HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.22.181685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Agenda
May 22, 2018
Andover City Hall
Council Chambers
7:00 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Approval of Minutes —May 8, 2018 Regular Meeting
4. Public Hearing— Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development —Petersen
Farms — 7th Avenue/165th Avenue NW
5. Other Business
6. Adjournment
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 — May 8, 2018 Regular Meeting
Minutes
DATE: May 22, 2018
REQUEST
The Planning and Zoning Commission is requested to approve the regular meeting minutes from
May 8, 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
47
PLANNINGAND ZONING COMMISSIONMEETING —MAY 8, 2018
The Regular Bi -Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
called to order by Chairperson Kyle Nemeth on May 8, 2018, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover
City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
Commissioners present: Scott Hudson, Bert Koehler IV, Nick Loehlein, Jeff Sims
and Mary VanderLaan
Commissioners absent: Dean Daninger
Also present: Community Development Director Joe Janish
City Planner, Stephanie Hanson
Others
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OFALLEGIANCE
WELCOME
Chairperson Nemeth welcomed new Commissioner Mary VanderLaan.
APPROVAL OFMINUTES
April 10, 2018 Regular Meeting
Commissioner Koehler requested the following change be made to the Workshop
minutes:
- Page 8, line 24 — "Mr. Hudson" should be replaced by "Mr. Smith"
- Page 11, line 31 & 32 — make a correction to indicate "this change would impact
adjacent lots perhaps making them unviable"
Chairperson Nemeth requested the following changes be made to the regular minutes:
- Page 1, line 12 — add "Kyle" before Nemeth
- Page 4, line 32 —add space between "MN" and "DNR"
- Page 6, line 13 — should read Mr. Janish described "the" vacation of easements,
removing "a"
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — May 6, 2018
Page 2
1 - Page 7, line 16 — Las Vegas, Nevada, add comma
2 - Page 10, line 17 —add a comma after "however"
3
4 There were no changes from staff.
5
6 Motion by Koehler, seconded by Hudson, to approve the April 10, 2018, Regular
7 Meeting minutes as amended. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -present (VanderLaan), 0-
8 nays, 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
9
to PUBLICHEARING. Sketch Plan/PlannedUnit Development —Knoll Property/Centra
11 Homes —1571h Avenue/Round Lake Blvd NW
12
13 Mr. Janish presented information regarding a sketch plan for a single family planned unit
14 rural residential development as requested by Centra Homes. The purpose of a PUD is to
15 encourage more efficient allocation of density and intensity of land use where such
16 arrangement is desirable and feasible by providing the means for greater creativity and
17 flexibility in environmental design than provided under the strict application of this Code.
18
19 The ARC reviewed the sketch plan and submitted comments to the applicant. A rough
20 sketch plan has been submitted for the entire property. The staff mocked up a plan that
21 was provided to the developer for consideration of changes prior to the Planning and
22 Zoning Commission meeting.
23
24 The property is not located within the MUSA Boundary. The Comp Plan Rural
25 Residential (R-1) land use provides development areas outside the MUSA.
26
27 Access is proposed from Tulip Street and 157"' Avenue NW with the construction of a
28 new street. A local street will be constructed to access the lots. The length of the cul -de -
29 sac exceeds five hundred feet as measured along the centerline from the intersection to
30 the center of the cul-de-sac area by approximately 50 feet.
31
32 The applicant is proposing a narrower street width (27 feet wide with 18 -inch ribbon
33 curb) and 50 feet of right of way. It should also be noted that this street width does not
34 allow for on street parking.
35
36 The Anoka County Highway Department has not yet made comment.
37
38 Mr. Janish commented that access from Tulip Street should be located further North to
39 meet the spacing requirements and it would provide access to the property to the North
40 that is not part of this proposal. Another option indicated by staff is to continue a street
41 to the North that could eventually be extended to provide access to that lot.
42
43 Each lot will be served by individual septic systems and individual wells.
44
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — May 6, 2018
Page 3
1 The applicant is proposing a Low Impact Development (LID) that would focus on
2 preserving as many trees as possible and reduce environmental impacts by having
3 narrower streets and work to minimize storm water impact.
4
5 The property is zoned Rl — Single Family -Rural, which allows for rural development.
6 The acreage in the proposal is approximately 28.59 acres. The applicant is proposing 14
7 lots, which equates to a density of .49 units per acre. At this density the developer would
8 receive 3 additional lots versus a typical R-1 Single Family -Rural development consisting
9 of 2.5 acre lots.
10
11 The applicant is requesting a PUD as part of this development. The applicant is
12 requesting flexibility in code requirements including lot size and dimension; primarily to
13 have flexibility to minimize tree removal and has indicated that the land is long and
14 narrow, limiting design options under the standard zoning requirements. The applicant is
15 also seeking a higher density that would provide for 3 additional lots within the
16 development.
17
18 The wetlands will need to be delineated and the report will need to be submitted as part
19 of the preliminary plat process. The Lower Rum River Water Management Organization
20 will need to review the preliminary plat and the developer will need to address any issues
21 that are raised during that review prior to a public hearing.
22
23 Commissioner Loehlein inquired about the flag lot. Mr. Janish responded that typically it
24 tends to be a lot that looks like a flag. Mr. Janish drew an example.
25
26 Commissioner Sims asked about an open area. Mr. Janish replied that some of the land is
27 likely unable to be developed and is not in the area under discussion.
28
29 Commissioner Koehler asked about the email sent to the developer on April 17 and if any
30 updates had been received. Mr. Janish confirmed that the narrative was updated, but the
31 sketch was not updated and that the Commission already had a copy of the updated
32 narrative in their information.
33
34 Commissioner Koehler asked about moving the road farther north and how far east it
35 would be going, if it would connect to Round Lake or the cul de sac. And further, would
36 the road meet the requirements for the access for going north? Mr. Janish confirmed that
37 it would and that the developer would make the determination of how far east.
38
39 Commission Koehler also asked about the double frontage lots and if there would be
4o double assessments in the future. Mr. Janish replied that would not be an issue,
41 considering it is a County road.
42
43 Commissioner VanderLaan asked about the area of the lots. Mr. Janish confirmed that
44 there would be 14 lots as requested and 11 lots if the City holds to the Code. He referred
45 to the staff memo. She noted that the City Council directed the Commission in the recent
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — May 6, 2018
Page 4
1 minutes to remain with the 2.5 acres as intended. Mr. Janish confirmed that if there were
2 14 lots, they would be smaller than 2.5 acres each. It is up to the developer to show how
3 a high-quality development can be created by using the PUD to change the R-1 standard.
4 Staff looked at the proposal and it is up to the Planning & Zoning Commission and City
5 Council to make this determination. This parcel, due to the length and width and existing
6 homes, makes it a greater challenge. The developer is not asking for a change in the
7 sewer requirement.
8
9 Commissioner Koehler asked if the City's suggestion to move the road to the north was
10 met and would the City be amenable to direct access to 157`h. Mr. Janish replied that
11 according to map, there is no access at this point, until the map is redone. This is just a
12 sketch plan, an informational step. The Commission will still see the preliminary plat.
13
14 Commissioner Hudson asked about the Memo from Anoka County regarding the
15 reconstruction of "the raised median channelization." He speculated that theoretically it
16 could affect the entire length of the development. Mr. Janish confirmed that they do not
17 yet know the County's intention for this particular property.
18
19 Chairperson Nemeth asked how wide the streets are supposed to be. Mr. Janish believed
20 that it was 32 feet, which is a 5 -foot loss, plus ribbon curb (goes to a ditch). He asked if
21 the Reynolds property was land locked. Mr. Janish referred to the narrative which talks
22 about possibly providing a road on the northern boundary. Staff is unsure at this time as
23 it relates to the easement and who has access.
24
25 Chairperson Nemeth asked if Lot 3 was buildable as it stands, due to the wetland. Mr.
26 Janish replied that the City does not require soil bearings at the sketch phase. He
27 followed up by asking about the lot width. Mr. Janish stated that it was not known at this
28 time. He also asked what the Park & Recreation Commission had determined. Mr.
29 Janish confirmed that they wanted cash in lieu of land.
30
31 Commissioner VanderLaan, noting the width of the roadway, asked about the statement
32 that there would be no off-street parking. She had concerns regarding no parking at all.
33 Mr. Janish explained the proposed parking situation and that there has been some trouble
34 with ribbon curb in the past, so they would like to be cautious. Engineering believes that
35 it has been done before and should be done, in spite of any difficulty. Commissioner
36 Koehler confirmed with Mr. Janish, the answer regarding the width of the street, resulting
37 in no parking being allowed on either side of the street.
38
39 There were no additional questions of staff.
40
41 Motion by Loehlein, seconded by Sims, to open the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. Motion
42 carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
43
44 Chairperson Nemeth explained the public hearing process.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — May 6, 2018
Page 5
1 Ray and Kathy Schraeder, of 3340 159' Avenue NW, residents that live just north of the
2 proposed development, have lived there for 20 years. They like the way it is laid out but
3 would hate to see the 2.5 acres requirement change. He expressed concern regarding the
4 road and concern for the view. He also asked about wetland concerns, drainage and the
5 price point of the homes. Most of his concern relates to taking away from the rural
6 environment, including the ability to hunt if you are a property owner of 5 acres or more
7 with a bow.
8
9 Mike and Deb Bertrom, 3537 157`h Avenue NW, expressed concerns about the road to
to the development abutting their rear property line, increased noise, dropping property
11 values, and they would have road frontage on 3 sides. They would like to see the road go
12 farther north. They would also like to see the speed limit on 157' lowered. Overall, the
13 value of the lots would be greater if the development had back-to-back backyards. They
14 would like to see the lot size remain at 2.5 acres as it makes it private.
15
16 Mark Bringham, of 17322 Aztec Street NW, asked about lot size in relationship to similar
17 capacity of the land to assimilate septic waste. He asked for clarification as to each
18 property having their own well and water and has concerns with the impacts to the water
19 table if there are more lots allowed.
20
21 Ken Putz, of 15640 Quay Street, lives on the property directly south off of Quay Street.
22 He agrees that the issues are around septic, conservation, well usage, and R-1 and lot
23 sizes. He noted that the lot sizes in the surrounding area are 2.5 acres and would like it to
24 be consistent. He would also like to see better accessibility with the property having
25 access from the north and a resulting very attractive plan for the whole area.
26
27 Developer Tate Baxter, of Oak Grove, Minnesota and Centra Homes has been a local
28 developer/builder for 7+ years and is currently a builder in 9 locations across the Twin
29 Cities. The owner of Centra Homes is also local and lives in Andover. He proposed the
30 PUD and sketch plan options.
31
32 Mr. Baxter described the development as similar to the Preserve at Oakview with a range
33 of lot sizes starting from 1.5 acres. A total of 14 lots are proposed for the development.
34 The purpose of the PUD is to propose a lower impact development that includes swales
35 on the outsides of the street. It is proposed to be a high-quality development. For
36 discussion purposes, he brought a new exhibit that was distributed to the Commissioners.
37 A street is being proposed, that goes all the way from west to east, with a width that is
38 greater than what is needed. The density is higher than the standard Code. The reasoning
39 for the way that it is laid out is the low impact design to preserve trees and maintain the
4o natural feel. The parking would be like The Preserve at Oakview. City staff felt that
41 parking on one side of the street would be acceptable. Regarding the road to the north
42 and to the east, he would like to do it as planned and he does not feel it would impact the
43 property. All storm water would be kept on site. All septic and water issues would be
44 addressed as the process moves to the preliminary plat. He addressed Mr. Putz and
45 responded that "if we were to go farther north, there is nowhere to come south, no
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — May 6, 2018
Page 6
i easement." The north property is 7.5 acres. There is an Anoka County egress/ingress
2 easement, and they have been in talks with the Reynolds family. They plan to add this to
3 the PUD if they can come "to terms" on an agreement.
4
5 Chairperson Nemeth asked staff to put up the new map and asked to hear Mr. Janish's
6 comments.
7
8 Mr. Janish described staff thoughts regarding Quay Street and described possible changes
9 that would be needed if the property was not developed as a PUD.
10
11 Commissioner Hudson referred to page 4 of the packet regarding standard development
12 standards.
13
14 Chairperson Nemeth asked about the widths of the lot as it relates to City Code. Mr.
15 Janish confirmed that some are under 300 feet width and some are over. The sketch
16 distributed in the packet is not to scale but is close.
17
18 Deb Bertrom, of 3537 157th Avenue, referred to the developer saying that it would be a
19 "high quality neighborhood." She wanted to know why 14 lots is "high quality"
20 compared to 9 lots, which would be of larger size. She asked do more homes equal more
21 quality? She thought that bigger lots are worth more to some people.
22
23 Steve Barry, of 17230 Aztec Street, looked at the proposal, specifically at lot 3 and 4 and
24 suggested splitting lots 3 and 4 for a road and putting a cul de sac in lot 2, at the edge of
25 lot 1.
26
27 Chairperson Nemeth reminded the resident that there was an issue with lot #3 due to the
28 wetlands.
29
3o Hope Luedtke, of 16932 Jivaro St, stated that she appreciated what Deb had to say. She
31 does not believe that Andover needs to be the Edina of the north. She enjoys the country
32 feel of the community and the quality the residents enjoy in the City. She acknowledged
33 that things are going to be developed.
34
35 Mr. Baxter came back to the podium and addressed "high quality" lots (14 vs. 9 lots). He
36 responded that it is planned as a low impact development, with narrower streets, ribbon
37 curb, a rain garden, ditches, landscaping. He specifically mentioned moving the lots west
38 for lower impact. Economic feasibility came into the picture to help compensate for the
39 costs for the extra features. In this type of scenario there are covenants in place to
40 maintain. He commented that 1.5 acre lots still feel like they are large and allow for
41 septic sites. In proposing the development, they are not trying to push the standards, but
42 rather they are trying to work around the wetlands. Chairperson Nemeth expressed
43 interest in learning more about the Architectural Controls Committee. Things he would
44 like to see are the type of home, minimum square footage, exterior materials, etc. Mr.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — May 6, 2018
Page 7
1 Baxter stated that a three -car garage would be standard, with 1,800 square feet on the
2 main level. The builder would start as the head over architectural controls.
3
4 Dave Dresback, of 3339 157`h Avenue NW, stated his main concern would be the style of
5 the home. He came to the meeting because he wanted to see what was being built.
6
7 Motion by Koehler, seconded by Loehlein to close the public hearing at 8:35 p.m.
8 Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent vote (Daninger).
9
to Commissioner Koehler gave advice to the builder saying "you are close, but you are not
11 quite there," in reference to 1.5 acres being too far off City Code. He expressed support
12 for a PUD as it relates to preserving the view and the trees, seeing the benefit. He went
13 on and referenced the narrower road, which is 5 feet wider than The Preserve at Oak
14 View, which would allow for parking on the side of the road. Narrowing road in that
15 case helped reduce speeding. State codes must be met for septic and water. He
16 expressed disapproval for the "flag lot," which was discussed a year ago. Lastly, he
17 suggested working with the builder on access roads because he is concerned about lot 1
18 and safety. He concluded by saying, "hopefully, when this comes back as a PUD, we can
19 horse trade to get some of these things done." He would like to work with this builder to
20 make it what fits in the community.
21
22 Commissioner Loehlein agreed that a PUD is probably appropriate, due to the odd shape
23 and access issues. He supported what staff stated about more access in the north,
24 avoiding the street on the Bertrom's abutting property. He thought there were advantages
25 to the current layout, especially preservation of trees and wetland.
26
27 Commissioner VanderLaan addressed the issue of the 2.5 -acre lot by recalling that in
28 1974, before the City became a City, there was a lot of insistence to keeping the rural
29 character. To provide services, the entire area had to be looked at. Every time the City
30 compromises, suddenly there is more pressure on roadways, so it is important to keep the
31 density light. Large lots give an assurance of rural character. It is the City's obligation.
32
33 Commissioner Hudson stated that the proposed lots are too small. He suggested that the
34 acreage "start with a number 2."
35
36 Chairperson Nemeth stated that he concurred. He does not believe that the Council will
37 approve less than 2.5 acres. He suggested illustrating the future access and possibly a
38 ghost plat, north of the property. He concurs with moving the street north on Tulip and
39 extending Quay Street. He likes the rural feel and lives in the area. He remarked that he
4o hears people in the community say at Family Fun Fest that they want bigger lots.
41
42 RECESS AND RECONVENE
43
44 The meeting was recessed at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 8:56 pm.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — May 6, 2018
Page 8
1 PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Petersen Farms — 71"
2 Avenue/16511 Avenue NW
3
4 Anoka Independent Grain and Feed Dealers Inc. has been conducting business as a turkey
5 farm within Andover. As part of the operation, the agricultural lands were enrolled in the
6 Agricultural Preserve Program. Minnesota Statute 473H establishes a program to
7 encourage preservation of land for the production of agricultural products by valuing
8 agricultural property in the metropolitan area in a manner similar to greater Minnesota.
9 To qualify, the property must be zoned long-term with a maximum residential density of
10 one house per forty acres. The parcel must (normally) be forty acres in size.
11
12 To remove property from the program, the owner files an "Expiration Notice" with the
13 County Recorder. Eight years after the Expiration Notice is filed, the property is released
14 from Agricultural Preserve. Anoka Independent Grain and Feed Dealers, Inc. filed for an
15 expiration notice in 2010. As of April 18, 2018, the property was removed from the
16 Agricultural Preserve Program; therefore, no longer qualifies for the current land use
17 designation.
is
19 Once property no longer qualifies for the program and to remain compliant with the
20 Comprehensive Plan, the land use designation should be changed to Rural Residential.
21 The Rural Residential district provides an area for low density residential development
22 outside the MUSA that will not be served by municipal sewer and water, with an overall
23 residential density of 0.4 units per acre.
24
25 Commissioner Koehler asked if there was other agricultural preserve land in the City.
26 Ms. Hanson confirmed that it does exist. If the City does not want to change the
27 designation, there would need to be someone to buy the land and re -enroll it in the
28 program. This is really the only thing that needs to be decided. Legally, the designation
29 is changing, but it is just a matter of what it is changing to. The recommendation is to
30 change it to R-1, rural residential. Developer or not, the City still needs to pull the land
31 out of the rural reserve.
32
33 Commissioner Sims asked if there is a developer and is there potential for another
34 Comprehensive Plan change. As long as the designation is changed to rural residential,
35 there will be no more Comprehensive Plan amendments.
36
37 Commissioner VanderLaan asked what conditions have changed: Was it being sold?
38 Was it intended to allow it to expire? Was this a plan to end the activity of farm? Ms.
39 Hanson confirmed that the owners intended for the expiration to occur.
40
41 Commissioner Koehler asked for confirmation as to whether the designation expired due
42 to negligence. Ms. Hanson confirmed that it was intended to expire. The land owners
43 made the decision to remove the property from the Ag Preserve program.
44
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — May 6, 2018
Page 9
1 Chairperson Nemeth clarified that a land use change was required. He remarked that, "if
2 we do not change this to rural residential, what else can we change to?" Ms. Hanson
3 replied that the most logical change is to match it with the surrounding area, which is
4 rural residential.
6 There were no additional questions of staff.
8 Motion by Lochlein, seconded by Hudson, to open the public hearing at 9:09 p.m.
9 Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent vote (Daninger).
10
11 Chairperson Nemeth reminded those in attendance that the hearing was not about future
12 development, only about land use change to rural residential. The hearing is not to
13 discuss future development.
14
15 Mark Bringham, of 17322 Aztec Street NW, said that his property is adjacent to the
16 property being discussed. His question was regarding the "little NE spike of land that is
17 flood plain land for the Rum River." This land is valued by people who access the area
18 in the summer and winter. He wondered if it would be possible to take part of that land
19 and create some preserve land so that the neighbors can freely access that area. If there
20 was potential to add to Martin Meadows it would be valued by neighbors. He asked if
21 that option could be considered, rather than a rural residential designation.
22
23 Steve Barry, of 17230 Aztec Street, confirmed that he was interested in the same piece of
24 land. In the past, the Peterson's had been approached about purchasing the floodplain,
25 but they had never managed to close the deal. He noted that land is flooded right now
26 and that area is not buildable, so it cannot be a part of a lot, except attached to a lot.
27
28 Commissioner Koehler noted that for a park to exist, it has to be residential property. To
29 change it to rural residential, it would need to be residential property.
30
31 Carol Dixon, of 16434 Zuni Street, shared that when she exited the neighborhood
32 recently, she saw a family of sand hill cranes. She expressed it would be great to have
33 this remain as park land in the City. There is still farmland. She thinks that it would be
34 progressive of Andover.
35
36 Melanie Thiel, of 4819 1701h Avenue, said that she appreciates being able to look out on
37 her deck at the cranes and the deer. She wants her kids to have that experience, and that
38 is why her family moved there. She stated that when the land is up for sale, their family
39 would be moving.
40
41 There was no one else in the audience to comment on the variance.
42
43 Motion by Koehler, seconded by VanderLaan to close the public hearing at 9:20 p.m.
44 Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — May 6, 2018
Page 10
1 Commissioner Koehler commented that if the land is not buildable, it is not buildable.
2 There will be future meetings going forward about what will happen to that land.
3
4 Chairperson Nemeth referred to the Tamara Anderson letter and her concerns of
5 environmental impacts. He asked that it be on the record as well.
6
7 Chairperson Nemeth asked if Open Space funds have been exhausted. Ms. Hanson
8 confirmed there are no more funds available to purchase open space.
9
to Commissioner VanderLaan looked at the map and recalled the early days when the City
11 had to determine street names while meeting in a room, in a school, and they grabbed a
12 book on minerals and Indian names and that is how the street names were born in the
13 City. One was discovered to have been named for a Peruvian headhunter, which should
14 maybe be changed.
15
16 Motion by Koehler, seconded by Loehlein to approve the resolution amending the City's
17 comprehensive land use plan. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent (Daninger)
18 vote.
19
20 This matter will be heard at the June 5, 2018, Council meeting at 7:00 pm.
21
22 OTHER BUSINESS
23
24 Ms. Hanson stated that Comprehensive Plan work was coming up. Work session dates
25 will be scheduled and she will email Commissioners to get them on the calendar. The
26 meetings will be each month.
27
28 Home construction is at 15 new homes. O'Reilly Auto Parts is working on an expansion
29 to the store. Muddy Paws doggy day care is remodeling and working toward an August
30 opening. Growing Generations Day Care is busy with construction, also opening in
31 August. Andover High School is beginning their addition and renovations. There will be
32 two phases, a classroom addition and science labs, and then a gymnasium addition. Two
33 emergency sirens are being replaced each year. In 6 years they will all finally be
34 updated.
35
36 As for Catcher's Creek East, Mr. Janish noted that the Council approved the preliminary
37 plat with the "eyebrow" in place. The cul de sac would be a permanent design.
38 Landscaping is planned along Andover Blvd, similar to Catcher's Creek.
39
40 Commissioner Koehler asked for an update on the eyebrow cul de sac. Mr. Janish stated
41 that the Council approved the resolution with no modifications, and the matter will move
42 forward. He also asked about volunteer slots for Fun Fest. Mr. Janish will follow up
43 with the Commission at a future date. The Commission will meet again on May 22, on
44 one item.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — May 6, 2018
Page 11
1 Commissioner Hudson inquired about the agricultural preserve lands and if any other
2 notices have been filed for expiration. Ms. Hanson noted that others have not filed and
3 that the largest area is south of the high school and they have no interest in filing.
4
5 Chairperson Nemeth asked about a Comprehensive Plan update. Ms. Hanson indicated
6 there would be meetings in the next few months, June — September. Each month the
7 Commission would go through one section. Sections would be emailed out a couple of
8 weeks in advance.
to ADJOURNMENT
11
12 Motion by VanderLaan, seconded by Koehler, to adjourn the meeting at 9:33 p.m.
13 Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 -absent (Daninger) vote.
14
15 Respectfully Submitted,
16
17
18 Marlene White, Recording Secretary
19 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
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: Conditional Use Permit / Planned Unit Development
Petersen Farms — 711 Avenue/165th Avenue NW — JD Andover Holdings
DATE: May 22, 2018
INTRODUCTION
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)/
Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Petersen Farms. The proposal contains 24 rural residential
lots and two Outlots. The PUD is requested by Landform, on behalf of JD Andover Holdings.
The PUD narrative submitted by the developer is attached for your review.
The applicant has provided a "Concept Master Development Plan" that shows how the overall
property could develop and how "Phase 1" (tonight's PUD request) would blend in with the
development. Additional development of "Concept Master Development Plan" shown for
property would have to follow the development process.
DISCUSSION
According to City Code 13-3 Planned Unit Development, 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 of greater creativity and flexibility in environmental design
than provided under strict application of the standards set in code. Attached for your review is
City Code 13-3.
City Code 13-3-9 regulates the findings that are required for a PUD to be approved and 13-3-11
identifies desirable PUD design standards that are sought in any PUD proposal. As part of the
attached PUD Narrative, the applicant addresses the design qualities they believe the city seeks
when granting for a PUD proposal as identified in City Code 13-3-11.
City Code 13-3-9 states the following required findings to consider when approving a PUD
(italicized responses are from the applicant's narrative):
1. The proposed development is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan
for the City.
The proposed project requires a comprehensive plan amendment to change the land use
from AG Agricultural to RR Rural Residential. This comprehensive plan amendment is
2
consistent with the surrounding land uses which are all RR Rural Residential and it is
our understanding that the city is in the process of making this Land Use amendment.
Upon approval of the land use change, the proposed development will be consistent with
the goals of the comprehensive plan.
2008 Comprehensive Plan Goals that may be relevant which are found in Chapter 1:
Foundation of the Comprehensive Plan (see attachment for additional goals).
Overarching Goals, Objectives and Policies
Goal 1: Maintain and enhance the quality of life in Andover
Land Use Goals, Objectives and Policies
Goal 4: Allow residential growth while maintaining the quality of natural resources and
amenities.
Goal: Reduce maintenance and energy costs for public facilities and infrastructure.
Housing Goals, Objectives and Policies
Goal: Provide a variety of housing types to accommodate the life cycle needs of all
residents.
Transportation Goals, Objectives and Policies
Goal: Minimize impacts of the transportation system on the natural environment.
2. The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and
unified environment within its own boundaries.
We are proposing to create custom home sites to allow for flexibility for the buyer and a
more attractive neighborhood in Andover. Each lot will be custom graded to allow for
construction of the individual homes in a manner that meets the needs of the homeowner
and allows them to design a site that works with the natural features of the lot. This
approach will allow flexibility in the placement of single family homes on each lot while
preserving the natural environment. The low -impact qualities of this development will
lead to a desirable and unified environment.
3. The proposed development demonstrates how each modified or waived requirement
contributes to achieving the purpose of PUD.
Our proposal is requesting flexibilityfrom lot size and lot width standards in the R-1
District and from minimum ROW width. The requested flexibilities contribute to
achieving the purpose of a PUD, specifically:
• The lot size change contributes to achieving a higher quality PUD development
because it helps preserve a larger number of existing trees, it allows for linear
cluster development that preserves the natural features and allows for the
dedication ofsignificant open space within the development.
• The lot width change contributes to achieving a higher quality PUD development
because it permits the development to arrange lots to preserve trees, minimize
wetland impacts and preserve natural features.
• The ROW width change contributes to achieving a higher quality PUD development
because it allows for a rural street section that minimizes tree removals and allows
for wider drainage and utility easements that can be used as ditches for stormwater
management. The use of ditches will also reduce the number of trees removed
because we will not need traditional ponding to achieve stormwater requirements.
4. 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.
The PUD proposal includes our master development plan that shows how the overall
property and adjacent large lot residential properties could be developed, visualizing
how future development could be planned for. Each phase of the development would
contribute to the overall development but would be independent of the previous and
future phases.
Street Improvements
As part of the PUD request the applicant is asking for flexibility with street construction
standards. The city standards, PUD proposal and staff recommendations are as follows:
Street Improvements:
Right of Way Width: City staff supports the proposal for a 50 foot right of way. This still allows
enough space for snow and storm water storage. There will be additional dedicated drainage and
utility easements outside the right of way.
Rural Street Pavement Width: Staff supports the proposed 27 foot pavement width and 18 -inch
ribbon curb on each side of the road. Staff is comfortable with parking on one side of the street.
Rural Street Pavement Width Including Curb (no ditches): The typical width of a new street
section from curb to curb is 31 feet. This includes 28 inches of surmountable curbing on each
side. The applicant is proposing a 30 foot width which includes 18 inches of ribbon curbing on
each side. The 18 inches of concrete ribbon curbing on each side of the street will maximize the
City
PUD
Standard
Proposal
Right of Way
50 feet /
width
60 feet
60 feet
Rural Street
Pavement width
26 - 31 feet
27 feet
Rural Street
Pavement width
including Curb
(no ditches)
31 feet
30 feet
Right of Way Width: City staff supports the proposal for a 50 foot right of way. This still allows
enough space for snow and storm water storage. There will be additional dedicated drainage and
utility easements outside the right of way.
Rural Street Pavement Width: Staff supports the proposed 27 foot pavement width and 18 -inch
ribbon curb on each side of the road. Staff is comfortable with parking on one side of the street.
Rural Street Pavement Width Including Curb (no ditches): The typical width of a new street
section from curb to curb is 31 feet. This includes 28 inches of surmountable curbing on each
side. The applicant is proposing a 30 foot width which includes 18 inches of ribbon curbing on
each side. The 18 inches of concrete ribbon curbing on each side of the street will maximize the
El
protection of the edge of paved surface from the wear and tear of vehicle parking and snow
removal. Since storm water will be treated within the ditch area, the ribbon curb will allow the
flow of water into the ditches yet support the edging of the paved area.
Lot Standards
Lot standards in the RI — Single Family Rural district require 2.5 acre lots with a 300 foot lot
width at the front yard setback. The PUD proposes lot sizes to range from 1.5 — 3.97 acres and
widths ranging from 101 — 458 feet at the front yard setback.
Each lot will meet the minimum requirement of 13,600 square feet of buildable area. The
standard R-1 requirement allows for 3,600 square feet for a home location and two 5,000 square
foot locations for septic systems. The applicant is proposing to provide an additional 29,960
square feet of area that does not include bluffs and wetlands, making the PUD minimum 1 acre
(43,560 square feet) vs. the standard 13,600 square feet. This "one acre" would be the area of the
lot that does not include bluffs and wetlands.
Utilities
Each of the lots will be served by individual septic systems and wells.
As the draft supportive resolution is drafted the PUD would need to be amended to include the
preliminary plat as part of the PUD application. The proposed PUD would not apply to
OUTLOT B and OUTLOT A. The PUD only would apply to Phase 1 as shown on Phase 1 PUD
Development Plan dated 05.07.18.
Other Standards
With a PUD all standards apply as typical, unless otherwise specified in the PUD request. The
applicant is asking for deviations from the minimum standards as it relates to: lot size, lot width
at the front yard seback, ROW width and street design for a low impact development (ribbon
curb vs. "highback" curb). All other regulations will still apply at time of development.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing to gather public input,
review the proposed PUD and make a recommendation to City Council.
If the Planning and Zoning Commission provides a positive recommendation to the City Council
please keep in mind the following findings required:
CITY CODE
REQUIREMENTS
PUD PROPOSAL
Lot size/Gross Density
2.5 acres/0.4 units per acre
1.5 — 3.97 acres/.38 units per
acre
Lot Width
300 feet
101 — 458 feet
Lot Depth
150 feet
+150 feet
Lots allowed on 63.19 acres
25
24 proposed
Each lot will meet the minimum requirement of 13,600 square feet of buildable area. The
standard R-1 requirement allows for 3,600 square feet for a home location and two 5,000 square
foot locations for septic systems. The applicant is proposing to provide an additional 29,960
square feet of area that does not include bluffs and wetlands, making the PUD minimum 1 acre
(43,560 square feet) vs. the standard 13,600 square feet. This "one acre" would be the area of the
lot that does not include bluffs and wetlands.
Utilities
Each of the lots will be served by individual septic systems and wells.
As the draft supportive resolution is drafted the PUD would need to be amended to include the
preliminary plat as part of the PUD application. The proposed PUD would not apply to
OUTLOT B and OUTLOT A. The PUD only would apply to Phase 1 as shown on Phase 1 PUD
Development Plan dated 05.07.18.
Other Standards
With a PUD all standards apply as typical, unless otherwise specified in the PUD request. The
applicant is asking for deviations from the minimum standards as it relates to: lot size, lot width
at the front yard seback, ROW width and street design for a low impact development (ribbon
curb vs. "highback" curb). All other regulations will still apply at time of development.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing to gather public input,
review the proposed PUD and make a recommendation to City Council.
If the Planning and Zoning Commission provides a positive recommendation to the City Council
please keep in mind the following findings required:
5
1. The proposed PUD is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan for the
City;
2. The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and
unified environment within its own boundaries;
3. The proposed development demonstrates how each modified or waived requirement
contributes to achieving the purpose of a PUD;
4. 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.
If the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial, findings of fact will need to be
provided to City Council. The Commission is to provide direction to staff, including language for
the Draft Resolution of Denial. If the Commission recommends denial, staff may have additional
questions in order to complete the draft resolution related to findings.
Respe lly ed, `
btn �e�v�eJ'CAn;Sl1
Joe Janish
Attachments
Draft Supportive of Approval. 6
Draft Resolution of Denial 8
Applicants Narrative .10
2008 Comprehensive Plan Goals .20
Engineer Letter w/Responses dated May 14, 2108. .32
Anoka County Highway Letter dated May 7, 2018 .34
Public Hearing Notification Area .36
Location Map . .37
Acreage Location Map .38
Phase 1 PUD Development Plan .39
Exhibit of Smallest Lot .40
Master Overall concept .41
Cc: - Jason Osberg, Metrowide Development, 15356 Yukon St NW, Andover, MN 55304
- Darren Lazan, Landform Professional Services, LLC 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite
513 Minneapolis, MN 55401
- Kevin Shay, Landform Professional Services, LLC 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513
Minneapolis, MN 55401
- Diane Park, 1524 155`h Lane NW, Andover, MN 55304
5
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CONDITION USE PERMIT / PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT REQUESTED BY LANDFORM, ON BEHALF OF JD ANDOVER
HOLDINGS, AS SHOWN AS PHASE 1 PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATED 05.07.2018,
LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
Part of PID: 07-32-24-41-0001; legally described as: UNPLATTED GROW TWP NE1/4
OF SEI/4 SEC 7-32-24
n- 0-17
Part of PID: 07-32-24-14-0001; legally described as: UNPLATTED GROW TWP SE1/4
OF NEI/4 SEC 7-32-24
/:dais
Part of PID: 07-32-24-11-0001; legally described as: THAT PRT OF GOVT LOT 2 OF
SEC 07 TWP 32 RGE 24 LYG SLY OF RUM RIVER, EX RD, SUBJ TO EASE OF
REC
WHEREAS, Landform on behalf of JD Andover Holdings has requested a Conditional Use
Permit for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Phase 1 of PETERSEN FARMS, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request does meet the criteria of City Code and would not have a detrimental effect
upon the health, safety, general welfare, values of property and scenic views in the surrounding
area, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request does not meet the criteria of City Code and 13-3-9; as the proposed PUD is not
in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan for the City; the proposed development is
designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and unified environment within its own
boundaries; and the proposed development demonstrates how each modified or waived
requirement contributes to achieving the purpose of a PUD; 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, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council the approval
of the Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development request , and;
7
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover does
hereby approve the Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development on the above legally
described property for PETERSEN FARMS phase 1 with the following conditions:
1. The developer shall amend this PUD to include the preliminary plat for Petersen
Farms Phase 1 PUD Development Plan dated 05.07.18.
2. The PUD shall only apply to the area as shown as Phase 1 of Petersen Farms Phase 1
PUD Development Plan dated 05.07.18.
3. The lot width shall not be less than 100 feet at the front yard setback.
4. The lot size shall not be less than 1.50 acres in size.
5. Each lot shall have a minimum of 1 acre of property that is not bluff or wetland.
6. The overall density for Phase 1 shall not exceed .40 units per acre.
7. Developer shall provide a 50' ROW for the North/South Roadway as shown on
Phase 1 of Petersen Farms Phase 1 PUD Development Plan dated 05.07.18.
8. Developer shall provide a 60' ROW for the East of the North South Roadway and 50'
ROW West of the North/South Roadway as shown on Phase 1 of Petersen Farms
Phase 1 PUD Development Plan dated 05.07.18.
9. Roadways shall be "Low Impact Development" in nature (27' asphalt width, with 18
inch ribbon curb on both sides).
10. Developer shall adhere to platting process and meet requirements and items identified
through that process.
11. Roadways shall be extended to the edge of the plat.
12. East/West Roadway as shown on Phase 1 PUD Development Plan dated 05.07.18
shall be engineered to show that city standards can be met for the future extension.
13. Developer shall address staff comments in Engineers Letter dated May 14, 2018.
14. Property being rezoned as part of the Preliminary Plat process.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this day of 2018.
16116•Z87". �1116110.7
ATTEST:
Michelle Harmer, Deputy City Clerk
Julie Trude, Mayor
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO. R
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CONDITION USE PERMIT / PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT REQUESTED BY LANDFORM, ON BEHALF OF JD ANDOVER
HOLDINGS, AS SHOWN AS PHASE 1 PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATED 05.07.2018,
LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
Part of PID: 07-32-24-41-0001; legally described as: UNPLATTED GROW TWP NEI/4
OF SE1/4 SEC 7-32-24
MilkI
Part of PID: 07-32-24-14-0001; legally described as: UNPLATTED GROW TWP SE1/4
OF NE1/4 SEC 7-32-24
u-NED
Part of PID: 07-32-24-11-0001; legally described as: THAT PRT OF GOVT LOT 2 OF
SEC 07 TWP 32 RGE 24 LYG SLY OF RUM RIVER, EX RD, SUBJ TO EASE OF
REC
WHEREAS, Landform, on behalf of JD Andover Holdings has requested a Conditional Use
Permit for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Phase 1 of PETERSEN FARMS, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request does not meet the criteria of City Code and would have a detrimental effect
upon the health, safety, general welfare, values of property and scenic views in the surrounding
area, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request does not meet the criteria of City Code and 13-3-9; as the proposed PUD is/is
not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan for the City; the proposed development
is/is not designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and unified environment within its own
boundaries; and the proposed development does/does not demonstrate how each modified or
waived requirement contributes to achieving the purpose of a PUD; the PUD is/is not of
composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation are feasible as a
complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council the denial of
the Conditional Use Permit request, and;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover does
hereby deny the Conditional Use Permit on the above legally described property for a Planned
Unit Development for PETERSEN FARMS phase I due to the following findings:
1.
2.
0
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this day of 2018.
CITY OF ANDOVER
".1 GOWN
Michelle Harmer, Deputy City Clerk
Julie Trude, Mayor
W
fQ 10
Narrative
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
L A N ® F O R M
11
Narrative
Petersen Farms Phase 1 PUD Development Plan and Master
Development Plan
Andover. MN
L A N ® F O R M
Revised May 17, 2018
12
Table of Contents
Introduction.......................................................................................................................................
2
Phase1 Development Plan..................................................................................................................
2
LotStandards.....................................................................................................................................
3
StreetImprovements..........................................................................................................................
3
Connectivity.......................................................................................................................................
4
Parkand Open Space.........................................................................................................................
4
MasterDevelopment Plan...................................................................................................................4
PUDFindings......................................................................................................................................
5
PUDFlexibility....................................................................................................................................
6
Summary...........................................................................................................................................
8
ContactInformation...........................................................................................................................
8
13
Introduction
On behalf of JD Andover Holdings, LLC, Landform is pleased to submit this application for approval
of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for phase 1 of Petersen Farms. The first phase of the
development would include the three eastern most parcels of Petersen Farms (PID # 07-32-24-41-
0001, 07-32-24-14-0001 and 07-32-24-11-0001) totaling approximately 110 acres. The 110 acres
is broken down into Outlot A, Outlot B and the development area for single family homes. The
three parts of phase 1 are 19 acres, 28 acres and 63 acres, respectively. Our phase 1 development
plan creates 24 new single-family lots with new streets to serve the future residents. The future
phases include the land shown on the master development plan to the west of phase 1.
The master development plan is shown for concept purposes, and includes thirteen. parcels
(approximately 411.40 gross acres) of land on the agricultural farm located at 165[1 Avenue NW
and Roanoke Street NW. The land is currently used as an existing family farm. (PID # 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-
32-0001, 07-32-24-31-0001, 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).
Building on the low -impact design philosophy and success of The Preserve at Oak View, the project
will be designed and developed by Metrowide Development and Landform Professional Services,
LLC. We are excited about the improvements proposed for this site and look forward to
developing the site.
Phase 1 PUD Development Plan
The parcels consist of agricultural fields, woodlands and large wetlands. The public streets have
been located to minimize the disturbance of the existing trees, bluff lines and topography for the
proposed lots. We are proposing to create custom home sites to allow flexibility for the buyer. Eacl-
lot will be custom graded to allow for construction of the individual homes in a manner that meets
the needs of the homeowner and allows them to design a site that works with the natural features
of the lot. Accordingly, the grading plan and tree preservation plan for the individual lots would be
developed and approved by staff at the time of building permit. A separate grading and tree
preservation plan for the new streets will be provided with the preliminary plat. This approach will
allow flexibility in the placement of single family homes on each lot while preserving the natural
environment.
The proposed subdivision has a current land use designation of Agriculture and is located in the
Agricultural Preserve Zoning District. It is currently guided as Agriculture by the future land use map
in the Comprehensive Plan, but it is our understanding that the city will be changing the
Comprehensive Plan guiding and zoning this spring to RR Rural Residential and R-1 Single Family
Rural, respectively. A portion of the proposed phase 1 area is also located in the Scenic River
Overlay District for the Rum River. This river overlay is not located in the development area for
phase 1, but is being platted as Outlot B and shown how it might be developed in the future. We
are requesting a PUD to allow flexibility from the R-1 district lot size and lot width standards and
minimum ROWwidth.
LDP17002 L A N D F O R M May 17, 2018
Phase 1 PUD and Overall Development Narrative 2
14
Lot Standards
Single-family homes in the R-1 district require a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres, a minimum width of
300 feet and a minimum lot depth of 150 feet. We are requesting flexibility in the bulk area
standards of the R-1 district, including lot size and dimension, primarily to have the flexibility to
minimize tree removal and wetland impacts. A summary table of the lot sizes and lot widths at the
setback are shown on the phase 1 development plan.
The phase 1 area of the plan has been designed to allow lot sizes that are consistent with those of
the adjacent residential properties. This includes 2.5 -acre lots on the south side of phase 1 and
transitioning into smaller lots on the north end of phase I, with the smallest lot being 1.5 -acre. All
parcels have a minimum of 1 -acre net land area. For the purposes of this development, net land
area is defined as the gross land area minus delineated wetlands and defined steep slopes.
The public streets have been located to minimize the disturbance of the existing trees and minimize
required grading for the new street. A grading and tree preservation plan for the new streets will
be provided with the preliminary plat.
Outlot B, as shown on the plan, is located within the Scenic River Overlay District. The overlay
district requires four -acre minimum lot sizes and a minimum lot width of 300 feet at both the front
building line and the line abutting the river. The phase 1 development plan shows a ghost plat
illustration of how the area could be developed to meet the overlay standards.
Street Improvements
Section 11-3-3 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires local rural city streets to be constructed with a
60 -foot right-of-way (ROW). Section 11-4-8 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires concrete curb
and gutter to be installed for new rural streets.
We are requesting flexibility in the street ROW width. All local streets will be in a 50 -foot ROW. We
are proposing to construct the street generally in accordance with City Standard Drawing No. 516F
design for typical rural section with ditches. After discussion with the Andover Fire Department, we
are proposing a 27 -foot wide two-way street with 18 -inch ribbon curb on both sides for a total
width of 30 feet. In return for a rural street section in a reduced ROW, we are proposing a wider
drainage and utility easement adjacent to the right-of-way, which will provide adequate space for
utilities and drainage. We are proposing a street design for a rural section that includes ditches for
low -impact stormwater management. This design will also reduce the number of trees removed
because we will not need traditional ponding sizing to achieve stormwater requirements.
The proposed MSA, Minnesota State Aid, road runs from Navajo Street on the north end of the site
to 165th Avenue on the South side of the site, as shown on the master development plan. That
street will be constructed in accordance with MSA standards and will have a dedicated 66 -foot
ROW.
LDP17002 L A N D F O R M May 17, 2018
Phase 1 PUD and Overall Development Narrative 3
15
Connectivity
Our plan provides an example of how the new public street would connect to new development in
the future. We are proposing future connectivity to the south, west, east and north of the site. Our
ghost plat shows how the property to the north could develop and the street extended, but we are
not proposing any development on that property. The ghost plat is provided at the request of City
staff simply to show how the future street connection could occur.
Park and Open Space
There are no open space areas proposed in phase 1. The Parks commission requested a park in the
future phase, and that the width of the ROW or an easement on the East/West road be adequate
to support a future trail. Both are currently shown reflecting Parks Commission comments.
Master Development Plan
Our master development plan shows how the overall property and adjacent large lot residential
properties could be developed, visualizing how future development could be planned for. We are
providing this exhibit to illustrate the layout of development on the site and to show future road
connection points with adjacent residential properties.
Included in the master development area is a lake classified as recreational lake 87W in the surface
water management plan. Single-family homes in the Shoreland District for a recreational lake
require a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres and a minimum width of 300 feet. We are presented with
two options regarding this lake and the development standards it presents:
1. We can reclassify the lake by working with city staff to gather information and present the
information to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for consideration. This process
can take considerable time and is not a guarantee that the lake will be reclassified.
2. We can request the same PUD flexibility for lot size and lot dimension that is being sought
for phase 1 of the development. The PUD flexibility would be from the city standards for
shoreland overlays, while still maintaining compliance with the state standards.
We are going to pursue the PUD flexibility option with future phases of the development, as this is
the more feasible option.
The master development plan proposes a total of 47 acres of park and private open space. In
addition to the park to be dedicated with the development of Outlot A, a large 46 -acre private
open space is proposed in the northwest corner of the development area. This space is created with
the transfer of density from developable areas within the open space, to the adjacent areas as part
of a low -impact approach to the development. Considerable natural areas, wetlands and the
recreational lake are included in this area, and will be accessible to the public via trails and
connections to the public right-of-way. The open space connects to two different areas of the
proposed subdivision and allows for a connection to Martin Meadows to the North. This will create
a link between these two great natural park amenities. These amenities take advantage of the
existing wetlands and topography to provide attractive spaces and will provide a local destination
for various uses that may develop including hiking, biking, and many others. A conservation
easement is proposed over the entirety of this area.
LDP17002 L A N D F O R M May 17, 2018
Phase 1 PUD and Overall Development Narrative 4
16
PUD Findings
We are requesting approval of a PUD development application. A PUD is subject to the standards of
Section 13 of the Andover City Code. Our plan shows compliance with the Section 13-3-9
standards. Specifically:
The proposed development is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan of
the city.
The proposed project requires a comprehensive plan amendment to change the land use from AG
Agricultural to RR Rural Residential. This comprehensive plan amendment is consistent with the
surrounding land uses which are all RR Rural Residential and it is our understanding that the city is
in the process of making this Land Use amendment. Upon approval of the land use change, the
proposed development will be consistent with the goals of the comprehensive plan.
2. The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and unified
environment within its own boundaries.
We are proposing to create custom home sites to allow for flexibility for the buyer and a more
attractive neighborhood in Andover. Each lot will be custom graded to allow for construction of the
individual homes in a manner that meets the needs of the homeowner and allows them to design a
site that works with the natural features of the lot. This approach will allow flexibility in the
placement of single family homes on each lot while preserving the natural environment. The low -
impact qualities of this development will lead to a desirable and unified environment.
3. The proposed development demonstrates how each modified or waived requirement
contributes to achieving the purpose of a PUD.
Our proposal is requesting flexibility from lot size and lot width standards in the R-1 District and
from minimum ROW width. The requested flexibilities contribute to achieving the purpose of a
PUD, specifically:
The lot size change contributes to achieving a higher quality PUD development because it
helps preserve a larger number of existing trees, it allows for linear cluster development that
preserves the natural features and allows for the dedication of significant open space within
the development.
The lot width change contributes to achieving a higher quality PUD development because it
permits the development to arrange lots to preserve trees, minimize wetland impacts and
preserve natural features.
The ROW width change contributes to achieving a higher quality PUD development because
it allows for a rural street section that minimizes tree removals and allows for wider
drainage and utility easements that can be used as ditches for stormwater management.
The use of ditches will also reduce the number of trees removed because we will not need
traditional ponding to achieve stormwater requirements.
The requested flexibilities and how they contribute to the PUD design qualities are also discussed in
detail in the next section of this narrative.
LDP17002 L A N D F O R M May 17, 2018
Phase 1 PUD and Overall Development Narrative 5
17
4. 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.
The PUD proposal includes our master development plan that shows how the overall property and
adjacent large lot residential properties could be developed, visualizing how future development
could be planned for. Each phase of the development would contribute to the overall development
but would be independent of the previous and future phases.
PUD Flexibility
We are requesting City approval for flexibility from lot area standards in the R-1 district and
minimum ROW width. In return, our PUD proposal will provide a low -impact, creative stormwater
design, minimize tree removal and minimize wetland impact. Section 13-3-11 of the Zoning Code
outlines nine design qualities that the City desires in PUDs. Our plan is consistent with these
requirements, specifically:
1. Achieves efficiency in the provision of streets and utilities and preserves area to achieve the
elements of design qualities described in this chapter.
Our proposed plan will achieve development efficiency and allow for low -impact design by
preserving trees and reducing wetland impacts. Our linear cluster development allows preservation
of natural features and provides creative design elements.
2. 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.
The proposed development is not anticipated to generate substantial traffic volumes. The narrower
rural street and ROW will be sufficient for the anticipated traffic that will be generated from
residents within the subdivision and potential visitors. The MSA road will be constructed as a wider
street with a greater ROW to handle the anticipated traffic volumes. It will provide an access point
into the development from the north and south.
3. Provides a buffer between different uses, adjacent properties, roadways, between
backyards of back-to-back lots.
Adequate buffers between different uses are provided in the development plan. The development
is clustered in a linear fashion and the lots will be buffered from existing and future development
because the abutting land is comprised of mainly wetland and bluff is undevelopable. The existing
vegetation will screen this project form adjacent properties.
4. Preserves existing stands of trees and/or significant trees.
The narrower rural section street and reduced ROW allow for a number of significant trees to be
preserved. Allowing flexibility in the lot sizes and configuration of development allows a greater
number of trees to be preserved. Additionally, the proposed design includes utilizing ditches as part
of the low impact stormwater management practices, which will allow a greater number of trees to
LDP17002 L A N D F O R M May 17, 2018
Phase 1 PUD and Overall Development Narrative 6
18
be preserved because ponding (which requires tree removal) will not be required to meet
stormwater design standards.
S. Provides considerable landscaping treatments that complement the overall design and
contribute toward an overall landscaping theme.
Each custom -build lot will allow residents to provide landscaping that is consistent with City Code
and will be reviewed at the time of building permit. Additionally, as part of the storm water
management plan, individual lots may provide bio swale gardens (rain gardens) adjacent to the
driveway. This landscaping will be designed to provide consistency along the street.
6. Preserves significant usable space on individual lots or through the provision of open space
within the development.
A linear cluster development preserves significant open space and natural features within the
development and our lot layout provides significant open space on each of the lots. The open space
is shown as two parks within the development that can be utilized for the needs of the community.
7. 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.
Given the natural amenities of this site and the proposed improvements, the proposed landscape
improvements within the development will provide a high-quality design. Details will be
incorporated at the time of preliminary plat submittal.
8. The proposed structures within the development demonstrate quality architectural design
and the use of high quality building materials for unique design and detailing.
Given the natural amenities of this site and the proposed improvements, the proposed homes
within the development will provide a high-quality design. The details will be provided at the time
of preliminary plat.
9. 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)
A home owner's association will be established for the proposed development for the purpose of
managing stormwater improvements and common elements.
LOP17002 L A N D f O R M May 17, 2018
Phase 1 PUD and Overall Development Narrative 7
19
Summary
We respectfully request approval of the planned unit development for Petersen Farms located at
16511 Avenue NW and Roanoke Street NW.
We understand the project will be heard with a public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting
on May 22nd, with action taken at the City Council meeting on July 31
Contact Information
This document was prepared by:
Kevin Shay
Landform
105 South Fifth Avenue, Suite 513
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Any additional questions regarding this application can be directed to Darren Lazan at
dlazan@landform.net or 612.638.0250
LDP17002 L A N D F O R M May 17, 2018
Phase 1 PUD and Overall Development Narrative 8
CITY O P
��Y 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
20
Zoog Ccxnp':cher�s�`��
Goals, Objectives and Policies kttn s
The f II ' I
0 owing pages describe the goals of the community and the strategies that are
employed to achieve them. The goals, objectives and policies are structured according
to the topic that they address. However, it is important to remember that these
statements are interrelated. As a result, the cause and effect for each topic must be
considered when decisions concerning the Comprehensive Plan are made. For the
purposes of this plan these terms are defined as follows:
Goal: A statement that expresses a desired outcome or state of affairs.
Objective: A statement that provides direction on how the goal will be achieved.
Policy: A specific action that will be taken or a general rule that will be applied to a
specific situation.
Overarching Goals, Objectives and Policies
Goal 1: Maintain and enhance the quality of life in Andover
Objective: Efficiently provide basic services to improve all aspects of the city
that contribute to quality of life including land use, public safety,
transportation, recreation, health, education, and resource
preservation
Policy: Prepare, implement, periodically evaluate and update local controls
such as:
• Comprehensive Plan
• City Code
• Capital Improvement Plan
• Water Resource Management Plan
• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
• Park Improvement Plan
Objective: Preserve the rural character of the community
Policies:
• Preserve the Rural Residential Planning Area Designation Identified by the
Metropolitan Council 2030 Regional Development Framework
• . Plan the efficient expansion of municipal sewer and water through
implementation of the Land Use Plan
• Preserve natural areas through implementation of the Parks and Open Space
Plan
21
`b
' 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
t �
Goal 2: Maintain a high degree of community planning and involvement
Objective: Ensure an open and accessible local government that is responsive
to the needs of residents
Policies:
• Provide access to information in a variety of forms including the newsletter,
official newspaper, web site and televised meetings
• Maintain healthy relationships with residents, businesses, community groups,
school districts, and government agencies to ensure all points of view are
represented
• Promote participation in citizen advisory committees
• Consider all available information and the potential impacts on all aspects of the
community when making land use decisions
• Maintain a mix of land uses, including schools, professional and medical office,
retail, community and park facilities to, provide a vital node of activity in the
vicinity of City Hall
• Encourage resident involvement through the public hearing process and utilize a
variety of public hearing notification methods including direct mailing, publication
in the official newspaper and signs placed on subject properties
Goal 3: Maintain the Comprehensive Plan as a relevant official
document
Objective: Consider Comprehensive Plan amendments that better achieve the
goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan,'
Policies:
• Adhere to the goals, objectives and policies of this Comprehensive Plan to
prevent incremental decision making that adversely affects the intent of the plan
• Review Comprehensive Plan text amendments with the following criteria:
o A public need for the proposed amendment. can be identified
o The proposed amendment is the best way to satisfy that need
o The amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan
c i a r o c .
1 MVER 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
o The amendment is in the best interest of the City of Andover as
determined by the City Council
Review Comprehensive Plan amendments concerning a proposed land use
change with the following criteria:
o Conditions have changed since the present land use designation was
established such to warrant the proposed amendment or the present land
use designation is in error
o The proposed land use is compatible with surrounding land uses and with
the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan
o There is capacity of public systems, facilities and services to serve the
proposed land use and capacity of these systems to serve other planned
land uses is not adversely affected
o 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
o Potential impacts by the proposed land use on natural resources including
vegetation, wetlands, floodplain and other natural features can be avoided
or sufficiently mitigated as determined by the City Council
o To ensure a transition or buffer between urban and rural residential zoning
districts
Land Use Goals, Objectives and Policies
Goal 4: Allow residential growth while maintaining the quality of natural
resources and amenities
Objective: Clearly define areas for urban and rural residential development
Objective: Promote orderly growth to ensure efficient utilization and delivery of
community services
Objective: Prevent extension of infrastructure that is inconsistent with the
Comprehensive Plan
Objective: Work cooperatively with resource protection agencies and
organizations to minimize the impact of development on natural
resources and amenities
Objective: Create opportunities for the city to preserve open space
and natural amenities through review of development proposals
and implementation of the Parks and Open Space Plan
4
rw"
23
Kbcarr ou
—Wt{ . 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
Policies:
• Maintain a Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA) Boundary to define the
boundary between the Developing Community and Rural Residential planning
area designations of the 2030 Regional Development Framework
• Stage urban development within the MUSA Boundary to ensure orderly growth
and cost efficient expansion of infrastructure
• Review and update the staging plan periodically to address changes in times and
conditions
• Prohibit platting of property without municipal sewer and water within the MUSA
Boundary
• Restrict lot splits without municipal sewer and water within the MUSA Boundary
• Encourage infill development within the MUSA Boundary with appropriate
transitions to existing neighborhoods
• Allow rural development outside of the MUSA Boundary consistent with the Rural
Residential Land Use Designation
• Require existing conditions information to be provided during the development
review process to allow evaluation of opportunities to preserve and protect
natural features and open. space
• Engage local watershed management organizations and other appropriate
agencies and organizations in the. review of development proposals
Goal 5: Encourage appropriate economic growth and redevelopment
Objective: Develop a diversified tax base through balanced development of
commercial, light industrial, and residential properties
Objective: Create a downtown area by aggregating commercial land uses
along Bunker Lake Boulevard between Hanson Boulevard and
Crosstown Boulevard
Objective: Select strategic locations for neighborhood and community
commercial sites and establish design performance standards for
such uses that promote quality site design and compatible land use
arrangements
Objective: Prevent the intensification of neighborhood commercial areas that
may negatively affect surrounding residential properties
c� m r a r A
N;JOVER 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
Policies:
• Maintain the existing commercial nodes along Hanson Boulevard, Bunker
Lake Boulevard and Round Lake Boulevard as cohesive, interrelated nodes of
commercial activity
• Prevent fragmented, uncoordinated and linear commercial development
away from these locations
® Provide limited opportunities for commercial development in other areas of
the city only when demand is demonstrated with a professionally prepared
market study
• Ensure that new development and redevelopment has a positive impact on the
community by providing appropriate transitions and demonstrating compliance
with the City Code
• Promote redevelopment of existing industrial zones to accommodate industrial
development, enhance community appearance and tax base
• Allow limited industrial development within Andover Station North when the use,
site design, and building architecture are compatible with the existing and
planned uses within this commercial center
Goal: Protect and develop access for alternative energy systems
Objective: Preserve reasonable access to all parcels so that alternative forms of
energy can be used to supplement or replace conventional forms of
energy
Policies:
• Encourage and support educational programs and research that focuses on
alternative or renewable energy systems such as offered by Metro Cities,
University of Minnesota Extension Services,Minnesota Office of Environmental
Assistance, Anoka County and other organizations
• Encourage the possible use of solar energy in future housing developments
• Encourage future site and building plans to design for efficient use of solar
energy including such elements as the location of windows, shade trees,
windows, and driveways
Goal: Reduce maintenance and energy costs for public facilities and
infrastructure
ri
24
25
wbv>;
2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
Objective: Where feasible, use low energy design elements for future public facilities
and infrastructure development
Policy:
• Explore alternative energy sources when replacing systems in public facilities
Housing Goals, Objectives and Policies
Goal: Provide a variety of housing types to accommodate the life
cycle needs of all residents
Goal: Remain responsive to housing .market demands through
implementation of the Land Use Plan
Objective: Utilize the existing housing stock to provide a portion of the
affordable housing demand projected by the Metropolitan Council
Objective: Utilize local controls to provide opportunities for a variety of housing
types, including affordable housing
Objective: Continue to work with agencies that provide affordable housing and
housing for residents with special needs
Policies:
• Work with property owners to identify sources of funding for home improvements
to prevent deterioration of the city's older homes
• Continue the housing rehabilitation revolving loan program to provide
maintenance assistance for housing occupied by low to moderate income
families and individuals
• Support Anoka County's efforts to implement the Five Year Consolidated Plan
• Utilize the planned unit development review process for medium and high density
residential projects to encourage more efficient allocation of density and intensity
of land use and get higher quality development while providing amenities not
otherwise achievable with existing zoning classes.
• Support public service agency applications for the Community Development
Block Grant Program
7
iN6ov
2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
Transportation Goals, Objectives and Policies
Goal: Provide a safe and efficient transportation system that is cost
effective and serves the existing and future access and
mobility needs of the City
Objective: Ensure adequate internal and external transportation access and
links for efficient movement of people and goods
Objective: Provide a transportation system that enhances quality economic
development within the City
Objective: Provide a transportation system that meets the varied needs of
Andover residents
Objective: Consider the mobility needs of all persons in the planning and
development of the transportation system
Policies:
• Provide for early and continuing citizen involvement in transportation planning
and implementation of projects
• Provide a roadway system within a functional hierarchy that accommodates
existing and future travel demands by providing the necessary design features to
satisfy, the roadway's intended use
• Provide sufficient roadway capacity through the construction of transportation
system improvements that accommodate existing and future demand
• Require construction of transportation system improvements in conjunction with
new developments when the need is created by the new development
• Require payment for future transportation improvements as apart of evelopment
approval proportionate to the demand created by new developments
• Ensure that all components of the transportation system are maintained and
developed to the highest standards to insure against detrimental impact upon
community growth.
• Utilize the Capital Improvement Plan to schedule projects that increase public
safety by minimizing hazards and correcting poorly designed intersections and
access points
26
27
�NJ3OVt
2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
i
Goal: Provide a coordinated transportation system that is
compatible with adjacent municipality, Anoka County,
Metropolitan Council and State of Minnesota transportation
plans
Objective: Coordinate transportation planning and transportation system
improvements with other government agencies to increase
efficiencies
Objective: Increase opportunities for funding of local transportation system
improvements from federal, state and county funding sources
Policies:
• Coordinate grant applications and other funding requests, when appropriate, with
neighboring municipalities, as well as state, regional and county agencies
• Coordinate participation of Anoka County and adjacent cities, where appropriate,
in the provision of Transportation Plan elements
Goal: Provide multi -modal transportation options whenever and
wherever feasible and advantageous
Objective: Periodically evaluate potential ridership and feasibility of joining the
Metropolitan Transit Taxing District to provide additional transit
options for Andover residents
Policies:
• Identify locations for park and ride facilities and preserve the ability to implement
these facilities in the future
• Promote ridesharing and increased vehicle occupancies throughout the City
Goal: Minimize impacts of the transportation system on the natural
environment
Objective: Ensure environmentally sensitive implementation of the
transportation system through the planning, design and
construction of improvements
Objective: Consider the impacts of improvements to the existing transportation
system on land use, environmental, social, historic, and cultural
resources
ci ry o r.
NLiOVER L 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
Policies:
• Adhere to best management practices and all components of the Implementation
Plan during the planning, construction and maintenance of the transportation
system
• Separate non -motorized traffic from arterial and collector roadways
• Encourage joint parking facilities to conserve land
Goal: Enhance accessibility by providing an interconnected multi-
use trail system
Objective: Provide an accessible trail system that links residential
neighborhoods, commercial developments, and park areas
Objective: Utilize multiple funding sources to complete the regional and local
trail systems
Objective: Coordinate trail construction with street improvement projects, new
development, expansion and redevelopment projects
Policies:
• Maintain a map of existing and future local and regional trails and coordinate trail
planning., construction and maintenance in the Capital Improvement Plan
• Fund regional trail system improvements adjacent to residential properties with
trail fees collected from new residential developments
• Require regional trail construction adjacent to commercial and industrial
properties, where shown on the trails plan, in conjunction with development,
expansion and redevelopment projects
• Require local trail construction adjacent to residential, commercial and industrial
properties, where shown on the trails plan, in conjunction with development,
expansion and redevelopment projects
• Develop trails in accordance with the American Association of State Highway
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards
• Coordinate trail and sidewalk improvements, where appropriate, with Anoka
County and neighboring cities
10
®'
NE
crr oc ;
ND�?VER ' 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
Water Resources Goals, Objectives and Policies
These goals, objectives and policies are included within the City of Andover Water
Resource Management Plan and Water Supply Plan. These are separate documents
that have been adopted as a component of the Comprehensive Plan.
Parks and Open Space Goals, Objectives and Policies
Goal 1: Provide parks and facilities that meet present park needs and plan
for the future needs of the city
Objectives:
a. Maintain and upgrade current park facilities
b. Evaluate existing conditions and future growth projections to determine
the types of parks and facilities needed to complete the park system
C. Provide more passive recreation opportunities
d. Provide for a balance among active and passive recreation areas and
activities
e. Provide recreation facilities for all age groups and abilities within the city
f. Design and maintain recreation areas with appropriate lighting,
landscaping, parking, and shelter design
g. Consider the Site Selection Criteria established in the Parks and Open
Space Plan and the standards of the National Recreation and Park
Association in the planning and design of the park system
Policies:
• Implement a maintenance schedule for the grounds and facilities within the
current park system.
• Aggregate resources from local, state and federal sources to complete planned
improvements as scheduled in the Capital Improvement Plan
• Maintain and Update the Park Study as a guide for the number, size, type and
location of parks and facilities needed to complete the park system to serve the
needs of residents
11
i7]OVER _ 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
• Accept only lands suitable for park and recreation purposes as fulfillment of the
parkland dedication requirements.
• Utilize the Capital Improvement Plan to schedule replacement of existing park
facilities and installation of new facilities.
• Utilize the Park and Recreation Commission to advise the Council on matters
relating to parks, recreation and park facilities
• Provide regulations and policies for park use and park dedication
• Consider the adopted Guidelines for Field Usage by Youth Athletic Associations
• Work cooperatively with other organizations and government agencies to
enhance local and regional park systems
Goal 2: Promote, protect, preserve and enhance the City's natural
and open space for the enjoyment of residents, protection of water
and air quality and the preservation of wildlife habitat
Objectives:
Consider development of passive, nature -related recreation or
conservancy areas on sites found to be suitable for these purposes
b. Identify appropriate areas for preservation through analysis of
natural features, the Site Selection Criteria established in the Parks
and Open Space Plan and the Land Use Plan
C. Plan for and Provide connections with the park and trail systems in a
manner that both preserves and allows public enjoyment of natural areas
d. Seek to provide buffer areas adjacent to significant natural resources and
parks
Policies:
• Work collaboratively with property owners in the preservation of open space
• Permanently protect open space with conservation easements, even when fee
title acquisition and other methods are used.
• Prepare, implement and monitor the effectiveness of conservation plans that
address the specific characteristics of the various types of natural areas
• Utilize the Open Space Advisory Commission to advise the Council on matters
concerning preservation of open space
12
30
31
OVER -
2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
Prevent incompatible land uses from locating adjacent to parks and
open space areas through implementation of the Land Use Plan and
zoning regulations
Work cooperatively with other organizations and government agencies to acquire
and enhance open space areas within the city
13
CAI T Y O F 32
ND OVE .
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
MEMO/ AWN
TO: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
FROM: David Berkowitz, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Jason Law, Asst. City Engineer
DATE: May 14, 2018
REFERENCE: Andover Farms/PUD Review #1
The following comments are regarding Review #1 of the PUD Submittal:
1. In the narrative, discussion on Page 2 refers to submitting a grading plan and tree
preservation at the time of building permit. This will be needed for each individual lot,
however, a grading plan and tree preservation plan will be required prior to any site
grading taking place for the street and utilities with the preliminary plat review.
Stormwater infrastructure will need to be constructed and at minimum the front portion of
each lot will need to be graded. Understood. We will provide a grading and tree
preservation plan with the infrastructure package as part of the preliminary plat. This
comment will be clarified in the narrative to reflect more clearly that an ADDITIONAL
grading and tree preservation will be provided for each lot at the time of building permit.
2. On page 3 of the narrative, it is mentioned the City Code does not require concrete curb
and gutter for rural lots. This is incorrect, refer to Section 11-4-8-A4. Understood, this will
be corrected.
3. On page 3 of the narrative, add to the discussion regarding the street width. Mention that
this was discussed with the Andover Fire Department, and the minimum allowable
roadway width is 27' of bituminous plus ribbon curb on each side for a total width of 30'.
This will be corrected in the Narrative. Understood, this wile be corrected.
4. On page 3 of the narrative, the developer is requesting flexibility with the shoreland
standards. This would also have to be reviewed with the DNR. It is understood that any
future development in the DNR's overlay district will require their review.
5. On the overall master plan exhibit, remove the southerly access onto 7th Avenue, which is
consistent with previous submittals. This access is close to a high-speed curve on 711
Avenue. This access point will be removed on the plan showing future phases.
6. On the Phase 1 concept plan, identify the location of the park. This revised park location
will need to be presented to the park commission. The park commission previously
commented on their desire for a trail along the southerly east -west roadway. Further
discussion is needed on this item. There are no parks located in Phase 1. The Parks
commission requested a park in the future phase, and that the width of the RNV or
Easement on the ENV road be adequate to support a future trail be provided. Both are
currently shown reflecting Parks Commission comments. If the city would like the trail
constructed in the initial phase, the applicant is willing to discuss installing the trail and
offsetting trail fees.
7. It is required to extend 168th Avenue to the west plat line. May want to consider not 33
including Outlot A in the plat. Other option would be to provide Right -Of -Way or roadway
easement to west plat line and a cash escrow for future construction of the road. The
adjacent, and underlying property owner will be a party to the plat, and will retain
ownership of Outlots A and B at recording. It is our belief that the proposed condition
meets the intent of the ordinance as the road is extended to the property line of the
adjacent owner. After discussion with Mr. Janish, it may be an option to file a lot split
concurrent with the plat so Outlot A can be removed from the plat limits to meet the
technical definition of "plat limits'. We are willing to work with the city on the best
process.
8. Show a future road access to the rear portion of 4239 165th Avenue for potential future
development. We are willing to work with the city in providing future access to this
property in future phases. In reviewing this condition, and the current and recent
construction, we felt the most reasonable access for this development would be a small
cul-de-sac from 165th, so we did not include that connection from the north.
9. Please review all City Codes for compliance. Understood.
10. Additional comments pending further review. Understood.
Note: It is a requirement that the Developer respond to each of these items in writing
digital copy from City 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.
2
Anka County
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION
i-4iynvvay
E
Stephanie Hanson RECENED
City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Blvd. NW MAY 11 2018
Andover, MN 55304
Re: Sketch Plan — Andover Farms
CITY OF 15,ND SVER
Dear Stephanie
34
May 7, 2018
AnotCa �ocM4'(
Ft' Hww7 I.eNcr
We have reviewed the sketch plan for Andover Farms, to be located north of CR 158 (1Q5th
Avenue NW) and east of CSAH 7 (Roanoke Street NW) within the City of Andover, and I offer
the following comments:
An additional 27 feet of right of way adjacent to CR 158 will be required for future
reconstruction purposes (60 feet total right of way width north of the CR 158 right of way
centerline). The existing right of way adjacent to CSAH 7 is 60 feet east of the CSAH 7
right of way centerline, which should be adequate for future reconstruction purposes,
unless additional right of way is needed to construct the required tum lanes for this
development. The sketch plan proposes three connections to the county highway
system, one on CSAH 7 at 1701 Avenue NW, and two on CR 158 at Inca Street NW and
via Eldorado Street NW. In concept, we find these local street connections acceptable,
provided that full turn lane construction occurs on the county at each location (ex - NB
and SB CSAH 7 left and right tum lane construction at 170th Avenue NW, EB and WB
CR 158 left and right turn lane construction at Inca Street NW, EB CR 158 left turn lane
or bypass lane and WB CR 158 right tum lane at Eldorado Street NW). In addition, we
also have concerns regarding safety and operations at the intersections of CSAH 7/CR
158 and CR 58/CR 158 as a result of this development, and it is likely that the
construction of a NB CR 58 bypass lane and a SB CR 58 right turn lane will be required
at the intersection of CR 58/CR 158, as well as the construction of a SB CSAH 7 right
turn lane/bypass lane at the intersection with CR 158.
It appears Case I and Case IIIB Intersection Sight Distance Requirements are not met at
the CR 158/Inca Street NW intersection with obstruction being trees, brush and
horizontal curve. The City and the Developer should ensure that clearing and/or grading
is completed to satisfy the sight distance requirements to the fullest extent possible for
this development. Please note that no plantings or business signs will be permitted
within the county right of way, and care should be exercised when locating signs,
plantings, berms, etc. outside of the county right of way, so as not to create any
additional sight obstructions for vehicles entering/exiting the new city street. If the City
has additional concerns regarding intersection operations as a result of this
development, we would be supportive of the development completing a traffic study.
ACHD would like to work with local governments in promoting compatibility between land
use and the county highway system. It should be recognized that residential land uses
located adjacent to County highways often results in complaints about traffic noise.
Existing and/or future traffic noise from CSAH 7 and CR 158 could exceed noise
Our Passion Is Your Safe way Home
1440 Bunker Lake Boulevard N.W. ® Andover, MN 55304-4005
Office: 763-324-3100 ® Fax: 763-324-3020 n www.anokacounty.us/highway
Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer
W
standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Department of
Transportation. Minnesota Rule 7030.0030 states that municipalities are responsible for
taking all reasonable measures to prevent land use activities listed in the MPCA's Noise
Area Classification (NAC) where establishment of the land use would result in violations
of established noise standards. It is advised that the City and the Developer should
assess the noise situation for this development as it is proposed to be located directly
adjacent to CSAH 7 and CR 158, and take the level of action deemed necessary to
minimize the impact of any highway noise by incorporating the appropriate noise
mitigation elements into the design and phasing of this plat as applicable.
The ACHD Engineering Plan Review process will apply to this site. Calculations must
be submitted along with a grading and erosion control plan that delineates the drainage
areas for this development. The post -developed rate/volume of runoff must not exceed
the pre -developed rate/volume of runoff for the 10 -year, critical design storm. Contact
Nicholas Dobda, Engineer III via telephone at 763.324.3118, or via email at
Nicholas. Dobda(a)co.anoka.mn.us for further information and to coordinate the ACHD
Engineering Plan Review process. Please submit the drainage calculations, grading and
erosion control plans, CSAH 7/CR 158/CR 58 right turn lane + left turn lane plans, ACHD
Design Requirements Checklist for County Highway.Modifications (copy available via
our website), and the applicable ACHD Engineering Plan review fee to Mr. Dobda for his
review and approval.
Following completion of the ACHD Engineering Plan Review process, the contractor(s)
completing the work in the county right of way can begin the ACHD Permit process. Two
Access Permits for the new City street connections (fee = $250.00 each) and Permits for
work within the county right of way (fee = $150.00 for each county roadway) are required
and must be obtained prior to the commencement of any construction. License Permit
Bonding, methods of construction, design details, work zone traffic control, restoration
requirement and follow-up inspections are typical elements of the permitting process.
Contact Sue Burgmeier in the ACHD Permit Office at 763.324.3176 for further
information regarding the permit process.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions
regarding this review.
Sin rel ,
Jane Rose
Traffic Engineering Manager
xc: CSAH 7/131ats + Developments/2018
Nicholas Dobda, Engineer III
Chuck Gitzen, County Surveyor
Sue Burgmeier, Traffic Engineering Tech I
Andover General Mapping Map
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTIFICATION AREA
Date Created: May 09, 2018
Disclaimer. The provider makes no representation or warranties with respect to the reuse of this data.
r�
\ 3�
Y„ -
O � N
O \
_ W
7
Powerline Esmt
00
�My �
O O
0 0
U A tNO V i .NP N t0 (�J tU0 A (011 fG N
-------- { p NV N N N N Wp N N N N N N—+(+�
A n A i W w V V i [UO O V i N N N [Uil N i m
Ald d d d d d d d y d daa d d d d d d d d d d d
A V OI A U A A A U A A A A yy OO.� Of A U A A OOff p� p�
O> O (Wn (T NN pW� U U O p w W pW W � p� OfOf (VJ O w p OI (T pa
^- Uwi (V.� �
N N y y T T N N N^ T H T N
w w N N++ -A N A i U p N O U+ W W N d �.
U U O CO O V W N A U 4
W �f O)N dJ fT N�Q704� O� (T+
g
r-
0
co
C
D
E
U) N u
m
v
v
�
O'
o
-i
Ocn
Z] N T
p
oa
��d�aa
a,3��Z
d
0
='
�D
N
m
�
�
Q
y
O
3
N
d
0
y
O
n
2.
cn
22
r
U C
a
�o m <
O
9) 0 0 0 0
m
cs
W
cn
v
TTN
T
x, 0
N
O
�_ Z
CiJ O
sT
m
a,3��Z
0
='
N
r
Er cn
F. co
d
m
C
n
cn
r
U C
�o m <
0
ii ilii iii 7 9i:9 1i5ii9
n _ � r.: nDD�uneuuuoD
I+i m
!�)f��� a !t!i(tiili++!ii1lle
ii S D I: itl1 „i„11 „i lj