HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 13, 2002CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
590 40th Avenue N.E.. Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (763) 706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692
Visit Our Website at: wwmci, colunlbia-heights.lnn, us
MEMB£R$
Tom Ramsdell, Chair
Donna Schmitt
Ted Yehle
Stephen W. Johnson
Tammera Ericson
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
7:00 P.M. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2002
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
590 N.E. 40T" AVENUE
1. Roll Call.
2. Minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of September 3, 2002.
3. Public Hearings:
· Case # 2002-1109
4350 Central Avenue NE
Conditional Use Permit
4. New Business:
None
5. Miscellaneous:
· Zoning News article
· Northstar Corridor Update
· 60-Day Rule
6. Adjourn
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
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR M'EETING
SEPTEMBER 3, 2002
7:00 PM
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Commission Chair, Tom Ramsdell.
Roll Call: Commission Members present-Yehle, Ericson, Schmitt, Ramsdell, and Johnson
Also present were Tim Johnson (City Planner), Shelley Hanson (Secretary) and Marlaine Szurek
(Council Representative).
Motion by Yehle, second by Ericson, to approve the minutes from the meeting of August 6, 2002.
All ayes. MOTION PASSED.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Case #: 2002-0908
3906 Reservoir Blvd
Lot Split
Terrell Berglund
A request has been made for a lot split of the property located at 3906 Reservoir Blvd. NE.
Currently 3906 Reservoir Blvd. is one parcel measuring 60 feet by 160 feet. The applicant is
proposing to split the property down the center, thereby creating twinhome zero lot line parcels.
Section 9.410(4) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance requires that an application for a lot
split be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission which shall provide a report to the
City Council either recommending approval or denial of the proposed lot split.
There are no previous Planning and Zoning Commission cases on this site.
The surrounding property is zoned R-2, single and two family residential and is used
residentially, az well as two apartment buildings across the alley to the west.
Technical Review:
Section 9.410(5) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance regulates lot area, width, and yard
requirements in the R-2 District, and Section 9.603 regulates accessory structures. Applicable
requirements are as follows:
Minimum lot size shall be 9,000 square feet for both twinhome lots, or 4,500 for each
twinhome lot. Parcel "A" will be 4,500 square feet and Parcel "B" will be 5,100 square
feet, both of which will meet the minimum size requirements.
Minimum lot width shall be 60 feet-Both parcels together are 60 feet wide, meeting
requirements.
Front yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet. However, staffis requiring this structure to be
50 feet from the front yard property line, because the average front yard setback for
adjacent structures is much greater than required by Ordinance. The ordinance indicates
the required setback shall not be more than fifty (50) feet. The proposed twinhome
structure on Parcel A and Parcel B will be 50 feet from the front property line, in line
with the structure to the south.
PLANNING & ZOND,[G MEqlJTES
SEPTEMBER 3, 2002
PAGE 2
Rear yard shall be 20% of lot depth. The proposed twinhome buildings on Parcel A and
Parcel B will both meet this requirement.
Side yards shall be at least five feet. The proposed twinhome buildings on Parcel A and
Parcel B will both exceed the five foot requirement.
Detached accessory structures shall be at least 3 feet away from side and rear property
lines. The proposed detached garages for Parcel A and Parcel B which will face the
alley, will be approximately 9 feet from the side property line and will be set back 20 feet
from the rear line.
Any lot under 6,500 square feet may have a building lot coverage of up to 35%-the lot
coverages of Parcel A and Parcel B will be fight at 35%, so the proposal meets these
requirements also.
Planner Johnson did point out that this property is just to the east of the Mady's site which is
being considered for redevelopment. This redevelopment may impact the future use of the
properties in the area. However, with this fact acknowledged, the Commission must now
consider the lot split being requested which would allow the owner to proceed with his proposed
plan.
The City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for future low density residential
development, and the intended use of the property is consistent with the Comp Plan. The
proposal also meets the minimum requirements of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance.
Staff, therefore, recommends approval of the lot split. This will be the third twinhome
constructed in Columbia Heights.
Yehle questioned whether the owners had considered building a single family home on the site.
Mr. Berglund answered that they had considered a double bungalow, but liked the twinhome
concept better. It would be a good use of the land and two homes would create a larger tax base.
He went on to explain that he would be moving into one side and the other home would be sold.
It will not be rental property.
The Commission members concurred that they liked the proposal with the detached garages.
They felt it would be a better fit for the neighborhood. Mr. Berglund stated they felt the same,
but would have to look at set backs, costs, and yard size before making a final decision on which
plan to build.
Motion by Ramsdell, second by Y'ehle, to recommend City Council approval of Resolution 2002-
55for the lot split of 3960 Reservoir Blvd, as it is consistent with City subdivision standard&
All ayes. MOTION PASSED.
pLANNING & ZONING MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 3, 2002
PAGE 3
NEW BUSINESS
FUTLrRE SALE OF 325 SUMMIT ST NE--
The existing city owned single family home at 325 Summit St which recently had a small piece
subdivided off to accommodate plans for the redevelopment of an adjoining parcel of land, will
be put back on the market and sold through a bidding process. It is intended that this property be
sold as a single family home. There are no redevelopment plans for this particular piece of
property. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property for Transit-Oriented Development.
Maintaining the existing use as a residential property would be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Motion by Ericson, second by Ramsdell to support the action of the City Council for the future
sale of the property at 325 Summit St. All ayes. MOTION PASSED.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
Upcoming First Ring Suburb Planning Forum:
Planner 3ohnson reminded Commission members about the meeting the City of Richfield is
hosting to discuss issues important to all the first ring suburbs including the age of the cun'ent
housing stock, redevelopment projects, funding concems, etc. The meeting is being held on
September 9, 2002, in the evening. Planner/[ohnson needs to notify Richfield on the number
attending, so please contact him if you intend to participate.
MN State Planning Conference:
Enclosed in the agenda packet was information on this fall's Planning Conference being held in
Minneapolis, September 11-13, 2002. If anyone wishes to attend, please contact Planner Johnson
so the registration can be sent in.
Motion by Yehle, second by Schmitt , to adjourn the meeting at 7:20 pm. All ayes.
Respectfully submitted,
Shelley Hanson
Secretary
Case: 2002-1109
Page: 1
STAFF REPORT TO TI~E PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
FOR THE NOVEMBER 13, 2002 PUBLIC HEARING
Case#: 2002-1109
GENERAL INFORMATION
Owner: Bradley Operating Ltd (Heritage Investment Trust)
Applicant: Northeast Metro 916
Address: 3300 Century Avenue North White Bear Lake, MN 55110
Phone: Metro 916 phone # (651) 415-5657
Parcel Address: 4350 Central Avenue NE
Zoning: GB, General Business
Comprehensive Plan: Commercial
Surrounding Zoning
and Land Uses:
Zoning
North: LB and R-2
South: LB and R-2
East: GB
West: R-2
Land Use
North: Commercial and Residential
South: Commercial and Residential
East: Commercial
West: Jackson Pond; Residential
BACKGROUND
Explanation qf Request:
A request for a Conditional Use Permit to establish an Area Learning Center in the existing
Walgreen's space at 4350 Central Avenue NE. The applicant is currently in discussions for
leasing the space now occupied by Walgreen's.
Site History:
There are previous Planning Commission and City Council cases on this site. Site Plans were
approved to allow for a fueling center and a multi-tenant retail facility in the front parking lot in
2001, but the facilities have not been built. Linder's Greenhouse applies yearly for a conditional
use permit for a seasonal greenhouse.
Case: 2002-1109
Page: 2
ANALYSIS
Surrounding Property:
The surrounding property on the south is zoned LB and R-2 and used for residential and for
business purposes. The property to the north is zoned R-2 and LB, Limited Business, and is used
for both residential and business purposes. The property to the east is General Business, and the
property to the west is Jackson Pond.
Technical Review:
Staff believes an Alternative School most closely resembles, in use, a public or private K-12
school. As such, a public or private K-12 is not a permitted or conditional use in the General
Business District (Section 9.1005). Vocational, Business, Performing, Visual, and Martial Arts
Schools are listed as permitted uses in the General Business District. However, the zoning
ordinance does provide the Zoning Administrator the ability to determine if uses not permitted,
conditional or accessory, are appropriate and compatible with the district. Section 9.1002(6)
General Provisions-Prohibited Uses, reads as follows:
"Any use not listed as either permitted, conditional or accessory in a particular district or
any use not determined by the Zoning Administrator to be substantially similar to a use
listed as permitted, conditional, or accessory shall be prohibited in that district."
In determining if the proposed use is substantially similar, the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Ordinance provide the following guidance.
The Comprehensive plan, related to commerce, states that the City's goals are to:
1. Preserve and enhance the existing commercial areas within the community. (p.8)
2. Enhance the economic viability of the community. (p. 10)
The Zoning Ordinance states, "commercial districts are established to provide for a wide range of
goods and services in locations throughout the community; provide employment oppommities;
and enhance the livability of the community by providing convenient access to goods and
services.
Furthermore, the Zoning Ordinance states in part that, "the purpose of the General Business
District is to provide appropriate locations for general retail sales, services and other commercial
developments that benefit from their proximity to other commercial uses.
Case: 2002-1109
Page: 3
As the Planning Commission reviews the application, please keep the following questions in
mind:
Does this use preserve and enhance the existing commercial areas within the community?
· Does this use enhance the economic viability of the community?
· Does this use meet the intent or purpose of Commercial Districts?
· Does this use provide for a wide range of retail goods and services?
· Will retail uses, such as Rainbow, adjacent to the proposed use benefit from the proposed
use?
The zoning ordinance also identifies specific development standards that apply to Schools, K-12
in Section 7; 9.701 (3) Page 7-20; these standards are:
· The use shall include a regular course of study accredited by the State of MN - The Area
Learning Center meets this requirement.
· The site shall be served by a major collector or higher classification of roadway- Central
Avenue is identified as a minor arterial roadway and 44th Avenue is identified as a
collector road.
· The parcel upon which the use is located shall have a lot area no less than four (4) times
the area of the building footprint - The current lot area is approximately 4 times the size
of the building footprint.
To the extent practical, new construction or additions to existing buildings shall be
complementary and compatible with the scale and character of the surroundings and
exterior materials shall be compatible with those used in the immediate neighborhood -
There are no plans to alter the appearance of the structural exterior of this space, other
than signage and facade improvements.
· An appropriate transition area between the use and adjacent property shall be provided by
landscaping, screening or other site improvements consistent with the character of the
neighborhood - There is an existing hedge line that buffers the commercial from the
residential on the north. This will be maintained.
· A transportation management plan shall be submitted to address off-street parking, bus
loading and unloading, traffic control, and the impact of the facility on the surrounding
roadways - The applicants have submitted a narrative that describes what is anticipated
for parking needs and bussing. It is anticipated that one shuttle will be used for drop-offs
and pick-ups twice through the day, which shouldn't create any traffic or transportation
conflicts on site.
The applicants have requested a conditional use permit to allow for what they believe is a similar
and compatible use to the other uses in the district. Staff has reviewed the applicant narrative and
attachments provided, and has these comments:
· The Area Learning Center proposed is a very vital community program. However, staff
3
Case: 2002-1109
Page: 4
believes this use is not substantially similar to permitted or conditional uses in the GB
District.
K-12 School Programs are currently allowed by conditional use permit in Residential
Zoning Districts. School District 916 believes Area Leaming Centers can best survive and
have success when located in non-traditional settings such as the Central Valu Retail
Center.
· There are several Area Learning Centers located in commercial space around the Twin
Cities area (see attachments). However, the most comparable locations are The
Mahtomedi Alternative Learning Center and The Alternative Learning Center in
Champlin.
· Several staff members had a chance to visit the Mahtomedi Area Learning Center and
learn about its programs. Staffwas impressed with the facilities, and the Learning Center
appeared to blend in well with its otherwise surrounding commercial environment. It
should be noted that the Mahtomedi Area Learning Center is next door to a liquor store,
and two doors down from a restaurant/bar.
Parking requirements for a Senior High School are ten (10) spaces plus one space per every 6
students. With a projection of 150 students initially and a 200 student maximum, a total of 43
parking spaces would be required. Currently Walgreen's requires approximately 40 parking
spaces. So the Area Learning Center would only require a max of 3 additional off-street parking
spaces. This change in use would have virtually no impact from a parking standpoint as the
existing parking lot has space for 627 vehicles. The parking lot ingress and egress will remain
unchanged, with two curb cuts along 44th Avenue and two on 43rd Avenue as well.
The current Walgreen's space is approximately 12,000 square feet in size, and Metro 916 intends
to revamp and redesign the interior of the building to meet its needs (see narrative). They are not
proposing any structural exterior changes, except aesthetic and signage improvements. The
interior space will be revamped with demountable walls, which can easily be adjusted to meet
changing space needs.
Summary:
The aspects of this proposal are as follows:
· An Area Learning Center will provide a reuse for a soon to be vacant Walgreen's space.
· An Area Learning Center is a beneficial and well-established program that is important to
serving Columbia Heights students.
· An Area Learning Center does not meet Comprehensive Plan land use and economic
development goals.
· An Area Learning Center does not meet the intent of the General Business zoning district.
· The Area Learning Center is being proposed for the space next to the City liquor store.
Case: 2002-1109
Page: 5
CONCLUSION
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of an Area
Learning Center for Northeast Metro School District 916 at 4350 Central Avenue NE for the
following reasons:
· Public and private schools (K-12) are not listed in the Zoning Ordinance as either a
permitted or conditional use in the GB, General Business District, and are only
allowed by conditional use permit in the residential districts.
· An Area Learning Center is not a substantially similar or compatible use with the
other uses in the district as determined by the Zoning Official under the guidance of
the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
Recommended Motion:
Move to recommend City Council denial of the Conditional Use Permit to allow for the
establishment of an Area Learning Center for Northeast Metro School District 916 to operate at
4350 Central Avenue NE, for the following reasons:
· Public and private schools (K-12) are not listed in the Zoning Ordinance as either a
permitted or conditional use in the GB, General Business District, and are only
allowed by conditional use permit in residential districts.
· An Area Learning Center is not a substantially similar or compatible use with the
other uses in the district as determined by the Zoning Official.
Attachments:
Completed application form; Notice of Public Heating; Attachment list and related
attachments
CITY 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. cohu, bia-heights.,m, us
Thomas Bamsdoll, Chair
Ted Yshla
Donna Schmitt
Stephan Johnson
Tamara Ericson
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the Planning and Zoning Commission will conduct a public hearing in the City Council Chambers of
City Hall, 590 N.E. 40th Avenue, at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, November 13, 2002. The order of business is as follows:
A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the establishment of an Area Learning Center for
School District 916 at the Central Valu Shopping Center, 4350 Central Avenue NE, which is now
occupied by Walgreen' s.
Section 9.408 requires that the Plant'lng Commission hold a public hearing for a conditional use permit,
and shall submit its recommendation to the City Council.
Notice is hereby given that all persons having an interest will be given an opportunity to be heard. For questions, you may
contact Tim Johnson, City Planner, at 763-706-3673.
Planning and Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
Walt Fehst
City Manager
TJ
The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or
employment in, its services, programs or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with
disabilities to participate in all City of Columbia Heights' services, programs and activities. Auxiliary aids for handicapped
persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council
Secretary at 706-3611, to make arrangements. (TDD/706-3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only.)
THE CITY OF' COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES
EQUAl OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Item
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
NORTHEAST METRO INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT 916
List of Attachments
Explanation of Proposed Land Use Change/Reason for Request
Site Map of Central Valu Mall Shopping Center
City of Columbia Heights Future Land Use Map
List of Similar Altemative Programs Located in Other
Metro Retail or Office Commercial Space
Photographs of Area Learning Centers in the Metro Area
Drawing of Existing Interior Building Space
Drawing of Proposed Changes to Interior Building Space
Proposed Lease Agreement between Bradley Operating Limited Partnership
and Northeast Metro School District 916
Legal Description of Subject Property
List of Property Owners within 350 feet of Subject Property
Attachment
1
lA
lB
lC
1D
1E
1F
2
3
4
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
**PRE-APPLICATION MEETING REQUIRED WITH CITY PLANNER BEFORE SUBMISSION**
APPLICATION FOR:
Re Zoning/Zoning Amendment
Variance
Conditional Use Permit
Subdivision Approval
Site Plan Approval
Lot Split
Vacation
X
Application Date 10- 21- 0 2
Case No:
Fee: 120.00 Date pa: [t9/.2,,/o
1. Street Address of Subject Property: 4350 Central Ave.
2. Legal Description of Subject Property: See At'cachmo_n'c_ .~
3. Applicant 4. Owner:
Name: Northeast Metro 916 Name: Bradley Operating Ltd.
Intermediate School District c/o Heritage Property Investment
Trust Inc
Address: 3300 c~n~,~ry Aw~n,3e North Address:535 Boylston S~_r~
White Bear Lake, MN 55110-1894 Boston, MA 02116-3766
Phone: 651-415-5657 Phone:
5. Reason for Request: (Please attach a written narrative describing request and justification for request)
6. Zoning: (Staffwill fill out)
Applicable City Ordinance #
Present Zoning C~>
Present Use ~-~)f7,%~I
See attached.
7. Exhibits Submitted (maps, surveys, diagrams, etc)
Section
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed Use
a ~- f.~ c.h,=d
8. Acknowledgement and Signature: The undersigned hereby represents upon all of the penalties of law,
for the purpose of inducing the City of Columbia Heights to take the action herein requested, that ali
statements herein are true and that all work herein mentioned will be done in accordance with the
Signature of Applicant: Date: 10-21-02
Taken by: ~,..~.~
Dr.___Don Lifto~
ATTACHMENT 1
Explanation of Proposed Land Use
Change/Reason for Request
II.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
NORTHEAST METRO INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT 916
Explanation of Proposed Land Use Change/Reason for Request
INTRODUCTION - BASIS FOR REQUEST
As set forth below, based on student need primarily in the Columbia Heights School District,
Northeast Metro Intermediate School District 916 ("Northeast Metro") is seeking to establish
an area learning center in the City of Columbia Heights. Also, as explained more fully
below, students attending an alternative program often have been unsuccessful in the
traditional school setting. Accordingly, Northeast Metro seeks to establish the area learning
center in an area/building within the community which does not resemble a traditional school
setting. Based on past experiences in the operation of area learning centers in other
communities, Northeast Metro determined that business or office space located within the
Columbia Heights School District boundaries would provide the most optimal location for
the success of this program.
Following an exhaustive exploration of available lease space in the community, Northeast
Metro located and entered into discussions for leasing space at the Central Valu Mall
Shopping Center. The leased space would occupy the former Walgreens store located at
4350 Central Avenue N.E. in Columbia Heights ("subject property") (see Attachment lA,
space # 4).
According to the Columbia Heights City Land Use and Development Ordinance, Chapter 9,
the space at Cental Value Mall presently is zoned as commercial space in the General
Business District (see attachment 1B). Based on the substantial similarity of present uses of
the General Business District as well as for reasons set forth below, Northeast Metro is
seeking a conditional use permit from the City of Columbia Heights to allow it to operate an
ALC at the subject property.
HISTORY OF AREA LEARNING CENTERS
Area learning centers were created by the Legislature in 1987 as a component of Minnesota's
open enrollment opportunities. In this regard, based on a recognized need for alternative
learning formats, the Minnesota Legislature authorized school districts, either individually
or in cooperation with other school districts, service cooperatives, intermediate school
districts, local educational and employment transition partnerships, public and private
secondary and post-secondary institutions, public agencies, businesses and foundations to
establish area learning centers. See MmrN. STAT. § 123A.05, Subd. 1.
The primary purpose of area leaming centers is to provide a non-traditional setting designed
to meet the individual needs of students to ensure that they are able to graduate from high
school. Area learning center programs specifically are targeted to meet the needs of students
who require a different approach or individualized instruction to be successful in school by
providing a non-traditional, smaller setting, using an experiential/hands-on approach. While
area learning centers generally are associated with providing opportunities for students to
meet high school graduation requirements, centers also serve middle school students. Area
learning centers further must seek the involvement of community education programs, post-
secondary institutions, interagency collaboratives, culturally based organizations, mutual
assistance associations, and other community resources, businesses and other federal, state
and local public agencies. See MINN. STAT. § 123A.05, Subd.3.
When area learning centers were initially established in Minnesota in 1987, the Legislature
authorized grants for four area learning centers to be developed. These four original area
learning centers were designed to demonstrate successful techniques for serving "at risk"
learners. These original four model area learning centers were located in the Carver-Scott
Cooperative Center, Mounds View Schools, North Branch Schools, and St. Cloud Schools.
Following their development, implementation, and extensive evaluation, the concept of area
learning centers was embraced by the Minnesota Department of Education for dissemination
around the state. There currently are over 70 area learning centers in Minnesota. Area
programs, including area learning centers, now enroll over 150,000 students each year.
III. SERVICES AREA LEARNING CENTERS PROVIDE
Area learning center attendance is an option for students, generally under the age of 21, who
qualify under the Graduation Incentives Program by meeting at least one of the following
criteria:
performs substantially below the performance level for pupils of the same age on a
local achievement test
is at least one year behind in satisfactorily completing course work or obtaining
credits for graduation
is pregnant or is a parent
has been assessed as chemically dependent
is a victim of physical or sexual abuse
has experienced mental health problems
has experienced homelessness sometime within the last six months
speaks English as a second language or has limited English proficiency
· has been referred by a school district for enrollment in an eligible program
IV.
has withdrawn from school or has been chronically truant
has been excluded or expelled
Area Learning Centers provide:
academic and life skills taught using nontraditional methods
trade and vocational skills training
career exploration and opportunities for work experience, applied learning, work-
based learning, school-based learning and youth services
transition services which assist learners to progress from school to school, school to
work, or school to post-secondary institution
support services to assist learners in solving personal and social issues
access to regular school programs
access to Post-Secondary Enrollment Options, allowing juniors and seniors to attend
post-secondary institutions and receive high school credit
Students may choose to receive their diploma from either their home district or the district
in which the area learning center is located. Area learning center credits are transferable to
any school district.
HISTORY OF AREA LEARNING CENTERS OPERATED BY NORTHEAST
METRO
Northeast Metro is an intermediate school district which, in cooperation with member school
districts, offers integrated programs and services for secondary, post-secondary, and adult
students in the areas of vocational education, special education, and other authorized
services. Northeast Metro provides programs and services for member school districts and
services in three core areas, namely special education, career and technical education, and
educational services.
In 1992, Northeast Metro received a proposal to develop its first area learning center.
Following a feasibility study, the Northeast Metro Area Learning Center was established.
It began serving students in the Capitol View Center in Little Canada in September of 1992.
In the fall of 2001, the Northeast Metro Area Learning Center moved into a newly remodeled
section of Capitol View. It is located on Rice Street and County Road B-2 in Little Canada.
The capacity of the facility is 300 students at any given time and 200 average daily
memberships in a calendar year. Current enrollment is 286 students on site. In addition,
facilitation of the Targeted Services program for interested member districts is provided, as
well as the education component of area workforce centers' summer youth programs.
Currently the Area Learning Center:
· operates in 9,500 square feet of space
· is staffed by 17 teachers and support staff
· serves 200 average daily memberships each year, excluding satellite programming
· provides learners with the opportunity to achieve 24 Graduation Standards
· is open from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Thursdays, and from 8:00 a.m.
to 2:00 p.m. on Fridays during the school year, and 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Monday
through Fridays during the summer
· serves learners 225 school days per year
· provides school-based and community-based programming
· offers carefully guided independent study to learners over 16 who demonstrate they
can manage it
· provides a mainstream program for special education students who meet area
learning center criteria
· provides a full middle school program for students for whom a comprehensive
referral establishes such a program is necessary
· facilitates the provision of Target Services for a member district
DEMONSTRATED NEED FOR AN AREA LEARNING CENTER IN THE CITY OF
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
Northeast Metro District 916 has been informed that a need exists on the west side of the
district for area teaming center programs and services similar to those offered at the Little
Canada site. This need has been confirmed based upon discussions with the local school
district leadership.
VI.
More specifically, in January 2002, leaders of the Columbia Heights schools visited the
Northeast Metro Area Learning Center. After establishing the compatibility of philosophy
regarding services to at risk learners, they inquired about the possibility of transporting their
alternative program students to the Capitol View site. However, Capitol View is, and has
been for the past four years, at capacity and could not accommodate the approximate 120
learners who are, or have requested, services in Columbia Heights. Therefore, in cooperation
with the Columbia Heights School District, Northeast Metro began consideration of
developing a west campus in the area of the City of Columbia Heights.
Through the meetings with the Columbia Heights School District leaders, it has been
established that there are currently 90 students in their alternative program, which would be
closed upon the creation of the west site. In addition, there are 30 students on a waiting list.
Using this information, and extrapolating based on the past five years' experience at the
Northeast Metro Area Learning Center, it is projected that a west site would serve 150
average daily memberships in its initial year, reaching its capacity of 200 by the third year.
In addition to providing opportunities for students to meet graduation requirements, there is
an expectation that the area learning center also will provide facilitation of Targeted Services,
summer school programming for special needs elementary and middle school students in the
Columbia Heights Schools, Graduation Standards/Basic Standards Remediation summer
school and possibly English as a Second Language services for the west side of the district.
An on-site middle school program, similar to that provided at the Capitol View site, is
included in the planning.
COMPATIBILITY OF PROPOSED LEASE SPACE TO THE NEEDS OF
STUDENTS
The experiences of Northeast Metro in its operation of alternative programs, as well as the
information obtained in the studies of area learning centers referenced above, show that
students attending alternative programs feel most comfortable and achieve better in sites
located within the community or in sites whose appearance does not resemble a traditional
school setting. Students attending an alternative program often have been unsuccessful in
traditional schools and associate their lack of success with traditional settings. Thus, the
most desirable situation for an alternative program site is one that is community based.
Moreover, as stated above, area learning centers offer, support and cooperate with many
community-based services. These services are not located on site but off-site at local
businesses, community centers and other government agencies which frequently are based
in commercially zoned areas. For example, many of the students served by area learning
centers participate in school-to-work programs in cooperation with local businesses. By
locating area learning centers in the business community, the availability of these programs
are more readily accessible to students. Similarly, area learning centers offer a flexible
source of labor for area businesses which is not necessarily available when students attend
a traditional school setting. Also, many of the students to whom area learning center services
are targeted are students who are pregnant or who are parents. The proximity of day care
facilities located near the area learning center provide a benefit to students who may
otherwise not attend school due to child care issues. Thus, involvement between these
agencies and businesses and area learning centers is much more conducive when these
entities are located in close geographic proximity.
For these reasons, the most likely area for success of an area learning center in the Columbia
Heights area would be in business or office space located within the business district of the
City of Columbia Heights.
VII. SUCCESS OF OTHER ALC PROGRAMS LOCATED IN BUSINESS
COMMUNITIES IN OTHER CITIES
The operation of the proposed area learning center in Columbia Heights is similar to the
operations of the Capitol View site referenced above. As mentioned, the Capitol View site
presently operates in retail space in the City of Mahtomedi. Despite the fact that school
districts surrounding the Capitol View site all have area learning centers or alternative
programs, the Northeast Metro Area Learning Center continues to operate at capacity.
Strong programming, committed staffing, good location, and fiscal responsibility lead to.
being able to offer a competitive operation.
Northeast Metro also has operated several other successful programs located in the business
community (see Attachment 1 C). Moreover, there are numerous other suburban cities which
have embraced the establishment of similar alternative programs in leased retail or other
commercial space (see Attachment 1 D).
As demonstrated, the districts surrounding the proposed west site have successful alternative
programming in place. With the core Columbia Heights student population and the
application of the principles that make the Capitol View site successful, there is no doubt the
west site will be successful financially, as well as programmatically upon establishment of
the area learning center at the subject property.
VIII. COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING USES AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF
THE GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
A. SIMILARITY OF USES
As set forth in the Columbia Heights City Ordinance, the City presently permits in
its General Business District uses which are similar to that of an area learning center.
In this regard, the ordinance allows for the establishment of vocational schools and
business schools, community centers, schools for the performing/visual/martial arts
and day care facilities.
CJ
As set forth above, the ALC is not a traditional K-12 public school. Rather, it offers
programs and services to non-traditional students in a non-traditional setting. One
of its primary goals is to provide career-oriented services with the participation of the
business community. As such, the services offered by the ALC would not differ
significantly from that of a vocational school.
Similarly, as mandated by law, the area learning center must seek the involvement
of community education programs, post-secondary institutions, interagency
collaboratives, culturally-based organizations, mutual assistance associations, and
other community resources, businesses and other federal, state and local public
agencies. See MrNN. STAT. § 123A.05, Subd.3. Thus, while the area learning center
focuses on offering educational services to students, it also will be offering to
students and participating xvith various community programs. In essence the area
learning center will be providing a service to the community not only by educating
and training its students but also by fulfilling this statutory duty of involving these
public and community agencies in its programming.
CONTINUATION OF TAX BASE
While traditional K-12 schools generally are exempt from property taxation in
connection with the operation of a K-12 educational program, the proposed area
learning center would be subject to taxation. In this regard, Northeast Metro would
be leasing retail/commercial space. Pursuant to state law, these leases may subject
to property taxation. See MINN. STAT. § Based on the fact that Northeast
Metro would only be entering into a lease agreement, in contrast to a lease/purchase
agreement, in an amount in excess of the statutory minimum, Northeast Metro's
leased interest in the Central Valu Mall Shopping Center would be subject to
taxation. This tax obligation further is set forth in the proposed lease agreement with
Central Value Mall shopping Center (see Attachment 2, Art. XIII). Accordingly, the
area learning center would continue to provide a taxable use of the space.
SIMILARITY WITH APPEARANCE AND OPERATION OF OTHER RETAIL
SPACES
1. Similarity of Outward Appearance
As stated above, the purpose of establishing area learning centers in the
business community is to provide students with a non-traditional school
setting. Therefore, the appearance of area learning centers closely resemble
local retail establishments and often are indistinguishable from other
businesses. For example, attached are photographs of other area learning
centers which presently are operated in business/retail spaces located in metro
communities of similar size and composition as the City of Columbia Heights
(see Attachment 1E). As these photographs demonstrate, these area learning
centers resemble the exterior of the other retail/business spaces surrounding
them.
Similarly, Northeast Metro would be constructing its area learning center in
Columbia Heights to meld with the appearance of the retail establishments
in the Central Value Mall Shopping Center. Northeast Metro would be
complying with all City ordinances with respect to signage and outward
fixtures and appearances. Changes to the present outward appearance of the
building further would be in compliance with the proposed lease agreement
(see Attachment 2).
2. Hours of Operation
The area learning center in Columbia Heights would be operating under the
same general hours as the area learning center operated by Northeast Metro
at the Capitol View site. The area learning center operates 12 months during
the year. It is anticipated that the area learning center would be open from
8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Thursdays, and from 8:00 a.m. to
2:00 p.m. on Fridays during the school year. The area learning center would
operate from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Monday through Fridays during the
summer.
While it is not presently anticipated that the area learning center would be
operating during the weekends, there are several other entities operating
under the permitted uses in the General Business District which also do not
operate during the weekends. For example, vocational or business schools,
government offices and day care programs traditionally are not open to the
public on weekends. Other establishments, such as medical and dental
clinics, veterinary clinics and other retail businesses, frequently do not
operate on Sundays and usually have limited Saturday hours. Thus,
Northeast Metro anticipates that its operations would be substantially similar
to the operations of other local area businesses and retailers.
D. IMPROVEMENT OF APPEARANCE OF SHOPPING CENTER AND LEASED SPACE
In order to comply with state and local ordinances as well as to meet the functional
needs of the proposed area learning center, it is the intention of Northeast Metro to
make numerous improvements to the present condition of the leased space. As
outlined in the attached proposed lease, Northeast Metro would make structural
improvements to the leased space which not only would add to the fiscal value of this
property but also would add to the physical appearance of the space.
mo
While there would be numerous structural improvements to the space, these
improvements are general improvements which are compatible to the use of this
space for any business purpose. For example, Northeast Metro would be installing
new carpeting and making improvements to the heating and air conditioning systems.
Moreover, to the extent specific improvements will be made to this space in order to
make it functionally operational as an area learning center, these particular changes
are not permanent in nature. In this regard, it is the intent of Northeast Metro to
divide portions of the space for uses as various classrooms. The rooms would not be
partitioned by permanent structures but rather by demountable walls which could be
easily removed, restoring the space to its original spacing. The specific plans for the
structural improvements to the interior of the space are attached (see Attachment 1F
and 1G).
IMPACT ON TRAFFIC AND PARKING ISSUES
Based on its operations at the Capitol View Site, Northeast Metro anticipates that the
operation of an alternative learning center at the Central Value Mall Shopping Center
would insignificantly impact the present parking and traffic situation at that location.
With respect to transportation, in general, area learning centers do not provide
transportation to individual students attending these facilities. Thus, students
attending area learning centers are responsible for their own transportation. Most
students walk to school, take public transportation, drive their own vehicle or obtain
a ride to school from either other students or caregivers. Based on the staggered
scheduling of student classes, it is anticipated that there would be little, if any, added
traffic congestion to the area by students and staff.
Similarly, the will be no added bus congestion from the operation of the area learning
center. In cooperation with area schools, students attending classes part time at area
schools and part time at area learning centers are shuttled between the school and the
area learning center. Northeast Metro anticipates it would operate only one shuttle
between area schools and the alternative learning center. The shuttle would arrive
once in the morning and once in the afternoon. Based upon present projections of the
number of students being provided such transportation, it is not anticipated that a
full-size bus would be necessary.
For the reasons set forth above, Northeast Metro similarly does not anticipate that the
operation of the area learning center would create any parking issues. For example,
at the Capital View site, the area learning center is allotted approximately 50 parking
spaces. Very rarely, if ever, are the majority of the parking spaces utilized by
students and staff. Based on the similarities between the Capitol View site and the
proposed operation of the Columbia Heights site, it is not anticipated that the
operation of the area learning center will cause any parking issues at the subject
property.
F. CONSISTENCY WITH THE GOALS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
In its stated Land Use Goals, Policies and Implementation Strategies, the City of
Columbia Heights has set as its primary goal for its Comprehensive Plan related to
the business areas within the City the "preservation and enhancement of the existing
viable commercial areas within the community." A second goal stated in the
Comprehensive Plan is the provision of opportunities and mechanisms for
redevelopment of targeted areas within the community.
It is the intention of Northeast Metro that by operating the area learning center at the
subject property, it would be assisting the City in meeting these goals. As set forth
above, Northeast Metro intends to make various improvements to the subject
property which will enhance the visual appearance of the Central Value Mall
Shopping Center. These improvements will make this area of the business
community more attractive to other retailers as well as consumers. The operation of
the area learning center will draw consumers, comprised of students, parents, staff
and other members of the community, to the mall area to patronize other local retail
establishments. In summary, the alternative learning center will keep this area of the
General Business District vital.
G. GENERAL BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY
As stated above, the Columbia Heights School District has exceeded its capacity in
providing area learning opportunities for its students. These students presently are
not being served, are not being served with the level of services which would make
them successful, or are being served by other school districts outside of the Columbia
Heights community.
These students, who are residents of the City of Columbia Heights, are an important
part of the community. Their ability to succeed educationally promotes the
realization of citizens who hold jobs in the community, contribute to the tax base,
pUrchase homes, participate in government and add to the virility of a community.
In contrast, students who are unable to succeed in school generally discontinue their
education, have difficulty obtaining jobs to support themselves and their families,
detract from the tax base, contribute to crime, and detract from the community. As
stated above, the best opportunity for these students to succeed is the provision of an
area learning center in a business area which offers a non-traditional educational
experience.
10
The proposed area learning center would provide a great benefit to all residents of the
City of Columbia Heights. Not only would the students being served by the area
learning center profit, the general community would benefit from the attendance and
success of these students. As non-traditional students attending a school in a local
retail area, these students will provide a convenient employee base in cooperation
with local retail employers. They, as well as staff members and visitors, will be
effective consumers of the products and services provided by local retailers. The
structural improvements will enhance the aesthetic value of this retail area which
would draw in other valuable retailers and their customers. In summary, the
operation of an area learning center at the subject property will be a mutually
beneficial venture for the City of Columbia Heights as well as the students who
desperately require these services.
IX. CONCLUSION
Northeast Metro remains ready and willing to provide the Planning Commission with any
additional information it may require to review Northeast Metro's application for a
conditional use permit. Additionally, Northeast Metro is willing to abide with any conditions
the City may attached to its proposed use of the subject property.
For the reasons stated above, Northeast Metro urges the Planning Commission to grant a
conditional use permit to allow the operation of an ALC at the subject property.
11
ATTACHMENT lA
Site Map of Central Valu Mall Shopping Center
Oct-1?-ZOOZ 03:ZBpm From-ATSR +?B~-SZ$-~B9 T-49B P,O0~/O0~ F-B94
///////-~. T77///;¢¢ ??~ /
/ , / // // /
ATTACHMETNT 1 C
List of Similar Alternative Programs Located
in Other Metro Retail or Office Commercial Space
SUBURBAN CITIES WITH ALTERNATIVE OR SPECIAL
EDUCATION K-12 PROGRAMS LOCATED IN LEASED RETAIL
OR OFFICE COMMERCIAL SPACE
The following listing represents and informal phone survey and is not all-inclusive. It is
intended to illustrate the fact that K-12 leased use of commercial space is not unusual.
Anoka (Independent School District 11)
Andover (Independent School District 11)
Brooklyn Park (Intermediate School District 287)
Champlin (Independent School District 11)
Coon Rapids (Independent School District 11)
Cottage Grove (Independent School District 832)
Eden Prairie (Intermediate School District 287)
Edina (Intermediate School District 287)
Golden Valley (Intermediate School District 287)
Hopkins (Intermediate School District 287)
Mahtomedi (Independent School District 831)
Minnetonka (Intermediate School District 287)
Plymouth (Intermediate School District 287)
Roseville (Independent School District 621)
Shoreview (Independent School District 621)
Vadnais Heights (Intermediate School District 916)
9~5~2~ms
ATTACHMENT 1D
Photographs of Area Learning Centers in the Metro Area
WELS Program
NE Metro 916
WELS Program
NE Metro 916;.':
Business Complex
Mahtomedi .Mternative
Learning Center
Tanning
Liquor
Store
Mahtomedi Al'
Learning
District 917 Alternative Program - I.D.E.A
Main Street, Farmington
ATTACHMENT 1E
Drawing of Existing Interior Building Space
11:S2am
From-ATS&R Elec
.!
I
I
!
T-324
P.004/005
F-30g
ATTACHMENT 1F
Drawing of Proposed Changes to Interior Building Space
Oc~-I?-ZOOZ 03:ZBpm From-ATSR +TB~-DZ~-~Z~B T-498 P.OOZ/O0~ F-Bg4
ravs
AUGUST 2002
AMERICAN
PLANNING
ASSOCIATION
Garages: Not Just for Cars Anymore
By./axon Wittenberg
The public interest in regulating accessory structures is in conflict with
a perceived need to build residential garages larger and in ways
that could compromise the character ot: a neighborhood.
This Minneapolis garage (detached and locatea
along the alley) was recently constructed with the
benoqt of a variance to increase the maximum
permitted height. The homeowner attempted to
mimic the characteristics of a carriage house that
previously existed on the pmpert~
Residential garages serve many functions today. For many
homeowners, the garage is still a place to park the family car.
Some use it for storage and others tinker in it to relieve stress.
The public interest in regulating these accessory structures is in
conflict with a perceived need to build them larger and in ways
that could compromise the character of a neighborhood. This
issue of Zoning News provides an overview of how communities
throughout the U.S. regulate residential garages, including floor
area and height limitations, minimum setbacks, design standards,
and restrictions related to authorized uses of garages.
History
Prior to the automobile, carriage houses and stables were the
prevalent accessory structures. In Garage: Reinventing the Place
We Park, author Kira Obolensky briefly covers the history of
. · . about this article.
Join us online!
During the week of September 16-20, go online to
participate in our "Ask the Author" forum, an interactive
feature of Zoning News. Jason Wittenberg will be
available to answer questions about this article. Go to
the APA website at www. planning.org and follow the
links to the "Ask the Author" section. From there, just
submit your questions about the article using an e-mail
link. The author will reply, posting the answers
cumulatively on the website for the benefit of all
subscribers. This feature will be available for selected
issues of ZoningNews at announced times. After each
online discussion is closed, the answers will be saved in
an online archive available through the APA Zoning
News webpages.
garages, including those with workshops, offices, hobby space,
dwelling units, and parking spaces. Obolensky notes that
America's first car owners, the wealthy, also built the first
garages, but when automobile ownership became a reality for
the middle class, garage construction multiplied. Fire concerns
kept them detached and along the alley, but with with the
coming of fire-resistant walls in the 1950s, the garage left: its
mainstay and was attached to the house. Still modest in size,
they faced the street.
Recent Trends
According to the National Association of Homebuilders
(NAHB), the percentage of new single-family homes
constructed with a two-car (or more) garage increased from 65
to 82 percent between 1987 and 2000 while the percentage of
single-family homes constructed without a garage or carport
declined from 18 to i I percent (see www. nahb.com/facts/
forecast/sf, html). According to NAHB, one in six new homes is
constructed with a three-car garage.
The PBS program Aff/uenza, produced by KCTS/Seattle and
Oregon Public Broadcasting, analyzed the social and environmental
aspects of materialism and overconsumption in America (see
www. pbs.org/kcts/afl:luenza/show/show, html). On the program's
website it is claimed that a typical three-car garage---increasingly
common in new homes--contains approximately the same square
footage as a home built in the 1950s. Also consider the decrease in
the number of persons per household in the U.S. between 1950
and 2000 from 3.37 m 2.62, and add to it the items placed in
today's garages: SUVs, yard-care equipment, tools, recreational gear,
and various other odds and ends. In short: garages are getting larger
and more versatile. Some estimates suggest that only about 15
percent of the households with a garage actually use it for parking.
Furthermore, street-facing attached garages have come to dominate
the front of many new homes--an unattractive and distinctly
unfriendly trend--with zoning as the only mitigating force behind
these structures.
Definitions
Garages and other accessory structures tend to be defined
similarly across the country, with almost universal agreement
that they are incidental and subordinate to the principal
structure. Some communities even combine the definitions for
accessory use and accessory structure.
The Lincoln, Nebraska, code states that, "An accessory
building is a subordinate building or a portion of the main
building, the use of which is incidental to that of the main
building or to the main use of the premises. An accessory use is
one which is incidental to the main use of the premises."
Attached garages can be a challenge to regulate because most
communities consider them part of the principal structure. So
how might a community determine a setback for the garage?
Most communities want to apply the same regulations, such as
floor area limitations, to both attached and detached accessory
structures. The Lincoln definition was written so that Ua portion
of the main building" may be interpreted to be an accessory
building or structure.
Some ordinances define garage separately from accessory use or
accessory structure. Stamford, Connecticut, states "Garage-
Private: A detached accessory building or a portion of a main
Jason Wittenberg is a planner with the al4inneapolis Planning
Department.
building for the parking and storage of automobiles belonging to
the occupants of the premises. One commercial vehide which does
not exceed three-quarters tons in capacity and is used solely by the
occupants may be stored in a private garage." A relatively small
percentage of codes offer a separate definition for carport, a
sheltering structure for vehicles that is open on two or three sides.
Floor Area
Being subordinate to the principle structure, floor area
limitations for garages are challenged under modern-day
consumer habits. Indeed, four- and five-car garages are a
growing problem for communities of'all sizes. Although this is
particularly problematic in developing communities, built-out
cities like Minneapolis also grapple with it.
The Minneapolis zoning ordinance from the 1960s to 1999
limited the size of residential accessory structures to 676 square
Part garage and part carport, this structure includes rooftop vegetation and
a rooftop deck.
feet or 10 percent of the lot area, whichever was greater. The
limitation applied to the sum of all detached accessory
structures (gazebos, storage sheds, etc.) and attached garages and
carports. Given that most residential lots in Minneapolis are
between 5,000 and 6,000 square feet, households were limited
to constructing a garage of 676 square feet or less. This allows
either a large two-car garage (e.g., 26 feet by 26 feet) or a small
thrce-car garage (e.g., 30 feet by 22 feet).
The city's current zoning code, adopted in 1999, eliminated the
~10 percent of the lot area~ allowance for lots with single- and two-
family dwellings. City officials found that some property owners
with unusually large lots (by city standards) were constructing
accessory structures that negatively affected the character of the
dty's urban neighborhoods. The current standards remain a topic of
debate, and requests for variances are not uncommon.
Some cities with the 10 percent rule have dealt with
"megagarages" by setting a cap on the extent to which the rule
may be applied. In Canton, Ohio, all residences are allowed a
garage of 720 square feet. For large lots, garage area may cover
up to 10 percent of the lot area but may not exceed 1,000
square feet. Lake Forest Park, Washington, also uses the 10
percent rule with a 1,000 square-foot limit.
Other communities express maximum garage size as a
percentage of the square footage of the principal structure. The
Greensboro, North Carolina, unified development ordinance
states that buildings accessory to single- and two-family
dwellings shall not exceed 50 percent of the gross floor area of
the principal building or 600 square feet, whichever is greater.
Some use the standard that an accessory structure cannot
cover more than a specified percentage of the rear yard. In
Evanston, Illinois, accessory structures can cover no more than
40 percent ora rear yard provided that the maximum lot
coverage for all structures on the lot must also be adhered to.
Woodbury, Minnesota, draws from three of the above
approaches. No residential garage can be larger than 1,000
square feet or 30 percent of the main floor area of the principal
building, whichever is greater. However, garages cannot occupy
more than 25 percent of the rear yard. Woodbury and other
developing suburban communities with remaining farms
distinguish between garage and agricultural buildings, which are
allowed to be much larger than private garages.
Setbacks
Detached accessory structures tend to have setback requirements
that are less than the requirements for principal structures or,
alternatively, they are considered permitted encroachments into
required side and rear yards. Attached garages typically must
meet the same setbacks required for principal structures.
Few ordinances allow garages to encroach into the normal
front yard setback. Many take the additional step of prohibiting
garages between a dwelling and a front lot line where the
dwelling may be set back far enough to place a garage in front
without violating the required front yard setback. Some codes
make specific exceptions to front yard setbacks for accessory
structures where a hilly or sloping parcel would prove
problematic or require substantial excavation.
Appropriate front setbacks for garages have become a major
topic of discussion in many parts of the country (See "Setbacks
and Garages in Residential Zoning," February 2001 Zoning
News). Portland, Oregon's, ordinance, which restricts street-
facing garages, received a good deal of media attention,
especially for a zoning issue. The ordinance states that the
length of the garage wall facing the street may be up to 50
percent of the length of the entire building facade. A street-
facing garage may be no closer to the street than the longest
street-facing wall of the dwelling. As an exception, the garage
may be up to six feet in front of the dwelling wall if the garage
wall is less than 40 percent of the length of the entire building
facade and there is a front porch at the dwelling entrance. The
garage wall cannot extend closer to the street than the porch.
Olympia, Washington, has design requirements and design
guidelines for garages. A requirement states that garages and
carports must be designed so as not to dominate the dwelling's
street faqade. Guidelines include suggestions that garages should
be located along alleys, behind the residence, stepped back from
the main building facade, or they should have an entry that is
perpendicular to the street. The dwelling's main entry should be
prominent and should not be subordinate to the garage. Drive-
ways should be as narrow as possible. Garage sidewalls that face
a street should appear as habitable space through the use of
windows or other design elements.
Determining the appropriate side yard setback for garages is
often related to lot sizes in the community. Such regulation is
often a balancing act between allowing flexibility and
recognizing the potential impact on neighboring properties and
community character. For example, where 100-foot-wide lots
predominate, slightly greater side and rear yard setbacks may be
required. In communities where lots are relatively narrow
garages may be allowed very close to side and rear lot lines.
In Canton, garages must be a minimum of four feet from the
side lot line and five feet from the rear lot line. Where garage doors
face an alley, the garage must be 20 feet from the centerline of the
alley. Garages may nor encroach into the front yard.
In Minneapolis, an accessory structure located entirely in the
rear 40 feet or 20 percent of the lot, whichever is greater, may be
located one foot from the interior side and rear lot lines. Where the
garage doors ~ace the alley at the rear lot line, the garage must be
five or six feet from the rear lot line, depending on the district.
In Olympia, residential accessory structures (other than
accessory dwelling units) may be located in a required rear yard
and/or in the rear 20 feet of a required interior side yard. Where
a garage entrance faces a side or rear lot line, it must be set back
at least 10 feet from that lot line.
This detached garage includes second-story space and was
constructed with materials that match the dwelling.
Note that...
* Some communities base side and rear garage
setbacks on the height and floor area of the
structure, recognizing that smaller structures
will have less of an impact on neighboring
properties.
Reductions in side yard setbacks for garages
generally do not apply to corner side yards.
· Reversed corner lots often have unique rules.
* Communities with alleys often have special rules
for setbacks along alleys to allow for vehicular
maneuvering.
It is common for communities to require a separation
of between six and 10 feet between a principal and
accessory structure. A number of communities will
require accessory structures to meet the more
restrictive principal structure setbacks if the accessory
structure is separated from the principal structure by
a distance of less than six ro I 0 feet.
In Evanston, accessory buildings located in a rear or interior
side yard must be at least three feet from any property line.
The Mesa, Arizona, code states the following:
In all Residence districts, a detached accessory building:
· May be located in the required side and rear yards, provided it is
within the rear one-quarter (1/4) of the lot and does not exceed
10 feet (10') in height.
· May be located in the required rear yard, provided ir does not
exceed fifteen feet (15') in height and is not in the required side
yard.
· May be located in the required side yard, provided it does not
exceed eight feet (8') in height (at the highest point) and one
hundred fifty (150) square feet of roof area and is not located in
a side yard required for vehicular access.
· Shall not be located in the required front yard or in front of the
front line ora dwelling.
· Shall not be located in the required rear yard ora corner lot
closer to the street than any dwelling on an adjacent key lot.
Height
As with setback, limitations on garage height also are intended
to ensure that accessory structures are subordinate to the
principal structure, and to prevent large structures from
imposing too much on neighboring properties. For garage
design, limits on the garage height affect the structure's roof
pitch, wall and door height, and inclusion of an attic or second-
floor space. Several different approaches are used to regulate the
maximum height of an accessory structure with a standard gable
roof, including measure to the peak, measure to the midpoint
between the peak and the eave (i.e., the average height), or
measure to the wall height.
Lincoln allows garages up to 15 feet in height, measuring to
the average height of the highest gable. However, any accessory
structure located within 20 feet of the front lot line cannot
exceed eight feet.
Minneapolis limits accessory structure height to 12 feet at
the midpoint between the peak and the eave or the height of the
principal structure, whichever is less.
In Mesa, accessory buildings in residential districts cannot
exceed the height of the dwelling when located on a lot of less
than one acre, and cannot exceed 30 feet in height on a lot of at
least one acre.
Limiting wall height offers extra protection against bulky
accessory structures, particularly where the maximum height is
measured to the peak of the structure. In Redondo Beach,
California, no accessory structure is permitted to exceed a height
of 15 feet at the highest point of the roof. The perimeter walls
cannot exceed 10 feet as measured from existing grade to the
point of intersection with the top plate. A parapet cannot
extend more than three feet above the top plate.
Design Review and Historic Districts
New garages in historic districts generally require review by the
local preservation commission. Obolensky writes about a
member of Minneapolis' Heritage Preservation Commission
who suggests that when constructing a garage that is accessory
to a historic home, one should pay particular attention to the
roof pitch and overhang, window styles, exterior materials, and
stylistic detailing unique to the house.
In Evanston, accessory structures are limited to 14Vz feet in
height for flat or mansard roofs and 17'4 feet for all other roofs,
except as provided for in special regulations for city landmarks
and structures in designated historic districts, where "garages
without flat or mansard roofs shall be no taller than three
fourths the height of the principal structure, measured to the
roof apex, but in no case shall the height exceed 28 feet..."
Further, "The roof of the garage shall be compatible in pitch
and shape with the roof of the principal structure" for those
garages on historic properties or in historic districts. These rules
allow for significantly taller buildings accessory to some of the
community's grand old homes.
Some communities review the design of garages regardless of
whether it is accessory to a historic structure. In Torrance,
California, detached accessory buildings and additions must be
designed to conform to the main structure in quality and
appearance.
In Santa Monica, California, most structures in the R1 district
are ~xempt from the city's architectural review. However, in a
delineated area of the city; several types of development require
architectural review, including, ';amy structure with garage doors
facing the street within the front one-half of the parcel which are
not setback fi.om the building fa(sade a minimum of five feet."
This Minneapolis garage, complete with a functional stor); would not
meet the city's current height limitation.
Must Be Accessory to Something
It is standard for municipalities to prohibit the construction of
accessory structures on property without a principal structure.
Allowing such would conflict with the very notion and
definition of accessory use or building. The Minneapolis zoning
code states, "No accessory use or structure shall be constructed
or established on any lot prior to the time of construction of the
principal structure to which it is accessory. This section shall not
be construed to govern the sequencing of a construction project
in which both the principal and accessory structures are to be
built simultaneously."
Accommodating Required
Off-Street Parking
Municipalities typically require either one or two parking
spaces per dwelling unit. The May 1991 issue of The Zoning
Report says approximately 20 percent of zoning codes (at that
time) have a requirement that one or more parking spaces
must be located within a garage. Enclosed parking
requirements are more common in suburban areas than in
cities. Those that do not have an enclosed parking
requirement dictate the location of parking spaces on a lot.
Most communities also limit the number of vehicles that
may be parked outdoors on a residential lot.
In Redondo Beach, a single-family dwelling in any residential
zone must provide two parking spaces within an enclosed
garage. Multiple-family dwellings need two parking spaces per
unit, of which at least one must be within an enclosed garage.
Condominiums are the exception and have to provide two
enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit.
Uses
Commonly accepted uses for garages include off-street parking,
private workshops, and personal storage. But communities vary
in their allowance of other types of uses, including those for
accessory dwelling units, home occupations, and garage sales.
Accessory Dwelling Units. Accessory dwelling unitsmalso
called mother-in-law apartments--are gaining momentum as a
way to increase affordable housing and provide additional
income for homeowners. They also can spark Opposition
because of the potential increase in density and parking
congestion, particularly in single-family districts.
This garage/carport offers a place to tuck the canoe above the SUV.
In addition to bulk and setback requirements for accessory
dwelling units, codes that allow them tend to mandate
compatibility in appearance with the principal structure
through, for example, a matching roof pitch and similar exterior
materials. They also require an off-street parking space,
ownership of one of the units on the property, and a minimum
amount of lot area (see ~Zoning for Accessory Dwelling Units"
January 1997 Zoning News). California and Washington have
adopted legislation requiring that municipalities allow accessory
dwelling units.
Home Occupations. Personal hobby or office space is generally
considered an acceptable practice for a portion of the garage,
but operating a full-blown business in an accessory structure is
usually prohibited. Excessive commercial use of one's garage is
sure to irritate neighbors who would bear the brunt of the
impacts from noise or fumes.
Garage Saks. To preserve community character and maintain
residential solitude, many communities place limitations on the
number of garage sales or number of days residents may have
them: For example, two sales per year or sales covering no more
than 10 days per calendar year.
The Future
Will design flexibility and relatively low construction costs
lead to more versatile use of garages, including those for
offices and living space? Perhaps an aging population, rising
land costs, and the smart growth movement will make
accessory dwelling units a necessity.
What will garages look like in 20 years? Will zoning code
restrictions prevent them from dominating the streetscape?
Anecdotal evidence suggests a correlation between garage size
and economic health. Perhaps a move toward a simpler lifestyle
could reverse this trend, or maybe commercial self-service
storage facilities could help to mitigate garage size. Until then,
planners and zoning officials will grapple with ordinance
provisions and the requests to vary from them.
NEWS BRIEFS
Seeking Countywide Rezoning Notices
By Dan Pennick, AICP
In both Oregon and South Carolina, there have been efforts by
landowner rights' organizations to broaden the notice policies
that currently exist in enabling legislation in many states, or in
the notice provisions included in most local zoning ordinances.
These policies could place an increased burden on local zoning
officials by specitS, ing that individual notice must be given to
every property owner within their jurisdiction for any proposed
text or map amendment to a zoning ordinance. In South
Carolina, for instance, the South Carolina Landowners'
Association has tried to amend state law and local zoning
ordinances to provide individual notice, via first-class mail, to all
property owners within a jurisdiction every time a rezoning,
or any change in a zoning ordinance, is proposed that may
affect uses allowed on a property and/or change the value of
property. Similar proposals have appeared in Oregon, Texas,
and other states.
Notification requirements in most zoning ordinances
traditionally have included: posted property notice, owner
notification letters, legal notice in a newspaper of general
circulation, and adjacent property owner or neighbor notice
provisions. Property rights organizations, which have been
advocating individual or personal notice, have been active in
areas throughout the country to have these provisions included
within state planning enabling legislation and in local zoning
ordinances. Broadening notification requirements also may
result in legal implications for municipal planners, and their
legal staffs, when someone does not receive individual notice as
specified under these proposed rules. Although the intent of
these proposals is to ensure that everyone is served personal
notice, any expanded notification requirements will place an
additional burden on municipalities through increased
administrative and postage costs.
Dan Pennick h the assistant director for the Charleston County,
South Carolina, Planning Department.
Zoning for the Arts in Maryland
Maryland recently became the first state to enact legislation
creating arts and entertainment district designations on a
statewide basis. As part the state's 5mart Growth initiative, the
Arts and Entertainment District program uses cultural activities
to economically and physically revitalize Maryland
communities. The program, which became effective in July,
provides financial benefits to areas receiving the state's
designation. The districts are exempt from state admissions and
amusement taxes. Developers revitalizing existing
manufacturing, commercial, or industrial buildings for artists to
live and work are exempt from certain property taxes for up to
I 0 years. Finally, ~qualifying artists" living and working in the
districts are eligible for a state income tax break. The state may
designate as many as six new districts each calendar year, but
only one district per county.
Among the first to receive the new designation is the
Prince George's County Gateway Arts District. This district
is unique in that it is comprised of four distinct communities
located along a two-mile stretch of U.S. Route 1. The
Gateway Arts District will include four newly constructed
projects developed by Artspace, Inc., a Minneapolis-based
consulting and development firm. One project will be
located in each of the four communities making up the
district-Hyattsville, Mount Rainier, Brentwood, and North
Brenrwood. Three of the sites will be live/work artist
residences. Each of the live/work projects will have an arts-
related community facility located on the first floor. The
fourth site, located in North Brentwood, will be an African
American heritage museum.
The U.S. Route I corridor along which the art district will be
developed is presendy home to liquor stores, pawn shops, nail
salons, and used car lots. The underlying zoning is Euclidean and
ranges from single-family residential to heavy industrial. Planning
efforts raise a number of challenging zoning issues that must be
addressed to ensure the success of the district.
The first zoning challenge for this project is to anticipate and
incorporate arts-related terminology into the current zoning
ordinance. In Maryland, those uses not explicitly allowed in the
zoning ordinance are deemed so. Therefore, when the art district
designations were implemented it was necessary to at least have
the related uses defined in the ordinance. Definitions for "artist"
and "artist residential studio" are just two of the terms the
zoning ordinance will need to include.
Another challenge Facing planners for the project will be how
to introduce more "vertical" mixed-use development into to the
district without disrupting the existing community character.
Many parts of the district were developed prior to the current
suburban-oriented zoning and therefore have a desirable
development pattern that planners would like to maintain.
However, arts districts typically have developed within urban
cores that vertically mix uses. The district's current horizontal
orientation does not allow for the same flexibility as its vertical
counterpart. Dineene O'Connor, a planner for Prince George's
County with the Maryland National Capitol Park and Planning
Commission (M-NCPPC), notes that a "fully functioning and
vital arts district will be a mix of uses that allow artists the
ability to create their art, as well as sell, demonstrate, or teach
their art to others."
Needless m say, a variety of zoning changes will be necessary
throughout the implementation of the arts district, and planners
will need to determine a suitable process for carrying out these
changes. Creating this process will likely be the most complicated
zoning challenge facing the project, and planners are considering
several options, according m Sandra Youla, a M-NCPPC zoning
analyst for Montgomery County, which currendy has two art
district designations. Ideally, county planners need an easily
replicated proce~ for implementing zoning changes as well as a
clear place in the zoning ordinance that allows for special arts
zoning within the geographic boundaries of the districts. Achieving
such goals is no easy rusk under state law.
Under Maryland statute any change made to a zoning
category--allowing live/work artist residencesmapplies to that
zone wherever it exists. That means there could be arts-related
uses anywhere in the county outside of the designated arts
districts. Planners also could run the risk of making some
existing arts uses non-conforming by changing the zoning
categories. Another option is the Local Map Amendment, which
can be introduced by an individual or agency. The Local Map
Amendment would allow the new arts uses to be geographically
limited, but the mechanism can only be used on a parcel-by-
parcel basis. The use of an overlay zone is also being considered
because it would be a comprehensive manner in which to allow
for special zoning in a geographic area. The downside to
creating an overlay zone is that it requires a somewhat longer
process.
The Gateway Arts District is a work in progress. Initiated in
February 2002, Prince George's County is currently preparing a
new sector plan and sectional map amendment (SMA) for the
district. M-NCPPC has prepared a public information brochure
regarding the sector plan and SMA available for viewing online
at www. mncppc.org/cpd/arts.htm.
LyNn Ross
Expanding Affordable Housing Through
Inclusionary Zoning: Lessons from the
Washington Metropolitan Area
Karen Destorel Brown. Brookings Institution Center on Urban and
Metropolitan Policy. October 2001. 42pp. Free. Available in pdf
format at: www. brookings, edu/es/urban/publications/
inclusionar~ htm.
This discussion paper produced for Brookings reviews the
features of four county zoning ordinances in Maryland and
Virginia, enacted at various times since 1989, and their
effectiveness in stimulating the production of affordable
housing. Clearly, the oldest and most advanced is the ordinance
in Montgomery County, Maryland, which is responsible for
adding more than 10,000 units, but many of these units (or
houses) are now leaving the county's control due to the
expiration of the 10-year restrictions on resale prices for owner-
occupied units. In a market known for high median incomes
and high housing prices, this analysis is a valuable examination
of the feasibility and efficiency of indusionary zoning measures
for increasing the supply of affordable housing.
~.onin~Ne~ is a monthly n~lcctcr published by thc Amcri~n Planning Auociation.
Subscriptions ue anilable for $60 (U.S,) md S82 (f0mgn). W. Paul Farmer, a~, ~ccutive
Dir~ran ~illlam R. Klein, .~mp. Dire~oe o~ R~ca~.
Zoning Ne~ is peodu~d at ~ Jim S~h~, a~, md Mi~ael Davi~on, ~itom Bar~
.ucc, H~ther ~mp~ll, Fay Dolni~ Nat~ Hut~on, S~jay Jeer, .ucc, Mean ~,
Ma~a Mo~is, az~, Rc~,en; Shcrric Mtcth~, ~mnc Editor; ~ Bauon, Design and
P~uction.
Copyright ~100l by Ameri~n Planning ~iation. 122 $. Michigan Ave.. Suite 1600. Chi~go,
IL ~603. The ~cri~n Planning ~ociation al~o h~ o~a~ at 1776 M~et~ Ave., N.W.,
W~hin~ton, DC 20036; ~.planning.org
,~l righu e~c~ed. No part of thi* publi~tion may ~ rcpr~uc~ or utili~d in any form or by any
mcan~, cl~tronic or mechani~l, including phot~opyin~, re~rding, or by any information
md rctriev~ ~tem, without permiuion in writin~ from *he ~eri~m PImnin~ ~iation.
Printed on re~cled paper, including 50-70% e~cled tiber
and 10% po~rcon*umcr
NORTHSTAR
RAIL
UPDATE
Northstar Hoving Forward
October 25, 2002
The push for Northstar commuter rail is on! Transportation has become one of the most important issues during this
campaign season. Candidates at every level are hearing from voters who are tired of long commutes and traffic jams -
and who are demanding a better system.
Talk To Legislative Candidates- The Time Is Now/
As Election Day draws near, it is vital that you speak with the candidates in your area. Tell them Northstar makes sense
because:
Minnesota needs an integmated ~ansporta~'on sy~em.
The issue is not roads or rail, the issue is building the most cost-effective transportation option for a given area.
The rails are already in place, let's use them. While Northstar is intended to serve central Minnesota, future lines
are planned to serve other parts of the state.
2. Northstar is cost-effect'ye.
A recent Minnesota Department of TransportaUon (Mn/DOT) analysis shows Northstar provides a benefit of 84¢ for
each 50¢ invested by state and local governments due to the efficiencies of this rail project.
3. Northstar will not compote for funding with highway improvement requesf~.
Federal funds are available from a New Start transit fund, and state funding would be through General Revenue
bonding - which is not used for state road projects. [f commuter rail were not an option, the cities and counUes Jn
this Corridor would now be lobbying Mn/DOT for improvements to Highway 10, estimated to cost over $1 billion
(2001 dollars) - more than 3 Umes the cost of Northstar.
4. Re~iden~ want another transportation option.
Government officials and many residents in the Corridor are committed to securing funding for Northstar commuter
rail. [t is the dght option for this Corridor and it just makes sense!
To find out who the candidate~ are in your area, please contact Secretary of State'~ office at 1-877-$$I-6767.
Survey Shows Strong Public Support For Northstar Commuter Rail
Support for Northstar commuter rail remains strong both within the Corridor and in
communities outside of the Corridor, according a poll released by the Northstar
Corridor Development Authority.
77% of Corridor residents believe Northstar commuter rail is a good idea, with 82%
saying they will use Northstar to get to popular destinations such as the airport,
entertainment, shopping or commuting to work.
The poll also found that:
71% of residents believe congestion has gotten worse in the areas they travel
frequently.
~ 53% believe their area's transportation needs are not being adequately served,
No~hs~r supporters ~ a .~nua~y 2002
commut~ mi/demonstraEo~ O-ain.
an increase from 36% in a similar poll 16 months ago.
67% believe the transportation system will not be sufficient to meet their needs in the next decade.
67% look to state government, rather than federal or local government, to solve our area's transportation problems.
Northstar Corridor Development AuthoritY"
2100 3rd Avenue, Anoka, Minnesota 55303-2265
1-888-478-NSTAR (6782) (763) 323-5700 Fax: (763) 323-5682
www. mn-GetOnBoard.com
Extending the Time to Act Under the 60-Day Rule
B), K,m'n Cole
y now, nearly all Minnesota cities
have had experience with the
60-day stature--Minu. Stat.
Sect. 15.99~that ~cts a time limit
for cc~xain land-use decisions.
Under the stature, cities have
60 days to make zoning and
septic system decisions. Cities
mav. extend the 61)-day period, but
only if thcv carefully comply with the
stll ttlt{.."S reqtliFellleIltS.
There are two dirK'rent ways cities
may extend the 61~-day period. First.
cities may extend the period on dacir
own Jr'they notify the applicant m
writing within thc initial 6l}-day period.
In its written notice, thc city must give
reasons fi~r thc extension and spcci6' its
length (no longer than an additional 60
days), lkcasom fbr the extension should
relate in some way to the specific appli-
cation. For example, the reason may bc
thc nccd to complete a certain study
bcfbrc acting on the application.
The deadline in,tv be extended in
another way: where the applicant and
the ciW both agree additional time may
be taken. This approach does not require
that any reason be ~ven for the exten-
sion. It is sufficient that both parties
agree.
A recent case decided by the Court
of Appeals undemcores some of the pit-
fills cities can encounter when seeking
the agreement of applicants to extend
the statutotT time period. The case of
,X'orthcm Stales Po,'cr Comic,thy t'. City
,f .~lcn,tota Hct~k, hts, 646 N.W.2d 919
(Minn. Ct. App. 20~)2), dealt with an
application for a conditional use pemfit
for the upgrade ora power line. Before
the tint 60-day period expired, the
realized it needed more time to study
the application and extended the time
period. After that, the ci~ proposed
that Xcel Enerb~ hire an independent
consultant and tl~at other cities along
the power line route appoint a com-
mittee to evaluate the design and
location of the expanded power line.
Xcel Encr~' agreed to the proposals
and agreed rile statutot.-y period tbr
review would be extended, as long :ts
tile work of tile committee was done in
good t~fith aud within a set time limit.
In tile mcautimc, the consultant was
hired and the committee was created
and met. Near tile end of the statutory
period, the City. Council detemfined it
needed more rune and adopted a reso-
lution denying the conditional usc permit
unless Xcel Encrg3' agreed to additional
time. Xcel EncrbT agreed in writing to
a five-month extension.
The new deadline came and went.
In the meantime, the consultant's work
continued. About seven months after
the new deadline passed, the mayor
told Xcel Enerb~ its proposal would be
on the agenda at the planning commis-
sion's next meeting and suggested that
some addition~ conditions were appro-
priate. At that point, thinb~ came to a
head. Xcel Ener~ demanded the ciD'
issue the pemfit. The company contend-
ed it had not agreed to any extension
beyond die initial one. Xcel Enerb~
contended that its permit application
was automatica~y approved under thc
60-day laxv because the ciW did not live
within the time limits and brought suit
to tbrce issuance of the permit.
One of the arguments made by the
ci~' was that Xcel Enerb~ had waived
its right to invoke the 60-day time limit
because it had acquiesced while studies
continued after the time ~nfit had p~scd.
Tile dismct court accepted that argvment
and ruled for tile city. Tile Court of
Appeals. however, reversed and ruled
that the permit lnUSt be issued. The
Court reached tllis conclusion even
though Xcel Ener~' waited seven
months to insist the permit be issued.
even though the studies thnded bv Xcel
at the city's reqt, est were ongoing, and
even though there had been a spirit of
cooperation between the city and the
company. The Court's decision, along
with several others, suggest that .\linne-
sota courts wiLl interl>ret the 60-day
statute strictly and that cities should be
carethl in extending the deadline.
Cities should draw sex'end lessons ti'om
the Xcel EnergT case. When extending
the time period by abn'eement, cities
should get the applicant's consent to
the extension in writing. Cities should
never rely on an intbmul verbal agree-
ment. CollS¢llt is sometimes given bv
applicants at public meetiu~. In that
case. cities *llot, ld ensure the meeting
is recorded so that an accurate, written
record can be made of the agreement.
Cities should supplement the verbal
consent with a written document signed
by the applicant before the time period
expires. Although not required, it is a
good idea to specit~' the precise date
when the extension will lapse. This will
avoid misunderstandings about the
deadline later. Lasdy, cities should ilot
be lulled into thinking that a written
and specific a~eement is not necessary
because the applicant and the ci~' are
on good terms. More than one city has
learned that misunderstandings can arise
:md relationships can change. The auto-
matic approval of an application contrary
to tile city's wishes can be the unfortu-
nate result. ~-
Cole is a shardtolder at Kcm~cdy
Gnwcn u,hcre shc f,ntctices in the area
qf municeal law ami litt~atio,. E-maih
hcolc~kcmu'dy~x,r,u,c,, com.
et: rt, nE~( 2(~02 5,11NNEgOr~. CIl'lE'q I ~)