Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 5, 2000 MEMBERS CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Ted Yehle Stephan Johnson 590 40TH AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS~ NIH 55421-3878 (612) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 Tammera Ericson PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES September 5, 2000 The September 5, 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Ramsdell. Members present were Ericson, Johnson, Yehle, and Ramsdell. Commissioner Hanson was not in attendance. Also present were Kathryn Pepin (Secretary to the Planning and Zoning Commission), and Tim Johnson (City Planner). MOTION by Yehle, seconded by Johnson, to approve the minutes from the meeting of August 8, 2000 as presented in writing. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. NEW BUSINESS Public Hearing Conditional Use Permit Case//2000-0922 HAW Enterprises RE: 5101 University Ave. N.E. Columbia Heights, Mn. Tim Johnson presented the request of Jeffery Bauer of HAW Enterprises doing business as 30 Minute Muffler for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a new owner/operator to conduct motor vehicle sales and auto repair at the current 30 Minute Auto site. He informed the Commission that a prior conditional use permit was issued to James Eno in September 1996 to allow for used motor vehicle sales in conjunction with an auto repair business. He stated that the surrounding property to the north and south is zoned as RB and is used commercially. The property to the east is zoned as R-2 and is used residentially. The property to the south is in the City of Fridley. Mr. Johnson stated that according to Section 9.113{2)(g) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance, a Conditional Use Permit is required for "Motor fuel stations (minor) and major fuel stations with minor repairs (not to exceed four bays) subject to Section 9.103(63)." In addition, Section 9.113{2){k) of the Retail Business Section of the Zoning Ordinance states that a Conditional Use Permit is required for "Vehicles not to exceed 2 tons, for sale in conjunction with only automobile repair businesses which do not sell fuel, provided that the following requirements are met: 1. Parking area for car sales cannot eliminate required parking spaces for primary use; 2. No more than ten vehicles can be displayed for sale at any one time; 3. Traffic flow on lot, lighting, parking lot striping must be approved through the Conditional Use Permit process before approval for such operation can be granted; 4. Size, type and style of any signage for such vehicle must be within vehicle at all times and approved by staff; 5. All required state and local licenses must be obtained". He informed the Commission that the applicant is not proposing any significant changes to the site. The site has 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 SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 2 functioned as an auto repair business and sales lot for some time, and, as such will not change with this proposal. The auto repair business currently operates three service bays, and is approved for sales of ten vehicles. The new business would only maintain what is currently operating. The new owner/operator is also a certified ASE Auto Technician. According to 9.116(18), Motor fuel stations in all districts shall be subject to the following standards: The setback of any canopy or weather protection, freestanding or projecting from the station structure shall not be less than ten (10) feet from the street right-of-way line nor less than twenty (20) feet from an abutting property line. The existing canopy meets and exceeds these requirements. The sale or rent of motor vehicles, trailers, campers, boats, and other items which are not kept entirely within the building shall require an approved open sales lot. Used car sales are proposed and the existing sales lot had prior conditional use approval. A minimum ten (1 O) foot landscaped yard shall be provided along all abutting public right-of-way lines, except where approved driveways occur. This requirement is met. All goods offered for sale on the motor fuel station site other than those generally required for the operation and maintenance of motor vehicles shall be stored, sold and displayed within a building. This requirement will be met. All trash, waste material and unwanted motor vehicle parts shall be stored within a separate enclosure behind the building. The trash is currently stored in an enclosure behind the building. All outside parking spaces shall be located to the side and/or rear of the principal building. The parking arrangements shall continue as they exist today and per site plan submitted. The parking proposed exceeds the requirements of the ordinance. The outside lighting system shall be approved by the City and shall be so designed to prevent any undue light therefrom being directly visible from the public right-of-way or abutting lots. The new owners are not proposing any changes to lighting, as the lot is currently lit during the evenings for security purposes, and does not shine onto adjacent residential properties. Wherever a motor fuel station abuts an "R" District, a fence not less than fifty (50) percent opaque nor less than six (6) feet high shall be erected and maintained along the side and rear property line that abuts the "R" District. There is currently a privacy fence for separation from the residential properties to the east approximately six feet in height. Minor motor fuel stations shall have two service stalls, one of which may have an automatic or semi- automatic auto wash installed, provided the station can accommodate six (6) off-street parking spaces in PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 3 addition to those required herein. The entrance doors for the service stalls shall not face toward the principal street on which the station is located. This station currently has three (3) service stalls, and has twenty-eight (28) plus off-street parking spaces. The existing service stalls face toward the frontage road as the building is considered legal non-conforming. Access or ingress curb cuts to a motor fuel station shall not be less than fifty (50) feet from the curb line intersection on secondary thoroughfares and eighty (80) feet on major thoroughfares. No curb cuts are proposed as curb cuts are existing. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that the Zoning Ordinance requires that this business provide at least twelve (12) parking spaces on site. According to the site plan, there are thirty-five (35) plus off-street parking spaces, of which seven (7) spaces will be used for the display of used vehicle sales. The vehicles for sale will be located at the front of the lot facing 51't Avenue and University Avenue, thereby maintaining consistency in appearance. Staff will require that the vehicles for sale display their signage and identification in the vehicle at all times. Staff has visited the site and has relatively few concerns as the current type of business will not change. There is also adequate ingress and egress on site and off-street parking exceeds requirements. He added that the City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for commercial use. It was his opinion that the proposal should not negatively impact any nearby residential areas as the current use will continue and will be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Yehle asked staff if there had been any complaints regarding the site. Mr. Johnson responded in the negative. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the' public hearing. Gerald Waller of 5052 N.E. 4th Street expressed concern with the dumping of trash at the site on weekends or when the business is closed. He also was curious if any expansion of the business was planned. Mitchell Watson of 5056 N.E. 4th Street was also present to voice concern regarding the dumping of trash after hours as well as the break-ins and vandalism that has occurred. He also addressed the problem with the snow being plowed onto the right of way across the street in the past causing large snow banks or snow is left in the street creating ridges or mounds of snow. Jeff Bauer, new owner of the operation, was present. He stated that the dumpster will be moved to be adjacent to the building, enclosed with a gate and lock. He has installed live security cameras around the site to deter theft and vandalism. He added that it is his intent to store snow on the lot on the north side. If he has to remove some of the "for sale" vehicles in order to have enough snow storage on the site, he will as vehicle repair is the major business with sales a secondary operation. Chairperson Ramsdell stated that storage of snow is required on site or to be removed from the site and not pushed onto the street or right of way, which is illegal. He asked if the lighting is adequate for the site. PLANNING ANO ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 4 Mr. Bauer felt the lighting was adequate. However, if necessary, he would space the "for sale" vehicles farther apart on the lot. He also stated that a lot of the unrepairable vehicles and junk have been removed from the site. Commissioner Ericson asked Mr. Bauer when he took over the operation. Mr. Bauer responded that he took possession of the business on June 1, 2000. Commissioner Johnson asked staff if them was anything in the Zoning Ordinance that limited the number of vehicles that could be repaired. Staff responded in the negative. Chairperson Ramsdell closed the public hearing. Motion by Yehle, seconded by Johnson, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow for auto repair and used vehicle sales to continue, subject to the following conditions: 1. A.II required state and local codes, permits, licenses and inspections will be met and in full compliance. 2. All screening requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for fencing and trash enclosure shall be in compliance. 3. Used vehicle sales shall be limited to a maximum of ten (10) vehicles, and vehicle signage must be displayed within vehicles at all times. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion Carried. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2000 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. Public Hearing Variance Case #2000-0923 St. Timothy's Lutheran Church 825 N.E. 51~t Avenue Columbia Heights, Mn. Mr. Tim Johnson presented the request of St. Timothy's Lutheran Church for a setback variance to allow the placement of a new electric lighted monument type sign measuring thirty-two (32) square feet, nine (9) feet from the front property line at 825 N.E. 51't Avenue. This sign is being proposed to replace a prior sign that was destroyed by a vehicle in 1997. The prior sign was approximately 8.4 feet from the front property line facing 51't Avenue. A variance of twenty-one (21) feet is being requested to allow for the proposed sign to be placed nine (9) feet from the front property line, as the ordinance requires a thirty (30) foot setback for freestanding signage. The ordinance in question is 9.117A(13), which requires that freestanding signs meet the same setbacks as structures from their respective property lines. The purpose of this request is to install attractive ground level monument type church signaoe that will be visible to passing vehicles. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 5 He informed the Commission that the surrounding property to the north and east is zoned Commercial and is used for commercial purposes. The surrounding property on the south is zoned both as R-1 (single-family), and R-2 (two- family), and is used residentially. The property on the west is used as a Park. Mr. Johnson stated that Freestanding Signs are regulated under Section 9.117A(7) of the Zoning Ordinance with requirements as follows: One institutional sign not to exceed thirty-two (32) square feet per surface and limited to two (2) surfaces. The proposed sign which is thirty-two (32) square feet meets this requirement. The maximum height of a sign, including its structures, shall not exceed eight (8) feet above the grade at street level, or at the base of the sign, whichever is higher. This requirement will be met as the height will be approximately six (6) feet above grade. Front yard setback shall be a minimum of 30 feet from front property line. The proposed sign will be nine (9) feet from the front property line. The minimum front yard requirements for freestanding signs shall be the same as that required for any other structure within the zone where such sign is located. The proposed sign will be setback nine (9) feet from the front property line. All illuminated signs shall be shielded in such a way as to protect the rights of adjacent property owners from nuisance. The sign will be illuminated and shielded. No animated signs shall be permitted. None proposed. With the exception of the front yard setback requirement, it was Mr. Johnson's opinion that the proposal meets the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance adding that the prior freestanding sign was setback at 8.4 feet from property line before it was destroyed by a vehicle in 1997. The prior sign was also further west from where the proposed sign will be placed. 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 whereby 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." Staff has visited the site and believes that a hardship exists in relation to the placement of the sign. The sign could be placed on the site to meet the thirty (30) foot setback, but by so doing would put the sign in the parking lot. A monument type sign would obviously not be conducive in this location, and would also interfere with existing parking stalls. The sign would appear to be somewhat obstructed by a row of trees to the east of the proposed sign. There appear to be circumstances unique to the situation whereby a variance could be granted and a hardship could be established. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that Staff has also researched numerous other City Sign Ordinances and found a typical sign setback of ten feet for institutions in residential neighborhoods. With the Zoning Ordinance rewrite, this monument type sign proposed would be a nice enhancement to the property, and would provide needed visibility for passing vehicles. He reminded the Commission that a hardship needs to be established for a variance to be granted adding that PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 6 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". He further stated that Section 1 of the Zoning Ordinance identifies the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Four of the purpose statements are as identified below: protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare; dividing the City into zones and districts restricting and reoulating 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, preventing overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures by regulating the use of land and buildinos and the bulk of buildings in relation to surroundino land and buildings. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that the City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for future commercial development adding that the proposal does not impact the goals and objectives of the City Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Johnson stated that staff recommends approval of the variance request, but recommends that the proposed freestanding sign be placed a minimum of ten (10) feet from front property line, rather than the nine {§) feet proposed adding that this proposal appears to be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance, and is consistent with other cities sign ordinances. Mr. Johnson stated that Staff has spoken with church representatives and informed them of the staff recommendation. Staff has received no objections to this request at this time. Chairperson Ramsdell asked the representatives of St. Tim's if there was any opposition to changing the setback to ten feet. They responded in the neoative. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. The public hearing was closed as no one was present to speak regarding this request. Motion by Yehle, seconded by Ramsdell, to recommend to the City Council the approval of a twenty (20) foot variance request as a hardship exists for placement of the proposed sion, and the proposal is in keepino with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2000 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA.. Public Hearing Two Variances Case #2000-0924 Wendy Howell 3711 Van Buren St. N.E. Columbia Heights, Mn. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 7 The applicant is proposing to build a detached garage measuring 24 feet wide by 2§ feet deep (624 square feet) at 3711 Van Buren Street N.E. A variance is being requested to allow for the proposed garage to be built fifteen (15) feet from the rear property line abutting the alley, with the ordinance requiring twenty (20) feet. An additional variance is being proposed to allow for the proposed garage to be built eighteen (18) feet in height, exceeding the fifteen (15) foot height requirement. The proposed garage would face the east or towards the alley. The ordinance in question is 9.104(5), which requires garages to be set back a minimum distance of twenty (20) feet from the property line when the garage doors face a street or alley, and also requires that accessory structures not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height as measured to the highest point. The garage as proposed would infringe five (5) feet into the required setback area. The existing house occupies 881 square feet of property, with the proposed detached garage occupying an additional 624 square feet. The total amount of lot coverage proposed with the addition of the detached garage would be 1,505 square feet. Ordinance 9.104(5) allows for a maximum lot coverage of up to 35% for lots 6,500 square feet or less. The lot which measures approximately 5,150 square feet has a maximum lot coverage of 1,802 square feet. This proposal meets lot coverage requirements. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that the surrounding property to the north, south, and west is zoned R-3, Multi-Family Residential, and is used residentially. The property to the east is zoned RB, Retail Business and is used commercially. He stated that accessory structures are regulated under Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance with requirements as follows: No accessory structure shall exceed the height of the principal structure or fifteen (15) feet, whichever is less. The height of the garage will exceed this requirement. The east end of the garage would be approximately eighteen (18) feet high, and the west end of the garage would be approximately sixteen (16) feet high. This proposal requires a three (3} foot height variance. No accessory structure or combination of accessory structures shall exceed 1,000 square feet. The proposed detached garage covers 624 square feet meeting requirements. Any lot at or under 6,500 square feet in size may have a lot coverage of up to 35%. The lot in question is 5,150 square feet. The maximum allowable lot coverage for this lot is 1,802 square feet. This proposal would cover 1,505 square feet. This proposal meets lot coverage requirements. Detached accessory structures must be six (6) feet or more from the principal structure. The proposed detached garage will be approximately twenty (20) 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. The proposed detached two-car garage will be placed fifteen (15) feet from the rear lot line, with the garage doors facing the alley. The proposal requires a five (5) foot variance. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 8 Mr. Johnson stated that Staff has visited the site and believes that a hardship exists with relation to the topography of the site which limits where and how a garage could be built without reasonable difficulty. There is an existing one-car detached garage as shown on the site survey, which will be removed and replaced with an uncovered carport. Staff has looked at possible options for building a garage to fit within the setback and height parameters. The proposed garage could be placed further back towards the house to meet the setback from alley. However, because of the topography of the lot, which drops three (3) plus feet on the alley side, this would mean excavating and removing a large amount of dirt, which could require retaining walls for support. Staff believes that there is a topographic hardship present, however, a fifteen (15) foot setback from garage doors to property line could potentially pose some concerns. He stated that Staff has concerns about vehicles parking in front of the proposed garage, as a fifteen (15) foot setback would place some vehicles in or near the right-of-way. The proposed variance also poses some slight safety concerns as the existing alley generates quite a bit of traffic from many adjacent businesses who use the alley for ingress and egress. Staff believes that anything closer than fifteen (15) feet could be very problematic for winter maintenance crews. However the outcome, the proposed two-car garage would intend to complement the property, and provide necessary storage space for the owners. It was Mr. Johnson opinion that the proposal would be an improvement on the current situation. Mr. Johnson stated that a variance is also being requested to allow for the proposed garage to be a maximum of eighteen (18) feet in height on the east end of the garage, and sixteen (16) feet in height on the west end at grade. The owners are hoping to build a barn style shaped garage to match the existing house. The additional height requested would be used for an attic style storage area. Staff has reviewed this request and believes that this proposal would intend to complement the property and would be compatible with the existing stucco house. However, staff sees no hardship present as to why the owners can't comply with the fifteen (15) foot height maximum. He added that the City Building Official, Mel Collova, has also reviewed this request and does not believe that a hardship exists. A two-car garage could be built to meet the ordinance. However, without the height variance, the owners probably couldn't build a barn style garage to match the house. This barn style shape also creates additional storage space above. Mr. Johnson further stated that a hardship needs to be established or circumstances unique to the property in question need to be established in order 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". In addition, Section 1 of the Zoning Ordinance identifies the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Four of the purpose statements are identified as follows: 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; PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 9 providing adequate light, air, and convenience of access to property; and, 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. Commissioner Ramsdell expressed his concern with the setback variance as he felt that the excavation and removal of dirt from the site in order to meet the setback requirement was not a real hardship. He did not like the possibility of a vehicle being parked in front of the garage doors and possibly encroaching into the alley. He felt the applicants could adjust the size or location of the garage to meet ordinance requirements. He also was not in favor of approving a height variance without a hardship unique to the lot. Commissioner Yehle concurred with Mr. Ramsdell. The applicants, Wendy Howell and James Stoss, were present. Ms. Howell stated that she erred in her letter explaining the request in that the height of the proposed garage on the east side would be nineteen feet in height rather than eighteen feet requiring a larger height variance. She explained that the height proposal is to allow for storage which she does not have in her house. In addition, the height would allow a barn style roof to be constructed to match the roof style of the house. The setback variance would allow them to have some back yard. The garage position as proposed along with the height would provide a site and sound barrier against the traffic from the businesses along Central Avenue. Chairperson Ramsdell stated that the barn style roof still could be met with a lesser height and different trusses. Ms. Howell argued that would cost more money than using a standard truss. Commissioner Johnson asked the applicant "what is more important the aesthetics to match the house or the storage area?" Ms. Howell responded that the aesthetics were more important. It was Commissioner Ericson's opinion that the sound/site barrier would be satisfied at the fifteen foot height. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. William Hannick, of 3713 Van Buren Street, was present to state that his garage built in 1987 was set fifteen feet from the alley and he has not experienced any damage to his Geo parked in front of the garage doors. He added that the alley is very busy with a posted speed limit of ten mph which is not upheld. He stated that he has requested speed bumps in the alley, but that has not been done. He also stated that his garage is higher than fifteen feet and did not recall that it was a problem. Council Representative Szurek stated that in 1987 the allowed height was eighteen feet. The accessory structure section of the Zoning Ordinance was amended in 1996. She directed staff to place this case on the regular agenda for the City Council meeting, not on the consent agenda, so it can be discussed. Chairperson Ramsdell closed the public hearing. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 10 Motion by Ramsdell, seconded by Ericson, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the five (5) foot setback variance request to construct a 24 foot by 2§ foot detached garage facing the alley at 3711 Van Buren Street NE due to topographic hardship, and the proposal is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. Motion by Ramsdell, seconded by Yehle to deny the four (4) foot height variance request to construct a nineteen foot high, 24 foot by 26 foot detached garage due to lack of a hardship, as the owners could build a garage to meet the requirements. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2000 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. Public Hearing CUP/Site Plan Case #2000-0925 Wendy's International RE: 5050 Central Ave. N.E. Columbia Heights, Mn. Mr. Johnson presented the request for a Conditional Use Permit to open a Wendy's Fast Food Restaurant in the former Boston Market building at 5050 Central Avenue N.E. The proposed restaurant will contain approximately 88 seats and will be open from 10:00 am till 10:00 pm and a drive-thru open until midnight daily. In April of 1995 a request was reviewed for Site Plan approval and a Conditional Use Permit to build a Boston Market Restaurant at 5050 Central Avenue N.E. The most recent proposal was to convert this space into a Golden China Restaurant in March 2000 which was withdrawn by the applicant. He informed the Commission that the surrounding property on the north, south and east is zoned RB, Retail Business and is used commercially. The property to the west is residential and is zoned residentially. The subject property is located in the RB, Retail Business District. He indicated that Section 9.113(2) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance requires a Conditional Use Permit for restaurants in the RB District. The Minimum Yard and Density Requirements are as follows: · Lot Width shall be at least 50 feet. The subject parcel is approximately 165 feet in width. · Lot Area shall be at least 6,000 square feet. The subject parcel is 34,650 square feet. Front Yard Setback shall be 15 feet. The existing structure is approximately fifty three feet from front property line. · There shall be at least one 10 foot side yard, the other side yard can be zero feet. Both side yard setbacks PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 11 are approximately forty plus feet from the property line. Rear Yard Setback shall be 10 feet. The existing building is approximately fifty feet from the rear property line. · The floor area ratio shall not exceed 1.0. The property does not exceed this requirement. Required minimum frontage of 40 feet. The subject parcel has roughly 165 feet of frontage along Central Avenue. Lighting shall not exceed 3 foot candles at property line. Though the current site exceeds this limit, a former Site Plan Approval allowed for it in 1995. Mr. Johnson stated that the applicant is not proposing any significant structural changes, however, there will be exterior changes made to the building as they pertain to redesign. There will be an additional drive-up pay window added, as well as repair of broken curb and pavement, along with seal-coating and re-striping of the lot. The existing fence that sits on the rear of the property will be repaired and/or replaced. The applicants are also proposing to erect a freestanding sign measuring approximately seventy (70) square feet on an existing pole in the front of the building. There will also be small directional signs installed for entrance, exit, and pick-up window. He informed the Commission that parking requirements for a restaurant are at least one space for each three seats based on capacity design. According to the floor plan, there will be 88 seats in the restaurant which requires 29 parking spaces. There are a total of 41 parking spaces on the site including two handicap accessible parking spaces with an access aisle located on the north side of the buildino. Mr. Johnson stated that the access aisle shown on the site plan will need to be adjusted to eight feet in accordance with disability requirements with signage posted in front of these handicap spaces. He stated that the loading requirements for the site would be as follows: A loading berth shall not be less than 12 feet in width, 25 feet in length and 14 feet in height and, for retail sales and service stores, at least one berth for each building having 2,500- 6,000 square feet. He added that there is a loading berth provided on the west side of the building. 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 for such purposes. He stated that the site plan shows an existing enclosure on the northwest side of the building which Wendy's will continue to use. The site plans submitted also show a lighting plan which utilizes existing poles. A landscaping plan has also been submitted showing ornamental trees, deciduous shrubs, and coniferous shrubs. The current Zoning Ordinance does not address minimum landscaping standards for commercial sites. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that Staff has received two phone calls from adjacent neighbors regarding the existing fence abutting the residential properties to the west. It appears that the fence is in a state of disrepair, and the neighbors wanted to make sure it was fixed. He indicated that this was a condition of approval. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 Page 12 Mr. Johnson stated that it was his opinion that the proposal would not negatively impact any nearby residential areas and will provide an appropriate reuse of an existing building, so the proposal is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. In addition, he stated that the site plans have been reviewed by the Fire Department and Public Works. They did not have any major concerns with the proposal. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. Don Rolf, architect representing Wendy's, was present to respond to any questions or concerns. Chairperson Ramsdell expressed his concern with the fact that the traffic flow and access to the site is from north to south. He sugoested that Wendy's consider breakfast items to take advantage of the morning traffic flow going south. He also stated he is excited, as well as other people, that Wendy's will be taking over the vacant building. Chairperson Ramsdell closed the public hearing. Motion by Ericson, seconded by Johnson, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow the operation of a Wendy's Restaurant at 5050 Central Avenue N.E., subject to the following conditions: 1. All required state and local codes, permits, licenses and inspections will be met and in full compliance. All proposed signage must be submitted on the City prescribed application form and must fully comply with the Zoning Ordinance. Solid waste material shall 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. The cedar fence on the rear of the property shall be rebuilt or replaced to maintain separation from residential properties to buffer from noise and maintain aesthetics. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2000 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. Staff Reports: A. TIF District//9. Tim Johnson presented a Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment District Number 9 for the Crest View/Real Estate Equities Project. In addition, he also presented a Resolution No. 2000-44, which is a resolution finding the tax increment financing plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 9 consistent with the plans for development of the City of Columbia Heights. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES SEPTEMBER §, 2000 Page 13 Motion by Ramsdell, seconded by Yehle, to approve Resolution No. 2000-44 and recommend the City Council hold the public hearing required by law and adopt the TIF Plan. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. B. Planner Johnson presented a copy of a draft of a Tower Sitting Ordinance which is proposed to eventually be incorporated into the City Zoning Ordinance. He explained that the City Council had recently extended the moratorium on telecommunication towers and antennas from September 7, 2000 until December 7, 2000 in an effort to provide staff, consultants, and relevant boards ample time to review this document. Discussion on this issue will be conducted at the October Planning and Zoning meeting as the members did not have adequate time to review this lengthy document. Motion by Yehle, seconded by Johnson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:35 p.m. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion carried. Kathryn Pepin Secretary to the Planning and Zoning Commission kp