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 /