HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 1, 2003CITY 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. colambia.l,eights.tnn.us
MEMBERS
Tom Ramsdell, Chair
Donna Schmitt
Ted Yehle
Gary Peterson
Phillip Baker
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
7:00 P.M. TUESDAY, JULY 1, 2003
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
590 N.E. 40'"" AVENUE
1. Roll Call.
2. Minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of June 3, 2003.
3. Public Hearings:
· Case # 2003-0708
4333 Washington Street NE
Lot Split
4. New Business:
· Columbia Heights Design Guidelines Memo
5. Miscellaneous:
· None
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 MEETING
JUNE 3, 2003
7:00 PM
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Chairperson, Tom Ramsdell.
Roll Call:
Commission Members present-Yehle, Schmitt, Baker, and Ramsdell.
Commission Members absent- Peterson
Also present were Tim Johnson (City Planner), Shelley Hanson (Secretary), and Tami Ericson (Council
Liaison).
Motion by Yehle, second by Schmitt, to approve the minutes from the meeting of April 1, 2003, with the
addition of a comment by Commission Yehle concerning his agreement that the building design for 3929
California St. did meet the intent of the ordinance in regards to the required percentage of window area.
All ayes. MOTION PASSED. The correction' was made to the minutes.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
NONE
NEW BUSINESS
Case #:
Owller:
Address:
Phone:
2003-0607-Site Plan Review
Todd Johnson DDS
5215 University Ave NE
Columbia Heights, MN 55421
(763) 572-8040
Applicant:
James Strapko Architects
4157 Minnehaha Ave So
Mpls', MN 55406
Parcel Address: 5207 & 5215 University Ave NE
Dr. Johnson and James Strapko Architects have requested a Site Plan Review to construct a new dental
facility on the properties at 5207/15 University Ave NE. The site is undeveloped and consists of three
platted parcels.
The site is currently zoned General Business. The surrounding property to the north is used and zoned
commercially. The property to the east across the alley is zoned and used residentially, and the property
to the south is a single family home and is zoned commercial.
Dr. Johnson owns 5 lots south of the City Liquor Store on 52nd and University Ave. He is proposing to
move out of his current building at 5215 University Ave. He plans to construct a new 3,416 square foot
dental facility on the three adjacent empty lots he owns, in order to accommodate the growth of his
practice. Dr. Johnson is proposing to split off the northerly two lots which house the existing dental
office and parking area. The current business employs a few workers and is anticipated to add
additional dental hygienist employees in the deSign-build process. In moving forward with this project,
Mr. Johnson has been working with City staffto identify the necessary processes and approvals since
2002..The proposed construction should take approximately 4 months and would begin this summer.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
JLYNE 3, 2003
PAGE 2
The 3,416 sq f~ building foundation proposed is intended to function as a commercial office type use,
but is being designed to have a residential type appearance. The building exterior will be a textured
siding that is composed of cement and wood fibers that look like wood. It will have residential styled
windows and decorative columns at the south entrance to give it a front porch type entrance. The
proposed project achieves the 30% window and door area requirement for non-residential uses. The
building will consist of several offices, a chart room and library, and seven patient rooms. The building
will also feature a small basement area for mechanical units and storage, as well as a private office in the
upstairs attic.
* The minimum front yard building setback is 15 feet and the proposed building meets this requirement
as it is 19 feet from the property line. While the building foundation is set back at 19 feet, the projecting
bay juts into the setback area one foot. The ordinance does allow for architectural enhancements to be
in the setback area.
* The minimum comer side yard building setback is 15 feet and the proposed building exceeds this
requirement, as it is approximately 60 feet from the south property line.
* Minimum rear yard building setback is 20 feet; The proposed building meets this requirement, as it is
20 feet from this property line.
* Minimum side yard building setback is 0 feet; The proposed building meets this requirement, as it is 5
feet from this property line.
The minimum requirements are one parking space per every 300 square feet of gross floor area; The site
plans shows 16 parking spaces, with the requirement being 14 based on 4,050 square feet. There is one
handicap space shown which meets the accessibility requirements. It should be noted that the lighting
plan for the parking area submitted provides details on the footcandle measurements. These
measurements meet the City requirements for lighting intensity at a maximum of 3 footcandles of light
at the nearest non-residential property line, and a maximum of ½ footcandles of light at the nearest
residential property line. The lighting for the site includes two pole lights to be located on the southeast
and southwest comers of the parking area.
Minimum parking setbacks are 15 feet from the front and comer side property lines and 5 feet from the
rear property line: The proposed off street parking meets the City requirements at 20 feet from the front
property line, 15 feet from the comer side property line, and 6 feet from the rear yard property line.
The General Business District allows for monument signage not to exceed 40 square feet in size; a
maximum of 8 feet in height; and setback 5 feet from any property line. The applicant is proposing an 8
foot high monument sign, measuring 38 square feet in size, and setback at least 5 feet from any property
line which meets City requirements. The wall mounted signage proposed for the building meets the
City's requirements as well.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 3, 2003
PAGE 3
The site plan includes a landscaping plan detailing the number, species, and location of the plantings.
The plans exceed the minimum City standards. It was noted that there is a 2 ½ foot grade difference
from the front of the property to the back. A retaining wall will be constructed along the east side with
additional plantings that will enhance the visual impact. The dumpster will be located on the east side of
the structure and will match the finish of the building and will be enclosed as required by ordinance.
The proposed building will be served by 52nd Avenue and University Avenue, and will provide adequate
ingress and egress. The site traffic will be.completely separate from the adjacent residential properties
and will not have an entry point on the alley side. The new parking lot area will require a new curb cut
along the frontage road.
Public Works Director Kevin Hansen has reviewed the plans and his comments are as follows:
He would encourage the addition of some masonry, such as brick or stone to enhance the
building entrance.
There will need to be a cut in and new tee to the VCP sanitary line in accordance with City
Specifications. The proposed Storm Sewer shall be a privately maintained line. Any work
done in the public Right of Way shall be inspected by the Engineering Dept.
The grading and erosion control plan is acceptable with the following conditions:
*Site access during construction should be limited to the University Ave Service Rd.
*The perimeter erosion control shall be placed prior to any site disturbance and inspected by
the engineering dept.
*Any debris tracking shall be cleaned offofpublic streets within a 24 hour period. If the
work is not performed within a 24 hour period, the City of Columbia Heights will clean the
streets and bill the Contractor.
*The rear retaining wall along the alley should be three .feet from the property line.
*The gutter line at the main entrance is flat. This should be reviewed in the field with
engineering staff prior to concrete placement.
The main entrance shall have a concrete apron from the curb to the property line. The
location of the driveway cut is acceptable. No site access should be provided to the existing
alley to the east.
He would suggest an escrow account of $1,500 for engineering inspection and erosion
control surety. Any unused portion of this escrow would be retumed to the owner upon
project completion (including landscaping and parking lot paving).
The applicant's plan directs the storm water runoffto the University Ave frontage road, away from
adjacent properties. The plans proposed appear to meet the City storm water requirements. The Fire
Department has also reviewed and preliminarily approved the plans.
The proposed construction is consistent with the 2001 City Comprehensive Plan which designates the
property for future transit-oriented use such as high density residential or neighborhood commercial
development. The new facility will further enhance the tax base and create additional jobs. The building
features varied architectural materials designed to create visual interest and to provide consistency with
the sUrrounding area.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 3, 2003
PAGE 4
Therefore, staff recommended approval of the Site Plan proposal to conslzuct a new 4,500 ~uare foot
dental facility on the property at 5207 University Avenue NE. with the addition of the condition
suggested by Public Works Director, Kevin Hansen, regarding the escrow of $1500 for engineering
inspection and erosion control surety.
Commission member Baker questioned whether there is adequate parking. Ramsdell stated the proposal
already exceeds the requirements of the Ordinance and we cannot make it more restrictive at this point.
Dr. Todd Johnson addressed the commission. He explained that he has waited to see what the City plans
to do with the Liquor Store property,' but that he can't wait any longer. He has outgrown his space and
needs to expand. He went on to state he felt the parking will be adequate as customers come and go
throughout the day. He also explained he does not currently have a handicapped access space, but he
and his stafftake care of those who need assistance whenever necessary. He feels the requirement of
one handicap space will also be adequate as he only sees approximately two patients a week that would
need this provision.
Commission member Ramsdell stated he liked the design and look of the building. He is excited about
the development of the site. He concurred with the Public Works Director that he would like to see
some brick or stone added to the south and west side to enhance the visual impact. He also asked Dr.
John~n what will happen to the old building, and whether it would be kept up. Dr. Johnson responded
that he plans on keeping the building. He will continue to use it for storage of old charts and X-rays that
must be kept up to 10 years per State law. He said he has been approached by an Oral Surgeon, and
Endodontist, and a Chiropractor for possibly leasing the building for their practices. He has not made
any decision regarding that at this point.
Commission member Ramsdell stated he would like to see the old building painted to match the new
facility. However, Dr. Johnson informed the commission that the old building has vinyl siding and new
vinyl windows, and is in a good state of repair at the present time. Commission member Yehle agreed
that the property is well maintained. When asked about how many people are employed at the facility
and what his plans are for expanding, he replied that he currently has a part time dentist working with
him and that he would like to go with a full time dentist and 2 or 3 additional hygenists. He is hoping to
break ground within the next month and a half.
Motion by Ramsdell, seconded by Yehle, to approve the Site Plan for Dr. Todd Johnson for4,500 sq fi
dental facility on the property at 5207 University Avenue, subject to the following conditions:
1. All required state and local codes, permits, licenses and inspections will be met and in full
compliance.
2. Final review and approval of grading~drainage, water and sewer plans by City Engineer and
Fire Chief.
3. Approved landscaping and screening shall be installed in conjunction with site development and
prior to issuance of a final certificate of occupancy.
4. ,,t cash escrow of $1,500 be submitted for engineering inspection and erosion control surety.
All ayes. MOTION PASSED.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 3, 2003
PAGE 5
MISCELLANEOUS
Enclosed in the agenda packets were several articles regarding redevelopment in the suburbs.
Commission Chair Ramsdell checked with the other members to see if everyone would be available for
the scheduled meeting July 1st. It was the consensus of the members to hold the meeting on that
scheduled date.
Commission member Schmitt asked about'the K~Mart site and whether the commission will be asked to
consider any changes to our Ordinance regarding the re-development of this site. Planner Johnson said
the issue of establishing Park Dedication Fees will be need to addressed again in the near future and the
Design Guidelines will also be submitted to the commission for consideration.
Commission member Baker asked if anything was happening with the Hardee's site. Planner Johnson
stated there has been some interest and inquiries regarding this site recently, but that nothing formal has
been submitted as of this date.
Motion by Yehle, seconded by Rarnsdell, to adjourn the meeting at 7:40pm. All Ayes.
Respectfully submitted,
Shelley Hanson
Secretary
Case: 2003-0708
Page: 1
STAFF REPORT TO ~ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
FOR TI~ JULY 1~ 2003 PUBLIC HEARING
Case #: 2003-0708
Owner: John Lurid
Address: 2073 Manitou
St. Paul, MN
Phone: (651) 260-2007
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
Parcel Address: 4333 Washington Street NE
Zoning: R-2, Single and Two-Family Residential
Comprehensive Plan: LDR, Low Density Residential
Silver Oak Development
3800 Apache Ln
Mpls, MN 55421
Surrounding Zoning
and Land Uses:
Zoning
North: R-2
South: R-2
East: R-2
West: R-2
Land Use
North: Residential
South: Residential
East: Residential
West: Residential
BACKGROUND
Explanation of Request:
A request for a lot split of an existing parcel located at 4333 Washington Street NE. Currently
4333 Washington Street NE is one large parcel measuring approximately 141 feet by 158 feet in
size (22,447 sq it). The applicant is proposing to split offthe south 60 feet of the parcel to create
a new buildable lot for a single-family home on a new 'Parcel A'.
Case HistorF:
There are no previous Planning and Zoning Commission cases on this site.
Case: 2003-0708
Page: 2
ANALYSIS
Surrounding PropertF:
The surrounding property is zoned R-2, single and two-family residential and is used
residentially.
Technical Review:
Section 9.410(5) oft. he Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance requires that an application for a lot
split be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, which shall make f'mdings and
submit its recommendation to the City Council.
Section 9.903 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 6,500 square feet for any newly created single-family lot - The
newly created 'Parcel A' (see survey attached) will be 9,519 square feet and the newly
created 'Parcel B' will be 12,926 square feet, both of which exceed minimum lot size
requirements.
· Minirrlum lot width shall be 60 feet- The newly created 'Parcel A' is 60 feet wide
exactly, and the newly created 'Parcel B' is 81.48 feet wide, which meet requirements.
· Existing homes in relation to newly created property lines are required to meet the same
setbacks as new construction. Side yards shall be at least five feet for any principal
structure - The newly created property line on the south side of the existing house is
proposed at 5.3 feet from the side yard property line, which meets requirements. The
existing stoop is approximately 2 feet away from the new property line, but the ordinance
allows for stoops, steps and landings to be located in the setback area as long as they are
not closer than 1 foot to the property line. The proposed single-family home on 'Parcel
A' will be required to meet appropriate setbacks from all property lines.
· Detached accessory structures shall be at least 3 feet away from side and rear property
lines - The existing detached structure is well over the 3 foot side yard setback
requirement.
· Any lot over 6,500 square feet may have a building lot coverage of up to 30% - Because
of the large parcel sizes, the lot coverage for the newly created 'Parcel B' is less than
15%. The new construction on 'Parcel A' will have to meet the 30% lot coverage as
well.
Eneineerin~:
The Public Works Department has reviewed this lot split and as part of the recently
completed street construction on Washington Street, this project will require street
excavation for the installation of new sewer and water stubs. This will require that the
Case: 2003-0708
Page: 3
contractor pay for a curb to curb and joint to joint milling and overlaying to the City's
specifications, rather than a patch job. As proposed, the City Council will have to formally
approve this request for street excavation at their next meeting.
Compliance with Cit~ Comprehensive Plan:
The City Comprehensive Plan designates this area as future low-density residential development.
Summary:
The positive aspects of this proposal are as follows.
1, The proposal is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan and meets the minimum
requirements of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance.
The parcel is large enough to create a new attractive single-family home that will further
add to the Columbia Heights tax base.
CONCLUSION
StatY Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the lot split as it meets the technical standards of the Zoning
Ordinance and is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan.
Recommended Motion:
Move to recommend City Council approval of Resolution 2003-31, as the lot split is consistent
with City Zoning Ordinance and City Subdivision standards.
Atta, chments:
Certificate of Survey; Area Map; Resolution 2003-31; Public Hearing Notice; Applicant
Narrative; Public Works Memo
REQUEST FOR LOT SPLIT
4333 WASBINGTON ST. N.E.
COLUMBIA. HEIGHTS
I am requesting the property at 4333 Washington St. be divided into two parcels. The
following is a description of what is being requested.
EXISTING:
THE PROPERTY CONSISTS OF ~WO PARCELS
A-43 FEET BY 158 FEET (APX.) North
B - 98 FEET By 158 FEET (APX) South
The existing house is offset to the North, but is set entirely on the South parcel.
PROPOSED:
What is beinging requested is the property be divided into two parcels each meeting all
city requirements
A - 81 FEET FORNTAGE BY 158 FEET DEPTH 12,926 SQ FEET WITH
THE EXISTING HOUSE
B - 60 FEET FORNTAGE BY 158 FEET DEPTH 9,510 SQ FEET
Lots will not require any variances for fi'omage, set backs, or area.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
$olm Lurid
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
590 40th Avenue N.E.. Columbia Heights. MN 55421-3878 (763) 70&-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692
Visit Our Website at: wsv,~:ci, coh,,bia.h¢ights, m,.u$
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Thomas R~m$#etl,
Oonna Schmitt
?hilip Baker
Ga~ Peterson
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 Hail, 590 N.E. 40th Avenue, at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 1, 2003. The order of business is as follows:
A request for a lot split of the property located at 4333 Washington Street NE. The current property
measures approximately 22,447 square feet in size (.52 acres). The lot split proposal will allow for the
existing single-family home (Parcel B) to be legally split off from a newly created lot (Parcel A). This
will allow for a new single-family home to be constructed on Parcel A.
Section 9.410 of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance requires that an application for a lot split be
reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, which shall submit its findings and provide a
recommendation to the City Council.
Notice is
contact Tim Johnson,
hereby given that all persons having an interest will be given an opportunity to be heard. For questions, you may
City Planner, at 763-706-3673.
Planning and Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
1/£°Im
.--South I~e.o~et ~
~..V..z
~'-North line of Lot ~0'
a 1''''--
e 4457
·
~ 4447 4.4.42
/,-i ~ H '~ '~-"
~ ~'~7 ,~,.
~ ~z~ ,..,.
~2o
~ 4417 441
'; 4356
:434.6
4332
4328
;' 4324
4..~Zo
· '..~.,~v~,.~.:; 4.306
'.~ 'a ,..:, ~300
; ~;..:c~;c.,~ ~
.. ',~,~,= ~
· -, ~ ~.' .'v,,~ 421o
~"~-.:.
~i 4500
'2 .2'
600
4449
4443 4440
4429 4'~0
4414
4~'~ ,..,.
4'~'7
4401
i 4357
,. 4~
~ 4329 4'~0
¢ 4323 4326
" 4507
4357 4358
4351 ',~.
,~*' 434.6
4343
'~' 4340
4333 4~r4
4323 4338
431g ~14
,~d~ ,~oo
4259 580
~236
4~9 4228
IZ~.:? t Z9.2'
4257 4262
425; 425~
4243
4240
4227
~209
"500
445 7 44,.,6
1""' 4',~b
4445
'"'"
4419
4401 4400
4,356
4550
4353 4348
· 4537
4334
4327 ~ 4326
4 4320
4312
IZ2.2' '
4257
4256
4251
4245
4239
,~.,' t~'2
~2~
4208
~ 870
43~5 4.048
o41 4338
4325
'~'" 4320
4321
,~.z' 67 .68~
4301
4257
4~4'7
4258
4 'z4
4~-~
4L~J~
,230
4208
CITY OF,COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
KEVIN HANSEN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER
KATHYJEAN YOUNG, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER ~
4330 WASHINGTON STREET LOT SPLIT
JLRqE19,2003 -
This bloclc of Washington Avenue was reconstructed in 2002.
Prior to full and partial street reconstruction the Engineering Department staff contacts
owners of platted, vacant lots to inquire whether they are interested in having sewer and
water stubbed to the vacant lot during construction. We do not contact owners of lots
that require a lot-split in order to be buildable. The reason for this is that the owner pays
for the service stubs ($3,470 in 2002), however, staff cannot guarantee the owner that the
lot split will be approved.
Sewer and water stubs have not been installed for this newly created parcel. City Council
approval is required to excavate in streets less than 5 years old.
Street restoration would need to be done in accordance with the City's Right-of-Way
ordinance. This would mean milling and overlaying the street from curb to curb and
construction joint to construction joint.
RESOLUTION NO. 2003-31
SUBDIVISION REQUEST
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
590 - 40TH AVENUE N.E.
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421
John Lund, Hereby requests a split of
PIN 35 30 24 12 0186 Legally describedas:
The West Half of Lot 10, Block 4, Rearrangement of Block A of Columbia Heights Annex to
Minneapolis, Anoka County, Minnesota.
and
The West Half of Lot 11, Except the North 55.00 feet thereof, Block 4, Rearrangement of Block
A of Columbia Heights Annex to Minneapolis, Anoka County, Minnesota.
THE DESCRIPTIONS HENCEFORTH TO BE:
Parcel A:
The South 60.00 feet of th:e West Half of Lot 10, Block 4, Rearrangement of Block A of Columbia
Heights Annex to Minneapolis, Anoka County, Minnesota.
Subject to any easements or valid restrictions of record.
Parcel B:
That part Of the West Half of Lot 10 which lies north of the South 60.00 feet thereof and that part
of the West Half of Lot 11 which lies south of the North 55.00 feet thereof, all in Block 4,
Rearrangement' of Block A of Columbia Heights Annex to Minneapolis, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
Subject to any easements or valid restrictions of record.
Be it further resolved that special assessments of record in the office of the City of Columbia Heights as of
this day, against the above described property, are paid.
Any pending or future assessments will be levied according to the new split as approved this day.
Any lot split given approval shall become invalid if the resolution, motion or other Council action approving
the said lot split is not filed with the County Recorder within one (I) year of the date of the Council action.
PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ACTION:
This 1st day of July, 2003
Offered by:
Seconded by:
Roll Call:
Zoning 0 ff'~er
Signature of Owner, Notarized
Owner's Address
Telephone No.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME
this ... day of ,'2003
CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Notary Public
This day of .. ,2003.
Offered by:
Seconded by:
Roll Call:
Secretary to the Council
Julienne Wyckoff, Mayor
7Tl-I STIL~___~T '
!!
190,21
of ~ack
~Mo ~urb fines extended
T.O,
I
,...-.North line of Lot 11
I
I
I t
I I
I
....... 186 ........ ~. ~
I
/
/
/
,/
x 186,~3
tt I
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. cohmtbia-heights, tnn. us
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Mayor
Julienne Wyckoff
Councilmembers
Bruce Nawrocki
Bruce Kclzenberg
Tammera Ericson
Bobby Williams
City Manager
Walter R. Fehst
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
June 25, 2003
Planning and Zoning Commission
Tim Johnson, City Planner
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines Adoption Process
The Columbia Heights Design Guidelines process that started in 2002 is essentially finished.
Thc Design Guidelines document that was developed by City Staff, consultants, and a Task Force
with representatives from the City Council, Planning Commission, area businesses, landowners,
and interested citizens is now ready for adoption. However, the proposed guidelines which will
be adopted by resolution, need to be specifically referenced in the Zoning Ordinance before
official adoption by the City Council. '
You have been sent a copy of thc final draft guidelines. Please take some time to review these
guidelines prior to your next meeting on August 5, 2003. At this meeting the consulting finn
URS that worked to develop these guidelines will be giving a presentation to the Planning
Commission on the guidelines. You will hear what these guidelines will apply to, and how they
will be implemented. We will also be recommending adoption of the resolution approving the
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines, and considering appropriate zoning text amendments to
implement the Design Guidelines.
Please call me if you have any questions on thc document orany processes associated with the
adoption of this document. I can be reached at (763) 706-3673.
THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF' DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF' SERVICES
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
~,~?~' ' ~'. Columbia
~ , Heights
~ Design
Guidelines
DRAFT
June 2003
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Contents
Purpose and Background
[mplementation .................................................................................................................
Applicability .......................................................................................................................
Design Districts .................................................................................................................
Architectural Guidelines
Building Placement ............................................................................................................ 4
Primary Facades and Roof Treatments ............................................................................... 7
Building Width and Fa~;ade Articulation ............................................................................... 8
Building Height ................................................................................................................ 10
Transparency: Window and Door Openings ......................................................................
Entries ............................................................................................................................ 13
Rear Facades and Entries ................................................................................................. 15
Building Materials ............................................................................................................ 16
Roof Top Equipment ........................ . ................................................................................ 19
Building Colors ................................................................................................................ 20
Architectural Detailing ...................................................................................................... 21
Franchise Architecture ..................................................................................................... 22
Drive Through Facilities ................................................................................................... 23
Awnings .......................................................................................................................... 23
Site Design Guidelines
Parking Location ........................... ................................................................................... 24
Parking Area.Screening .................................................................................................... 26
Structured Parldng ........................................................................................................... 27
Placement and Screening Of Service, Loading and Storage Areas ...................................... 28
Landscape and Site Improvements ................................................................................... 29
Pedestrian and Bicycle Access .......................................................................................... 30
Signs ............................................................................................................................... 31
Lighting ........................................................................................................................... 33
Appendices
Glossary .......................................................................................................................... 35
Summary of Community Preference Survey ...................................................................... 37
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Credits
Columbia Heights City Council
.~ulienne Wyckoff (Mayor)
Bruce Kelzenberg
Bruce Nawrocki
Tammera Ericson
Bobby Williams
Gary Peterson (former Mayor)
Marlaine Szurek (through 2002)
Design Guidelines Task Force
.~eff Bahe
Pon Clark
Tammera Ericson
Bob Grootwassink
Connie Kuppe
Bruce Nedegaard
Tom Ramsdell
Marlaine Szurek
Catherine Vesley
City Staff
Robert Streetar, Community Development Director
Tim .Johnson, City Planner
Kevin Hansen, City Engineer
Consultants
URS Corporation
Bob Kost, ASLA, ATCP, Project Manager
Suzanne Rhees, ATCP, Planner
Columbia Hei h, ts Design Guidelines
Purpose and Background
::
W~I~I~IG
The Columbia [-[eights Design Guidelines have two primaU-
functions:
To guide developers ~)r business owners wishing to
propose expansions, rcnovati,)ns or new construction of
buildings or parking within ~!q~ c~gunercial districts:
· To assist City officials :md s[:~:T in reviewing
development prop,
The Guidelines build on and con:plcmcnt recendv
completed streetscapc improvcm~-nts to thc Central .\venue
business district. Thcv wure dcvc-!,>pcd bv City staff.
consultants and a Task 14~rcc xx-itt~ ruprescnta~ves from the
Citx' Council, Planning (i~mmissi, m, area businesses ~md
landowners, and intcrcstud citiz~-:~s (see Acknowledgq'nents).
A public workshop w.as ':add, inc!::ding a CO~TWnunin'
Preference Survey to :~sscss ~ttti<,.dcs toward thc built
environment (see Appendix 2).
Implementation
The guidelines will bc li:-~k~.d ro r i'.c Z~ ming ()rdinancc
through creation of thruu i)usi.~ ',. ~vcrlav Districts rh:tr
match the three Desis~ !)is~ricrs h~ tl~is document.
Comp~ance with thc guLL. Enus ~x'{]] 10c dctcr~ned through
the site plan review pr~,ccss sp~-ci~iud in d~c zoning
or~ance.
Applicability
The guidelines apply to ~i! nunrcsidcntial, mixed usc nnd/or
multiFamily buildings, :w.d [o tM- :5 ,lh ,wing activities:
· New construction;
· Anv exterior changus, includit~g rupainting, with rhc
exception of replacement ~r repair of c~sting materials;
· Any internalrcm()~u:m<' ~' < ,)r c,~.msi,m. ~. . activin' that
increases thc over~ll d>:u ,)f thc 1ouilding by 1() pcrcunr or
more;
· Any development, >r cxpa~asi, ~} ~)f parking areas that
would result in a l~t ",Sdq m, ,re t-h~tn ~our parking spacus.
Minor alterations such ,,_< ,:up:ti:'.r/:~x may be handled
administratively, as dutu,:mhacd b,' lac I :{tv l>lanncr.
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
The guidelines are intended to be
mandatory. It is assumed that the
intent of the guidelines shall be met;
however, it is understood that there
may be many xvays to achieve the same
design objective. The City. may permit
alternative approaches that, in its
deter-ruination, meet the objective(s)
of the design guideline(s) equally well.
The Cid- mav waive any guideline
when specific physical conditions of
the site or building would make
compliance difficult or inappropriate.
The Guidelines apply only to the
building or site elements (such as
parking or loading facilities) being
developed or altered. That is, a
proposal for changes to a building
would be required to meet onlv those
guidelines that pertain to buildings,
while changes to a par-king area would
be required to meet all guidelines for
par-king areas, but not for buildings.
Planning staff will make the initial
determination as to which guidelines
are applicable.
Design Districts
The Guidelines apply to two of the
Ci~"s primary, commercial corridors:
Central Avenue and 40m Avenue.
These corridors actually comprise
three distinct areas, each with its own
patterns of land uses, buildings, and
parking. Therefore, three Design
Districts have been established, each
with its own guidelines for topics such
as building placement and fa~cade
design. Other guidelines, such as those
applying to building colors and
architectural detailing, are the
COlumbia Hei lts Design Guidelines
same for all districts. The districts are:
· The Central Business District,
extending from 37* to 42ad Avenues,
includes a number of historic or
architecturally interesting buildings,
including the Heights Theatre. Most
office and storefront buildings meet
the sidewalk, xvhile shopping centers
and franchise buildings are set back
behind parking lots. Architectural
styles are diverse, from historic
commercial or Mediterranean Revival
(the theater) to 202 century modem.
Nexv multi-family housing has recently
been developed. Several off-street
ramps help to reduce the need for
surface parking. Recent streetscape
improvements have enhanced the
pedestrian character of this district.
· The Highway District extends along
Central Avenue from 42=d Avenue
north to the City bounda~. This
segment has a distinctly different
character than the CBD: most
buildings are set far back from the
street behind large parking lots or
along frontage roads. Central Avenue
is a sLx-lane highway through most of
this area, and the road width and
traffic speeds combine to make the
area less pedestrian-friendly.
· Fortieth Avenue has its own
character, combining homing with
institutions such as City Hall and
smaller commercial businesses.
Commercial buildings tend to be
single-sto~', set back 5 to 10 feet from
the sidewalk. Housing is
predominantly single-family, although
additional townhouse and mulfifamily
development is envisioned in the
Do~'nto~vn Master P/an (2000).
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Architectural
Guidelines
Building Placement
CBD
Object]ye: To maintain and reinforce a
consistent street edge and to focus attention on
Central,4t'enue and otherptima~y streets
mithin the CBD.
Buildings should have a well-defined
front fa%de with primaxy entrances
facing the street. Buildings should be
aligned so that the dominant lines of
their facades parallel the line of the
street and create a continuous edge.
Buildings should meet the established
building facade line on the block where
they are located for at least 75 percent
of the length of their front fa%de. On
most downtown blocks, this fac~ade
line is at or very close to the edge of
the sidewalk.
The remaining 25 percent of the
fagade may be set back up to 10 feet to
emphasize entries or create outdoor
seating and gathering areas.
At intersections, buildings should
"hold the comer" - that is, have street
facades at or near the sidewalk on both
streets.
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Building Placement
40* Avenue District
Objective: To orient buildings to~'ard 4Cfi
,4venue in order to im~ease its visual interest
and attractiveness to pedestrians.
All buildings should have a well-
defined front fa.cade with primary
entrances facing the street. Buildings
should be aligned so that the dominant
lines of their facades parallel the line of
the street.
Nonresidential and m£¥ed use building
facades should be flush xvith the
sidewalk or set back no more than 10
feet for at least 60 percent of the
length of their front facade. At
intersections, these buildings should
"hold the comer" - that is, have street
facades at or near the sidexvalk on both
streets.
Residential buildings should be set back
between 5 and 20 feet from the
sidexvalk edge. The purpose of the
setback is to provide a transitional
semi-private area bet~veen the sidewalk
and the front door. Landscaping,
steps, porches, grade changes, and low
ornamental fences or xvalls may be
used to provide increased privacy and
livability for f'zrst floor units.
Columbia Hei h, ts Design Guidelines
Building Placement
Highway District
Obfect]ve: To orient nonresidential
bui~'ngs tog'aM the street in order to improve
its malkabilt~, uahik creating opportunities
for more intemallyfo~sed residential
development.
Nonresidential or m£¥ed-use buildings
should have a well-defined front
faqade with entrances facing the street.
Larger buildings (30,000 square feet or
more in size) may be oriented
perpendicular to the street provided
that at least one entrance facing the
street is provided.
Buildings may be set back a maximum
of 85 feet from the sidexvalk, in order
to allow for two ro~vs of parking and
drive aisles plus landscaped frontage.
This setback may be increased in cases
where topography or other physical
conditions xvould prevent par 'lrng
areas from being located to the rear of
the building.
Residential bui~'ngs may be oriented
toward Central Avenue or toward
internal streets or courts, with side
facades parallel to Central Avenue.
Facades parallel to Central Avenue
should be xvell-detailed and service
areas should not be located along the
Central Avenue frontage. The
frontage should be appropriately
landscaped (see Parking Screening,
page 26).
Columbia Hei~hts Desi~n Guidelines
Primary Facades
and Roof Treatments
CBD
Objective: To emplqy buildingproportions
consistent t~ith traditional storefront
commercial buildings characteristic of a
douanto~'n district.
Buildings should have a well-del'reed
base, middle and top. The base, or
ground floor, should appear visuallv
distinct from the upper stories,
through the use of a change in building
materials, window shape or size, an
intermediate cornice line, an axvnmg,
arcade or portico, or similar
techniques.
Roofs should be flat, consistent with
traditional storefront commercial
design. Building tops should be
articulated with detailed cornices or
parapets.
40~' Avenue and Highway Districts
Ob/ective: To encourage attached
residential and mLYed-use buildings that are
compatibk mith the prerailineg single famil),
residential surroundings.
Residential buildings may be designed
with flat or pitched roofs. A variety of
roof shapes and parapet details are
encouraged; however, non-structural,
purely decorative roof elements should
be avoided.
Columbia Heights Des!~n Guidelines
Primary Facades
and Roof Treatments
Nonresidential or m£¥ed- use buildings may
be designed xvith pitched or flat roofs.
Pitched roofs may include gable or hip
roofs, but not mansard or other roof
types not characteristic of the region.
The base or ground floor of the
building should include elements that
relate to the human scale, including
texture, projections, doors and
windows, awnings, canopies or
ornamentation.
Building Width and
Fa(gade Articulation
CBD
Objective: To reJle~:t ;ypical 6mTding
widths found in the CBD and to add dsual
interest and z'arie~y b5, aroiding long~
monotonous facadea;
The prima~~ fa~cade(s) of buildings of
40 feet or more in width should be
articulated into smaller increments
through the following techniques or
similar ones:
· Stepping back or extending
fonvard a portion of the facade;
· Use of different textures or
contrasting, but compatible,
materials;
· Division into storefronts with
separate display windows and
entrances
· Arcades, axvnings, window bays,
balcomes or similar ornamental
features;
ColUmbia Heights Design, Guidelines
Building Width and:
Fagade Articulation
Variation in roof lines to reinforce
the articulation of the primary
facade.
40'~ Avenue District
Obfective: To rejTect buil&'ng midths
characteristic of eMstineg residential and
commercial buildings on 40~* Avenue, and to
add ~isual interest and rariqy to buildings.
The primary facade(s) of buildings of
30 feet or more in ~vidth should be
articulated into smaller increments
through the techniques listed above or
similar ones.
Highway District
Ob/ectJve: To add zisual interest and
rariqy to buildings and emphasi~ the
pedestrian scak.
The primau, facade(s) of buildings of
40 feet or more in width should be
articulated into smaller increments
through the techniques listed above or
by division of the building mass into
several smaller "xvings" - i.e., an "L"
or "U" shape - to lessen its apparent
bulk.
Columbia Heir,its Design Guidelines
Building Height
O b/ecti;re: To create an imreased sense of
enclosure, diminish the perceived uddth of the
street, and pmti& opportunities for ~per-
sto~y housing~ offices or studios.
All Districts
T~vo- and three-story buildings are
strongly encouraged. Taller buildings
are encouraged in the CBD. ~MI
buildings shall have a minimum
cornice height of 22 feet. This height
is adequate to achieve the objective
above, conveying a multi-story
appearance ex'en if the building has
only one occupied floor.
22 feet
10
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Transparency: Window and
Door Openings
Ob/ecti~re: To reflect the character of
eMsting storefront commercial buildings,
enliven the streetscape and enhance se~wff~y by
protiding, zievvs into and out of buildings:
CBD and 40~' Avenue Districts
For nonresidential or mixed-use
buildings, window and door openings
shall comprise at least 30 percent of
the area of the ground floor of the
prirrmn/street fa,cade.
3, minimum of 20 percent of any two
side or rear facades at ground level
shall consist of window and door
openings designed as specified below.
A minimum of 15 percent of all upper
sto~' facades shall consist of window
or balcony door openings designed as
specified below.
For residential buildings, a minimum
of 20 percent of primary, (street-facing)
facades and 15 percent of each side or
rear facade shall consist of window and
door openings designed as specified
below (page 12).
Highway District
\X?nere commercial or office uses are
found on the ground floor, at least 20
percent of the ground floor fac~ade
fronting Central Avenue and 15
percent of any two side or rear facades
shall consist of window and door
openings designed as specified below
(note that spandrel glass may be used).
11
Columbia Hei. 'lts Desitin Guidelines
For residential buildings, a minimum
of 20 percent of primary (street-facing)
facades and 15 percent of each side or
rear facade shall consist ofwindoxv and
door openings designed as specified
below.
Window and Door Design
Windows and door openings shall
meet the following requirements:
· Windows should be designed with
punched and recessed openings, in
order to create a strong rhythm of
light and shadow in keeping xvith
traditional architecture.
· ~Errored glass or glass block
should not be used on street-facing
facades. Glass on xvindows and
doors should be clear or slightly
tinted, allowing views into and out
of the interior.
· In the Highway District, spandrel
glass (opaque) may be used on up
to half the window and door
surfaces on any building fa~cade.
· Window shape, size and patterns
should emphasize the intended
organization of the fagade and the
definition of the building.
· Display windows at least 3 feet
deep may be used to meet this
requirement, but not ~vindows
located above eye level.
12
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Entries
Objecffve: To estabh'sh the zisual
importamv of the prima~y street entrance, and
to em'ute that entries contribute to the tisual
attractiveness of the building, and are readily
tisibk to the cmtomer.
Nonresidential or Mixed-Use
Buildings, All Districts
Prirn~,- building entrances on all
buildings should face the primary.
abutting public street or wallctvay, or
linked to that street by a clearly defined
and visible walkxvay or courtyard.
Additional secondary, entrances may be
oriented to a secondary street or
parking area.
In the case of a comer building or a
building abutting more than one street,
the street with the higher classification
shall be considered primary.. The main
entrance should be placed at sidewalk
grade. Entries shall be designed with
one or more of the following=
· Canopy, portico, overhang, arcade
or arch above the entrance
· Recesses or projections in the
building facade surrounding the
entrance
· Peaked roof or raised parapet over
the door
· Di~lay windo~vs surrounding the
entrance
· A.rchitecmral det.qiling such as tile
work or °mamental moldings
· Permanent planters or window
boxes for landscaping
13
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Entries
Residential Buildings, All
Districts
Primary building entrances on all
buildings should face the pfmav]
abutting public street or wall~vay, or
linked to that street by a clearly de£med
and visible xvalkxvay or courtyard.
Additional secondary entrances may be
oriented to a seconda~- street or
parking area.
Porches, steps, pent roofs, roof
overhangs, hooded front doors or
similar architectural elements should
be used to define the primary.
entrances to all residences.
14
Columbia Hei~J~ts Design Guidelines
Rear Facades and Entries
Ob/ective: To improve the appearance of
rear facades, orient customers parking or
~'alking to the mar (buildings, and protide
safe and convenient access to all bmTding
All Districts
Rear facades should be xvell maintained
and welcoming in appearance.
Landscaping and small wall signs
identifying businesses are encouraged.
If customers park to the rear of the
building, a well-defined and lighted
rear entrance is strongly encouraged. If
a rear entrance is provided, an awning
is also encouraged.
If no entrance is provided, a signed
and lighted walkxvay to the front of the
building should be provided. A small
identification sign with the name of the
business is also encouraged.
15
Columbia. Heights Design Guidelines
Building Materials
Ob/ective: To ensure that high-quali(y,
durable and authentic building materiah are
used in residential and nonresidential
construction.
All Districts
The following standards apply to all
districts, xvith the additions and
exceptions noted on pages 17 and 18
for the 40~ Avenue and Highway
Districts.
~M1 buildings should be constructed of
high-quality materials, including the
following:
Primary materials:
· Brick
· Natural stone
· Precast concrete units and concrete
block, provided that surfaces are
molded, serrated or treated with a
textured material in order to g~ve
the wall surface a three-
dimensional character.
· Stucco
· Jumbo brick may be used on up to
30 percent of any faqade, provided
that it is used only on the lower
third of the building wall.
Prohibited materials:
· Unadorned plain or painted
concrete block
· Tilt-up concrete panels
· Pre-fabricated steel or sheet metal
panels
· ,Uuminum, vinyl, fiberglass,
asphalt or fiberboard (masonite)
siding
16
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Building Materials
Accent materials: May be used on up
to 150 0 of any of the buitding's
fa,cades. These may include
architectural metalwork, glass block, or
similar materials as approved by the
Planning Commission.
Building materials of similar quality
should be used on front, side and rear
facades, and detailing of all facades
should be compatible. However, on
rear facades, EIFS (exterior insulating
£mish system) may be used as a
primary material, at a height of at least
3 feet above grade. On front or side
facades, EIFS may only be used as an
accent material (up to 15~ of the
fa,cade area).
40* Avenue District
Residential buildings in this district
may use the following additional
materials:
· Wood, consisting of horizontal lap
siding with an exposure no greater
than 5 inches or wood shakes;
surfaces must be painted;
· Synthetic wood (fiber cement)
siding resembling horizontal lap
siding, such as Hardiplank and
similar materials.
I15
17
Columbia Heillhts Design Guidelines
Building Materials
Highway District
For nonresidential or mixed-use
buildings, EIFS may be used as a
primary material on any fagade, at a
height of at least 3 feet above grade.
On facades fronting a public street
EIFS shall be limited to a ma.mum of
60 percent of the fa%de area.
Buildings of 100 feet or more in width
shall employ at least two masonry
types or colors on the primary fa%de.
Residential buildings in this district
may use the following additional
materials:
· Wood, consisting of hohzontal lap
siding with an exposure no greater
than 5 inches or wood shakes;
surfaces must be painted;
· Synthetic wood (fiber cement)
siding resembling horizontal lap
siding, such as Hardiplank and
similar materials.
18
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Rooftop Equipment
Objective: To ensure that ~ie~vs of rooftop
equipment from public streets orpedestrian
mays are minirai~d.
All Districts
,MI rooftop equipment shall be
screened from viexv from adjacent
streets, public rights-of-way and
adjacent properties. Preferably,
rooftop equipment should be screened
by the building parapet, or should be
located out of view from the ground.
If this is infeasible, the equipment
should be grouped xvithin a single
enclosure. This structure shall be set
back a distance of 11/2 times its height
from any primal.' fa%de fronting a
public street. Screens shall be of
durable, permanent materials (not
including xvood) that are compatible
with the primal- building materials.
Exterior mechanical equipment such as
duct~vork shall not be located on
primary building facades.
19
Columbia Heights D~si~n,Guidelines
Building Colors
Ob/¢ctive: To ensure that building colors
are aesthetically pkasing and compatible ~th
their surroundings.
All Districts
Building colors should accent, blend
with, or complement surroundings.
Principal building colors should
consist of subtle, neutral or muted
colors with low reflectance (e.g.,
browns, grays, tans, dark or muted
greens, blues and reds). "Warm-
toned" colors are encouraged because
of their year-round appeal. No more
than txvo principal colors may be used
on a facade or individual storefront.
Bright or primary colors should be
used only as accents, occupying a
ma.mum of 15 percent of building
facades, except when used in a mural
or other public art.
2O
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Architectural Detailing
Ob/ecti~'e: To encourage ne~v building
design that echoes the design of the fear 'iconic'
buildings that remain in Columbia Heights-
notably the Heights Theater- ~vhik
en~t'ening building facades and contributing to
a human-scakd emimnment.
All Districts
Architectural details such as
ornamental cornices, arched windo~vs
and ~varm-toned brick ~vith bands of.
contrasting color are encouraged in
nexv construction. The contemporary
adaptation of historic and vernacular
residential, institutional and
commercial styles found in Columbia
Heights and in Northeast Minneapolis
is encouraged.
:~lll~l$11111 IIIIIIIII
IlllllIl
21
Columbia Hei tts Design Guidelines
Franchise Architecture
Ob/ec~ive: To encourage nero building
design that is supportive of the urban design
goals of the Ci[y, and that reJponds to its
context.
All Districts
Franchise architecture (building design
that is trademarked or identified with a
particular chain or corporation and is
generic in nature) is generally
discouraged unless it employs a
traditional storefront commercial style.
Franchises or national chains shall
folloxv these guidelines to create
context-sensitive buildings.
Drive-through Facilities
Ob/ective: ~o ensure that drive-through
fadlities do not dominate the appearance of
building facades or hinder pedestrian
circulation.
All Districts
Drive-through canopies and other
structures, xvhere present, shall be
constructed from the same materials as
the prima_D,- building, and with a similar
level of architectural quality and
det,qiling.
Site design shall accommodate a logical
and safe vehicle and pedestrian
circulation pattern. Adequate queuing
lane space shall be provided, without
interfering xvith on-site par'king.
22
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Drive-through Facilities
CBD
Dm'e-through facilities shall be placed
to the rear of the principal building,
and may be accessed from side streets
or e.,dstmg senSce drives; access from
Central Avenue is discouraged.
40* Avenue and Highway Districts
Drive-through elements shall be placed
to the side or rear of the principal
building, and shall not be located
between any building fa,cade and
Central Avenue or 402 Avenue.
Awnings
Objective: To encourage the use of
awnings as a may to shelter ~stomer~; reduce
glare and consen'e enerv~y, and proride
additional accent color to building facades:
Ail Districts
~q~ere axvnings are desired, canvas or
fabric awnings should be used, rather
than xvood or metal. Awnings should
be installed without damaging the
building or visually impairing
distinctive architectural features.
Internally illuminated awnings are
prohibited.
23
Columbia Hei~[hts Design Guidelines
Site Design Guidelines
Parking Location
Objective: To ensure that buildings, rather
than parking lots, dominate the appearance of
the streetscape.
CBD
Generally, parking in the Central
Business District is provided in several
off-street structures. If provided on-site,
off-street parking should be located to
the side or rear of buildings or within
structures, not bet~veen buildings and
the street. A maximum of 40 percent of
the lot frontage may be occupied by
parking.
40th Avenue District
For nonresidential or mixed-use
buildings, off-street parking should be
located to the side or rear of buildings,
or within structures, not between
buildings and the street. A maximum of
50 percent of the lot frontage may be
occupied by par'king.
24
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Parking Location
Highway District
Objective: To improve the appearance and
cont~nience of parking lot circulation for vehicles
and pedestrians by breaking the parking area
q) into smaller unit~: Parkdng areas should be
distributed around large buildings in order to
shorten the distance to other buildings and
reduce the overall scak of the pared suoCace.
No more than 50 percent of the off-
street parking area for the entire site
shall be located between the front
fa%de of the principal building and the
primary abutting street.
Internal accessways xvith landscaping
and sidexvalks are encouraged as a
means of dividing large par-king areas
into smaller ones and facilitating
pedestrian circulation. ,~mgled or
parallel parking may be provided along
an accessway.
I eeonn ~') C:hin
Maior arterial road
Major relail -
ouIlel$
25
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Parking Area Screening
Ob/ect~'e: To soften the appearance of
parka'ng areas ~vhen tie~d fmm an abutting
street or sidewalk, and to screen parking areas
from re~idential yards.
All Districts
Screening along streets and
sidewalks. Parking areas adjacent to
public streets or sidewalks shall be
screened with a combination of
landscape material and decorative
fencing or xvalls sufficient to screen
parked cars on a year-round basis xvhile
providing adequate -+isibilitv for
pedestrians.
Screening adjacent to residential
uses. Parking and loading areas
abutting residential districts or uses shall
be screened along side and rear lot lines
as specified in the Zoning Ordinance
(Section 9.613(5)), in order to block
views into par-king areas from residential
yards.
26
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Structured Parking
Objective: To ensure that parking
structures are compatibk uith surrounding
buildings and make a po~itire contribution to
the streetscape.
All Districts
The ground floor facade of any parking
structure abutting any public street or
walkway should be designed and
architecturally detailed in a manner
consistent with nearby commercial or
office buildings.
Upper floors should be designed so that
sloped floors t3'pical of par'king
structures do not dominate the
appearance of the facade.
Windows or openings should be
provided that echo those of surrounding
buildings.
Entrance drives to structured par'king
(including underground par-king) should
be located and designed to minimize
interference with pedestrian movement.
Pedestrian walks should be continued
across drivewavs.
The appearance of structured par'king
entrances should be minimized so that
they do not dominate the street frontage
of a building. Possible techniques
include recessing the entry,; extending
portions of the structure over the entry,;
using screening and landscaping to
soften the appearance of the entry,; using
the smallest curb cut and drivexvav
possible; and subordinating the par-king
entrance (compared to the pedestrian
entrance) in terms of size, prominence,
location and design emphasis.
27
Columbia Hei/lhts Design Guidelines
Placement and Screening of
Service, Loading and Storage
Areas
Objective: To s~reen ~$ews of sertice and
loading areas, and to ensure that the noise
impacts of these functiom are fully contained
and not audibk fmm surrounding streets and
properties.
All Districts
~kny outdoor storage, service or loading
area shall be screened as provided in the
Zoning Ordinance (Sections 9.612 and
9.613).
Loading docks, truck parking, HVAC
equipment, trash collection and other
sen'ice functions shall be incorporated
into the design of the building or
screened with walls of similar design and
materials to the principal building,
combined xvith landscape material to
create a screen at least 6 feet in height.
Businesses with service bays for auto
repair and similar uses are encouraged to
locate them to the side or rear of the
building, where feasible.
28
Columbia Hei~hts Design Guidelines
Landscape and Site
Improvements
Objective: To ensure that private
improvements ~ill compkment and enhance
public ir~prorements.
CBD
,M~y landscape improvements or site
furnishings included xvithin a
development site, including lighting,
seating, planters, trees or shrubs, trash
receptacles and similar elements, shall be
compatible xvith the Ci~'s streetscape
improvements to the Central Business
District. City, staff can provide guidance
on public streetscape elements.
29
Columbia HeiRhts Desisn Guidelines
Pedestrian and Bicycle Access
Objective: To ensure thatpedestrians and
bi~'clists hare safe and convenient access to all
business establishments.
All Districts
Where sidexvalks are lacking, they may
be required along all street frontages.
A well-defined pedestrian path shall be
provided from the sidewalk to each
principal customer entrance of a
building. Walkxvays shall be located so
that the distance betxveen street and
entrance is minimized. Walkways shall
be at least 5 feet in width, and shall be
distinguished through pavement
material from the surrounding par-king
lot. Wall~vavs shall be landscaped for at
least 50 percent of their length ~vith
trees, shrubs, flower beds and/or
planter pots.
Sidewalks of at least 5 feet in width shall
be provided along all building facades
that abut public par-king areas.
3O
Columbia Hei~hts DesiJJn Guidelines
Signs
All Districts
Objective: Sigm' should be architectural#
compatibk ~ith the s~yk, composition,
materials, colors and details of the buildinb and
uith other ~igns on nearby buildingJ: Signs
should be an integral part of the building and
site design.
Wall and projecting signs. Signs
should be positioned so thev are an
integral design feature of the building,
and to complement and enhance r_he
building's architectural features. Signs
should not obscure or destroy
architectural details such as stone arches,
glass transom panels, or decorative
brick~vork. Signs may be placed:
· In the horizontal lintel above the
storefront windmvs;
· Within windmv glass, provided that
no more than 25 percent of any
individual window is obscured;
· Projecting from the building;
· As part of an axvning;
· In areas where signs were
historically attached.
Shape. Wall signs should generally be
rectangular. In most cases, the edges of
signs shall include a raised border that
sets the sign apart from the building.
Individual raised letters set onto the sign
area surface are also preferred.
Projecting signs may be designed in a
varietv of shapes.
31
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Signs
Colors. Sign colors shall be compatible
with the building fagade to tvhich the
sign is attached. No more than three
colors should be used per sign, unless
part of an illustration. To ensure the
legibility of the sign, a high degree of
contrast between the background and
letters is preferable. A combination of
soft/neutral shades and dark/rich
shades (see Building Colors standard)
are encouraged.
Materials. Sign materials should be
consistent or compatible with the
original construction materials and
architectural style of the building facade
on which they are to be displayed.
Natural materials such as wood and
metal are more appropriate than plastic.
Neon signs mav be appropriate for
windows.
Illumination. External illumination of
signs is permitted by incandescent, metal
halide or fluorescent light that emits a
continuous white light. Light shall not
shine direcdy onto the ground or
adjacent buildings. Neon signs are
permitted. Internallv lit box signs and
awnings are not permitted, with the
exception of theater marquees. Variable
electronic message signs are not
permitted, with the exception of e.,dsting
me/temperature signs.
Free-standing signs. Ground or
monument signs are encouraged rather
than pylon signs. Sign materials, colors
and architectural detailing should be
similar to those of the principal building.
The area around the base of the sign
should be landscaped.
32
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Lighting
Objective: To ensure that safe and
attractim h'ghting kvels are pmtCded around all
bui~'ngs and parking areas, v~thout excessive
glare or brightness.
All Districts
Exterior lighting should be the
minimum necessary for safety and
security. Lighting should be designed to
coordinate with building architecture
and landscaping. Building-mounted
fixtures compatible with building
facades are encouraged.
Overall lighting levels should be
consistent with the character and
intensity, of the surrounding area, as
specified in the Zoning Ordinance
(Section 9.611). Light standards shall be
consistent with existing pedestrian-scale
lighting standards, where present or
planned.
33
Columbia Hei~hts Design Guidelines
34
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Appendix 1: Glossary
Arcade: A roofed passage~vay, usually with shops on one or both sides.
Building Frontage: The front facade of a building, typically abutting the sidewalk.
Canopy: A projection or hood over a door, window, niche, etc.
Cornice: 2my projecting ornamental moulding along the top of a building or wall.
EIFS: Exterior insulating finish system - a building wall system ts/pic:xlly consisting
of an insulation layer, a water-resistant base coat, and a finish coat similar to stucco
in appearance.
Drive-through facilities: Facilities that allow the customer to purchase or usc
services without leafing their ~-ehicle, including bank machines, car washes, ~asr
coffee shops or 'kiosks, or similar uses.
Franchise Architecture: Building design that is trademarked or identified with a
particular chain or corporation and is generic in nature.
Frontage: That portion of a lot or parcel that abuts a street.
Jumbo Brick: Brick that is oversized, usually 4 inches tall by 12 inches long.
Nonresidential Development: Commercial, office, institutional or similar land
uses without residential components, including commercial lodging.
Pitched Roofs:
Gable Roofi A pitched roof with a central ridge line and vertical w:~ll ends.
Gambrel Roofi A roof with a double pitch terminating in a small gable
the ridge.
Hip Roofi A pitched roof with sloped instead of vertical ends.
Mansard Roofi A pitched roof hating a double slope, the l~wer ?irc?~ being
longer and steeper than the upper.
Parapet: A low wall placed along the edge of a structure, such as at d'.c edge
bridge or rooftop.
Portico: A roofed entrance to a building that is columned like a tcmpic Front.
Reflective Glass: Glass with a metallic coating that produces a mirr(.~r
typically used on facades to screen interiors from view and reduce solar heat.
Service Areas: Areas for loading docks, truck par'king, t-I~,rAC equipment, trash
collection and other serrice functions for a building.
Sign Types:
Wall Sign: A single-faced sign attached to or painted on an exterior wall
a building, parallel to the building wall.
Freestanding Sign: A permanent sign which is not affixed ro any part
building or structure and which is supported by upright braces or posts
placed in the ground.
35
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Monument or Ground Sign: A freestanding sign ~'pically c,.)nst~ctcd o£
masonry,, concrete, wood or other decorative ,type material to complement
the surrounding area.
Projecting Sign: A sign which extends outxvard from the wall o£ a building
more than 18 inches and is supported or suspended from the building wall.
Pylon Sign: A freestanding sign supported by a pole-D'pe structure
anchored in the ground.
Spandrel Glass: Glass that has been rendered opaque; ~'pically used to hide
materials from viexv on the exterior of a building.
Streetscape: Public improvements xvithin a street right-of-way, including sidewalks,
street furniture, landscaping, trees, light standards and similar features.
Storefront Commercial Style: The traditional commercial store(font dates (rc~rn
the 19~ and early 20~ centuries, and is strongly associated with downtown or "M~in
Street" development. The ,typical commercial storefront includes a ground floor
entrance and display windo~vs, an upper fagade, usuaLlv with regularly spaced
windows, and a cornice that caps the building (see sketch).
Synthetic Wood: Fiber cement siding materials such as "Hardiplank" or other %'pcs
designed to resemble xvood lap siding, not including fibreboard, vinyl, aluminum or
masonite siding.
Typical commercial storefront
36
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Appendix 2: Summary of Community Preference Survey
A community workshop held in January, 2003, included a discussion of current conditions
along the Central Avenue and 40th Avenue, followed by a Community Preference Survey,
the results of which are summarized beloxv. A Community Preference Survey is is a short
exercise in which participants rate a series of slides of buildings and streetscape elements
from similar communities for their aesthetic and visual appeal. Slides were ranked on a scale
of 1 (most negative) to 5 (most positive). The survey results assisted the consultants in
drafting the guidelines by indicating general attitudes for or against specific building u'pes
and site design features. The other advantage of the sun'ey is that it increases participants'
awareness of the built environment, as well as their confidence in their own ability to make
aesthetic judgements about that environment.
Images were presented in slx categories:
· Residential
* MLxed Use
* Office
· Commerdal
· Signs
· Parking Lots and Structure
The summary below highlights general trends, the most positively- and negatively-rated
images, and the most controversial ones - those with the greatest variation among
responses. Many of the posidve images have been used to illustrate the Design Guidehnes.
ResidenUal
The residential category drew a wide range of responses, with less consistency than some
other categories. Townhouses that have well-detailed facades with a consistent relationship
to the street are preferred over those that have garages dominating the street frontage.
Landscaping in the foreground has a strong positive influence. Most negadve responses
went to mulfifamily buildings with lime detailing and bo%' shapes. Widest range of opinions
were for images that send "mixed messages" - buildings with very traditional Gcadcs but set
too close to the street, or buildings with attractive shapes but monotonous colors in a snowy
setting.
Most positive
Most negative
Most
controversial
Avg. Score
Block of 2-story townhouses, Kansas City - red brick, unified appearance, 3.58
enhanced by Iow brick walls and front yard trees.
2-story townhouses, E. Hennepin - brick with projecting windows, colorful front 3.42
yard landscaping, narrow setback
2-story apartment building, Green Bay- stark stucco/brick building, barren setting 1.16
Senior high-rise, St. Paul - slab-like appearance 1.37
"Federal" style brick townhouses, Kentlands, MD - prominent front steps, minimal 2.47
sidewalk
Duplexes1 St. Paul - monochromatic siding, no visible landscaping but fits 3.05
residential context
Mixed Use
There was a consistent pattern of responses in this category, and generally high so)rcs.
Buildings with a high degee of detailing, a high percentage of masonry, and visibtc
37
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
landscaping received high scores. Buildings with flat-appearing facades received lower
scores. Both 2- and 4-story buildings were favored. All the buildings in this categoU- were
located at the sidewalk or set back behind a fairly narrow parking area.
Most positive
Most negative
Controversial
Avg. Score
Slide 2: 4-story bdck building, Winnetka, IL - street trees and detailed facade 3.42
minimize building bulk
Slide 5: Golden Valley Commons, 2 ~ stories - accent tower, storefront design, 3.42
landscaped median in foreground
Slide 8: Classic traditional brick 2-story storefront, Excelsior. Low hedge 3.42
between fa~de and sidewalk
Slide 9: 4-story tower, brick & stucco, University Village - lack of facade detailing 2.00
makes it seem oversized
Slide 4: 3-story building, Shakopee - flat brick, windows too small 2.32
Slide 11: Renovation of traditional 2-story storefront, Hennepin Ave. 2.47
Office Development
Responses xvere fairly consistent, although not as positive as the mE, ced-usc catego~-.
Preferred were buildings with a modest scale (1- and 2-story), pitched roofs and adequate
landscaping.
Most positive
Most negative
Controversial
Avg. Score
Slide 7: 2-story brick building, pitched roofs, landscaping - Mariemont, OH, 1920s 3.58
Slide 2: 2-story brick building, Northbrook, IL - pitched roof, large windows, Iow 3.47
profile
Slide 5: 2-story brick/stucco, Wayzata- distinct base, midCle and top, Iow shrubs 3.47
along sidewalk
Slide 8: 60's style 3-story building, Wayzata - flat fa~:ade, .~rey color 1.89
Slide 5: tall 2-sto~ building, ornate design with small-paned windows - too 2.47
"fussy"?
Commercial Development
This catego~ had the least agreement between scores; some viewers seem to Gvor sh(>pping
centers as a development t?-pe, where others dislike the appearance of' large paring l()ts. In
general, highest scores went to newer buildings with a variety of materials (i.e., stucco
masonry), detailing on facades (columns, fights, dlework) and heights of :~t least 1 !.= stories.
Landscaping also had a positive effect.
Most positive
Most negative
Controversial
Avg. Score
Slide 10: mini-mall, Northbrook, IL 3.84
Slide 7: small non-franchise Burger King, Cedarburg, WI 3.79
Slide 6: Jimmy's Steaks, Mpls. - painted brick w/bricked-in windows 2.32
Slide 9: Shopping center without landscaping; paved parking 2.16
Slide 9 (as above) - shows some acceptance of development type vs. dislike of
large parking lots?
~8
Columbia Heights Design Guidelines
Signs
There was a high degree of consistency among responses. Signs with simple, bold, Lind
sometimes colorful designs were preferred over more "historical" or detailed desi~ms, Neon
and illumination received high scores. Monument signs that are well-coordinated with their
ptiman., buildings, and free-standing district identity signs were preferred over wat/signs for
individual businesses. Billboards and standard franchise signs in bright colors received the
loxvest scores.
Most positive
Most negative
Controversial
Avg. Score
Slide 13: Low monument Walgreen's sign, Northbrook, IL 3.63
Slide 6: District identity sign, 50th and France - contemporary, simple, colorful 3.61
Slide 12: Billboards on roof of Iow building 1.63
Slide 10: Car-X pylon sign in parking lot - paved foreground, no landscaping 1.89
Slide 10 (as above) -simple bold design may be a positive
Slide 9: Stacked wood wall signs for several businesses - too busy. "quaint" 3.28
Parking Lots and Structures
Responses were quite consistent in this category,. Parking structures received high sca)rcs
when their parking function was concealed behind the front facade, or when heavily
landscaped. Unscreened entrances receired low scores. Screening of surGcc parking with
low wails and decorative fencing, combined with landscaping, received positive so)rcs, ~ it
appeared neat and uncluttered. The same xvas true for landscaping alone.
Most positive
Most negative
Controversial
Avg. Score
Slide 3: iron fence and hedge, Wayzata - "main street" character 3.84
Slide 4: mixed use parking structure, Iowa City- fa~;ade appears as mixed-use 3.63
building, not ramp
Slide 6: parking ramp, Red Wing - brick fagade, heavily landscaped, parking 3.63
hardly visible
Slide 5: surface parking lot, Hutchinson -parking is dominant compared to 2.11
buildings
Slide 8: surface lot, Wayzata, Iow buildings in distance, some landscaping in 2.26
foreground
Slide 9: parking ramp entrance, E. Hennepin - rear block entrance, no 2.26
landscaping
Slide 1: ornamental fence with landscaping, Hennepin - multi-colored brick, 3.56
metal rails, ground plantings - too busy?
Slide 13: Calhoun Beach Club -tall, imposing building, modest parking entrance 3.21
(below-ground parking)
39