Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 7, 2017 minMINUTES OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 7, 2017 7:00 PM The meeting was called to order at 7:05 pm by Chair Szurek. Commission Members present- Novitsky, Fiorendino, Hoium, Schill, and Szurek Also present were Elizabeth Holmbeck (Planner), Larry Pepin (Building Official), and Shelley Hanson (Secretary) along with Council Liaison, John Murzyn. Motion by Hoium, seconded by Novitsky, to approve the minutes from the meeting of February 7, 2017. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE NUMBER: 2017-0301 APPLICANT: Venture Pass Partners LLC LOCATION: 4707 Central Avenue REQUEST: Final Plat Approval Holmbeck explained that on behalf of Hy-Vee, Inc., Venture Pass Partners, LLC has applied for Final Plat Approval for the vacant parcel located at 4707 Central Avenue NE. The site is currently one lot of record and the applicant is requesting to re-plat the property to create two separate lots. The plat would allow for two separate developments to occur on the property; a convenience store to be built on the south end in conjunction with the future Hy-Vee Grocery Store, and a future fast casual restaurant on the north end. The Preliminary Plat was unanimously recommended for approval at the February 7th Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and unanimously approved by the City Council at the February 13th meeting. ZONING ORDINANCE The property located at 4707 Central Avenue NE., is located in the Mixed Use Zoning District, as are the properties to the east. The properties to the north are located in the General Business Commercial Zoning District. The properties to the south are located in the Multiple Family Residential Zoning District. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for mixed use development (commercial, residential and institutional uses), and specifically transit oriented development. Developing the vacant parcel to include commercial uses which complement the existing residential development is consistent with the goals and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. FINDINGS OF FACT Section 9.104 (M) (6) of the Zoning Ordinance outlines two conditions that must be met in order for the City to grant a Final Plat. They are as follows: The Final Plat substantially conforms to the approved Preliminary Plat. This is correct. The Final Plat conforms to the requirements of 9.115. This is correct. P & Z Minutes Page 2 March 7, 2017 Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of the proposed Final Plat request made by Venture Pass Partners, LLC on behalf of Hy-Vee, Inc. for the property located at 4707 Central Avenue NE. Questions from members: Hoium asked if the retaining wall was part of the approval of the final plat. Holmbeck said that engineer designed plans will be submitted later. Hoium then asked if setbacks and drainage will be handled by staff as part of the construction process. Holmbeck told him that was correct. Fiorendino asked if the property would be re-zoned. Holmbeck said it is not being re-zoned, that it will remain as a Mixed Use classification. Public Hearing Opened. No one wished to speak on this issue. Public Hearing Closed. Motion by Hoium, seconded by Fiorendino, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2017-19, 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 that the City Council approve the Final Plat for the property located at 4707 Central Avenue NE., 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. Any requirements outlined by the Minnesota Department of Transportation must be met (MNDOT review pending). Any comments from MNDOT will be forwarded over to the applicant and will become part of this approval. Easements will need to be placed over the storm water BMP’s to be installed, and the easements will need to be on a recordable document, accepted by Anoka County Recorder’s Office. The applicant shall be responsible for the cost of filing and recording written easements with the Anoka County Recorder’s Office. Upon approval of the Final Plat, the applicant shall be responsible for filing and recording the Final Plat with the Anoka County Recorder’s Office within one year of the date of City Council action. In the event that a Final Plat is not recorded within this time period, the Final Plat will become void. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. The following Resolution will go to the City Council March 13th. P & Z Minutes Page 3 March 7, 2017 RESOLUTION NO. 2017-19 A resolution of the City Council for the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, approving a Final Plat for Venture Pass Partners, LLC. Whereas, a proposal (Case # 2017-0301) has been submitted by Venture Pass Partners, LLC on behalf of Hy-Vee, Inc. to the City Council requesting Final Plat Approval from the City of Columbia Heights at the following site: ADDRESS: 4707 Central Avenue NE, Columbia Heights, MN 55421. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On file at City Hall. THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING: Final Plat Approval per Code Section 9.104 (M). Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing as required by the City Zoning Code on March 7th, 2017; Whereas, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the effect of the proposed Final 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 (M) (6) of the Zoning Ordinance outlines conditions that must be met in order for the City to grant a Final Plat. They are as follows: The Final Plat substantially conforms to the approved Preliminary plat The Final Plat conforms to the requirements of 9.115. Further, be it resolved, that the attached plans, maps, and other information shall become part of this Final 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 recorded with the Anoka County Recorder’s Office within one (1) calendar year after the approval date. CONDITIONS All required state and local codes, permits, licenses and inspections will be met and in full compliance. Any requirements outlined by the Minnesota Department of Transportation must be met (MNDOT review pending). Any comments from MNDOT will be forwarded over to the applicant and will become part of this approval. Easements will need to be placed over the storm water BMP’s to be installed, and the easements will need to be on a recordable document, accepted by Anoka County Recorder’s Office. The applicant shall be responsible for the cost of filing and recording written easements with the Anoka County Recorder’s Office. Upon approval of the Final Plat, the applicant shall be responsible for filing and recording the Final Plat with the Anoka County Recorder’s Office within one year of the date of City Council action. In the event that a Final Plat is not recorded within this time period, the Final Plat will become void. P & Z Minutes Page 4 March 7, 2017 CASE NUMBER: 2017-0302 APPLICANT: ASA, LLC LOCATION: 4048 Central Avenue REQUEST: Appeal Holmbeck told members that ASA, LLC has filed an Appeal to the Planning and Zoning Commission which acts as the City’s Board of Appeals. She reviewed the duties of the Board of Appeals and the Appeal procedure outlined in the City’s Zoning Code. Board of Appeals and Adjustment duties: In accordance with M.S. § 462.354, as it may be amended from time to time, the City Council has designated the Planning Commission as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. As such, the Planning Commission shall have the following additional responsibilities:       (1)   Hear and make decisions on all applications for an appeal of any administrative order, requirement, determination or final decision made by the Zoning Administrator or other official in the administration of this article.       (2)   Hear and make decisions on all applications for a variance from the literal provisions of this article.  Appeals Procedure:       (1)   Right of appeal.  At any time within 30 days after a written order, requirement, determination or final decision has been made by the Zoning Administrator or other official in interpreting or applying this article, except for actions taken in connection with prosecutions for violations thereof, the applicant or any other person affected by such action may appeal the decision.       (2)   Application for appeal.  An appeal must be made by filing a written notice of appeal addressed to the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission, and stating the action appealed as well as the specific grounds upon which the appeal is made.       (3)   Public hearing.  The Planning Commission, sitting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, shall hold a public hearing on the appeal in accordance with the requirements of this section. After the close of the hearing, the Planning Commission shall render its findings. BACKGROUND Holmbeck told members that the Appeal before them is in response to a written order sent to the property owner on January 27, 2017 that was provided in the agenda packet. A building permit was submitted to the Community Development Department to remodel the existing commercial building located at 4048 Central Avenue NE. Staff reviewed the application and found that, while an Adult Daycare facility is a permitted use, the proposal does not meet certain development standards for such a use outlined in the Zoning Code. The property owner is proposing to use the first floor of the building to operate an Adult Daycare. The upper floor has existing residential apartment units, which are not a part of this proposal. The property owner submitted a letter detailing the Appeal, and a number of pictures of the building and surrounding outdoor area. Upon review staff found that the proposed use does not meet the following specific development standards: For adult daycare facilities, at least 150 square feet of outdoor area for seating or exercise will be provided for each adult under care. P & Z Minutes Page 5 March 7, 2017 The use shall provide a designated area for the short-term parking of vehicles engaged in loading and unloading of children or adults under care. The designated area shall be located as close as practical to the principal entrance of the building and shall be connected to the building by a sidewalk. According to the property owner’s letter, the proposed Adult Daycare will be operated by The Millennium Center for Performing Arts, which focuses on an arts-based alternative social services and enrichment program for adults. The clients under care will have opportunities for outdoor exercise by walking or utilizing the company’s transportation services to one of the area parks. The letter also states that from time to time the clients are taken to area malls or other indoor community areas for exercise. The property owner has proposed to designate a drop-off and pick-up location at the rear of the building. There is currently an entrance at the rear of the building which the owner will be renovating to make it handicap accessible. The proposed drop-off and pick-up location is for the rear of the building rather than the front door (per City Code) because the rear of the building provides a safer location with less traffic. Also, the applicant has stated that it is difficult to consistently find parking right outside the front door. ZONING ORDINANCE The subject property located at 4048 Central Ave. NE. is located in the Central Business Zoning District as are the properties to the north, south, and east. The properties to the west are located in the Multiple Family Residential Zoning District. The proposed Adult Daycare is a permitted use in the Central Business Zoning District. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for commercial uses. The proposed use is commercial in nature. DESIGN GUIDELINES The subject property is located in the Design Guidelines Overlay District and is subject to the Central Business District standards. If the property owner makes any of the following modifications, adherence to the guidelines would be required: New construction or additions. Any exterior changes, including repainting, with the exception of replacement or repair of existing materials. Minor alterations such as repainting may be handled administratively, as determined by the City Planner. Any internal remodeling or expansion activity that increases the overall size of the building by 10 percent or more. Any development or expansion of parking areas that would result in a lot with more than four parking spaces. At this time, the property owner has not proposed to make such enhancements to the site. SITE PLAN The applicant has submitted a floor plan/site plan of the interior first floor area and exterior area, as well as a number of pictures to illustrate how the building is proposed to be used. P & Z Minutes Page 6 March 7, 2017 FINDINGS OF FACT There are no Findings of Fact specifically outlined in the City’s Code, which must be met in order to approve an Appeal. However, the Board of Appeals must make findings to approve or deny the request. The Board of Appeals has the authority to make a ruling on the request based on the evidence presented by the applicant. RECOMMENDATION Holmbeck told members that in the case of an Appeal, staff does not make a recommendation to the Board of Appeals. It is up to the Board to make a determination on the request. The Board of Appeals must make a motion to deny or approve the appeal. There is no Resolution document to approve or sign; rather a letter will be sent to the applicant following the meeting, stating the Board’s finding. If the Board of Appeals denies the request, the property owner has the right to appeal to the City Council for a final ruling. Questions/commen ts from members: Fiorendino asked Holmbeck the reason she had for denying their building plans. She explained to members that she’s the first person to look at Building permit plans to ensure construction meets setbacks and Zoning Code requirements. Even though this type of business is a permitted use in the CBD, she noticed that the site did not meet all the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, she denied the issuance of the permit and the use of the building for an Adult Daycare Facility. Fiorendino asked her what she felt about the rear parking situation. She thought it was reasonable to allow the parking and the drop off area to be in the rear of the building since Central Avenue is such a busy road. Hoium stated that it is not the Commission’s job to “like the ordinance requirements”, it is their job to determine if it “meets the requirements”. Szurek asked how many clients they would have. Holmbeck said the number of clients is determined by Anoka County as the licensing agency, and is based on the size of the interior space. Szurek then asked the Building Official when he became aware of their desire to use the building as an Adult Daycare. Pepin stated he noticed construction was going on in the building and there hadn’t been a permit issued for the site, so he put a Stop Work Order on the project. After speaking with the new owner, he told them they needed permits for the interior remodeling and for a sprinkler system. When plans were brought in for review it became apparent they first had to deal with whether they could actually use the facility as planned , which is why the case is now before the Board. It is also now apparent that they continued with the remodeling and installed the sprinkler system, without permits being issued to do so. Szurek said she has an issue with people who buy properties and don’t follow proper procedures to ensure they can meet zoning regulations and when they fail to obtain the proper building permits to do remodeling or construction. Szurek asked how another business down the street that is basically the same type of facility was allowed to go in. Pepin explained that a previous Planner saw that it was a “permitted use” in that zoning district, but failed to look at the other requirements pertaining to this use. P & Z Minutes Page 7 March 7, 2017 Ella Selyukou is the owner of Millennium Center for the Performing Arts. She explained their program to the Commission. She explained their clients are usually elderly, have disabilities, or mental/memory issues. They operate at other locations throughout the metro area (New Hope, Eagan, and Plymouth) and none of these cities have an outside space requirement. Most of the clients can’t move around without assistance. Ella stated they occasionally take clients out to parks or to malls, especially in the summer, but not in winter as the clients are not very mobile. She said they would provide an outside patio area in the rear for those that are up to being outside. She was under the assumption that they only need to provide 150 sf for each person that is actually outside. Szurek believed that the code states 150 sf for each person being cared for at the facility. Holmbeck read the actual language of the code and the Board agreed the requirement is for each person being cared for within the facility. Szurek said it may mean that the code needs to be changed. She didn’t feel the Board could grant waivers or exceptions to the code, it is their job to enforce the existing code. Novitsky said the code requires the outside area be fenced with a 5 ft high fence. He is concerned that they would not be able to provide that space and to also allow enough parking for the apartments and a client drop off area, especially when there is snow. Holmbeck told members that parking for the workers in the CBD is not required. They plan on providing one parking space for each apartment (4) as required, and they plan to re-design the rear door to make it handicap accessible and allow for a drop off area, which leaves them enough room for a small patio area. She said they have, therefore, made an attempt to meet the intent of the code. Sal Bell who owns the building and is partnering with Millennium apologized to the Board for doing work without permits. He said he trusted his contractor to take care of this. He thought the permits were pulled. He spoke again of how the rear area would be used. He told members that clients are typically there for about 6 hours a day and are provided with access to music, artwork, and social interaction in a safe environment. He also stated that since the other business 2 doors down is operating a similar type of business, that an exception to the code should be allowed since they are making an attempt to meet it to the best of their ability. Szurek asked Holmbeck why they are even considering this since it doesn’t meet the requirements. Holmbeck explained that according to the City Attorney, the Board has the authority to make exceptions to the rules if there is a reasonable option provided. Hoium asked who determines how much space is required per person on the interior of the building for this type of use. Holmbeck stated that the inside space required is determined by the licensing authority which is the County and she believes that amount is 40 sf per client. The outside space is determined by local Zoning Ordinance, and the State and/or County does not address this. Teshite Wako from the Orono Chamber of Commerce spoke on behalf of the daycare business and owner that they provide needed services and to consider granting the appeal. Another person spoke on behalf of the business also and told members that the owners had asked if this property was zoned properly for an Adult Daycare before they purchased it. They were told by the Planner it was, but they were not told about the outside space, or extra requirements, or they wouldn’t have purchased this particular building. P & Z Minutes Page 8 March 7, 2017 Fiorendino said it sounds like there are a couple of different things to be considered. He felt the job of the Board is to decide if the request meets our code or not, and if staff interpreted the code correctly. He personally thinks the code is wrong, and asked if there was a process for changing it. Holmbeck explained that the Commission, or an individual, or business owner can approach the City Council to request the Code be amended. If the City Council is in favor of doing this they will direct staff to research language of other surrounding cities and to bring information back to them for consideration. An amendment to the Code could then be prepared and the City Council would need to go through the Public Hearing and approval process. Novitsky and Hoium agreed the code doesn’t make sense, but it is what is required. Schill asked Holmbeck if they actually had the authority to make an exception. Holmbeck said she believed so. Fiorendino said he disagreed with that and again reiterated that he thought their job is to decide if staff originally interpreted the code correctly. Holmbeck said no matter what decision they make they must give a Finding of Fact (reason) for doing so. Schill said he would like to see more detail of how the rear area would be laid out. He would like to see a drawing with measurements and where everything would be placed, along with proper measurements. He said the pictures provided didn’t really prove that everything would fit back there. Holmbeck said they have 3 options: to approve, to deny, or to table for more information. However, we must provide a decision to the applicant within 60 days per State Statute. Motion by Hoium , seconded by Novitsky, to deny the Appeal of Specific Development Standards of the Zoning Code of the City of Columbia Heights for the use of 4048 Central Avenue as an Adult Daycare facility, as it does not meet the Zoning Code requirement regarding the amount of outside space that must be provided. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. Hoium suggested the applicant submit a more detailed depiction of the rear area to the City Council for the meeting on Monday night. Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Schill to make a request to the City Council to review the Zoning Ordinance requirements for Adult Daycare Facilities especially in regards to the outside space requirement. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. There was a brief discussion about how many daycare facilities we are getting along the Central Avenue Business corridor. Szurek thought the long range vision of the downtown area was to encourage more retail businesses, small restaurants, etc. to generate foot traffic and entertainment options. She thought it may be a good time to place a moratorium on additional daycare businesses going in until staff can gather more information regarding the actual number and the impact it has on the area. It was made clear that this moratorium would not affect the decision the City Council would make regarding the site considered tonight. Motion by Szurek, seconded by Hoium to consider placing a moratorium on Adult Daycare and Child Daycare facilities along the CBD. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. P & Z Minutes Page 9 March 7, 2017 OTHER BUSINESS There were no other updates. The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 pm. Respectfully submitted, Shelley Hanson Secretary