HomeMy WebLinkAboutJan 3, 2017 minMINUTES OF
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JANUARY 4, 2017
7:00 PM
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Chair Szurek.
Commission Members present- Fiorendino, Hoium, and
Szurek
Commission Member absent- Schill
It was noted that Buesgens resigned from the Commission since she was elected to the City Council. The City Council will need to appoint
a new member to fill the vacancy.
Also present were Elizabeth Holmbeck (Planner), and Shelley Hanson (Secretary) along with Council Liaison, John Murzyn.
Motion by Fiorendino, seconded
by Hoium, to approve the minutes from the meeting of December 6, 2016. All ayes. MOTION PASSED.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
CASE NUMBER: 2017-0101
APPLICANT: Aisling Fitness LLC
LOCATION: Vacant
property on 51st Court
REQUEST: Site Plan Approval
Holmbeck told members that on behalf of Planet Fitness, Aisling Fitness, LLC has applied for Site Plan Approval per Code Section
9.104 (N), for the vacant site located behind La Casita and White Castle. The site is currently comprised of three vacant lots, which do not have assigned addresses: (Property Identification
Numbers (PIN): 25-30-24-23-0018, 25-30-24-23-0017, and 25-30-24-22-0066). The applicant is proposing to construct a fitness facility on the 2.1 acre site.
The proposed site plan accommodates
a 20,094 square foot one story fitness facility building. The applicant is proposing to construct the building on the south end of the site and have parking on the north end of the site.
The proposal includes 146 parking stalls, with landscaped islands and a number of landscaping improvements throughout the site. Overall the proposal meets the City’s Zoning Code and
Design Guideline Standards. A narrative provided by the applicant, was given to members to review. Holmbeck explained that since the submittal, Aisling Fitness LLC has also purchased
the parcel to the north of this one that is located in the City of Fridley. This will provide additional parking and another access point to the property. This will increase the parking
approximately 48 spaces for a total of 194. Aisling is working with the City of Fridley to get their approval on the coordinated plan and will submit separate storm water plans to them
for that additional piece.
ZONING ORDINANCE
The site is currently comprised of three properties which are located in the General Business Commercial Zoning District. The properties
to the north are located in the City of Fridley. The properties to the east are located in the One and Two Family, and Built as Duplexes Residential Zoning District. The properties to
the south and west are located in the General Business Commercial Zoning District.
P & Z Minutes
Page 2
January 4, 2017
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for commercial land use. Commercial development on the longstanding vacant commercial
property is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
DESIGN GUIDELINES
The subject property is located within the Design Guideline Overlay District, and is governed by the “Highway
District” standards within the Design Guidelines. The intent of the Design Guidelines is to make the City more aesthetically appealing, by requiring a set of minimum standards for new
construction along Central Avenue and 40th Avenue. The minimum standards were created by a task force of City Officials, business owners and residents, and adopted into the City Code
by the City Council.
In general, the proposed building meets the spirit of the Design Guidelines for the Highway District. Signage will be addressed when the applicant or tenant applies
for a Sign Permit. Signage must be consistent with Design Guidelines and with City Code. The following components are requirements of the Design Guidelines Highway District and how
the applicant has attempted to meet the guidelines:
Buildings may be set back a maximum of 85 feet from the sidewalk, in order to allow for two rows of parking and drive aisles plus
landscaped frontage.
Due to the fact that the site is narrow the proposed building is to be situated on the south end of the property, with parking to the north. There isn’t currently
a sidewalk located on 51st Court NE. The City will be working with adjacent businesses to connect current sidewalks to the businesses along 51st Court NE. Planet Fitness is required
to ensure pedestrian connections are provided from the buildings rear fire exit and main front entrance sidewalk to the street where future connections will be in place. There will be
a landscaped frontage on 51st Court NE.
The primary facade(s) of buildings of 40 feet or more in width should be articulated into smaller increments through the techniques such as
using of different textures or contrasting, but compatible, materials; dividing storefronts with separate display windows and entrances or incorporating arcades, awnings, window bays,
balconies or similar ornamental features.
The proposed primary façade of the building will be articulated into smaller increments with different vertical and horizontal panels, and
windows.
Building height shall be a minimum of 22 feet.
The proposed building will be 24’ tall.
Where commercial or office uses are found on the ground floor, at least 20 percent
of the ground floor facade fronting Central Avenue and 15 percent of any two side or rear facades shall consist of window and door openings.
The proposed plan meets this guideline on
the front and west side of the building, however there are no windows on the rear side or east side of the building.
The building should have a well-defined front facade with primary
entrances facing the street.
P & Z Minutes
Page 3
Jan 4, 2017
The proposed building will have a well-defined front and side façade. Due to the narrowness of the lot, the primary entrance is facing north towards
the parking lot rather than 51st Court NE.
Building colors should accent, blend with, or complement surroundings.
The colors that are proposed are neutral, and the accenting bolder
colors coincide with the company’s recognizable brand. Overall, the colors presented should complement the surrounding area.
No more than two principal colors may be used on a façade
or individual storefront. Bright or primary colors should be used only as accents, occupying a maximum of 15 percent of building facades, except when used in a mural or other public
art.
The proposed building will consist of two primary colors: purple and yellow.
All buildings should be constructed of high-quality materials, including the following: Brick, Natural
Stone, Stucco Precast concrete units and concrete block, provided that surfaces are molded, serrated or treated with a textured material in order to give the wall surface a three dimensional
character. Jumbo brick may be used on up to 30 percent of any façade, provided that it is used only on the lower third of the building wall.
The proposal meets this guideline. The
building will be constructed with precast concrete wall panels with a painted finish to meet this guideline.
Architectural details such as ornamental cornices, arched windows and warm-toned
brick with bands of contrasting color are encouraged in new construction.
The proposal generally meets the intent of this guideline.
Parking areas adjacent to public streets or sidewalks
shall be screened with a combination of landscape material and decorative fencing or walls sufficient to screen parked cars on a year-round basis while providing adequate visibility
for pedestrians.
The proposed landscape plan includes a variety of trees and shrubs to be planted around the perimeter of the site, which should provide adequate screening.
SITE PLAN
Parking
The proposed plan identifies 146 parking stalls for the fitness facility. Staff believes this number is adequate. Planet Fitness has done previous studies to determine the
amount of parking that is necessary. The number of stalls proposed for this site is based on previous fitness facility usage and takes into account peak times of the year, such as after
the holidays.
P & Z Minutes
Page 4
Jan 4, 2017
Access
The site will be primarily served by two access points off Central Avenue onto 51st Court. The property itself will be served by one access
off 51st Court and 52nd Ave. NE. Since submitting the site plan documents, the applicant has purchased the property directly due north for additional parking and to provide an additional
access point to the site. This property is in the City of Fridley and the applicant is currently working with Fridley to obtain the necessary permits to do site work. With the applicant
acquiring this additional property, there will be an additional access point off of 52nd Ave. NE. to the property, which will provide more flexibility for exiting and entering the site,
alleviating some of the traffic on 51st Court and on Central Avenue.
Landscape
The proposed landscaping materials are shown on the attached Landscape Plan. The applicant is proposing
to plant trees and shrubs which will complement the layout of the development.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Section 9.104 (N) 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:
The Site Plan conforms to all applicable requirements of this article.
The applicable Zoning Code requirements
are achieved.
The Site Plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for commercial development. The proposed
Site Plan for the property is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
The Site Plan is consistent with any applicable area plan.
There is no area plan for this parcel.
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 the minimum setback requirements and general
development standards outlined in the Zoning Code. Therefore, the properties in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development should not be adversely impacted.
Questions from
members:
Szurek asked what type of barrier would be used between the Planet Fitness building and the residential area to the east. Holmbeck stated that they will be installing a white
vinyl fence with trees and shrubs on both sides. Szurek then stated she didn’t think the building met the Design Guidelines with the Purple and Yellow color scheme. Holmbeck said the
primary exterior is a neutral color and they are allowed to use two primary colors for accent, but understands these are not the typical colors used throughout the City where the guidelines
are in effect.
P & Z Minutes
Page 5
Jan 4, 2017
Hoium asked about the 2 sidewalks and where they will run. Holmbeck reviewed the plan detailing the route of the sidewalks. She then told members
that Public Works is working with White Castle to extend sidewalks from 51st Court out to Central Avenue which will provide pedestrian access since there are several bus stops in the
immediate area. She noted that stop signs will also be added to the LaCasita exit point and to the Planet Fitness exit point to minimize traffic problems.
Hoium asked if the 146 planned
parking spaces meet our requirements for this type of business. Holmbeck stated that our Code does not address the number of parking spaces needed for this type of use. She said this
plan was provided by Planet Fitness based on their other locations and what is needed at the peak times of the year, such as right after New Years, when people seem to use these facilities
more. She reminded members that there will be 194 spaces once the Fridley parcel is added. Hoium asked if all the storm water plans were reviewed and approved by Public Works. Holmbeck
told members that Public Works was satisfied with the plan and that very detailed information was provided regarding this issue.
Fiorendino asked if staff felt there is adequate parking.
Holmbeck stated they did. Fiorendino asked what she meant when she said that most of the Design Guidelines were met. Holmbeck explained she knew the colors used as accent (purple
and yellow) may be an issue for members, and that some of the architectural requirements regarding windows and minor detailing don’t exactly meet requirements. However, staff took into
account that some of these items weren’t appropriate for this building use. For example, eliminating windows along the back side of the building where the locker/shower rooms will be
located. Staff considered these small deviations.
Public Hearing Opened.
Larry Larson is the owner of a duplex to the east of this property. He wanted to know the distance from
the fence to the lot line. He was happy to hear there would be some screening between the business and the residences. Holmbeck told him there is approximately 19-20 ft from the building
to the lot line where the fence will be placed. Larson’s major concern is drainage since his lot is the lowest in the area. He was worried that all the storm water from the area would
flow to his lot especially after the Planet Fitness lot is paved. Holmbeck told him that the plans indicate that all the storm water from this site will be taken care of on site, it
cannot be diverted to his property. She encouraged him to communicate with Kevin Hansen in Public Works regarding this matter for a more in depth explanation.
Representatives present
from Aisling Fitness were Ed Farr and Don Anderson, Architects, and Dan Hill from Aisling Fitness. Farr spoke to several of the issues discussed. He said all the storm water will go
to an underground holding area and that it may actually help relieve some of the problems he has experienced in the past. He went on to tell members that the fencing along the east
property line will be 6 ft in height and will be staggered back and forth along the entire property line with shrubs on one side and trees on the other to provide an aesthetic barrier.
He said that will leave about 20 feet of green space between the building and the barrier. Farr said the color scheme used is their national branding colors and that they limited the
use of it as they were mindful of the City’s Design Guidelines and tried to come to a compromise from what they normally use.
Fiorendino asked what the hours of operation would be.
Farr said they are open 24 hours a day/7 days a week. Fiorendino asked about the lighting plan so as not to have a negative impact on the residential properties. Farr told members
that they will have poles in the parking lot that will have downcast lighting, but there will be no lighting on the back side of the building. He said the fencing will prevent any headlights
from vehicles shining into the residences behind the site.
P & Z Minutes
Page 6
Jan 4, 2017
Fiorendino asked Farr if there would be a large impact on their plan if Fridley does not approve their plans for the northern piece. He said it
would not.
Public Hearing Closed.
Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Hoium, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2017-PZ01, there being ample copies available to the public. All
ayes. MOTION PASSED.
Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Hoium, to adopt Resolution No. 2017-PZ01, being a resolution approving a Site Plan, for the proposed Planet Fitness subject to
the following conditions:
The building and site shall be meet all requirements found in the Fire Code and the Building Code.
Trash and/or recycling collection areas shall be enclosed
on at least three sides by an opaque screening wall or fence no less than six feet in height. The open side of the enclosure shall not face any public street or the front yard of any
adjacent property.
Mechanical equipment shall be placed and/or screened so as to minimize the visual impact on adjacent properties and from public streets and adjacent residential properties.
The applicant shall meet the requirements outlined in the attached report from the Public Works Director/City Engineer, dated December 21, 2016.
The applicant will be responsible for
installing two new stop signs to calm traffic exiting/entering the Planet Fitness property and the La Casita property.
The sidewalk currently shown wrapping around the south west side
of the building will be continued and connect with the front (north) sidewalk, which will empty onto 51st Court NE.
All City Storm Water Management requirements shall be achieved for
this property.
Site and elevation plans included in this submittal, dated December 5, 2016 shall become part of this approval.
All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements
shall be met at all times.
All ayes. MOTION PASSED.
RESOLUTION NO. 2017 – PZ01
A Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission approving a Site Plan for the construction of a
Fitness Center on the Three (3) vacant lots located at 51st Court NE within the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota.
Whereas, a proposal (Case #2017 - 0101) has been submitted by Aisling
Fitness, LLC, on behalf of Planet Fitness, to the Planning and Zoning Commission, requesting Site Plan Approval from the City of Columbia Heights at the following site:
ADDRESS: Three
(3) vacant lots located at 51st Court NE (Property Identification Numbers (PIN): 25-30-24-23-0018, 25-30-24-23-0017, and 25-30-24-22-0066).
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On file at City Hall.
THE
APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING PERMIT: Site Plan approval for the construction of a Planet Fitness Center located on the three (3) vacant lots located at 51st Court NE (Property Identification
Numbers (PIN): 25-30-24-23-0018, 25-30-24-23-0017, and 25-30-24-22-0066).
P & Z Minutes
Page 7
Jan 4, 2017
Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing as required by the City Zoning Code on January 4, 2017;
Whereas, the Planning and
Zoning Commission has considered the advice and recommendations of 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;
Now, therefore, be it resolved, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Columbia Heights after reviewing the proposal, accepts and adopts the following findings:
The site
plan conforms to all applicable requirements of this article.
The site plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
The site plan is consistent
with any applicable area plan.
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 one (1) calendar year after the approval date, subject to petition for renewal of the permit.
CONDITIONS:
1. The building and site
shall be meet all requirements found in the Fire Code and the Building Code.
2. Trash and/or recycling collection areas shall be enclosed on at least three sides by an opaque screening
wall or fence no less than six feet in height. The open side of the enclosure shall not face any public street or the front yard of any adjacent property.
3. Mechanical equipment shall
be placed and/or screened so as to minimize the visual impact on adjacent properties and from public streets and adjacent residential properties.
4. The applicant shall meet the requirements
outlined in the attached report from the Public Works Director/City Engineer, dated December 21, 2016.
5. The applicant will be responsible for installing two new stop signs to calm
traffic exiting/entering the Planet Fitness property and the La Casita property.
6. The sidewalk currently shown wrapping around the south west side of the building will be continued
and connect with the front (north) sidewalk, which will empty onto 51st Court NE.
7. All City Storm Water Management requirements shall be achieved for this property.
8. Site and elevation
plans included in this submittal, dated December 5, 2016 shall become part of this approval.
9. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met at all times.
Passed this 4th day of January, 2017
Offered: Fiorendino ___________________________________
Seconded: Hoium Marlaine Szurek, Chair
Roll Call: All ayes
___________________________
___________
Shelley Hanson, Secretary
P & Z Minutes
Page 8
Jan 4, 2017
CASE NUMBER: 2017-0102
APPLICANT: Aisling Fitness LLC
LOCATION: Vacant property on 51st Court
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat
Holmbeck explained this
request goes hand in hand with the previous request, and again on behalf of Planet Fitness, Aisling Fitness, LLC has requested Preliminary Plat Approval per Code Section 9.104 (L), for
the vacant site located behind La Casita and White Castle. The site is currently comprised of three vacant lots, which do not have assigned addresses: Property Identification Numbers
(PIN): 25-30-24-23-0018, 25-30-24-23-0017, and 25-30-24-22-0066. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing lot lines, and re-plat the property to allow for a fitness facility
to be constructed on the south end of the site. State Building Code prevents constructing a new building over a property line. Furthermore, in order to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy
for the property, the lot lines must be removed.
ZONING ORDINANCE
The site is currently comprised of three properties which are located in the General Business Commercial Zoning District.
The properties to the north are located in the City of Fridley. The properties to the east are located in the One and Two Family, and Built as Duplexes Residential Zoning District. The
properties to the south and west are located in the General Business Commercial Zoning District.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for commercial land use.
Commercial development on the longstanding vacant commercial property is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Section 9.104 (L) (6) of the Zoning Ordinance
outlines three conditions that must be met in order for the City to grant a Preliminary Plat. They are as follows:
The proposed Preliminary Plat conforms to the requirements of City
Code Section 9.115.
This is correct.
The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
This is correct.
The proposed subdivision contains parcel and land subdivision
layout that is consistent with good planning and site engineering design principles.
This is correct.
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of
the proposed Preliminary Plat request made by Aisling Fitness, LLC on behalf of Planet Fitness for the properties located on 51st Court NE., (PIN: 25-30-24-23-0018, 25-30-24-23-0017,
and 25-30-24-22-0066).
P & Z Minutes
Page 9
Jan 4, 2017
Questions/comments from members:
There were no questions.
Public Hearing Opened.
No one wished to speak on this matter.
Public Hearing Closed.
Motion
by Hoium, seconded by Fiorendino, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2017-03, there being ample copies available to the public. All ayes. MOTION PASSED.
Motion by Hoium, seconded
by Fiorendino, that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the City Council approve the Preliminary Plat for the three vacant properties located on 51st Court NE., (PIN:25-30-24-23-0018,
25-30-24-23-0017, and 25-30-24-22-0066), subject to certain conditions of approval that have been found to be necessary to protect the public interest and ensure compliance with the
provisions of the Zoning and Development Ordinance, including:
All required state and local codes, permits, licenses and inspections will be met and in full compliance.
The applicant
shall be responsible for the cost of filing and recording written easements with the Anoka County Recorder’s Office.
An approved Preliminary Plat shall be valid for a period of one
year from the date of the City Council approval. In the event that a Final Plat is not submitted within this time period, the Preliminary Plat will become void.
All ayes. MOTION PASSED.
The
following Resolution will go to the City Council January 9, 2016.
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-03
A Resolution of the City Council for the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, approving a Preliminary Plat for Aisling Fitness, LLC for the Three (3) vacant lots located at 51st Court
NE.
Whereas, a proposal (Case # 2017-0102) has been submitted by Aisling Fitness, LLC to the City Council requesting Preliminary Plat Approval from the City of Columbia Heights at
the following site:
ADDRESS: Three (3) vacant lots located at 51st Court NE (Property Identification Numbers (PIN): 25-30-24-23-0018, 25-30-24-23-0017, and 25-30-24-22-0066).
LEGAL
DESCRIPTION: On file at City Hall.
THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING: Preliminary Plat Approval per Code Section 9.104 (L).
P & Z Minutes
Page 10
Jan 4, 2017
Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing as required by the City Zoning Code on January 4, 2017;
Whereas, the City Council
has considered the advice and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the effect of the proposed Preliminary Plat 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;
Now, therefore, in accordance with the foregoing, and all ordinances and regulations of the City of Columbia Heights, the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
Section 9.104 (L) (6) of the Zoning Ordinance outlines conditions that must be met in order for the City to grant a Preliminary Plat. They are
as follows:
(a) The proposed Preliminary Plat conforms to the requirements of City Code Section 9.115.
(b) The proposed Subdivision is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
(c) The
proposed Subdivision contains parcel and land subdivision layout that is consistent with good planning and site engineering design principles.
Further, be it resolved, that the attached
plans, maps, and other information shall become part of this Preliminary Plat; and in granting approval the City and the applicant agree that the Plat shall become null and void if a
Final Plat is not submitted to the City Council within one (1) calendar year after the approval date, subject to petition for renewal.
CONDITIONS
1. All required state and local codes,
permits, licenses and inspections will be met and in full compliance.
2. The applicant shall be responsible for the cost of filing and recording written easements with the Anoka County
Recorder’s Office.
3. An approved Preliminary Plat shall be valid for a period of one year from the date of the City Council approval. In the event that a Final Plat is not submitted
to the City Council within this time period, the Preliminary Plat will become void.
CASE NUMBER: 2017-0103
APPLICANT: Mulata Associates LLC
LOCATION: 820 40th Avenue
REQUEST: Zoning
Amendment (Rezoning)
Holmbeck said Mulata Associates, LLC has petitioned the City of Columbia Heights to change the zoning designation of the property located at 820 40th Ave. NE. from
‘Public and Open Space’ to ‘Central Business’. This change would accommodate the relocation of an adult daycare to the site. Mulata Associates, LLC operates an adult daycare in St. Paul
which has outgrown the current space. The applicant is planning to purchase the City’s former Library building to allow for the daycare to operate in the building. In addition to the
daycare, the applicant is proposing to use the building as a community center, when it is not being used as a daycare facility.
P & Z Minutes
Page 11
Jan 4, 2017
In terms of the Rezoning request, rezoning the property to Central Business is in the best interest of the public and the future of the property.
Right now the property can only be used for a ‘public use’ such as a government building or a non-profit. Allowing the property to be rezoned provides opportunities for a variety of
commercial uses to operate on the parcel in the future. Due to the property’s close proximity to the Central Business corridor, and from a long term planning perspective, approving the
rezoning will provide a viable commercial property for the future. A list of the current permitted uses in the Public and Open Space and the Central Business District was given to members.
It
is important to note that there are some conflicts regarding the specific types of uses that are being proposed for the building. The proposed uses do not meet the Specific Development
Requirements that are called out in the City’s Zoning Code for an Adult Daycare and Community Center. The Specific Development Requirements are a list of requirements for certain types
of commercial, residential, and industrial uses.
For example, a ‘use’ such as a daycare may be permitted in the zoning classification, but will also need to meet the Specific Development
Requirements guided for that type of ‘use’. The applicant has been made aware that the uses which are currently proposed would not be allowed under the City’s current code, due to the
fact that the Specific Development Standards are not met, and that staff does not have the authority to waive these requirements. Holmbeck told members that they have met with the applicant
to explain this conflict; however the applicant decided to proceed with the Zoning request. Holmbeck said they would have to appeal the Specific Development Standards at a later time
to the Board of Appeals if they choose to move ahead with their proposed plan for the building.
The Specific Development Requirements for an Adult daycare and a Community Center are
attached for your review. The issue in this particular case is that the proposed uses do not meet the following standards:
For a Community Center, the parcel upon which the use is
located shall have a lot area no less than four times the area of the building footprint.
For an Adult Day Care Center, at least 150 square feet of outdoor area for seating or exercise
shall be provided for each adult under care.
ZONING ORDINANCE
The property is located in the Public and Open Space Zoning District. The properties located to the north and south are
located in the Multiple Family Residential Zoning District. The properties to the west are located in the Limited Business Zoning District, and the properties to the east are located
in the Central Business Zoning District.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan guides this property for Institutional Uses. It was unknown that a new library facility would be
built, at the time the Comprehensive Plan was completed. Now that the new library facility is in operation, the former library is vacant and the City has no immediate public use for
the property. The City should look for ways to make the property viable long term. Staff believes the rezoning request achieves this goal.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Section 9.104(F) (5) requires
four findings of fact to be made when a zoning amendment petition is made. The findings of fact are as follows:
P & Z Minutes
Page 12
Jan 4, 2017
The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
As previously stated, the Comprehensive Plan identifies and guides the property for Institutional
Uses. However, staff believes that due to the fact the surrounding area is guided for transitional development and commercial development, and from a land-use perspective, the proposal
makes sense for the long term viability of the parcel.
(b) The amendment is in the public interest and is not solely for the benefit of a single property owner.
The property is currently
vacant, and has been vandalized in the past few months. It is in the public interest that the property is being used for the highest and best possible use. Unfortunately, because the
parcel is zoned for Public and Open Space, the types of uses that can operate on the site are strictly limited. Allowing a variety of commercial uses to operate on the site is in the
public’s interest.
(C) Where the amendment is to change the zoning classification of a 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 surrounding properties are a mix of commercial, residential, and institutional.
Staff believes that overall the zoning classification of the property within the general area of the property is compatible with the proposed zoning classification.
(d) Where the amendment
is to change 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 its current zoning classification.
The parcel’s current zoning classification reflects the City’s planned land-use goals at the time
the Comprehensive Plan Update was last updated. Since 2008, the City has built a new library facility, and now operates at a different location. Due to the subject property’s proximity
to Central Avenue and a growing trend in commercial development throughout the Twin Cities Metro, it is a smart long term strategy to rezone the parcel to meet the growing commercial
property demand.
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of the proposed rezoning of the property located at 820 40th Avenue, based on the aforementioned
findings of fact.
Questions from members:
Fiorendino asked if there had been any consideration to re-zoning this parcel to Limited Business (LB) instead of CBD. Holmbeck said that
option was discussed, however the applicant made the decision to request the change to CBD as it allows more choices of permitted uses. She again made it clear to the Commission members
and the applicant, that if the re-zoning is approved, and the use of the building is determined to be a permitted use, they still must meet the other Specific Development Standards depending
on the proposed use.
Hoium asked what other permitted uses are in this District. Holmbeck said the members were given a list in their packets. Hoium and Fiorendino both felt it made
sense to change the zoning from “Public Use” to “ CBD” as it allows more uses for any future owner and will help to achieve the best use of the building in that area.
P & Z Minutes
Page 13
Jan 4, 2017
Hoium wanted confirmation that if they approved the re-zoning to “CBD” that the applicant would not be able to use the facility as an Adult Daycare
or Community Center without appealing the section of our Code for Specific Development Standards to the Board of Appeals. Holmbeck said that is correct. The Board of Appeals could
grant an exception, but if they decided to uphold the Code as it is written, then the Applicant could appeal to the City Council as a last resort.
Public Hearing Opened.
Steve Smith
of 3813 Lincoln Street is a Trustee of Immaculate Conception Church. He wanted to make sure that any changes to the zoning of this site, and the lack of parking on site, would not impact
Immaculate Conception Church in any way. Szurek assured him it would not. Any future business going into this building would not be able to use the Church’s parking lots without permission.
Chante
lle Henning of 3975 Jackson Street thinks parking will be an issue for the proposed use. She doesn’t feel there is adequate parking in the lot or on the side streets for a community
center. She doesn’t think that people will use the parking ramp and walk to this site which is 2 blocks away. Most of those needing the Adult Daycare probably would not be able to
navigate that far. She is concerned that it will increase the street parking in the neighborhood.
Fiorendino said we don’t know what the actual use will be at this point, but said
that most businesses will probably use the lot parking first and some street parking just like the Library did in the past, so this should not be a dramatic impact on the neighborhood.
As far as use as a community center, that is why there are standards in place to ensure a certain amount of parking is provided on site, so as not to inconvenience the surrounding area.
Public
Hearing Closed.
Motion by Fiorendino , seconded by Hoium, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2017-04, there being ample copies available to the public. All ayes. MOTION PASSED.
Motion
by Fiorendino, seconded by Hoium, that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the City Council approve Resolution No. 2017-04, rezoning the property located at 820 40th Avenue
NE from ‘Public and Open Space’ to ‘Central Business’.
The following Resolution will go to the City Council January 9th.
P & Z Minutes
Page 14
Jan 4, 2017
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-04
A Resolution of the City Council for the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, approving a Zoning Amendment for the property located at 820 40th Avenue NE.
Whereas, a proposal (Case
# 2017-0103) has been submitted by Mulata Associates, LLC to the City Council requesting a Zoning Amendment from the City of Columbia Heights at the following site:
ADDRESS: 820 40th
Avenue NE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On file at City Hall.
REQUEST: Zoning Amendment (Rezoning).
Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing as required by the City’s
Zoning Code on January 4, 2017;
P & Z Minutes
Page 16
Jan 4, 2017
Whereas, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding
the effect of the proposed Rezoning 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;
Now, therefore, in accordance with the foregoing, and all ordinances and regulations
of the City of Columbia Heights, the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
The
amendment is in the public interest and is not solely for the benefit of a single property owner.
Where the amendment is to change the zoning classification of a 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.
Where the amendment is to change 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 its current zoning classification.
Now, therefore, in accordance with the foregoing, and all ordinances and regulations
of the City of Columbia Heights, the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights hereby rezones the property at 820 40th Avenue NE to “Central Business”.
P & Z Minutes
Page 15
Jan 4, 2017
CASE NUMBER: 2017-0104
APPLICANT: Scenic Sign Corp/New Perspectives Sr. Living
LOCATION: 3801 Hart Blvd
REQUEST: Variance
Holmbeck said that
Scenic Sign Corporation representing New Perspectives Senior Living is requesting a Variance to allow for the installation of a new monument sign for the property located at 3801 Hart
Blvd. NE. The senior apartment complex, formerly known as the Lighthouse Apartments, has recently rebranded to be known as New Perspective Senior Living. The applicant is proposing
to remove the old sign and replace the existing monument sign on the property to reflect the new name of the building.
The applicant is requesting a Variance to City Code to allow for
a monument sign that exceeds the maximum allowed 16 square feet. The applicant submitted plans for the packets for a proposal that calls for the sign face to be 52.25 square feet, with
10.4 square feet concrete pillars on either side of the sign face. The proposed sign is approximately 86 square feet in total. The Variance request is to allow the monument sign to exceed
the dimensional requirements by 70 square feet.
The existing monument sign is located on the west side of the property as you enter the parking lot and is 72 square feet in size. The
applicant is proposing to rebuild the sign closer to the street (Hart Blvd.). According to the City’s Zoning Code, monument signs for this zoning classification have a maximum permitted
height of 8 ft. The proposed sign would meet this requirement, as it would be just over 6 ft. tall. A rendering of the existing sign and proposed sign, which includes dimensions and
placement, is attached for consideration.
Before the meeting, Scenic Sign submitted a second plan showing a different sized sign which Holmbeck passed out to members just prior to the
meeting. Then at the meeting, a representative from New Perspectives, Holly Osters, passed out yet another plan showing different sizes again. All of the requests exceeded the allowed
size.
ZONING ORDINANCE
The property is located in the R-3 Multiple Family Residential Zoning District, as are the properties to the north. The properties to the west are zoned Public
and Open Space. The properties to the south and east are located in the General Business Commercial Zoning District.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan designates this zoning
district for high density residential.
DESIGN GUIDELINES
The subject property is not located within the Design Guideline Overlay District
FINDINGS OF FACT
Section 9.104 (G) of the
Zoning Ordinance outlines five conditions that must be met in order for the City Council to grant Variances. They are as follows:
P & Z Minutes
Page 16
Jan 4, 2017
Because of the particular physical surroundings, or the shape, configuration, topography, or other conditions of the specific parcel of land involved,
strict adherence to the provisions of this article would cause practical difficulties in conforming to the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant, however, is proposing to use the property
in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance.
The application provided does not identify specific difficulties in conforming to the Zoning Ordinance. The property does
not appear to have topographical or other unique conditions that pose a practical difficulty in conforming to the Zoning Ordinance.
The conditions upon which the variances are based
are unique to the specific parcel of land involved and are generally not applicable to other properties within the same zoning classification.
This parcel does not appear to have unique
conditions as compared to the surrounding parcels.
The practical difficulties are caused by the provisions of this article and have not been created by any person currently having
a legal interest in the property.
The application provided does not appear to identify a practical difficulty.
The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan does not address signage for multiple family residential uses.
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 proposed sign does not appear to be detrimental
to the public welfare, use and development, or value of properties in the vicinity.
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the City Council deny the
Variance request for the proposed monument sign for the property located at 3801 Hart Blvd. The applicant has not submitted a reasonable request based on the Findings of Fact outlined
in the City’s Zoning Ordinance, which are required by the City Council in order to approve a Variance. Based on the application and renderings received for review, it is not evident
there is a practical difficulty present in order to grant the Variance.
While there appears to be no issue with the request to move the sign closer to the street (Hart Blvd) for visibility,
no justification has been provided that demonstrates the need for such a large sign on the residentially zoned property. The commercially zoned properties to the south and east are only
allowed up to 50 square feet of signage. For this reason, and because the Findings of Fact have not been met, the request is not justifiable. A sample resolution was provided, should
the Planning and Zoning Commission decide to recommend approval.
Questions from members:
Holly Osters from New Perspectives said the building was constructed in 2008. During the
past year the company has created a new name and they have rebranded. The sign that is presently there is not a conventional one used at any of their other locations. Their wish is
to replace the sign in a better location that will be consistent with all of the buildings they own. She told members that the existing sign is not visible to traffic coming from the
north or south on Hart Blvd. therefore, guests, volunteers, & perspective residents have
P & Z Minutes
Page 17
Jan 4, 2017
trouble finding the facility. She said the current sign is 34.8 sq ft in size (which exceeds the allowable size, and is therefore non-conforming).
Staff has researched this and there was never a permit issued for that sign and it was never approved as part of the Site Plan or any other action approved by the P & Z Commission.
There was a discussion to try and clarify which plan of the three submitted is their actual request. That lead to discussion about whether to make a decision on just the sign itself
or whether the pillars or other supports should be included in the total sq ft. Members wanted to concentrate on the size of the actual signage not the surrounding supports. But it
was still unclear what size they wanted a variance for. Hoium stated he was not in favor of expanding a non-conforming use. He was ok with moving and replacing it with the same size,
but no bigger.
Fiorendino said he needed a good reason to allow the variance. More visibility, or to attract more business is not good enough reasons in his opinion. He said they
must go by what is established in the Code. He said the Commission doesn’t have the authority to approve this without a hardship.
Holly Osters stated that they are trying to provide
consistency at all their buildings. Szurek said every city has different code requirements and we can’t be expected to make decisions on other cities. She also said she can’t justify
the variance unless there is a hardship. Osters said they can’t reface the current sign as it is made from limestone and it will crack if changes are made to it. The only option they
have is to construct a new one. Osters went on to say that the Liquor Store to the south is larger than it should be. Holmbeck said the Liquor Store is in a commercially zoned area
which has different requirements.
The discussion continued about varying sizes of the new sign and whether the members would be willing to grant a variance on any specific size.
At this point, the members were very confused about what the actual request was, and since they could see no hardship they were not in favor of granting a variance at this time. The
members suggested Osters go to the City Council meeting and provide them with one proposal with precise measurements for the smallest size they think they could live with, and see if
the City Council would approve it. Szurek said too many options were discussed at this meeting and it is hard to approve something that hasn’t been submitted correctly.
Public Hearing
Opened.
No further discussion.
Public Hearing Closed.
Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Hoium, to close the public hearing and recommend that the City Council deny the Variance
request for a monument sign for the property located 3801 Hart Blvd., due to the Findings of Fact not being met.
P & Z Minutes
Page 18
Jan 4, 2017
OTHER BUSINESS
No other new business.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:22 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Shelley Hanson
Secretary