Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC April 18, 2000 ~ C\/l... Lúll ~ CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW, . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304· (612) 755-5100 Regular City Council Meeting - Tuesday, April 18, 2000 agenda Call to Order - 7:00 PM Resident Forum Bookmark Agenda Approval Name Consent Agenda Approval of Minutes minutes Discussion Items I. Anoka County Sheriff Monthly Report sheriff 2. Public Hearing/98-11/Jay Street NW ph9811 , 3. Public HearingIVacation of EasementlEd Fields and Sons phvfield 4. Public HearinglInterim Ordinance Establishing a MoratoriumlMulti-family Housing phmorato 5. Sketch Plan Review/Brooke Crossing PUD/Laurent Companies skplaur 6. Sketch Plan Review/Woodland Woods/Woodland Development skpwood 7. Discuss Ordinance 109/Snowmobiles ordl09 8. Consider Variance Request (VAR 00-10)/2621 Bunker Lake Blvd. NW var0010 9. Reconsider Request/Street Lights/Langfeld's Oakridge Estates strlight Staff. Committees. Commissions 10. City Bus Tour & Soil Boring Discussion/OO-18/Extension of Andover Boulevard NW meetingOO18 Non-Discussion/Consent Items 11. Approve Lot SplitlVariance(LSN AR 00-05)/17138 Aztec Street NW/Norton and Elfelt IsvOO05 12. Approve Variance(V AR 00-02)/Side Yard Setback/3547 133rd Lane NW/Holte varOOO2 13, Approve Variance(V AR 00-03)/Lots & Ag Preserve/NE 1/4 of Section 28/Eveland varOO03 14. Approve Variance(V AR 00-04)/Rear Yard Setback/143xx Butternut Street NW/SemlerConst,varOOO4 15. Approve V ariance(V AR 00-05)/Roof Pitchll4122 Prairie Road/Menth varOOO5 16. Approve V ariance(V AR 00-06)/Rear Yard Setback4472 I 49th A venue NW /Donlin varOOO6 17. Accept Feasibility Report/OO-14/142XX Round Lake Blvd acptOO 14 18. Award Bid/99-18/Shadowbrook 6th Addition bid9918 19. Accept Petition/OO-20/24XX -139th Avenue NW/WM pet0020 20. Approve 2000 Mowing Contract/City Properties/W eed Abatement mowing 21. Vehicle Committee Recommendation vehicle 22. Approve Hiring/Summer Building Intern intern Mayor/Council Input Payment of Claims Adjournment ~~ c<ð Wì~ REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 18, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS RESIDENT FORUM ........................................................ 1 AGENDA APPROVAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . ,. 2 CONSENT AGENDA Resolution R087-00 approving lot split/va..iance/17138 AzteclNorton & Elfelt .,. ..,. 2 Resolution R088-00 approving variance/Side yard setback!3547 133rd Lane/Holte. . ., 2 Resolution R089-00 approving varianceIRoofpitch/l4122 Prairie Road/Menth ...... 2 Resolution R090-00 approving varianceIR"ar yard setback!4472 149th Ave/Donlin. ., 2 Resolution R091-00 accepting feasibility/POO-14/142xx Round Lake Blvd ......... 2 Resolution R092-00 awarding bid/IP99-l8/Shadowbrook 6th .................... 2 Approve 2000 mowing contract/City properties/Weed abatement (Perfonnance Lawn Care - Moreiarty) . . . . , . . . , . . , . . . . . . . . . , . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . ., 2 Vehicle Committee recommendation (purchase pick-up for Utility Dept) ........... 2 Approve hiring/Summer building intern APPROVAL OF MINUTES .........,........................................ 2 ANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF MONTHLY REPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3 PUBLIC HEARING: IP98-11/JA Y STREET NW Resolution R093-00 ordering project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 3 PUBLIC HEARING: V ACA TION OF EASEr-.- ENT/ED FIELDS AND SONS ....,..... 3 Resolution R094-00 vacating easements ..................................... 4 PUBLIC HEARING: INTERIM ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING MORATORIUM/ MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING ............................................. 4 Motion to adopt moratorium ordinance ,............................,........ 6 SKETCH PLAN REVIEWIBROOK CROSSING PUD/LAURENT COMPANIES. . . . . .. 7 SKETCH PLAN REVIEW/wOODLAND WOJDS/WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT. .. II DISCUSS ORDINANCE NO. 109/SNOWMOBILES ..,.......................... 12 CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST/2621 BUNKER LAKE BOULEVARD NW Resolution R095-00 granting variance from front yard setback .................. 13 ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY WEST OF PUBLIC WORKS/IPOO-13 Motion to increase offer to $100,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . , . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. 13 CITY TOUR AND SOIL BORING DISCUSSI )N/IPOO-18/EXTENSION OF ANDOVER BOULEVARD (Monday, Ap, i124, 2000, 6 p.m.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13 V ARIANCE/LOTS AND AG PRESERVEINE 1/4 OF SECTION 28/EVELAND . . . . . .. 13 Motion to table to April 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14 V ARIANCE/REAR YARD SETBACKJI43XX BUTIERNUT/SEMLER CONSTRUCTION Resolution R096-00 approving variance .................................... 14 MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT Hunting ordinance ...................................................,. 15 Standing committees ..........,........................................ 15 Mid-year administrative review .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15 Grey Oaks. . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. 15 Progress of negotiations with school district .......................,......... 15 Variances along Bunker Lake Boulevard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15 APPROVAL OF CLAIMS .................................................. 15 ADJOURNMENT..,.........................................,.......... 16 CITY of ANDOVER REGULAR ANDOVER CITY CO ¡NClL MEETING - APRIL 18, 2000 MIl,'UTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andov~r City Council was called to order by Mayor Jack McKelvey, April 18, 2000,7:05 p.m., at the A>,dover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmembers present: Don Jacobson, Julie Johnson, Mike Knight Councilmember absent: Ken OrtteI Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins City Engineer, Scott Erickson City Finance Director, Jim Dickinson Community Development Director, Dave Carlberg City Administrator, Richard Fursman Others RESlDENT FORUM Ken Reiner. 3028 181 st A venue - in driving around town the past two months, he's noted many more land use change signs than a year ago. It's been mly a year since the Comprehensive Plan has been in place, and he was concerned that that Pla'1 is already being changed. People look at the Comprehensive Plan to know what is being plan, led before they buy in the City. They want the rural part to remain rural. He expected to see 2Y2 10 s in the rural area; and based on that, he made the biggest investment he will ever make. He can't ¡fford to pick up and move because he doesn't like what is going on next to his neighborhood. He ¡- Jped the City would hold up the covenant made to the citizens. The Council and Staff explained cuany of the items in the Comprehensive Plan need land use changes, The signs are being put up as n effort to inform residents of any proposals on the property, including land use or zoning changes. It is an effort to let residents know of the public hearings so they have an opportunity to give input. Mr. Reiner - suggested the City get an iron-clad contract with the school district regarding the use of the City's ball fields. High schools use the fields until 8 or 9 o'clock at night all year round. Also, the school is being built for a certain number of students; and without an agreement, he predicted within a few years there will be portab'e classrooms because of increased enrollment. He felt the City should be prepared for that. - Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 2 AGENDA APPROVAL Add Hem 9a, Acquisition of Property West of Public Works/IPOO-13; Remove from Agenda Hem 9, Reconsider Request/Street lights/Langfeld's C akridge Estates, and Item 19, Accept PetitionlIPOO- 20/24xx 139th Avenue NW/Watermain; remo-!e from Consent Agenda for discussion, Item 13, Approve Variance/Lots & Ag Preserve/NE 1/4 of Section 28lEveland, and Item 14, Approve Variance/Rear Yard setbackl143xx Butternut S ,reet NW/Semler Construction. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Johnson, the Agenda as amended. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. CONSENT AGENDA Item 11 Approve Lot Split/Variance (V AR 00-05)/17138 Aztec Street NW/Norton and Elfelt (Resolution R087-00) Hem 12 Approve Variance (V AR 00-J2)/Side Yard Setbackl3547 133rd Lane NW/Holte (Resolution R088-00) Hem I 5 Approve Variance (V AR 00-05)/Roof Pitch/14122 Prairie RoadlMenth (Resolution R089-00) Hem 16 Approve Variance (V AR 00-06)/Rear Yard Setbackl4472 149th Avenue NWlDonlin (Resolution RO<:O-OO) Hem 17 Accept Feasibility Report/U'OO-14/142xx Round Lake Boulevard (Resolution R091-00) Item 18 A ward BidlIP99- I 8/Shadowbrook 6th Addition (Resolution R092-00) Hem 20 Approve 2000 Mowing Contract/City PropertieslWeed Abatement (Performance Lawn Care - Paul Moreiarty) Hem 21 Vehicle Committee Recomm"ndation (to purchase 2000 Dodge Dakota Extended Cab Pick-up for Utility Dep¡ rtment) Hem 22 Approve Hiring/Summer Building Intern Motion by Johnson, Seconded by Knight, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April -I, 2000, Regular Council Meeting: Corre"t as written. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to approve the April 4 Meeting Minutes. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I -Absent (Orttel) vote. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 3 ANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF MONTHLY REPORT Captain Larry Klink reported they responded to 964 calls for service in March and detailed the specific calls. The anima! complaints were from a variety of sources but most were barking dogs. PUBLIC HEARING: IP98-11/JA Y STREET NW The Council acknowledged the April 17, 2000, letter from Steven Quam, Fredrickson & Byron, P.A., representing Kottke's Bus Service, advising t'le that City Kottke's Bus Service objects to the proposed assessment on the grounds that the iml rovements associated with Project IP98-11 will not increase the value of the property in the am Junt equal to or greater than the amount of the assessment. Attorney Hawkins advised this is aJ' infonnationalletter objecting to the project. This is a public hearing to order the improvements, D a fonnal objection would need to be given at the assessment hearing. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to open the public hearing. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. 7:19 p.m. There was r 0 public testimony. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to close the public hearing. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, th~ Resolution as presented. (Resolution R093-00 ordering the improvement and approving final ¡lans and specifications for Project No. 98-11, Jay Street NW) Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. PUBLIC HEARING: VACATION OF EASE, fENTÆD FIELDS AND SONS Mr. Carlberg reviewed the vacation of Swallow E'treet and Uplander Street road and utility easements as a part of the preliminary plat of North Valley ~idge. The existing easement along Swallow Street was dedicated to the City to provide access for an existing home. Public right-of-way dedication during the platting of North Valley Ridge would eliminate the need for the easement. The extension of the Uplander Street temporary cul-de-sac in that same plat makes the extra easement for turn- around purposes unnecessary. Staff is recommending approval. The Resolution also includes a sunset clause stipulation. Motion by Johnson, Seconded by Jacobson, to OJen the public hearing. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. 7:23 p.m. There was no public testimony. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Johnson, to close the public hearing. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 4 (Public Hearing: Vacation of Easement/Ed Fie:ds and Sons, Continued) Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Johnson, tI e Resolution as presented. (Resolution R094-00 vacating the two easements at the request of Ed 'ields and Sons as a part of the preliminary plat of North Valley Ridge) Motion carried on a 4-Ye:, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. PUBLIC HEARING: INTERIM ORDINANC'; ESTABLISHING A MORA TORIUM/ MULTI- FAMILY HOUSING Mr. Carlberg explained the ordinance would establish a one-year moratorium on all multi-family housing in excess of two units per building. Also, no multi-family housing development will be allowed at a density of more than four units per acre. The moratorium would allow time for the City to prepare the necessary policies and ordinances to regulate multi-family housing resulting from the recent adoption of the housing goals for the City. Those goals must also be integrated and implemented in the Comprehensive Plan and ordinances. Discussion was on the effect ofthe ordinance on the proposed development of Grey Oaks, which has an approved preliminary plat with a number of contingencies. That plat has been extended to April 30, 2000. Attorney Hawkins advised the preliminary plat was approved. If it meets the required conditions within the time period, they will have the right to develop. If they don't, the preliminary plat and extension would be void and they would not have the right to develop that property. They have until April 30 to meet the conditions of the preliminary plat approval. Mr. Carlberg noted this is the last Council meeting before the April 30 deadline. Attorney Hawkins stated it was his opinion that the developer would be able to proceed without the City Council taking any further official action if all conditions are met by the April 30 deadline. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Johnson, to open the public hearing. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. 7:30 p.m. Gre~g Herrick. Attorney representing Dave Harris - asked that the multi-family development being proposed by Dave Harris on the comer of LSth and Crosstown Drive be excluded from the moratorium. Mr. Harris has presented a sketch plan to put together a quality development that he thinks will really enhance the neighborhood. There was no opposition at the sketch plan review. Based on that, Mr. Harris invested time and money in preparing blue prints, landscaping and architectural plans. He has cooperated with the City in delaying his plans because of the City's proposal to redevelop that area, and now he finds this may be tied up for up to IS months because of a moratorium, Because this has been through the sketch plan review, he asked that Mr. Harris be exempted from the moratorium and be allowed to continue with the project. Mr. Harris is willing to work with the City on the study plans for that area but asked that he be allowed to develop as soon as those study plans are completed. Mayor ~ cKelvey understood Mr. Harris' situation, but the Council cannot make exceptions to the moratorium without doing so for every other request for a similar exemption. Attorney Hawkins advised this moratorium is for a maximum of one year but may be lifted sooner if all the planning is completed. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - AprilI8, 2000 Page 5 (Public Hearing: Interim Ordinance Establishi,¡g Moratorium/Mufti-Family, Continued) Mr. Herrick stated if an exemption cannot be made for property that has gone through the sketch plan review, he'd ask that the Council vote down the moratorium. James Bullard. Leonard. Street and Deinard. representing Jeny and Carol Windschitl - pointed out the Windschitl's submitted the plan of Andover Oaks about 50 days ago on the same 60-acre site proposed for Grey Oaks. He asked that that project be exempted from the moratorium, noting a letter submitted to the City and Council yesterday on this issue. He made the following five points in support of the request that the moratorium should not apply to the Andover Oaks proposed plat: 1) There is the question of reliance and reasonab~e expectations, noting the three-year history on this project in which the Windschitls have been trying to develop the property. A number of proposals have been before the Council, and they feel the last plat meets all the requirements. 2) There is the question of reasonable expectations and funda nental fairness. The Windschitl's have expended over $600,000 on the site in terms of site work, excavations, grading, etc. They have changed the geography to accommodate multi-family development on the site. It would be unfair to exclude the plat they have submitted that meets all the City's requirements. 3) There is the question of where the burden of this moratorium will fall. It falls most heavily on this particular project. There are few areas already zoned for multiple housing and even fewer that are buildable. The bulk of the multi- family housing units are on this one 60-acre site. A plan consistent with this multi-family zone was submitted 50 days ago, and the affect of this moratorium is unfair and singularly discriminatory. In fact, he alleged this project is being singled out. 4) Two weeks ago the Council denied the final plat approval of Grey Oaks, creating enormous problems for this development. Andover Oaks is another way to solve the problem, but those problems cannot be solved if a 12-month moratorium is imposed. The Andover Oaks plan is the solution to the problem that was created when the City rejected the final plat approval of Grey Oaks. 5) The City has recently adopted housing goals. The result of this moratorium will be that no multi-family housing units will be built for a 12-month period, which contradicts those goals. Andover Oaks is geared toward life cycle housing and meets those goals. Mr, Bullard asked that if a moratorium is adopted, it should allow this project to go forward in a way that is fundamentally fair. Bill Hupp. developer of Hanson Hollow plat - introduced a sketch plan for his development in January, 1999. They submitted plans for preliminary plat approval by the July I, 1999, deadline, but have since been working with the City to resolve the issues. He requested an exemption of Hanson Hollow from the moratorium. The density in the plat started as four units per acre but has been pared down to three units per acre. He has 36 acres, Uld the density amounts to about one unit per acre, which is less than most of his neighbors who have septic systems. They are also working with the City on bermings and landscaping. The proposal is a very upscale PUD and provides pristine environmental units. He asked the Council to consider exempting this project from the moratorium. Aaron Walker. 1565] Osage - noted three people have already asked to be exempted from the moratorium. He applauded the Council's effort, encouraging the Council to do what is best for the City. Regarding Grey Oaks and Andover Oaks, he believed reasonable expectations should apply. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 6 (Public Hearing: Interim Ordinance Estabfishi./g Moratorium/Mulii-Family, Continued) The property was rezoned for senior housing. He felt the last plat for straight high density housing is by far something that doesn't meet the reasonable expectations of the citizens of Andover. The fact that Andover is growing at such a phenomenal rate means the growth has exceeded the Plan in many ways, and one of the concerns is the level of high density housing exceeding the ability of the infrastructure to support it. There are also issu.,s of traffic, safety, roads, as well as infrastructure that have to be resolved. Those stipulations w're somehow skirted because of the argument that senior housing would mean less people using the roads at different periods of time. He didn't believe the Andover Oaks proposal meets the test of reasonable expectations in high density housing. Mike Getz. 15629 Osage - is in full support of the moratorium, suggesting it should go for two years if possible. Tom Enzmann. 1718 Andover Boulevard - cone rrred, suggesting the moratorium be kept going for two, three, four or more years if possible. He ch rified on the Hanson Hollow plat that even though there is 36 acres, only 16 of it is buildable. The density is actually over three per acre. Mr. H upp - noted there are many residential lots in the City that have wetlands incorporated in them. Overall, the acreage under the MUSA is consid~red. The new wetlands law is legislated. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Johnson, to close the public hearing. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. 7:49 p.m. Mr. Carlberg stated he has talked with Metropolitan Council staff about the proposed moratorium. While this wasn't well received, they understand the City's need to have time to integrate the goals into the Comprehensive Plan and to implement them via the ordinances. The City has until June 8 to draft the Comprehensive Plan changes and nine months after that to have the official controls in place to support that Plan. The housing goals are goals for the next 10 years. Attorney Hawkins stated he has read the proposed ordinance, noting it is similar to the one used in the past. He is comfortable with the language as presented. A simple majority vote is required for approval. The Council does have the authority to extend it up to 18 months, but it must be conducting studies. Any moratorium cannot be simply to stop multi-family development in the community. Mayor McKelvey favored the moratorium on anything above twin homes, noting the need to have time to determine how the housing goals will best fit into the community. Councilmember Knight also supported the proposal as a planning mecha llsm because of the Metropolitan Council housing requirements which came about because ofthe h' gh school. Until a plan is in place, he hoped people would understand that the moratorium is not airr ~d at anyone particular development or developer. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Johnson, the ordinance as presented by Staff. (Ordinance 255, an interim ordinance regulating the use and development ofland within the City of Andover for the purpose of protecting the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of the City). DISCUSSION: Councilmember Jacobson felt no one would be exempted from the moratorium. To . . 'I Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes -April 18,2000 Page 7 (Public Hearing: Interim Ordinance Establishi,¡g Moratorium/Mufti-Family, Continued) do so would createmany problems. As moved, f lere are no exemptions. Mayor McKelvey agreed. Attorney Hawkins advised that as worded, anyone who testified this evening would not be allows to proceed because they have not had preliminary plat approval, other than the Grey Oaks project. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. SKETCH PLAN REVIEWIBROOKE CROSS'NG PUDILAURENT COMPANIES Terry Forbord. Laurent Development Companies - reviewed the sketch plan of Brooke Crossing proposed as a PUD in Section 3 consisting of sirgle family rural residential lots on 138.57 acres of land. They believe this property provides a unique opportunity to provide high quality housing while embracing and enhancing the natural characteristics of the land. A PUD provides an opportunity to do something that standard subdivisions do not allow them to do. It allows them to protect the natural resources, to be more environmentally conscience and to provide additional amenities and features. The two primary issues of the Planning and Zoning Commission had to do with the road pattern and the movement of traffic through the surrounding area and the number of units proposed. On April 6 the Park and Recreation Commission recommended accepting cash in lieu of land for park dedication. On April 12 they held an infoIT.1ational meeting with the neighborhood where the two main issues were again discussed. They had proposed 60 units, which includes three dwellings on the property now; but as a result ofthe neighborhood meeting and in an effort to compromise, they have submitted a revised sketch plan removing four of the lots. Using PUD calculations, they are allowed 52 units which could be increased to 62. They also removed the connection to l75th Street and removed one lot there. The other three lots were removed from the interior of the plat. All lots now access on interior roads within the subdivision, including the lot off Hanson and 181 st. Mr. Forbord went on to explain the reasons for developing this property as a PUD, which included the ability to retain natural amenities, to develop an innovative and unique plat, to creatively and efficiently use the land and to increase density to provide the extra amenities economically. He then went into some of the amenities they would provide within the plat including heavily landscaped entrances with split medians, monuments and retaining wells, a homeowners' association, 46 acres ofland owned in common which will include deed restrictions to protect the wetlands, the planting of many mature trees, bridges rather than culverts, creative lighting to enhance the street scape, trails within the PUD which would be maintained by the homeowners' association and a fully developed tot lot, also to be maintained by the homeowne s' association. In addition, they will be making a contribution to the City's Park Department for park dedication. They would be going beyond the requirements of the Wetlands Conservation Act in protecting the wetlands. They believe this upscale development will be a benefit to the City of Andover which will enhance the tax capacity. Mayor McKelvey noted 52 lots are allowed and asked what the City would be gaining by allowing the four extra lots since the wetlands would be protected either way and the park and trails are for those in the development only. He didn't necessarily disagree with the concept, but he didn't think the City was getting anything more. 1 Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 8 (Sketch Plan Review/Brooke Crossing PUD/Laurent Companies, Continued) Mr. Forbord stated many of the features cost an exorbitant amount of money to install and could not be done in a standard subdivision because the funds would not be available. They have found most communities would much rather see high amenity features in their neighborhoods, plus the public likes it as well. Those amenities come at a high price. It relieves pressure on the City's park system. He again noted some of the amenities that would be provided, emphasizing they would provide much greater protection of the wetlands. They look at the project holistically. Councilmember Knight understood the profit motive, but asked how the wetlands would not be protected under the standard 2 l/2-acre development. He had a problem with small lots in the rural areas because of the wells and septic systems. He didn't see how it is protecting the land by stuffing as many houses as possible in as small a parcel as possible. His perspective v'as that isn't to anyone's advantage other than the developer's. Mr. Forbord stated there would be no incentive to create 46 acres of open space. The concept is to cluster the housing and do less grading to lessen the impact of the development. The benefit of the PUD is to minimize the grading and tree loss and increase the boundary around the wetlands. Councilmember Jacobson asked if Laurent Companies was the fee owner of this property or is it being purchased under a contingency. If held to the 2 1/2-acre standard, would the bridges be eliminated? The proposal also calls for an enormous number of variances to setbacks, etc., on almost every lot. He also asked about 177th Avenue. Should the north part of North Cress Way be extended to the west to meet the other neighborhood? Finally, if this were approved, would the City have to protect land elsewhere to accomplish the one-per-ten density requirements in the rural area being discussed with the Metropolitan Comcil? Mr, Forbord stated they are not currently the fee owners. They would not proceed with this development if there is controversy. If subdivided under the standard plat, all amenities would be eliminated. They are making this proposal because they believe it is more environmentally sensitive. The houses would be closer to the streets so the back yards would be larger and left undisturbed and protected. All wetlands and common spaces would be held in common. Sketch plan #2 shows how the southwest comer would be developed to eliminate a lot. Mr. Carlberg stated 177th Avenue would stop short of going through the plat Mr. Forbord stated they have proposed not to make the neighborhoods connect, and the neighbors agree. Mr. Carlberg stated this is being developed under the existing Comprehensive Plan and zoning, which does not require the one-per-ten density, There are discussions about that density in the new Plan. Potentially the plat could come in under the new Plan, which means development rights may have to be transferred to other acreage outside the plat to meet the density. Mayor McKelvey stated he lives in a rural PUD ('evelopment and likes the idea that the wetlands and open spaces are protected. In standard developments, the property owners own those areas, which have caused problems of trash and junk being thrown into the wetlands. He'd like to see this developed as a PUD but felt 56 lots is quite dense. He didn't feel 177th should go through but would " I Regular Andover Ci'Y Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 9 (Sketch Plan Review/Brooke Crossing PUD/La¡:rent Companies, Continued) rather work with the county to upgrade 181 st. He would also like to see more exists from the neighborhood because two exists for 56 houses im't many. A resident in the audience stated they do not want a road extending to the neighborhcJd to the west. Mr. Forbord explained they try to design so it fe:ls much larger. The key is they believe it is more environmentally sound than just running lot lines back there. There are deed restrictions on the titles as to what the property owner can and cannot do in those conservation areas. It does benefit the City overall and sets the standard by example. They ¡ re proposing an average of 1.49 acres per lot plus 46 acres of open space. The only way they can do the improvements proposed is to develop at a higher density which is allowed under the City'c PUD ordinance. They have compromised down to 56 units. If that doesn't meet with the Council's satisfaction, he would like to know this evening what number would be agreeable so they can beg:n the next step of development. Councilmember Jacobson stated they can still have an association and protect the environment without a PUD. He'd prefer it be developed as 2\12 acre lots. He didn't see where the PUD proposed was benefiting the City and suggested the developer would have to r-onvince him otherwise. Councilmember Johnson stated she liked the PUD concept. C JUncilmember Knight was concerned with the pie shaped lots and was troubled with the Metropol'tan Council density standards. The City may end up paying the price on another piece of propertJ later on. The City made an agreement with the Metropolitan Council, but seems to be tossing it out right away. Mr. Carlberg stated the new guidelines must be submitted by June 8. It is a ¡:ming issue. Dick Jenkins. 177th Lane - stated their main con ;ern was extending 177th through as an east-west connection. With 181st already an east-west cOl_lection, there is no point in having 177th. He also felt the developer doesn't want it connected. Th(.y built on a deadend road with a cul-de-sac. There are many elementary aged children in the nei ;hborhood, and safety is a big issue. He has a handicapped son which would be at a high risk v:ith high speed vehicles going through. He hoped that road would not connect. He and the neighLJrs are also concerned with the density. Another resident was glad to hear the comments about not extending I 77th Lane, which was the main concern of the residents. He would rather s~e that area not develop at all but knows that won't happen. He appreciated the efforts of the developer to compromise with the people who live there, but he didn't think this type of development belcngs on the north side of Andover. He doesn't want to see a gated community there. In their community, everyone knows everyone else, and they like it that way. They would prefer to see a similar development on this site. Mr. Carlberg clarified under the PUD ordinance, 52 units are allowed. Under the standard rural development, only 40 to 45 units could be platted. Gary Lemke. I 77th - is adjacent to the development with most of his property being wetland. He liked the concept of having deed restrictions to keep people from throwing things into the wetlands plus the trails. He was also concerned with 177th going through and was glad to see the Council will not be enforcing that. ,1 I Regular Andover City Council Meetin¡? Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 10 (Sketch Plan Review/Brooke Crossing PUD/Lazrent Companies, Continued) Martha? . I 77th - stated the two main concerns o~'both the Planning Commission and neighborhood meetings were 177th going through and the density. There is a concern with water quality with so many lots having wells and septic systems. The;' are also concerned with the number of cars going through. It is a beautiful development, an island, a separate gated community; but their area on 2\1, acres is also beautiful. Liz Smith. I 76th Lane - stated her biggest concern was I 77th because she didn't see t~ need to have it go through between Hanson Boulevard and Ve.din. She was totally opposed to th development when she first heard about it, but is now lear :ng in favor because more roads may open their neighborhoods under the standard development. They don't need that. She didn't see this as a gated community, but it would bring up the tax base. They definitely need that in the St. Francis school district. Another resident on ISl st A venue noted the two one-acre lots were Ada Orr's children's that have now been sold. He felt this would beautifY the rommunity. The people in their neighborhood do not do anything to damage the wetlands but try tc. beautifY the ponds and keep the wetlands as nice as any gated community or one with an associLtion because they are proud of their places. Oak Grove just to the north is very much against high density homes. This is an island out in the middle of a nice rural area. Mr. Carlberg noted a letter dated April 11, 20C:>, from Jim Lever, 2150 I 80th Avenue expressed items of concern on density, isolation and lightin'3. He then asked for Council direction on a number of items relating to the proposal. The Council gl .lerally agreed that I 77th should not be developed as an MSA street. They saw no need to have \\':0 east-west roads within 3 \I, blocks of each other. They also felt the standard road easement would ;"e preferable through the plat because of plowing. Street names should be uniform with the City's ¡:;rid system for safety protection, but there may be some exceptions. There was no consensus on the density issue. Councilmember Jacobson preferred the 2 1I2-acre development unless he can be conv:nced that the City will receive benefits for a higher density. Councilmember Knight was in favor of the standard rural development of2\1, acres. Mayor McKelvey preferred a PUD with a homeowners' association to protect the wetlands but with fewer lots. Because the neighbors did not want to see Nortl, Cress Way connect with ISOth, the Council saw no need to do so. Mr. Erickson stated they wo.:ld look at options regarding ISOth. There are no houses on it, so an option may be to vacate that light of way. The Council had some concern with the northeast comer lots and the long driveway. r,1r. Carlberg stated he will work with the developer to redesign that area. Another item of concern if the entrance off IS I st may pose problems because of the angle of the street. He asked if the Council would prefer T·intersections coming into the development. The Council felt it would depel1<._ on the site lines. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page J I (Sketch Plan Review/Brooke Crossing PUD/Lm,rent Companies, Continued) The Council also suggested the possibility of t" king the easement for a trail along 181 st but not construct it at this time. rfno trail is desired up :"Iere, then don't take the easement. Mr. Carlberg suggested the Park Board look at the feasibility of trails in this area, the timing and make a recommendation. Jav Squires. Chair:person of the Planninl! and Z( ning Commission - felt the Council must address a major policy issue on the future growth in the P~al areas of the City. Over the last three years the City has adopted a PUD ordinance for rural areas to develop in certain circumstances exceeding the 2.5-acre lot size standard. That density can be inrreased to preserve the wetland. But that, in effect, creates a one-acre density standard in the rural ~'ea. That is a large issue for the City that needs to be considered. Councilmember Knight agreed, f 1ting it opens the door to more and more PUDs in the rural area. He was also troubled with the pil shaped lots. Councilmember Johnson tended to favor the PUD but felt Chairperson Squires I ade a very good point. There were no further comments on the sketch plan. The Council recessed at 9:37; reconvened at 9:4'1 p.m. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW/WOODLAND WO, IDS/WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT Byron Westlund. Woodland Development - stated the property in Section 14 consists of approximately 40 acres and is proposed to be ieveloped into 73 single family urban lots. It is currently zoned R-I, single family; so it would hLve to be rezoned. The minimum size is 140 feet, but they typically exceed that. They do place rovenant restrictions on their lots. The Park and Recreation Commission is recommending cast, in lieu of land for park dedication. The Road Committee discussed the proposed MSA route. They are proposing to have access off 161st and come straight south through the property with twe cul-de-sacs. They discussed east-west streets with Staff and the Planning Commission and will b: working with the property owner to the east to detennine the best location. There is only one u.. developed property to the west. Sewer and water is stubbed to the south property line in Chesterte;¡ Commons North. There is one lot with a house and garage that would remain that large because of the size of the wetlands. Councilmember Jacobson wondered if right-of-.vay could be reserved in this development for the roadway that would take off from the end of 156th Lane and curve to the southeast comer of the property, then head east. Mr. Westlund stated tho yare willing to work with the City on that. They are talking with the two property owners to the e LSt about acquiring that land. They have sketched both parcels where they think the streets should c,mnect so they can get a north-south street through from 16lst to Crosstown. ,I - i I Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 12 (Sketch Plan Review/Woodland Woods/Woodla¡,d Development, Continued) Councilmember Jacobson was concerned with on~ very long cul-de-sac, again suggesting a provision be made for going east to at 156th to a future <~velopment. With a straight narrow roadway, it becomes a race track. Is there some way to bac:: it up? His main concern is where the roads will go outside of this plat. Mr. Westlund stated that was discussed with S 'lff. Mr. Carlberg felt it would be appropriate for Staff and the developer to meet with the pro] ~rty owners from both sides to look at potential development of the entire area. Councilmeml "r Jacobson asked if the developer had considered looking at putting townhomes in here, a mixed used with a higher density. Mr. Westlund stated they did propose a PUD with mixed housing and met with Mr. Carlberg; but because it is so narrow and how the road can go, this seems to be the best fit for the property. They are willing to look at some low cost housing. Mayor McKelvey was concerned with one long cul- de-sac and suggested working with Staff to see if it can be corrected. There were no further Council comments. DISCUSS ORDINANCE NO. I09ISNOWMOr;ILES John Campbell. 4017 145th Avenue - stated he has no interest in pursuing snowmobiling in Andover. They find it incompatible with the proposed development going on in the City, the parks and the trails. He felt they are beating their heads against the wall and suggested the issue of whether or not snowmobiling should be allowed in Andover be put on a referendum for the residents to vote on. The Sno-Dragons have no interest in pursuing trails or in snow patrol. Councilmember Jacobson noted the current ordinance was to be in place for only one year. He suggested a hearing be held to determine whether the current ordinance in place should be rescinded and snowmobiling be allowed everywhere in the City, whether the ordinance in place now should be retained which splits the City as to where snowmobiling is and is not allowed, or to expand no snowmobiling throughout the entire City. Councilmember Johnson knew there were still concerns with sno'hIDobiling north of 161 st where people are to be riding in the streets. They are still riding in the boulevards and through people's yards. She wondered if they should look at the possibility of banning snowmobiling on all City streets and giving the trail association time to come up with trails and park-and-ride locations. The Council agreed to hold a hearing as suggested by Councilmember Jacobson to be held at a special meeting in June, the Staff to choose a date. I I Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 13 CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST (VAR 0(1-10)/2621 BUNKER LAKE BOULEVARD NW Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Johnson, tI e Resolution as presented. (Resolution R095-00 approving the variance request of Steven Ortte to vary from the front yard setback from a major arterial provision of Ordinance 8, Section 6.,02 at 2621 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW) Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY WEST OF J-UBLlC WORKSIlPOO-13 Mr. Erickson noted the Council had authorized the purchase of the property adjacent to the Public Works site for $97,000. The owner indicated he had a purchase agreement with another party but would be open to a counter offer. After discussion, the Council generally agreed to counter with $100,000. Attorney Hawkins advised the capping of the well would normally be part of the purchase agreement. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to increase the offer by $3,000 to the $100,000 mark discussed earlier but this would be the final offer. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. CITY TOUR AND SOIL BORING DlSCUSSlONIlPOO-18ÆXTENSION OF ANDOVER BOULEVARD NW The Council agreed to meet for a tour of the projects in the City at 6 p.m., Monday, April 24, 2000; then meet back at City Hall around 7 p.m. to discuss the soil boring report. It was suggested the property owners that may be affected by an extension of Andover Boulevard be contacted about this meeting. APPROVE VARIANCE (VAR 00-03)/LOTS riND AG PRESERVE/NE 1/4 OF SECTION 28/ EVELAND CounciImember Jacobson wondered if the site for the new house is where the extension of Andover Boulevard would go. He was concerned with siting the house without knowing where the road will go. Also, the parcel must be on a dedicated and constructed road in order to pull a building permit. There is none where the house would go. It is a matter of timing. He could build one house; but when the property is condemned for the school and that access is cut off, it would be nonconforming. Mr. Carlberg stated Staff needs to look at the land Mr. Eveland owns and the number of houses he has. Under Ag Preserve, he can have one hous~ per 40 acres. He suggested the item be tabled to review this further. " - Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 14 (Variance/Lots and Ag PreservelNE 1/4 of Section 28/Eveland, Continued) Mr. Eveland stated he is only asking for a variance, not where the road will go. He is going to be homeless in 90 days, and the City is not giving him a place to live. He wouldn't have to move ifit wasn't for the City pushing for the high school. ::>ne meeting it is in; the next meeting it is out. He is sitting in limbo because the school can't do anything until the Ag Preserve is out. He's been waiting since the first of December, and now it is time to plan his life. He doesn't even know if he can plant in the spring. He needs to know ifhe can do these things. Mr. Carlberg suggested by the end of the week the Environmental Quality Review Board should have made their decision on the Ag Preserve status. The Council suggested Mr. r:arlberg meet with Mr. Eveland to detennine if Mr. Eveland can do what he wants without a variance. Because they were sympathetic of the time frame for Mr. Eveland, it was suggested if a variance is still needed, that it be brought to the special meeting on April 24 for consideration. Mr. Eveland agreed. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Jacobson, to tat Ie the item to the April 24 meeting. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. APPROVE VARIANCE (VAR 00-04)/REAR YARD SETBACK/143XX BUTTERNUT STREET NW/SEMLER CONSTRUCTION Councilmember Jacobson was concerned with th: size of the variance, a 34.5-foot encroachment into a 50-foot year yard setback on the property. He !~lt the house could b.e placed in the middle to avoid the setback problem. Mike Oui\:ley - stated they originally assumed that Butternut Extension would end in a cul-de-sac. They have learned that is not the case. They alSL assumed the southern exposure would be the back yard. After proceeding that way, they were infonned when pulling the building pennit that it was the side yard and the back yard is to the east. With that infonnation, they are asking for a variance because sanitary sewer is right across the creek. They tried moving the house, but it doesn't resolve the problem. Mr. Carlberg stated Butternut was vacated south of the creek. This right of way goes to the creek. The time for sewer to this area is in the 2005-2010 time frame. The property to the east is a six-acre landlocked parcel. Mr. Quigley stated he has purchased the lot to the east, which would be designed to confonn to the R-4 standard subdivision. The site for this house has been cleared. To move the house would mean removing trees four to five years before it is necessary. It would impact the septic area that has b.een designed as well. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Johnson, to approve the variance. (Resolution R096-00) Motion carried on a 3-Yes, I-No (Jacobson based on principles), I-Absent (Orttel) vote. ~ Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 15 MA YOR/COUNCIL INPUT Hunting ordinance - Councilmember Jacobson suggested the Planning and Zoning Commission be directed to review the hunting ordinance given Lie increase in subdivisions developed over the last few years. He has received a number of calls on the issue. The P & Z should look at possible changes because of changing conditions. The Council agreed. Standing committees - Councilmember Jacobson noted the Council had agreed to discuss the need for some of the standing committees which rarely or never meet. He suggested that item be placed on the next work session agenda. The Council agreed. Mid-year administrative review - CouncilmeI ¡ber Jacobson suggested the Council review the administrative progress on the goals for this year. That mid-year review should be done some time in June. The Council agreed and suggested the Administrator schedule the date. Grey Oaks - Councilmember Jacobson noted the Grey Oaks plat was not on this evening's agenda and the next meeting is in May, after the preliminary plat extension expires. Attorney Hawkins advised the applicant still has the right to come in with the information by April 30. If not, the preliminary plat expires. No action is needed by the City Council. The Council suggested if the plat expires, that the Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning for the site be placed on the May 2 regular Council Agenda. Progress of the negotiations with the school district - Attorney Hawkins advised he spoke with the attorney for the school district. The documents are b.eing drafted, but he hasn't been given a copy yet. Councilmember Knight suggested Mr. Fursman and Mr. Erickson get involved in preparing the report on the feasibility of a tunnel versus n oving the fields and the costs. Mr. Fursman stated in talking with the Superintendent, he noted the City is interested in keeping both avenues open for discussion and feasibility studies. Councilmen ber Knight also felt those involved in the creation and building of the Field of Dreams be involve'~ in the discussions. Variances along Bunker Lake Boulevard - Mr. Carlberg stated the county will be paying the application fees for the variances similar to the one granted this evening by Steven Orttel for other properties along Bunker Lake Boulevard that are nonconforming. Would the City Council be interested in having them go through that process with a number of applications or should the individual properties come forward? The Council suggested waiting until a definite redevelopment plan is in place for that area. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, approval of Claims. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. [ Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - April 18, 2000 Page 16 Motion by Johnson, Seconded by Knight, to adjourn. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-Absent (Orttel) vote. The meeting adjourned at 10:56 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~.1- Recording Secretary