HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.08.181685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. a ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 a (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 a WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Agenda
May 8, 2018
Andover City Hall
Council Chambers
7.00 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Approval of Minutes — April 10, 2018 Regular Meeting
4. Public Hearing - Sketch Plan/Planned Unit Development — Knoll
Property/Centra Homes —157th Avenue/Round Lake Blvd. NW
5. Public Hearing — Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Petersen Farms — 71h
Avenue /165th Avenue NW
6. Other Business
7. Adjournment
ANLb Y
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Stephanie L. Hanson, City Planner
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes — April 10, 2018 Regular Meeting
Minutes
DATE: May 8, 2018
REQUEST
The Planning and Zoning Commission is requested to approve the regular meeting minutes from
April 10, 2018.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING — APRIL 10, 2018
The Regular Bi- Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning 4071c
called to order by Chairperson Nemeth on April 10, 2018, . .n
Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesc_
Commissioners present:
Commissioners absent:
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF
minutes:
- Page 3, ]
Hudson.
Timothy Cleven,
Koehler IV, Nicl
g Commission was
at the Andover City
Joe Janish
I:Zl
the following change be made to the Workshop
was made by Commissioner Loehlein, not Commissioner
Chairperson Nemeth requested the following changes be made to the regular minutes:
- Page 2, line 41 — add a comma after "2018."
- Page 3, line 9 — remove the comma after "replied," and add a comma after "yes."
- Page 3, line 11 - Capitalize the "C" in "Code."
- Page 3, line 16 — add a comma after "yes."
- Page 4, line 30 — remove the comma after `replied," and add a comma after "no."
- Page 5, line 8 — add a comma after "yes."
- Page 5, line 33 — insert the word "it" after "appreciates."
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — April 10, 2018
Page 2
1 - Page 5, line 36 —add a comma after "yes."
2 - Page 6, line 14 — insert "the" after the word "from."
3
4 There were no changes from staff.
5
6 Motion by Daninger, seconded by Koehler, to approve the March 27, 2018, Regular
7 Meeting minutes as amended. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 1- present ( Cleven), 0 -nays, 0-
8 absent vote.
9
10 PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning RI Rural Residential to R4 residential —
11 Catcher's Creek East — Mark of Excellence
12 Affi-V _
13 Mr. Janish presented information regarding a proposed V est to % %-U' e the parcels
14 located east of Hickory Meadows Subdivision and t@6 City o Lake /Andover
15 border from R -1 Single Family Rural to R -4 Singki amify Urban as rested by Mark
16 of Excellence.
18 The property is located within the Metropolitan Uri �� ice Area (MUSA) and also
19 within the current stage of sewer exp Sion. Times an ditions have changed with the
20 extension of municipal sewer and wat this area of t 'ty. The Comp Plan has the
21 properties guided as Transitional Resi ch contain rties within the
22 MUSA currently zoned rural but guidedr ur lopme ' It has been requested by
23 the property owner to rezone the propertiO%so la a developed into urban
24 residential lots for the pri 06 developme own as -1 tcher's Creek East.
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
There were no
Motion by
carried ong
one else
the public hearing at 7:07 p.m. Motion
vote.
comment on the rezoning.
Motion by sin, second by Cleven and Sims to close the public hearing at 7:08
p.m. Motion c' -4 on a eyes, 0 -nays, 0- absent vote.
36 Commissioner Simsuired about the land outside of the "red area." Mr. Janish stated
37 that the land is not owned by the developer and there is not a request to rezone that area.
38 Commissioner Sims asked if it was consistent with other similar situations. Mr. Janish
39 replied that it was consistent as it is part of the transitional area. Commissioner Sims
40 stated that he feels this is inconsistent with 3 different zonings in a 1 or 2 mile stretch
41 with the area around the development being zoned R -4. He asked why the City would
42 not zone the whole area the same.
43
44 Mr. Janish explained that the area is in a location where they have traditionally rezoned
45 after a development has been proposed. The 3 parcels in question are not requesting
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — April 10, 2018
Page 3
1 rezoning to R -4 at this time. Mr. Janish confirmed that the applicant would have to meet
2 requirements of an R -1 district in order to have a 2nd home on the property.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Motion by Koehler, seconded by Loehlein to rezone Catchers Creek East from R1 Rural
Residential to R4 Urban Residential. Motion carried on a 7 -ayes, 0 -nays, 0- absent vote.
This matter will be heard at the April 17, 2018, Council meeting at 7:00 pm.
PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat —Catcher's Creek EastmMark of Excellence
The proposed plat contains 39 urban residential lots as
The property is located in the MUSA and is currently z
Residential. However, the comprehensive land use plat
residential, which contains properties within the MYV
for urban development. A rezoning of the proper06 to
accomplishes this request._
18 Public street access to Catcher's Creek East would
19 A temporary fire lane would be consucted on the
20 as required by the Fire Department. " porai
21 future when the property to the west de
22 development (144`" Lane and 144' AvenW).
23 the City's standards (33 feet wide within fe� i
24 the proposed "eyebrow" s-ac•
25
26 Staff is requestmgoft
27 (Condition 14). With
28 lot. Howev it
29 become True
30 "cul -d ac truck" co'
31
req itior
32
improvers
33
-z :.
34
Staff is requestit
35
on the eastern ed
36
design vs. a teml
37
City of Andover
by Mark of Excellence.
u ingle Family Rural
it gu `as transitional
ently z al, but guided
Single F rban
e&from Andover Boulevard.
of the proposed development
(�uld be removed in the
=ficcess to the proposed
fye streets will conform to
vay), with the exception of
the "e�ow" from the proposed plat
cul -dec, the developer would have one less
wed for an "eyebrow" cul -de -sac to
as a City. "Eyebrow" cul -de -sacs require that a
the snow from the area. An "Eyebrow" also
ne and funds over the lifetime of the
ev #per to provide a 93' diameter permanent cul -de -sac design
ikevelopment at 144`h Avenue. The reason for a permanent
lesign is that the future extension is up to a different city. The
authority as to if or when the future extension would occur.
38
39 Staff is suggesting the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council consider
40 condition 15 of the resolution which requires the eastern 1441h Lane "temporary" cul -de-
41 sac to be designed to permanent cul -de -sac standards due to the amount of variables that
42 exist with the future extension.
43
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —April 10, 2018
Page 4
1 The Anoka County Highway Department is in the process of reviewing the applicant's
2 submittal. The applicant has currently submitted plans which include the construction of
3 a right -hand turn lane.
4
5 Water and sewer for this development will be obtained from the south and staff has
6 requested from the developer the status of obtaining a right of entry or temporary
7 easement from the property owner along Butternut Street, south of the plat, for
8 construction of the sanitary sewer and water main.
9
10 Condition 8 of approval restricts utility work until the developw.UMveloped a
I 1 resolution on the process in which the sewer and water exten,
ft will be installed.
12
13 The applicant will need to satisfactorily address all co ni4i, is by oon Creek
14 Watershed District prior to the submittal of the fmaj�
15 _
16 The applicant is proposing to impact 7,995 sch " eet of tland. The rn ' `n will be
17 done through wetland bank credits. Portions of t O-yqOVI fringe aolhe 500-
18 year floodplain areas will need to be removed from dplain due to the proposed
19 construction of homes within the area
20" £'_
21 The property has burial grounds on it t inventori " 'ihe State Archeologist.
22 The applicant is working with that office dete e reqements, if any, for
23 additional protection of the urial site. Cot-li ' ; 1 that the protection of the
24 burial grounds shall be e to the Mi sota Indian Affairs Council and State
25 Archaeologist._
26 —
27 The developer and/or o ible totain all necessary permits.
28 = 1
29 The Cit ' vomp ows nal trails along Coon Creek and along Andover
30 Boul d. Construct a tray, _g the Creek may be challenging due to the
31 loc io etland and M M plain. e trail along Coon Creek would be a regional trail
32 paid for o the City's t fun and/or potential MNDNR grant funds.
33
34 A more detaile scap plan must be submitted that shows tree spacing, removal
35 and species of tree �lanted in the development. Also, the landscaping plan shall
36 show the type of lan .- screening to be provided on the multiple frontage lots along
37 Andover Boulevard as required by City Code. The existing trees around the two homes
38 within the proposed development will be removed.
39
40 The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the preliminary plat at their December 7,
41 2017 meeting. A recommendation of a cash contribution in lieu of land was made.
42
43 Each of the 39 lots met the minimum lot width, depth and area requirements of the R -4
44 Zoning District.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —April 10, 2018
Page 5
1 The City received supplemental information, a letter from Arlene Elin that was
2 distributed to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Janish noted that Mike
3 O'Donnell also submitted photos but he was present at the meeting and could address his
4 concerns. Ms. Elin also included the names of other residents in her correspondence.
5 Mr. Janish offered to share those names upon request.
6
7 Commissioner Koehler asked if the "eyebrow" cul -de -sac was removed, would a lot be
8 sacrificed. Mr. Janish confirmed that would likely be the case. Likely 4 lots would have
9 to become 3 lots. Commissioner Koehler went on and asked abothe need to pull sewer
10 and water from the south end and if there would be potential d' 46n. He asked if it
11 was recommended to address what their need would be in t "_ guage of the resolution.
12 Mr. Janish referred to item #8 of the resolution. The prod y r(s) and the developer
13 would have a conversation, in conjunction with City staf L e also ed about access for
14 the homeowner in the resolution. Mr. Janish expla' aY this dev - ent is unique,
15 and the important factors would be having temp _y access to homes ccess for
16 emergency vehicles. The developer has coney to the ligmeowner that uld
17 provide vehicle access to and from the property d ° th lopment of tproperty.
18 There were questions about the landscaping plan an = a ck of current details. Mr.
19 Janish indicated that staff would be 1< king for someth imilar to other landscaping in
20 the area. Commissioner Koehler aske` re was discus' about retaining the road as
21 it is currently. Mr. Janish stated that th n severalrsations, however, it
22 would cause the loss of 4 lots. There haft, een s4tion about University Avenue
5 i M �°
23 coming through. The prNL- ner in _ ice w lnterested in having
24 University extend thro perty. Bo _ evelope - d City of Ham Lake's City
25 Engineer spoke to t aesident in card to the possibility of extending
26 University. Commis t er Koe r asked whe nearest neighboring park would be
27 located. Mr. Janish res ie K ark is the closest to this proposed
28 developme
29
� 2
30 Com I Toner Danin a ed a length of the cul -de -sac. Mr. Janish responded
31 tha ode -sacs wou t exce 500 feet because they are considered temporary.
32 Commissi� r;..Daninger b ved at all cul -de -sacs are temporary. He also asked if
33 there was a prM us sketean for this development. Mr. Janish confirmed there was
34 not.
35
laldv
36 Commissioner Hudscl' asked for confirmation regarding Butternut, and if a vacation of
37 easement will be needed to retain road access to a homeowner that is not part of this
38 development, and if there would be two homes removed. He also asked about a fire
39 road/second access point on the western side of the property. Mr. Janish pointed out the
40 area that can be used [for road access]. He noted that the developer has about 2 years to
41 get everything done. The road would be removed when the additional developed area
42 would allow for an additional access for safety reasons. Commissioner Hudson asked
43 about the size of a permanent cul -de -sac. Mr. Janish responded that he thought that it
44 was 93 feet. Commissioner Hudson was concerned about how that might change some of
45 the new lots when/if a large cul -de -sac was installed at a later date. Mr. Janish replied
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —April 10, 2018
Page 6
1 that the cul -de -sac is designed to permanent standards within a temporary easement.
2 Eventually, the "bulb" would be removed if there was a street connection, and the
3 easement would be vacated.
4
5 Commissioner Loehlein stated that because the cul -de -sacs are temporary in nature, the
6 500 -foot rule does not apply, however, the access is under 500 feet. Mr. Janish countered
7 that comment by saying that was not exactly right because of how the measuring is done.
8 Temporary cul -de -sacs are not measured because it is a "moot point" either way.
9
10 Commissioner Sims asserted that a decision was being made o W ing "permanent"
1 t when it is really "temporary." Mr. Janish stated that it was
the individual when
12 they are ready for a development. Measurements are not-Olh _ n on the temporary
13 cul -de -sacs. Mr. Janish described that vacation of eas mkt /righter= _ay process.
�
14 dw� -
15 Commissioner Hudson asked about the "eyebrow d if it was appro written, the
16 eyebrow would be removed from the resoluti e quesf1 ned if it coul an
17 adjustment to the existing homes that would then ba the Commis ion as a
18 variance request. Mr. Janish confirmed that it woul to the developer and
19 described a loss of a lot.
20�
21 Commissioner Loehlein asked if the Cod i � 6 - would get e another look at this
22 plat. Mr. Janish stated that they would n,
23
E-
24 Chairperson Nemeth a � the street Wess 144t" lane and 144`" Boulevard, as
25 noted in the packet&10:
anis- �plained thatwas an error and it should be "Avenue"
26 and "Lane." He aY rmedat many of tees will not be saved. Chairperson
27 Nemeth also asked abouf pQ� � of setts a timeframe. The preliminary plat is
28 valid for 2 per man be F� of the City for grading. Setting a timeline
29 would
30- -
31 Moo aninger, sec ed by ven, to open the public hearing at 7:58 p.m.
32 Motion ca= on a 7 -aye -' -nays 0- absent vote.
33 -=
34 Mr. Janish mend d the�er again that he had received and Mr. O'Donnell who was in
35 the audience.
36
37 Mike O'Donnell, of the Shadowbrook Townhome Association, asked for clarification on
38 the map as to where the Indian Mounds were located. Mr. Janish referred to the Mound
39 area and pointed it out.
40
41 Mr. O'Donnell commented that there are about 10 -12 homes that have overlooked this
42 project for 5 years. He reviewed a timeline and showed photographs that were projected.
43 The photos included ones illustrating flooding and removal of trees. He noted that for 2
44 years hardly any grading was done and in December 2016, the applicant got an extension.
45 In May of 2017, within 3 weeks, the dirt was cleaned out and the job was done. In April
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —April 10, 2018
Page 7
1 2016, there should have been a silt fence, but it was lying down. He also noted that the
2 fence was 5 feet higher than the grading. He expressed that the 9 -month project "was an
3 eye sore for 5 years." Mr. O'Donnell's hope was that the Planning and Zoning
4 Commission could oversee these developments more closely.
5
6 Chet Hapka, of 67 — 142nd Avenue NW, in the Shadowbrook Cove area, expressed that
7 he did not understand why there are 4 houses "at the top on the right -hand side" and
8 wanted to know how far from the Creek that would come. Mr. Janish clarified the
9 question by responding that no additional homes would be const ted due to the burial
10 mound. Mr. Janish also confirmed that the water and sewer co s would go under
11 the creek. Mr. Hapka asked if there would be any additiona o avating. Mr. Janish
12 confirmed that the developer did not own that property. Wl*k# expressed that he
13 does not want the natural area disturbed. Mr. Janish stat, that tli ad been no
14 discussions, that he was aware of, regarding utilities gyould be �.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Jerry Beam, of Las Vegas Nevada, came repr
Andover Blvd. He had concerns regarding the it
development. He wondered at what point would
point would that get determined and would it be
the area. He noted that the road has n a ma
the early 1970s. He felt that at some poop,
lane in the driveway. Mr. Beam noted tljinter
Boulevard and how everyone keeps talkit
He wondered why it w 'd out in al ip
lanes come out oft He = of feel liked `
had concerns that 0' did n constitute a
the whole development know ab -
sandy soil am re qu so ii 3?re
the neighWis.
his ither, Shirley' ; of 121
ten of this prop
the by -pass road /lane and at what
based e amount of travel through
intained, -that it was the same as in
s.
uld mean ttltiere would be a bypass
.t Unirsity and Andover
it d out in a temporary way.
orary f4i ,Aiion, and "why wouldn't the 4
`made a whole lot of sense." He also
er. He was interested in a timeline for
mat dust control and monitoring due to the
lated protection [from blowing sand] for
Davy of 50 - 139i° 1t NW, = the Shadowbrook Cove, expressed concerns about
drainage and the "m{ r dit " in the area. He wondered if it was going to be
upgraded to _" Q , e the adder nal drainage.
Daniel Gunderson,' "' ndover Blvd NE in Ham Lake, lives just to the east of this
development. He w ered if there was any speculation regarding the kind of trees being
planted, specificallyf there would be trees planted between the development and his
property.
40 Mark Smith, of Lino Lakes, Minnesota, is the developer of this project. He wanted to
41 clarify that there is another park in Hickory Meadows. In the short term the property to
42 the south would be guaranteed to have a way to go to and from the property. Sewer and
43 water will come from the south side of the creek and they will work with her to get a man
44 hole in. As to the "eyebrow," buyers love them and buy those lots. It gives more street
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —April 10, 2018
Page 8
1 room and does create a little more curve. They are popular in other cities. He believes
2 that all cul -de -sacs should be designed as temporary.
3
4 Chairperson Nemeth asked about getting University to Bunker, but due to wetlands it
5 would be almost impossible. As to thoughts about extending University to 144th Avenue,
6 the homeowner in Ham Lake is not interested. Mr. Smith has talked to the property
7 owner. There would be trees planted. He noted a difference in elevation between his
8 property and the homeowner, Mr. Beam. He would project a tree would be planted about
9 every 10 feet or 7 -8 trees per lot.
10
11 As for dust control, Chairperson Nemeth stated that he had a lot about this in
12 regard to the Shadowbrook development. He asked wha� pper was going to do
13 differently and stated that being a good developer is bean n 1 good hbor. Mr. Smith
14 stated that it would be seeded right away. He con -mom fed, that the co ints have been
15 overshadowed by the compliments. He noted thf��rnut is a dirt ro d people still
16 use that as a main road, but it is not prepared Vie. He was surprised a �ceiving
3r
17 complaints still. Chairperson Nemeth expressed `cam rns , Coon Creek leas gotten
18 higher and higher. Mr. Smith confirmed that the C as approved the plan. The rise
19 of the Creek is not due to current devVopment project
20 "W-
21 Commissioner Hudson asked where th .. I _ as stored s ere the silt fencing
22 was located. Mr. Smith replied that the cing' due Wthe Indian Mound. He
23 also asked about the amo _ of sand/dirt nod' to "£d for the development. Mr.
24 Smith stated that they to keep it ote. Mr. tr idson clarified that his plan was
25 not to move the fill offsite. .
26
27 Commissioner Daninge e about th ` omeowner having access to get to the
28 street. Mr . wed th tterni stay in place until the last possible minute
29 and anti altern d is ed. He also asked if there was a sketch plan
30 sub He said th f ind that it was not necessary. Commissioner Daninger
31 star a would be ag stafe same question.
32
33 Commission ehlein as - about trees on the lot line. Mr. Smith noted trees would be
34 planted.y
35
36 Chairperson Nemeth ed about the silt fence. Mr. Smith stated that it would remain
37 until staff allowed for its removal. He estimated that grading would take about 2 months
38 and pipe work would take about 1 additional month plus additional time for the street
39 construction (about 3 weeks). He would plan to start and then complete the work and be
40 done. Some tradesmen are in high demand [so work can be delayed].
41
42 The project may begin in mid - summer. "It is getting tight right now to meet that
43 schedule," commented Mr. Smith.
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — April 10, 2018
Page 9
Commissioner Koehler asked again about the fence. Mr. Smith confirmed that the fence
needs to stay until the grading is done, and vegetation established, which should be the
fall.
Mr. O'Donnell asked about the grading and the silt fence. He believed that the fence has
been up for 5 years now and that the orange fences seem to be able to stay up "forever."
He felt that there should be no reason for the fence to be up at this time as there is not
something currently in force.
Mr. Gunderson came back to the podium. He expressed
clear- cutting of trees. He wondered about the lot line ch
Mr. Hapka, also returned to the podium. He
"in the first place."
Mr. Smith addressed the mining project. He
been met. He confirmed that they were not a
Mounds, originally.
Mr. Janish revealed additional details W ng the letter
i�
Elin.
Chairperson Nemeth
the Commission's ju
No one else
Motion by
Motion
Mr.-I-diftWonfirmed. the
not needed _ City Code
Commissioner Chi
R
would be possible
removed were not
to
those in
the elevation and
roof -top views.
the n ees were removed
that Cit _ —' fia had
of some £'the Indian
submitted by Arlene
roads are outside of
MRAWe the public hearing at 9:04 p.m.
0- absent vote.
indicated to Mr. Smith that the sketch plan was
e a sketch plan for R -4 developments.
about drawings of trees and shrubbery. He asked if there
-Is. Mr. Janish referred to the packet materials. Trees to be
Chairperson Nemeth reviewed the silt fencing concerns. Mr. Janish recalled a
conversation from Engineering that it would be better if the fencing would stay up in the
short-term to protect the area environmentally. The fencing will need to be re- inspected
as it deteriorates over time. It was felt it provides some level of safety at this point in
time.
Commissioner Koehler asked for clarification regarding an "eyebrow" cul -de -sac and the
problems for the City related to snow plowing and additional expense due to a larger
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes -April 10, 2018
Page 10
amount of street surface. Mr. Janish described the equipment that was utilized.
Commissioner Koehler asked about penalties for lack of compliance [related to the pile
of displaced soil]. He acknowledged the inherent difficulty in living in an area under
development.
There was additional discussion regarding the pros and cons of the "eyebrow" cul -de -sac.
The draft resolution has the "eyebrow" removed. The Commission acknowledged that
the applicant could bring the matter to the City Council.
Commissioners Loehlein and Cleven spoke to the benefits of
have any concerns with the "eyebrow," snowplowing or oth
Commissioner Koehler stated that he would expect
again with a variance request [if the "eyebrow" is r
Commissioner Sims noted that the Commissi
however a variance could come to the Planning
Commissioner Daninger stated that hg —wants to see the
Chairperson Nemeth noted that the Co`__ " not the
{referring to the City Council). m
Commissioner 1
they may never
would essential
They did not
seeing Mr. Smith
to see the vWlat again,
to get to see this
they are '*lly beingsked to approve something that
;r Sims agr d. If the "eyebrow" has to come out, they
plat and submit again.
There was adadiscu V reg-MIWWsilt fence. A timeframe was discussed, but
consens as t efr as not practical (due to weather, etc.). When the work
is do r. Smith m ove e. There was reference to the mining project,
whin erent than d oping idential property. Commissioner Cleven noted that
City Code dy has the -. guage to deal with these issues.
There was addih discliF ion about setting a timeline. Mr. Smith was encouraged,
again, to be a good or.
Commissioner Hudson stated that he believes the neighbors' concern is more around the
time when roadwork is being done and ditching, after that the issues are by in large gone.
A single phase of development is being proposed.
Additional discussion was held around enforcement. Mr. Janish explained what can
happen and how financial securities come into play.
Chairperson Nemeth asked about tree planting and recommended additional trees in
conjunction with Mr. Gunderson's request.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —April 10, 2018
Page 11
2 Commissioner Hudson referred to page 3 of the packet. Commissioner Koehler stated
3 that a landscaping plan must be submitted. He does not want to "call out the trees in
4 every single property." Commissioner Cleven encouraged work between the two parties
5 (referring to the developer and Mr. Gunderson). It was noted that Mr. Gunderson does
6 not want more trees on his property.
7
8 Chairperson Nemeth directed adding something regarding vehicle access to the home at
9 Butternut. There was a question about to what standards the [tem xary] road should be
10 maintained. There was further discussion about possible lang luding "access that
11 meets or exceeds current access."
12
13 Commissioners Daninger and Cleven expressed concern I gardiirl accessibility of
14 fire vehicles to the proposed development.
15
16 Chairperson Nemeth wondered if the City Co�[ ressed quirements ffgts
17 specific to fire and ambulance services.
AP
18 -
19 Commissioner Loehlein inquired abort the letter regard rading. Mr. Janish
20 responded that City staff felt comforta t the water fl ould not affect the
21 neighbors. He illustrated the direction age, histo
22�
23 Mr. Janish noted that the to �_ orary cul de�aadd ribV00 `addressed. There was a
24 proposed size for the A .93 ft diamc� for a permanent one (50 ft for the
25 temporary one). Mi
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Chairperson Nemeth
is DermanerrL 1.
Koehler
diameter.
Commissioner
know what the
M lution �s that the cul -de -sac on the eastern end
R as written. Mr. Janish also noted that the
the "eyebrow."
the radius by 6.5 -feet or a 13 -foot
that if approved, as written, the Commissioners would not
k like, and if it will meet City Code.
Chairperson Nemetli asked why the "stub" was there if University Avenue is not going
through.
Commissioner Hudson asked how all cul -de -sacs could be temporary in nature and this
one be permanent.
43 Mr. Janish responded that the cul -de -sac would remain temporary but would be designed
44 to permanent standards. The eastern cul -de -sac would allow for street access to
45 properties within the City of Ham Lake.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — April 10, 2018
Page 12
Commissioner Daninger commented, "then the plat is incorrect that the Commission was
looking at, but they could make a recommendation."
Commissioner Koehler moved to deny because there was not sufficient information to
know what the plat would look like.
Motion by Koehler, seconded by Cleven to deny approval of the preliminary plat of
"Catcher's Creek East." Motion carried on a 7 -ayes, 0 -nays, 0- abpFnt vote.
This matter may be heard at the April 17, 2018, Council meS-ftat 7:00 pm.
Commissioner Koehler addressed Mr. Smith stating
forward, but that there was not enough information,
Commissioner Daninger asked about getting
more definite.
Chairperson Nemeth stated that he j
Chairperson Nemeth thanked the
OTHER BUSINESS
On April 3, 2018,1ie h pl
Ridge. The City Coun vi
about lot sib ote
due to mity. elim
Co s was the t ine
vac io drainage o ili
which wa approved, ` t:
Staff
not like the
was flbftainst the plat going
of him.
for such
and
meeting.
plan,
reviewe E QX, the PUD for the Estates at Cedar
rection to
_, _e developer. They were concerned
7 _ n
3 e kennel business and the residential area
at for Winslow Cove was approved by the City
ess 0' Addition. Action was taken on the
iment for the White Pine Wilderness 4`h Addition,
on the final plat being approved and recorded.
will not meet again until May.
Commissioner Sims ked if the Comp Plan has next steps on schedule. Mr. Janish
replied, "not at this time."
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Koehler, seconded by Daninger, to adjourn the meeting at 10:09 p.m. Motion
carried on a 7 -ayes, 0 -nays, 0- absent vote.
Respectfully Submitted,
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — April 10, 2018
Page 13
Marlene White, Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
Y 0 F
O j E
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Sketch Plan/Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review — Knoll
Property / Centra Homes — Centra Homes LLC
DATE: May 8, 2018
INTRODUCTION
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a sketch plan for a single family planned unit
rural residential development as requested by Centra Homes. The developer submitted a narrative of the
proposed PUD. The PUD narrative is attached for your review.
DISCUSSION
What is a PUD Concept Plan?
A PUD Sketch Plan is used to provide feedback to the developer through Andover Review Committee
(ARC), Planning and Zoning Commission, Park and Recreation Commission, and City Council.
Purpose of PUD?
The purpose of a PUD is to encourage more efficient allocation of density and intensity of land use
where such arrangement is desirable and feasible by providing the means for greater creativity and
flexibility in environmental design than provided under the strict application of this code. It must be
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Council that a higher quality development will result than
could be otherwise achieved through strict application of this code.
Findings for a PUD:
City Code 13 -3 -9: FINDINGS REQUIRED: In order for a PUD to be approved, the City shall find that
the following are present:
A. The proposed development is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan of the
city.
B. The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and unified
environment within its own boundaries.
C. The proposed development demonstrates how each modified or waived requirement
contributes to achieving the purpose of a PUD.
D. The PUD is of composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation
are feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit. (Ord. 298, 8 -4-
2004).
Background
The Andover Review Committee (ARC) reviewed the sketch plan and submitted comments to the
applicant. These comments have been attached for your review. Staff suggests the comments be
reviewed as part of the sketch plan process.
A rough sketch plan has been submitted for the entire property. The applicant revised only the narrative
portion of the application after receiving staff comments. Staff has included a "mocked" up plan that
was provided to the developer for consideration of changes prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting.
Conformance with Local and Regional Plans and Ordinances
1. The property is not located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) Boundary.
2. The Comprehensive Plan Rural Residential (R -1) land use provides development areas outside
the MUSA. This section is attached for your review.
Access
Access is proposed from Tulip Street and 157' Avenue NW with the construction of a new street. A
local street will be constructed to access the lots. The length of the cul -de -sac exceeds five hundred
(500') as measured along the centerline from the intersection to the center of the cul -de -sac area by
approximately 50 feet.
Tulip Street is classified as a collector roadway. The Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan
has identified access spacing of 330 feet. The proposed access from Tulip appears to be about 260 feet
from the intersection of 157f Ave (CSAH 20). Staff suggests the developer move the access from Tulip
to the northern portion of the sketch plan as shown. Staff suggests the Planning and Zoning Commission
and City Council consider the potential traffic impacts from deviating from the spacing guidelines in this
instance.
The applicant is proposing a narrower street width (27 feet wide with 18 -inch ribbon curb) and 50 feet of
right of way. It should also be noted that this street width does not allow for on street parking.
The City of Andover forwarded a copy of the proposed sketch to the Anoka County Highway Department
but has not received comments at the time of the write up.
The applicant has not proposed additional access to other parcels in the area. As part of staff comments
and a sketch provided to the developer, staff indicated that access from Tulip should be located further
North to meet the spacing requirements and this access could possibly provide access to the property to
the North that is not part of this proposal. Another option indicated by staff is to continue a street to the
North that could eventually be extended to provide access to that lot.
Utilities
Each lot will be served by individual septic systems and individual wells.
Low Impact Development (LID)
The applicant is proposing a Low Impact Development (LID) that would focus on preserving as many
trees as possible and reduce environmental impacts by having narrower streets and work to minimize
stormwater impact. The applicant indicates under a standard development at RI standards approximately
10.25 acres of wooded area would be disturbed and with a PUD approximately 5.5 acres would be
disturbed.
Surrounding Land Uses
North: R -1 zoned property, lots directly north of the proposed development range from 2 to 5 acres in
size.
South: R -1 zoned property; the developments appear to have 2.5 acres lots with the corner of Round Lake
Blvd.
West: R -1 zoned property; some agricultural activities; lots directly across the street are listed as 2 to 2.27
acres in size.
East: Rural Reserve area with agricultural activities at this time.
L E G E N D
Landuse
N
RR - Rural Residential
RRR -Rural Reserve
OS - Open Space
Lots Generally
The property is zoned RI — Single Family - Rural, which allows for rural development. According to tax
information the acreage involved in this proposal is 28.59 acres. The applicant is proposing 14 units,
which equates to a density of .49 units per acre. At this density the developer would receive 3 additional
lots versus a typical R -1 Single Family -Rural development consisting of 2.5 acre lots (28.59 acres /2.5
acre per lot = 11.436 lots)
The following table shows code requirements for the rural residential area versus the PUD proposal:
The applicant is requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) as part of this development. The
applicant is requesting flexibility in code requirements including size and dimension; primarily to have
flexibility to minimize tree removal, and has indicated the land is long and narrow limiting design
options under the standard zoning requirements. The applicant is also seeking a higher density that
would provide for 3 additional lots within the development. The developer would like the PUD to
preserve existing trees, and to create a Low Impact Development (LID).
Lot 2
Staff has pointed out to the developer that the driveway access for Lot 2 appears to traverse through a
wetland basin (see wetlands in this report). Staff has also suggested Lot 2 be reconfigured.
The developer has indicated that lot 2 is designed to reduce driveways onto Round Lake Blvd or 157'h
Avenue NW. The City of Andover Comprehensive Plan designates Round Lake Blvd as an "A Minor
Arterial' Roadway and 157`h Avenue NW as a `B Minor Arterial." City Code 11 -3 -6 limits access to
certain type of roadway classifications (please see code citation below).
City Code 11 -3 -6: LOTS:
I. Access To Arterials or Major Collectors: In those instances where a plat is
adjacent to a limited access arterial or major collector, no direct vehicular access
11
CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS
PUD PROPOSAL
Lot size /Gross Density
2.5 acres/0.4 units per acre
0.49 units per acre
Lot Width
300 feet
150 — 300+ feet
Lot Depth
150 feet
+150 feet
Lots allowed on 28.59 acres
Approximately 11
14 proposed
The applicant is requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) as part of this development. The
applicant is requesting flexibility in code requirements including size and dimension; primarily to have
flexibility to minimize tree removal, and has indicated the land is long and narrow limiting design
options under the standard zoning requirements. The applicant is also seeking a higher density that
would provide for 3 additional lots within the development. The developer would like the PUD to
preserve existing trees, and to create a Low Impact Development (LID).
Lot 2
Staff has pointed out to the developer that the driveway access for Lot 2 appears to traverse through a
wetland basin (see wetlands in this report). Staff has also suggested Lot 2 be reconfigured.
The developer has indicated that lot 2 is designed to reduce driveways onto Round Lake Blvd or 157'h
Avenue NW. The City of Andover Comprehensive Plan designates Round Lake Blvd as an "A Minor
Arterial' Roadway and 157`h Avenue NW as a `B Minor Arterial." City Code 11 -3 -6 limits access to
certain type of roadway classifications (please see code citation below).
City Code 11 -3 -6: LOTS:
I. Access To Arterials or Major Collectors: In those instances where a plat is
adjacent to a limited access arterial or major collector, no direct vehicular access
11
shall be permitted from individual lots to such streets unless no access can be
provided by other means. (Amended 9/18/07, Ord. 355)
Even though Anoka County Highway Department is the road authority for Round Lake Blvd and 157"
Avenue NW, staff suggests the developer consider lot reconfigurations in order to avoid private
residential driveways accessing Round Lake Blvd or 157th Avenue NW. This may be accomplished by
extending the existing cul de sac further east, or look at another roadway access onto 157' Avenue NW.
The extension of the cul de sac may require an emergency access with barricades from Round Lake Blvd.
Wetlands
There are wetlands that appear as part of the 2013 NWI information. A map has been inserted below that
shows the existing wetland information according to available data. The wetlands will be required to be
delineated and the report will need to be submitted as part of the preliminary plat process.
Lower Rum River Water Management Organization ( LRRWMO)
Once the overall layout of the sketch has been agreed upon and direction provided, the developers will
prepare a grading plan, hydrology calculations and a soils report that will be reviewed by the City, an
engineering consultant and the LRRWMO. The LRRWMO will need to review the preliminary plat and
the developer will need to address any issues that are raised during that review prior to a public hearing
being scheduled for the preliminary plat.
Park and Recreation Commission
The Park and Recreation Commission will review the request on May 3, 2018. The current Master Park
Plan does not show the potential of parkland in this area which leads staff to believe that the Park and
Recreation Commission would request cash -in -lieu of land for this particular development.
Coordination with other Agencies
The developer and/or owner are responsible to obtain all necessary permits (Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, LRRWMO, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,
LGU and any other agency that may have an interest in the site). Initial contact shall be made with the
City Engineering Department regarding this item.
E
NEXT STEPS
Based on the feedback received on the sketch plan, the developer will modify the layout and make
application for Preliminary Plat, PUD, and Final Plat and submittals to seek their desired outcome.
Staff would suggest the applicant provide responses to the findings required (13 -3 -9) and indicate with
each deviation from a code requirement on how it provides a "higher quality" development.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing, take public feedback on the
proposed sketch plan /PUD and informally advise the applicant on adjustments to the proposed project to
conform to local ordinances and review criteria.
Attachments
City Code 13 -3 -11 Desirable PUD Design Qualities
Sketch/PUD Narrative
City Staff Comments, dated April 17, 2018
Location Map
Aerial Sketch Plan
Marked up (by staff) Aerial Sketch Plan
ec y ubmitted,
I Jani
Cc: - Knoll Farms Inc. 3301 1571 Ave NW, Andover, MN 55304
- Tate Baxter, Centra Homes, 11460 Robinson Dr. NW, Coon Rapids, MN 55433
on
13 -3 -11: DESIRABLE PUD DESIGN QUALITIES: The following design qualities will be
sought in any PUD:
A. Achieves efficiency in the provision of streets and utilities and preserves area
to achieve the elements of design qualities described in this chapter.
B. Provides convenient and safe access for vehicles and pedestrians and all types
of activity that are anticipated to be a part of the proposed development.
C. Provides a buffer between different uses, adjacent properties, roadways,
between backyards of back -to -back lots.
D. Preserves existing stands of trees and/or significant trees.
E. Provides considerable landscaping treatments that complement the overall
design and contribute toward an overall landscaping theme.
F. Preserves significant usable space on individual lots or through the provision
of open space within the development.
G. Provides an attractive streetscape through the use of undulating topography,
landscaping, decorative street lighting, decorative mailbox groupings,
retaining walls, boulders, fencing, area identification signs, etc.
H. The proposed structures within the development demonstrate quality
architectural design and the use of high quality building materials for unique
design and detailing.
I. The lasting quality of the development will be ensured by design, maintenance
and use guidelines established through an owners' association. (Ord. 298, 8 -4-
2004).
7
CENTRA HOMES LLC
Exceiient Experiences
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Application Background:
The proposed Single Family subdivision contains 14 rural residential lots. This land is not within
the MUSA Boundary and the lots will be served individually by private well and septic systems.
This property is currently zoned Single Family Rural Residential (R -1). Two parcels involved
total 28.59 acres. The proposed density is just under .5 unit per acre, standard R -1 zoning
allows for .4 units per acre.
PUD Zoning:
We request the PUD Zoning for the following reasons:
Cohesive Neighborhood:
Our goal is to create a neighborhood that fits and flows together. Compared to what we
feel is achievable through standard ordinance, we feel the PUD layout creates a higher
quality neighborhood.
Low Impact Development:
With the flexibility of the PUD we propose to preserve as many trees as possible and
reduce environmental impact by having narrow streets through the neighborhood. With
the LID, we would work to minimize stormwater impact. Under standard ordinance
approximately 10.25 acres of wooded area would be disturbed, some of which abutt
neighboring properties and homes. Under the proposed PUD layout, only approximately
5.5 acres would be disturbed, a 53% reduction.
Health and Safety:
As we looked at designing the new neighborhood, we wanted to provide a safe and
inviting neighborhood for families. We wanted to limit the number of driveway access
points off of 157th Ave NE and Round Lake Blvd. As you know both of these streets
have 55 MPH speed limits. Our proposal has just one lot (Lot 1) having a driveway off of
157th Ave, the remaining lots will have driveway access off the new interior road.
Rural Feel:
As you drive North on Round Lake Blvd there is a signature `rural' feel. Minimizing the
driveway and street accesses off of Round Lake Blvd will preserve that feel. We would
be able to preserve the area just to the West of Round Lake with zero impact to trees
and wetland.
Covenants:
Under the PUD we plan to create a higher quality neighborhood by covenants. A couple
things we would limit or restrict would be:
• Exterior Finishes (i.e. no vinyl siding, minimum stone requirements, etc.)
• 30 -year architectural shingles
• House Types (i.e. two -story, ramblers, no split -entry)
• Minimum 3 -car garage
• Minimum Square Footage (2,300 two -story, 1,400 rambler
We would create an Architectural Control Committee that would oversee and
Enforce the covenants above.
PUD Flexibility Request:
The items of flexibility from standard zoning requested in this neighborhood are:
Cul -De -Sac Length:
Existing City standard has a minimum cul -de -sac length of 500'. This concept has
cul- de-sac length of approximately 550'.
Driveway Length /Flag Lot:
Lot 2 is a creatively designed lot. We ask for flexibility on how this lot would generally
get access as shown in the concept with a long driveway access from the proposed
cul -de -sac rather than driveway access of of Round Land Blvd.
Lot Sizes and Widths:
We ask for flexibility lot sizes and lot widths at the setback line. The setbacks and width
vary across the new neighborhood ranging from 150' to over 300'.
Right of Way and Street Width:
We request a narrower street width (27' wide with 18 inch ribbon curb) and 50' right of
way. This change is not shown in the proposed concept plan but this will be seen in the
preliminary plat application. This will be similar the the Preserve at Oak View PUD with
an additional 5' of blacktop as requested by City Staff.
Response to Staff Meetings:
Access to Reynolds Property:
In our meetings with City Staff, we discussed providing access through this
neighborhood to the parcel of land to the north owned by Stella Reynolds (PID
17- 32- 24 -43- 0008). After reviewing the title work, this Reynolds parcel is benefited by
an Anoka County easement for ingress and egress as shown in the concept. This
easement allows this particular parcel to use the county easement to gain access to
either Tulip Street or Round Lake Blvd. Thus we have not shown the proposed access
to the future interior streets we are proposing.
We have discussed with the Reynolds family about purchasing the 7.5 acres to the
North, negotiations are ongoing. They have expressed that they would be fine accessing
their property through the Anoka County easement if we are not able to reach an
agreement.
CENTRA HOMES.
Fxce/fent FxImmWtea
We expect the type of homes to be two -story and rambler homes with full basement with prices
to be from $500,000 to $750,000, depending on customer selected finishes.
Thank you for your consideration and we look forward with creating a new neighborhood in the
City of Andover.
Sincerely,
Tate Baxter
Centra Homes LLC
CENTRA HOMES,,,
Exre&ft( Evperieaee!
FAIT =1 moli ON
A _
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
FROM: David Berkowitz, Director of Public Works /City Engineer —
Jason Law, Asst. City Engineer
DATE: April 17, 2018
REFERENCE: Knoll Property /Sketch Plan /Review #1
The following comments are regarding Review #1:
1. The currently shown access point off of Tulip Street does not meet City spacing
guidelines on a collector street. Move the access to the north property line. This will also
allow for access to the Reynolds property to the north. A second roadway along the
Anoka County egress easement would result in double frontage lots on this property,
another reason to move the access north.
2. Staff does not support the long driveway proposed for Lot 2 and flag lots are not allowed
per City Code. This driveway access also results in an unusual configuration for Lots 3
and 4.
3. Submit sketch plan to the Anoka County Highway Department. Submit a copy of the
ACHD comments to the City. It's likely intersection improvements (bypass and /or turn
lanes) will likely be required at proposed intersection with 157th Avenue, which is an
important access to provide a secondary access to the plat. See if the Anoka County
Highway Department would allow access for Lot 2 from Round Lake Boulevard and Lot 1
from 157th Avenue.
4. Show a fixture road access and ghost plat the property north of the proposed
development.
5. Lot sizes and dimensions do not meet R -1 minimum standards. A PUD development
would be required to deviate from current zoning district requirements. Based upon other
recently submitted plats, the City Council may not support the size of lots proposed.
Refer to the City Council meeting video (http-./ /qctv.org /city_meeting /andover- city- council-
4 -4 -2018/ ) Item 10 from April 3, 2018 for the Estates at Cedar Ridge sketch plan
discussion.
6. The narrative identifies 22 -foot roadway width with ribbon curb. Recent discussions with
the Andover Fire Chief indicate a minimum of 27' bituminous paved with 18" ribbon curb
is necessary for fire protection.
7. Ribbon curb is proposed in the narrative. Construction methods and details would need
to be discussed and reviewed further to avoid the issues that the City has experienced on
a previous development with ribbon curb.
8. Please review all City Codes for compliance.
9. Additional comments pending further review.
Note: It is a requirement that the Developer respond to each of these items in writing LC et
diaital copv from Citv and type responses below original comment when re- submitting
the revised plat to the City. If you have any questions, feel free to contact Jason Law, Assistant
City Engineer at (763) 767 -5130 or David Berkowitz, Director of Public Works /City Engineer at
(763) 767 -5133.
N
NDOVE Acreage Location Map W F
10N wili
T14
iN N
1,3Z, Zi-43 0.,-,
4�59N-A �pav \
& TIVA
RE� oaE! A 1.4 OISLIN,
117-32-24-43 DWZ
15885 m� ST pm
"NSON TRUSTEE "URA . .....
7-11-24 43 E
15885 M�
*PST 'M
"URA
Al 59
f 1,4 WEE
r: L
31y, I tl; �w
4
Ao t
-32- -OOOa
AOttaz�s NOT AnGhm
v
IP4 1
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*?'
V
_VICINITY MAP API;
6 2018
115,
SCALE, 1- . 200'
KNOLL PROPERTY CONCEPT 5KETCH 4B2010
GENTRA HOMES
II 1Y
1 4 -
319
lws
aaNSM MUSTEE "URA
A"W"M
2
IS-011114
R i E- C EE �! V EE D
—VICINITY MAP APR
SITE 1615TAVE NW
15;Tm
47
00
N.T.S.
:4 10
x
169 r T 65
-to Ac"b's 7vfto, .4 st.4ass
6 2018
7 ii,
KNOLL PROPERTY CONCEPT SKETCH
CENTRA HOMES
A C I T Y NID 06V • A
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Stephanie L. Hanson, City Planner
SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) (18 -01)
DATE: May 8, 2018
DISCUSSION
Anoka Independent Grain and Feed Dealers Inc. has been conducting business as a turkey farm
within Andover. As part of the operation, the agricultural lands were enrolled in the Agricultural
Preserve Program. Minnesota Statute 473H, known as the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves
Act, establishes a program to encourage preservation of land for the production of agricultural
products by valuing agricultural property in the metropolitan area in a manner similar to greater
Minnesota. To qualify, the property must be zoned long -term agricultural by the city, with a
maximum residential density of one house per forty acres. The parcel must (normally) be forty
acres in size.
To enroll in the program, the owner obtains city approval and records a covenant with the County
Recorder to leave the property in agricultural use. To remove property from the program the
owner files an "Expiration Notice" with the County Recorder. Eight years after the Expiration
Notice is filed, the property is released from Agricultural Preserve. Anoka Independent Grain
and Feed Dealers, Inc. filed for an expiration notice in 2010. As of April 18, 2018, the property
was removed from the Agricultural Preserve Program; therefore, no longer qualifies for the
current land use designation, as shown on the City of Andover Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Map (attached).
Once property no longer qualifies for the program and to remain compliant with the
Comprehensive Plan, the land use designation should be changed to RR — Rural Residential. The
RR district provides an area for low density residential development outside the Municipal Urban
Service Area that will not be served by municipal sewer and water, with an overall residential
density of 0.4 units per acre.
Review Criteria
The Comprehensive Plan establishes criteria for review of amendment concerning a proposed
land use change. The Planning and Zoning Commission should consider the amendments based
on the following criteria:
1. Conditions have change since the present land use designation was established such to
warrant the proposed amendment or the present land use designation is in error.
2. The proposed land use is compatible with surrounding land uses and with the goals,
objectives and policies in the Comprehensive Plan.
3. There is capacity of public systems, facilities, and service to serve the proposed land use
and capacity of these systems to serve other planned land uses is not adversely affected.
4. Agreement can be reached for the applicant of the proposed land use to pay for any
increased capacity of public systems, facilities and services required to serve the proposed
land use.
5. Potential impacts by the proposed land use on natural resources including vegetation,
wetlands, floodplain and other natural feature's can be avoided or sufficiently mitigated
as determined by City Council.
6. To ensure a transition or buffer between urban and rural residential zoning districts.
Next Step in CPA Process
If the proposed changes are approved by the City Council, city staff will make the necessary map
changes in the Comprehensive Plan. The CPA will then be submitted to the Metropolitan
Council for review and approval.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission hold a public hearing, consider the
proposed CPA and to make a recommendation of approval to the City Council. If approved by
the City Council, this amendment will be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council for their
approval. The proposed CPA includes:
1. To change the land use designation from Agricultural Preserve to RR — Rural Residential.
Attachments
Resolution
Location Map
Existing Land Use Map
Proposed Land Use Change Map
Andover Land Use Map
Rectful su tted,
Stephanie L. Hanson
Cc: Darren Lazan, Landform, 105 South Fifth Avenue, Suite 513, Mpls, MN 55401
Diane Park, Anoka Independent Grain and Feed Dealers Inc, 1524 155' Lane NW,
Andover, MN 55304
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
PIMIROWS1
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN OF THE
CITY OF ANDOVER TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: REMOVE THE AGRICULTURAL
PRESERVE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND CHANGE TO RR — RURAL RESIDENTIAL
FOR THE PARCELS IDENTIFIED AS THE FOLLOWING: 07- 32 -24 -43 -0003; 07- 32- 24 -43-
0002; 07- 32 -24 -34 -0002; 07- 32 -24 -34 -0003; 07- 32 -24 -33 -0001; 07- 32 -24 -23 -0002; 07- 32 -24-
24 -0001; 07- 32 -24 -42 -0001; 07- 32 -24 -41 -0001; 07- 32 -24 -14 -0001; 07- 32 -24 -11 -0001.
WHEREAS, the above - mentioned parcels have been removed from the Agricultural Preserve
Program pursuant to Minnesota Statute 473H, and;
WHEREAS, the City requests to remove the Agricultural Preserve land use designation and
change to RR — Rural Residential, and;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held pursuant to state statutes, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of
the amendment as requested, and;
WHEREAS, the City Council acknowledges that the parcels have been released from the
Agricultural Preserve Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover has
received the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and adopts the following
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, subject to review and approval by the Metropolitan
Council:
1. To change the Agricultural Preserve land use designation to RR — Rural Residential.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this _ day of , 2018.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
Michelle Hartner, Deputy City Clerk Julie Trude, Mayor
0
163RD
n.
159TH
l0-
I-
LU . I
A
174TH AVE -
inks
�
= b JA
DR,
h6a
162ND LN
161 ST LN --
160TH LN
e
a
I=001
Document Path: H: \Gisdata \Planning\compplan \projects \Figure 2.4 Future Land Use.mxd
9 C I 'C N
Incorporated 1974
Comprehensive Plan Figure 2..
FUTURE LAND USE MAP
The information represented an this map displays the hontents of the City of Andover Proposed Land Use Map.
Figure 24 Existing Land Use Map when the 2008 Comprehensive Plan is adopted. This map is a grapr
The Planning Office should be referenced for specific question concerning the content ofthe
Land use designatbns are subject to change. For questions or comments please contact the Chy,
City of Andover - Planning Department 1685 Crosstown Blvd. NW Andover, MN 68304
Map Date: July 2015
L E G E N D
Land Use Acres
RR - Rural Residential 10,847.22
URL - Urban Residential Low 3,069.79
URM -Urban Residential Medium 75.259
- URH - Urban Residential High 111.869
TR - Transitional Residential 1417.2
LC - Limited Commercial 1.461
- LC /MD- Limited Commercial /Medium Density 7.942
NC - Neighborhood Commercial 27.467
- GC - General Commercial 300.557
® TC - Transitional Commercial 16.591
1 -I - Light Industrial 75.516
- P -Public 468.54
RRR - Rural Reserve 970.404
OS - Open Space 1,357.6
- AG- Agricultural 934.2
Water 468.93
Right of Way 2.162.29
m sis MUSA Boundary
= City Limits 22,312.39
EL
Lij
Q
D
0
z
LL
`W
O
0
z
Q
13.75%
.33%
.50%
6.35%
.007%
04%
.12%
1.35%
.07%
.44%
2.1%
4.35%
6.09%
4.19%
2.1%
9.69%
100%
Gross Residential Density Range by Land Use
Land Use
Density Range
RR -Rural Residential
0.0 to 0.4 units per acre
URL - Urban Residential Low
1.76 to 3.6 units per acre
PUD maximum density is 4 units per acre
URM - Urban Residential Medium
3.6 to 6 units per acre
PUD maximum density is 6 units per acre
- URH - Urban Residential High
6 to 12 units per acre
PUD maximum density is 14.4 units per acre