Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 3, 2008 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING JUNE 3, 2008 7:00 PM The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Chair-Marlaine Szurek. Commission Members present- Thompson, Fiorendino, Schmitt, Peterson, and Szurek. Also present were lefT Sargent (City Planner), Gary Peterson (Council Liaison), and Shelley Hanson (Sccrctary). Motion by Fiorendino, seconded bySchmilt, to approve the minutesfi-om the meeting of May 6, 2008. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: 2008-0601 DeMars Signs 4110 Central Avenue Site Plan Approval for signage INTRODUCTION At this time, DeMars Signs is rcquesting a site plan approval for new signage for a tenant at 4110 Central Avenue. The tcnant space had been vacant for some time and is now occupied by Checks Cashed. The proposed new signage for the tenant space requires a site plan approval because the property is located within the Design Overlay Central Business District. COMPREHENSIVE l'LAN The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for Commercialrelatcd activities. Properties in this area must also conform to the Design Guidelines. Thc proposed sign plan meets all the requirements of the Design Guidelines, and for this reason is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ZONING ORDINANCE The propcrty is located in the CBD, Central Business District, as are the properties to the north and south and east. Thc properties to the west are zoned R-4, Multiple Family Rcsidential. The subject parcel is also located within the Design Overlay Central Business District, and is subject to the regulations for such properties. The City Code at Section 9.106 (P)(12) states that total signage in the CBD District shall not exceed two square feet for each front foot of tenant space provided in the multi-tenant building. The tenant space occupied by Checks Cashed is 22 feet in width. For this reason, the total amount of signage allowed for the tenant is 44 square feet. The applicant's sign plan indicates one wall sign totaling 19 square feet in area, meeting the minimum sign code regulations. DESIGN GUIDELINES SIGNAGE. The Design Guidelines prohibit internally lit box signs. The proposed wall sign consists of channel letters on a raceway, and is internally illuminated. The Design Guidelines allow for internally lit channel letters, and therefore the sign plan meets the minimum requirements. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 2 JUNE 3, 2008 FINDINGS OF FACT Site Plan Approval Section 9.104 (M) requires that the Plmming and Zoning Commission shall make each of the following findings before approving a site plan: 1. The site plan conforms to all applicable requirements of this article The proposed site plan meets all the Design Guidelines standards for wall signs in relation to the color of the sign and the types (!lmaterials used to construct it. 2. The site plan is consistent with the applicable provisions ofthe city's comprehensive plan. The proposed sign plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as it is consistent with the Design Overlay Central Business District. 3. The site plan is consistent with any applicable area plan. There is no applicable area plan for this area. 4. The site plan minimizes any adverse impacts on property in the immediate vicinity and the public right-of-way. The proposed signage meets all the minimum square footage requirements and all Design Guideline requirements. For this reason, the property in the immediate vicinity should not be adversely impacted. The signage plan conforms to all standards outlined in the Design Guidelines, therefore, staff recommends approval of the site plan for the Checks Cashed located at 4110 Central A venue. Questions by members: Schmitt commented that several signs on that building never came before the Commission for approval. Sargent said maybe they were installed before the Design Guidelines were established or before the policy was changed requiring signage in that district to come before the commission for approval. Schmitt brought up the example of the Hair Styling business that she thought recently put up a box sign, and that it never came before the commission. Sargent stated he would check on it and report back to the commission. He reminded members that if they re- faced an existing sign, it would not have to be approved by the commission. Public Hearing Opened: Noone was present to speak on this. Public Hearing Closed: PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 3 JUNE 3, 3008 Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Schmitt, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2008-PZ09, there being ample copies available to the public. All ayes, MOTION PASSED. Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Schmitt, to adopt Resolution No. 2008-PZ09, being a resolution approving a site plan for Check~ Cashed located at 4110 Central Avenue. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-PZ09 RESOLUTION OF TI-IE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A SITE PLAN FOR SIGNAGE AT 4110 CENTRAL AVENUE WITHIN THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, a proposal (Case #2008-0601) has been submitted by DeMars Signs to the Planning and Zoning Commission requesting a site plan approval from the City of Columbia Heights at the following site: ADDRESS: 4110 Central Avenue LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On filc at City Hall. THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING PERMIT: Site Plan approval for signage for Checks Cashed located at 4110 Central Avenue. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing as required by the city Zoning Code on June 3, 2008; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has considered the advice and recommendations of the City staff regarding the effect of the proposed site plan upon the health, safety, and welfare of thc community and its Comprehensive Plan, as well as any concerns related to compatibility of uses, traffic, property values, light, air, danger of fire, and risk to public safety in the surrounding areas; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Columbia Hcights after rcviewing the proposal, that the Planning and Zoning Commission accepts and adopts the following findings: 1. The site plan conforms to all applicable rcquirements of this article, exccpt signage. 2. The site plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the city's comprehensive plan. 3. The site plan is consistent with any applicable area plan. 4. The site plan minimizes any adverse impacts on property in the immediate vicinity and the public right-ot~ way. FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the attached conditions, maps, and other information shall become part of this permit and approval; and in granting this permit the city and the applicant agrec that this permit shall become null and void if the project has not been completed within one (1) calendar veal' after the approval date, subject to petition for renewal of the permit. Passed this )'" day of June 2008, Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: Fiorendino Schmitt A Il ayes CHAIR Marlaine SZlIrek At/est: SECRETARY, Shelley Hanson PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 4 JUNE 3, 2008 CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: 2008-0602 CROS Companies, Chris Little 3700 Central Avenue Screening Variance, Site Plan Approval INTRODUCTION At this time, CROS Companies is requesting a site plan approval for a 9,349 square foot neighborhood retail center located at the northwest corner of 37'h Avenue and Central Avenue. The subject property consists of five separate parcels of land, totaling approximately 0.65 acres. The three northerly properties are currently owned by the City of Columbia Heights and the southerly two properties are currently owned by Golden Holdings, LLC. As of May 5, 2008, CROS Companies has a purchase agreement with Golden Holdings, LLC to acquire the southerly two parcels, consisting of approximately 11,800 square feet. In addition, CROS Companies has a Preliminary Development Agreemcnt with the City of Columbia Heights for the northcrly three parcels, consisting of the balance of the site. The subject property is currently occupied by the fonner Chutney's restaurant, built in 1914, and owned by Golden Holdings, LLC. The remainder of the site is currently unoccupied, but was once the location for the Beecroft building and two single-family residences. This area has been designated as a primary redevelopment site by the City Council. The proposed project will consist of one contiguous building, which will contain a tenant mix of three to seven businesses, ranging in size from 1,200 square feet to 6,500 square feet, depending on the user. The applicant is also requesting a variance to the screening requirements outlined in the Zoning Code. Per code section 9.106 (M)(5)(a), all off-street parking areas containing six or more parking spaces and located adjacent to a residential or residentially zoncd property, shall be screened along the boundary with the residential use. Required screening shall consist of a fence, wall, earthen benning and/or vegetation no less than six feet in height and no less than 80% opaque on a year round basis. The properties to the west are residentially zoned and screening would be required to shield those properties from the parking area. The variance requested by the applicant would waive the 80% opacity requirement. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan guides the property as Commercial. The proposed retail center is consistent with the types of uses allowed in all commercially zoned areas of the City. ZONING ORDINANCE The property located at 3700 Central A venue is zoned GB, General Business, as are the properties to the north and east. The properties to thc west are zoned R-3, Multiple Family Residential, and the property to the south is located in thc City of Minneapolis. The subject property is also located in the Design Overlay Central Business District and is subject to a set of specific development standards as outlined in the Design Guidelines. PARKING. Properties located in the GB, General Business District are required to provide one (I) parking stall for each 300 square feet of gross floor area for retail entities. The total amount of retail space provided by this development is 9,349 square feet, which requires a minimum of 28 parking stalls. The site plan indicates a total of34 on-site parking stalls, meeting the city's requirements. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 5 JUNE 3, 2008 LANDSCAPING. The City Code requires landscape plans that include a minimum of one tree for every 50 feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. Parking areas shall also have a minimum of one over-story tree for each 20 spaces or fraction thereof as well. The proferty at 3700 Central Avenue has approximately 367 feet of street frontage along Central Avenue and 37" Avenue, and incorporates 34 parking stalls. This requires seven regular trees and two over-story trees. The proposed plans indicate a total of 15 trees, five of which are over-story trees, meeting the City's minimum requirements. STORMW A TER MANAGEMENT. The subject property is less than one acre in size, which means that on-site stormwater ponding is not required. However, the property is still required to control the rate of rainwater run-off from the property. The water from this property will be divcrted south towards catch basins located in 37'11 Avenue. The rate of run-off will be controlled with the installation of grass islands containing a rain garden and heavy landscaping on the south side of the property. DESIGN GUIDELINES The property at 3700 Central Avenue is located in the Design Overlay Central Business District and is subject to a set of specific development standards as outlined in the Design Guidelines. Some of the following areas of interest are as follows: BUILDING PLACEMENT. Buildings should have a well-defined front fayade with primary entrances facing the street. At intersections, buildings should "hold the corner" - that is, have street facades at or near the sidewalk on both streets. The building at 3700 Central Avenue will be placed very near the intersection of Central and 3 7'11 Avenues. The proposed placcment of the building meets the Design Guidelines for the district. BUILDING HEIGHT. All buildings shall have a minimum cornice height of 22 feet, in order to give the impression of a two-storicd structure. The building for this projcct measures 22 feet in height, meeting this requirement. PRIMARY FACADES. Buildings should have a well-defined base, middle and top. The base, or ground floor, should appear visually distinct from the uppcr stories, through the use of a change in building materials, window shape or size, and intermediate cornice line, an awning, or similar techniques. The base of the proposed building incorporates windows and brick columns. The upper level is visually distinct from the lower level through the use of awnings and a change in building material from brick to ElI'S. BUILDING MATERIALS. The building will incorporate, brick, glass, and ElI'S, which are all acceptable building materials for the district in which the building is located. FINDINGS OF FACT (Variance) Section 9.1 04 (G) of the Zoning Ordinance outlincs five findings of fact that must be met in order for the City to grant a variance. They are as follows: PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 6 JUNE 3, 2008 a) Because of the particular physical surroundings, or the shape, conl1guration, topography, or other conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, strict adherence to the provisions of this article would cause undue hardship. The developer held a neighborhood meeting with the residents abutting the public alley adjacent to the proposed development. A concern that the residents had regarding a sixj'oot, 80% opaque fence revolved around security. A screening fence would create a "wall ejfect" along that portion of the alley, and would also greatly diminish potential areas usedfor snow removal. A concern that a fence would invite a place for people to hide behind or congregate was also the neighborhood '.I' concern b) The conditions upon which the variance is based are unique to the specific parcel of land involved and are generally not applicable to other properties within the same zoning classil1cation. The subject parcel is located on the border of Minneapolis and Columbia Heights and is (u(jacent to a residentially zoned parcel. Although there are other land situations similar to the subject parcel, this parcel is unique in that it is a corner lot with a lot depth of 1 09 feet. These conditions put an imposition on the property regarding the location of the building and parking area, leaving the only location 0.[ parking lot screening directly adjacent to the alley. c) The difficulty or hardship is caused by the provisions of this article and has not been created by any person currently having a legal interest in the property. The City Code requires the parking lot screening and also requires the proper setbacks fiJr the parking lot and structures on the property. No person having a legal interest in the property has caused the hardship. d) The granting of the variance IS in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides the property as Commercial. The proposed retail center is consistent with the types of uses allowed in all commercially zoned areas of the City. e) The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or materially injurious to the enjoyment, use, development or value of property or improvements in the vicinity. The granting of the variance will ensure the public welfare by eliminating a potential dangerous situation by increasing visual sightlines jiJr motor vehicle trqf{ic, as well as eliminating the creation ofa hiding spotfor individuals along the jJublic alley. FINDINGS OF FACT (Site Plan Approval) Section 9.104 (M) of the Zoning Ordinance outlines four l1ndings of fact that must be met in order for the City to approve a site plan. They are as follows: a) The site plan conforms to all applicable requirements of this article. The site plan meets all setbacks, building density, and parking criteria pertaining to the Zoning Code. b) The site plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the city's Comprehensive Plan. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 7 JUNE 3, 2008 The Comprehensive Plan guides the property as Commercial. The proposed retail center is consistent with the types of uses allowed in all commercially zoned areas of the City. c) The site plan is consistent with any applicable area plan. There is no area plan for this portion of the city. d) The site plan minimizes any adverse impacts on property in the immediate vicinity and the public right-of-way. The proposed site plan meets all applicable setback requirements and zoning provisions. For this reason, there will be no adverse impacts on property in the immediate vicinity or the public right-aI-way. The site involving the proposed development has been a redevelopment priority for the City of Columbia Heights and provides an additional 10,000 square feet of retail development along the major commercial corridor of Columbia Heights. The proposed plans for the construction of the new building meet aJI zoning and design guideline requirements. For these reasons, stafIrecommends approval of the variance to section 9.106 (M)(5)( c) as weJI as approval ofthe site plan for 3700 Central A venue. Ouestions from members: Peterson asked for clarification on the need to place the building so close to Central Ave and 37'h Ave, being this is a corner lot. Sargent explained that there are three districts under the Design Guidelines, and each one has different criteria. They are the CBD district (Central Ave from 37'h - 43I'd), the Highway district (Central Ave from 43rd_53rd), and the 40th Ave district (University to Central). The CBD district is also known as the Downtown District. In that area, the desire is to have the buildings located close to the street to make them pedestrian friendly and encourage walking traffic. Parking will be provided in the rear. The main access to the buildings wiJI be in the front, however, the developer stated access will also be provided in the rear of the building. Peterson was also concerned about lighting of the parking lot area and that it could be intrusive to the residential properties across the alley in the rear. Sargent said the lighting plan was not part of this submittal, but that the foot candle requirements of the code would still need to be met. Chris Little, the developer, stated he had submitted a lighting plan earlier, but it was not included in the packet for this meeting. Peterson questioned the entrance and exit plan of the site and if headlights would shine into the properties to the west of the site. Sargent said the screening should reduce that from being a problem. He said that there may be some car headlights directed towards these properties, but that is the rear of those properties and there are mostly detached garages along the aJIeyway. Chris Little, also reviewed the entrance and exit pattern they hope to create on this site and that signs will be instaJIed to encourage a smooth traffic flow. The plan is for vehicles to enter on the south entrance and to exit out the north opening, and to continue north through the aJIeyway. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 8 JUNE 3, 2008 Schmitt asked the developer if a patio area was still part of the plan. He stated that plans have changed from the initial one he had for the site and he isn't planning one at this time. Parking restrictions limited that, and since there will not be a sit down restaurant, this shouldn't be an issue. He explained that the businesses located at this site will be quick stop, retail space. She asked if the sidewalk would go around the building from the parking area, and Chris stated, it would. Schmitt was happy to hear he had met with the residential neighbors of this site to discuss the best way to screen this site. She understood the reasoning to use the trees and garden areas as screening rather than the required fencing, and agreed it may be a bctter plan to kecp the parking area more visible. Fiorendino asked that Sargent define what the hardship would be which is required to allow a variance. Sargent said that due to the location of the property and thc size of the site, the requirement for fencing to screen the site is difficult to do and creates a safety concern for patrons and neighboring property owners. The fence would make it difficult for snow removal, for accessing the property, and for deliveries to be made. The fence would create a potentially unsafe area allowing for undesirable activity if not easily visible. Staff, the developer, and the neighbors all agreed on this issue. There was a discussion regarding future signage for the businesses that will be located in this retail center. Sargent explained that the commission could make a decision to allow staff to review and approve all signage requests and to ensure they meet the requirements of the code. This would speed up the process and would eliminate the need to bring signage requests to the Planning Commission. It doesn't hold up requests for new construction projects such as this, but it does hurt new businesses moving into already established sites. Thompson was concerned about setting precedence in granting a variance allowing an alternative solution to the fence screening requirement. He wanted to hear from the neighbors themselves that they agree to the "no fencing" approach. He asked if anyone in the audience wanted a fence, and no one present did. Szurek was comfortable granting this variance and felt it is something that can be decided on a case by case basis as development occurs. Public I-Iearing Opened: Sandy Popa of 3812 Van Buren St said she is not concerned about the lighting or fencing issues. She is more concerned about possible empty store-fronts once it is built and how it would affect property taxes. And she was concerned about deliveries and additional congestion in the alley. Sargent responded that it will not have an affect on her taxes at all. The property owner is still responsible for keeping his taxes current whether he has tenants in the spaces, or not. Chris Little said that most of the deliveries will be made by smaller box trucks in the parking lot. Any occasional semi trucks would need to park in the alley to unload as they cannot access the parking lot due to size of the site. Nancy King of 3717 Van Buren St said she is in favor of the re-development and she wanted to go on record that she does not want a fence installed as it would create more problems than not having one. She expressed her appreciation of the developer holding the neighborhood meeting to get the input of the residents abutting this development. Peterson asked her if she would be bothered by truck traffic or lighting issues. She said she would not. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 9 JUNE 3, 2008 Steve Poppa of 3812 Van Buren St. asked if there would be spots reserved for handicapped individuals. Sargent said the plan designates two spots on the north end of the site. Poppa then noted that it only shows three doors in the rear. Szurek responded that the drawing is conceptual at this point, as they aren't sure how many spaces (doors) will be needed in the building. Bill Johanneck of3713 Van Buren St stated he is in favor of the re-development. There have been all kinds of problems on that site and he thinks if the new site is fenced, it would encourage the bad activity to continue. Wendy Howell of 3711 Van Buren St brought pictures of plants that may grow on that site. She said the plan to grow grass there will not work. Szurek stated that the garden and grass areas are designed for draining rainwater on the site. She said the green areas will be designed by professionals using plants and shrubs that will work for that site. Ms. Howell also agreed with the "no fence" option, but said she is concerned that trucks will block access to their properties. Peterson thanked developer, Chris Little, for putting forth the effort to involve the neighbors in his planning process. Public Hearing Closed: Motion by Thompson, seconded by Peterson, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2008-P210, there being ample copies available to the public. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. Motion by Thon/pson, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution No. 2008-P210, being a resolution approving a site plan/or a new retail center located at 3700 Central Avenue. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-PZ10 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A SITE PLAN FOR A RETAIL CENTER AT 3700 CENTRAL AVENUE WITHIN TIlE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, a proposal (Case #2008-0602) has been submitted by CROS Companies to the Planning and Zoning Commission requesting a site plan approval from the City of Columbia Heights at the following site: ADDRESS: 3700 Central Avenue LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On file at City Hall. THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING PERMIT: Site Plan approval for the construction ofa retail center at 3700 Central Avenue. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing as required by the city Zoning Code on June 3, 2008; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has considered the advice and recommendations of the City staff regarding the effect of the proposed site plan upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community and its Comprehensive Plan, as well as any concerns related to compatibility of uses, traffic, property values, light, air, danger of fire, and risk to public safety in the surrounding areas; and PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 10 JUNE 3, 2008 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Columbia Heights after reviewing the proposal, that the Planning and Zoning Commission acccpts and adopts the following findings: 1. The site plan conforms to all applicable requirements of this article, except signage. 2. The site plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the city's comprehensive plan. 3. The site plan is consistent with any applicable area plan. 4. The sitc plan minimizes any advcrse impacts on property in the immediatc vicinity and thc public right-of- way. FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the attached conditions, maps, and other information shall become part of this permit and approval; and in granting this permit the city and the applicant agree that this permit shall become null and void if the project has not been completed within one (1) calendar veal' after the approval date, subject to petition for renewal ofthe permit. Passed this 3Hl day of June 2008, Offered by: Seconded by: RollCall: Thompson Peterson All ayes CHAIR Marlaine Szurek Attest: SECRETARY, Shelley Hanson Motion by Thompson, seconded by Peterson, that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the variance to code section 9.106 (M)(5)(c), waiving the 80% opacity requirement for screening a parking lot for the property located at 3700 Central Avenue, subject to certain conditions of approval that have been/ound to be necessary to protect the public interest and ensure compliance with the provisions a/the Zoning and Development Ordinance, including: 1. All application materials, maps, drawings and descriptive information submitted with the application shall become part of the permit. 2. The six (6) Shaunting Maples indicated on the landscape plan shall be kept in good condition and shall act as a screening mechanism. 3. The island in which the Shauntlng Maples are located shall be landscaped with grass and/or other natural landscape materials All ayes. MOTION PASSED. The.following Resolution will go to the City Council June 9, 2008. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGEIl JUNE 3, 2008 RESOLUTION NO. 2008-XX RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ZONING CODE FOR CROS COMPANIES WHEREAS, a proposal (Case # 2008-0602) has been submitted by CROS Companies to the City Council requesting a variancc from the City of Columbia Heights Zoning Code at the following site: ADDRESS: 3700 Central Avenue LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On file at City Hall. THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING RELIEF: A variance to waive the 80% opacity requirement for a screening mechanism per Code Scction 9.106 (M)(5)(c). WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing as required by the City Zoning Code on June 3, 2008; WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendations of the Planning Commission regarding the effect of the proposcd variancc upon the health, sately, and welfarc of the community and its Comprehensive Plan, as well as any concel'll related to traffic, property values, light, air, danger of tire, and risk to public safety, in the surrounding area; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights that the City Council accepts and adopts the following tindings of the Planning Commission: 1. Because of the particular physical stll'roundings, or the shape, contigtll'ation, topography, or other conditions of the specitic parcel of land involved, where strict adherence to the provisions of this Ordinance would cause undue hardship. 2. The conditions upon which the variance is based are uniquc to the specitic parcel of land involved and are generally not applicable to other propcrties within the samc zoning classitication. 3. The dift1culty or hardship is caused by the provisions of this Ordinance and has not bcen creatcd by any person ctll'rently having legal intcrest in the property. 4. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of thc Comprehensive Plan. 5. The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or materially injurious to the enjoyment, use, dcvelopment or value of property or improvements in the vicinity. FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that thc attached plans, maps, and othcr information shall become part of this variance and approval; and in granting this variance the city and the applicant agree that this variance shall become nnll and void if the project has not been completed within one (1) calcndar year after the approval date, subject to petition for renewal of the permit. CONDITIONS ATTACHED: 1. All application materials, maps, drawings and descriptive information submitted with the application shall become part of the permit. 2. The six (6) Shaunting Maples indicated on thc landscapc plan shall be kept in good condition and shall act as a screening mechanism. 3. The island in which the Shaunting Maples arc located shall be landscaped with grass and/or other nattll'al landscape materials. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 12 JUNE 3, 2008 CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: 2008-0603 Nelson Building and Development 4707 Centml Avenue Conditional Use Pet'mit for Parking Ramp, Site Plan Approval INTRODUCTION At this timc, Nelson Building and Development is requcsting a Conditional Use Permit for a 219-stall parking ramp and a Site Plan approval for approximately 55,000 square feet of retail and commercial space located at 4707 Central Avenue. Originally, this property was included as part of the Grand Central Lofts development and has always been planned for commercial dcvelopment. The current owner of the Grand Central Lofts sold the commercial component to Ehtesham Khoyratty, who will take over the development responsibilities for this parcel. The plans include two, two-story retail/commercial buildings. The northern building will contain a 17,000 square foot Aldi 's grocery store on the first floor, with approximately 16,700 square feet of office space above it. A 5,200 squarc foot Buffalo Wild Wings will anchor the building to the south, with approximately 10,000 square feet of office space on the second floor. Located bctween the Aldi's grocery store and Bl!ffalo Wild Wings, is enough tenant space for up to two additional retail stores, with the possibility of another restaurant occupying one of the spots. The 219-stall parking ramp will be a two-level structure and will serve the entire development. The ram~ will be located behind and adjacent to the buildings with access fi'om Grand Avenue to thc east, 4 i 1 Avenue to the south and Central Avenue to the west. It is anticipated that the first level of the parking ramp will serve the retail component of the development, while the second floor of the ramp will serve the office users, COMI'REHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Transit Oriented Development. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan to promote business and enhance the city's economic vitality through redevelopment efforts. ZONING ORDINANCE The property located at 4707 Central Avenue NE is zoned MXD, Mixed Use Development District, as are the properties to east. The property to the north is zoned GB, General Business and the properties to the south are zoned R-3, Multiple Family Residential. The City ofI-lilltop is located to the west. PARKING RAMP. The Zoning Code at Section 9.112 (D)(2) allows for parking ramps as a Conditional Use in the MXD District. The Specific Development Standards at Section 9.107 (31) state the criteria in which the parking ramp must meet. These standards state the following: a) Parking ramp structures shall meet the setback requirements for a principal structure in the zoning district in which the use is locatcd. The property is located in the MXD, Mixed Use Development District. The setbacks in this district are regulated by the final site plan and development agreement approved by the City Council based on the fact that the proposed setbacks provide adequate distances Fom uses in adjacent districts, and that the setbacks maintain and enhance the character of the neighborhood in which the mixed- use development is located. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 13 JUNE 3, 2008 Given these standards, the setback of the parking ramp shall be determined through the site plan approval by the City Council. Stqr{ recommends approval of the suggested parking ramp setback, as it provides the best access to the site and blends in with the surrounding topographic features. b) Exterior fayade materials shall be compatible with surrounding buildings. The parking ramp design is included .with the overall design package for the development. The parking ramp is integrated into the development and serves both the first and second floors of the buildings simultaneously. Because the parking ramp has been designed as an integral part of the development, it shares the same building materials and architectural features as the surrounding buildings. PARKING REOUIREMENTS. The Zoning Code requires one 0) parking stall for each 300 square feet of gross office/retail space and enough parking to accommodate 30% of a restaurant's seating capacity. The proposed development includes approximately 49,000 square feet of office/retail space and the BlifJalo Wild Wings restaurant will have a seating capacity of 228 patrons. In total, this requires 215 parking stalls. The development, which includes the two-story parking ramp, provides for 219 on-site parking stalls. Twelve parking stalls adjacent to Central Avenue were proposed, but denied by MN DOT. LANDSCAPING. The City Code requires landscape plans that include a minimum of one tree for every 50 feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. Parking areas shall have a minimum of one over-story tree for each 20 spaces or fraction thereof as well. The property at 4707 Central Avenue has approximately 1,000 feet of street frontage along Central Avenue, 47'h A venue and Grand Avenue, and incorporates 219 parking stalls. This requires 20 trees and 11 over-story trees. The proposed plans indicate a total of 31 trees, 26 of which are over-story trees, meeting the City's minimum requirements. STORMW A TER MANAGEMENT. Roughly 50% of the stormwater from this site will be collected in an underground infiltration system, with the remainder diverted to the City's storm sewer pipe located in Central Avenue. The City is currently working with the developer in order to upsize the diameter of the storm sewer pipe, which is currently at capacity use. SIGNAGE. Signage for the development shall meet the minimum city requirements for size, location and illumination. Signage shall be limited in size to two square feet of signage for each front foot of tenant space for each tenant, not to exceed 100 square feet per tenant. The Design Guidelines do not allow for internally illuminated box signs, but do allow for internally illuminated channel letters, backlit signs and halo-lit signs. The proposed development currently has two tenants, namely Aldi 's and Bl!IJalo Wild Wings. In order to approve new sign age for the building, each new tenant would need to apply for and receive Site Plan approval when they occupy a new tenant space. In order to save time, staffrecommends that the Planning Commission approve a sign plan for the development that would meet the City's minimum standards. This would allow new tenants of the development to receive a sign permit without needing an additional site plan approval for signagc. DESIGN GUIDELINES The property at 4707 Central Avenue is located in the Design Overlay Highway District and is subject to a set of specific development standards as outlined in the Design Guidelines. Some of the following areas of interest are as follows: PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 14 JUNE 3, 2008 BUILDING PLACEMENT. Buildings shall have a well-defined front fayade with entrances facing the street. Larger buildings may be oriented perpendicular to the street provided that at least one entrance facing the street is provided. The proposed buildings will be oriented so that their well-defined front facades face Central Avenue. The Aldi's building will be perpendicular to Central Avenue, but the main Aldi's entrance will face the street. BUILDING HEIGHT. All buildings shall have a minimum cornice height of 22 feet, in order to give the impression of a two-storied structure. The two buildings making up this development are both two-storied structures, meeting this criterion. PRIMARY FACADES. The base or ground floor of the building should include elements that relate to the human scale, including texture, projections, doors and windows, awnings, canopies or ornamentation. The proposed building incorporates all of these criteria, giving an appropriate mix of window coverage, projections, awnings and ornamentation suitable for the pedestrian scale. BUILDING MATERIALS. The building will incorporate rock face block, brick, stone, pre-finished metal panels and EIFS, which are all acceptable building materials for the district in which the building is located. FINDINGS OF FACT (Conditional Use Permit) Section 9.104 (H) of the Zoning Ordinance outlines nine findings of fact that must be met in order for the City to grant a conditional use permit. They are as follows: (a) The use is one of the conditional uses listed for the zoning district in which the property is located, or is a substantially similar use as determined by the Zoning Administrator. The MXD, Mixed Use Development District allows for any permitted or conditional use allowed in any of the commercial districts throughout the city. Parking ramps are conditional uses in the CED, Central Business District. (b) The use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Transit Oriented Development. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan to promote business and enhance the city's economic vitality through redevelopment efforts. (c) The use will not impose hazards or disturbing influences on neighboring properties. The parking ramp is located on the back of the property and will be at the same grade level as Grand Avenue to the east. The incOlporation of the design of the parking ramp into the rest of the development will considerably diminish any negative impacts to the surrounding area. (d) The use will not substantially diminish the use of property in the immediate vicinity. lIw use of the property in the immediate vicinity will not be diminished as a result of the construction of the parking ramp. The parking ramp will serve the general public wishing to use the services provided by the development. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 15 JUNE 3, 2008 (e) The use will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner that is compatible with the appearancc of the existing or intended charactcr ofthe surrounding area. The parking ramp design is included with the overall design package for the development. The parking ramp is integrated into the development and serves both the first and second fioors of the buildings simultaneously. Because the parking ramp has been designed as an integral part of the development, it shares the same building materials and architectural features as the surrounding buildings, andfits into the intended character of the area. (f) The use and property upon which the use is located arc adequately served by essential public facilities and services. The property located at 4707 Central Avenue NE meets this criterion. (g) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to minimizc traffic congestion on the public streets and to provide for appropriate on-site circulation of traffic. The parking ramp's only pW]Jose is to improve on-site circulation of traffic. Each parking stall and drive aisle width meets the city's minimum standardsfor construction. (h) The use will not cause a negative cumulative effect, when considered in conjunction with the cumulative effcct of other uses is the immediate vicinity. The parking ramp will cause a positive cumulative effect on uses in the immediate vicinity, as it will provide access to 55,000 square feet of new office and retail development along Central Avenue. (i) The use complies with all other applicable regulations for the district in which it is located. The use complies with all other applicable regulations for the MXD zoning district. FINDINGS OF FACT (Site Plan Approval) Section 9.104 (M) of the Zoning Ordinance outlines four findings of fact that must be met in order for the City to approve a site plan. They are as follows: e) The site plan conforms to all applicable requirements of this article. The site plan meets all setback, building density, parking and Design Guidelines criteria pertaining to the Zoning Code. 1) The site plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the city's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Transit Oriented Development. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan to promote business and enhance the city's economic vitality through redevelopment ~fJorts. g) The site plan is consistent with any applicable area plan. There is no area plan for this portion of the city. h) The site plan minimizes any adverse impacts on property in the immediate vicinity and the public right-of-way. The proposed site plan meets all applicable setback requirements and zoning provisions. For this reason, there will be no adverse impacts on property in the immediate vicinity or the public right-of way. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 16 JUNE 3, 2008 The Grand Central Commons site has been a redevelopment priority for the City of Columbia Heights and provides an opportunity for 55,000 square feet of new office and retail development along the major commercial corridor of Columbia Heights. The proposed plans for the construction of the two buildings and parking ramp meet all zoning and design guideline requirements, and the parking ramp will be an unobtrusive scrvice to the public. For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the parking ramp as wcll as approval of the site plan for 4707 Central Avenue. Ouestions from members: Fiorendino stated he thought the design of the parking ramp was great. He liked the fact that trees will be placed to create green space between the street and building. He questioned if the sidewalk would remain along Central Avenue since MN DOT had rej ected the proposal of the parking spaces. Sargent stated that MN DOT suggested the sidewalk remain. Schmitt sought clarification of the exit points from the site. She asked if MN DOT had approved the one off Central. Sargent said thcy approved an exit from the site on Central that would only go north. She then asked who would be responsible for blocking the median on Central Ave to prohibit left turns to the south. Kevin Hansen was present and stated that it is the developers responsibility to have that work done so that trafl'ic will be directed in the right direction. There was a discussion regarding the signage for the site and whether or not to bring these requests before the Planning Commission for approval, or let staff process the requests. Sargcnt said staff already reviews the requests for size, colors, type of sign, and lighting. The only reason they are brought to the commission is because of wording in the Design Guidelines. It would shorten the process if staff could approve them. Schmitt felt strongly that all requcsts for the Design Guidelines Districts should still come before the commission. She said this has been a "hot issue" in the past and prefers to see the requests. Szurek agreed and doesn't feel it holds up the process as it only goes before the Plmming Commission, not to the City Council. Peterson thanked the developer for submitting all the conceptual drawings for the site. He said it helps visualize what a project will look like. He was concerned about the parking area facing Grand Central Lofts. He thought the renderings showed a lot of white wall area that should be softened with more greenery. He asked if any thought had been given to establishing a rooftop garden area. Sargent said that is not a requirement in our code, therefore we could not force the developer to do that. He said it would add cost to the proj ect as the design would have to account for the extra weight. Public Hearing Opened. Tom Kurak resides at 15001 Sunfish Lake Blvd in Ramsey, but owns condos in the Grand Central Lofts building would also like to see more greenery around the parking ramp. He also hopes the lighting will be soft and not glare into the condo units. He thought Grand Avenue was a residential street, not for businesses that are open late. He wanted the ramp re-designed to have all the traffic exit onto 4ih Avenue instead of Grand. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 17 JUNE 3, 2008 Sargent explained only the 2nd level of the ramp exits onto Grand Ave. and that will be used mostly by the offices on the second level of the business center during the day. The first level ofthe ramp will exit to 4ih Avenue and will serve the restaurants located on the first level of the center. He stated that the ramp can't be re-designed as they are very close to the minimum number of required parking spaces, and therefore, can't afford to lose any. He also reminded members, and those in the audience, that the site was zoned Mixed Use to allow for residences and retail/commercial space. This was established so residents would be encouraged to walk to local businesses and restaurants. Members agreed that most of the night traffic would exit to 4ih Avenue. Public Hearing closed. Sargent explained that because the site IS located in the MXD zoning district, the setbacks must be approved by the City Council. Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Schmitt, that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the Site Plan for the commerciallretailfaciiity located at 4707 Central Avenue. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. The attached Resolution will go to the City Council.Iune 9, 2008. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-132 RESOLUTION OF THE I'LANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A SITE PLAN FOR A 55,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 4707 CENTRAL AVENUE WITHIN THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, a proposal (Case #2008-0603) has been submitted by Nelson Building and Development to the Planning and Zoning Commission requesting a site plan approval ti'om the City of Columbia Heights at the following site: ADDRESS: 4707 Central Avenue LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On file at City Hall. THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING PERMIT: Site Plan approval for the construction of an office/retail development located at 4707 Central Avenue. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing as required by the city Zoning Code on June 3, 2008; WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the effect of the proposed site plan upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community and its Comprehensive Plan, as well as any concerns related to compatibility of uses, traffic, property values, light, ail', danger of fire, and risk to public safety in the surrounding areas; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights after reviewing the proposal, that the City Council accepts and adopts the following findings of the Planning Commission: I. The site plan conforms to all applicable requirements of this article, except signage. 2. The site plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the city's comprehensive plan. 3. The site plan is consistent with any applicable area plan. 4. The site plan minimizes any adverse impacts on property in the immediate vicinity and the public right-ot~ way. FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the attached conditions, maps, and other information shall become part of this permit and approval; and in granting this permit the city and the applicant agree that this permit shall become null and void if the project has not been completed within one (1) calendar veal' after the approval date, subject to petition for renewal of the permit. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 18 JUNE 3, 2008 Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Schmitt, that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit for a parking ramp located at 4707 Central Avenue. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. The attached Resolution will go to the City Council June 9, 2008. DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 200S-XX RESOLUTION API'ROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PARKING RAMP FOR GRAND CENTRAL COMMONS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, a proposal (Case #2008-0603) has becn submitted by Nclson Building and Development to thc City Council requesting a conditional use permit Ii'om the City of Columbia Heights at the following site: ADDRESS: 4707 Central Avenue. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On file at City Hall. THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING PERMIT: A Conditional Use Permit per Code Section 9.112 (0)(2), to allow the construction of parking ramp at 4707 Central Avenue. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing as required by the city Zoning Code on June 3, 2008; WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendations of the Planning Commission regarding the effect of the proposed conditional use permit upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community and its Comprchensive Plan, as well as any concerns related to compatibility of uses, traffic, property values, light, air, danger of tire, and risk to public safety in the slJl'rounding areas; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of thc City of Columbia Heights after reviewing the proposal, that the City Council accepts and adopts the following tindings of the Planning Commission: 1. The use is one of the conditional uses listed for the zoning district in which thc property is located, or is a substantially similar use as determined by the Zoning Administrator. 2. The use is in harmony with the general plJl'pose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The use will not impose hazards or distributing influences on neighboring properties. 5. The use will not substantially diminish the use of property in the immediate vicinity. 5. The use will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner that is compatible with the appearance of the existing or intended character of the surrounding arca. 6. The use and propeliy upon which the usc is located are adequately served by esscntial public facilities and serVices. 7. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to minimize tramc congestion on the public streets and to provide for appropriate on-site circulation of traffic. 8. The use will not cause a negative cumulative effect, when considered in conjunction with the cumulativc effect of other lIses in the immediate vicinity. 9. The use complies with all other applicable regulations for the district in which it is located. FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the attached conditions, maps, and other information shall become part of this permit and approval; and in granting this permit the city and the applicant agree that this permit shall become null and void if the project has not been completed within one (1) calendar Veal' after the approval date, subject to pctition for renewal of the perm it. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISION MINUTES PAGE 19 JUNE 3, 2008 CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: 2008-0604 City of Columbia Heights 825 - 41st Avenuc Rezone PlII'cel from R-4 to 1'0 INTRODUCTION In early 2008, the City Council explored many options in locating the new public safety building. After extensive research and site analyses, the former NEI School site, located at 825 - 41 sl Avenue was determined to be the best location. On February 6, 2008, the Planning Commission reviewed a proposal that created the Public and Open Space "PO" District throughout the City. The Council approved this zoning classification and all publicly owned parcels were converted to this classification. Parcels included in the PO District were: City Hall, Murzyn Hall, Public Works, the City Library, and all public parks. The NEI site was not considered for the PO zoning classification because it had not yet been determined that the NEI site would be the location for the public safety building. At this time, the City of Columbia Heights requests to rezone the parcel at 825 - 41st Avenue from R-4, Multiple Family Residential to PO, Public and Open Space, in order to be consistent with placing all publicly owned parcels in the PO zoning classification. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan currently guides the property at 825 - 41 st Avenue for Transit Oriented Development. The Comprehensive Plan guidance for this site will be amended during the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update to ref1ect Park Use guidance. ZONING ORDINANCE When the zoning amendment is complete, the parcel at 825 - 41st Avenue will be PO, Public and Open Space. The newly created Public and Open Space District ordinance allows publicly owned and operated facilities as a permitted use. FINDINGS OF FACT Section 9.1 04 (F) of the Columbia Heights zoning code requires that the City Council make each of the following four findings before approving a zoning amendment: 1. The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan currently guides the property at 825 - 41"' Avenue for Transit Oriented Development. The Comprehensive Plan guidance for this site will be amended during the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update to reflect Park Use guidance. 2. The amendment is in the public interest and is not solely for the benefit of a single property owner. The City of Columbia Heights owns all the parcels that would be afJected by this proposed zoning amendment. The rezoning of this parcel is consistent with the zoning classification for all other publicly o;vned parcels. Being that the parcel will be used to serve the public, it is in the public's interest to rezone the property. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTE PAGE 20 JUNE 3, 2008 3. Where the amendment is to change the zoning classification ofa particular property, the existing use of the property and the zoning classification of property within the general area of the property in question are compatible with the proposed zoning classification. The existing use 4 the property is vacant land, and has been so for the past several years. The proposed use of the land, as well as the existing zoning classification of the property within the general area, are consistent and compatihle with the Public and Open Space zoning classification. 4. Where the amendment is to change the zoning classification of a particular property, there has been a change in the charactcr or trend of development in the general area of the property in question, which has taken place since such property was placed in the current zoning classification. The purpose of the zoning amendment is to keep the consistency of including all the public uses throughout the City in one zoning classification. Doing so would make the uses, setbacks and pelformance standards for the parks and other public uses consistent with one another. Redeveloping a vacant parcel with a public service use is in line with the general trend of redevelopment in the area. Staff recommends approval to proceed with the first reading of the Ordinance to re-zone this parcel. Ouestions from members: Schmitt asked why this property wasn't re-zoned in February along with the rest of the Public Service buildings. Sargent explained that at the time, it hadn't been decided what the site would be used for. Now that the Council has decided to locate the Public Safety building at this site, this is the first step that needs to take place before a site plan can be approved. Schmitt asked if it could be re-zoned afler the building is constructed and Sargent told her no. It would affect the design and placement of the building because the setbacks are different. Public Hearing Opened. Mary Pribula from 4141 Quincy St does not want the Public Safety building constructed at that site. She realizes that most of her issues need to be addressed at the Site Plan approval. She is concerned the noise from the emergency vehicles will have a detrimental affect on the neighborhood and bring down property values. The owners in the area were previously told this site would be used for a townhouse development and now they are changing the plan. She asked if a contractor had been selected yet. Sargent explained that the City Council is being aggressive in getting this project underway, but that a contractor had not been selected yet. He believes the Site Plan will be brought to the Planning & Zoning Commission at the July or August meeting. He said that staff has had several meetings with the Architect and the City Council regarding noise, lighting, and landscape issues. They are awarc they must have as little impact on the neighboring properties as possible. Deb Miller from 4130 Quincy St does not want the Public Safety building constructed at that site. She, too, thought it would eventually be used for new residential properties. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 21 JUNE 3, 2008 Joe Grote who resides at 4627 Chatham Rd, but owns a duplex at 4144 Quincy St, and is a parishioner at Immaculate Conception Church, also thought it was not an appropriate placc to construct a Public Safety Building. He said emergency vehicles rushing out near a school and church with a lot of activity and people coming and going, was not a good plan. Sargent said staff has considered many options regarding use of sirens and response to emergencies. They have considered installing a flashing light system that would alert drivers and pedestrians to emergency activity. Peterson wanted to know if this is a preliminary plan to locate the Public Safety building at this site, or if it has been designated as the actual site. Sargent responded that the City Council has decided to construct the Public Safety building at this site, and are moving quickly as the Fire and Police Depts. are in dire need of additional space. Staff has been meeting with the Architect to help finalize the plans for the building. The Public will have the opportunity to voice their opinions at thc Public Hearing for the Site Plan Approval. Public Hearing Closed. Motion by Peterson, seconded by Thompson, that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the first reading of the ordinance rezoning the property at 825 - 41" Avenue fi'om R-4, Multiple Family Residential to PO, Public and Open Space in order to accommodate the construction of a new public safety building. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. This will go to the City Council June 9, 2008for the first reading. ORDINANCE XXXX CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA BEING AN ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE NO. 1428, PERTAINING TO THE REZONING OF A CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCA TED AT 825 - 41st A VENUE NE SECTION 1: WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights promotes the healthy and safety of its citizens by ensuring adequate public safety services; and WHEREAS, the rezoning of the subject parcel will enable the construction of a new public safety facility; and WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights recognizes that the PO, Public and Open Space zoning allows for public safety buildings as permitted uses; and WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights recent practice is to include publicly owned parcels in the PO, Public and Open Space District; and WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights has embraced redevelopment efforts as a means to revitalize the City's economic and social welfare vitality; and PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 22 JUNE 3,2008 WHEREAS, rezoning the subject parcel from R-4, Multiple Family Residential to PO, Public and Open Space provides opportunity for redevelopment of a vacant property; and WHEREAS, the rezoning is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan, as amended by Resolution 2007-133, and is in the public interest and not solely for the benefit of a single property owner; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission has reviewed and recommends approval of the proposed rezoning from R-4, Multiple Family Residential to PO, Public and Open Space. SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect li'om and after 30 days after its passage. CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: 2008-0605 Archetype Sign makers 4000 Central Avenue Site Plan Approval for signage INTRODUCTION At this time, Archetype Signmakers is requesting a site plan approval for new signage for the bnilding located at 4000 Central Avenue. Fairview Pharmacy has recently moved into the Columbia Park Medical Clinic building and would like a sign to promote their business. The proposed new signage requires a site plan approval because the property is located within the Design Overlay Central Business District. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for Commercial related activities. Properties in this area must also conform to the Design Gnidelines for commercial-related activity. The proposed sign plan meets all the requircments of the Design Guidelines, and for this reason is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ZONING ORDINANCE The property is located in thc CBD, Ccntral Business District, as are all the surrounding properties. The subject parcel is also located within the Design Overlay Central Business District, and is subject the regulations for such properties. The City Code at Section 9.106 (1')(12) states that total signage in the CBD District shall not excecd two square feet for each front foot of tenant space provided in the multi-tcnant building. The tenant space occupied by Fairview Pharmacy is 93 feet in width. For this reason, the total amount of signage allowed for the tenant is capped at 100 square feet. The applicant's sign plan indicates one wall sign totaling 34.4 square feet in area, meeting the minimum sign code regulations. DESIGN GUIDELINES SIGNAGE. The Design Guidelines prohibit internally lit box signs. The proposed wall sign will not be illuminated, and meets all other aspects of the Design Guidelines. FINDINGS OF FACT Site Plan Approval Section 9.104 (M) requires that thc Planning and Zoning Commission shall make each of the following findings before approving a site plan: I. The site plan conforms to all applicable requirements of this article The proposed site plan meets all the Design Guidelines standardlfor wall signs in relation to the color of the sign and the types of materials used to construct it. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 23 JUNE 3, 2008 2. The site plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the city's comprehensive plan. The proposed sign plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as it is consistent with the Design Overlay Central Business District. 3. The site plan is consistent with any applicable area plan. There is no applicable area plan for this area. 4. The site plan minimizes any adverse impacts on property in the immediate vicinity and the public right-of- way. The proposed signage meets all the minimum square footage requirements and all Design Guideline requirements. For this reason, the property in the immediate vicinity should not be adversely impacted. The signage plan conforms to all standards outlined in the Design Guidelines, therefore, staff recommends approval of the site plan for the Fairview Pharmacy located at 4000 Central A venue. Ouestions from members: Schmitt questioned if the applicant is aware oflighting allowances for signage. Sargent said they are aware of what they can and can't have for signage. Public Hearing Opened. No one was present for this issue. Public Hearing Closed. Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Peterson, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2008-1'Z12, there being ample copies available to the public. All ayes. MOTlON PASSED. Motion by Firoendino, seconded by Peterrson, to adopt Resolution No. 2008-PZ12, being a resolution approving a site plan for the Fairview Pharmacy located at 4000 Central Avenue. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-PZ12 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A SITE PLAN FOR SIGNAGE AT 4000 CENTRAL AVENUE WITHIN THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, a proposal (Case #2008-0605) has been submitted by Archetype Signmakers to the Planning and Zoning Commission requesting a site plan approval from the City of Columbia Heights at the following site: ADDRESS: 4000 Central Avenue LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On filc at City Hall. THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING PERMIT: for the Fairview Pharmacy located at 4000 Central Avenue. Site Plan approval for slgnage PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 24 JUNE 3, 2008 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing as required by thc city Zoning Code on June 3, 2008; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has considered the advice and recommendations ofthe City staff regarding the effect of the proposed site plan upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community and its Comprehensive Plan, as well as any concerns related to compatibility of uses, traffic, property values, light, air, danger of fire, and risk to public safety in the surrounding areas; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Columbia Heights after reviewing the proposal, that the Planning and Zoning Commission accepts and adopts the following findings: 1. The site plan conforms to all applicable requirements of this article, except signage. 2. The site plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the city's comprehensive plan. 3. The site plan is consistent with any applicable area plan. 4. The site plan minimizes any adverse impacts on property in the immediate vicinity and the public right-of- way. FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the attached conditions, maps, and other information shall become part of this permit and approval; and in granting this permit the city and the applicant agree that this permit shall become null and void if the project has not been completed within aile (J) calelldar veal' after the approval date, subject to petition for renewal ofthe permit. Passed this 3'" day of June 2008, Offered by: Seconded by: RollCall: Ayes: Nays: CHAIR Marlaine Szurek Attest: SECRETARY, Shelley Hanson Approval is contingent upon execution and return of this document to the City Planning Oft1ce. I have read and agree to thc conditions of this resolution as outlined above. Archetype Signmakers Representative Date PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 25 JUNE 3, 2008 CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: 2008-0606 City of Columbia Heights City Wide Zoning Amendment fOI' Establishment of Shordand Overlay District INTRODUCTION The purpose of creating a Shoreland Overlay District is to promote the health, safcty and general welfare of the citizens of Columbia Hcights. The unregulated use of shorelands in the city affects the public health, safety and general welfare not only by contributing to pollution of public waters, but also by impairing the local tax basc. Therefore, it is in the best interests of the City to provide an ordinance geared towards the wise use and development of shorelands of public waters. One of the main goals of the City's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program is to prevent, reduce and limit site erosion with differcnt controlling methods. The establishment of a Shoreland Overlay District would greatly effect the control that the City would have over development in close proximity to Columbia Heights' impaired waterways, to ensure that safe construction methods are utilized in order to protect these water bodies. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN One of the overarching goals of the Comprehensive Plan is to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Columbia Heights. Establishing the Shoreland Overlay District helps accomplish this by protecting the City's waterways. ZONING ORDINANCE The Shoreland District boundaries shall include all properties located within 1,000 feet of a designated waterway. The Shoreland Overlay District will regulate such properties if rainwater from those properties drains directly to the waterway in question. The following is a list of the designated waterways in the City of Columbia Heights: Silver Lake Highland Lake Clover Pond Sullivan Lake Hart Lake LaBelle Pond FINDINGS OF FACT Section 9.104 (F) of the Columbia Heights zoning code requires that the City Council make each of the following four findings before approving a zoning amendment: 1. The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. One of the overarching goals of the Comprehensive Plan is to promote the health, sqrety and general we!fclre of the citizens of Columbia Heights. Establishing the Shoreland Overlay District helps accomplish this by protecting the City's waterways. 2. The amendment is in the public interest and is not solely for the benefit of a single property owner. The creation of the Shoreland Overlay District is not only an NPDES - Phase II requirement, it will ensure the health, safety and general welfare of the public by promoting positive construction practices in close proximity to the impaired waterways of Columbia Heights. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 26 JUNE 3, 2008 3. Where the amendment is to change the zoning classification of a particular property, the existing use of the property and the zoning classifieation of property within the general area of the property in question are compatible with the proposed zoning classification. The zoning classification of a particular property is not changed with the proposed establishment of the Shore land Overlay District. The underlying zoning will still be intact once the Shore land District is established. 4. Where the amendment is to ehange the zoning classification of a particular property, there has been a change in the character or trend of development in the general area of the property in question, which has taken place since such property was placed in the current zoning classification. The zoning classification ofa particular property is not changed with the proposed establishment of the Shore land Overlay District, The underlying zoning will still be intact once the Shoreland District is established. Sargent reviewed the Ordinance briefly to point out the definitions of Shoreland properties, what constitutes impervious surfaces, and the Impact Zone. Staff recommends approving the first reading ofthe Ordinance to create the Shoreland Overlay District. Ouestion from Members: This Ordinance is required by the State and would affect new construction, additions, changes to the grade, the ability of bringing in fill, or eonstruction of accessory buildings. Major excavations would now require a conditional use permit. Properties in this overlay district would have all hard surfaces counting toward lot coverage including paved areas, gravel areas, decks, patios, and structures. Kevin Hansen told members that this should have been dealt with sooner, and that we held a space for it in our Zoning Ordinance, but never formally adopted it as part of the Ordinance. This will enable the City to deal with pollution to our water systems as changes are made that affect these areas. This Ordinance will complement the requirements from Rice Creek Watershed also. Kevin stated he is obligated to get this Ordinance and an Erosion Control Ordinance in place by June 30, 2008. When asked how this would have affected the Park renovations underway, he stated that it would have required the City to obtain a Conditional Use Permit first to do the improvements. But the overall affect to the water systems would be the same. These renovations include steps to improve the drainage around the lake areas. Public Hearing Opened. No one was present. Public Hearing Closed. Motion by Peterson, seconded by Fiorendino,that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the creation of the Shoreland Overlay District, which create a 1,000 - foot buffer around the impaired waterways in the City of Columbia Heights in order to impose construction standards suitable for protecting these lakes and ponds. All ayes. MOTION PASSED, The following Ordinance will go to the City Council June 9, 2008. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 27 JUNE 3, 2008 ORDINANCE NO. XXXX BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1490, CITY CODE OF 2005 RELATING TO THE PUBLIC AND OPEN SPACE ZONING DISTRICT IN TI-IE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS The City of Columbia Heights does ordain: Chapter 9, Article I of the Columbia Heights City Code, is proposed to include the following additions. ~9.113 OVERLAY DISTRICTS. (C) Shore/and Management Overlay District. (1) PUllJose. a. The unregulated use of shorelands in the city affects the puhlie health, safety and geueral welfare not only by contributing to pollution of public waters, but also by impairing the local tax base. Therefore, it is in the best interests of the public health, safety aud welfare to provide for the wise use and development of shorelands of public waters. b. Statutory anthorization. These shoreland regulations arc adopted pursuant to the anthorization and policies contained in Minn. Stat. Ch. 103F, Minnesota Regulations, Parts 6120.2500 through 6120.3900, and the planning and zoning enabling legislation in Minn. Stat. Ch. 462. c. Jurisdiction. The provisions of this Code shall apply to shorelands of the public water bodies as classified in Section 9.113 (C)(4)(b) of this Code. A body of water created by a private user where there was no previous shoreland may, at the discretion of the govel'lling body, be exempt from this Code. d. Compliance. The use of any shoreland of public waters; the size and shape of lots; the use, size, type and location of structures on lots; the grading and filling of any shoreland area; and the cntting of shoreland vegetation shall be in fnll compliance with the terms of this Code and other applicable regnlations. e. District application. The shoreland ove"'ay district shall be superimposed (overlaid) upon all the zoning districts as identified in Chapter 9 of this Code as existing or amended by the text and map of this Code. The regulations and requirements imposed by the shoreland overlay district shall be in addition to those established by the base zoning district, which jointly apply. Under joint application of the districts, the more restrictive requirements shall apply. f. Exemptions. 1.A structnre or nse which was lawful before adoption of this article, bnt which is not in conformity with the provisions of the Shoreland Ove"'ay District, may be continued snbjeet to Section 9.105 of this Code. 2.A property located within the Shoreland Ove"'ay District that does not drain into a body of water listed in Section 9.113 (C)(4)(b). (2) District Boul/daries. The boundaries of the shoreland overlay district within the city consist of the first tier of riparian lots abutting a protected lake or tributary identified in Section 9.113 (C)(4)(b) of this Code. The specific boundaries of the Shoreland Ove"'ay District are shown on the official Columbia Heights Shoreland Overlay District Map in the Columbia Heights Zoning Code. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 28 JUNE 3, 2008 (3) Definitions. Fo.. the pu..pose of this Chapte.., ce..tain te..ms and wo..ds a..e he..eby defined: Wo..ds use in the p..esent tense shall include the futu..e; wo..ds in thc singula.. include the plural, and the plnral the singula..; the wo..d "bnilding" shall inclnde the wo..d "st..nctnl'e"; and the word "lot" shall include the word "plot"; and the word "shall" is mandato..y and not dil'ecto..y; and the wo..d "inclnding" shall mean "including, but not Iimitcd to". For the purpose of this district, thc following definitions shall apply: (a) Accessory Building. A subordinate building 0" use, which is located on the same, lot as the principal building 01' use and is necessary 01' incidental to the conduct of the principal building or use. (b) Commission. The City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission. c) Commissioner. The Commissione.. of the Department of Natural Reson..ces of the State of Minnesota. (d) Council. The Columbia Heights City Council. (e) Development. The maldng of any material change in the use 01' appcarance of any stl'uctu..e of land including ..econst..uction; alteration of thc size of any st....ctul'e; alte..ation of the land; alte..ation of a sho..e 0" bank of a rivet", stream, lake 0" pond; a commencement of d..iIling (exccpt to obtain soil samples); mining 0" excavation; demolition of a st..uctu..e; clea..ing of land as an adjunct to const..nction; deposit of ..efusc, solid 0" liquid waste, 0" fill on a pa..cel ofland; the dividing of land into two (2) o..mo..c pa..cels. (f) Impervious Surface. A const..ucted ha..d snrface that eithe.. p..events 0" ..eta..ds the ent..y of wate.. into the soil, and canses wate.. to ..un off the su..face in g..eate.. quantities and at an inc..ease ..ate of flow than existed p..io.. to developmcnt. Examples include ..ooftops, sidewall<s, patios, driveways, pa..ldng lots, sto..age a..eas, and conc..ete, asphalt 0" gmvel ..oads. (g) Lot Coverage. The amount of impe..vious su..face on a lot. (h) OrdinOlY High Water Level. Minnesota State Statute 103G.005, subdivision 14 defines o..dina..y high wate.. level as the bounda..y of wate..basins, wate..cou..ses, public wate..s, and public waters wctlands and: 1. The o..dina..y high wate.. level is an elevation delineating the highcst wate.. level that has been maintained fo.. a sufficient pe..iod of time to leave evidence upon the landscape, commonly the point whe..e the natu..al vegetation changes from p..edominately aquatic to p..edominately te....estrial; 2.Fo.. wate..cou..ses, the o..dina..y high wate.. level is the elevation of the top of the bank of the channel; and 3.Fo.. ..ese..voi..s and flowages, the o..dina..y high wate.. level is the ope..ating elevation of the no..mal summe.. pool. (i) Shorelaml. Sho..eland means land located within the following distances f..om the o..dina..y high wate.. elcvation of public wate..s: 1. land within 1,000 feet f..om the no..mal high wate..ma..k of a lake, pond, 0" flowage; and Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 29 June 3, 2008 2. Land within 300 feet if a river or stream or the landward side of a floodplain delineated by ordinance on the river or stream, whichever is greater. (j) Shore Impact ZOlle. The area between the ordinary high water mark and fifty (50) feet inland form the ordinary high water mark (k) Structure. Anything constructed or erected which requires location on or undCl"ground or attachment to something having location on or underground. This includes an edifice or building of any Idnd, or any piece of work artificially built up or composcd of parts joined together in some definite manner, whether of a temporary or permanent chamcter. (4) Shorelalld Classificatioll System. (a) Public waters. The public waters of Columbia Heights have been classified below consistent with the criteria found in Minnesota Regulations, Part 6120.3300, and the DNR Protected Waters Inventory Map for Anoka County, Minnesota. (b) Official Map. on the Columbia Heights Map. The shore land permit district for the waterbodies listed below shall be shown Recreational Development Lakes Protected Waters InventOlY J.D. 1/ Silver Lake 83P General Development Lake Protected Waters JnventOlY J.D. 1/ Sullivan Lake Highland Lake Hart Lake Clover Pond LaBelle Pond 80P 79P 81P 686W 687P (5) Admillistratioll. (a) Building Permit Required. A permit is required for the construction of buildings or building additions (and including such related activities as construction of dccl<s and signs), and those gmding and filling activities not excmpted by this Code that occur within thc shoreland district. Application for a building permit shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator or any staff persons designated by the City Manager on an official application form of the City, accompanied by a fee as set forth in Chapter 6, Article n of the City Code. Where required by law, the building permit application shall bc forwarded to the applicable watershed district for review and comment. The application shall include the necessary information so that the Zoning Administrator can determine the site's suitability for the intended nse. (b) Variance. Variances may only be granted in accordance with Section 9.104 (G) of this Code. A variance may not circumvent the general purposes and intent of this Code. No variance may bc granted that would allow any usc that is prohibited in the undcrlying zoning district in which the subject property is located. (c) Conditional Use Permit. Conditional Use Pcrmits may only be granted in accordance with Section 9.014 (II) of this Code. Conditional Use Permits arc required to ensure specific development standards within the Shore land Overlay Districts. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 30 JUNE 3, 2008 (d) Notifications to the Department of Natural Resources. I. Public Hearil/gs. Copies of all notices of any public hearings to consider variances, amendments, conditional nses, 01' special uses under local shoreland management controls mnst be sent to the commissioner 01' the commissioner's designated representative and postmarked at least ten days prior to the hearings. Notices of hearings to consider proposed snbdivisions/plats must include copies of the subdivision/plat. 2.Approval. A copy of approved amendments and subdivisions/plats, and final decisions granting variances and conditional nse permits under local shoreland management controls must be sent by the City to the commissioner 01' the commissioner's designated representative and postmarked within ten days of the final action. (6) Lal/d Use District Descriptiol/s. (a) Allowed land uses within the shoreland district shall be determined by the underlying zoning district, as listed within Chapter 9 of the City Code. (7) Lot Area al/d Widtll Stal/dards. (a) Lot area and width standards for residcntial development shall bc regulated pel' the underlying zoning district in Chapter 9 of the City Code. (8) Placemel/t, Desigl/, al/d Height of Structures. (a) Placement of structures on lots. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacl<s. Where structnres exist on the adjoining lots on both sides of a proposed building site, structure setbacl<s may be altered without a variance to conform to the adjoining setbacl<s from the ordinary high water level, provided the proposed building site in not located in a shore impact zone. Strnctures shall be located as follows: 1. Required Setbacks. All required real' yard, side yard and front yard setbacks shall be met pel' the underlying zoning district. 2. Ordil/llIY High Water Level Setback. Strncture setbacl<s (in feet) from the ordinary high water level are: Classes of Public Waters General Development Lake Reercational Dcvelopment Lal{e Structure Setbacl<s 50 feet 75 feet 3. Height of Structures. Maximum allowable height for all strnetures shall be regulated pel' underlying zoning districts in Chapter 9 ofthe City Code. (b) Shoreland alterations. Alterations of vegetation and topography will be regulated to prevent erosion into public waters, fix nutrients, preserve shoreland aesthetics, prescrve historic valucs, prevent bank slumping, and protect fish and wildlife habitat. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 31 JUNE 3, 2008 1. Vegetation alteration. Removal 01' alteration of vegetation is allowcd subjcct to the following standards: a. Intensive vegetation clearing within the shore impact zones and on steep slopes is not allowcd. b. In shore impact zones and on stcep slopes, limited clearing of trees and shrubs and cutting, pruning, and trimming of trees is allowcd to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling site and to accommodate the placement of stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, beach and watercraft access areas, and permitted water- oriented accessory structures or facilities provided that: (i)The scrcening of structnres, vchicles, 01' othcr facilitics as viewcd from thc water, assuming snmmer, Icaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduccd. (ii)The above provisions are not applicablc to the rcmoval of trces, limbs, 01' branchcs that are dcad, diseascd, 01' posc safcty hazards and thc removal of plants deemed noxious under thc Minnesota Noxious Wccd Law. 2. Building permit. Grading and filling and excavations necessary for the constl'Uction of structures and driveways under validly issued building permits for these facilities do not rcquire thc issuance of a separatc shoreland grading and filling permit. 3. COl/ditional Use Permit. Notwithstanding (2) above, a Conditional Use Permit will bc required for those propcrties locatcd in the Shoreland Ovcrlay District for: a. Placement, removal 01' gl'llding of more than 250 cubic yards of earthcn matcrial on developed property zoncd R-l, R-2A OJ' R-2B. b.Placement, removal 01' grading of more than 500 cubic yards of earthcn matcrial on undevelopcd property zoned R-l, R-2A 01' R-2B. c.Placement, rcmoval 01' grading of morc than 750 cubic yards of earthcn material on property zoncd R-3, R-4 01' LB. (I.Placemcnt, removal 01' gl'llding of more than 1,000 cubic yards of carthen material on property zoncd GB, CBD, 1-1, 1-2, 01' MXD. 4. Land altemtion pel'll/it. Notwithstanding (2) above, a land altel'lltion pcrmit will be reqnircd for: a. The movemcnt of more than ten cubic yards of material on stcep slopcs 01' within shore impact zones. b. The movemcnt of more than 50 cnbic yards of material outsidc of stecp slopcs and shol'e impact zones. 5. Conditions. Thc following considerations and conditions must be adhered to during the issuance of building permits, land alteration permits, varianccs, conditional use permits, and subdivision approvals: PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 32 JUNE 3, 2008 a. Grading or filling in any type 2-8 wetland must be evaluated to determine how extensively the proposed activity would affect the following functional qualities of the wetland (This evaluation shall also include a determination of whether the wetland alteration being proposed requires permits, reviews, or approvals by other local, state, or federal agencies such as a watershed district, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, or the United States Army Corps of Engineers): (i) Sediment and pollutant trapping and retention. (ii) Storage of surface nmoffto prevent or reduce flood damage. (Hi) Fish and wildlife habitat. (iv) Recreational use. (v) Shoreline or bank stabilization. (vi) Noteworthiness, including special qualities such as historic significance, critical habitat for endangered plants and animals, or others. b. Alterations must be designed and conducted in a manner that ensures only the smallest amount of bare ground is exposed for the shortest time possible. e. Mulches or similar materials must be used, where necessary, for temporary bare soil coverage, and a permanent vegetation cover must be established as soon as possible. d. Methods to minimize soil erosion and to trap sediments before they reach any surface water feature must be used. e. Altered areas must be stabilized to acceptable erosion control standards consistent with the field office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation districts and thc United States Soil Conservation Service. f. Fill or excavated material must not be placed in a manner that creates an unstable slope. g. Plans to place fill or excavated material on steep slopes must be reviewed by qualified professionals for continued slope stability and must create finished slopes ofless than 3:1 slope. h. Any alterations below the ordinary high water level of public waters must first be authorized by the commissioner under Minn. Stat. ~ 103G.245. i. Alterations of topography must only be allowed if they arc accessory to permitted or conditional uses and do not adversely affect adjacent or nearby properties. j. Placement of natural rock rip rap, including associated grading of the shoreline and placement of a filter blanket, is permitted if the finished slope does not exceed three (3) feet horizontal to one (1) foot vertical, the landward extent of the rip rap is within ten (10) feet of the ordinary high water level, and the height of the rip rap above the ordinary high water level docs not exceed three (3) feet. Must be done in accordance with other State and Federal regulations. A permit from the DNR is required. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 33 JUNE 3, 2008 5. Connections to public wllters. Excavations whCl"e the intended pnrpose is connection to a pnblic water, snch as boat slips, canals, lagoons, and harbors, must be controlled by local shoreland controls. Permission for excavations my be given only after written anthorization has been obtained from the Minncsota Departmcnt of Natural Resources approving the proposed connection to pnblic waters. (c) Stormwater management. The following general and specific standards shall apply: 1. Generlll stllndllrds. a. When possible, existing natural drainage-ways, wetlands, and vcgetated soil surfaces must be used to convey, storc, IiIter, and retain stormwater I'\Inoff before discharge to public watcrs. b. Development must be planned and conducted in a manner that will minimize the extent of distnrbed areas, runoff velocities, erosion potential, and reduce and delay I'\Inoff velocities, crosion potential, and reduce and delay runoff volumes. Disturbcd areas must be stabilized and protected as soon as possible and facilities 01' methods used to retain sediment on the site. c. When development dcnsity, topographic features, and soil and vegetation conditions are not sufficient to adequately handle stormwater I'unoff using natural features and vegetation, various types of constl'\lcted facilities such as diversions, settling basins, slumming devices, dikes, watcrways, and ponds may be used. Preference must be given to designs using surface drainage, vegetation, and inliltration rather than buried pipcs and manmade matCl'ials and facilities. 2. Specific stllndllrds. a. Impervious surfacc lot coverage shall not exceed thirty-five percent (35%) of the lot area, exccpt as a variance, which shall comply with the following standards: (i) All stl'llcturcs, additions or expansions shall meet sctback and other requirements of this Code. (ii) The lot shall be scrved with municipal sewer and water. (iii) The lot shall provide for the collection and treatment of stonnwater in compliance with Chapter 9 of the City Code if determined that the site improvemcnts will result in incrcased runoff directly entering a public water. All development plans shall require review and approval by the City Engineer and the underlying watershed district. (iv) Measures will bc taken for thc treatment of stormwater runoff and/or prevention of stormwater from directly entering a public water. The measures may include, but not limited to the following: A. Appurtenances as sedimentation basins, debris basins, desilting basins, 01' silt traps. B. Installation of debris guards and microsilt basins on store sewer inlets. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 34 JUNE 3,2008 C. Use where practical, oil sldmming devices 01' snmp catch hasins. D. Direct drainage away from the lake and into pervions, grassed yards through site grading, use of gutters and down spouts. E. Construction of sidewall{s of partially pervious raised materials such as decking, which has natural earth 01' other pervious material beneath 01' between the planldng. F. Use grading and construction techniques that encourage rapid infiltration, e.g., sand and gravel under impervious materials with adjacent infiltration swales graded to lead into them. G. Install berms, water bars, 01' terl'llces, which temporarily detain water before dispersing it into the pervious area. a) When constructed facilities are used for stormwater management, documentation must be provided by a qualified individual that the constl'llcted facilities are designed and installed consistent with the field office tcchnical guide for the local soil and water conservation districts. b) Newly constructed stormwater outfall to public waters must provide for filtering 01' settling 01' suspended solids and sldmming 01' surface debris before discharge. 3. Nonconfo/'mities. All legally established nonconformities as of the date of this section may continue, but they will be managed according to Section 9.105 of this Code with the following exceptions: A.. Decl{s are allowcd as a conforming use provided all of the following criteria and standards are met: (i) The principal structure existed on the date the stl'llcture setbacks were established. (ii) No other reasonable location for the deck exists. (Hi) The deck encroachment toward the ordinary high water level maintains a minimnm setback in accordance with applicable code sections and a maximum encroachment often (10) feet into the Shore Impact Zone. (9) Public Nuisance: Penalty (a) Any person who violates any provisions of this district or fails to comply with any of its terms 01' requirements shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than $500 01' imprisoned for not more than ninety (90) days, or both, and in addition shall pay all costs of prosecution and expenses involved in the case. Each day the violation continues shall be considered a separate offence. (b) Every obstrnction 01' use placed or maintained in the Shoreland Overlay District in violation of this Chapter is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and creation thereof may be enjoined and the maintenance thereof abated by appointed judicial action. (c) Nothing herein contained shall prevent the City from taldng such other lawful action as is necessary to prevent, remedy or remove any violation. Section 2: This o/'dinance shall be in fii/I force and effect fi'om and qfter 30 days after its passage. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 35 JUNE 3,2008 NEW BUSINESS Sargent reminded members of the Joint meeting with the City Council to review the goals set forth in the update ofthe Comprehensive Plan. The meeting was adjoul'1led at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, \.~,,::] ~(LQJLQ-a cbk\c'uL) dV\ Shelley Hanson Secretary