Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 1, 2001CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (763) 706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692 Visit Our Website at: www. ci. colurnbia-heights, rnn. us MEMBERS Tom Ramsdell, Chair Donna Schmitt Ted Yehle Stephen W. Johnson Tarnrnera Ericson PLANNINO AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. TUESDAY, MAY 1, 2001 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 590 N.E. 40TH AVENUE Roll Call Minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of April 3, 2001. New Business: A. Public Hearing Variances Case #2001-0507 Richard L. Abraham 3954 Arthur St. N.E. Columbia Heights, Mn. B. Site Plan Review Case #2001-0508 PMJ Group, Inc. RE: 4301 N.E. 3~a St. 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: 2001-0201 Page: 1 Case #: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE MAY 1, 2001 MEETING 2001-0508 GENERAL INFORMATION Owner: Address: Mike Juaire PMJ Group, Inc. PO Box 43243 Brookly Park, MN 55443 (763) 382-0704 Applicant: Same Parcel Address: 4301 3~a Street N.E. Zoning: R-3, Multiple Family District Comprehensive Plan: High Density Residential Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: Zoning North: R-3 South: R-3 East: R-3 West: R-3 Land Use North: Residential South: Residential East: University Avenue West: Residential BACKGROUND Explanation of Request: The applicant requests site plan approval to permit construction of a four unit, rental townhouse, multi-family building at 4301 3a Street Northeast. The submitted plans show a building footprint of 70 fi. by 42fi. which includes 1,245 square feet of living space for units 1 and 2, and 1,295 square feet of living space for units 3 and 4. Each unit includes two bedrooms, and furnished appliances. You will find attached a narrative describing the project proposal as well as elevation drawings, and floor plans for these four two level townhouse units. Case Histo~_ : There is no case history on this property as it has been vacant for an extended period of time. PMJ Group has purchased the property which measures 110 X 110 and intends to build a new construction 4-plex similar to the 4-plexes formerly approved on 44~ and University Avenue. Case: 2001-0201 Page: 2 ANALYSIS Surrounding Property: Surrounding property on the north, south, and west is zoned R-3 (Multi-Family District) and is used residentially. Property to the east is University Avenue. Technical Review: The Zoning Ordinance specifies that this proposal is a permitted use in the R-3 Multi-Family District as noted in Section 9.109(1)(b), which states that "Multiple family buildings [are permitted uses] subject to the lot area per family provisions of Section 9.109(4)(5)." The revised proposal meets and exceeds the minimum yard and density requirements of the Zoning Ordinance as follows: Lot Width shall be at least 80 ft. - subject parcel exceeds this requirement with a lot width of 110 feet. Minimum lot area shall be at least 10,000 sq. ft. - subject parcel exceeds this requirement with 12,188 square feet. Total lot coverage of the primary building and accessorY structures is 30%. Front Yard Setback shall be 30 ft. - building proposed is at the minimum 30 foot setback. The Side Yard Setback shall be 10 ft. - the proposal will exceed this requirement with 20 foot setbacks from both property lines. Rear Yard Setback shall be 20 ft. - the subject parcel exceeds this requirement with a 38 foot setback. The front fagade area as recommended in the proposed ordinance requires a minimum of 20% of the fi'ont fagade area facing a street to be doors or windows in residential areas - This proposal covers 21% of the front faqade area, meeting the requirements of the proposed ordinance. Parking requirements will be met as each unit includes a two-stall garage which is 20 ft. by 20 ft. This is the minimum recommended size for a two stall garage. The proposal includes two units, each with a two-car attached garage, and two units each with a two-car detached garage. Compliance with City Comprehensive Plan: The new Comprehensive Plan designates this area as medium and high density residential. The residential 4-plex proposal is consistent with the surrounding residential area, so the proposal is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. Positive aspects of this proposal are as follows: · The proposal is an opportunity to meet the identified need for more upscale rental townhouse and condominium style housing in the City. · The proposal will provide an opportunity to enhance the surrounding residential Case #: 2001-0201 Page: 3 area, the tax base will be increased, and the community image will be improved. Negative aspects of this proposal are as follows: · None as identified CONCLUSION Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the site plan to allow the construction of a four-unit, rental townhouse multi-family building at 4301 3rd Street Northeast in the R-3 Multi-Family District.. Recommended Motion: Move to approve the site plan request to allow a 70 ft. by 42 ft., four-mt rental townhouse building at 4301 3~a Street Northeast in the R-3 Multi-Family District. Attachments: Site Plan; area map; completed application form; applicant narrative; elevation drawings; floor plan drawings. Pz2001-0508 4301 3~ St NE Case: 2001-0507 Page: 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE MAY 1, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING Case #: 2001-0507 Owner: Address: Phone: Parcel Address: 3954 Arthur Street NE Zoning: R-2, Single and Two- Family Residential Comprehensive Plan: LDR, Low Density Residential Richard Abraham 3954 Arthur Street NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 (763) 788-5309 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: SalTle Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: Zoning North: R-2 South: R-2 East: R-2 West: R-2 Land Use North: Residential South: Residential East: Residential West: Residential BACKGROUND Explanation of Request: This is a request for a 760 square foot variance from garage size and a three foot variance from garage height to allow the construction of a 30 foot by 40 foot (1200 sq. ft.) eighteen (18) foot high detached garage on the property at 3954 Arthur Street NE. Section 9.104(5) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance states that no accessory structures, including attached garages, or any combination of accessory structures shall exceed 1,000 square feet in area. Currently, there is 560 square feet of attached garage space on the property (3-car garage), and an additional 1200 square feet is proposed. Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance also requires that no accessory structure can exceed 15 feet in height, as measured to the highest point. Plans indicate that the proposed addition will be 18 feet in height which requires a 3 foot variance. As stated on the application and narrative attached, the purpose of the request is to provide additional space for auto, boat, motorcycle, and trailer parking, as well as to provide additional storage for other various items as listed in attached narrative. Case: 2001-0507 Page: 2 Case History: There are no pertinent zoning cases on the lot or in the surrounding area. ANALYSIS Surrounding ProperS_: The surrounding property to the north, south, east and west is zoned R-2, Single and Two-Family Residential, and is used residentially. Technical Review: Accessory structures are regulated under Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance. Requirements are as follows. · No accessory structure shall exceed the height of the principal structure or fifteen (15) feet, whichever is less - plans indicate that the proposed garage will be 18 feet to the highest point which requires a variance. However, the proposed zoning ordinance would allow for a garage height to be eighteen (18) feet. · No accessory structure or combination of accessory structures shall exceed 1,000 square feet - the proposed detached garage will be 40 feet wide by 30 feet deep (1200 square feet). The existing attached garage space is 560 square feet. The cumulative square footage for accessory structures on the property will be 1,760 square feet. · Any lot over 6,500 square feet in size may have a lot coverage of up to 30% - the lot coverage will be approximately 13% which meets this requirement. However, much of the lot is unbuildable because of the L shape configuration and its use as a driveway to access the property. · Detached accessory structures must be six (6) feet or more from the principal structure - the existing detached garage is approximately 50 feet away from the principal structure · Whenever a garage is designed so that the vehicle entry door is facing a street or alley, the distance between the door and the lot line shall be 20 feet or more - this requirement is not applicable as the garage doors would face the rear of the neighbors property. · Accessory structures shall be a minimum of 3 feet inside the side and rear lot lines as approved by the Building Official - the proposed detached garage would be 6 feet from the side lot line and 15 feet from the rear lot line. State Building Code requires any residential accessory structure exceeding 1,000 square feet to be more than five feet from any property line and not to allow any openings of any kind in that five foot area, including doors, windows, etc. 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. The real issue at hand is 'can this property be put to reasonable Case: 2001-0507 Page: 3 use under the controls of the ordinance?' Are the circumstances unique to the property in question in order to justify granting of this variance. As indicated in the attached narrative submitted by the applicant, the lot size is 22,000 + square feet with the proposed lot coverage at 13% if the garage is approved. The lot coverage isn't an issue. The property is unusually large for a City lot, and does have an unusual shape, but this hardship statement isn't applicable because the shape doesn't restrict the garage proposed. The proposed garage height is eighteen (18) feet, which is consistent with the proposed zoning ordinance. However, coupled with the fact that the proposed structure is 40 feet wide by 30 feet deep; the structure will be very large in size. As mentioned above, the applicant is proposing the detached structure to create additional space for auto/boat, miscellaneous storage. The applicant has stated that he does not intend to operate any business out of the garage. However, a garage of this size could be used in the future for some type of business operation. Please note that the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of two off-street parking spaces for single family dwellings, one of which shall be in a garage. In addition, Section 5A.207(1)(f) of the Housing Maintenance Code states: "Outside storage of articles, equipment, construction materials, items not designed for exterior use, and miscellaneous items, including but not limited to, lawn mowers and other lawn maintenance equipment shall not be allowed." Considering that there is a three-car attached garage on the property, the parking requirement has been met without the additional garage. The additional garage will provide storage for a minimum of four additional vehicles and then some. Please also note that the applicant has obtained the adjacent property owners signatures who have evidently give their written consent to this proposal. However, I have received a number of phone calls from the public notice sent, in opposition to this proposal. As mentioned above, hardship needs to be established for a variance to be granted. Section 9.105(3)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance also states that the Commission shall hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of this Ordinance in instances where their "strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and to recommend variances only when it is demonstrated that such action will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Ordinance". Section 1 of the Zoning Ordinance identifies the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Four of the purpose statements are identified below: · protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare; · dividing the City into zones and districts restricting and regulating therein the location, height, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and other open spaces, and the density and distribution of population; · providing adequate light, air, and convenience of access to property; and, Case: 2001-0507 Page: 4 · preventing overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures by regulating the use of land and buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land and buildings surrounding them. Staffis aware of two previous cases where a variance was granted to allow accessory structures in excess of the maximum allowed. The following briefly summarizes these cases. · Case 2000-0511; Planning Commission and City Council in May 2000 approved a request for Richard Kinnan at 819 49th Avenue NE for an eighteen foot high 864 square foot garage, with a variance of 824 square feet above the 1,000 square foot maximum allowed. However, staff had recommended denial due to lack of clear hardship and unreasonable use of the property. · Case 9807-34 was a variance of 2,072 square feet at 4015 Stinson Boulevard to allow the total square footage of all existing and proposed accessory structures on the lot to be 3,072 square feet. Unusual topography and potential loss of trees and shrubbery around the existing garage were identified as a hardship. At the time of the request, the property had the following accessory structures: One 462 square foot garage (21' x 22'); One 154 square foot shed (7' x 22'); and, a 576 square foot guest cabin. The proposal indicated a new two-level attached garage would be constructed, totaling 1,880 square feet (940 square feet per level). The applicant demonstrated that due to the topography on the lot a two story garage was necessary, or a large amount of fill would need to be brought in to elevate the main floor of the garage to the same level as the house. Also, if the existing accessory structures were required to be removed, there would be a substantial loss of existing trees and shrubbery on the subject parcel and adjacent property. Compliance with City Comprehensive Plan: The City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for future Low Density Residential Development. The proposal would not appear to impact the goals and objectives of the City Comprehensive Plan. However, staff has reservations about whether a garage of this size is reasonable in addition to an existing three-car attached garage. Summary: The positive aspects of this proposal are as follows: 1. The proposal will be built to match the house, will create additional space for auto/boat storage, and the proposal will also allow space for additional storage. The negative aspects of this proposal are as follows: 1. The proposal is in excess of the maximum square footage allowed for accessory structures. 2. The 30 foot by 40 foot structure will be as large as some surrounding homes. CONCLUSION Case: 2000-0507 Page: 5 Staff.Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the request because there does not appear to be a legitimate hardship on which to base approval of the size variance. The height variance alone is not in issue, but it certainly creates a much larger structure on a 30 X 40 foot proposal. It is staff's opinion that because minimum lot coverage and setback requirements will be met, the property would not be overcrowded, and adequate light, air, and convenient access to the property would be maintained, so the proposal seems consistent with the spirit and intent of the Ordinance. However, staff believes that the size variance requested is unreasonable and cannot recommend approval from a planning perspective. The applicant is allowed to build this garage at 20 feet by 22 feet without a variance, giving the applicant a total of five covered parking spaces. This would seem to be a much more reasonable proposal. A garage of this size in a single-family area could be considered a visual obtrusion for adjacent neighbors. Recommended Motions: Move to recommend City Council denial of the 760 square foot variance request because a legitimate hardship has not been established, and the property can be put to reasonable use under the provisions of the ordinance. Move to recommend City Council approval of the three (3) foot height variance as the proposal is consistent with the newly proposed height standard of eighteen (18) feet. Alternative Motion Recommending Approval: Move to recommend City Council approval of the three (3) foot height variance and the 760 square foot size variance at 3954 Arthur Street NE as circumstances of lot size are unique to the property in question, and the proposal is consistent with the spirit and intent of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance. Attachments: · Completed application form; Survey Site Plan; Narrative; Elevation View; Neighbor's signatures; and Public Notice CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS A_pplication For= Rezonin$ Variance~ Privacy Fence Cond£tional Use Permit Subdivision Approval Site Plan Approval Other 6. Zoning: Applicable City Ordinance Number Present ZoninEi -Section Proposed Zonin§ Present Use Proposed Use 9. Acknowledgment and SiKnature: The undersiTned 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 O..rdinancesno£ the City of Columbia Heights and the laws of the State__of Hin~o~a.~__/~'~ ~~ . Signature'of Applicant:~_~_3/~ Date: ' Taken By: i / f. .. 4040 4056 4030 4021 4020 4017 4011 4008 3988 3949 3936 5952 5926 3920 3916 3979 5974 3975 3970 3971 3964 5963 3958 3947 3948 5941 3944 5937 3938 3933 3934 5929 3930 5925 5919 3918 3912 5908 5904 5900 3850 3845 3839 3842 3836 3830 3820 3815 3813 5807 5810 3812 3804 3808 4042 4036 4028 4020 1925 129-~ ~ 50.0' ~° 6~0' ~.0' 79.0' I 65.3' o4 ~ ~ ~ ~ o 3991 ~ ' ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ o o 3985 ~ ~ ~ ~ 3967 ~ 59.54 3952 3955 3946 3947 3940 ,. 3939 ~ ',,~, ~ . , 3934 ~. 3928 . 3953 ~ 3927 ~ 3923 3916 ~ 3917 J 3910 ~ 3909 ~ 1853 '1818 1825 3901 I~ ?~'~* I 74.~' 60.~ 60.0*60.0' 59TH 2010 2018 ~ 4o45 4040 4039 4034 ~4o35 4028 4025 4020 [ 4017 4014 ~400g 4008 ~ 4001 4000 AVE ~3983, 5972 ~3977~ 3966~ 3971 3960 5965, 3952 3959~ [5955~ 5948~ 3947~ 5942 3941 ' 5936~ .~3935-~ 3930 [ 3929 3924 ~ 3919 3918 3912 ~ 3913 3906 ! 3915 ~ 3901 5900 4029 AVF ~ ~.21oo 21 /~2101/2' / ~.~' / ' 39 CITY OF C0LUHBIA HEIGHTS _Application For: Rezoning Variance Privacy Fence Conditional Use Permit Subdivision Approval Site Plan Approval Other Street Address of Subject Property, 2. Legal Description of Subject Property= 3. Applicant: 4. Owner: Phone: ~ i ~-- ~o - ~ ~ ~ ~ Phone, Description of Request: Zoning: Applicable City Ordinance Number Present Zoning Present Use Reason for Request= Section Proposed Zoning. Proposed Use ~hibits Submitted (maps, diagrams, etc.) Acknowledgment and $i~nature: The unders£sned hereby represents upon all of the penalties of law, for the purpose of inducin$ the City of Columbia He£shts 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 ~nnesota. ~, / From: Nk:haet P. 3ua,m To: Tim Jot~nsc~ Dam: 4,/101200! Time: 2:42:].,~ PM Paqe 5 of 5 .o .o ¢¢50 4457 4446 4440 4441 4436 445555 4432 4428 4427 4420 4421 4419 4416 4415 4412 4411 4408 4404 4401 4400 ~ 44TH 4357 4354 4353 455548 4347 455544 455541 4540 435557 4338 4333 4334 455529 4528 ~ 4524 ~ 455527 4322 ~ 4516 4315 4512 4309 4504 4301 4302 45RD 4258 4255 4254 4250 4249 4242 4243 4236 4229 4225 4224 4221 4217 4218 4213 4212 4207 4206 4200 t ~.~.ei' 42ND ~o 4157 4154 4151 4147 4146 4145 4159 4152 .~ 4133 h 4445 4444 4441 4440 4459 445556 4455 4432 4429 4424 4425 4421 4420 4417 4416 441 ,:3 4412 4409 4404 4405 4401 215 4445 4439 4433 4427 4421 4407 t 29.6' 4440 4436 4432 4426 4420 4416 4408 4404 4400 200 214 218 222 250 240 250 435~ 4343 4344 4330 4325 4333 4318 4319 4313 I fY' 4305 O_ 4304 4301 I,I ~-- 4300 4259 4253 4247 4241 4242 425557 4233 4232 4221 4215 4200 ~ 4207 233 ~ 4201 241 AVE 4157 204 208 212 218 224 ~, 4171 4147 4137 ~ 4133 4141 4445 4441 4433 4429 4425 4421 4417 4411 ¢22. 4359 4351 4343 4337 4441 4433 4425 4417 315 4141 F~m: Michael P..lumre To: Tim Johnson Date: 412512001 Time: 8:04:4.6 AM Paqe 2 of 2 Memo Columbia Heights Planning Department Michael P. Juaire, Owner, PMJ GROUP, INC. Description of Proposed 4Plex Project at ~,~;7 U~:~_.,,i~; A;-c NE The Purpose of this memo is to describe a proposal for a new construction 4Plex project at 4301 3~ St. NE. presented by PMJ GROUP, INC. Buildinq description The plans for the 4Plex to be considered for this proposal were submitted 4/11/01. The 4Plex will have four Town house style units, each with their own entry, and the following features: Units 1 and 2 1,245 square feet of living space. 2 bedrooms 1 Bathroom Full Kitchen with range, dishwasher, and refrigerator Utility and Laundry Room with Furnace, Central Air, washer, and dryer 2 car tuck-under garage with automatic garage door openers Units 3 and 4 1,295 square feet of living space. 2 bedmorns 2 Bathrooms Full t~tchen with range, dishwasher, and refrigerator Utility and Laundry Room with Furnace, Central Air, washer, and dryer 2 car detached garage with automatic garage door openers Site Plan and Zoninfl Issues As shown in the site plan, the 4Plex will be positioned on 4301 3"~ St. NE with a 30 foot front yard, 20 fool side yards, and a 38 foot mar yard. The primary building will cover 24% of the lot area. The pdmary building and accessory buildings (detached garages) will cover 30% of the lot area. The window and door area on the front of the building covers 21% of the frontal area of the building. The front of the building contains ten 4lt. x aft. windows, two 5ff. x 4ft. windows, and two 3lt. x 80 in. entry doom. The building frontal area is 1155 sq. f. From: t4~chaet P..]uaim To: Tim Johr~sorl Date: 4/1012001 Time: 2:42:14 ~ Paqe 2. ors From: I~ichaet P. Jua~m To: T~n Johnson Dam: '~1L012001 Time: 2..:42:14 P~ Paqe 3 oft; Prom: M)chae( k'. Jua~re ~fo: llm Johnson Date: 4/10/2001 Time: 2:42:14 PM Pacle 4 of S -/~' Miller/Davis Co., St. Paul, MN--Form 1300 (1994; Rev. 1996; Rev. 1997; Rev. August 1997) M.S.B.A. Real Property Form No. 1 Minnesota Standard Residential Purchase Agreement PURCHASE AGREEMENT / PAGE 1 MINNESOTA STANDARD RESIDENTIAL PURCHASE AGREEMENT e Copyright 1996, 1997 by Minnesota State Bar Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota BEFORE YOU USE OR SIGN THIS CONTRACT, YOU SHOULD CONSULT WITH AN ATTORNEY TO DETERMINE THAT THIS CONTRACT ADEQUATELY PROTECTS YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS. Minnesota State Bar Association disclaims any liability arising out of the use of this form. ~,---,1 1. PARTIES. This Purchase Agreement is made on ~ 2001 · by and between 2 ' N. Hiller and Sharon E. Hille_~c.t~usband and wffe /maritalstatus! 3 of [seller's addressJ 1520 San Carlos Ba.L~._.~.~_. Sahibs1 isiand_z_.FL 33957 4 PHJ Grou Inc. , SELLER, and 5 x~4~Arygfi,dl~,k~a/jl~eT~x~ ]buyer's address] 6 7 , BUYER. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 2. OFFER/ACCEPTANCE. Buyer offers to purchase and Seller agrees to sell real property legally described a~: .on the attached Exhi bi t ^ [Property Tax Identification Number or Tax Parcel Number located at 4241m 4255~ 4301 Thfrd Street NE , City of Columbia Heights County of _^noka State of Minnesota, Zip Code 18 2 · 21 " ' 24 storm ~o ~ w,th · . . ' r , ,- , o,c, .eaters, n satin stov ' ' · . . 26 ullt-,n -,,, =,=uuu~;c air tilters, automatic ara 27 annas, .... a, Umuage olsposms, OUllt-ln trash compactors, built-in ovens and coo i 28 ..... +; ...... u ~ ~. . k ng stoves, hood fans, ~ntercoms, 3~., 31 32 33 · . g 35 . ' ie. 36 5. PRICE AND TERMS. The price for the real and personal property included in this sale is 37 _ One hundred forty seven thousand and nine hundred Dollars ¢$ 1~7~900.00 ), 38 which Buyer shall pay a.~Xe/Iou~[: as set: forth in the Contract: for Deed at:t:ached hereto as Exhibi~ B 39 40 Earnest money of $ _ 1~,790.00 by ICASH, CHECK· NOTE - state which) c,r-~ifi,,-I ~h,,r.t~ payable to 41 [select one:! 42 ~ Seller· to be deposited and held by Seller (and may be commingled with Seller's other funds) pending closing, 43 Seller's lawyer· to be deposited and held in the lawyer's trust account pending closing, 44 Seller's broker· to be deposited or held by broker according to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes· 45 Other [describe how the earnest money will be he/d] 46 47 receipt of which is hereby acknowledged ands , 48 the balance of $_ cash, on 49 by financing as shown on the attached Financing Addendum. 50 8. DEED/MARKETABLE TITLE. Upon performance by Buyer, Seller shall execute and deliver a 51 in by spouse, if any, conveying marketable title of record, subject to: 52 A. Building and zoning laws, ordinances, state and federal regulatione; 53 B. Restrictions relating to use or improvement of the real property without effective forfeiture provisions; 54 C. Reservation of any mineral rights by the State of Minnesota; 55 D. Utility and drainage easements which do not interfere with existing improvements; 56/,~. Exceptions to title which constitute encumbranc . ~-~ .... es, restrictions, or easements which have been disclosed to Buyer and accepted by Buyer -,, ~n th~s Purchase Agreement [must be specified in writing]: 58 59 7. REAL ESTATE TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. Real estate taxes due and payable in and for the year of closing shall be pro- , the DATE OF CLOSING, and Warranty Deed· joined 60 rated between Seller and Buyer on a calendar year basis to the actual Date of Closing_ urd-a- ~;h~-~ ~~N.-REeEIPT--~F CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Date: April 25, 2001 To: City Council Members From: Tim Johnson, City Planner Re: Zoning and Development Ordinance As you are aware, the City Council has set up a work session for April 30, 2001, to review the proposed Zoning and Development Ordinance. The City Council formerly received a copy of a highlights section pertaining to important or significant changes proposed in the new ordinance as was presented to the public at the open house on March 6, 2001. The purpose of this overview is to give you a better understanding of each section of the proposed ordinance, and to briefly mention some of the changes that are being made in this rewrite process. As a whole the existing Zoning Ordinance and the proposed Zoning and Development Ordinance are quite similar in nature as indicated in this overview. There are some unique aspects of the proposed ordinance that are entirely new or have been rewritten in order to maintain consistency and accuracy. However, it has been quite difficult to track each individual change or to try to explain how and why certain sections have changed. This is especially true considering that staff and planning consultants who formerly worked on the project are no longer available to provide insight on certain sections. Herein is a section by section overview: Section 1: Purpose, Authority, and Jurisdiction There are no substantial changes to note in this section as compared with the existing ordinance. The intent and purpose section is substantially consistent with the existing Zoning Ordinance. Section 2: Rules of Construction There are no substantial changes to note in this section as compared with the existing ordinance. Additional language has been added to clarify the rules of construction. Section 3: Definitions This section is substantially similar to the existing ordinance with the addition of several new terms, and expanded language designed to provide clarification and to eliminate any confusion for the reader. Section 4: Administration And Enforcement This section outlines the required procedures for the administration of this ordinance as well as the duties of officials and boards. This section is essentially the same as the existing ordinance with quite a bit more detail and explanation of the required process. A Development Review Committee designation has been added to this ordinance 9.402(3), which identifies applicable staff who have the responsibility of reviewing plans and plats for conformance with the ordinance. Section 9.409 has been added which would allow the Planning Commission to hold a public heating for the vacation of any public street, alley, or other public right-of-way. The City Council then makes the final decision on this matter. This process is typical for many cities. Section 5: Non-Conformities This section is essentially the same as the existing ordinance and mirrors other cities non- conformity sections. However, City staff and the Planning Commission recommended an exception to the section Damaged or Destroyed 9.502(9), and 9.503(5) that would allow for some property owners along 40th Avenue who own non-conforming homes in the Limited Business District to rebuild their home if destroyed by fire or natural causes, not to exceed the building footprint. This provision would allow for these owners to be able to refinance on their homes, or allow for any future buyer of these homes to obtain affordable financing. This provision was suggested because the residential properties along this stretch are the majority, even though the district has a number of commercial buildings as well. Section 6: General Development Standards This section was created to provide some consistency, as the existing ordinance standards are brief, in no particular order and provide very little detail or description. This section needed to be revamped, as certain standards were lacking proper sequence. The new section incorporates: · Expanded lot controls 9. 602. Consistent with lot provisions from existing ordinance; · Accessory structure requirements 9. 603, with highlighted changes as indicated on the highlights pages; · Home occupation requirements 9. 603(3) which are essentially the same as the existing requirements; · Requirements for outdoor swimmingpools and courts 9.603(5). Consistent with industry standards; · Dwelling structure requirements 9. 604. With highlighted changes as indicated on the highlights pages; · Fencing requirements 9.605. Which are currently a supplement to the Zoning Ordinance and have inconsistencies, the proposed requirements mirror the existing requirements; · Temporary uses and structure requirements 9. 607. These are typical provisions used in many cities; · Expanded performance standards section 9. 608. Designed to protect and enhance land use; Essentially the same as the former requirements; · The storm water management section 9. 609 has been added to the new ordinance by City Engineer Kevin Hansen (see overview); · Land alteration requirements 9.610. Consistent with other cities ordinances; · Exterior lighting standards 9. 611. Highlighted changes are indicated in the highlights pages, a lighting specialist was consulted in conjunction with making the recommended changes in footcandle measurements; · Off-Street Parking and Loading 9. 612. The proposed requirements are substantially similar to the existing ordinance, although we have proposed to add a minimum driveway aisle width of 24 feet to the proposed ordinance, which is an industry standard. The proposed requirements are easier to read as they have been put in a table format. Some other changes to make note of include a requirement of 2 covered parking spaces for single-family, two-family, and multi-family units, as the existing ordinance requires a minimum of one covered parking stall for each use. The Planning Commission looked at the off-street parking table as provided by our planning consultant, and believed it to be reasonable and consistent with industry standards. (See also highlights section for off-street parking surfaces); · Landscaping & Screening 9.613. This section has been added. The landscaping standards proposed are necessary as the existing ordinance doesn't really address minimum landscaping standards aside from screening. The landscaping and screening standards proposed are based on industry standards. A proposed requirement to make note of is that a landscape plan is required for all new commercial, industrial, institutional, or multi-family development. There are also minimum plant materials and minimum size standards for plantings in the proposed ordinance. See highlights section for highlighted landscaping standards proposed; · Building Design Standards 9. 614. This section is brand new as the existing ordinance did not spell out any criteria for building materials or design in residential, commercial, or industrial areas. The proposed ordinance would not allow for pole structures, and would help tremendously to dress up our commercial and industrial districts for any new construction. This section will probably be most beneficial to the city as we look to aesthetically enhance front facades. Refer also to highlights section for highlighted standards added to the proposed ordinance; · Telecommunications 9.615. Refer to separate Tower Siting Ordinance # 1424; · Sign Regulations 9. 616. Although this section has been rewritten, the content is substantially similar to the existing ordinance, with a few revisions and updated standards as addressed in the highlights section. It should be noted that we have proposed to eliminate the permit process for temporary signage because of the tremendous amount of staff time it takes to process these permits for short time periods, and the difficulty in enforcing the timelines imposed; Section 7: Specific Development Standards This section is completely new and has been written in order to establish specific supplemental development standards that will be applicable to certain land uses. The uses listed in this section are accompanied by industry standards that seem applicable in order to determine the feasibility of the project, and to also provide for a quality project. A number of these uses are identified in the highlights section provided. The criteria for certain uses proposed is identified in this section and is required to be met. Section 8: General District Provisions This section is consistent with the existing ordinance in which it identifies the division of the City into certain Zoning Districts. Section 9: Residential Districts Table 9.903 has been added to easily identify lot dimensions, height, and bulk requirements for the residential districts. The only substantive changes being considered have been identified in the highlights section. R-1 This section has been written in order to preserve and enhance our single-family districts. The list of permitted and conditional uses are essentially the same as the existing ordinance, with the deletion of some conditional uses. Residential care facilities and daycare facilities are allowed per statute. R-2 This section is nearly identical to the existing ordinance with reference to permitted and conditional uses. However, churches and schools would be considered a conditional use rather than a permitted use. R-3 This section is essentially the same with motels, hospitals, clubs and lodges, and manufactured homes no longer allowed in this district. R-4 This section is essentially the same with funeral homes, offices, clinics, retail sales, motels, and hospitals no longer allowed in this district. Section 10: Commercial Districts There are three (3) commercial districts as identified by the proposed ordinance. The item of substance to be noted is the change in title of the Retail Business (RB) District, to now be called General Business (GB) District. This change was brought about when the former consultant and former staff believed the general business district title more appropriately described our commercial areas. The Retail Business District title would be eliminated from the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map. Table 9.1003 has also been added to easily identify lot dimensions, height, and bulk requirements for the commercial districts. The regulations herein are similar to the former ordinance, with some minor changes. Limited Business District (LB) This district allows for the same type of limited retail sales and services for neighborhood convenience. However, some changes to make note of include: Religious facilities allowed as a conditional use; the existing ordinance did not permit them in this district. Hotels and motels are allowed as a conditional use; the existing ordinance permitted them; Laboratories are not allowed in this district; the existing ordinance allowed with a conditional use; Schools are allowed as a conditional use; the existing ordinance permitted them; Central Business District (CBD) This district is very similar to the existing CBD requirements but its uses are more condensed and easier to follow. A few changes to make note of include: Dwelling units allowed as a permitted use, but subject to certain conditions identified in specific development standards; existing ordinance allowed dwelling units with a conditional use; Restaurants (food service, coffee shop, fast food) are allowed as a permitted use subject to specific development standards; existing ordinance allowed with a conditional use; General Business (GB) District This district is similar in nature to the existing Retail Business (RB) District, but has been rewritten and takes the place of the RB District. The same type and nature of uses are allowed. However, there are some changes to make note of: Dwelling units not allowed; existing ordinance allowed with a conditional use permit; Restaurants, cafes, would be allowed as permitted uses, but subject to certain development standards. Existing ordinance allowed as a conditional use. Auto sales would be allowed as a permitted use, but also subject to certain development standards. Existing ordinance allowed as a conditional use; Refer also to consigmuent stores, pawnshops, currency exchanges, and drop-in facilities, which are allowed as a conditional use, but need to meet distance criteria as well; Section 11: Industrial Districts I-1 and I-2 Districts Table 9.1103 has also been added to easily identify lot dimensions, height, and bulk requirements for the industrial districts. This section is essentially the same and allows for the same type of industrial uses as the existing ordinance. The I-1 District has been retitled as I-1, Light Industrial District; and the 1-2 District has been retitled as 1-2, General Industrial District. Section 12: Mixed Use Development District This purpose of this section is to replace the traditional Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. This section has been written in order to set up mixed-use opportunities for these districts identified below. This section identifies three mixed-use districts all as identified in the Comprehensive Plan: · Transit-Oriented Mixed-Use District · Community Center Mixed-Use District · Transitional Mixed-Use District However, any mixed-use proposal would require a rezoning to a mixed-use district as set up in this section and as shown on the comprehensive plan. Each of these districts requires a specific mix of residential/commercial in order to achieve the desired development, should it occur. The minimum size of a mixed-use development as recommended by our planning consultant is five (5) acres. Section 13: Overlay Districts Floodplain Management Overlay District Shoreland Management Overlay District These districts have been established to recognize those unique areas of land and land use in the City, within flood prone areas and shoreland areas. The purpose of these districts in intended to protect public health and safety by preserving the environment. Section 14: Subdivision Regulations This section was reviewed and rewritten by City Engineer Kevin Hansen, and is consistent with a number of other similar communities. From: Date: Re: City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager, City Attomey Tim Johnson 4/24/01 Zoning and Development Ordinance As you know, the City of Columbia Heights has been involved in an extensive process to update the City Zoning Ordinance. This process was initiated in 1999 by City staffand SRF Planning Consultants. Subsequently, the first work session devoted exclusively to the Zoning Ordinance was held by the Planning and Zoning Commission on February 24, 1999. During this time, the consultants were also working on the City Comprehensive Plan, which was eventually adopted in May 2000. Since July 2000, staff has devoted a tremendous mount of time and effort in rewriting the proposed Zoning and Development Ordinance that had been temporarily put on hold due to City Staff and consultant remover. Community Development Staff have also spent additional time not indicated below in reviewing and making changes to the document since August 2000. Staffhas met a total of nine (9) times, all dedicated exclusively to the proposed Zoning and Development Ordinance. This total does not include the countless hours that planning staffhave devoted to making changes, doing research, and frae tuning the document. Articles were published in the last two Heights Happenings releases which talked about the Zoning and Development Ordinance rewrite. An official public notice was published as required on February 22, 2001 for the March 6, 2001 public heating. Staffpublicized the Zoning and Development Ordinance rewrite in a recent Focus News article before the public hearing was held. Staffhas also publicized the Zoning and Development Ordinance rewrite on a number of occasions on Cable Television. The following briefly summarizes the time that the Planning and Zoning Commission and recently the City Council has specifically devoted to the Zoning and Development Ordinance rewrite, and the ongoing public participation process. · February 24, 1999 - The Planning and Zoning Commission held a work session on the proposed Zoning Ordinance. March 1999 through March 2000 - Staff and SKF Planning Consultants worked to develop a draft ordinance. Several planning consultants left during this time and new consultants were brought in to spearhead the process. City Planner Joe Hollman also left at the end of April 2000, which also held up the adoption process. · July through September 2000 - City Staff continued review of Zoning Ordinance rewrite with SKF Planning Consultant, and Community Development Staff. September 2000 - SRF Lead Planning Consultant left the fu-m and the City of Columbia Heights staff was given the responsibility to spearhead the adoption process and continue revising and rewriting this proposed ordinance. · October 3, 2000 - The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the draft Tower Ordinance as well as the draft Zoning and Development Ordinance proposed at their regular meeting. April24, 2001 November 27, 2000 - A special meeting was held for the NEI Project. The Zoning and Development Ordinance was also reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commissioners. December 5, 2000 - The Planning and Zoning Commission held a regular meeting and the Zoning and Development Ordinance was reviewed. January 9, 2001 - The Planning and Zoning Commission held a special work session to review sections of the proposed Zoning and Development Ordinance. January 23, 2001 - The Planning and Zoning Commission held a special work session to review sections of the proposed Zoning and Development Ordinance. February 1, 2001 - The Planning and Zoning Commission held a special work session to review sections of the proposed Zoning and Development Ordinance. February 6, 2001 - The Planning and Zoning Commission held a regular Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and also reviewed sections of the Zoning and Development Ordinance. February 13, 2001 - The Planning and Zoning Commission held a special work session to review sections of the proposed Zoning and Development Ordinance. The Planning Commissioners £mished their formal review of the document at this meeting and directed staff to make necessary changes and present to City Council and the public. March 6, 2001 - An open house and public hearing were held at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to address any concerns and to present the document to the public. City staff, Planning Commissioners, City Council Members, and concerned citizens were present to discuss issues relevant to the Ordinance. The Planning Commission approved the document and passed along the recommendation to the City Council. March 12, 2001 - The City Council held a regularly scheduled meeting and passed a f~rst reading of the Zoning and Development Ordinance proposed. April 3, 2001 - The Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council held a joint work session to discuss the Zoning and Development Ordinance proposed, and to address relevant issues. The City Council decided to set up another special work session on April 30, 2001, to discuss the Zoning and Development Ordinance. April 9, 2001 - City Council held a second reading on the proposed Zoning and Development Ordinance. The item was tabled and a work session scheduled for Ap. 30. 2001. April 30, 2001 - City Council work session scheduled to review exclusively the Zoning and Development Ordinance proposed, and to decide a course of action relevant to adoption. to. 538 · DOor ope'tier I. nstalled and .. Building Official Report It seems like we spend all our time ~ ~aidng what "mother nature" does to uur properties. We use the summer to repair winter and summer damage. Now is the tJme to get our heating plants ready for the next season. Have your furnace checked by qualified personnel. Remember to pay particular attention to "cement asbestos" chimney flues. Most of these flues are 40+ years old and beginning to deteriorate and collapse. If you have this type of chimney flue, I strongly urge you to have the flue replaced with a new class B metal flue. _.~.,,?~ ~' {.,{,,~1~.,..~., Reme m ber, carbon .,,, ~ monoxide is a silent ~ I~~ killer. It is produced by ~-I;~/J fuel buming appliances // inside your home and is the same deadly gas coming out of your automobile tail pipe. All fuel burning appliances, such as ranges, dryers, etc., are capable of producing carbon monoxide and should be periodically checked for proper operation. Remember, your family ~mbers are at dsk and the cost of ,ntenance is Iow compared to hospital or doctor bills or even the death of a loved one. Make sure your combustion air supply is clear of any restrictions. When the air inside the home becomes depleted, there is a possibility of "back draft," gases coming back down the chimney. As an example, the average natural gas water heater will use up the air contained in a 12x12x8 foot room in one hour of time when the burner is on. If we are to rely on infiltration air (air leaking in around doors, windows, etc.), wa have to leave our homes loose and I.eaking which makes them very inefficient to heat. Remember, it is not only your life, but also the lives of your loved ones. For information on combustion air or energy conservation in constructJon, brochures are available from the Energy Information Center, k'"~nesota Department of Public . ~ice, phone (651) 296-5175. This agency has a wealth of information available on energy systems such as insulation, windows, indoor moisture, air conditioning, caulking, weather-stripping` etc. Item of Interest: Zoning Ordinance Rewrite The City of Columbia Heights is in the process of updating its Zoning Ordinance and would like the public to be aware of this ongoing plan. City Planning staff have been working since 1999 with SRF Consulting Group, Inc., a multi-disciplinary planning firm, and the Planning and Zoning Commission to t~y to update requirements for appropriate zoning districts, development projects, and to address relevant land use issues. City Planner, Tim Johnson, and City staff have been reviewing the draft Zoning Ordinance rewrite and will be submitting comments and recommendations for changes to incorporate into the final 33e Planning and Zoning Commission at ~ their October 3, 2000 meeting, discussed the upcoming Zoning Ordinance rewrite and decided to review the draft Zoning Ordinance, Chapters 1-6, at their meeting on November 8, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. The Planning and Zoning Commission will also be reviewing Chapters 7-13 at the December 5, 2000 meeting at 7:00 p.m. in City Hall. This reviewal process should allow for the Planning and Zoning Commission to vote on the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance rewrite in January or February 2001, which would then be passed on to the City Council for final adoption. Please check with the Columbia Heights Community Development Department if you have questions about the new Zoning Ordinance, the time line for adoption, or if you would like to see a copy of the document. You can reach Tim Johnson (City Planner) at (763) 706-3673 regarding this document. Master Redevelopment (Concept) Plan for Downtown Columbia Heights The City Council approved a Master Redevelopment Plan (Town Square) for downtown Columbia Heights. The geographic focus of this plan is between 37th Avenue N.E. and 43rd Avenue N.E., primarily along Central Avenue N.E. The plan also includes the area along 40th Avenue N.E., west of Central, to University Avenue. The plan considers a variety of issues, including,: e Potential sites for redevelopment; · Design themes for such things as uniform street lighUng and plantings; e Potential linkages and amenities All of these improvements are designed to enhance the pedestrian environment in downtown Columbia Heights. A volunteer task force had been assembled to assist with the preparation of this plan. An initial meeting of the task force was held in July, 1999 to review and discuss the following: ~ Opportunities and constraints of the project area; · Market analysis and demographics of the area; · Possible market opportunities for downtown Columbia Heights; e comparable development models in the Twin Cities A second meeting was held in September, 1999 to review possible streetscape opportunities and land use alternatives. An open house Town Meeting was held in November 1999 to seek input. The Town Square concept was approved by the Council in August, 2000. If you have any questions on the Master Concept Plan, feel free to contact the City Planner at (763) 706- 3673. Columbia Heights EDA Adopts .Mission Statement The Columbia Heights EDA was origi- nally established by an enabling resolu- tion adopted by the Columbia Heights City Council in January, 1996. At that time the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (I-IRA) transferred all projects and programs to the new EDA. As part of the EDA's review of proposed projects and activities, it was determined that a Mission Statement should be established to help identify the purpose and role of the EDA. The Board adopted the following Mission Statement to serve as a brief statement identiSfing the role and purpose of the new agency in providing essential programs within Columbia Heights. The adopted Mission Statement is as follows: The mission of the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority is to provide financial and technical assis- tance and resources to residential, commercial, and industrial interests to ~,,,promote health, safety, welfare, economic development and redevelop- ment. Questions about EDA programs may be directed to Ken Anderson at 782-2854. _~IHFA Home ~ The Columbia Heights ~ EDA provides quali- ~.~l~ fled homeomers wi~ ~~ loans ~der the Great Mi~esom Fix Up Fund. h order to quali~ for these lo~s you m~t have equi~ in yo~ home, be credit wo~y ~d have a household income below ~9,000 ~lly. Many home improve- menu quali~ for this lo~ includ~g, but not limited to roofs, siding, ~veways, elec~cal, plmb~g ~d room additions. A homeowner can borrow up to $25,000 for a maximum term of 25 years with a fixed interest rate which varies from 2% ~ 8% based on the borrower's income. Home Improvement Grant/Deferred Loan Prat, ran, The Columbia Hei ts EDA offi -Ye' : ...... gh --. ers a Ho.me Improvement Grant/Deferred Loan for Iow income homeowners, l'ms program provides homeowners with a deferred loan up to $15,000 to be used for health and safety repairs. The loan is deferred 10% per year up to 50% which is due and payable at the time the title transfers. Eligible homeowners can submit an application to the EDA and will be placed on a waiting list which is approximately one year. Homeowners are selected from the waiting list on a first come, first served basis. Once the homeowners' name comes up on the waiting list, the EDA will process the necessary paperwork, an inspector will come out to your house and make determinations of what items in your home need to be repaired. Once the repairs are determined, bids will be sent out to participating contractors. The homeowner and EDA will select a contractor based on the amount and quality of the bids. The income limits for this program are as follows: If you are interested in any of these home improvement programs, you can contact the .Co. mmunity Development Department at 782-2854 for an application or additional m~ormation. 31eet our ne~v employee~ ,Joe Hoihnan. Planner Joe HoIlman started as our new Planner on February 23, 1998. Mr. Hollman's duties include staff liaison to the Planning and Zoning Commission and serving as the Zoning Administrator with the responsibility of implementing provisions of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Hollman has previously worked in the planning departments of Goodhue County, MN; Peoria County, IL; and the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission in Duluth, MN. Mr. Hollman will be a key player in overseeing the work associated with the Comprehensive Plan update, rewriting of the Zoning Ordinance, and follow-up to the Minnesota Design Team recommen- dations made during their visit the first week of May. He may be contacted by calling 782-2856. MHFA Home Energy Loans The Columbia Heights EDA administers a Home Energy Loan for qualified homeowners. This loan can be used for energy improvements such as furnaces, water heaters, insulation, door and window replacement. A homeowner can borrow up to $8,000 with a fixed interest rate of 8% for a maximum of 8 years. Universal Service Ax'ailable Under a special agreement with Meredith Cable, those residents who currently do not have cable TV service may subscribe to a new tier of service called Universal. This new tier consists of: The Educational Access Channel The Library Access Channel K~IBI, - local Origination The Public Access Channel The Government Access Channel There is no charge for installation of this service on one TV set, and there is no monthly charge for the service. For more information, please call Meredith Cable at 483-9999. Looo Tips from the Building Official Now is the time we not only repair the damage to our prope~es from last winter, but also damage by summer storms. It seems like we spend all our time repairing what "mother nature" does to our properties. I suggest we get our homes and furnaces ready for the next season while preparing for the cold winter months ahead. Have your furnace checked by qualified personnel. Pay particular attention to 'cement asbestos' chimney flues. Most of these flues are 40+ years old and may begin to deteriorate and collapse. If you have this type of chimney flue, I strongly urge you to have the flue replaced with a new class B metal flue. Most mortgage lenders will require it to be removed before they will grant a mortgage to any prospective buyers. Remember, carbon monoxide is a silent killer and is produced by fuel burning appliances inside your home and is the same deadly gas coming out of your automobile tail pipe. All fuel buming appliances such as ranges, d~yers, etc. are capable of producing carbon monoxide and should be periodically checked for proper operation. Remember, your family members are at risk, and the cost of maintenance is Iow compared to hospital or doctor bills or even the death of a loved one. When the Legislature passed the Bill making the 1999 Energy Code law in the State of Minnesota, they recognized that we are constantly tightening up our homes to reduce energy usage. Part of this Bill was a requirement to provide p make-up air for existing uildings. The most economical method is ~"'" /_ ._~1~ tO install a "Combustion Air Supply.' This 'outside air suppl~/' replaces the air ~ that goes up the chimney in an effort to maintain the up flow of gases. When the air inside the home becomes depleted, there is a possibility of a "back draft," ,.which is gases coming back down the chimney. As an example, the average natural gas water heater will use up the air contained in a 12 x 12 x 8 foot room in one hour of time when the burner is on. If we are to rely on infiltration air (air leaking in around doors, windows, etc.), our homes will not meet new energy code requirements. When replacing windows, siding, doors, and re- insulating, we have to provide this "make up" air to keep the chimney drawing gases up and out of the building. Remember, it is not only your life that will be protected, but also the ~lives of your loved ones. For information on combustion air or energy conservation in construction, brochures are available from the Energy Information Center, Minnesota Department of Public Service, phone 651-296-5175. This agency has a wealth of information available on energy systems such as insulation, ~ windows, indoor moisture, air conditioning, caulking and weatherstripping, etc. New Planner Starts We welcome Tim Johnson as the new City Planner working in the Community Development Department! Tim has worked the last three years as a consulting planner to the Cities of Princeton and Milaca. Tim will perform all planning functions to include staff liaison to the Planning and Zoning Commission and Zoning Administrator, As Zonin~ Administrator, Tim will review building permit applications to insure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and process variance and conditional use permit applications. One of Tim's first duties will be to review the proposed new Zoning Ordinance and to prepare staff comments for the upcoming citizen review and public headng process, if you see Tim, please welcome him to Columbia Heights! Columbia Heights Transit Hub Opening in September Many of you have noticed the construction of the Columbia Heights Transit Hub at the southeast comer of 41st and central Avenue N.E. Anoka County and Metro Transit have worked to jointly plan and develop this facility to improve transit service in the north metro area and particularly in Columbia Heights. Construction will be completed in August and the new bus routes utilizing the new Transit Hub will be effective sometime in September of 2000. The Co, JumtR"~'l:re~-'l~it~?~at.~s. it Hub will featu~ a heated shelter f~ bus patron~-a.~Z~m.a~mall room for bus drivers, bicycle parkin~ and stops for up to six buses at one time for people to transfer between routes, Metro Transit has also completed a restructuring study and will be increasing the frequency of bus routes on central Avenue N.E. For instance I travel north and south on central Avenue at five minute intervals; whereas, the bus service is provided at fifteen minute intervals. Also coming in September will be a new bus mute which will run from the Heights Transit Hub to Apache Plaza and continue to Roseville Sh, The same ~ route will continue from the Columbia Heights Transit Hub to 1-694 and stop at Brookdale Shopping center. This will provide greatly increased transit system services by allowing Columbia Heights residents to better travel east and west to suburban destination stops without having to travel into downtown Minneapolis and back to suburban destination points. Many thanks to Anoka County Commissioner Jim Kordiak, Anoka County Board, Metro Transit, and Columbia Heights City Council members for their foresight and cooperation in making improved transit a reality in Columbia Heights. Highlights of Proposed Changes CURRENT STANDARDS: Accessory Structures Three (3) foot rear yard setback for residential accessory structures when doors do not face the alley or right-of-way. Fifteen (15) foot height restriction for all residential accessory structures. · No Minimum residential garage size. Twenty (20) foot setback for residential garages when doors face the alley or street. Dwelling Units One story, split level, and split entry dwellings require a minimum floor area of 1,020 sq. ft., plus 120 sq. ft. for each additional bedroom. Exterior Lighting Maximum of three (3) footcandles of light at any property line. Off-Street Parking Off-street parking areas and driveways shall be surfaced with material to control dust and drainage. PROPOSED STANDARDS: Five (5) foot rear yard setback for residential accessory structures when doors do not face the alley or right-of-way. Eighteen (18) foot height restriction for all residential accessory stmctures. Minimum residential garage size is 20 X 20. Twenty (20) foot setback for residential garages facing alley or street for lots 6,500 square feet or more; Fifteen foot setback for residential garages facing alley for lots 6,500 square feet or less. One story, split level, and split entry dwellings require a minimum floor area of 1020 sq. fL, plus 120 sq. ft. for each additional bedroom. The floor area may be reduced to 960 sq. ft. if lot size if6,500 sq. ft. or less. Maximum of one-half (1/2) footcandles of light at closest residential property line. Max of three (3) foot candles of light at closest non-residential property line. All off-street parking areas and driveways shall be surfaced with a dustless all weather hard surface material consisting of asphalt, concrete, brick, cement pavers, or similar material. Highlights of Proposed Changes CURRENT STANDARDS: Signage · Portable signage allowed up to 8 X 4 in size Temporary signage allowed by permit for four (4) eleven (11) day periods annually, and 30 days seasonally. Freestanding signage allowed in Limited Business (LB) District not to exceed twenty (20) feet in height. Freestanding signage in Retail Business (RB) and General Business (GB) Districts allowed up to thirty (30) feet in height. Billboards allowed up to forty (40) feet in height, maximum 300 sq. R., and spaced at 500 foot intervals in 'I' Districts with 45 MPH speeds. Maximum height of forty (40) feet for freestanding signage in all Industrial Districts. Signage · Minimum setbacks for freestanding signs are the same as setback requirements for structures in that district. Freestanding signage in Central Business District(CBD) allowed up to twenty (20) feet in height. PROPOSED STANDARDS. Portable signage rifle-allowed. Temporary signage allowed without a permit. Freestanding signage allowed in Limited Business (LB) District not to exceed eight (8) feet in height. If located adjacent to a State Trunk Highway, maximum height shall be twenty (20) feet. Freestanding signage in General Business (GB) District allowed up to twenty-five (25) feet in height if located adjacent to a State Trunk Highway. Billboards allowed up to twenty-five (25) feet in height, max 100 sq. ff., and spaced at 1500 foot intervals in T Districts with 45 MPH speeds. Maximum height of twenty-five (25) feet for freestanding signage in all Industrial Districts. Minimum setbacks for freestanding signs shall be ten (10) feet from property line or as otherwise stated in the ordinance. Freestanding signage in Central Business District (CBD) allowed up to eight (8) feet height. If located adjacent to a State Trunk Highway, maximum height shall be twenty (20) feet. Highlights of Proposed Changes CURRENT STANDARDS: Specific Development Standards Adult Entertainment Use Allowed in Industrial District by conditional use permit. No minimum separation standards from residential properties, or schools. Consignment/Secondhand Store Currency Exchange Drop In Facility Pawnshops Permitted in Business Districts and Industrial Districts. No minimum separation standards from other similar facilities. No minimum standards or separation distances from similar facilities. Salvage Facility/Transfer Station Permitted in Industrial Districts. No minimum standards. Transitional/Emergency Housing · Not addressed in current ordinance. Landscaping and Screening · No minimum landscaping standards. pROPOSED STANDARDS- Allowed in Industrial District by conditional use permit. This use shall be a minimum of 500 feet from any residential property; daycare facility; educational facility; library; park; or place of worship. Allowed in General Business District by conditional use permit only. Not allowed in Central or Limited Business Districts. These uses shall be located a minimum of 3000 feet from any existing consignment store, currency exchange, drop-in facility or pawnshop. Permitted in Industrial Districts. Need to maintain a minimum distance of 500 feet from any residential property. Shall require an environmental management plan. Allowed with a conditional use permit in R-3, R-4, and LB Districts. Shall be located at least ¼ mile from all existing transitional housing. Minimum of one tree for every fifty (50) feet of street frontage. Minimum of four (4) trees for every one (I) acre of lot area. Highlights of Proposed Changes CURRENT STANDARDS: Building Design Standards No minimum building design standards. I, ot Requirements Rear yard setback for R- 1 and R-2 Districts is thirty (30) feet. Side yard setback for R-3 District is ten (10) feet; Rear yard setback for R-3 District is twenty (20) feet Twinhome Requirements They are not addressed in our current ordinance. PROPOSED STANDARDS: All structures over 120 sq. ft. shall have full perimeter footings. Steel frame structures with metal siding and roof shall be allowed provided that 50% or more oft. he front of the building is of masonry type veneer and windows, and the side walls are at least four (4) feet from grade with the same type of masonry veneer. Building facades shall contain windows at the ground level or first floor in order to provide visual interest and increase security of adjacent outdoor spaces by maximizing natural surveillance and visibility. At least 20% of the first floor faqade that faces a public street, sidewalk or parking lot shall be windows or doors for residential use. At least 30% of the first floor fagade that faces a public street, sidewalk or parking lot shall be windows or doors of clear or lightly tinted glass that allows views into and out of the building at eye level for non-residential uses. Rear yard setback for R-1 and R-2 Districts is 20% of the lot depth. Side yard setback for R-3 District is twenty (20) feet; Rear yard setback for R-3 District is thirty (30) feet. Lot area requirements for twinhomes are 9,000 sq. ft. for both lots that share a common wall; 4,500 sq. ft. minimum lot size for each individual lot sharing a common wall.