Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 11, 2000 Tern Rammd~ll, Chak CiTY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS I a 8t~km~ Jdm.n 590 401'H AVENUE N.J., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN $$42 ! -38'78 (612) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 PLANNilil6 AND ZONING COMMISSION REOULAR MEETING- MINUTES July I1, 2000 The July 11, 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was called to order by at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Remsdel. Members present were Shettock, Johneen, Yelde and Rams~ll. Commissioner Hanson was not present. Aisc present were Tim Johnson (City Planner), Kathryn Pepin (Secretary to the Planning and Zoning Commission), and Ken Anderson (Community Development Director). MOTION by Yehie, seconded by ShattUCk, to approve the minutes from the meeting of June 6, 2000 as presented in writing. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. Public Hearing Conditional Use Permit Cue #2000-0717 Olive Tree Deli Re: 3700 Central Ave. Columbia Heights, Mn. Mr. Johnson presented the request'of the Olive Tree Deli for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review to aflow for the currant Olive Tree Grocery and Deli at 3700 Central Avenue N.E. above to provide seating as a restaurant at the current site. Information on the menu items and additional hours of operation have not yet been provided. He added thet they am proposing 24 seats for dining. // He informed the Commission that the surrounding property to the north and east is zone~ as RB, .Retail Business, and is used commercially. The property to the west is zoned as R-3 and is used residentially. The property to the south is in Minneapolis. Mr. Johnson stated that according to Section 9.112(2) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance, a Conditional Use Permit is required if the proposed use contains a restaurant, cafG, tea room, bar, prepared food outlets subject te Section 9.116(15) and Prepared Food Delivery Establishments as such establisimmnts are defined in Section 9.1'03(63). He stated that the applicant is not proposing any physical changes to the exterior of the building. However, there will be some interior modifications necessary to establish seating for twenty-four (24) persons. These improvements are subject to review and approval by tho Building Official, Fire Department, and the Anoka County Health Department. Mr. Johnson stated that the Minimum Yard and Density Requirements areas follows: The floor-area-ratio within the "CBD" District shall not exceed 1.0. This requirement appears to be met after staff review. TH[ CITY' OF' COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NO1' DISCRIMINATE; ON THE BASIS OF' DISABILITY IN EMPLOYM~'NT OR '~H~' PROVISION OF' SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY E~MPLDYER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY ! 1, 2000 Page 2 Lots shall have a minimum frontage of forty (40) feet, This lot has approximately one hundred twelve feet of frontage. T~ frontage meets ordinance requhmants. Front Yard setback shall be fifteen (15) feet. The structure is not in compliance, but the structure is a legal non-conforming buikling. The rear yard setback shall be ten (10) feat, with the existing structure meeting this requirement. Ne side yard setback required. Lot width required is fifty (50) feet. The lot width i.s one hundred twelve (112) feet. No structure shall exceed three stories or thirty-five (35) feet in height. No exterior changes are planned. He stated that the building is in compliance. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that the Zoning Ordinance requires that restaurants provide at least one space for each three seats based on capacity design per each thirty-five (35) square feet of gross floor area. According to the floor plan, them are 24 seats proposed for restaurant use. He noted that the proposed parking let configuration identifies 23-plus spaces on-site, one of which is handicap accessible. However, he stated that the site plan submitted showing the parking lot layout will need to be adjusted to allow for a walkway or five foot area between the parking lot and the building. The front parking lot stalls shown on the site plan submitted need to be adjusted to allow for curbing and sidewalk access to the buildinO. However, by reducing the available amount of parking space for sidewalk and pedestrian access, the vehicle access lane is also reduced to less than twenty (20~ feet. There is currently no requirement in the Zoning Ordinance referring to a minimum access lane width. He felt that this could he problematic for large vehicles puffing in and out of the proposed spaces. Mr. Johnson added that Iondsoaping of 200 quare feet is abe required for off-street parking areas that accommodate twenty-one (21) spaces or more in the Retail Business District. This landscaping could be provided if the parking stalls closest to CantrM Avenue were removed from the plan. This adjustment appears to be able to provide for enouoh stalls to meet parking requirements. The facilities for off-street loading are required to maintain a twenty, foot distance from centedine of the alley to first, floor foundation. The loading space proposed meets and exceeds this requirement. However, the loading space needs to be adjusted to meet the minimum 12 by 25 foot loading space requirement. The site plan appears to be able to accommodate this adjustment, but one space would need to be widened. SoiM waste material is required to be so located and fenced as to be removed from public view and shall be kept in an enclosed building or properly contained in a closed container for such purposes. An enclosed dumpstor area has been provided at the rear of the building. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that the City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for commercial use. One goal of the Land Use and Redevelopment Plan is to improve the commercial viability of the Central Avenue corridor while protecting nearby residential neighborhoods, and the plan promotes the rehabilitation of existing PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 3 development land within the City. The proposal will not negatively impact any nearby residential areas and will be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. Discussion was held regarding the parking lot layout. Chairperson Ramsclell felt that the twenty foot area between parking spaces would he sufficient for circulation of traffic. Ha asked if staff had considered diagonal parking. Ken Andwson stated that with diagonal parking you would gain aisle width but that would create difficulty with one- way traffic and ingress and egress to the site. He added theft he would like to see the width of drive aisles addressed in the new Zoning Code and that they be dependent upon the style of parking space design. Commissioner Shattuck asked Staff for the section of the Zoning Code that requires parking lot curbing and sidewalk area. He also inquired if landscaping could be provided anywhere on the site. Mr. Johnson stated that parking lot requirement could he found in Section 9.116(3)(e). Mr. Anderson stated that the landscaping wee suggested in the front area of the site because the Retail Business Section of Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of a fifteen foot front yard. At this site that fifteen foot front yard area could he utilized to fuffill the 200 square feet of landscape requirom~t. Commissioner Shattuck felt that the current arrangement of bumper curbs have served the purpose and intent of the ordinance thus far and fait that the same could be allowed fo~ this proposed business. He suggested that the bumper curbs be set a minimum of five feet from the building to allow for room to keep vehicles from hitting the building. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. Nancy King of 3717 Van Buren Street was present to inform the Commission of the problem with garbage in the ama since someone removed the garbage container that was adjacent to the bus bench along 37~ Avenue and the "bus bench was moved into the sidewalk area so you can't even walk on the sidewalk". She further stated that the newspaper boxes that offer free papers are in the same location and these papers are often left on the bus bench and then blow around the area and cause problems. Mr. Anderson stated that he would check with the Public Works Department and Metro Transit to see who the garbage container belonged to and if.it could he reinstalbd. Mohamed of the ornm Tree Deli end Grocery abe stated that they would work with the City to have the garbage resolved either by providing a container or emptying the container periodically. Chairperson Ramsdell closed the public hearing as no one else was present to speak regarding this case. Motion by Yehle, seconded by Shattuck, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow the Olive Tree Grocery and Oeli to provide seating as a restaurant, subject to the following conditions: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 4 All required state and local codes, permits, license and inspections will be met and in full compliance. All screening requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for fencing and dumpster enclosure shall be in compliance. Parking int site plan shall be resubmitted and be in substantial compliance with the Zoning Ordinance before restaurant mating is allowed, including handicap parking stag. Landscaping ef 200 square feet needs to be incorporated into the revised site plan. Loading areas shall meet ordinance requirements and be accessible. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion Passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE JULY 24, 2000 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Public Hewing Variance Case #2000-0718 Danny R. Hunter 4328 N.E. 2"d St. Columbia Heights, Mn Mr. Jshneen presented the request of Mr. Hunter for a 0.4 foot side yard setback variance to allow for tho construction efa second story addition and a 12 foot by 24 feet addition onto the rear of the house at 4328 N.E. 2'd Street. HI stated that Section 9.108(4) of tile Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance requires that any part of a principal structure maintain a minimum five (5} foot setback from the side yard property line. He explained that the request is to allow for the new addition to encroach .4 feet into the five (5) foot setback in order to line up with the outside well of the existing house. He informed the Cmmnission that the surrounding property to the north, south, east and west is zoned R-2, One and Two Family Rssidendal District and is used residentially. There are three lots across the alley fronting on Main Street, and just south of this property which are zoned as R-3. gauvitte Park also abuts the residential properties to the east. He explained that, according to Section 6.108(4) of the Columbia Heights Zoning'Ordinance, a variance is required for this additio~ in that it would encroach .4 feet into the five (5) foot required side yard setback area. The Minimum Yard requirements for the site are as follows: Ne structural building shell exceed three storks or 35 feet which ever is the lesser' in height. This structure is less than 35 feet. A side yard abutting an adjacent parcel is five (5) feet. The existing house was built at 4.80 feet from the side yard property line at the closest point. The proposed addition would be a continuation of the existing house to the west, as the addition would be approximately 12 feet by 24 feet. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 5 The existing front yard setback is 17.0 feet from the property line. Tho zoning ordinance requires 25 feet, with the proposed addition not infringing on this setback. The other side yard setback is et twelve (12) feet including the proposed addition, with the requirement being five (5) feet. The rear yard setback is at approximately sixty-eight (68) feet, with the required setback being at least thirty (30) feet. Any lot bss than 6,500 square feet may have a lot coverage of up to 35%. The lot coverage will be approximately 27% which meets this requiromerg. The primary purpose of the requested variance appears to he in matching with the setback of the existing structure on the narth property line at approximately 4.6 feet. Mr. Johnecn reminded the Commission that Section 0.105(3) (d) of the Zoning Ordinance states the following: "In recommending a variance, it shall be found that by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of lot or where by mason ef exceptienal topography, soil conditions, tree number or location or water conditions the owner of such lot would ha~e an undue hardship in using his lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the rules of the zoning district." In order for a variance to be granted, hardship needs te be established. Circumstances unique to the individual property in question need to be established. It was Mr. Johnson's opinion that, according to the definition of hardship provided in the Zoning Ordinance, it appears that there is no hardship shown as to why the applicants cannot meet the minimum five (5) foot setback requimnmnt. It was his epinion that addition could be built so that e variance would not be necessary. He felt that there did not appear to be any legitimate reasons, in relation to variance standards, whereby staff could recommend approval of this request to the Commission. The proposed addition could be shortened up by a few inches and stiff meet requirements, but the new addition would probably jog a bit from the existing side walls. However, he stated that the cmmnen sense approach would be to match the addition up with the walls of the existing structure. This approach would entail allowing for the new addition including the secend story to encroach a few inches into the setback. Mr. .Johnsen also cited Section 9.104(3)(j) of the Zoning Ordinance which addresses increasing the outside perimeter of non-conforming structures. This section would allew the addition es it will improve the livabilJty of the structure provided a variance is obtained. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. Dan Hunter of 4328 N.E. 2'" Street wes present. Commissioner Shat"tuck asked Mr. Hunter what year his house was built. Mr. Hunter responded that the house was built in 1928 and it was bugt at a slight angle to the property line as shown by the survey he had submitted. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING. MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 6 Commiuiouer Shattuck 4qagested that the herdehip would he the initial conguuction of the hoL~8 not being properly located mKI constructed on the lot or the lock of setbacks and inepectiona in 1928. Commissioner Johnson admd Mr. Hunter if tho rear porch was proposed to be removed. Mr. Hunter responded that the mar parch would be removed in place of the proposed addition. Motion ky RamsdelL seconded by Yehle, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the 0.4 side yard setback es it win not extend beyond the existing structure setback, would increase the livability of the structure and would be in keeping with tim spirit and intent of the ordinance. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE JULY 24, 2000 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. C. Site Plan Review Mike Juaire Case #2000-0719 RE: 315 N.E. 44* Ave. 4417 University Ave. Mr. Anderson presented the request of Mike Juaire for a eite plan approval to permit construction of a four unit, rental townhonse, muitifemily balding at 315 N.E. 44* Avenue. Ha informed the Commission that the property has been vacant for an extended period of time. The lot had a residential structure on site which was demolished in tim Spring of 2000. In 1998 and 1999 a number of requests were submitted for City approvals, meet notable was submitted by Caself's General Store, which was denied due to noise and traffic concerns. The owner has verbal agreement from the property owner to the north to sell the property and a purchase agreement has been prepared and forwarded for signature. After closing, the owner will separate the northernmost lot (40 ft. by 119 ft.) from this parcel to be combined with the parcel to the north for development of a sinular townhouse project. The applicant has sulxnitted a revised plan by fax on July 6, 2000 which is a change from the original site plan layout. The new plan shows a building footprint of 84 ft. by 48 ft. which includes four units of 28 ft. by 21 ft., each with an attached garage of 20 ft. by 20 ft. The original plan was 92 ft. by 44 ft. which did not meet required setback requirements. He added that both plans were provided for the Commissioners information.. He distributed revised fleer plan layouts with elevation drawings. The units will have 1,176 SCl. ft. of living space per unit on two floors of a split entry design. Mr. Anderson informed the Cemmiuion that the surrounding property on the north and south is zoned LB, Limited Business and is used residentially or is vacant. The property to the east and west of University Ave. and .the frontage road is also used residentially. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Pago ? Section 9.111 (1Xd) of the Zoning Ordinance specifbs that this proposal is a permitted use in the LB District subject to the lot area per family provisions of Section 9.110(4)." He stated that the revised proposal meets or oxceods the minimum yard and density requirements of the Zoning Ordinance as fellows:. Lot Width shall be at bast 50 ft. The subject parcel meets t~ requirement; Minimum lot area shall be at least 9,000 sq. ft. TlR, subject parcel meets this requirement with and without the proposed lot suparatien to the north. From Yard Setback shall be 12 ft. The proposed building will front on 44'" Avenue N.E. as currently preposed and exceeds this requirement. With the lot separatl'on, tho front yard will be fronting on the University Avenue frontage road and the proposal will also exceed this requirement. The Side Yard Setback shaft be 15 ff. and the Side Street Yard shall not be leas than 10 ft. or the height of the structure measured fram the center of the public right-of, way, whichever is greater. The proposal will meet or exceed this requirement with a 20 ft. setback on the west property line. Rear Yard Setback shall be 20 ft. The mJhjoct parcel meets this requirement. Mr. Anderson stated that tho perking requirements will be met as each unit includes a two stall attached garage which is 20 ft. by 20 ft. which is the minimum recommended size for a two stall garage. He informed the Commission that the 1992 City Comprehensive Plan designates this ama as a future redevelopment area as a potential light rail transit development influence area.. However, development of light rail transit in the inmlediate future is not likely given fiscal and competitive constraints. The Land Use Plan shows this area for deveiopmmt of e LRT station with medium density residential immediately to the north. One goal of the land use and redevelopment plan is to protect the hereby residential neighborhoods. In addition, the plan promotes the rehabilitation of existing development in the City. The proposal will not negatively impact any nearby residential areas and will provide an appropriate aesthetic improvement to the former, vacant, residential use, therefore, the proposal may he considered to be consistent with that portion of the City Comprehensive Plan. He further stated that the new Comprehensive Plan designates this area as Transit Oriented Development. As such, "a higher percentage of service-oriented commercial/retail development win be necessary with high-density residential development providing the balance of the development". Permitting tMs development to go forward will likely necessitate construction of any transit development to the south side of this intersection or another of the identified sites along the corridor. Commiasio~or Yehle asked the applicant Mr. Juaire why the townhouses were proposed to bo rental and not ownership. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Page 8 Mr. Juaife stated that ownership requires a PUD and he wanted to proceed with the development as soon as possible. He stated that he has a long term plan to ostabP, sh income property adding that he currently owns housing in Fridley, Momldeview and Brooklyn Park. Ha stated that this building is the first stage of his plan. After the Iotsplit and combination of property to the north is completed, he w~ propose e second four unit building. Commissioner Yelde asked Mr. Juaire where the proposed rent will be set. Mr. Juairo responded that the rent will be approximately $1,000 a month. Discussion was hem regarding the exterior design of the prop, osed building in reopect to the roof line and lack of windows to provide natural rqlht, ventilation and visual eesthetice. Mr. Juairo stated that central air conditioning will be provided in all units and the lack of windows would provide privacy. Medea by Shattuck, seconded by Johnson, to approve the site plan request to allow a 84 ft. by 48 ft., four unit rental townhouse multifomily building at 315 N.E. 444 Avenue in the LB, Limited Business District. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. STAFF REPORTS: A. Discussion was held regarding rascheduling the August 1, 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting as it is scheduled for the same day as National Night Out. Motion by Ramsdell, seconded by Yehb, to reschedub the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on August 8, 2000. Voice Vote: Afl Ayes. B. Mr. Anderson presented an update on a number of items in process within the City. He informed the Commission that the NEI proposal was presented to the City Council in June and was scheduled for a second reading on July 10, 2000 but was delayed to allow the PUD terms to he agreed to by NEI and the city. He presented an update of the proposed Puerto Valkrta Restaurant proposed at 3800 Central Avenue. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan was submitted to the Metropolitan Council on June 30, 2000 for their review. A meeting was held this day with the Joint Task Force of Columbia Heights and Fridley regarding requests fo~ proposal for a Land Use Planning and Marketing Consultant adding that Tom Romsdell was appointed Vice Chair of this Committee. Motion by Yelde, seconded by Johnson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 a.m. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. Secretary to the Planning and Zoning Commission