HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 7, 2003CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
590 40Ih Avenue N.E.. Columbia Heights. MN 55421-3878 (763) 706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692
Visit Ottr Website at: www. ci. columbia-heights, tmt.us
Tom Ramsdell, Chair
Donna Schrnitt
Ted Yehle
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
7:00 P.M. TUESDAY, JANUARY 7, 2003
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
590 N~E. 40TH AVENUE
1. Roll Call.
2. Minutes fi.om the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of December 3, 2002.
3. Public Hearings:
· None
4. New Business:
· Election of officers
· Proposed sale of property at 3929 California Street NE
-. Park Dedication
5. Miscellaneous:
· None
6. Adjourn
THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS OOES NOT DISCRIMINATE on THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 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, Schmitt, and Ramsdell.
Commission Members absent- Ericson and Johnson
Also present were Tim Johnson (City Planner), Shelley Hanson (Secretary), and Marlaine
Szurek (Council Liaison).
Motion byYehle, second by $chmitt, to approve the minutes from the meeting of November 13,
2002. All ayes. MOTION PASSED.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Case#: 2002-1109
4350 Central Ave
Conditional Use Permit-(Continued from November Mtg)
Northeast Metro 916
Planner Johnson updated the Commission on the Status of the Conditional Use Permit being
requested by Northeast Metro 916 for an Area Learning Center at 4350 Central Ave. At the
November meeting, the Commission tabled this matter and asked that staff work with School
District Officials to identify other locations that may be more suitable as a Learning Center.
During the past three weeks staff met with district officials and has identified several
commercial-office locations on Central Ave that may meet the needs for this center. The owners
of these spaces have not yet given their consent for this use. In addition, the school district needs
time to analyze building plans to make sure the space can be retrofitted for their needs.
The two locations that have been explored for possible use are:
· 4111 Central Avenue (a two story office complex). If this space is used, the school
district would use the entire second story of the south office building, as well as a
portion of the first floor. However, there is no elevator in this building, which would
need to be installed in order to meet accessibility codes. The building is also void of
a sprinkling system, which would need to be added as well. There is plenty of
parking on site, and the building is 100% office-oriented businesses. Staff would
support this location as it would not negatively impact the retail district, and is
substantially similar to uses listed in the Central Business District (CBD).
· 3989 Central Avenue (Northeast Bank Building). The entire 4th floor is currently
vacant. There is plenty of off street parking in the ramp. However, students would
utilize a common lobby and elevator with all the other businesses in the building.
Staff could support this location as it is substantially similar to uses in the Central
Business District (CBD), but would prefer the 4111 Central Avenue complex.
In addition, the Planning Commission was informed that the School District has asked that their
Conditional Use Permit request for 4350 Central Avenue remain on the table and be continued in
case these two options are not available. Because of the pending 60-day requirement, staff has
requested an additional 60-day extension in reviewing this application, in order to allow for other
options and locations to be explored. The new 60-day period will expire on February 21, 2002.
PLANNING & ZONING MINUTES
MEETING OF DECEMBER 3, 2002
PAGE 2
The applicant intends to explore these office locations for possible use, and will submit a new
Conditional Use Permit if either site works. No action was needed. The Commission agreed to
continue this request and allow the 60 day extension.
NEW BUSINESS
The Planning Commission and Park and Recreations Commission have been asked by the City
Council to review the City owned property at 3929 California St and to provide a
recommendation, for or against, the removal of park status for this property. As you may be
aware, the City Council recently identified potential industrial development of property north of
Lomianki Park (39th to 40th Ave). Both the Planning & Zoning and the Park & Recreation
Commissions previously recommended the removal of Park Dedication Status for the piece of
property south of Lomianki Park in spring of 2002. The City Council then amended the
Ordinance, and officially removed the park designation from the south parcel.
The Park was originally three pieces of land between 37th Ave and 40th Ave, excluding the
existing Industrial businesses. A citizens group raised funds to develop the park for their
neighborhood. The funds were used on the middle piece between 38th and 39th Ave. The
remaining two parcels remained undeveloped and are zoned Industrial, even though it is used as
passive parkland. The land is maintained by the City of Columbia Heights. The north piece of
property is currently accessible via a cul-de-sac that dead ends adjacent to approximately 7
homes which front on Main St. There is a platted and maintained alley that is used for garage
access for those properties and for the existing Industrial business.
The Commission has been asked to make a recommendation on whether to remove the park
status on the north piece which is a little less than one acre in size, to allow for future economic
development. The City Comprehensive Plan indicates that the loss of the north and south
parcels of Lomianki Park would not be crucial to the integrity of the park system.
Commissioner Ramsdell asked about the location of the 200 ft tower at the site. Planner Johnson
informed him that the tower sits on property still owned by the railroad and is located just west
of the cul-de-sac. He then opened the floor to comments from the public.
Dave Peterson of 3950 Main Street asked why the City is trying to take park property away from
its residents. He passed around a sheet showing the amount of parkland we have per person
compared to other surrounding communities. The data was obtained from the various cities on
the list. He also questioned why someone would want to locate a business next to residents who
don't want him there. He asked why only seven properties were notified. Planner Johnson
explained that according to State Law we only need to notify residents within a certain distance
when a Public Heating is called. This is not a Public Heating, but the City Council specifically
asked that residents in the area be notified that the topic was being discussed. Mr. Peterson
stated that if it comes down to the property being sold, that the City should open it to bids and
not just accept the first offer on the table, such as this. He felt the price being offered for the
property was too low.
PLANNING & ZONING MINUTES
DECEMBER 3, 2002
PAGE 3
Commissioner Schmitt stated she had visited this park on occasion with her children. She said it
is not easily accessible to the general public. Most parks have some parking for residents and
this piece does not. It is not developed as a park and is not marked as such. Commissioner
Ramsdell told those in attendance that the job of the Commission was to make a
recommendation on whether the request to eliminate the park status meets the Zoning Ordinance
and the intentions detailed in the Comprehensive Plan. He also went on to state that if the
property were ever sold, a percentage of the money received will go to update Lomianki Park.
He explained the City Council is looking at options to generate more tax dollars for the
community, and that's the reason this is being discussed at this time.
William Platt of 3942 Main Street said he believes this site is an unbuildable site. This is a wet,
boggy area in the spring and needs drainage help. He is concerned with drifting of snow
between the buildings and the fact the alley would be blocked. He was assured that soil tests
would be done prior to any construction at the site.
CliffEngquist of 3928 Main Street wants the piece to remain park property. It is a buffer
between the railroad and the residential properties. That's what it was meant to be from the time
the railroad deeded it to the City. Once a building is built there, the City could never get this
property back. There are better locations for a machine shop than this site. Planner Johnson
agreed that there are potentially better sites for this shop, but at the present time with the
moratorium in place for the Industrial area, nothing can be redeveloped there at this time. The
purpose of the moratorium is to allow time for the City to decide how they want the property
redeveloped. They do not want someone to develop a piece that would not fit into a future plan
they decide would best suit Columbia Heights.
Marlaine Szurek stated that if this business is built on this site, there would be buffering between
the new building and the residences. The building would be set back and would be a better use
of underutilized land. She said it is the Council's job to make financial decisions that impact
everyone in the community, and she has to look at what's best for the City as a whole.
Deanne Bogangrief of 3938 Main Street thought the project would deteriorate the area and the
property values of the residences would drop as a result of being located next to businesses. She
hates to see the overcrowding that is taking place by added development. She also felt the price
being considered is too low. Ms. Bogangriefreviewed the history of the land being given to the
City for safekeeping for the residents along the railroad property. She feels the added business
on this site would have a negative impact on the residences and the citizens in this area. The
business that is currently located adjacent to this site blocks the alley already and the addition of
another business will only make it worse.
Carol Ford from 3942 Main Street stated if the City doesn't have room for kids to play, there will
only be more crime as they will have fewer places to go to gather with their friends. She stated
this park is used by most of the residents from a 5 block radius. She felt it should be left as park
land. Another business added to the area will bring more truck traffic and make it unsafe for
PLANNING & ZONING MINUTES
DECEMBER 3, 2002
PAGE 4
children in the area going to and from the park. Once the park status is eliminated, there will be
no way of getting it back again.
Motion by Schmitt, second by Yehle, to recommend elimination of the current park status for the
City-owned parcel at 3929 California Street, as it is consistent with the City Comprehensive
Plan. Yehle and Schmitt-aye, Ramsdell-nay. MOTION CARRIES.
The Commission encouraged the residents to attend the City Council meeting of December 16,
2002, where this will be decided by the City Council. The Park and Recreation Commission will
also be discussing this item on December 10, 2002, so they can make their recommendation to
the City Council prior to the December 16th meeting date. They made it clear that as a
Commission they understand how the residents of this area feel and that this is a very difficult
decision.
Jeanene Unke from 4359 7th Street had been watching the meeting at home and came down to
make a few comments to the Commission. She is a 4th grade teacher who grew up in this area
and still lives here. She stated that even though the parks may be underutilized compared to
years ago, they still are important to some, and should be saved. Once this property is given
away, it cannot be retrieved. A dollar amount may not be able to be placed on the true value of
parkland. She urged the Commission and the City Council to keep the parkland status of this
piece of property.
MISCELLANEOUS
PARK DEDICATION--
Planner Johnson explained that he would like the Planning Commission to consider a change to
our current ordinance as it relates to park dedication after looking at the comparisons of other
cities' requirements in the Twin Cities area. The current language in our ordinance creates some
confusion over interpretations of what "estimate of improvements" means. He reviewed some of
the language and fees set by surrounding communities and suggested we amend the ordinance
with specific fees. The Commission requested that Staff prepare an amendment change with fees
that would be comparable to the surrounding communities and submit it for consideration at the
next meeting.
RESIGNATION OF STEVE JOHNSON--
Enclosed in the agenda packet was the resignation of Steve Johnson, due to time management
conflicts in his schedule. This leaves two spots open on our commission with the election of
Tami Ericson to the City Council. Two new members will need to be appointed in January.
Motion by Yehle, second by Schmitt, to adjourn the meeting at 8:45pm. All Ayes.
Respectfully submitted,
Shelley Hanson
Secretary
2002 PLANNING ZONING ATTENDANCE
P= Present NA-Not app ! i cab ! e
A= Absent No Heet ing
!Jan. Feb. March April May June July~Aug. r Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.
Ericson, Tammera NA P P P P NA P P P NA P A
Johnson, Stephen NA ? ? F ^ NA P A I~ NA A A
Ramsdell, Thomas NA P.* P P P NA A A p NA p P
Schmitt, Donna Kay ~u~ p p p P NA P P P NA p P
Yehle, Ted NA P P P P NA P P P NA P p
Marlaine Szurek NA P A A A NA A. A P NA A P
Counc. Liaison
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
590 40th Avenue N.E.. Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (763) 706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692
Visit Oar Website at: www. ci. columbia-heights, mn. us
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Mayor
Gary L. Peterson
Councilmembers
Bruce Nawrocld
Marlaine Szurek
Julienne Wyckoff
Bobby Williams
City Manager
Walter R. Fehst
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
January 2, 2003
Planning and Zoning Commission
Tim Johnson, City Planner
Proposed sale of property @ 3929 California Street NE
The now vacant City-owned property at 3929 California Street has been proposed for potential
industrial development to be sold to Glenn Stauffacher who owns Profile Tool and Engineering
at 3825 3rd Street NE. The highest and best use of the property has been determined as light
industrial.
Minnesota Statute 462.356 requires that if a City has a Comprehensive Plan, it must notify the
Planning Commission of the intent to purchase or sell land.
The City Comprehensive Plan designates this property for parkland use, but the Planning
Commission, Park and Recreation Commission and the City Council have all recommended to
remove the park designation for this parcel. The City Comprehensive Plan also indicates that the
loss of this parcel will not have a detrimental impact on the future park system.
The City has submitted a future land use change to the Metropolitan Council, that would change
the future status fi-om parkland to industrial in anticipation of the proposed sale and development
of this parcel.
Recommended Motion:
Move to support the future action of the Columbia Heights City Council to sell the property at
3929 California Street NE, as it is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan.
Attachrmnts: City Map of propert3q, Comp Plan sectim
THE CItY Of COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION Of SERVICES
EQUAL OPPORtUnitY EMPlOYEr
3956
3950
3929 3946
· ,,<,- 3942
Pr/ 3938
<:~ 3932
el_
3928
3924.
3916
3905 ~ 591~
9oo
40TH
100
3852
3848
3842
80 3836
3828
· x~ 3824
Z 3820
3816
3810
3804
81 3800
150 160
3949 3948
3945 3946
3941 3942
3937 3938
39i!9 3928
3926
3920
3919
3916
3915 3912
3906
151.
39TH
3856
3855 3852
5849 5848
3843
3840
3837 3836
3831 3852
3825 3828
3819 3820
3815 3806
3811 3804
3807 3802
3800
38TH
82
3741
3701_._
3752
374-4-
3740
3732
3728
3720
3712
3706
3702
3755 3756
3748
3747
3744
3743 3740
3739 3736
3733 3732
3729 3728
3724
3725
3720
3717 3712
5708
3709
3705 3704
3700
37TH
3923
3915
3919
3907
3901
3863
5859
3855
3851
3847
3843
3839
3837
3833
3827
3819
3815
3809
3805
AVE
212 ~
3948
3940
3934
\2
18
~')~°' ~ 222 226 228 230 i.
~ ~'"'392g ?,,
5925
5915
3900
3858
3850
3848
3844
3930
3838
3909
3852
3826
3820
3816
3812
3806
3800
3753 3752
5748
3747
3744
3741 3740
3736
3737
3732
3731 3728
3724
3723 3720
3717 3716
3711 3712
3708
3705
3704
3701 3700
3835
3829
3825 3822
3823 3816
5815 3810
3811
3804
3805
3800
AVE
3755 3754
3746
3745
3742
3741
3737 3736
3733 3732
3729 5726
3725
3722
5721
5717 3716
5709 5710
3705 249
129.6'
3853
3825
3809
3801
5757
5741
3737
5719
5701
CONCLUSIONS AND MAJOR FINDINGS
The following conclusions and findings were included in the 1996 Comprehensive Park System
Plan: ,,
DEMOGRAPHICS
To best meet the changing needs of the population, the City of Columbia Heights park system
must be prepared to conform to the needs of the increasing elderly population as well as the
increasing number of preschool children and young families in the area. It is also recommended
that the Recreation Department do its part to address the rising growth of non-traditional
families by providing alternative activities to meet the needs of single-parent households.
To meet the needs of a completely developed urban area, the 'City of Columbia Heights must be'
,~wi..'lling to acquire additional land that is deemed beneficial to the park system ~e~ides the
'i~}Srth'aridi~outh"end of Lomiartki Park, the. loSs of any additional oark snace wo~d~,6~b' be": x
, xt~.emely cntacal to. the vxtahty of the park system.~Posszble future land acquisitions include a
vacated lot for sale at 3932 Qmncy Street, as ~I1 as the Kremer and Davts building at
3900 Jefferson Street. Since both these properties adjoin Huset Park, the acquisition of the
properties would be beneficial to the redevelopment of Huset Park.
RECREATION AND FACILITY TRENDS
Besides demographics, the primary trend affecting parks and recreation is increased
transportation. People are becoming more destination-oriented and are willing to travel to those
places and/or communities that offer them the services they are seeking. With increased
transportation, improvements in transportation routes (especially pedestrian-based) and ease of
access (including handicap persons) are becoming more critical. Other projected trends include
more group activities, improved group areas and picnic facilities, and close-to-home, low-cost
recreation opportunities.
TRAILS AND PATHWAYS
A rapidly increasing trend, trails and pathways are becoming an essential component in linking
parks to developments, people, and to the community. As recreation activities such as biking,
running, walking, and inline skating increase, the need for an effective trail and pathway system
in Columbia Heights becomes more of a priority.
122
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. columbia-heights, mn. us
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Mayor
Gary L. Peterson
Councilmembers
Bobby Williams
Marlaine Szurek
Julienne Wyckoff
Bruce Nawrocki
City Manager
Waiter R. Fehst
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
January 2, 2003
Planning and Zoning Commission
Tim Johnson, City Planner
Park Dedication
In 2002, the Planning Commission and the City Council granted approvals for Parkside Village,
a 25 trait market-rate townhome subdivision adjacent to Sullivan Lake. In this process the park
dedication issue was discussed, and ultimately a decision was made to require $750.00 per unit
for park dedication fees.
Staffwould like the Planning Commission to look at our current ordinance as it relates to park
dedication and to also compare other cities requirements in the Twin Cities area. The current
ordinance language creates some confusion over interpretation of what 'estimate of
improvements' means. Please refer to 9.1403; Section 14: Subdivision Regulations; Page 14-7
for current description of park dedication formula.
As you can see fi.om the comparison sheet attached, park dedication fees range tremendously
from City to City. It would be staff's hope that we would establish a consistent and fair amount
for both residential and commercial/industrial in hopes of planning appropriately for new
development and redevelopment projects. At a minimum staff would recommend that we stay
consistent with other first-ring suburbs.
Staffwould like the Planning Commission to provide appropriate feedback and discussion so that
a draft ordinance amendment can be brought back in February 2003 for review.
Attachrmats: Columbia Heights Park dedicadm fees; Comparison park dedicaticn fees
THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES
EQUAL OPPOrTUnitY EMPLOYER
COMPARISON OF OTHER CITIES '
PARK DEDICATION FEES
e
e
e
e
ge
City of Richfield
· Park dedication fees are not required. Their municipal liquor stores provide funds
for the park system. Their airport expansion also provided funds for park
replacement and enhancement.
Ci.ty of Elk River
· Residential $1,615 per dwelling unit
· Commercial $3,000 per acre
· Industrial $2,000 per acre
City of New Brighton · Duplex $650.00/unit
· Single-Family $750.00/unit
· Multi-Family $350.00/unit
· Townhomes $500.00/unit
City of Fridley · Residential Subdivision $1,500.00 per lot
Residential Lot Split $750.00 per lot
· Townhome Subdivision $750.00 per townhome unit
· Commercial/Industrial Subdivision or Lot Split 0.023 per square foot
St. Louis Park
· Single-Family dwelling units $900.00 per dwelling unit
· Multi-Family dwelling units $900.00 per dwelling unit
· Commercial/Industrial 5% of current market value of the unimproved
land as determined by the City assessor ': ~
City of Golden Valley
· Residential Subdivision $1,000.00 per lot
Brooklyn Park · Residential dwelling units
· Commercial/Industrial
$2,000.00 per unit
$6,000 per acre
Burnsville · Residential Single-Family (R-l)
· Residential Two-Family (R-2)
· Residential Multi-Family (R-3)
$1,647.00 per unit
$1,519.00 per unit
$1,500 per unit
(5)
Park dedication. For any development or redevelopment where a
subdividision or resubdivision of property occurs which creates additional
parcels, the resulting contribution shall require either ten (10) percent land
dedication for parks, or the cash equivalent often (10) percent of the
estimate of improvements. The City Council shall determine which
measure is most appropriate.
9.1404 Design Standards. Subdivision 1. The following design standards are to be
followed unless the City Council shall permit a variance because of unusual
circumstances due to the topography, placement of buildings or other factors making it
reasonable to vary the standards set forth without nullifying the intent and purpose of the
Comprehensive Plan or this section.
Subd. 2. Streets.
The arrangement, character, extent, width, grade and location of all streets
shall conform to the Comprehensive Plan and shall be considered in their
relation to existing and planned streets, to topographical conditions, to
public convenience and safety, and in their appropriate relation to the
proposed uses of the land to be served by such streets.
Where such is not shown in the Comprehensive Plan, the arrangement of
streets in the subdivision shall either:
ao
Provide for the continuation or appropriate projection of existing
principal streets in surrounding area~; or
Conform to a plan for the neighborhood approved or adopted by
the City Council to meet a particular situation where topography or
other conditions make continuance or conformance to existing
streets impractical.
City of Columbia Heights
Zoning and Development Ordinance - Section 14
Page 14-7