HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 8, 2004CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
590 40th A~enuc N.E., Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (763) 706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692
Visit Our Website at: www. ci. colutnbia-heights, mn. us
MEMBERS:
Gary Peterson, Chair
Donna Schmitt
Phillip Baker
Marlaine Szurek
Rob Fiorendino
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
7:00 PM WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2004
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
590 40~rH AVENUE NE
Roll Call
Minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 4, 2004
Public Hearings:
Case #2004-0901
· Lot Split
Gladys Wychor, Applicant
1813 40th Avenue NE/4041 Hayes Street NE
Case #2004-0902
· Lot Split
Laurie Kames, Applicant
1'226 43rd Avenue NE
Case #2004-0903
· Appeal
Greg Lonsky, Applicant
4232 Madison Street NE
Case #2004-0904
· Site Plan and Preliminary/Final Plat
ALDI, Inc., Applicant
4707 Central Avenue N'E
New Business: NONE
Miscellaneous: NONE
Adjourn
THE CITY OF" COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF' SERVICES
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
CTTY OF COLUF4BZA HEZGHTS PLANNZNG REPORT
CASE NUMBER:
DATE:
TO:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
PREPARED BY:
2004-0901
September 8, 2004
Columbia Heights Planning Commission
Gladys Wychor
1813 40th Avenue NE/4041 Hayes Street NE
Lot Split
Ellen Berkelhamer, AICP, City Planner
Introduction
Gladys Wychor, the owner of the property at 1813 40th Avenue NE, has made an application for
a lot split to reconfigure the property line separating her property and an adjacent property at
4041 Hayes Street NE. Ms. Wychor proposes to sell the rear portion of her lot (6,595 sq. ft. of
land) to Mark Carlson, the owner of 4041 Hayes St. NE, to create an increased rear lot for his
property. Mr. Carlson has also signed off on the lot split application.
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 then provide a report to
the City Council either recommending approval or denial of the proposed lot split.
Planning Considerations
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
The City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Iow density residential development.
The proposed lot split will create newly configured lots that continue to be consistent with this
designation.
Consistency with Zoning Ordinance
Both of the properties involved in the lot split are zoned R-2 One and Two Family Residential.
The lot at 1813 40th Avenue NE is surrounded on all sides by properties zoned R-2. The lot at
4041 Hayes St. NE is surrounded on the north, east, and south by properties zoned R-2. The
west side of Hayes St. is zoned R-1 Single Family Residential.
The lot split meets all of the lot area, setback and lot coverage requirements for the R-2 Zoning
District. Section 9.903 of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance regulates lot area, setback,
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission
· Lot Split, 1813 40th Av. NE/4041 Hayes St. NE
September 8, 2004
Case # 2004-0901
height and lot coverage requirements and Section 9.603 regulates accessory structures and lot
coverages. Applicable requirements are as follows:
· Minimum lot size shall be 6,50Osq. ft. for a single family home. Currently, the lot at 1813
40th Av. NE contains 34,022 sq. ft. and the lot at 4041 Hayes St. NE contains 6,600 sq. ft.
After the proposed lot split, 1813 40th Av. NE would contain 27,427 sq. ft. and 4041 Hayes
St. NE would contain 13,195 sq. ft.
· Minimum lot width shall be 60 feet. The lot widths of the both properties remain unchanged
as a result of the lot split. 1813 40th Av. NE has a lot width of 80 ft. and 4041 Hayes St. NE
has a lot width of 60 ft.
· Yard setbacks shall be as follows: Front yard - 25 ft; side yard - 5 ft.; rear yard - 20% of lot
depth; detached accessory structures - 3 ft. from side and rear property lines. All of the
setbacks of existing structures on both properties will continue to meet these requirements.
Any new structures that may be built subsequent to the lot split must also meet these
requirements.
· Lots greater than 6,500 sq. ff. in area may have a lot coverage of up to 30 percent:
Currently, the lot at 1813 40th Av. NE has a lot coverage of 21 percent and the lot at 4041
Hayes St. NE has a lot coverage of 6 percent. After the proposed lot split, 1813 40th Av. NE
would have a lot coverage of 8 percent and 4041 Hayes St. NE would havea lot coverage
of 10 percent. Any new structures that may be built subsequent to the lot split must also
meet the lot coverage requirement.
Findings of Fact
1. The proposed subdivision of land will not result in more than three lots. 'The proposed
subdivision will create two reconfigured lots.
2. The proposed subdivision of land does not involve the vacation of existing easements. The
proposed subdivision does not involve vacating existing easements.
All lots to be created by the proposed subdivision conform to lot area and width
requirements established for the zoning district in which the property is located. As detailed
above, the lots conform to the minimum requirements of the R-2 Zoning District.
The proposed subdivision does not require the dedication of public rights-of-way for the
purpose of gaining access to the property. The proposed subdivision does not require any
dedication of public fight-of-way.
The property has not previously been divided through the minor subdivision provisions of
this Ordinance. City records do not show that there have been any previous minor
subdivisions of the property.
The proposed subdivision does not hinder the conveyance of land. The proposed
subdivision will not prohibit the conveyance of land.
The proposed subdivision 'does not hinder the making of assessments or the keeping of
records related to assessments. As long as the applicant records the lot split with Anoka
County in accordance with afl City and County requirements, this finding will be met.
Page 2
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission September 8, 2004
· Lot Split, 1813 40th Av. NE/4041 Hayes St. NE
Case # 2004-0901
o
The proposed subdivision meets all of the design standards specified in the Section 14
(Subdivision Regulations). The proposed subdivision meets the requirements of the
Subdivision Regulations.
Recommendation
Staff finds that the prOposed lot split is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan and meets
the minimum requirements of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance and recommends that
the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the lot split, subject to
conditions of approval outlined below.
Motion: Move to recommend that the City Council approve the lot split, subject to the following
conditions of approval that are deemed necessary to protect the public interest and ensure
compliance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance:
The applicant shall provide required utility and drainage easements for all newly created lots
and be responsible for the cost of filing and recording wdtten easements with the Anoka
County Recorder's Office.
o
Upon approval of a minor subdivision, the applicant shall be responsible for filing the
subdivision survey with the Anoka County Recorder's Office. The minor subdivision shall
become invalid if not filed with the Anoka County Recorder within one (1) year of the date of
the City Council action.
Attachments
· Location Map
· Certificate of Survey
· Resolution
Page 3
Ci~j of
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FI G URE 2-2, FUTURE
LAND USE M A P
LEGEN
Futura Land Use:
Medium Desity Rmidential
~t,//~si~atial,
~ Ofien~d DevelOpment
Public:
I I I~.J~-~-Wa~
Non-City ~md:
D
A~: % of Total:
1,029.20244.30~
59.538 Z56~,
69.970 3.01%
4&191 Z07%
90.026 3.~/~ '
g'/.83 ! 3.78%
7.641 033%
59.431 2.56%
10.6'/:5 0.46%
0.316 0.01%
12.3.483 5.31%
517.569 22.2~A
69.317 2.98%
74.845 3.22%
TOTALS: 2323.443 I00.00%
City of Co~ ii. his.
~G.I.,R. Divis/an~
-FOR
CERT I F I CATE OF
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY. PLAN OR REPORT
WAS PREPARED BY ME OR ~,~U~.N~.,..,R-MY--D_IREC_L.~.UPERVISION
AND 1HAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LA~"~'URVL:TgR UNDER
Rondy L. ~I~.$. No. '20270
Russell J. Kurlh. L.L.S. No. 16113
SURVEY
(YEASUREI)(ENTS SHOI/N IN FEET AND DEClt~LS OF A
KURTH SURVEYING, INC.
4002 &'FFERSON ST. N.E.
COLLM~ I~GHTS, ~N 55421
Rt~E (76~).7M-9759 FAX (763) 788-7602
I-MAIL. KURrHSURVEYeAOLCOY .
'!
I
0
ff.
I
I
I
_J
FOOT)
0 40
I
SCALE IN FEET
EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION
404 ! Haycs St. NE
The south 60.00 feet front and rear of thc north
240.00 feet, front and rear of Lot 5, Block 17,
Auditor's Subdivision of Waltnn's 2"a
Subdivision, Anoka County, Minnesota.
EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION
1813 40~ Avenue NE
That part of Lot 4, Block 17, Auditor's
Subdivision of Walton's 2"a Subdivision, Anoka
County, Minnesota, lying southerly of thc north
180.00 feet thereof.
Together with:
The easterly 10.00 feet of Lot 6, Block 17,
Auditor's Subdivision of Walton's 2"a
Subdivision, Anoka County, Minncsola, c,xeept fl~c
nmlh 2 lO.O0 feet thereof.
Also together with:
The west 70.00 feet of LOt 7, Block 17, Auditor's
Subdivision of Walton's 2"a Subdivision, Anoka
County, Minnesota.
DESCRIPTION
4041 Hayes St. NE After Split
The south 60.00 feet of the north 240.00 feet, as
measured along the cast and west lines of Lo! 4
and 5, Block 17, Auditor's Subdivision of
Walton's 2~a Subdivision, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
DESCRIPTION
1815 400' Avenue NE After Split
Thal pan of Lot 4, Block 17, Auditor's
Subdivision of Walton's 2"d Subdivision, Anoka
County, Minnesota, lying southerly of the north
240.00 feet, as measured along the east and west
lines thereof.
Together with:
The east 10.00 feet of~ot 6. Block 17, Audilor's
Subdivision of Walton s 2nd Subdivision, Anoka
County, Minnesota, except the north 210.00 feet
thereof.
Also together with:
Thc west 70.00 feet of Lot 7, Block 17, Auditor's
Subdivision of Walton's 2"a Subdivision, Anoka
County, Minnesota.
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-
SUBDIVISION REQUES¥-
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
590 - 40TH AVENUE N.E.
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421
I, Gladys Wychor, hereby request a split of
PIN 36-30-24-42-0112 Legally described as:
That part of Lot 4, Block 17, Auditor's Subdivision of Walton's 2"~ Subdivision, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying
southerly of the north 180.00 feet thereof.
Together with:
The easterly 10.00 feet of Lot 6, Block 17, Auditor's Subdivision of Walton's 2nd Subdivision, Anoka County,
Minnesota, except the north 210.00 feet thereof.
Also together with:
The west 70.00 feet of Lot 7, Block 17, Auditor's Subdivision of Walton's 2n~ Subdivision, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
PIN 36-30-24-42-0014 Legally described as:
The south 60.00 feet front and rear of the north 240.00 feet, front and rear of Lot 5, Block 17, Auditor's
Subdivision of Walton's 2n~ Subdivision, Anoka County, Minnesota.
THE DESCRIPTIONS HENCEFORTH TO BE:
PIN 36-30-24-42-0112 Legally described as: .~
That part of Lot 4, Block 17, ,Auditor's Subdlvision of Walton's 2nd Subdivision, Anoka County, Minnesota°lying
southerly of the north 240.00 feet, as meas~Jred along the east and west lines thereof.
Together with:
The easterly 10.00 feet of Lot 6, Block 17, Auditor's Subdivision of Walton's 2n~ Subdivision, Anoka County,
Minnesota, except the north 210.00 feet thereof.
Also together with:
The west 70.00 feet of Lot 7, Block 17, Auditor's Subdivision of Walton's 2nd Subdivision, Anoka County,
Minnesota.
PIN 36-30-24-42-0014 Legally described as:
The south 60.00 feet of the north 240.00 feet, as measured along the east and west lines of Lot 4 and 5, Block
17, Auditor's Subdivision of Walton's 2nd Subdivision, Anoka County, Minnesota.
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 ~ day of ,2004
Offered by:
Seconded by:
Roll Call:
Zoning Officer
COUNCIL ACTION: Notary Public
Signature of Owner, Notarized
Owner's Address
Telephone No.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME
this. day of ,2004
CITY
This day of
Offered by:
Seconded by:
Roll Call:
,2004.
Secretary to the Council
Julienne Wyckoff, Mayor
C]:TY OF COLUMBZA HEZGHTS PLANNZNG REPORT
CASE NUMBER:
DATE:
TO:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
PREPARED BY:
2004-0902
September 8, 2004
Columbia Heights Planning Commission
Laurie Karnes
1226 43"~ Avenue
Lot Split
Ellen Berkelhamer, AICP, City Planner
Introduction
Laurie Karnes of LEK Holding Company, the owner of the property at 1226 43r" Avenue NE, has
made an application for a lot split of the one parcel at 1226 43n~ Avenue NE into one single
family lot and two twinhome lots. Ms. Kames proposes that the existing structure will remain on
the single family lot and that she will sell the two twinhome lots to a builder.
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 then provide a report to
the City Council either recommending approval or denial of the proposed lot split.
Planning Considerations
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
The City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Iow density residential development.
The proposed lot split will create newly configured lots that continue to be consistent with this
designation.
Consistency with Zoning Ordinance
The property involved in the lot split is zoned R-2 One and Two Family Residential. The parcel
is surrounded on all sides by properties zoned R-2.
The lot split meets all of the lot area, setback and lot coverage requirements for the R-2 Zoning
District. Section 9.903 of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance regulates lot area, setback,
height and lot coverage requirements and Section 9.603 regulates accessory structures and lot
coverages. Section 9.904 regulates standards for "zero lot line" (twinhome) setbacks.
Applicable requirements are as follows:
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission
- Lot Split, 1226 43"d Avenue NE
September 8, 2004
Case # 2004-0902
For the proposed sin.qle-family lot:
· Minimum lot size shall be 6,500 sq. ff. for a single family home. One lot will be created to
contain the existing single family home on the site. This is referred to as Lot A on the
certificate of survey. The total parcel area is currently 18, 850 sq. ft. After the proposed lot
split, Lot A will be 8, 700 sq. ft.
· Minimum lot width shall be 60 feet. The total parcel is currently 130 ft. in width. After the
proposed lot split, Lot A will be 60 fl. in width.
· Yard setbacks shall be as follows: Front yard - 25 ft; side yard - 5 ft.; comer side yard - 10
ft.; rear yard - 20% of lot depth; detached accessory structures - 3 ft. from side and rear
property lines. All of the setbacks of the existing structure on the proposed Lot A will meet
these requirements. The front yard setback will be 39.5 ft., the side yard setback will be 8.9
ft., and the comer side setback will be 18.5 ft. Any new structures that may be built
subsequent to the lot split must also meet these requirements.
· Lots greater than 6,500 sq. ft. in area may have a lot coverage of up to 30 percent.
Currently, entire parcel has a lot coverage of 7 percent. After the proposed lot split, Lot A
would have a lot coverage of 16 percent. Any new structures that may be built subsequent
to the lot split must also meet the lot coverage requirement.
For the proposed twinhome lots:
A twin home is defined as a single-family residential dwelling on an individual lot, sharing a
common wall with another single-family residential dwelling. This is also known as a "zero lot
line" development. Each individual lot has a separate PIN number. Combined, the two
twinhome lots must contain the minimum required lot area, setbacks and lot coverage for
twinhome dwellings in a given zoning district.
According to Section 9.904, the yard for a single family attached dwelling may be reduced to
zero (0) feet, provided that the following conditions are satisfactorily met:
· The wall of the dwelling unit shall be placed upon said property line in a manner that does
not encroach upon another property.
· The applicant records all required agreements, easements and deed restrictions against all
properties that abut the zero lot line.
· The minimum front, side and rear building setbacks shall be applied to the structure as a
whole, rather than to individual units. Two lots .will be created that will each contain one
twinhome. These are shown on the certificate of survey as Lots B and C. As required, Lots
B and C taken as a whole will have a minimum front yard setback of 25 ft., a side yard
setback of 5 ft., and a rear yard setback of 20% of lot depth. Any detached accessory
structures must be a minimum of 3 ft. from side and rear property lines.
· The minimum lot area requirement shall be applied by dividing the sum of the area of all
parcels occupied by the structure by the total number of dwelling units. The minimum lot
area needed for development of twinhome dwellings is 9,000 sq. ft. and the total lot width
must be 60 ft. After a lot split, each individual twinhome lot must have a minimum of 4,500
sq. ft. per dwelling unit and 30 ft of lot width. After the proposed lot split, Lots B and C will
each have 5,075 sq. ft. and a lot width of 35 ft. The total property may have a maximum lot
coverage of 30 percent (or 3, 045 sq. ft. based on the combined area of Lots B and C of
10,150 sq. ft.).
Page 2
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission
· Lot Split, 1226 43rd Avenue NE
September 8, 2004
Case # 2004-0902
When reviewing twinhome subdivisions, the Planning and Zoning Commission has historically
been provided with sample building elevations and footprints to confirm that twinhome
development can occur on the property. These samples are not intended to be building permit
plans but rather concepts of what will be developed. Therefore, attached to this report is a
photograph of a single-family product built by the intended builder of the twinhomes. This
product would be modified as shown in the attached elevation sketch to create two zero lot line
twinhomes for the site. Placement would be approximately as shown on the attached building
footprint, Each unit would have 3 bedrooms and two bathrooms on the upper level, The lower
level of each unit would contain a two-car garage unit and with the remainder of the level
unfinished space.
Findings of Fact
1. The proposed subdivision of land will not result in more than three lots. The proposed
subdivision will three lots.
2. The proposed subdivision of land does not involve the vacation of existing easements. The
proposed subdivision does not involve vacating existing easements.
All lots to be created by the proposed subdivision conform to lot area and width
requirements established for the zoning district in which the property is located. As detailed
above, the lots conform to the minimum requirements of the R-2 Zoning District.
The proposed subdivision does not require the dedication of public rights-of-way for the
purpose of gaining access to the property. The proposed subdivision does not require any
dedication of public rfght-of-way.
The property has not previously been divided through the minor subdivision provisions of
this Ordinance. City records do not show that there have been any previous minor
subdivisions of the property. Records do show that the property was previously two lots that
were combined into one lot in 1998.
6. The proposed subdivision does not hinder the conveyance of land. The proposed
subdivision will not prohibit the conveyance of land.
The proposed subdivision does not hinder the making of assessments or the keeping of
records related to assessments. As long as the applicant records the lot split with Anoka
County in accordance with all City and County requirements, this finding will be met.
The proposed subdivision meets all of the design standards specified in the Section 14
(Subdivision Regulations). The proposed subdivision meets the requirements of the
Subdivision Regulations.
Recommendation
Staff finds that the proposed lot split is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan and meets
the minimum requirements of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance and recommends that
Page 3
CiW of Columbia Heights Planning Commission
· Lot Split, 1226 43rd Avenue NE
September 8, 2004
Case # 2004-0902
.the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the lot split, subject to
conditions of approval outlined below.
Motion: Move to recommend that the City Council approve the lot split, subject to the following
conditions of approval that are deemed necessary to protect the public interest and ensure
compliance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance:
The applicant shall provide required utility and drainage easements for all newly created lots
and be responsible for the cost of filing and recording written easements with the Anoka
County Recorder's Office.
2. The applicant shall pay parkland dedication fees in.the amount of $2,195 per lot for each of
the two lots newly created lots. This fee is payable at the time of building permit.
Should soil conditions on the property warrant, information as to how soil conditions will be
corrected shall be submitted to the Building Official along with the building permit
application.
Upon approval of a minor subdivision, the applicant shall be responsible for filing the
subdivision survey with the Anoka County Recorder's Office. The minor subdivision shall
become invalid if not filed with the Anoka County Recorder within one (1) year of the date of
the City Council action.
Attachments
· Location Map
· Letter from Applicant
· · Certificate of Survey
· Resolution
· Sample photographs, elevations and footprint
Page 4
Cily of
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FIGURE 2-2, .FUTURE
LAND USE M A P
LEGEND
Future Land Usc: ~e~: % otTo~l:
e~om,um Oe~,ity Residential ~.538
~ ~,~ 3.01%
V~ ~316 ~01%
~k I~.~
~1~:
I ~ ~w~ ~17.~
Non~ity
LEK Holding Company
P.O. Box 1958
Maple Grove, MN 55311
August 5, 2004
City of Columbia Heights
590 40th Avenue NE
Columbia Heights, MN 55421
re: Lot Split Request for 1226 43rd Avenue
Dear Columbia Heights Staff, Planning Commission and City Council,
I'm excited to be creating opportunities for three more families to live in your
community. I purchased a home at 3919 Main Street NE in December of 2002 and split a lot off
that property. I've been actively looking for another property in Columbia Heights ever since.
Part of what makes Columbia Heights such a great place to live is the character of the
community and the diversity of housing styles. I live in Maple Grove, where new construction
has seen so many cookie cutter housing units that the Maple Grove City Council just approved a
radically new zoning code to try to create the character that Columbia Heights already has.
My petition is to keep the remaining single family home at 1226 43ra avenue as is and sell
the property. On the vacant land I'm splitting off I'm proposing a Twin Home to be built by J.D.
Roofing and Construction, Inc., who has built in your community. His letter is attached.
The surrounding neighborhood has other scattered recently built 2 family homes
including:
3820 NE Hayes, built in 2001
4401/4405 Quincy NE, built in 2002
677 NE 43ra Ave, built in 1999
The new proposed lot with the existing home does meet your standards to also build a
Twinhome on it, being 8,700 square feet with 60' width. However, the existing home is in
excellent condition so I'm leaving it as is.
The new proposed Twinhome lot exceeds the standards for Twinhome lots, as it will be
10,150 square feet and'70' wide. Each dwelling unit will be 35' wide and 5,075 square feet,
exceeding the minimum 4,500 square feet.
I understand that I could have a duplex built on the lot without requesting the additional
lot line split down the center of my Twimhome lot. But a duplex, by definition, is a rental
property because it is a two family home with one property ID number so it can only have one
owner. A Twinhome has two property ID numbers and can be sold to 2 different families, each
owner occupied.
I believe that owner occupied units will be more welcomed by the neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Laurie E. Kames, President
LEK Holding Company
July 28, 2004
City of Columbia Heights
590 40~ Avenue NE'
Columbia Heights, MN 55421
Dear Columbia Heights Planning Commission and City Council,
My name is Jack BuSzta and a have a purchase agreement to buy
the lot that LEK Holding is splitting off from 1226 43rd Avenue North.
My intent is to build a Twinhome and sell it to two families, each side
being owner occupied. If I built a Duplex that would, by definition, be a
rental property. My homes features a sunken living room with a bay
window that is popular with my home buyers.
I understand that the water and sewer are in the street and they are
not stubbed to the lot. I know I am responsible to bear this cost to bring
the utilities to service the new homes I'm building.
This will be my second home built in your community. I also built a
home at 4344 5th Street NE. I look forward to building again in Columbia
Heights.
Thank you.
J.D. Roofing & Construction, Inc.
11345 Uplander Street
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-
SUBDIVISION REQUES¥-
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
590 - 40TH AVENUE N.E.
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421
I, Laurie Karnes of LEK Holding Company, hereby request a split of
PIN 36 30 24 24 0153 Legally described as:
The west 60.00 feet of the North 150.00 feet of Lot 6, and the east 70.00 feet of Lot 7, lying north of the south
165.00 feet; All in Block 3, Reservoir Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota.
THE DESCRIPTIONS HENCEFORTH TO BE:
The west 60.00 feet of the north 150.00 feet of Lot 6, Block 3, Reservoir Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota.
Subject to easements of record.
The east 35.00 feet of Lot 7, Block 3, Reservoir Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying north of the south 165.00
feet of said Lot 7. Subject to easements of record.
The west 35.00 feet of the east 70.00 feet of Lot 7, Block 3, Reservoir Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying
north of the south 165.00 feet of said Lot 7. Subject to easements 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 ~ day of ,2004
Offered by:
Seconded by:
Roll Call:
· Zoning Officer
COUNCIL ACTION: Notary Public
Signature of Owner, Notarized
Owner's Address
Telephone No.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME
this ~ day of ,2004
CITY
This ~ day of
Offered by:
Seconded by:
Roll Call:
,2004.
Secretary to the Council Julienne Wyckoff, Mayor
CERTIFICATE
. FOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY. PLAN OR REPORT
WA8 PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DJ,~ECT
AjJl~rtl4T I AMA I[/l~.Y _Li.~HSED Ltd,) SURYEYOR UNDER
..~__j~s OF p~ENATF~F N,,HE~!~
R¢i. dy C. ~'urth. 'E.-u.sT No.
Russell J. Kurth. L.L.$. No. 16113
OF SURVEY
fYEASUREYENT$ SHOVN IN FEET AND DEClY,~LS OF A FOOT)
KURYH SURVEYING, INC.
4oo~ ~ sr. ~. o. "~.o
· 'COLWt~ tE1GHTS~ ~ .,~42! ~ J
PHOI~ (763) 788-9769 FAX (763) 788-7602
E-YAIL: KURTHSURVEY*eAOL.COY SCALE IN FEET
Ezistiag l~pl Description
The west 60.00 feet of the North 150.00 feet of Lot 6, and the east 70.00 feet of Lot 7, lying nm~h of the so~th 16:5.00 fee~,
All in Block 3, Reservoir Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota.
--i
UA"
The west 60.00 feet of thc north 150.00 feet ofL°t 6, Block 3, Reservoir Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota. Subjec~ to easements of record.
"B"
Thc east 35.00 feet of Lot 7, Block 3, Reservoir Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying ninth of the south 165.00 feet of said Lot 7. Subject to easements of record.
'C"
The west 35.00 feet of the east 70.00 feet of Lot 7, Block 3, Reservoir Hills, Anoim Counly, Minnesota, lying north of the south 165.00 feet of said Lot 7. Subject
easements of record.
JD Roofing & Construction Page 1 of 2
JD Roofing
WELCOME
Home
About Us
Services
Our Clients
Contact Us
Our Clients
612-366-5545
Fax: 763-862-1660
Eagle Lake Road
Groveland
htm;//www.idroofingandconstruction.com/ourclients/
8/5/2004
CI'TY OF COLUMBI'A HETGHTS PLANNI'NG REPORT
CASE NUMBER:
DATE:
TO:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
PREPARED BY:
2004-0903
September 8, 2004
Columbia Heights Planning Commission
Greg Lonsky
4232 Madison St.
Appeal of Decision not to Issue Rental License
Ellen Berkelhamer, AICP, City Planner
Tntroduction
Greg Lonsky, representing the property owners of 4232 Madison St., has made an application
for an appeal of a decision by the Fire Department and Zoning Administrator not to issue a
rental license for the subject property.
Section 9.402 of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance states that the City Council has
designated the Planning Commission as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, responsible for
making decisions on all applications for an appeal of any administrative order, requirement,
determination or final decision made by the Zoning Administrator or other official in the
administration of this Ordinance. The Planning Commission must hold a public hearing on the
appeal in accordance with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance and after the close of the
hearing', render its findings.
Planning Considerations
The subject property is located in the R2 One and Two Family Residential District. This District
allows for single family and duplex units, if properties meet the minimum required lot, area, and
bulk requirements. As described in the attached letter, the owner of the property at 4232
Madison Street, Helen Penicnak, has used her property as a legal, licensed duplex rental unit
for over 30 years. In July of 2003, Ms. Penicnak did not renew her rental license because she
did not have a tenant. When this property was initially used as duplex, such use was allowed as
a legal use on the property. From the time the Fire Department began licensing rental units and
keeping records on the same, this property received yearly licenses. Under the most current
Zoning Ordinance adopted in 2001, however, the property at 4232 Madison Street was made
legally nonconforming with respect to duplex use, as it no longer contains the minimum required
lot area. The Ordinance currently requires lots in the R2 zoning district to have 8,400 sq. ft. of
area for use as a duplex. Ms. Penicnak's property contains only 5,166 sq. ft.
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission September 8, 2004
· Appeal, 4232 Madison Street
Case # 2004-0903
Had Ms. Penicnak renewed her license in July 2003, she would have been able to continue
using her property for duplex use. The Zoning Ordinance states that legally nonconforming
uses have the right to continue, unless certain circumstances occur. The circumstance that
applies in this case is that the nonconforming use was discontinued for approximately one year.
Section 9.502 of the Zoning Ordinance states that a non-conforming use that has been
discontinued for a period of six months shall not be re-established.
Because of the technical requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, City Staff is unable to approve
the request for the rental license. However, Staff and the City Attorney have consulted on this
matter and find it to be a unique case for the following reasons:
· The property has been legally used as a duplex for over 30 years.
· The property has been used as rental units as far back as City records exist.
· The two units in the duplex are completely separate; there is no connection between the first
and second floors, meaning the building is not suitable for single-family use.
· The property owner was over 90 years old when she made the decision not to renew her
rental license and it is Staff's understanding from speaking with relatives that she did not
understand the consequences of this action.
Even though the property has not been used as a rental unit for more than 6 months, because
of the unique circumstances of this specific case, Staff and the City Attorney do not object to the
Planning Commission making the determination that the property may continue to be used for
duplex use.
Recommendation
That the Planning Commission consider whether to grant an appeal of the decision not to issue
a rental license.
Motion: Move to (approve/deny) the request to appeal the decision not to issue a rental license
for the property at 4232 Madison Street (and to direct City Staff to issue the rental license for
duplex use).
Attachments
· Location Map
· Letter from Applicant
Page 2
._ Cil~ of
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FIGURE 2-2, FUTURE
LAND USE M A P~
LEG
Future Land Use:
Low Density Residential
-- Relilioul lns~tulions
Conlme~al
Co .n~_' Center District
Transit Oriemed Development
Park
Public:
I" I Right-of-Way
Non-City Land:
E7'7-/~ C~ of Minneapolis
END
Acres: % of To~al:
1,029.20244.30%
.59.538 2.56%
69.970 3,01%
48.191 2-07%
16.092 0.69%
90.026 3,87%
87.831 3.78%
7.641 0.33%
59.43 ] 2.56%
10.675 0.46%
0.316 0.01%
123.483 5.31%
517.$69 22.28%
69.317
74.845 3.22%
TOTALS: 2323.443
I I Wa~et Featm~s 54.091 Acres ~ City
Limits
August 9, 2004
To: Columbia Heights Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission
Good morning:
Let me introduce myself. I am Greg Lonsky; I live in Princeton, Minnesota.
Today I am representing my cousin John Penicnak for my Aunt Helen
Penicnak. John lives in New Jersey and can't be here.
I am requesting an appeal of the decision not to issue a rental license to my
Aunt Helen Penicnak who lived at 4232 Madison St NE.
Let me give you a little background on the problem I am going to present to
You and ask you to help me resolve it. This past June my Aunt Helen
became ill and made the decision to move into assisted living. She now lives
at 1515 44t" Ave NE, in Columbia Heights. Helen is a vibrant 91-year-old
independent lady. I believe that she purchased the house in the late 1960s
as a "duplex". She has paid the license fee for the rental property for as long
as this fee has been required. Last July, according to the fire department
records, she came in with the license and didn't pay the $22.50 free because
she didn't have a renter. I am sure that she didn't realize at this moment
what she was doing by not keeping the license current. Now, by not paying
this fee according to the new zoning rules, the house is no longer considered
a nonconforming duplex grandfathered in, it must be sold as a single family
home. Her house at 4232 Madison St NE has two entrances for the
downstairs house, two entrances for the upstairs rental, and two electric
meters. The rental has a complete kitchen, full bath, living room, and
medium sized bedroom. This house has been a duplex for at least 35 years.
Here is the problem. This house is her nest egg. It has a value of about
$175000 as a duplex. Because its now nonconforming, to bring the house
back into a single-family residence, would require a remodel in the vicinity of
maybe $30000. Now we all know what the cost of assisted living is...the
difference between her selling the house as a duplex vs. a single family
dwelling is about 10 months living expenses at the assisted living apartment
building.
I am asking the Planning Commission, to again reinstate the duplex license
for the house at 4232 Madison St NE. I am sure there was a
misunderstanding as to what would happen if she didn't pay the license fee
for the year 2003.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Greg Lonsky
1104 Fairway Dr
Princeton, MN 55371
763.633,4883 home
612.817.8797 cell
CI'TY OF COLUMBZA HEZGHTS PLANN'rNG REPORT
CASE NUMBER:
DATE:
TO:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
PREPARED BY:
2004-0904
September 8, 2004
Columbia Heights Planning Commission
ALDI's Inc.
4707 Central Avenue (Arby's Site)
Site Plan Approval and Preliminary/Final Plat Approval
Ellen Berkelhamer, AICP, City Planner
Tntroduction
An application has been made by ALDI's Inc., the contract purchaser of the subject property, for
Site Plan approval and Preliminary/Final Plat approval for a proposed ALDI's grocery store.
Nedegaard Construction is the owner of the property and has signed off on the application.
Two actions will be taken by the Planning Commission, as follows:
A. Motion recommending City Council action on the Preliminary/Final Plat
B. Motion on approval of the Site Plan
The Preliminary/Final Plat resubdivides "Outlot C" that was created as part of the Grand Central
Lofts subdivision for future commercial use. Outlot C is being resubdivided into Lot 1 and Outlot
A. Lot 1 will be used by the ALDI's store. Outlot A, a 20 ft. strip along the north property line,
will be Sold by Nedegaard Construction to the adjacent property owner, The preliminary and
final plat review has been combined into one action because the minor nature of the plat.
Planning Considerations
Comprehensive Plan
1)
The Comprehensive Plan designation of the site is Transit Oriented Development.
Specifically, the Comprehensive Plan states that these areas "will focus on the commuting
needs of Columbia Heights residents. As a result, a higher percentage of service-oriented
commercial/retail development will be necessary with high-density residential development
providing the balance of the development. Mixed-Use pedestrian-oriented development
near transit nodes will provide opportunities for high-density residential and neighborhood
commercial development. Redevelopment of these areas will also provide the opportunity
for pedestrian linkages to other parts of the community and improvement of the overall
non-motorized circulation system within the community that will help improve the image of
Columbia Heights."
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission
September 8, 2004
'ALD['s Preliminary/Final Plat and Site Plan
Case # 2004-0904
2)
The proposed ALDI's grocery store complies with the Comprehensive Plan designation:
· The development is located along an existing transit route;
· It is a continuation of new development in the area begun by the Kmart
Redevelopment. New residents in the Grand Central Lofts project, plus existing
neighborhood residents, will be able to walk or commute to the grocery store.
· Sidewalk connections are provided from the grocery store to the adjacent residential
neighborhoods.
Zoning Ordinance
3)
The zoning classification for the property is Mixed. Use District. The purpose of the Mixed-
Use District is to promote redevelopment that facilitates linkages and interaction of transit
services, housing and neighborhood services. The focus of land use within this district is to
ensure a pedestrian friendly environment and pedestrian connections to and from
residential development and transit facilities. There is no minimum lot size for
redevelopment in this zoning district.
4)
The proposed ALDI's redevelopment complies with zoning designation. The size of the
subject property is approximately 2.2 acres. The proposed grocery store building is
approximately 15,894 sq. ft.
5) The proposed plat is divided into one lot and one outlot. Lot 1 will contain the ALDI's
facility. Outlot A will be sold by the property owner to the adjacent property owner.
Circulation, Access, Parking and Sidewalks
6)
Circulation through the site is provided through one vehicular access off of Central Avenue.
The existing Arby's site is served by a full access at Central Avenue that also served the
Kmart site. As part of a master plan that City Staff has worked on with MnDOT, as
properties along Central Avenue redevelop, 'access points will be consolidated to provide
for more safe ingress and egress to commercial properties. In accordance with
discussions with MnDOT, the existing full access will be closed and a new right in/right out
access will be created at the north end of Lot 1. The existing median that serves the full
access will also be closed and the striping of the adjacent left turn lanes extended as
necessary. ALDI's will be responsible for and will pay for the closure of the existing curb
cut, creation of the new curb cut, closure of the median, and left lane striping. A
Development Contract will be entered into by the City and ALDI'S guaranteeing the
completion of these actions.
7)
ALDI's has reserved an easement for future roadway connection at the northeast corner of
Lot 1. As other properties along Central Avenue redevelop, ALDI's will be able to connect
through a backage road to a new full access that is planned to be created to serve the
remainder of the commercial properties on the east side of Central Avenue, in accordance
with discussions between City Staff and MnDOT.
8)
The parking requirement for commercial buildings of this size is 48 stalls with dimensions
of 9 ft. x 20 ft. ALDI's is providing 83 stalls plus 4 handicap accessible stalls, for a total of
87 parking spaces. The typical size of the standard parking stalls will be 10 ft. x 20 ft.
Page 2
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission
ALDI's Preliminary/Final Plat and Site Plan
September 8, 2004
Case # 2004-0904
9)
The performance standards for the Mixed-Use District require sensitivity to adjacent usable
open space and include pedestrian/bicycle connections to enhance existing circulation
patterns. The development will provide approximately 1.6 acres of impervious surface and
0.60 acres of greenspace, including landscaped islands in the parking lot and landscaping
th
around the building and along Central Avenue. A sidewalk along 47 Avenue will connect
to a Central Avenue walkway. Additionally, the 47th Avenue sidewalk will provide a direct,
handicap accessible connection to the ALDI's main entrance.
Transit
lo)
The transit stop servicing northbound traffic currently stops just north of 47th Avenue,
directly in front of Arby's. The transit stop servicing southbound traffic currently stops on
the Hilltop side of Central, on the northwest side of 47th and Central. The development
includes a sidewalk connection from 47~h Avenue to Central Avenue: City Staff will'
continue to have discussions with Metro Transit about possible site improvements to the
Metro Transit stops along the west side of Central Avenue to enhance transit use from the
development.
Lot Lines and Setbacks
Building setbacks in the zoning district are regulated by the final site plan and development
agreement approved by the City Council, based on the following findings: a) the setbacks
provide adequate distances from uses in adjacent districts, and b) the setbacks maintain
and enhance the character of the neighborhood in which the mixed-use development is
located. The setbacks shown on the site plan provide adequate distances to adjacent
properties and provide an urban character on the interior of the development appropriate
for mixed-use development. The building is setback 20 ft. from the south property line
(adjacent to 47th Avenue), 30 ft. from the west property line (adjacent to Central Avenue),
and 292.2 ft. from the north property line. Approximately 60 ft. of the southeastern portion
of the building will be built adjacent to the east property line. This is in the area of the
loading dock and will be buffered from the proposed adjacent street serving the Grand
Central Lofts by a retaining wall. All required sight lines and sight triangles will be
maintained where the building is adjacent to the intersection of 47th Avenue and the new
public roadway. Parking spaces are setback a minimum of 27.8 ft. from property lines.
Landscape Plan
12)
The Developer has submitted a Landscape Plan in accordance with the requirements for
site plans in the Zoning Ordinance. The Landscape Plan is well done and consistent both
with the Zoning Ordinance and with the Highway District Design Guidelines.
Signage Plan
14) The Developer has submitted a Signage Plan in accordance with the requirements for
signs in the Mixed-Use District. Section 9.1205 of the Zoning Ordinance states that
signage shall be allowed in conformance with the approved site plan and development
agreement, and reflect the following standards: a) Pylon signs are prohibited; and b)
Freestanding monument signs shall utilize the same exterior materials as the principal
building(s). The signage plan meets these requirements. Two wall signs are proposed,
one on the north fac,.ade above the entry and one on the west fac,.ade above the entry.
Page 3
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission
September 8, 2004
· ALD['s Preliminary/Final Plat and Site Plan
Case # 2004-0904
Each of these signs measures 83 sq. ft. for a total of 166 sq. ft. of wall signage on the
building. The monument sign is 9.5 ft. in height and 10.5 ft. in width. The total sign area is
less than 100 sq. ft. The monument sign shall be located to the south of the driveway
access to the site, shall be two-sided and shall be landscaped at its base.
Highway District Design Guidelines
The Columbia Heights Design Guidelines were created to guide developers and businesses in
the design of expansions, renovations or new construction of buildings or parking within the
Central Avenue and 40th Avenue commercial corridors, and to assist City officials and staff in
reviewing development proposals. The guidelines are mandatory, but the City may permit
alternative approaches that meet the objectives of the design guidelines. The design district
that is applied to the ALDI's development is the Highway District.
Architectural Guidelines
1)
2)
3)
4)
Building Placement Objective: To orient non-residential buildings toward the street in order
to improve its walkability, while creating opportunities for more internally-focused
residential development. Front facades should be well defined with entrances facing the
street. Buildings may be set back a maximum of 85 ft. from the sidewalk in order to allow
two rows of parking plus landscape frontage.
· The development meets the intent of this objective. The front fa(;ade is well defined,
although the front of the building is perpendicular to Central Avenue. The front
entrance is, however, located immediately adjacent to Central Avenue and is visible
and identifiable from Central Avenue. The building is setback 20 ft. from the south
property line (adjacent to 47t~ Avenue) and 30 ft. from the west property line (adjacent
to Central Avenue), which helps add the urban character of the redevelopment area
created by the Grand Central Lofts development. Appropriate landscaping is provided.
Primary Fac,,ades and Roof Treatment Objective: To encourage attached residential and
mixed-use buildings that are compatible with the prevailing single-family residential
surroundings. Nonresidential buildings may be designed with pitched or flat roofs. 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 omamentation.
· The development meets this objective. The building has a flat roof and the entries,
windows, canopies and lighting relate to human scale.
Building Width and Fac,.ade Articulation Objective: To add visual interest and variety to
buildings and emphasize the pedestrian scale. The primary fac,.ades of buildings should be
40 ft. or more in width and should be articulated into smaller increments by following
methods listed in the Design Guidelines to lessen apparent bulk.
· The building meets this objective. The building facades are predominantly red brick
but are articulated both horizontally and vertically by decorative elements.
Horizontally, the facades are divided into smaller increments of about 27 ft. by light
colored brick piers with stone and tile accents and decorative lighting. Vertically, the
building is divided by a combination of awnings and horizontal band of lighter colored
brick above the windows, as well as a band of lighter colored brick below the parapet.
Building Height Objective: To create increased sense of enclosure, diminish the perceived
width of the street, and provide opportunities for upper-story housing, offices or studios.
Page 4
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission September 8, 2004
· ALDI's Preliminary/Final Plat and Site Plan
Case # 2004-0904
Two and three story buildings are strongly encouraged. All buildings shall have a minimum
cornice height of 22 ft. This height is adequate to achieve the building height objective,
conveying a multi-story appearance even if the building has only one occupied floor.
· The proposed building meets the intent of this objective. The building is one-story
with a typical height of 20 ft. Staff finds this meets the intent of the design standards
because of the design elements that are included on each fagade of the building (see
description in item 3 above). The entrance of the building will have a cornice height of
23 ft.
5)
Transparency - Window and Door Openings Objective: To reflect the character of existing
storefront commercial buildings, enliven the streetscape and enhance security by providing
views into and out of buildings. Where commercial or office uses are found on the ground
floor, at least 20 percent of the ground floor fagade fronting Central Avenue and 15 percent
of any two side or rear facades shall consist of window and door openings. The design
guidelines note that spandrel glass may be used in up to half of the window and door
surfaces on any building facade.
· The proposed building meets the intent of this objective. The length of the Central
fae,,ade and the north fac,,ade (the front fa(;ade) are lined with windows. The windows
of the front entry way allow for visibility into the store. The remaining windows are
spandrel glass because these windows are generally located in front of stock, office
and storage areas that for security and aesthetic reasons do not need to be visible
from the street. Staff believes spandrel glass in these areas is appropriate. The 47~
Avenue fae,,ade also contains two groups of spandrel glass windows that will be visible
from the road. Staff directed the applicant to use landscaping along the remainder of
this far~de, as elevation changes limit visibility of the fac.~ade in this location. The
window shape, size and patterns emphasize the organization of the far, de and the
definition of the building.
6)
Entries Objective: To establish the visual importance of the primary street entrance, and to
ensure that entries contribute to the visual attractiveness of the building and are readily
visible to the customer. Primary building entrances should face the primary abutting public
street or walkway or be linked to that street by a clearly defined and visible walkway.
Corner buildings shall use the street with the higher classification as the primary entrance.
· The proposed building meets this objective. The front facade is located perpendicular
to Central Avenue but is visible from this primary street. Additionally, the main
entrance is visible and accessible from Central Avenue. The entrance is articulated
with a raised roof level and overhang feature, as well as containing vision glass
windows. Additionally, the landscaping plan shows landscaped areas in front of the
Central Avenue fac,,ade.
7)
Rear Fac,,ade and Entries Objective: To improve the appearance of rear fae,,ades, orient
customers parking or walking to the rear of buildings, and provide safe and convenient
access to all building entrances.
· Each of the fae,,ades of the proposed buildings is designed to the same high standard
and meet this requirement. There is no rear entry. The rear (47~ Avenue frontage) of
the building includes window treatments, landscaping, and the same architectural and
lighting treatments as all other facades.
8) Building Materials Objective: To ensure that high-quality, durable and authentic building
materials are used in .residential and nonresidential construction. All buildings should be
Page 5
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission September 8, 2004
· ALDI's Preliminary/Final Plat and Site Plan
Case # 2004-0904
constructed of high-quality materials, including the following: brick; natural stone; precast
concrete units and concrete block, provided that the surfaces are molded, serrated or
treated with a textured material in order to give the wall surface a three-dimensional
character;' stucco; jumbo brick may be used on up to 30 percent of any fa(;ade, provided
that it is used only on the lower third of the building wall. EIFS may be used as a primary
matedal at a height of at least 3 ft. above grade, limited to a maximum of 60 percent of the
fa(~ade when fronting a public street.
· The proposed building meets this requirement. The exterior building materials are
predominantly face brick, with precast stone sills and accents. Metal flashing will be
used on the parapet wall, which is allowed. Aluminum is proposed to be used on the
awnings. (See discussion under "Awnings" in item 12 below.)
9)
Rooftop Equipment Objective: To ensure that views of rooftop equipment from public
streets or pedestrian ways are minimized. All rooftop equipment shall be screened from
view 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.
· The proposed building meets this objective. Rooftop equipment will be screened from
view of the right of way by the building parapet and from view of the adjacent
condominium buildings by a screen around the equipment in a material that is
compatible with the building materials.
10)
Building Colors Objective: To ensure that building colors are aesthetically pleasing and
compatible with their surroundings. Building colors should accent, blend with, or
complement surroundings. Principal building colors should consist of subtle, neutral or
muted colors with Iow reflectance. Warm-toned colors are encouraged. No more than two
principal colors may be used on a fa~de. Bright or primary colors should be used only as
accents, occupying a maximum of 15 percent of building fae,.ades.
· The proposed building meets this objective. The building and monument sign will
match using warm-toned natural colors. The primary brick color will be reddish brown
and the accent brick will be cream color.
11)
Architectural Detailing Objective: To encourage new building design that echoes the
design of the few iconic buildings that remain in Columbia Heights - notably the Heights
Theater - while enlivening building fae,.ades and contributing to a human-scaled
environment. Architectural details such as ornamental cornices, arched windows and
warm-toned bdck with bands of contrasting color are encouraged in new construction. The
contemporary adaptation of historic and vernacular residential, institutional and commercial
stYles found in Columbia Heights and in Northeast Minneapolis is encouraged.
· The proposed building meets this objective. Horizontal brick bands will be used
throughout the middle of the building and at the roofline. Exterior columns will be
located along all building fac,.ades approximately every 27 ft. Decorative stone, tile
and light treatments will also be located on the columns.
12) Awnings Objective: To encourage the use of awnings as a way to shelter customers,
reduce glare and conserve energy, and provide additional accent color to building fa(~ades.
Where awnings are desired, canvas or fabric should be used, rather than wood or metal.
· The awnings are proposed to be constructed of metal. Staff believes in this instance
that the metal awnings as proposed are appropriate for this location because of their
durabilitY and because of their size. The awnings are proposed to be 3 ft. 4 in. long
Page6
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission September 8, 2004
· ALDI's Preliminary/Final Plat and Site Plan
Case # 2004-0904
with an angle of 4 ft. 4 ¼ inches long, extending 3 ft. from the building. This will
provide ample shelter along the side of the buildings (particularly the north and west
fagades where pedestrians may be walking along the building), as well as provide an
appropriate decorative feature for the area.
Site Desi.qn Guidelines
13)
Parking Location Objective: To improve the appearance and convenience of parking lot
circulation for vehicles and pedestrians by breaking the parking area up into smaller units.
No more than 50 percent of the off-street parking area for the entire site shall be located
between the front fagade of the building and primary abutting street. Internal accessways
with landscaping and sidewalks are encouraged.
· The parking location meets this intent. Approximately 57 percent of the Central
Avenue frontage is comprised of parking surface. Although not all of this parking is
necessary by City Code, the applicant wants to provide increased parking based' upon
their market needs. However, this parking area is setback from the property line by
27.8 ft. and will be buffered from Central Avenue by landscaping. The parking lot
includes landscaped islands.
14)
Parking Area Screening Objective: To soften the appearance of parking areas when
viewed from an abutting street or sidewalk and to screen parking areas from residential
yards.
· The landscape plan for the development illustrates that these requirements are met.
15)
Placement and Screening of Service, Loading and Storage Areas Objective: To screen
views of service and loading areas, and to ensure that the noise impacts of these functions
are fully contained and not audible from surrounding streets and properties. Screening
must be provided in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance. Loading docks, truck parking,
trash collection and other service functions shall be incorporated into the design of the
building or screened with walls of similar design and materials to the principal building,
combined with landscape material to create a screen at least 6 ft. in height.
· The site plan for the development illustrates that these requirements are met. The
loading area will be screened from the new public road serving the Grand Central
Lofts by a retaining wall.
16)
Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Objective: To ensure that pedestrians and bicyclists have
safe and convenient access to all business establishments. Walkways should be at least 5
ft. in width and shall be landscaped for at least 50 percent of their length.
· The proposed building meets this objective. A sidewalk will extend from the new
public road on the .east to Central Avenue, and continue along Central. A walkway will
also connect the' sidewalk at 47~h Avenue to the main entry. Landscaping will be
adjacent to the walkways as required. Sidewalks shall be 5 ft. in width.
17)
Signs Objective: Signs should be architecturally compatible with the style, composition,
materials, colors and details of the buildings .and with other signs on nearby buildings.
Signs should be an integral part of the building design. Signs should have no more than
three colors unless part of an illustration.
· A signage plan has been submitted that meets the design guidelines requirements.
The sign contains three colors, yellow, orange and blue, plus a separate color for the
ALDI's logo (allowed as part of an illustration).
Page 7
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission
September 8, 2004
· ALDYs Preliminary/Final Plat and Site Plan
Case # 2004-0904
The signage plan includes one two wall signs (for the north fa(;ade and west fa~de
above the building entry) and one monument sign.
All signs are subject to review and approval of sign permit applications, and all signs
must comply with required setbacks from property lines and utilities and requirements
for intersection clear zones.
Lighting Objective: To ensure that safe and attractive lighting levels are provided around
all buildings and parking areas, without excessive glare or brightness. 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 far,,ades are encouraged.
· The Developer has submitted a site lighting plan that shows lighting meets the
requirements of City Code for glare.
· The building mounted fixtures are compatible with the building fa(;ade.
Findings of Fact
Preliminary/Final Plat
Based on the discussion above, the Preliminary Plat of Subdivision is found to meet the
following Findings of Fact established in Section 9.411 (6) of the Zoning Ordinance for
Preliminary Plats.
1. The proposed Preliminary Plat conforms to the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance.
2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed subdivision contains parcel and land subdivision layout that is consistent
with good planning and site engineering design principles.
Site Plan
Based on the discussion above, the Site Plan is found to meet the following Findings of Fact
established in Section 9.413 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan Review.
1. The Site Plan conforms to all applicable requirements of this Ordinance.
2. The Site Plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the City's Comprehensive
Plan.
The Site Plan is consistent with the applicable area plan. The Site Plan has been
designed in accordance with the goals, objectives and concept plan of the Kmart Site
Redevelopment' Concept Plan.
4. The Site Plan minimizes any adverse impacts on property in the immediate vicinity and the
public right-of-way.
Page 8
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission
September 8, 2004
· ALD['s Preliminary/Final Plat and Site Plan
Case # 2004-0904
Recommendation
This recommendation consists of two separate motions:
Preliminary/Final Plat
That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Preliminary/Final
Plat of Subdivision subject to the following conditions of approval that have been found to be
necessary to protect the public interest and ensure compliance with the provisions of the Zoning
and Development Ordinance, including:
Upon approval of the final plat, the applicant shall be responsible for filing and recording the
final plat with the Anoka County Recorder's Office within one year of the date of City Council
action. In the event that a final plat is not recorded within this time period, the final plat will
become void.
2. As part of this subdivision, a sidewalk shall be installed along 47th Avenue from the new
public roadway at the east end of the property to Central Avenue.
10.
11.
12.
All construction traffic shall be directed through the vehicle tracking pad, as indicated on the
SWPPP plan. Due to the traffic volume on Central Avenue, frequent street cleaning may be
necessary.
Due to the height of the proposed retaining wall (exceeds four feet in height) and that it is
adjacent to a public ROW, the final plans shall include a wall design by a registered
engineer. The wall shall also have protective fencing at the top where the vertical height
exceeds 48 inches.
Any site grading prior to final plat approval will require an excavation permit, obtained from
the Engineering Department.
An NPDES permit will be required, at the time of construction.
The City reserves the right to require additional erosion control measures during
construction, as conditions warrant.
All erosion control measures shall be installed and inspected by the City prior to any site
activities beginning.
All restoration of turf areas in the Public ROW shall be by sodding.
All site utilities serving ALDI's shall be privately owned and operated.
All utilities (water main, sanitary sewer and storm sewer), shall meet the City of Columbia
Heights specifications for materials and installation.
The Development shall provide the City of Columbia Heights with as-built drawings of all
newly constructed utilities, in both hardcopy and electronic (.dwg) format.
Page 9
City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission
September 8, 2004
· ALDI's Preliminary/Final Plat and Site Plan
Case # 2004-0904
13. The sidewalk shall meet MnDOT requirements for pedestrian ramps and grade.
14. The developer shall protect the existing sidewalk and provide appropriate construction
signage for any work on public sidewalks.
15.
Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the developer shall be responsible for
median work, median closing and left turn lane striping as required by MnDOT and in
accordance with a Development Contract to be entered into between the City and ALDI's.
16. The developer shall provide the City of Columbia Heights with a written copy of the 40-foot
drainage and utility easement that crosses the parking lot.
17,
The developer shall provide information from the Fire Protection Engineer designing the
building sprinkler system that the 6" water main shown coming into the building is adequate
for the sprinkler system. Otherwise an increased water main will need to be shown on the
plans.
18. Final construction plans are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer.
Site Plan
That the Planning Commission approve the application for Site Plan Review, based on the
Findings of Fact and subject to the following conditions of approval that have been found to be
necessary ensure compliance with the requirements of the Zoning and Development Ordinance:
1. The approval of a Site Plan by the Planning Commission shall be valid for a period of one
year.
Final building plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Staff to ensure
that the building design meets the requirements of the Urban Design Guidelines for the
Highway District, prior to issuance of any building permits.
All signs are subject to review and approval of sign permit applications, and all signs must
comply with required setbacks from property lines and utilities and requirements for
intersection clear zones. The monument sign shall be located a minimum of 10 feet
(horizontally) from any public utility.
Attachments
· Location Map
· Letter Dated July 29, 2004 from MnDOT
· Preliminary/Final Plat
· Existing Conditions
· Site Plan
· Landscape Plan
· Grading Plan
· Utility Plan
· Lighting Plan
· Elevations
Page 10
,. City of
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FIGURE 2-2, .FUTURE
LAND USE M A P
LEGEND
Future Land Us~:
Tnmsit Orierdld Development
Vacant
Park
Public:
I I l~ght-~f-Way
Non-City Land:
~ ~J~ ~'MLr~e~polis
,029,202
59,538
69,970
4&191
16.092
90.O26
87.83 I
7.641
59.43 I
10,675
0.316
1~.4~3
517.569
69.317
74.845
% of To~al:
44.30%
Z56%
3.01%
0.69%
3.87%
3.7~A.
0.33%
2.56%
0.46%
0.01%
5.31%
22.28%
2.98%
3.22%
TOTALS:
I,, I Wa~xFem~a 54,091Acr~
Area
2323.443 100.00%
N City Limits
CtwnmUmty l)e~clopment Dcpatlment
~G.I.S. Division)
Minnesota Depar:.ment cf T,-anspor~afion
Metropolitan Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B2
Roseville, MN 55113
July 29, 2004
Ellen Berkelhamer
City Planner - City of Columbia Heights
590 40th Avenue NE
Columbia Heights, MN 55421
SUBJECT:
Aldi Retail - Columbia Heights
Mn/DOT Review S04-064
NE Quad of 47th and TH 65
Columbia Heights, Anoka County
Control Section 0207
Dear Ms. Berkelhamer:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the above referenced site plan. As you are
aware Mn/DOT and the city of Columbia Heights have been working together on an
access plan for this block of TH 65. Redevelopment of this site will provide the
oppommity to move toward the southern access changes identified in the plan. Please
see the following comments regarding the proposed site plan.
We were pleased to receive a revised plan showing the site's access on the north
property line consistent with the access plan. There is a need to lengthen the left mm
lane at 47th Avenue with the new development on the east side of the block. Keeping
the existing median open on a temporary basis would not allow the turn lane to be
lengthened. Opening the median across from the new access would be too close to
the exiting northern median opening south of 49th Avenue. Closure of the southern
median opening needs to be coordinated with the construction of this development.
Please contact Beth Neuendorf, Area Engineer, at (651) 582-1579 with any questions
concerning these issues.
· Additional drainage information will need to be submitted to determine whether a
Mn/DOT Drainage permit is required. Please submit the following materials:
Existing and proposed drainage area maps.
Existing and proposed hydraulic computations for the 10 and 100 year rainfall
events.
The proposed development will need to maintain existing drainage rates (i.e., the rate
at which storm water is discharged from the site must not increase). In order to
reduce runoff a pond or rain garden would be recommended. Please direct questions
An equal ooportunity employer
concerning these issues to Pam Selden (651) 634- of Mn/DOT's Water Resources
section.
A Mn/DOT Access permit will be required, in addition a Mn/DOT Drainage permit
may be requ2'cd. Permit forms are available from MnDOT's utility website at
www.dot.state.rnn.us/tecsup/utilitv. Please direct any questions regarding permit
~o,,ir,ments to Keith Van W~o,,.er (651-582 ' '~ ~"~
.,--~.,j, or Buck r,.~;o (651-582-1447)
of MnDOT's Metro Permits Section.
As a reminder, please address all initial future correspondence for development activity
such as plats and site plans to:
Development Reviews
Mn/DOT - Metro Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
Mn/DOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and
two (2) copies of other review documents including site plans. Failure to provide three
(3) copies of a plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents will make a
submittal incomplete and delay Mn/DOT's 30-day review and response process to
development proposals. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing the
necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us fi.om having to delay and/or return
incomplete submittals.
If you have any questions concerning this review please feel free to contact me at (651)
582-1378.
Sincerely'i .~ //~
(~l~rigid Gombold
Senior Transportation Planner
Copy:
Kate Garwood / Anoka County Planning Department
Doug Fisher / Anoka County Engineer
Joseph Samuel / RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd.
~Z
a
o~..~
o
O~
c;:~.
I
,,MI;: /,TTr..r;
$~9 '36 '5 7"E
"-- 24Z95
244.17
OUTLOT A
C)
208.50
. /
rtl
ITl
Z
;3: :TI , ,T
C
I I
I
, f
:¢. / \
/
ALDI, INC. - COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
PRELIMINARY PLAT
t
I
f
I
t
I
\ I
\
\ I
\ I
\ I
\ I
I
I
I
I /
i~.
Ps
, ·o 0
= ~
ISSUED
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS PLANJ
UC. NO. 2....~.~16
BUILDING S["I~AO( UN[
..-I
/
I
I
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
I
I
I
I
I
/
!
/
/
/
/
.b
I
I
~ j ~1 i.
Iii ,.,d:~ ~ -. ,, ' ~ ;z ~ , -1'
~.~.....,-....,,.- ."'..",. ,~ ,,,..,_,,,,,, o,,...,, -- __~ ~:,;-.. - .~... -: _.. --.,_......,. _.-., ',. .-
.,_~-~ .,I,.~ll~ ,, Io c:
ISSUED FOR Cl~ REVIEW ' , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ [ SITE & SIGNAGE PLAN ~
mm--
Z
-I
c~
ISSUED FOR CITY REVIEW
i/
LANDSCAPING PLAN
DAVID w. PAT'r~N
DATE__ LIC NO. 414.~
, /
,ii
I&
0 _-.I ~,~
m~- , __l~..~m_ __ -[ :bb -'-~-~'
~' ~
o
o
/
I
! I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i I
I I
I I
I !
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 'Iff
I ~' I ,
I iht Fl ,---[- .....
I
"I [ ~', B~,~ , ~,~.~,~.~--
{ m..-' L
I ~ ~ ~--- ~T.~ ............
~!i I .... ~ ~ I --"-,L .... ~.~~ --
',l?l -,-; ~, .... ~.~- ..... ,
9=8{ lC ,,"~ ~ -- ",
I I ~:..I ' { ~ ~ I
· 1'~ ~, ' ,,~{
~ .... I '~ % ~ -'" .. '
/
/
I
133
ITl
Z
ISSUED FOR CITY REVIEW
v
/
/
/
/
I
I
5.50
~{ ~ { ALDI, INC. - COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
UTILITY PLAN
/ I
/ I
/ I
l
/
/
1
~ /
,/
/
/
/
iI
S00~24'48"Y/ ~
~.00
cc)
JOSEPH M. SAMUEL
DATE__ UC. NO._ ,2~416
.fl~ ,.
~'//,~///)~////'////"///~
/
/
% //
/
/
// 'o
o
/ L. ~
/
/
· .-. %
J~
--I I,
~ V~NUJ~
EX. Iz" RCP
ISSUED FOR CI~ REVIEW
ALDI, INC. - COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
LIGHTING PLAN
/