Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-23-21 Workshop1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Workshop Agenda March 23, 2021 Andover City Hall Senior Center 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Discussion - Site Visioning Constance Free Church Andover / Station 19 Architects 3. Discussion - Subordinate Classroom Structures 4. Discussion - Construction of Accessory Structures Prior to Principal Structures 5. Other Business 6. Adjournment Please note: Some or all members of the Andover Planning & Zoning Commission may participate in the March 23, 2021 workshop by telephone or video conference call rather than by being physically present at the Commission's regular meeting place at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Blvd NW, Andover, MN 55304. Members of the public can watch the meeting live on the government access channel, web stream via QCTV.org or physically attend at Andover City Hall. Please keep in mind that seatine in the City Senior Center is currently very limited as appropriate social distancing will be practiced by the Commission and visitors. The public can also participate in the public hearing remotely through the video conference call. A link to the call will be available on the Planning Department website the day of the meeting. 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV TO: Planning & Zoning Commissioners CC: Joe Janish, Community Development Director4 FROM: Jake Griffiths, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Discussion - Constance Free Church Visioning / Station 19 Architects DATE: March 23, 2021 INTRODUCTION The leadership of Constance Free Church and Station 19 Architects, Inc. requested to meet with the Planning & Zoning Commission to discuss the future of the Constance Free Church site. Constance Free Church is located at 16150 Crosstown Blvd NW on the northwest corner of 161 st Ave NW and Constance Blvd NW. The Andover Review Committee (ARC), Park & Recreation Commission and City Council will have all met with Station 19 Architects prior to the Commission's workshop. A copy of questions provided by Station 19 Architects to be discussed during the workshop is attached for your review. Respectfully submitted, Jake Griffiths Associate Planner Attachments Community/City Leaders Listening Questions CONSTANCE FREE CHURCH ANDOVER, MN PROJECT #4577 02 /16 / 2021 - COMMUNITY LEADERS COMMUNITY / CITY LEADERS LISTENING QUESTIONS STATION dig ARCHITECTS, INC. 1. As the city of Andover grows - What are some important services that are needed or desired? 2. What ideas is the city cultivating to fill those needs, but are trying to find the right partner? 3. How can Constance Free be a good partner & great neighbor to support & address some of those needs? 4. What does the city see as the highest & best use of Constance Free's property? 5. How has the city partnered with private / public partnerships in the past? ' , • ' r-�� 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV TO: Planning & Zoning Commissioners CC: Joe Janish, Community Development Director? / FROM: Jake Griffiths, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Discussion — Subordinate Classroom Structures DATE: March 23, 2021 INTRODUCTION: At the March 9, 2021 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, the Commission reviewed a proposed City Code Amendment that would expand locations suitable for daycare centers. At that time, the Commission also discussed the requirements around subordinate classroom structures (commonly referred to as "portables" or "temporary classrooms") and their use within the community. Some Commissioners felt that additional daycare space should not trigger the need for a subordinate classroom structure. At staff's suggestion, the Commission requested to review the subordinate classroom structure City Code requirements at a future workshop meeting. DISCUSSION: City Staff has provided relevant information related to City Code requirements and the history of the subordinate classroom structure ordinance below to aid in the Commission's discussion: Existing City Code Requirements City Code defines a subordinate classroom structure as follows: Subordinate Classroom Structures: Those structures erected upon a lot containing a school or religious institution structure as the principal use, for the purposes of either classroom instruction or office use associated with the principal use, and, which meet all state code requirements. Subordinate classroom structures are an interim use on properties containing a school or religious institution as a principal use in all residential districts. This means that prior to installation, or prior to continuation of their use, an Interim Use Permit (IUP) must be obtained from the City Council. The IUP process requires a public hearing, review by the Planning & Zoning Commission, and a recommendation to the City Council. Through this process, the City Council may also add reasonable conditions to its approval such as time limits, architectural finishes, compliance with state building code, etc. The IUP approval process has been in place since 2014 when interim uses were added into the City Code. Prior to that time, subordinate classroom structures were a conditional use that was still anticipated to be temporary. Approval History & Active Permits In the past, there were several properties that had subordinate classroom structures. However, overtime many of these structures have been removed as expansion of the principal use has occurred. For example, prior to the Andover High School expansion, Andover High School utilized multiple subordinate classroom structures. As Phase I of the expansion project was completed, the subordinate classroom structures were removed. As of the date of this staff report, there are two active IUPs for subordinate classroom structures. Details on these permits are included below for your review: Active Subordinate Classroom Structure IUPs Address Original Approval Expiration Date Duration at Date Expiration Date 16045 Nightingale St November 4, 1998 August 31, 2023 24 years, 9 months NW 13655 Round Lake May 2, 2006 December 31, 2023 16 years, 7 months Blvd NW Resolutions for the remaining subordinate classroom structure IUPs have been attached for your review. During the City Council's last review of the subordinate classroom structure IUPs when renewed in late 2018 and early 2019, it was anticipated that the remaining IUPs would not be renewed at expiration and the subordinate classroom structures on the properties listed above would be removed. Pursuant to that direction, City Staff will be following up with these property owners in late 2021 to remind them of the upcoming deadline. ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to discuss the City Code and provide direction to staff. Re ectfullllyy submitted, ake Gri fithf s� Associate Planner Attachments Subordinate Classroom Structures Resolutions Photos of Subordinate Classroom Structures CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. R024-19 A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR EXTENDING THE TIME OF REMOVAL OF SUBORDINATE CLASSROOM STRUCTURES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13655 ROUND LAKE BLVD (PIN 32-32-24-42-0009), LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: THAT PRT OF W 445.02 FT OF NWl/4 OF SETA OF SEC 32 TWP 32 RGE 24 LYG N OF N R/W LINE OF 136TH LN NW, EX RD, SUBJ TO EASE OF REC, Anoka County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, Grace Lutheran Church requested an interim use permit for the use of subordinate classroom structures with a four-year extension on the removal of the subordinate classroom structures, and; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on February 12, 2019; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds the request: 1. Will not create an excess burden on parks, streets, and other public facilities; • The subordinate classrooms have been in place since 2006 with no issues being reported at this time. 2. Will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise harm the public health, safety, and general welfare; • The subordinate structures are inspected by the Fire Department every 2 or 3 years. A condition has been included on the resolution that will require an inspection by the building official. 3. Will not have a negative effect on the values of property and scenic views; • The subordinate classrooms have been in place since 2006 with bi-yearly safety inspections. • The applicant is not proposing to move or modify the subordinate classrooms. • Routine maintenance to the subordinate classrooms has been conducted since initially obtaining a permit to have them. 4. Will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public; • The subordinate classrooms are the responsibility of the applicant and any costs associated with removal, and maintenance are the sole responsibility to the applicant. 5. Will be subjected to, by agreement with the owner, any conditions that the City Council has deemed appropriate for the permission of the use, including a condition that the owner may be required to provide appropriate financial surety to cover the cost of removing the interim use and any interim structures upon the expiration of the interim use permit. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council anoroval of the interim use permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby aunrovea the interim use permit to allow for extending the time for the removal of the subordinate classroom structures on property located at 13655 Round Lake Blvd with the following conditions: 1. The Interim Use Permit shall expire on December 3I, 2023, at which time the temporary structures shall be removed. 2. Upon the issuance of the Interim Use Permit, the Andover Fire and Building Departments shall perform an inspection of the subordinate classroom structure. 3. If the subordinate classroom structures do not pass inspections by Andover Fire and Building Departments, the structures may shall be brought into compliance or the Interim Use Permit may be revoked. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 51 day of March 2019. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: ley Trude, Mayor Mich le Harmer, Deputy C�tyClerk © CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. R053-18 A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR EXTENDING THE TIME FOR THE REMOVAL OF A SUBORDINATE CLASSROOM STRUCTURE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16045 NIGHTINGALE STREET NW (PIN 15-32-24-42-0006) THAT PRT OF NW 1/4 OF SE1/4 OF SEC 15 TWP 32 RGE 24 LYG SLY OF SLY R/W LINE OF CSAH NO 20 & LYG NWLY OF FOL DESC LINE: BEG AT A PT ON W LINE OF SD 1/41/4 663 FT S OF NW COR THEREOF, TH E PRLL/W N LINETHEREOF 402 FT, TH NELY TO A PT ON SD SLY R/W LINE 300 FT WLY OF E LINE OF SD 1/4 1/4 & THERE TERM, EX RD, SUBJ TO EASE OF REC, Anoka County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, Andover Christian Church requested an interim use permit for the use of subordinate classrooms for a five year extension on the removal of the subordinate classroom structure granted by past conditional use permits, and; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 15,2018; Q and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds the request: 1. Will not create an excess burden on parks, streets, and other public facilities; • The subordinate classrooms have been in place since 1998 and no issues have been reported at this time. 2. Will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise barn the public health, safety, and general welfare; • The subordinate structures are inspected by the Fire Department every 2 or 3 years. A condition has been included on the resolution that would also require an inspection by the building official. 3. Will not have a negative effect on the values of property and scenic views; • The subordinate classrooms have been in place since 1998 and inspected by the Fire Department every 2 or 3 years. • The applicant is not proposing to move or modify the subordinate classrooms. • Routine maintenance to the subordinate classrooms have been conducted since initially obtaining a permit to have them. 4. Will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public; • The subordinate classrooms are the responsibility of the applicant and any costs associated with removal, and maintenance are the sole responsibility to the applicant. O 5. Will be subjected to, by agreement with the owner, any conditions that the City Council has deemed appropriate for the permission of the use, including a © condition that the owner may be required to provide appropriate financial surety to cover the cost of removing the interim use and any interim structures upon the expiration of the interim use permit. DO] WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the interim use permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby U2rovg the interim use pemrit to allow for extending the time for the removal of the subordinate classroom structure(s) on property located at 16045 Nightingale Street NW with the following conditions: 1. The Interim Use Permit shall expire on August 31, 2023, upon the transfer of the property to a third party, or upon a change of use of the property, whichever shall first occur. 2. Upon the issuance of the Interim Use Permit, the Building Department shall perform an inspection of the subordinate classroom structure. 3. If the subordinate classroom structure does not pass inspections by the Building Department and or Fire Department the Interim Use Permit may be revoked. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 21" day of August, 2018. C�1Pli a • J ' Trude, Mayor 13655 Round Lake Blvd NW Image Source: Anoka County Pictometry (April 2020) Examples of Subordinate Classroom Structures 16045 Nightingale St NW ` f 1 Image Source: Anoka County Pictometry (April 2020) 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV TO: Planning & Zoning Commissioners a CC: Joe Janish, Community Development Directorq FROM: Jake Griffiths, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Discussion — Construction of Accessory Structures Prior to Principal Structures DATE: March 23, 2021 INTRODUCTION: At a previous Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, there was general consensus among the Commission that the City Code requirements related to construction of accessory structures prior to principal structures should be reviewed. In response, staff has created several potential options for amending the City Code based on the Commission's direction in which we are seeking feedback. DISCUSSION: Over the past few years, the Commission has dealt with a number of lot split applications on properties that had detached garages. In some cases, property owners were proposing to split their lots in such a way that would leave the existing home on its own property, and the detached garage on its own separate property. This was the case for the last lot split the Commission reviewed at its February 23, 2021 meeting. Recent practice has been to approve the lot split request with a condition that a land use agreement be entered into that allows the accessory structure to remain on its own property so long as a principal dwelling is constructed within one year. This allows the property owner flexibility to complete their lot split as planned, and still allows the City some control over the City Code requirements. Existing City Code Requirements & Challenges City Code 12-6-2: Construction Prior to Principal Structure: No accessory structure shall be permitted on any lot prior to the principal structure except by Conditional Use Permit. There are essentially two challenges with the City Code as written. The first being that the City Code is fairly vague in standards that should be reviewed when considering allowing an accessory structure prior to a principal structure. Second, staff feels that the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process may not be the correct zoning tool to utilize when approving such a request as CUPS are land rights that run indefinitely with the land. So, if a CUP were approved to construct an accessory structure prior to a principal structure, then the accessory structure could remain on a lot on its own indefinitely so long as the conditions of approval are met. Potential Options Staff has included several potential options below for amending the City Code and will walk through each of them during the meeting: Option #1— Codify the existing land use agreement practice for lot split applications only and allow the CUP process to remain for property owners who wish to construct an accessory structure only on their property. Create objective and specific standards for accessory structure CUPS. Option #1 would keep application requirements for lot splits identical, avoid an additional approval process for property owners and would allow property owners the opportunity to construct an accessory structure only on their property subject to Planning Commission and City Council review and public hearing. Option #2 - Codify the existing land use agreement practice for lot split applications only and prohibit the construction of only an accessory structure on a property. Create IUP process and objective and specific standards for construction of an accessory structure prior to a principal structure for all other cases besides lot splits. Option 92 would keep application requirements for lot splits identical and avoid an additional approval process for property owners. It would also create an appropriate temporary approval process for approval of an accessory structure prior to a principal structure should those situations arise. Option 43 - Require an IUP in all cases of an accessory structure being constructed prior to a principal structure and create specific standards for said process. Option 43 would allow the Commission and City Council the most control over proposed applications as it would require a separate application process, public hearing and recommendation. The Commission could also add time limitations as a condition of approval to the IUP approval ifgranted. Option 44 - Leave the City Code the same or some other option not listed above. ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning & Zoning Commission is asked to discuss the City Code and provide direction to staff on if any of the options presented above, or some other option, should be pursued. ectfully submitted, /4�� Griffith Associate Planner