Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-02-2020 Planning Commission Packet Planning Commission Meeting June 2, 2020 6:00 p.m. Columbia Heights City Hall 590 40th Avenue NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 6-2-2020 Planning Commission Agenda 1. Call to Order (Vice Chair of Planning Commission will call meeting to order) 2. Roll Call (Recording Secretary) 3. Election of Officers, Approval of the Minutes a. Election of Officers (Staff Liaison will introduce the election. Commissioners may nominate themselves or other Commissioners) 1. Elect a Chairperson (Meeting to resume under the leadership of the elected Chairperson) 2. Elect a Vice Chairperson 3. Elect a Secretary/Treasurer c. Approval of May 5, 2020 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 3. Other Business a. Sale of land (3989 Central) for redevelopment purposes by the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority b. Update from Community Development Director c. Next Planning Commission meeting: Tuesday, July 7, 2020 6:00 p.m. 4. Adjourn MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION May 05, 2020 6:00 PM The meeting was called to order at 6:03 pm by Secretary Hoium. Commission Members present- Sahnow, Novitsky, Fiorendino, Hoium, Kaiser, and Szurek. Members Absent: Schill Also present were Aaron Chirpich (Community Development Director), Elizabeth Hammond (City Planner), Christy Bennett (Secretary), and Connie Buesgens (Council Liaison). APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Novitsky, seconded by Sahnow, to approve the minutes from the meeting of March 4, 2020. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE NUMBER: 2020-0501 APPLICANT: Renaissance Fireworks LOCATION: 4005 Central Ave NE REQUEST: Interim Use Permit for Seasonal Fireworks Sales INTRODUCTION Hammond explained that Renaissance Fireworks, Inc. has applied for an Interim Use Permit to allow the operation of a seasonal fireworks sales tent at 4005 Central Avenue. The specific development standards for outdoor fireworks sales/display are found in Section 9.107 (C) (22) of City Cod e, and will be added as conditions of approval for this permit. The attached property and tent location map illustrates the configuration and orientation of the fireworks tent to Central Avenue. The Fire Chief and Building Official will conduct a site inspection of the tent. ZONING ORDINANCE The property located at 4005 Central Avenue is located in the CBD, Central Business District. The properties to the north, south and west are also zoned Central Business and the properties to the east are zoned in th e R-4, Multiple Family Residential District. Seasonal Fireworks Sales is allowed as Interim Use in the Central Business Zoning District. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for commercial use. The proposal for seasonal firewo rks sales is consistent with the intent of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 FINDINGS OF FACT Section 9.104 (I) of the Zoning Ordinance outlines seven findings of fact that must be met in order for the City to grant an interim use permit. They are as follows: 1. The use is one of the interim uses listed for the zoning district in which the property is located, or is a substantially similar use, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. Fireworks tents are specifically listed as an Interim Use in the Central Business District, and are considered retail sales, which are permitted. 2. The use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for commercial use, including retail sales. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 3. The use will not impose hazards or disturbing influences on neighboring properties. The proposed temporary use should not have hazardous or disturbing influence on neighboring properties because of its proximity to Central Avenue and because it’s shielded from adjacent residential uses by the surrounding commercial buildings. 4. The use will not substantially diminish the use of property in the immediate vicinity. The fireworks tent shouldn’t diminish the use of the adjacent properties. 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 area. The Fire Chief and Building Official will conduct an on-site inspection prior to any temporary sales. All State and City requirements regarding fireworks sales will be achieved. 6. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to minimize traffic congestion on the public stre ets and to provide for appropriate on-site circulation of traffic. The traffic generated by the fireworks tent will not significantly increase the traffic on the public streets, and the site is large enough to handle additional interior traffic. 7. The use will not cause a negative cumulative effect on other uses in the immediate vicinity. The fireworks tent should not have a negative impact on other uses in the immediate vicinity, which are all zoned commercial. Staff recommends that the Planning Commissio n approve the Interim Use Permit to allow the operation of a seasonal fireworks sales tent at 4005 Central Avenue, subject to the conditions provided in the recommended motion. Questions from Members: Fiorendino asked if there was anything different about this request than past years. Hammond said nothing has changed. Hoium thought we had talked about doing this administratively rather than having them go through this process every year. Hammond explained that it is required under the current ordinance and since we haven’t changed it, they still have to go through the process. Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 Public Hearing Opened No one was present to speak on this issue. Public Hearing Closed Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Szurek, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2020-PZ02, there being ample copies available to the public. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Szurek, to adopt Resolution No. 2020-PZ02, being a Resolution approving an Interim Use Permit for a fireworks tent at 4005 Central Avenue NE, from June 22, 2020 to July 10, 2020, 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: 1. The fireworks tent, display area, access aisles, and surrounding area shall be reviewed by the Fire Department prior to operation. The applicant must contact the Fire Department to set up an inspection prior to any sales occurring on the property. 2. The applicant must obtain a Building Permit from the Building Official, and a site inspection must be conducted prior to operation. The applicant must contact the Community Development Department to obtain to Building Permit and schedule an inspection prior to any sales occurring on the property. 3. The sale of fireworks shall meet all requirements of Chapter 24 of the Fire Code and NFPA Chapter 1124. 4. The fireworks tent shall be accessory to a commercial use. 5. Fireworks tents located within the public right-of-way are prohibited. 6. All goods shall be displayed on a designated impervious surface area. 7. All goods shall be displayed in an orderly fashion, with access aisles provided as needed. 8. Music or amplified sounds shall not be audible from adjacent residential properties. 9. The fireworks tent shall not reduce the amount of off-street parking provided one-site below the level required for the principal use. 10. An appropriate transition area between the use and adjacent property shall be provided by landscaping, screening or other site improvements consistent with the character of the neighborhood. 11. Signage shall be limited to two (2) professionally made signs, with a combined square footage not exceeding thirty-two (32) square feet. 12. Fireworks tents may be allowed for a maximum of 90 days per calendar year. 13. Any electrical use associated with the temporary sales, will require an Electrical Permit and is required to be inspected by the State Electrical Inspector. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-PZ02 A resolution of the Planning Commission for the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 WHEREAS, a proposal (Case # 2020-0501) has been submitted by Renaissance Fireworks to the Planning Commission requesting an Interim Use Permit from the City of Columbia Heights at the following s ite: ADDRESS: 4005 Central Avenue NE., Columbia Heights, MN 55421 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On file at City Hall THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING: An Interim Use Permit to allow for the operation of a seasonal fireworks sales tent on the subject property. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing as required by the City of Columbia Height’s Zoning Code on May 5, 2020; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the advice and recommendations of City staff regarding the effect of the proposed Interim Use 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, in accordance with the foregoing, and all ordinances and regulations of the City of Columbia Heights, the Planning Commission of the City of Columbia Heights makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The use is one of the interim uses listed for the zoning district in which the property is located, or is a substantially similar use, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. 2. The use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The use will not impose hazards or disturbing influences on neighboring properties. 4. 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 compatib le with the appearance of the existing or intended character of the surrounding area. 6. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to minimize traffic congestion on the public streets and to provide for appropriate on-site circulation of traffic. 7. The use will not cause a negative cumulative effect, when considered in conjunction with the cumulative effect of other uses in the immediate vicinity. 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 pe rmit. Further, the permit is 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: CONDITIONS 1. The fireworks tent, display area, access aisles, and surrounding area shall be reviewed by the Fire Department prior to operation. The applicant must contact the Fire Department to set up an inspection prior to any sales occurring on the property. Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 2. The applicant must obtain a Building Permit from the Building Official, and a site inspection must be conducted prior to operation. The applicant must contact the Community Development Department to obtain to Building Permit and schedule an inspection prior to any sales occurring on the property. 3. The sale of fireworks shall meet all requirements of Chapter 24 of the Fire Code and NFPA Chapter 1124. 4. The fireworks tent shall be accessory to a commercial use. 5. Fireworks tents located within the public right-of-way are prohibited. 6. All goods shall be displayed on a designated impervious surface area. 7. All goods shall be displayed in an orderly fashion, with access aisles provided as needed. 8. Music or amplified sounds shall not be audible from adjacent residential properties . 9. The fireworks tent shall not reduce the amount of off-street parking provided one-site below the level required for the principal use. 10. An appropriate transition area between the use and adjacent property shall be provided by landscaping, screening or other site improvements consistent with the character of the neighborhood. 11. Signage shall be limited to two (2) professionally made signs, with a combined square footage not exceeding thirty-two (32) square feet. 12. Fireworks tents may be allowed for a maximum of 90 days per calendar year. 13. Any electrical use associated with the temporary sales, will require an Electrical Permit and is required to be inspected by the State Electrical Inspector. ORDER OF PLANNING COMMISSION Passed this 5th day of May, 2020. Offered by: Fiorendino Seconded by: Szurek Roll Call: All Ayes CASE NUMBER: 2020-0502 APPLICANT: Alatus, LLC LOCATION: 3989 Central Ave NE REQUEST: Easement Vacations INTRODUCTION Hammond told members that Alatus, LLC has requested to vacate easements on the property located at 3989 Central Avenue NE. (subject property). The subject property is the site of the future planned mixed use development project, which was approved by the City Council earlier this year. The applicant identified roadway, and sidewalk and landscape easements that will need to be vacated as part of the redevelopment of the site. The legal descriptions of these easements to be vacated were provided. Once approved, the applicant is responsible for filing the vacations with Anoka County. ZONING ORDINANCE The Zoning Ordinance requires the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing on the application for the vacation of a street, alley, or other public right-of-way and submit its recommendation to the City Council. The Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 property is zoned mixed use and the surrounding area is zoned commercial, with limited multiple family residential to the east. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for Transit Oriented Mixed Use Development. The redevelopment of the site to include a mix of residential, institutional and commercial uses is consistent with the goals and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. FINDINGS OF FACT The City Council shall make each of the following findings before vacating a street, alley, or other public right- of-way: a) No private rights will be injured or endangered as a result of the vacation. This is correct. b) The public will not suffer loss or inconvenience as a result of the vacation. This is correct. Staff recommends approval of the roadway, and sideway and landscape easement vacations for the property located at 3989 Central Avenue NE. Questions from Members: Kaiser asked if there is any change from the original plan. Chirpich said there were a couple of sidewalk and road easements with the original plat and plan, but it’s become clear we need to do this on the north and west borders also. The request is to vacate all easements and re-establish them to make it easier going forward, both for the title and just overall ease. Hoium asked if this is consistent with the overall plan. Chirpich responded that the general plan has not changed. Sahnow asked what the difference is between the current and new easement. Chirpich explained it would be moving the easements west about 2 feet and re-establishing them. Hoium asked if the state has any easements on the site. Chirpich said these are all for city utility easements. Sahnow asked if the building footprint is up against the easement. Chirpich said it is not. There’s at least 5 feet between the building edge and the easement. This came up in discussions with the engineer about the footings and water main placement. Public Hearing Opened No one was present to speak on this issue. Public Hearing Closed Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Szurek, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2020-44 and Resolution No. 2020-45 there being ample copies available to the public. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Szurek, to recommend that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2020- 44 and Resolution No. 2020-45, vacating roadway, and sidewalk and landscape easements at 3989 Central Avenue NE. subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall be responsible for providing legal descriptions of all easements that are subject to be created. Said descriptions are subject to review by the City Attorney. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for filing the easements vacations with the Anoka County Recorder’s Office. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. The following Resolutions will go to the City Council at the May 11, 2020 meeting. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-44 A resolution of the City Council for the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, approving an easement vacation for property located in the City of Columbia Heights, MN, legall y described as: The West 5.00 feet of Lots 30, 31, and 32, Block 6, Reservoir Hills; and the West 5.00 feet of Lots 26, 27, and 28, Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills, according to the recorded plats thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota AND That part of said Lot 30, Block 6, Reservoir Hills, which lies northwesterly of a line drawn northeasterly from a point on the west line of said Block 6 distant 30.00 feet southerly from the northwest corner of said Lot 30, as measured along said west line, to a point on the north line of said Lot 30 distant 30.00 feet easterly from said northwest corner, as measured along said north line. AND The east 10.00 feet of the west 15.00 feet of Lots 30, 31, and 32, Block 6, Reservoir Hills, and the east 10.00 feet of the west 15.00 feet of the above referenced Lots 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, and 32. AND That part of Lot 30, Block 6, Reservoir Hills, which lies northwesterly of a line drawn northeasterly from a point distant 22.00 feet southerly and 15 feet westerly from the northwest corner of said Lot 30, to a point on the north line of said Lot 30 distant 37.00 feet easterly from said northwest corner, as measured along said north line, which lies southwesterly of the permanent easement for road p urposes described above. Whereas, a proposal (Case # 2020-0502) has been submitted by Alatus, LLC to the City Council requesting an easement vacation at the following site: ADDRESSES: 3989 Central Avenue NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING: Easement vacation per Code Section 9.104. (J), of the above legally described easement. Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission held an informal public hearing as required by the City Zoning Code on May 5, 2020; Whereas, the City Council held a formal public hearing as required by the City Zoning Code on May 11, 2020; Whereas, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the effect of the proposed easement vacation 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 1. No private rights will be injured or endangered as a result of the vacation. 2. The public will not suffer loss or inconvenience as a result of the vacation. Further, be it resolved, that the attached plans, maps, and other information shall become part of this easement vacation; and in granting approval the City and the applicant agree that the easement vacation shall become null and void if the resolution is not recorded with Anoka County within one (1) calendar year after the approval date, subject to petition for renewal. CONDITIONS 1. The applicant shall be responsible for providing legal descriptions of all easements that are subject to be created. Said descriptions are subject to review by the City Attorney. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the easement vacations with the Anoka Count y Recorder’s Office. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-45 A resolution of the City Council for the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, approving an easement vacation for property located in the City of Columbia Heights, MN, legally described as: The north 4.00 feet of the west 232.00 feet of Lots 27-30, Block 6, Reservoir Hills. And together with that part of Lots 30-32, Block 6, Reservoir Hills and Lots 26-28, Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills described as follows: Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 30, Block 6, Reservoir Hills, thence east along the north lot line of said Lot 30 a distance of twelve (12.0) feet; thence southerly and parallel with the west line of said Block 6 a distance of one hundred thirty (130.0) feet; thence southwesterly in a straight line to a point two hundred twenty-five (225.0) feet from said northwest corner of Lot along the west line of Block 6, Reservoir Hills and Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement of Lot 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills; thence north two hundred twenty- five (225.0) feet to the point of beginning. Whereas, a proposal (Case # 2020-0502) has been submitted by Alatus, LLC to the City Council requesting an easement vacation at the following site: ADDRESSES: 3989 Central Avenue NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING: Easement vacation per Code Section 9.104. (J), of the above legally described easement. Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission held an informal public hearing as required by the City Zoning Code on May 5, 2020; Whereas, the City Council held a formal public hearing as required by the City Zoning Code on May 11, 2020; Whereas, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the effect of the proposed easement vacation 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 1. No private rights will be injured or endangered as a result of the vacation. 2. The public will not suffer loss or inconvenience as a result of the vacation. Further, be it resolved, that the attached plans, maps, and other information shall become part of this easement vacation; and in granting approval the City and the applicant agree that the easement vacation shall become null and void if the resolution is not recorded with Anoka County within one (1) calendar year after the approval date, subject to petition for renewal. CONDITIONS 1. The applicant shall be responsible for providing legal descriptions of all easements that are subject to be created. Said descriptions are subject to review by the City Attorney. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the easement vacations with the Anoka County Recorder’s Office. Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 CASE NUMBER: 2020-0503 APPLICANT: Friends of Prodeo (Prodeo Academy) LOCATION: 4141 University Ave NE REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit, Variance Hammond Stated that Friends of Prodeo (Prodeo Academy), has applied for a Conditional Use Permit, and Variance for the property located at 4141 University Ave NE. In September of 2019, the City Council approved the Conditional Use Permit and plans allowing for the school to be constructe d on the subject property. At that time, the landscape plans indicated that the play area on the southern end of the property would be surrounded by a fence. Along a portion of the fence, the applicant would like to have ten (10) feet in height section, running north and south (76 feet in length) between the southwestern edge adjacent to the school’s entrance drive and in middle of the property. The fence would extend from the south end of the southwest corner of the building, down to the south property line (as shown in red on the attached plan). The purpose of the fence would be to prevent play objects (balls, Frisbees etc.) from rolling down the hill and entering the drive way and parking area on the west side of the property where there is a grade chan ge. ZONING ORDINANCE The subject property is located in the R-3, multiple-family residential zoning district as are the surrounding properties to the north, south, east and west. K-12 Schools, public or private are permitted in this zoning district. Fences exceeding 6 feet in height require a Conditional Use Permit. The Zoning Ordinance further requires that fences cannot exceed 7 feet in height. Because the proposed fence exceeds this height, a Variance is requested. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan guides this property for institutional development, which includes religious facilities, public and private educational facilities, fire stations, libraries, water system facilities, and any other City, County, or State use. The redevelopment of the subject property to include a new educational facility with landscaping and storm water improvements meets the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. SITE PLAN The applicant submitted a plan showing the location and configuration of the fence. The area where the fence is proposed to be 10 feet in height is identified in red on the plan. FINDINGS OF FACT Section 9.104 (H) of the Zoning Ordinance outlines findings of fact that must be met in order for the City to approve 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. This is correct. A fence exceeding 6 feet in height is specifical ly listed as a Conditional Use for this district. (b) The use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides this property for institutional use. Installing a fence in conjunction with the new educational facility is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 (c) The use will not impose hazards or disturbing influences on neighboring properties. The addition of the fence at the proposed location shouldn’t cause hazards or disturbing influences on neighboring properties. (d) The use will not substantially diminish the use of property in the immediate vicinity. The addition of the fence shouldn’t diminish the use of the property in the immediate vicinity. (e) 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 area. The fence will match the rest of the fencing surrounding the property in design and color, however, this section is proposed to be (5.5) five and a half feet taller in height. Also, due to the proposed height of the fence, it will required engineered plans, which will be reviewed and approved by the Building Official. (f) The use and property upon which the use is located are adequately served by essential public facilities and services. This is correct. (g) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to minimize traffic congestion on the public streets and to provide for appropriate on-site circulation of traffic. This is correct. The fence shouldn’t affect traffic congestion on public streets or on-site traffic circulation. (h) The use will not cause a negative cumulative effect, when considered in conjunction with the cumulative effect of other uses in the immediate vicinity. This is correct. The fence shouldn’t cause a negative cumulative effect. (i) The use complies with all other applicable regulations for the district in which it is located. This is correct. The fence will be constructed of approved fencing materials per the Zoning Ordinance and State Building Code. 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 a Variance. They are as follows: (a) 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. This is correct. The variance request is reasonable given the topography of the parcel, particularly on this side of the parcel where the elevation changes. (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 classification. This is correct. This appears to be the only educational facility in the area with this type of topography. Given that the fence will be surrounding an area where school children will be playing, the conditions are unique to this parcel. Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 (c) 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. This is correct. The variance allowing additional height on the fence will help to keep play equipment from rolling down the hill on the west side of the property. Having a shorter fence on this stretch of the parcel could result in play equipment ending up in the drive aisle, parking lot or University Avenue frontage road. (d) The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The property is guided for institutional use such as a k-8 educational facility. Schools should have adequate outdoor space with play areas for the children that attend the school. The proposed use of the property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (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. This is correct. It does not appear that the taller fence in this location would be detrimental to the public welfare or affect the overall enjoyment, use or value of the property in the area. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approves the request for a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance for the property located at 4141 University Ave NE. subject to the conditions provided to members. Questions from Members: Fiorendino asked if there had been any comments from the public about this. Hammond said that the property to the south had been in contact, but they mostly had questions about the updated plans for landscaping to shield the property. Hoium asked if the fence was going to be opaque or not. Hammond said that it is not; it will be a vinyl-coated chain link fence. Novitsky said it was good planning to have the foresight to address a potential problem up front. Hammond agreed that it is a reasonable request. Hoium mentioned that there is a big drop in that area and asked if it would be on the higher or lower part. Hammond said it would be on the higher part. Public Hearing Opened No one was present to speak on this issue. Public Hearing Closed Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Szurek, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2020-46, there being ample copies available to the public. Planning Commission Minutes Page 13 All Ayes. MOTION PASSED. Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Szurek, to recommend that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2020 - 46, approving the conditional use permit and vari ance for a portion of a fence (as shown on the plan) to be ten (10) feet in height, in conjunction with an educational facility to be located on the property at 4141 University Ave NE., subject to certain conditions of approval. 1. The site plan included in this submittal shall become part of this approval. 2. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met at all times. 3. The applicant will meet the requirements outlined in the letter from the Building Official dated, April 17, 2020. All Ayes. MOTION PASSED. The following resolution will go to the City Council on May 11, 2020. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-46 A resolution of the City Council for the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, approving a Conditional Use Permit, and a Variance for 4141 University Ave NE. Columbia Heights, MN 55421, (PID 35-30-24-24-0191). Whereas, a proposal (Case #2020-0503) has been submitted by Friends of Prodeo to the City Council requesting a Conditional Use Permit, and a Variance to allow for a portion of a fen ce to be ten (10) feet in height at the following site: ADDRESS: 4141 University Ave NE. Columbia Heights, MN 55421 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: On file at City Hall THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING: Conditional Use Permit, Variance Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing as required by the City Zoning Code on May 5, 2020; Whereas, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the effect of the proposed Conditional Use Permit, and Variance 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 (Conditional Use) (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. (b) The use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission Minutes Page 14 (c) The use will not impose hazards or disturbing influences on neighboring properties. (d) The use will not substantially diminish the use of the property in the immediate vicinity. (e) The use will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained in a manner that is compat ible with the appearance of the existing or intended character of the surrounding area. (f) The use and property upon which the use is located are adequately served by essential public facilities and services. (g) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to minimize traffic congestion on the public streets and to provide for appropriate on-site circulation of traffic. (h) The use will not cause a negative cumulative effect, when considered in conjunction with the cumulative effect of other uses in the immediate vicinity. (i) The use complies with all other applicable regulations for the districts in which it is located. FINDINGS OF FACT (Variance) (a) 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. (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 classification. (c) 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. (d) The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. (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. Further, be it resolved, that the attached plans, maps, and other information shall become part of this Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approval; and in granting this Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan approval with variances, 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. This approval is subject to certain conditions that have been found to be necessary to protect the public interest and ensure compliance with the pr ovisions of the Zoning and Development Ordinance, including: CONDITIONS 1. The site plan included in this submittal shall become part of this approval. 2. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met at all times. 3. The applicant will meet the requirements outlined in the letter from the Building Official dated, April 17, 2020. CASE NUMBER: N/A APPLICANT: City of Columbia Heights – EDA Planning Commission Minutes Page 15 LOCATION: 4141 Central Ave NE REQUEST: Review the Proposed Acquisition of 4441 Central Ave NE, and Determine if it Conforms to the Comprehensive Plan INTRODUCTION In July 2017, the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority (the “EDA”) initiated the Commercial Revitalization Program (the “Program”) with the approval of EDA Resoluti on 2017-18, a program which was created to revitalize the commercial corridors throughout the City of Columbia Heights (the “City”), specifically through the acquisition of properties identified as nonconforming under the current zoning code of the City. Nonconforming properties acquired through the Program are held for the purposes of eventual redevelopment. However, pursuant to State Statue, Section 462.356, Subdivision 2, the Planning and Zoning Commission (the “Planning Commission”) in and for the City is required to review and ultimately determine that the proposed acquisition of real property conforms to the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Therefore, the EDA has requested that the Planning Commission review the acquisition of 4441 Central Avenue NE, Columbia Heights, MN 55421 (the “Subject Property”) to determine if its acquisition conforms to the Comprehensive Plan of the City. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The proposed acquisition of the Subject Property responds to several goals and policies adopted in the Comprehensive Plan of the City, specifically in Chapter 2: Land Use and Chapter 4: Economic Development. Below are the specific goals and policies from the Comprehensive Plan that directly and indirectly correlate to the conformity of the proposed acquisition. LAND USE AND REDEVELOPMENT Goal: Preserve and enhance the existing viable commercial and industrial areas within the community. Goal: Provide mechanisms for successful redevelopment of vacant lands and targeted areas within the community. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Goal: Enhance the economic viability of the community. 1. Encourage the continuation and enhancement of existing industries within the community. 2. Rehabilitate, or where necessary, redevelop substandard and/or functionally obsolete commercial development through private means or, if necessary, public means. Goal: Promote reinvestment in properties by the commercial and industrial sectors. 2. Encourage existing industries and businesses to expand within the community. 4. Promote high quality development and redevelopment opportunities within the community. Questions from Members: Novitsky and Szurek asked if the property is set for demolition. Chirpich responded the plan is to demo it at some point and hold it for future development. Szurek asked if there had been any movement to obtain 4453 Central Ave. Chirpich said that it is an interesting parcel and that at one time they had reached out to Community Development to potentially purchase it. It Planning Commission Minutes Page 16 would be good to buy it to this piece for future development if the terms were right. Staff has also talked to the owner of the parcel to the north. Hoium asked how much we paid. Chirpich said it was $125k, which was close to the counties assessed value. It was a big eyesore and in foreclosure. Buesgens asked if there were renters there. Chirpich said yes, there had been through the fall. They found out it was on the market after flooding in the basement late last year. It was a multiple offer situation and many had called in to the office seeking info on the property. Hoium asked if any of the people calling in had plans that would have fit in with development ideas for that parcel. Chirpich said no. A lot had ideas of buying and renting it out. The plot is legally non-conforming and would have had to be vacant for 1 year to change its current use as residential. As it had not been vacant for that long, there would be no way for us to prevent it from continuing to be a residential/rental property. Hammond also stated that they had discussed this with the lawyer to see if they could argue that it had been modified. Szurek said the house has not been modified. She mentioned it had deteriorated a lot over multiple ownerships to where you could even see a hole in the roof. She feels this was a good use of EDA fund s to buy this property. Chirpich agreed that the property hit all the high points of the program and this is why they were aggressive in their bid to purchase. Public Hearing Opened No one was present to speak on this issue. Public Hearing Closed Motion by Fiorendino, seconded by Szurek, to adopt Resolution 2020-PZ03 a resolution finding that the proposed acquisition of certain land for redevelopment purposes by the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority is consistent with the City of Columbia Heights’ Comprehensive Plan. All Ayes. MOTION PASSED. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-PZ03 A RESOLUTION FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN LAND FOR REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES BY THE COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS’ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHEREAS, the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) proposes to purchase certain property (the “Property”) located at 4441 Central Avenue NE, (PID 36-30-24-22-0042) in the City of Columbia Heights (the “City”) and described on the attached Exhibit A, for the purposes of eventual redevelopment; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.356, subd. 2 requires the City Planning and Zoning Commission to review the proposed acquisition or disposal of publicly-owned real property within the City prior to its acquisition or disposal, to determine whether in the opinion of the Planning and Zoning Commission, such acquisition or disposal is consistent with the comprehensive municipal plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposed acquisition of the Property, and has determined that the Property is located in an area of the City designated for transitional development within the City’s Planning Commission Minutes Page 17 comprehensive plan, that the Authority’s purpose is to redevelop the Property consistent with this use, and that the proposed acquisition is therefore consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Columbia Heights, that the acquisition of the Property by the Authority is consistent with the City’s comprehensive municipal plan, and will promote the correction of a nonconforming property and redevelopment consistent with the transitional development designation of the Property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be communicated to the Board of Commissioners of the Authority. ORDER OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Passed this 5th day of May, 2020 Offered by: Fiorendino Seconded by: Szurek Roll Call: All Ayes OTHER BUSINESS Updates: Chirpich thanked the commission members for bearing with the new method of meeting and said he appreciated their patience. Chirpich mentioned that the next meeting will be in June and that there will be at least one item on the agenda, which is the sale of the EDA property to Atlatus. Kaiser asked if the department had heard anything from Atlatus about the economic slowdown affecting the project. Chirpich said it has been talked about and that he has been in contact with Atlatus weekly. As of right now, they are still full steam ahead. Their biggest investor, who is 55% of their equity, has the foresight to see that this will not hit the market for another two years. The next Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 2, 2020 at 6 pm. The meeting was adjourned at 6:46 pm. Respectfully submitted, Christy Bennett Secretary CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING REPORT CASE NUMBER: N/A DATE: June 2, 2020 TO: Columbia Heights Planning Commission APPLICANT: N/A DEVELOPMENT: N/A LOCATION: 3989 Central Avenue NE, 3889 Central Avenue NE, 950 40th Avenue NE, and 961 Gould Avenue NE REQUEST: Review the Proposed sale of property and Determine if it Conforms to the Comprehensive Plan PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Hammond, Planner INTRODUCTION The Economic Development Authority (EDA) of Columbia Heights is proposing to convey the property located at 3989 Central Avenue NE, 3889 Central Avenue NE, 950 40th Avenue NE, and 961 Gould Avenue NE, Columbia Heights, MN 55421 (Subject Properties) for the purposes of redevelopment as mixed-use multifamily housing and a city hall facility, pursuant to a Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with Alatus Columbia Heights LLC . Minnesota Statutes (Section 462.356, subd. 2) requires the Planning Commission to review the proposed disposal (sale) of publicly-owned property within the City prior to its disposal, to determine it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The EDA has requested that the Planning Commission review the sale of the Subject Properties and make a determination. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The proposed sale of the Subject Properties responds to several goals and policies adopted in the Comprehensive Plan, specifically in Chapter 3: Land Use, Chapter 4: Housing, and Chapter 5: Economic Competitiveness. Below are the specific goals and policies from the Comprehensive Plan that correlate to the conformity of the proposed sale. LAND USE AND REDEVELOPMENT Goal: Preserve and enhance the existing viable commercial and industrial areas within the community. 1. Facilitate the enhancement and redevelopment of major streets and commercial districts. Goal: Provide mechanisms for successful redevelopment of vacant lands and targeted areas within the community. City of Columbia Heights June 2, 2020 Planning Report Page 2 1. Enhance the image and viability of the Central Avenue co rridor while protecting and enhancing adjacent residential uses.  Utilize mixed-use land use and design principals to integrate office, commercial, and residential uses with a focus on pedestrian and bicycle amenities within redevelopment along Central Avenue. Housing Goal: Strengthen areas of commercial and civic activity by introducing complementary housing development. 1. Support the inclusion of appropriate housing alternatives during redevelopment in mixed use districts. ECONOMIC C OMPETITIVENESS Goal: Enhance the economic viability of the community. RECOMMENDATION Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 2020-PZ04 a resolution finding that the proposed sale of land for redevelopment purposes by the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority is consistent with the City of Columbia Heights’ Comprehensive Plan. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (1 Page) 2. Resolution 2020-PZ04 (3 Pages) Subject Property 3989 Central Avenue NE, 3889 Central Avenue NE, 950 40th Avenue NE, and 961 Gould Avenue NE 653348v1 MNI CL205-73 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2020-PZ04 A RESOLUTION FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED SALE OF CERTAIN LAND FOR REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES BY THE COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS’ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) proposes to convey certain property (the “Property”) located at 3989 Central Avenue NE, 3889 Central Avenue NE, 950 40th Avenue NE, and 961 Gould Avenue NE in the City of Columbia Heights (the “City”) and described on the attached Exhibit A, for the purposes of redevelopment as mixed-use multifamily housing and a city hall facility, pursuant to a Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with Alatus Columbia Heights LLC; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.356, subd. 2 requires the City Planning and Zoning Commission (the “Commission”) to review the proposed acquisition or disposal of publicly- owned real property within the City prior to its acqu isition or disposal, to determine whether in the opinion of the Planning and Zoning Commission, such acquisition or disposal is consistent with the comprehensive municipal plan; and WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the proposed sale of the Property, and has determined that the Property is located in an area of the City which, on February 4, 2020, was approved by the Commission for designation as Planned Unit Development with allowed uses of market -rate apartments, commercial/retail, and office, that the Authority’s purpose is to redevelop the Property consistent with these uses, and that the proposed acquisition is therefore consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Columbia Heights, that the sale of the Property by the Authority is consistent with the City’s comprehensive municipal plan, will promote the elimination of blight and blighting factors, and will foster redevelopment consistent with the zoning designat ion of the Property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be communicated to the Board of Commissioners of the Authority. Adopted this 2nd day of June, 2020, by the Columbia Heights Planning and Zoning Commission. Chair, Columbia Heights Planning and Zoning Commission 653348v1 MNI CL205-73 EXHIBIT A Description of Property Lot 32, Block 6, Reservoir Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota. Lots 25 through 28, Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota. The vacated alley adjacent to Lots 25 through 28, Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills, Anoka County, Minnesota. Those parts of Lots 28 through 31, Block 6, Reservoir Hills; Lots 23 and 24, Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills; and of the vacated alley adjacent to Lot 24, Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills; lying Southwesterly and Westerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the South line of Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement, said point being 18.00 feet West of the Southeast corner of Lot 23, of said Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement; thence Northerly on a line 18.00 feet West of and parallel with the East line of Lot 23, a distance of 87.00 feet; thence on a straight line to a point on the North line of Lot 30 of said Block 6, Reservoir Hills, said point being 47.23 feet Easterly of the Northwest corner of said Lot 30 and there terminating. Anoka County, Minnesota Abst ract and Torrens Property AND Those parts of Lots 27 through 31, Block 6, Reservoir Hills and those parts of Lots 23 and 24, Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills and of the vacated alley abutting Block 1, "Walton's Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills", as dedicated in said plat, lying within the following described tract: Commencing at a point on the South line of said Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement distant 18.00 feet West of the Southeast corner of Lot 23, said Block 1, Walton's Rearrangement; thence Northerly on a line 18.00 feet West of and parallel with the East line of said Lot 23, a distance of 87.00 feet, to the actual point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence continuing Nor therly on the extension of said line to the North line of Block 6, Reservoir Hills; thence Westerly along said North line of Block 6, to a point being 47.23 feet Easterly of the Northwest corner of Lot 30, Block 6, Reservoir Hills; thence Southeasterly, to the point of beginning; Excepting therefrom Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 250, Anoka County, Minnesota. Abstract Property AND Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 250, Anoka County, Minnesota. Torrens Property 653348v1 MNI CL205-73 AND Lots 24, 25, and 26, Block 6, Reservoir Hills Lots 20, 21, and 22, Block 1, Walton’s Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills, and all of the vacated alley adjacent to said Lots 20, 21, and 22. Those parts of Lot 27, Block 6, Reservoir Hills and of Lot 23, Block 1, Wa lton’s Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills and of that part of the vacated alley abutting Block 1, “Walton's Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills”, as dedicated in said plat, which lies westerly of the northerly extension of the east line of Lot 23, said Block 1, lying easterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the south line of said Block 1, Walton’s Rearrangement, said point being 18.00 feet west from the Southeast corner of Lot 23 of said Block l, Walton's Rearrangement; thence northerly on a line 18.00 feet west of and parallel with the east line of said Lot 23, to the north line of said Block 6, Reservoir Hills. Reserving and subject to easement to the City of Columbia Heights for roadw ay purposes over the north 4.00 feet of the west 232.00 feet of said Block 6, Reservoir Hills. AND Lot 19, Block 1, Walton’s Rearrangement of Lots 33 and 34, Block 6, Reservoir Hills. Anoka County, Minnesota.