the lesser in height. This structure is less than 35 feet. A side yard abutting an adjacent parcel is five (5) feet. The existing house was built at 4.60 feet from the side yard property line at the closest point. The proposed addition would be a continuation of the existing house to the west, as the addition would be approximately 12 feet by 24 feet. The existing front yard setback is 17.0 feet from the property line. The zoning ordinance requires 25 feet, with the proposed addition not infringing on this setback. The other side yard setback is at twelve (12) feet including the proposed addition, with the requirement being five (5) feet. The rear yard setback is at approximately sixty-eight (68) feet, with the required setback being at least thirty (30) feet. Any lot less than 6,500 Square feet may have a lot coverage of up to 35% - the lot coverage will be approximately 27% which meets this requirement. The primary purpose of the requested variance appears to be in matching with the setback of the existing structure on the north property line at approximately 4.6 feet. Section 9.105(3) (d) of the Zoning Ordinance states the following: "In recommending a variance, it shall be found that by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of lot or where by reason of exceptional topography, soil conditions, tree number or location or water conditions the owner of such lot would have an undue hardship in using his lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the rules of the zoning district." In order for a variance to be granted, hardship needs to be established. Circumstances unique to the individual property in question need to be established. According to the definition of hardship provided in the Zoning Ordinance, it appears that there is no hardship shown as to why the applicants can't meet the minimum five (5) foot setback requirement. Could the applicant build a reasonable addition meeting the five (5) foot setback? Case: 2000-0718 Page: 3 There don't appear to be any legitimate reasons in relation to variance standards whereby staff could recommend approval to the Commission. The proposed addition could be shortened up by a few inches and still meet requirements, but the new addition would probably jog a bit from the existing side walls. However, the common sense approach would be to match the addition up with the walls of the existing structure. This approach would entail allowing for the new addition including the second story to encroach a few inches into the setback. Staff doesn't know of any prior similar type requests that would be comparable to this situation. Compliance with Ci~_ Comprehensive Plan: The City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for future low density residential. One of the goals of the Land Use and Redevelopment component of the Plan states "Protect and enhance the residential neighborhoods of the Community (Page 27)." The proposal would not appear to be inconsistent with the City Comprehensive Plan as it encroaches only a few inches. The positive aspects of this proposal are as follows: 1. The proposal would appear to be in line with the existing house and would not encroach any closer than what is there now. There are numerous houses that have similar side yard setbacks. 2. The proposed addition would improve upon the livability of the property. The negative aspects of this proposal are as follows: 1. The request encroaches into the side yard setbacks of the Zoning Ordinance which could establish an undesirable precedent. CONCLUSION Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the variance as the proposed addition does not exhibit a defined hardship according to the Zoning Ordinance. Recommended Motion: Move to recommend the City Council deny the variance request because a legitimate hardship has not been established. Alternative Motion Recommending Approval: Move to recommend City Council approval of the side yard setback variance of .4 feet, in that it will not extend beyond the existing structure setback, and would be keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Attachments: Area Map; Completed application form; survey site plan; public notice. H:\Tim's filesX2000 P&Z Comm~2000-0718dannyhunter CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Application For: Rezoning Variance Privacy Fence Conditional Use Permit Subdivision Approval Site Plan Approval Other Fee: 7,~. n,4 Date Pal 1. Street Address of Subject Property: 2. Legal Description of Subject Property: 4328 N.E, 2nd Street Owner: Name: Address: Description of Request: .4 foQ~ ~|de yard ~.~ba~.k variaoce Zoning: Applicable City Ordinance Number Present ZoningI Present Use Section Proposed Zoning. Proposed Use 7. Reason for Request: on rear of house to al}ow a second story onto dwe]lino as we]] as a 12'x2~' mHH~;~n 8. Exhibits Submitted (maps, diagrams, etc.) 9. Acknowledgment and Si2nature: The undersi~ned hereby represents upon all of the penalties of law, for the pu~ose of inducing the City of Columbia Heights to take the action herein requested, that all statements herein are true and that all work herein ~ mentioned will be done in accordance with the Ordinances of the City of Columbia Heights and the laws of the State of Minnesota. l'homas Ram,~e/I, CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ,%,%°. Stephsn Johnson 590 40TH AVENUE N,E,, COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421-3878 (612) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 DsnielShattuck PZA#IVI#G AND ZONING COMMISSIO# NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Planning and Zoning Commission will conduct a public hearing in the City Council Chambers of City Hall, 590 N.E. 40th Avenue, at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 11, 2000. The order of business is as follows: A request for a .4 foot side yard setback variance to allow a second story addition and a 12 foot by 24 foot addition on the rear of the house at 4328 N.E. 2"~ Street. Section 9.108(4)(c) of the R-2 Section of the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side yard of five (5) feet. Section 9.104(3)(j) of that section of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to Non-Conforming Uses and Structures states: "Alterations may be made to a building containing non-conforming residential units when the alteration will improve the livability thereof, provided it will not increase the number of dwelling units nor the outside perimeter of the building. Provided, however, that such alterations increasing the perimeter may be made when the alteration will improve the livability thereof and provided that a variance is obtained pursuant to Section 9.105(3), et.seq. In addition to the variance criteria contained in Section 9.10§(3)(d), the Board of Appeals and Adjustments may consider the need for fire protection, sanitary facilities, and general safety of the subject building. No such alterations shall be made to buildings which ara not structurally sound". Notice is hereby given that all persons having an interest will be given an opportunity to be heard. For questions, you may contact Ken Anderson, Acting City Planner, at 763-706-3672. Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Walt Fehst City Manager kp The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its services, programs or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all City of Columbia Heights' services, programs and activities. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 706-3611, to make arrangements. (TDDI706-3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only.) THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Case: 2000-0719 Page: 1 Case #: Owner: Address: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE JULY 11, 2000 MEETING 2000-0719 Mike Juaire PMJ Group, Inc. PO Box 43243 Brookly Park, MN 55443 (612)382-0704 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Same Parcel Address: 315 44t~ Avenue N.E. Zoning: LB, Limited Business District Comprehensive Plan: C-Commercial Surrounding Zoning Zoning and Land Uses: North: LB South: LB East: R-2 West: R-2 Land Use North: Vacant - Residential South: Residential East: Residential West: Residential BACKGROUND Explanation o_f Request: The applicant requests a site plan approval to permit construction of a four unit, rental townhouse, mulfifamily building at 315 44t~ Avenue Northeast. Case Historv: The property has been vacant for an extended period of time. The lot had a residential structure on site which was demolished in the Spring of 2000. In 1998 and 1999 a number of requests were submitted for City approvals, most notable was submitted by Casey's General Store, which was denied due to noise and traffic concerns. The owner has verbal agreement from the property owner to the north to sell the property and a purchase agreement has been prepared and forwarded for signature. After closing, the owner will separate the northernmost lot (40 ft. by 119 ft.) from this parcel to be combined with the parcel to the north for development of a similar Case: 2000-0719 Page: 2 townhouse project. The applicant has submitted a revised plan by fax on July 6, 2000 which is a change fi.om the original site plan layout. The new plan shows a building footprint of 84 fi. by 48 fi. which includes four units of 28 fi. by 21 fi., each with an attached garage of 20 fi. by 20 fi., The original plan was 92 fi. by 44 fi. which did not meet required setback requirements. Both plans have been attached for your information. You will note that the revised submittal does not include a floorplan layout with elevation drawings, however, the applicant will have them available at the meeting for review. The units will have 1,176 sq. fi. of living space per unit on two floors of a split entry design. ANALYSIS Surrounding ProperS_: Surrounding property on the north, south, is zoned LB, Limited Business District and is residentially or vacant. Property to the east and west (of University Ave. and frontage road) is also used residentially. Technical Review: The Zoning Ordinance specifies that this proposal is a permitted use in the LB District as noted in Section 9.11 l(1)(d), which states that "Multiple family buildings [are permitted uses] subject to the lot area per family provisions of Section 9.110(4)." The revised proposal meets or exceeds the minimum yard and density requirements of the Zoning Ordinance as follows: Lot Width shall be at least 50 ft. - subject parcel meets this requirement; Minimum lot area shall be at least 6,000 sq. ft. - subject parcel meets this requirement with and without the proposed lot separation to the north. Front Yard Setback shall be 12 ft. - the proposed building will front on 44th Avenue N.E. as currently proposed and exceeds this requirement. With the lot separation, the front yard will be fronting on the University Avenue frontage road and the proposal will also exceed this requirement. The Side Yard Setback shall be 15 ft. and the Side Street Yard shall not be less than 10 ft. or the height of the structure measured fi.om the center of the public right-of-way, whichever is greater - the proposal will meet or exceed this requirement with a 20 ft. setback on the west property line. Rear Yard Setback shall be 20 ft. - the subject parcel meets this requirement. Parking requirements will be met as each unit includes a two stall attached garage which is 20 ft. by 20 ft. However, this is the minimum recommended size for a two stall garage. Compliance with City Comprehensive Plan: The 1992 City Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a future redevelopment area as a Case #: 2000-0719 Page: 3 potential light rail transit development influence area.. However, development of light rail transit in the immediate future is not likely given fiscal and competitive constraints. The Land Use Plan shows this area for development of a LRT station with medium density residential immediately to the north (see attached). One goal of the land use and redevelopment plan is to protect the nearby residential neighborhoods, in addition the plan promotes the rehabilitation of existing development in the City. The proposal will not negatively impact any nearby residential areas and will provide an appropriate aesthetic improvement to the former, vacant residential use, so the proposal may be considered to be consistent with that portion of the City Comprehensive Plan. The new Comprehensive Plan designates this are as Transit Oriented Development. As such, "a higher percentage of service-oriented commercial/retail development will be necessary with high-density residential development providing the balance of the development. Permitting this development to go forward will likely necessitate any transit development to the south side of this intersection or another of the identified sites along the corridor. Summa~: Positive aspects of this proposal are as follows: · The proposal is an opportunity to meet the identified need for more townhouse and condominium style housing in the City. · The proposal will provide an opportunity to enhance University Avenue, the tax base will be increased, and the community image will be improved. Negative aspects of this proposal are as follows: 1) The proposal will remove a potential site in the City for a LRT station which is identified in the Comprehensive Plan. CONCLUSION Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the site plan to allow the construction of a four unit, rental townhouse multifamily building at 315 44th Avenue Northeast in the LB, Limited Business District subject to more formal review of the revised plan submittal at the meeting. Recommended Motion: Move to approve the site plan request to allow a 84 fi. by 48 fi., four unit rental townhouse multifamily building at 315 44th Avenue Northeast in the LB, Limited Business District. Attachments: Area map; ca}..~ ...... e~--'-"-- ........ ,,, applicant correspondence; elevation drawings; ~-" '--~ "' ' 1_ 1! .... ' ,° Pz2000-0719 315 44th Address Book N!~ 1/4 Section 35 i! i ! iii: !4432 ! 4433 !~ ~*~.4408 ~44!Z ~'*-'~ ~~: 4343 ~~: --~ ~4~ ~ ~ ~ : 4318 ~ !4323~ ~4255 ii~ ' 4225 ~4~4 ; I ~i;~ ! 44iZ: I 43~i! 405:1.; '1 [ ; ~IOt~ 4055 4042 ! C0~4051 ;!4050 , ! : ',!4rl~p~ , j Projecir~,ne. AI:)OEK:X3KAF~i P~ojeOi~n~: CVSISDATA~EOTS Develop~fo~Goiu.t~,al-~s(Tr~GiyJ<xntPowss)byPlanS~, LLC. FROM : THE PM$ GROUP PHONE NO. : 612 315 5916 ~ul. ~6 2800 ~8:31PM P1 PMJ GROUP, INC PO Box 4:1243 BrOoklyn Park, Mlq 5544:i IBOncl]Vl To: Ken Anderson F~: 612-706-3671 Fram: Mike Iuaire 0ale: 07/06/00 ~: Come.on Proj~ P~: ....... :,....., ...~,.. · i.,:i~,' i reduoed thc overaU megm ofthe tamoing, mm mcrcasm mc oqan. r-a~ unit will '/'::':'::' '": ":' "' '~ --:,~i~,.x 28', fo~ a tmal of 1176 ~q. R o[tiving spaoc oa the two ~veas. I've made .......... ~o~ submimd next week. l~Me ~evigw d~c s~c ptan and call mc at 612_382-0704 with yom. a, O~ o' o~ /' I hO}l~.lV _--]OVN I V}I(] = ,, ) 'A--ti_--} (l_--ISOdO[Id ~ ~ I :'1:1 -I hi I " ~OOqa INB~BS¥8 'ON 's'q" z L~ 0,9 0,9 0 I ,,0, Og Z '<:C __1 EL Z 0 Z O 0 ~D 0 tY C) Z --J Z / n~ 0 0 _.J ._J J r~ 13_ Z Z © © Z © CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40TH AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421-3878 (612) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: TO: FROM: RE: July 7, 2000 Tom Ramsdell, Chair Ted Yehle, Commissioner Kevin Hanson, Commissioner Stephen W. Johnson, Commissioner Tammera Ericson, Commissioner Kathryn Pepin, Secretary Set August Meeting Date The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission is Tuesday, August 1, 2000 (see attached). Because of the National Night Out, the Planning and Zoning Commission can reschedule their meeting date. The alternate date is Tuesday, AugustS, 2000. This meeting would still be held before the City Council meeting of August 14, 2000. Staffis requesting the Commission discuss the possible alternate date, and, if they so choose, make a motion changing the meeting date. Recommended Motion: Move to schedule the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission for the month of August on August 8, 2000. THE CItY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION Of SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER SCHEDULE OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DEADLINES Planning and Zoning Commission Meetin§ Date January 4, 2000 February 1, 2000 March 7, 2000 April 4, 2000 May 2, 2000 June 6, 2000 July 11, 2000 August 8, 2000 September 12, 2000 October 3, 2000 November 14, 2000 December 5, 2000 January 9, 2001 Application Deadline December 10, 1999 January 14, 2000 February 11, 2000 March 17, 2000 April 14, 2000 May' 19, 2000 June 16, 2000 July 14, 2000 August 18, 2000 September 15, 2000 October 20, 2000 November 17, 2000 December 10, 2000 Public Hearing Notice Mailinq Date December 22 January 21 February 18 March 24 April 21 May 28 June 23 July 21 August 25 September 22 October 27 November 24 December 22 Deliver A§enda December 29 January 28 February 25 March 31 April 28 June 2 June 30 July 28 September 1 September 29 November 3 December 1 December 29 *Subject to change. Lotsplit ReZoning Conditional Use Permit Variance PLANNING AND ZONING FEE SCHEDULE 9150- Residential 9250-Commercial/Industrial 9500 9100 9 20 Filing Fee 75- Residential 100- Commerical/Industrial Appeal Site Plan Review P.U.D. Plat R.L.S. 8100 9150 8250 8250 3100 MEMBERS Tom Ramsdell, Chair CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS KT::;eHhla:s°n Stephan Johnson 590 40TH AVENUE N.I='., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421 -;3878 (612) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 DsnielShsttuck PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES July ! !, 2000 The July 11, 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was called to order by at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Ramsdell. Members present were Shattuck, Johnson, Yehle and Ramsdell. Commissioner Hanson was not present. Aisc present were Tim Johnson {City Planner), Kathryn Pepin {Secretary to the Planning and Zoning Commission), and Ken Anderson (Community Development Director). MOTION by Yehle, seconded by Shattuck, to approve the minutes from the meeting of June 6, 2000 as presented in writing. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. NEW BUSINESS Ac Public Hearing Conditional Use Permit Case//2000-0717 Olive Tree Deli Re: 3700 Central Ave. Columbia Heights, Mn. Mr. Johnson presented the request of the Olive Tree Deli for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review to allow for the current Olive Tree Grocery and Deli at 3700 Central Avenue N.E. above to provide seating as a restaurant at the current site. Information on the menu items and additional hours of operation have not yet been provided. He added that they are proposing 24 seats for dining. He informed the Commission that the surrounding property to the north and east is zoned as RB, Retail Business, and is used commercially. The property to the west is zoned as R-3 and is used residentially. The property to the south is in Minneapolis. Mr. Johnson stated that according to Section 9.112{2) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance, a Conditional Use Permit is required if the proposed use contains a restaurant, cafe, tea room, bar, prepared food outlets subject to Section 9.116(15) and Prepared Food Delivery Establishments as such establishments are defined in Section 9.103(63). He stated that the applicant is not proposing any physical changes to the exterior of the building. However, there will be some interior modifications necessary to establish seating for twenty-four (24) persons. These improvements are subject to review and approval by the Building Official, Fire Department, and the Anoka County Health Department. Mr. Johnson stated that the Minimum Yard and Density Requirements are as follows: The floor-area-ratio within the "CBD" District shall not exceed 1.0. This requirement appears to be met after staff review. THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 2 Lots shall have a minimum frontage of forty (40) feet. This lot has approximately one hundred twelve (112) feet of frontage. This frontage meets ordinance requirements. Front Yard setback shall be fifteen (15) feet. The structure is not in compliance, but the structure is a legal non-conforming building. The rear yard setback shall be ten (10) feet, with the existing structure meeting this requirement. No side yard setback required. Lot width required is fifty (50) feet. The lot width is one hundred twelve (112) feet. No structure shall exceed three stories or thirty-five (35) feet in height. No exterior changes are planned. He stated that the building is in compliance. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that the Zoning Ordinance requires that restaurants provide at least one space for each three seats based on capacity design per each thirty-five (35) square feet of gross floor area. According to the floor plan, there are 24 seats proposed for restaurant use. He noted that the proposed parking lot configuration identifies 23-plus spaces on-site, one of which is handicap accessible. However, he stated that the site plan submitted showing the parking lot layout will need to be adjusted to allow for a walkway or five foot area between the parking lot and the building. The front parking lot stalls shown on the site plan submitted need to be adjusted to allow for curbino and sidewalk access to the building. However, by reducing the available amount of parking space for sidewalk and pedestrian access, the vehicle access lane is also reduced to less than twenty (20) feet. There is currently no requirement in the Zoning Ordinance referring to a minimum access lane width. He felt that this could be problematic for large vehicles pulling in and out of the proposed spaces. Mr. Johnson added that landscaping of 200 square feet is also required for off-street parking areas that accommodate twenty-one (21) spaces or more in the Retail Business District. This landscaping could be provided if the parking stalls closest to Central Avenue were removed from the plan. This adjustment appears to be able to provide for enough stalls to meet parking requirements. The facilities for off-street loading are required to maintain a twenty-foot distance from centerline of the alley to first floor foundation. The loading space proposed meets and exceeds this requirement. However, the loading space needs to be adjusted to meet the minimum 12 by 25 foot loading space requirement. The site plan appears to be able to accommodate this adjustment, but one space would need to be widened. Solid waste material is required to be so located and fenced as to be removed from public view and shall be kept in an enclosed building or properly contained in a closed container for such purposes. An enclosed dumpster area has been provided at the rear of the building. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that the City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for commercial use. One goal of the Land Use and Redevelopment Plan is to improve the commercial viability of the Central Avenue corridor while protecting nearby residential neighborhoods, and the plan promotes the rehabilitation of existing PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 3 development land within the City. The proposal will not negatively impact any nearby residential areas and will be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. Discussion was held regarding the parking lot layout. Chairperson Ramsdell felt that the twenty foot area between parking spaces would be sufficient for circulation of traffic. He asked if staff had considered diagonal parking. Ken Anderson stated that with diagonal parking you would gain aisle width but that would create difficulty with one- way traffic and ingress and egress to the site. He added that he would like to see the width of drive aisles addressed in the new Zoning Code and that they be dependent upon the style of parking space design. Commissioner Shattuck asked Staff for the section of the Zoning Code that requires parking lot curbing and sidewalk area. He also inquired if landscaping could be provided anywhere on the site. Mr. Johnson stated that parking lot requirement could be found in Section 9.116(3)(e). Mr. Anderson stated that the landscaping was suggested in the front area of the site because the Retail Business Section of Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of a fifteen foot front yard. At this site that fifteen foot front yard area could be utilized to fulfill the 200 square feet of landscape requirement. Commissioner Shattuck felt that the current arrangement of bumper curbs have served the purpose and intent of the ordinance thus far and felt that the same could be allowed for this proposed business. He suggested that the bumper curbs be set a minimum of five feet from the building to allow for room to keep vehicles from hitting the building. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. Nancy King of 3717 Van Buren Street was present to inform the Commission of the problem with garbage in the area since someone removed the garbage container that was adjacent to the bus bench along 37th Avenue and the "bus bench was moved into the sidewalk area so you can't even walk on the sidewalk". She further stated that the newspaper boxes that offer free papers are in the same location and these papers are often left on the bus bench and then blow around the area and cause problems. Mr. Anderson stated that he would check with the Public Works Department and Metro Transit to see who the garbage container belonged to and if it could be reinstalled. Mohamed of the Olive Tree Deli and Grocery also stated that they would work with the City to have the garbage resolved either by providing a container or emptying the container periodically. Chairperson Ramsdell closed the public hearing as no one else was present to speak regarding this case. Motion by Yehle, seconded by Shattuck, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow the Olive Tree Grocery and Deli to provide seating as a restaurant, subject to the following conditions: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 4 All required state and local codes, permits, licenses and inspections will be met and in full compliance. All screening requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for fencing and dumpster enclosure shall be in compliance. Parking lot site plan shall be resubmitted and be in substantial compliance with the Zoning Ordinance before restaurant seating is allowed, including handicap parking stall. Landscaping of 200 square feet needs to be incorporated into the revised site plan. Loading areas shall meet ordinance requirements and be accessible. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion Passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE JULY 24, 2000 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Public Hearing Variance Case #2000-0718 Danny R. Hunter 4328 N.E. 2"" St. Columbia Heights, Mn Mr. Johnson presented the request of Mr. Hunter for a 0.4 foot side yard setback variance to allow for the construction of a second story addition and a 12 foot by 24 foot addition onto the rear of the house at 4328 N.E. 2"d Street. He stated that Section 9.108(4) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance requires that any part of a principal structure maintain a minimum five (5) foot setback from the side yard property line. He explained that the request is to allow for the new addition to encroach .4 feet into the five (5) foot setback in order to line up with the outside wall of the existing house. He informed the Commission that the surrounding property to the north, south, east and west is zoned R-2, One and Two Family Residential District and is used residentially. There are three lots across the alley fronting on Main Street, and just south of this property which are zoned as R-3. Gauvitte Park also abuts the residential properties to the east. He explained that, according to Section 9.108(4) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance, a variance is required for this addition in that it would encroach .4 feet into the five (5) foot required side yard setback area. The Minimum Yard requirements for the site are as follows: No structural building shall exceed three stories or 35 feet which ever is the lesser in height. This structure is less than 35 feet. A side yard abutting an adjacent parcel is five (5) feet. The existing house was built at 4.60 feet from the side yard property line at the closest point. The proposed addition would be a continuation of the existing house to the west, as the addition would be approximately 12 feet by 24 feet. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 5 The existing front yard setback is 17.0 feet from the property line. The zoning ordinance requires 25 feet, with the proposed addition not infringing on this setback. The other side yard setback is at twelve (12) feet including the proposed addition, with the requirement being five (5) feet. The rear yard setback is at approximately sixty-eight (§8) feet, with the required setback being at least thirty (30) feet. Any lot less than 6,500 square feet may have a lot coverage of up to 35%. The lot coverage will be approximately 27% which meets this requirement. The primary purpose of the requested variance appears to be in matching with the setback of the existing structure on the north property line at approximately 4.8 feet. Mr. Johnson reminded the Commission that Section 9.105(3)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance states the following: "In recommending a variance, it shall be found that by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of lot or where by reason of exceptional topography, soil conditions, tree number or location or water conditions the owner of such lot would have an undue hardship in using his lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the rules of the zoning district." In order for a variance to be granted, hardship needs to be established. Circumstances unique to the individual property in question need to be established. It was Mr. Johnson's opinion that, according to the definition of hardship provided in the Zoning Ordinance, it appears that there is no hardship shown as to why the applicants cannot meet the minimum five (5) foot setback requirement. It was his opinion that addition could be built so that a variance would not be necessary. He felt that there did not appear to be any legitimate reasons, in relation to variance standards, whereby staff could recommend approval of this request to the Commission. The proposed addition could be shortened up by a few inches and still meet requirements, but the new addition would probably jog a bit from the existing side walls. However, he stated that the common sense approach would be to match the addition up with the walls of the existing structure. This approach would entail allowing for the new addition including the second story to encroach a few inches into the setback. Mr. Johnson also cited Section 9.104(3)(j) of the Zoning Ordinance which addresses increasing the outside perimeter of non-conforming structures. This section would allow the addition as it will improve the livability of the structure provided a variance is obtained. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. Dan Hunter of 4328 N.E. 2"~ Street was present. Commissioner Shattuck asked Mr. Hunter what year his house was built. Mr. Hunter responded that the house was built in 1928 and it was built at a slight angle to the property line as shown by the survey he had submitted. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 6 Commissioner Shattuck suggested that the hardship would be the initial construction of the house not being properly located and constructed on the lot or the lack of setbacks and inspections in 1928. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Hunter if the rear porch was proposed to be removed. Mr. Hunter responded that the rear porch would be removed in place of the proposed addition. Motion by Ramsdell, seconded by Yehle, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the 0.4 side yard setback as it will not extend beyond the existing structure setback, would increase the livability of the structure and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE JULY 24, 2000 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. C. Site Plan Review Mike Juaire Case #2000-071§ RE: 315 N.E. 44th Ave. 4417 University Ave. Mr. Anderson presented the request of Mike Juaire for a site plan approval to permit construction of a four unit, rental townhouse, multifamily building at 315 N.E. 44th Avenue. He informed the Commission that the property has been vacant for an extended period of time. The lot had a residential structure on site which was demolished in the Spring of 2000. In 1998 and 1999 a number of requests were submitted for City approvals, most notable was submitted by Casey's General Store, which was denied due to noise and traffic concerns. The owner has verbal agreement from the property owner to the north to sell the property and a purchase aoreement has been prepared and forwarded for signature. After closing, the owner will separate the northernmost lot (40 ft. by 119 ft.) from this parcel to be combined with the parcel to the north for development of a similar townhouse project. The applicant has submitted a revised plan by fax on July §, 2000 which is a change from the original site plan layout. The new plan shows a building footprint of 84 ft. by 48 ft. which includes four units of 28 ft. by 21 ft., each with an attached garage of 20 ft. by 20 ft. The original plan was 92 ft. by 44 ft. which did not meet required setback requirements. He added that both plans were provided for the Commissioners information. He distributed revised floor plan layouts with elevation drawings. The units will have 1,176 sq. ft. of living space per unit on two floors of a split entry design. Mr. Anderson informed the Commission that the surrounding property on the north and south is zoned LB, Limited Business and is used residentially or is vacant. The property to the east and west of University Ave. and the frontage road is also used residentially. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 7 Section 9.111 (1)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance specifies that this proposal is a permitted use in the LB District subject to the lot area per family provisions of Section 9.110(4)." He stated that the revised proposal meets or exceeds the minimum yard and density requirements of the Zoning Ordinance as follows: Lot Width shall be at least 50 ft. The subject parcel meets this requirement; Minimum lot area shall be at least 6,000 sq. ft. The subject parcel meets this requirement with and without the proposed lot separation to the north. Front Yard Setback shall be 12 ft. The proposed building will front on 44th Avenue N.E. as currently proposed and exceeds this requirement. With the lot separation, the front yard will be fronting on the University Avenue frontage road and the proposal will also exceed this requirement. The Side Yard Setback shall be 15 ft. and the Side Street Yard shall not be less than 10 ft. or the height of the structure measured from the center of the public right-of-way, whichever is greater. The proposal will meet or exceed this requirement with a 20 ft. setback on the west property line. Rear Yard Setback shall be 20 ft. The subject parcel meets this requirement. Mr. Anderson stated that the parking requirements will be met as each unit includes a two stall attached garage which is 20 ft. by 20 ft. which is the minimum recommended size for a two stall garage. He informed the Commission that the 1992 City Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a future redevelopment area as a potential light rail transit development influence area.. However, development of light rail transit in the immediate future is not likely given fiscal and competitive constraints. The Land Use Plan shows this area for development of a LRT station with medium density residential immediately to the north. One goal of the land use and redevelopment plan is to protect the nearby residential neighborhoods. In addition, the plan promotes the rehabilitation of existing development in the City. The proposal will not negatively impact any nearby residential areas and will provide an appropriate aesthetic improvement to the former, vacant, residential use, therefore, the proposal may be considered to be consistent with that portion of the City Comprehensive Plan. He further stated that the new Comprehensive Plan designates this area as Transit Oriented Development. As such, "a higher percentage of service-oriented commercial/retail development will be necessary with high-density residential development providing the balance of the development". Permitting this development to go forward will likely necessitate construction of any transit development to the south side of this intersection or another of the identified sites along the corridor. Commissioner Yehle asked the applicant Mr. Juaire why the townhouses were proposed to be rental and not ownership. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 8 Mr. Juaire stated that ownership requires a PUD and he wanted to proceed with the development as soon as possible. He stated that he has a long term plan to establish income property adding that he currently owns housing in Fridley, Moundsview and Brooklyn Park. He stated that this building is the first stage of his plan. After the Iotsplit and combination of property to the north is completed, he will propose a second four unit building. Commissioner Yehle asked Mr. Juaire where the proposed rent will be set. Mr. Juaire responded that the rent will be approximately $1,000 a month. Discussion was held regarding the exterior design of the proposed building in respect to the roof line and lack of windows to provide natural light, ventilation and visual aesthetics. Mr. Juaire stated that central air conditioning will be provided in all units and the lack of windows would provide privacy. Motion by Shattuck, seconded by Johnson, to approve the site plan request to allow a 84 ft. by 48 ft., four unit rental townhouse multifamily building at 315 N.E. 44"' Avenue in the LB, Limited Business District. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. STAFF REPORTS: A. Discussion was held regarding rescheduling the August 1, 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting as it is scheduled for the same day as National Night Out. Motion by Ramsdell, seconded by Yehle, to reschedule the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on August 8, 2000. Voice Vote: All Ayes. B. Mr. Anderson presented an update on a number of items in process within the City. He informed the Commission that the NEI proposal was presented to the City Council in June and was scheduled for a second reading on July 10, 2000 but was delayed to allow the PUD terms to be agreed to by NEI and the city. He presented an update of the proposed Puerto Vallerta Restaurant proposed at 3800 Central Avenue. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan was submitted to the Metropolitan Council on June 30, 2000 for their review. A meeting was held this day with the Joint Task Force of Columbia Heights and Fridley regarding requests for proposal for a Land Use Planning and Marketing Consultant adding that Tom Ramsdell was appointed Vice Chair of this Committee. Motion by Yehle, seconded by Johnson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 a.m. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. Secretary to the Planning and Zoning Commission