HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-23-21ANLb
Y O F6
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Agenda
November 23, 2021
Andover City Hall
Council Chambers
7.00 p.m.
1. Call to Order - - -
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Oath of Office — Commissioner Jonathan Shafto
4. Approval of Minutes — September 14, 2021 Regular Meeting
5. Public Hearin e — Variance Request — Increase Maximum Size of Ground Mounted Solar
Panels — 16971 Ward Lake Drive NW — Harold & Linda Haluptzok (Applicants)
6. Other Business
7. Adjournment
1 ' 1 "'
I F.,L,
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Peter Hellegers, City Planner
SUBJECT: Swearing in of Appointed Commissioner Jonathan Shafto
DATE: November 23, 2021
Commissioner Marni Elias resigned and Jonathan Shafto has been appointed to the
Commission and will take an Oath of Office.
Commissioner Shafto's term will end on January 1, 2023.
Resp
e lly sub 'tted,
Pete e s
City Plarmer
C I T Y o f
ND OVE:
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.AN DOVE RM N.GOV
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes — September 14, 2021 Regular Meeting minutes
DATE: November 23, 2021
REQUEST
The Planning and Zoning Commission is requested to approve the September 14, 2021 Regular
meeting minutes.
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
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 14, 2021
The Regular Bi -Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
called to order by Chairperson Bert Koehler IV on September 14, 2021, 7:00 p.m., at the
Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
Commissioners present: Karen Godfrey, Mary VanderLaan, Nick Loehlein, and
Wes Volkenant
Commissioners absent: Scott Hudson
Also present: Community Development Director Joe Janish
City Planner Peter Hellegers
Associate Planner Jake Griffiths
Others
PLEDGE OFALLEGL4NCE
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
August 24, 2021 Workshop Meeting
Commissioner Volkenant requested a change on page 2 lines 37-39: "Commissioner
Volkenant said there are two portions where parks 2 is proposed listed and portion 2 is
wetland. and it appears they ,..e in the -- edam He asked which park is the designated park.
Mr. Hellegers said Park 2, in the northwest east corner, consists of wetland and upland."
Commissioner Volkenant requested a change on page 3, lines 22-24: "Commissioner
Volkenant stated that at Fun Fest, there is was a concern from residents about t L�
etA and abe with trails and sidewalks along busy roads and asked if trails in this
development should be constructed sooner than later."
Motion: Chairperson Koehler assumed a motion to approve the August 24, 2021 Workshop
Meeting minutes as amended. Motion carries unanimously.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — September 14, 2021
Page 2
I August 24, 2021 Regular Meeting
3 Associate Planner Griffiths requested a change on page 5, line 39 "He stated staff does a
4 good job protecting the City' s interest."
6 Commissioner VanderLaan requested a change on page 10, lines 15 — 19: "Commissioner
7 VanderLaan stated she served on the Eemmissien City Council with the owner of the
8 Holasek property. She said Mr. Holasek would be pleased with the development. She
9 explained Mr. Holasek served the City, protected his land, and attended many City
to meetings. Commissioner VanderLaan believes Mr. Holasek would be pleased that 48% of
11 his land is open space, parks, and that 41 acres of previously farmed land is being returned
12 to wetlaxd a natural state."
13
14 Chairperson Koehler requested staff review the meeting video in regard to page 6, line 14
15 and make appropriate adjustments to his statement regarding PUDs.
16
17 Motion: Chairperson Koehler assumed a motion to approve the August 24, 2021 Regular
18 Meeting minutes as amended. Motion carries unanimously.
19
20 PUBLIC HEARING: CITY CODE AMENDMENT — TITLE 12: ZONING
21 REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 2: DEFINITIONS AND CHAPTER 12: RESIDENTIAL
22 PERMITTED, PERMITTED ACCESSORY, CONDITIONAL INTERIM AND
23 PROHIBITED USES — ADOPT CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR KEEPING OF
24 ROOSTERS ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES — CITY OF ANDOVER
25 (APPLICANT)
26
27 The Planning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing, take public comment, and
28 provide a recommendation on the proposed Code amendment. Associate Planner Griffiths
29 stated the City has seen an increase in complaints about roosters on smaller lots. He
30 explained City Code does not address roosters. Mr. Griffiths provided a map that shows
31 lots smaller than the 2.5 -acre standard. He stated staff have been grouping roosters with
32 poultry and applying the Code for poultry. Mr. Griffiths explained the City also has a
33 nuisance ordinance that is primarily written for dogs.
34
35 Mr. Griffiths explained that staff surveyed adjacent communities and found that roosters
36 are predominantly prohibited. Mr. Griffiths presented the proposed amendment to the City
37 Code that defines a rooster and where they would be allowed. He noted the only policy
38 change is requiring the lot to be 3 acres or greater. Mr. Griffiths stated the amended City
39 Code would apply to new roosters and existing roosters will be grandfathered in.
40
41 Commissioner Godfrey asked Mr. Griffiths why they chose 3 acres when the R-1: Single
42 Family Rural zoning district standard is 2.5 acres. Mr. Griffiths explained that the majority
43 of complaints are coming from properties that are 2.5 acres or smaller.
44
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — September 14, 2021
Page 3
1 Commissioner Loehlein stated the core issue is the noise. He asked why the Commission
2 is being asked to change the code to regulate the rooster instead of changing the noise
3 ordinance to prohibit that kind of noise. Mr. Griffiths stated when they surveyed adjacent
4 communities, they addressed the rooster. Mr. Griffiths said the Commission could address
5 the noise ordinance but addressing land use seemed the most effective way to address the
6 issue.
8 Commissioner Loehlein asked if a property owner has a rooster and it passes on, can they
9 continue to have a rooster. Mr. Griffiths stated if the rooster exists today, they can continue
to to have a rooster if the ordinance is changed. He explained he consulted with the City
11 Attorney, and if the rooster passes, per state statute they can get another rooster within 1
12 year. They will lose grandfather status if they don't replace the rooster within 1 year.
13
14 Commissioner Volkenant said there are complaints from certain locations where neighbors
15 are being disturbed by roosters, but under the grandfather clause, those locations will
16 continue to operate with the same number of roosters. He stated the problem is not going
17 away because there will continue to be a noise problem. Mr. Griffiths stated he was correct,
18 and after code changes there are legal non -conformities due to State Law. He explained it
19 is a property right permitted by State Statute.
20
21 Commissioner Volkenant asked if there are properties within the MUSA that are greater
22 than 3 acres. Mr. Griffiths displayed a map of properties under 3 acres. He said there are
23 properties within the MUSA that qualify to have chickens, but they would no longer qualify
24 with this amendment. Commissioner Volkenant said there are some locations in gold that
25 do have chickens, others that do not, and if the code amendment is passed, they would not
26 be able to add chickens even if there is a home a few doors down that has them.
27 Commissioner Volkenant said that roosters are the key part. Mr. Griffiths clarified that the
28 Code Amendment is addressing roosters, and not all chickens.
29
30 Commissioner Godfrey asked Mr. Griffiths if the legal nonconforming standard applies to
31 the property, the property owner, or the roosters. Mr. Griffiths stated legal nonconformities
32 transfer with the property. He explained State Statute says if the property discontinues its
33 use for a year, they lose the legal nonconforming right. Commissioner Godfrey stated it
34 stays with the property and a new property owner could continue to have roosters provided
35 it has not been one year since the property has been rooster -less.
36
37 Commissioner VanderLaan asked for clarification on Commissioner Volkenant's comment
38 about the parcels in gold having roosters. She stated that not all of those parcels have
39 roosters, it displays the properties that cannot have roosters due to the size of the lot. Mr.
4o Griffiths explained the map in front of the Commission does not show every property that
41 has a rooster, it shows every property under 3 acres in size.
42
43 Commissioner Volkenant asked if the code change is passed, would there need to be a
44 rooster map that identifies the properties and how many roosters they have. He asked if
45 Code Enforcement would be responsible to carry out enforcement. Mr. Griffiths stated the
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —September 14, 2021
Page 4
1 City will not make a map. He explained the City is reactionary for code compliance. When
2 residents call with a complaint, staff looks into the property and responds.
4 Chairperson Koehler asked if there was a limit on the number of roosters a property can
5 have. Mr. Griffiths stated there are no limits on the number of poultry and they aren't
6 proposing any limits on the number of roosters with the new amendment.
8 Chairperson Koehler stated the amendment does not require residents to get a license to
9 have a rooster. Mr. Griffiths stated that is correct, the rooster amendment is similar to the
to poultry ordinance which does not require a license. Chairperson Koehler stated the City
11 would have no idea if someone got a rooster as long as the City didn't receive any
12 complaints.
13
14 Motion: Chairperson Koehler assumed a motion to open the Public Hearing at 7:25 p.m.
15 Motion carries by unanimous consent.
16
17 Richard Jacobs, 16530 Yakima Street, came forward and stated he lives directly across the
18 street from a resident who owns roosters. He said the rooster is a constant nuisance and is
19 the first noise they hear in the morning and the last thing they hear at night. He explained
20 they hear the rooster from 5:30 a.m. until dark, around 200 times a day. Mr. Jacobs stated
21 there are days the rooster crows all day long and he has called the Sheriff 9 times. Mr.
22 Jacobs stated he cannot have the windows open because the rooster will wake them up. He
23 wonders how it will impact him selling his house. Mr. Jacobs has asked for the City's help,
24 and he stated the proposed ordinance doesn't change a thing. He said the City needs to
25 recognize that roosters are a nuisance. He can't sit outside on a Saturday morning and have
26 a quiet cup of coffee. He said the neighborhood was quiet before March, when the neighbor
27 got the rooster. Mr. Jacobs said he doesn't understand why the City isn't enforcing the
28 nuisance ordinance. He said if it was a dog, it would have been taken care of Mr. Jacobs
29 is asking for help from the City to adopt an ordinance to prohibit them from having a rooster
30 on less than 3 acres. He doesn't believe grandfathering in existing roosters and allowing
31 people to have more will resolve the problem.
32
33 Krystin Nergard, 16531 Zuni Street NW, came forward and stated she lives behind the
34 Jacobs. She said once you hear the rooster, you cannot unhear the rooster. She said it goes
35 off all the time. Ms. Nergard said she has lots of neighbors with chickens and one with a
36 rooster. She loves to have her windows open, and the rooster ruins it. Ms. Nergard stated
37 the neighborhood will continue to call on noise complaints. She stated she would prefer to
38 get rid of the rooster, but if they can't, she recommended educating and preparing the
39 Sheriff to respond to noise complaints.
40
41 Motion: Chairperson Koehler assumed a motion to close the Public Hearing at 7:31 p.m.
42 Motion carries by unanimous consent.
43
44 Commissioner Volkenant asked staff if there is an ordinance that prohibited roosters, the
45 existing roosters would remain because they would be grandfathered in. Mr. Griffiths
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — September 14, 2021
Page 5
I responded that under State Law, if the City changes its code, anything that was previously
2 permitted is allowed to continue.
4 Commissioner Volkenant asked if the residents who spoke tonight can speak at the City
5 Council meeting where this topic is discussed. He stated the way the residents have
6 described the crowing is violating the nuisance ordinance and asked if the residents can ask
7 the City Council for help. Chairperson Koehler stated the question is out of order.
8 Chairperson Koehler encouraged residents to call and ask the question of City Hall.
10 Commissioner VanderLaan has a history of having helped in forming the ordinances for
11 control of horses, dogs, cats, and wild birds. She asked if there is a mechanism in place
12 that after a number of complaints, or violations of a noise ordinance, similar to complaints
13 about dogs, to work something in the ordinance about roosters. Community Development
14 Director Janish said there are two issues: stopping the number of roosters coming into the
15 City, which is what the ordinance amendment will do, and how does the City address
16 existing roosters and noise complaints. Mr. Janish stated staff can research how to address
17 the crowing. He said the ordinance presented tonight will stop the addition of more
18 roosters. Mr. Janish stated staff can look at adding roosters to the noise ordinance. He said
19 the Sheriff is analyzing the crowing and it is not meeting the same intent as the barking.
20
21 Chairperson Koehler noted the Commission wants to address the noise issue in the future,
22 however, it is not on the agenda tonight. Chairperson Koehler stated staff is hearing loud
23 and clear that there is another issue that needs to be addressed at another time.
24
25 Commissioner Godfrey said the core issue is the noise from the current rooster. She said
26 the Commission is not addressing it with a change to the noise ordinance. She said they
27 have a challenge in ensuring that property owners have the freedom to use their property
28 as they choose provided they don't create undue annoyance to their neighbors.
29 Commissioner Godfrey explained the City needs to stay within State Law and within the
30 Comprehensive Plan, but they have not directly addressed the noise issue which appears to
31 be the core issue. She recommends they vote against the current band aid approach and dig
32 deeper into a real solution.
33
34 Chairperson Koehler stated roosters should be farm animals and not on a residential
35 property. He doesn't believe having a rooster on a small piece of land is a good idea.
36 Chairperson Koehler believes the Commission should think of roosters differently than
37 they think of chickens. He doesn't think 3 acres is enough. He explained the Commission
38 is asking for a different topic to be brought to them to deal with the noise ordinance.
39
40 Commissioner VanderLaan asked Chairperson Koehler for his guidance in procedure. She
41 understands one mechanism is to vote against the adoption of the amendment and refer it
42 back to staff to address the noise issue. She stated this would be bringing more attention to
43 the problem. Commissioner VanderLaan stated the Commission could adopt the ordinance
44 amendment and direct staff to go further. She asked what the best procedure would be.
45 Mr. Janish stated if the City were to address the noise portion, it falls under the Police
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —September 14, 2021
Page 6
1 Chapter which is not the Zoning Code and will not come before the Planning and Zoning
2 Commission. Mr. Janish reminded the Commission that several of the neighboring
3 communities have prohibited roosters in the community. Mr. Janish stated staff can
4 research how to handle the noise issue and they can regulate the crowing. Mr. Janish stated
5 the noise ordinance does not require a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning
6 Commission. Chairperson Koehler stated he supports staff addressing the noise issue
7 without coming to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
9 Chairperson Koehler stated his opinion is if they are against allowing roosters on properties
to on three acres or more, then they should deny the amendment. If the Commission thinks
I 1 three acres is sufficient, then they should approve the amendment.
12
13 Motion: Motion by VanderLaan, second by Volkenant, to recommend approval of the
14 amended ordinance to allow roosters on lots with 3 or more acres and trusting City Council
15 will be aware and address the issue of the noise created by the existence of the roosters.
16
17 Discussion:
18 Commissioner Loehlein stated he would like to see the noise issue resolved. He does not
19 support passing this code change because it does not address the noise issue and the
20 neighbor with the rooster was not present to speak for themselves. Commissioner Loehlein
21 said the sound is the core issue for him, not the owning of a rooster and he will be voting
22 against the motion.
23
24 Commissioner Godfrey stated she will vote against the motion because it is
25 mischaracterized that if the Commission were to approve it, it would mean roosters would
26 be prohibited. She doesn't believe roosters are the issue, it is the noise. She stated the
27 Commission shall not do harm by limiting the freedom to use one's property without
28 solving the actual problem. Commissioner Godfrey thinks the Commission should look at
29 solving the whole problem and not just one piece of it.
30
31 Commissioner Volkenant agrees the noise issue is at the heart of it and he has concern that
32 even if something is done in this manner it is not going to resolve the problem. He does
33 think that roosters are a key part of many farms, and the rural component of Andover is
34 part of their daily life. He does not believe the 3 -acre limit is appropriate. He believes it
35 should be a much larger acreage.
36
37 Amendment to the Motion, Commissioner Volkenant proposed an amendment to the
38 motion to change 3 acres to 10 acres or greater. The amendment failed due to lack of a
39 second.
40
41 Chairperson Koehler called for a roll call vote on the motion:
42 Godfrey - nay
43 VanderLaan — aye
44 Koehler - nay
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — September 14, 2021
Page 7
1 Loehlein — nay
2 Volkenant - nay
3 Hudson — absent
4 The motion failed 1 aye and 4 nays.
5
6 Mr. Griffiths stated the Commission does not need to provide reasons for denial since the
7 City is the applicant.
8
9 Motion: Motion by Loehlein, second by Godfrey, to recommend denial of the proposed
10 Code amendment.
12 Discussion:
13 Commissioner Loehlein stated he is recommending denial because the amendment does
14 not address the noise issue and it would infringe on the rights of folks to do what they wish
15 with their property.
16
17 Chairperson Koehler called for a roll call vote:
18 Godfrey - aye
19 VanderLaan - aye
20 Koehler - aye
21 Loehlein - aye
22 Volkenant - aye
23 Hudson - absent
24 Motion passed unanimously.
25
26 Chairperson Koehler stated the City Council will hear the Commission doesn't think the
27 amendment is a good idea. The City Council will make a final determination on September
28 21, 2021. He recommended residents attend the Council meeting and call City Hall to talk
29 about the noise issue. Chairperson Koehler commended the Commission for their work at
30 the meeting and he is proud of them.
31
32 Commissioner Volkenant asked if the existing language will still group roosters with
33 poultry. Mr. Griffiths stated nothing is changed until the City Council adopts an
34 amendment if they choose to. Commissioner Volkenant commented that the Commission
35 did not put anything in motion. Chairperson Koehler explained the Commission did put
36 the issue in motion. He stated the Commission does not have decision making capability,
37 but they do have influence.
38
39 OTHER BUSINESS
40
41 Mr. Janish updated the Commission on projects they have reviewed and the final decisions
42 of the City Council.
43
44 Chairperson Koehler asked if staff were planning a second meeting in September. Mr.
45 Janish stated at this time, they are not anticipating a second meeting.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —September 14, 2021
Page 8
Commissioner Godfrey asked how the City is progressing on filling the Commission's
vacancy. Mr. Janish stated the City Council will be conducting interviews on September
21, 2021. The City received 5 applications.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Chairperson Koehler assumed a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
Motion carries by unanimous consent.
Respectfully Submitted,
Shari Kunza, Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off'Site Secretarial, Inc.
P1
y�
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`/ t
FROM: Jake Griffiths, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Public Hearing — Variance Request — Increase Maximum Size of Ground
Mounted Solar Panels —16971 Ward Lake Drive NW — Harold & Linda
Haluptzok (Applicants)
DATE: November 23, 2021
INTRODUCTION
The applicants are requesting a variance for their property located at 16971 Ward Lake Drive
NW in order to construct 3,600 square feet of ground mounted solar panels on their property.
The subject property is located within the R-1: Single Family Rural zoning district and is 114
acres in size. The dwelling on the subject property is approximately 7,000 square feet in size and
is an above average sized home within the City.
What is a Variance?
A variance is a way that cities may allow for an exception to part of an ordinance for a specific
property. A variance is generally for dimensional standards such as setbacks or height limits and
allows the landowner to break a dimensional rule that would otherwise apply. Minnesota State
Statute and City Code provide specific criteria the City must consider when reviewing a variance
request, this criteria is included later in this report. If a variance is approved it becomes a
property right which runs with the land.
DISCUSSION
The applicants are proposing to construct 3,600 square feet of ground mounted solar panels.
Ground mounted solar panels are freestanding solar systems mounted directly to the ground
using a rack or pole rather than being mounted on a building. In the case of this property, City
Code 9-14-5 would allow for up to 1,200 square feet of ground mounted solar panels to be
constructed. In order for the applicants to construct the proposed 3,600 square feet of ground
mounted solar panels on their property, a variance for an additional 2,400 square feet is required.
A potential alternative to the proposed ground mounted solar panels would be roof mounting.
City Code allows roof mounted solar panels as an accessory use in all zoning districts and
generally does not have any restrictions on maximum size other than that they may not extend
beyond the perimeter of the roofline and must meet all applicable height restrictions. If roof
mounted solar panels were used, a variance may not be required. City staff shared this potential
alternative with the applicants and they chose to move forward with their proposal and variance
request due to concerns with the addition of solar panels to the roof of their dwelling.
P2
Review Criteria
City Code 12-14-7 establishes review criteria for considering a variance request and states that
variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent
of the official control and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical
difficulties in complying with the official control. "Practical difficulties" as used in connection
with the granting of a variance, means:
1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
an official control.
• The applicants are looking to construct solar panels on their property in order to
have a positive impact on energy production and conservation.
• City Code and the Comprehensive Plan encourage the use of alternative energy,
such as solar panels, in ways that will not have an adverse impact on the
community.
• City Code allows for the construction of solar energy systems in all zoning
districts provided they meet City Code requirements.
• The applicants believe their request is reasonable as the increased size will allow
for a solar energy system that will meet their energy needs year-round.
2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
• The subject property is 114 -acres in size and is much larger than the typical 2.5 -
acre rural lot within the City.
• The applicant has indicated their home is 7,000 square feet in size and may be
above-average sized for the City.
• The applicant has indicated that their dwelling has a roof utilizing cedar shakes
which would not allow for the use of solar panels on the roof.
• The applicant has indicated that most contractors they have worked with would
not install solar panels over top of cedar shakes.
3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
• The subject property is 114 acres in size.
• The subject property is located within the rural portion of the community.
• The subject property is zoned R-1: Single Family Rural.
• The proposed ground mounted solar panels will be setback approximately 1,777
feet from Ward Lake Drive NW, 1,700 feet from Crosstown Blvd NW and 588
feet from the nearest property line.
• The proposed ground mounted solar panels will be screened in accordance with
City Code requirements and meet all other City Code requirements.
4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
• If the variance is not granted, the applicant has indicated the 1,200 square foot
maximum for ground mounted solar panels would not provide the electricity they
need to meet their energy needs year-round.
• The applicant has indicated they are not comfortable with the use of roof mounted
solar panels partially due to the cost of potential roof reconstruction and
maintenance.
P3
As the amount of solar power varies from day to day, the applicant has indicated
they may sell a limited amount of electricity back to the public utility which may
create a profit for the applicants.
A 1,200 square foot system would actually cost the applicants less money to
construct versus the proposed 3,600 square foot system.
The City Council may also impose reasonable conditions on the granting of a variance request. A
condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created
by the variance. One such condition might be screening or landscaping.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to hold a public hearing on the variance
request, compare the variance request with the review criteria of City Code 12-14-7 and make a
recommendation based on findings of fact to the City Council. Staff has drafted the attached
resolutions with potential findings of fact the Commission may want to consider when
recommending approval or denial of the variance request. -
-RPVectfully submitted,
5Jake GriflitOs
Associate Planner
Attachments
Page #
Draft Resolution of Approval...........................................................................
4
Draft Resolution of Denial...............................................................................7
SiteLocation Map........................................................................................
9
City Code 9-14: Solar Energy Systems...............................................................10
City Code 12-14-7: Variance Review Criteria.......................................................15
Applicant's Materials....................................................................................18
Applicant's Letter.................................................................................18
SitePlan ..........................................................................................20
Map Showing Setbacks........................................................................
21
Ground Mounted System Flyer...............................................................
22
Draft Construction Plans.......................................................................
24
CC: Harold & Linda Haluptzok, 16971 Ward Lake Drive NW, Andover, MN 55304
P4
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16971
WARD LAKE DRIVE NW, PID# 12-32-24-24-0002, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
THE S1/2 OF NWl/4 OF SEC 12 TWP 32 RGE 24 EX N1/2 OF SW1/4 OF SD NW114 ALSO
EX A PARCEL DESC AS FOL: BEG AT SW COR OF SD SWI/4 OF NWl/4, TH NLY ALG
W LINE OF SD 1/4 OF 1/4,250 FT, TH ELY ALG A LINE PERPENDICULAR TO W LINE
OF SD 1/4 OF 1/4,174.24 FT, TH SLY ALG A LINE FRILL/W W LINE OF SD 1/4 OF 1/4,
250 FT + OR — TO S LINE OF SD 1/4 OF 1/4,174.24 FT + OR — TO POB, TOG/W NE 1/4 OF
SW1/4 AND SEI/4 OF SW1/4 SD SEC, EX THAT PRT LYG SELY OF CASH NO 18, ALSO
EX RD SUBJ TO EASE OF REG
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested approval of a variance from City Code 9 -14 -5 -4 -b -ii to
increase the maximum size of ground mounted solar energy systems on the subject property from
1,200 square feet to 3,600 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the Andover Review Committee has reviewed the variance request; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning
Commission held a public hearing on November 23, 2021 pursuant to the requirements of City
Code 12-14-7; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that said request is in
harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official control and is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of
the variance request; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council completed a review of the variance request along with the
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council approves the variance request to increase the maximum size of
ground mounted solar energy systems from 1,200 square feet to 3,600 square feet in order to
accommodate the construction of a solar energy system to provide for the year-round electricity
needs of the applicants; and,
WHEREAS, based on the criteria for granting a variance under City Code 12-14-7, the City
Council finds the following findings of facts to support the approval of the variance requests:
P5
1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
an official control.
• The applicants are looking to construct solar panels on their property in order to
have a positive impact on energy production and conservation.
• City Code and the Comprehensive Plan encourage the use of alternative energy,
such as solar panels, in ways that will not have an adverse impact on the
community.
• City Code allows for the construction of solar energy systems in all zoning
districts provided they meet City Code requirements.
• The applicants believe their request is reasonable as the increased size will allow
for a solar energy system that will meet their energy needs year-round.
2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
• The subject property is 114 -acres in size and is much larger than the typical 2.5 -
acre rural lot within the City. .
• The applicant has indicated their home is 7,000 square feet in size and may be
above-average sized for the City.
• The applicant has indicated that their dwelling has a roof utilizing cedar shakes
which would not allow for the use of solar panels on the roof.
• The applicant has indicated that most contractors they have worked with would
not install solar panels over top of cedar shakes.
3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
• The subject property is 114 acres in size.
• The subject property is located within the rural portion of the community.
• The subject property is zoned R-1: Single Family Rural.
• The proposed ground mounted solar panels will be setback approximately 1,777
feet from Ward Lake Drive NW, 1,700 feet from Crosstown Blvd NW and 588
feet from the nearest property line.
• The proposed ground mounted solar panels will be screened in accordance with
City Code requirements and meet all other City Code requirements.
4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
• If the variance is not granted, the applicant has indicated the 1,200 square foot
maximum for ground mounted solar panels would not provide the electricity they
need to meet their energy needs year-round.
• The applicant has indicated they are not comfortable with the use of roof mounted
solar panels partially due to the cost of potential roof reconstruction and
maintenance.
• As the amount of solar power varies from day to day, the applicant has indicated
they may sell a limited amount of electricity back to the public utility which may
create a profit for the applicants.
• A 1,200 square foot system would actually cost the applicants less money to
construct versus the proposed 3,600 square foot system.
W
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby
approves the variance request with the following conditions:
1. All appropriate permits shall be obtained prior to construction.
2. The solar energy system must meet all other applicable City Code requirements.
3. Pursuant to City Code 12-14-7-E-6, if the City Council determines that no significant
progress has been made in the first twelve (12) months after the approval of the variance,
the variance will be null and void.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 7th day of December, 2021.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
Michelle Hartner, Deputy City Clerk Sheri Bukkila, Mayor
P7
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
I: ►f
A RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16971
WARD LAKE DRIVE NW, PID# 12-32-24-24-0002, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
THE S1/2 OF NW1/4 OF SEC 12 TWP 32 RGE 24 EX NI/2 OF SWI/4 OF SD NWl/4 ALSO
EX A PARCEL DESC AS FOL: BEG AT SW COR OF SD SWIA OF NWl/4, TH NLY ALG
W LINE OF SD 1/4 OF 1/4,250 FT, TH ELY ALG A LINE PERPENDICULAR TO W LINE
OF SD 1/4 OF 1/4,174.24 FT, TH SLY ALG A LINE PRILL/W W LINE OF SD 1/4 OF 1/4,
250 FT + OR — TO S LINE OF SD 1/4 OF 1/4,174.24 FT + OR — TO POB, TOG/W NE 1/4 OF
SWIA AND SETA OF SWI/4 SD SEC, EX THAT PRT LYG SELY OF CASH NO 18, ALSO
EX RD SUBJ TO EASE OF-REC
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested approval of a variance from City Code 9 -14 -5 -4 -b -ii to
increase the maximum size of ground mounted solar energy systems on the subject property from
1,200 square feet to 3,600 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the Andover Review Committee has reviewed the variance request; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning
Commission held a public hearing on November 23, 2021 pursuant to the requirements of City
Code 12-14-7; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that said request is not in
harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official control and is not consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council denial of the
variance request; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council completed a review of the variance request along with the
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council denies the variance request to increase the maximum size of
ground mounted solar energy systems from 1,200 square feet to 3,600 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, based on the criteria for granting a variance under City Code 12-14-7, the City
Council finds the following findings of facts to deny the variance request:
1. The property has alternatives to meet City Code requirements such as utilizing roof
mounted solar energy systems, or a combination of roof mounted and ground mounted
solar energy systems, to meet the property's energy needs.
UL
2. The intent of City Code 9-14: Solar Energy Systems was to provide a method for solar
energy production on a typical sized home within the City of Andover and was not
intended to accommodate the entire year-round energy needs of a large home with
multiple accessory structures.
3. The construction of the increased ground mounted solar energy systems would
substantially alter the natural topography of the area.
4. The variance, if approved, is a property right that will run with the land. Future
subdivision of the property may alter the conditions in which the variance could have
been granted and may have a negative effect on the value of properties and scenic views
in the area at that time.
5. The City Code was recently amended on March 2, 2020 to increase the maximum amount
of solar energy systems on residential properties. In the case of the subject property, the
amendment increased the maximum square footage from 400 square feet to 1,200 square
feet.
6.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby
denies the variance request to increase the maximum size of ground mounted solar energy
systems on the subject property.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 7th day of December, 2021.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
Michelle Hartner, Deputy City Clerk Sheri Bukkila, Mayor
c .1
c
P10
CHAPTER14
SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
SECTION
9-14-1 Purpose and Intent
9-14-2 Definitions
9-14-3 Accessory Use
9-14-4 Exemptions
9-14-5 System Standards
9-14-1: PURPOSE AND INTENT: It is the goal of the city council for
Andover to become a more sustainable community by encouraging activities that
conserve energy and result in less/no pollution output such as alternative energy
sources. In accordance with that goal, the city finds that it is in the public interest
to encourage alternative energy systems that have a positive impact on energy
production and conservation while not having an adverse impact on the
community. Therefore, the purposes of this section include:
1. To promote rather than restrict development of alternative energy sources by
removing regulatory barriers and creating a clear regulatory path for approving
alternative energy systems.
2. To create a livable community where development incorporates sustainable
design elements such as resource and energy conservation and use of
renewable energy.
3. To protect and enhance air quality, limit the effects of climate change and
decrease use of fossil fuels.
4. To encourage alternative energy development in locations where the
technology is viable and environmental, economic and social impacts can be
mitigated.
9-14-2: DEFINITIONS: The following words, terms and phrases shall have
the following meanings when used in this chapter:
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SYSTEM: An energy transfer of generating system
such as ground source heat pump, wind or solar energy system.
SOLAR COLLECTOR: A device, structure or a part of a device or structure for
which the primary purpose is to capture sunlight and transform it into thermal,
mechanical, chemical, or electrical energy.
P11
SOLAR ENERGY: Radiant energy received from the sun that can be collected in
the form of heat or light by a solar collector.
SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM: A device or structural design feature, a substantial
purpose of which is to provide daylight for interior lighting or provide for the
collection, storage and distribution of solar energy for space heating or cooling,
electricity generation or water heating.
SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM, ACTIVE: A solar energy system whose primary
purpose is to harvest energy by transferring solar energy into another form of
energy or transferring heat from a solar collector to another medium using
mechanical, electrical, or chemical means.
SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM, BUILDING INTEGRATED: A solar energy system
that is an integral part of a principal or accessory building, replacing or
substituting for an architectural or structural component of the building. Building
integrated systems include, but are not limited to, photovoltaic or hot water solar
energy systems that are contained within or substitute for roofing materials,
windows, skylights, awnings and shade devices.
SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM, GROUND MOUNTED: A freestanding solar system
mounted directly to the ground using a rack or pole rather than being mounted on
a building.
SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM, PASSIVE: A system that captures solar light or heat
without transforming it to another form of energy or transferring the energy via a
heat exchanger.
SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM, ROOF MOUNTED: A solar energy system mounted
directly or abutting the roof of a principal or accessory building.
SOLAR HOT WATER SYSTEM (Also THERMAL SYSTEM): A system that
includes a solar collector and a heat exchanger that heats or preheats water for
building heating systems or other hot water needs, including residential domestic
hot water and hot water for commercial processes.
9-14-3: ACCESSORY USE:
1) Ground mounted solar energy systems shall be allowed in the R-1, Single
Family Rural District as a permitted accessory use in accordance with the
standards in this section.
2) Roof mounted solar energy systems shall be allowed as a permitted
accessory use in all zoning districts in accordance with the standards in
this section.
P12
9-14-4: EXEMPTIONS: Passive or building integrated solar energy
systems are exempt from the requirements of this section and shall be regulated
as any other building element.
9-14-5: SYSTEM STANDARDS:
1) Electrical:
a) All utilities shall be installed underground except the electrical lines for
roof mounted units.
b) An exterior utility disconnect switch shall be installed at the electric
meter serving the property.
c) Solar energy systems shall be grounded to protect against natural
lightning strikes in conformance with the national electrical code as
adopted by the city.
d) No solar energy system shall be interconnected with a local electrical
utility until the utility has reviewed and provided written approval for the
interconnection. The interconnection of the solar energy system with the
utility shall comply with the City Code and Minnesota State Building Code.
e) All solar energy systems shall meet the standards of the Minnesota
State Building Code.
2) Aesthetics: All solar energy systems shall be designed to blend into the
architecture of the building to the extent possible without negatively
impacting the performance of the system and to minimize glare towards
vehicular traffic and adjacent properties.
3) Glare: The panels of ground mounted solar energy systemsshall be
placed and arranged such that reflected solar radiation or glare shall not
be directed onto adjacent buildings, properties or roadways. Prior to the
issuance of a permit for a ground mounted solar energy system, the
permit applicant must provide an analysis demonstrating that the ground
mounted system will not impact aesthetics of adjacent properties.
4) Location:
a) Roof mounting:
1) The solar energy system shall comply with the maximum height
requirements of the applicable zoning district. Roof mounted solar
collectors shall be flush mounted on pitched roofs unless the roof
pitch is determined to be inadequate for optimum performance of the
P13
solar energy system in which case the pitch of the solar collector may
exceed the pitch of the roof up to 5% but in no case shall be higher
than ten inches above the roof. Solar collectors on flat roofs may be
bracket mounted. Commercial/Industrial collectors located on flat
roofs shall be placed on the roof to limit the visibility from public right-
of-ways and residential properties and meet the screening
requirements of the City Code.
2) The solar energy system shall not extend beyond the perimeter of
the exterior walls of the building on which it is mounted.
b) Ground mounting:
1) The solar energy system shall not be located in the front yard as
defined by City Code Section 12-2-2. (Amended Ord. 502, 3/2/20)
2) All components of the solar energy system shall be set back a
minimum of thirty feet (30') from interior side lot lines and rear lot
lines, and shall otherwise be set back as required by City Code
Section 12-6-5 for accessory structures. (Amended Ord. 502, 3/2/20)
3) The solar energy system shall not exceed fifteen feet (15') in
height.
4) The solar energy system shall be limited to a maximum ground
coverage area based on parcel/lot area (Amended Ord. 502, 3/2/20):
i. Lots Less Than 3 Acres — On parcels less than three (3) acres, the
maximum ground mounted solar electric ground coverage area must
not exceed four hundred (400) square feet. (Amended Ord. 502,
312120)
ii. Lots 3 Acres and Larger — On parcels three (3) acres and larger,
the maximum ground mounted solar electric ground coverage area
must neither exceed the foundation area of the residence (not
including the attached garage), nor one thousand two hundred
(1,200) square feet, whichever is less. (Amended Ord. 502, 312/20)
5) Solar energy systems shall not encroach upon drainage and utility
easements.
5) Screening: Solar energy systems shall be screened in accordance with
the requirements of Section 12-13-5 of the City Code to the extent
possible without affecting their function.
P14
6) Certification: The solar energy system shall be listed and labeled by an
approved third party testing agency and comply with the requirements of
the Minnesota State Building Code. (Amended Ord. 502, 3/2/20)
7) Abandonment: If the solar energy system remains damaged,
nonfunctional or inoperative for a continuous period of one year, the
system shall be deemed to be abandoned and shall constitute a public
nuisance. The owner shall remove the abandoned system at their
expense after a demolition permit has been obtained. Removal includes
the entire structure including transmission equipment.
8) Building Permit: Permits as required by the Minnesota State Building Code
shall be obtained for any solar energy system prior to installation.
P15
with a fee as set forth by ordinance. An additional fee as set forth by
ordinance may be required for each meeting in excess of two (2), which is
necessary because of incomplete information or changes in the petition.
The Community Development Director shall refer the application to the
Planning and Zoning Commission. (Amended Ord. 8,10-21-1970; amd.
2003 Code)
2. A public hearing shall be held in accordance with section 12-14-8.
(Amended Ord. 314 10-4-2005)
3. City Council Action: After a completed application has been submitted,
the City Council shall follow the deadline for response as outlined in State
Statute 15.99. (Amended Ord. 314, 10-4-2005)
4. Amended Application: An Amended Conditional Use Permit application
shall be administered in a manner similar to that required for a new
conditional use permit; and the fee shall be as set forth by ordinance.
Amended conditional use permits shall include reapplications for permits
that have been denied, requests for changes in conditions, and as
otherwise described in this title. (Amended Ord. 8, 10-21-1970; amd. 2003
Code)
5. Reapplication After Denial: No application for a Conditional Use Permit
shall be resubmitted for a period of one year from the date of said order of
denial.
6. Hearing May Be Held: When a Conditional Use Permit may be of
general interest to the community or to more than the adjoining owners,
the Planning and Zoning Commission may hold a public hearing, and the
Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed with notice of said hearing
published at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing. (Amended Ord. 314,
10-4-2005)
D. Time Limit On Implementing Conditional Use: If the City Council
determines that no significant progress has been made in the first twelve
(12) months after the approval of the Conditional Use Permit, the permit
will be null and void. (Amended Ord. 8, 10-21-1970)
.k 12-14-7: VARIANCES:
A. Variances Authorized: The City Council, as authorized by Minn. Stat.
462.354 subdivision 2, and Minn. Stat. 462.357, subdivision 6, shall have
the authority to hear requests for variances from the requirements of the
zoning ordinance and other sections of the City Code where variances
are authorized, including restrictions placed on nonconformities.
1 See subsection 1-7-3H of this code.
P16
(Amended Ord. 407, 6-21-11)
B. Review Criteria:
1. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the
general purposes and intent of the official control and when the variances
are consistent with the comprehensive plan. (Amended Ord. 407, 6-21-11)
2. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance
establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the official
control. 'Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting
of a variance, means:
a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a
reasonable manner not permitted by an official control;
b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to
the property not created by the landowner;
c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of
the locality;
d. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical
difficulties. (Amended Ord. 407, 6-21-11)
C. Conditions Authorized: The City Council may impose conditions in the
granting of variances. A condition must be directly related to and must
bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
(Amended Ord. 407, 6-21-11)
D. Specific Variances Authorized: No variance may be granted that would
allow any use that is not allowed in the zoning district in which the subject
property is located, except as follows: (Amended Ord. 407, 6-21-11)
1. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined
in Minn. Stat. 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the official
controls. (Amended Ord. 407, 6-21-11)
2. Variances may be granted for the temporary use of a one family
dwelling as a two family dwelling. (Amended Ord. 407, 6-21-11)
E. Procedure: The procedure for granting variances is as follows:
1. Request For Variance; Fee: A person desiring a variance shall fill out
and submit to the Community Development Director a request for variance
application form together with a fee asset forth by ordinance. (Amended
Ord. 407, 6-21-11)
2. Planning and Zoning Commission Review: A public hearing shall be
I See subsection 1-7-31-1 of this code.
P17
held by the Planning and Zoning Commission as provided in City Code
12-14-8. The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the
City Council based upon the provisions of City Code 12-14-7. (Amended
Ord. 407, 6-21-11)
3. City Council Action: The City Council may grant the variance based
upon the provisions of City Code 12-14-7. (Amended Ord. 407, 6-21-11)
4. Appeals: The petitioner, if appealing an interpretation of this title by an
employee of the city which would require him/her to obtain a variance,
shall have the fee refunded if his/her appeal is upheld by the City Council.
5. Emergency Variance Requests: The City Council may waive Planning
and Zoning Commission review and take immediate action on emergency
variance requests that affect the immediate health, safety and welfare of
the citizens of Andover or if time constraints present severe hardship to
the applicant. The applicant is required to show the immediacy of the
issue and the potential health, safety or welfare threat. The City Council
shall determine if the request warrants immediate review. (Amended Ord.
407, 6-21-11)
6. Time Limit On Implementing Variance: If the City Council determines
that no significant progress has been made in the first twelve (12) months
after the approval of the variance, the variance will be null and void.
(Amended Ord. 8, 10-21-1970)
12-14-8: PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS:
B. Council Actions Requiring a Public Hearing: The following Council actions
shall require a public hearing:
1. Variance
2. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) - - -
3. Rezoning and Text Amendment
4. Sketch Plan
5. Preliminary Plat
6. Comprehensive Plan Amendment
7. Interim Use Permits (Amended Ord. 436, 4-15-2014)
C. Public Hearing
1. A public hearing on an application for Council actions in this
chapter shall be held by the Planning Commission in
accordance with the Minnesota State Statutes.
2. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing shall be
published in the official newspaper of the city ten (10) days prior
to the day of the hearing.
3. Property owners and occupants within three hundred fifty feet
P18
Planning Department
City counci I
City of Andover
Re: Harold and Linda Haluptzok Variance Request of Solar Energy Systems Chapter 14
12-14-7 Variance
A. As stated by the city under 9-14-1 the goal of the city council for Andover to become a more
sustainable community by encouraging activities that conserve energy and result in less /no
pollution output such as alternative energy sources. In addressing the Purpose and Intent as
listed in 9-14-1 of the Andover requirements for solar energy systems we agree and believe that
our proposed installation addresses our and the City's interest in installing a solar energy system
that has a positive impact on energy production and conservation.
B. There are practical difficulties in complying with the official control of our property:
a. We plan to continue living on our property and use it in a reasonable manner with our
children and grandchildren now and into the future
b. -Our home has cedar shakes which would not allow the use of solar panels on the roof
without removing most of our roofing. Most contractors would never install solar over
cedar shakes. Also, our property includes a workshop and a barn
-Our property is 114 acres, with large mature forests and setbacks from Ward Lake Drive of
1777 feet, from County Road 18 of 1700 feet, from nearest neighbor's property line of 588
feet. No part of our solar installation would be visible from roads or neighboring homes.
-We have a 7000 square foot home which requires three times the size of solar power
generating than in the code
-using a ground mounted system removes problem of roof leaking and trying to repair under
solar panels
-in the future if something changes we can easily remove this system and sell or move it to
another location.
C. The installation of the proposed solar energy system will not alter the view of our property
when traveling on any of the adjacent streets due to the mature forests and large setbacks.
- It is practical for us to design a solar system that fits our house and property. The proportionality
of passing an ordinance that is for a city lot without taking into account the size of the property will have
a direct effect on designing a system for any larger home or diverse property. In addressing the stated
requirement for solar installations City Code 12-14-7 which requires 1200 square feet maximum for
solar panels we request a variance to allow us up to 3600 square feet of solar panels.
-In the winter the amount of sunlight is at a low of 8 hours and 44 minutes and in the summer the
sunlight is at a high of 15 hours and 38 minutes. In the winter the sun is much lower in the sky, so the
output of the solar panels is reduced even more, probably only producing 1/3 of the summer
production.
-Connexus Energy and Minnesota State law allows up to 40kWAC of production which they will buy back
and use to power other homes in our area. This reduces the amount of gas, oil, coal or nuclear
P19
necessary to produce electricity. If every third house in our neighborhood was able to do this, we would
reduce our carbon footprint to nearly zero. We feel that we have a responsibility to do our share to help
stop global warming and reduce our carbon footprint and this is the best we can do right now. Our
variance request will not allow us any use that is not allowed in our zoning district.
1. Does not apply to us.
2. Does not apply to us.
E. Please find attached the required variance application and fee.
The installation of this system will comply with all "System Standards" as dictated in 9-14-5 except as
allowed by a granted variance.
Thank you for your consideration of our request for this variance. We would be happy to answer any
additional questions or concerns you may have.
Thank you for your time,
Harold and Linda Haluptzok
16971 Ward Lake Drive NW
Andover, MN 55304
Phone 612-716-2560
on
ic
ii
Ir)
Qj
r6
J
i
r0
G
There are no overhead, or
any other, clearance
issues.
DER is connected to the
secondary of the EPS. —
Production meter & fused
AC disconnect will be
located together, in a
readily accessible location
within 10' of the main
service meter.
2,350'
V\S WE
�oScX O� S
P20
Utility: Connexus Energy
24/7 unescorted keyless
access for meters and
fused AC discconnect
provided. _
System is weatherproof,
durable and premanently
Equipment LIM:
Modules: (124) Ankn Solar 40OW
X Optimizers: (124) SE -P400
Inverter. (3)SE11400H-U5&
(1) SE500@4US w/25-&arweneed
Nhnunry 8 Sel otdge C—.qu,W
tMn9oiln9
Aggregate 39.2kW AC
Attachment: Ground Screw with
Pipe Clamp Nit
Rackmg:SunModo
Mount: Ground Mount
Customer:
Harold Haluptzok
16971 Ward Lake Dr NW,
Andover, MN 55304
Phone: (612) 716-2560
ha"..haluptzok@gmail.com
Project Information:
49.6kW DC Ground
Mounted Solar PV
System
#PV -SP -101
(SilePlan)
Installer:
MN Solar and More
Li p,m a EA1.SP,999
I Ie , 4RC//P'311
11930 County Road 13 SE,
Watertown, MN 55389
(320)444-5994
Leah®mMMnSNNlarandmore.com
MNSularandMo,ecom
P21
Forth
h7 �y
C. * � * ..Y $� F •. 1 b e � ,� x..i s 1 `a" l�r,r}..�� +' » `
s+����� .+Fr} � � - ♦ a % ,,a,,, �-�'�.t }fii i 'O�y �trcw �" r Y� #��
s
t r r "1 »'tap,l $ .c r ha0(�ijL , •+. s .,�` ' , i%A�'+Y rsj+,r, r(
'1 AJ r Lt w
wry .�.��,• i "._.- _ �; � . i"
'; ' wt,, J �� f, �5.♦,.r •.• �* a x; -
s.
ol
Ile
a
.A ppSRi.'yp$
Y'aS�i:[ ,y}�� A •' (,,fir"' 'v%++l '•� ti , n, s
�''1`� ` � a.Y" •�� Susi a r'� i�; ; —.. r
rA •Yw`
ra'r,P ,L;".. i4 !+ �•
,1 y
,yl0iO Vertical ; < Thu Apr 1 2021
y
Sal
South
i
The SunTurfT" Ground !Mount
Advantage
J Easily scalable from kilowatts to
multimegawatts PV Arrays.
Foundation design solution for
every soil condition.
Online configuration tool
available to streamline design
process.
r/ Components optimized for
strength, durability and fast
installation.
J UL 2703 Listed by Intertek.
SUNM IM
Y P 2 3
Augers and Ground Screws
Our augers are suitable for use in weak to moderate strength soils and areas with a high-water table. Our ground
screws are ideal for use in hard packed earth or soils with large amounts of cobble and gravel.
Application
Ground Mount
Material
High grade aluminum, galvanized steel and 304 stainless steel hardware
Module Orientation
Portrait and Landscape
Tilt Angle
Range between 10 to 50 degrees
Foundation Types
Post in concrete, helical earth auger, ground screw anchor and ballast
Structural Integrity
Stomped engineering letters available
Certificate
UL2703 listed by ETL
Warranty
25 years
SunModo, Corp. Vancouver, WA., USA • www.sunmodo.com • 360.844.0048 o info@sunmodo.com
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST 1 of 15
Haluptzok HaroldP24
..
$UNMi...
545380
Ground Mount
_ Project Details
Pmiect Name HaluPtzak-)iareld
21p Code:
55304
ASCE 7-16
Cty,State
Andow,MN
Total Watts 50 kW
Date
11/01/21
Total Modules 124
Module Madel YnkeSolar, JKM400M-72HL-V
Module Dimensions Height 2,OOBAmm. Wicift 1,002.0 mm, Depth: 40Amm(79.06' a 39.45'x 1,571
Load Assumptions
Structure 6 Foundation
VAnd Speed 115 mph
spun Selection
Automatk 114'
Wind Expsoure B
Front Edge Height
36'
Gnund Snow Load 50 psf
Foundanon Type
Ground Screw
Length of Screw
80'
Tat
35'
Sub Array fi Details
Odgrtatio, Landscape
Ran Type
Hello Rail HOWL 168'
Layout 4rows by 11 cols
N/Sspan(in)
80
Front Posts 11
E/Nr Max Span (ln)
84
Back Pats 11
Area
870' (EW) x 156* (NS)
Sub Array M2 Details
Orientation Landscape
Rail Type
Hello R.ff HR30g168'
Layout 4mws by 10 Is
Nis Spun ON
80
Front Pats 10
E/WMuSpan(In)
84
Back Pasts 10
Am
791'(EW) x 158'(NS)
Sub Array C3 Details
Onienb8on Landscape
Ran Type
Hello Rao HUM 168'
Layout 4mwsbylOmis
N/S Span(in)
80
Front Posts 10
F/W Max Spa. (in)
04
Back Posts 10
Area
791'(EW1x158"(NS)
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST 1 of 15
Dill of Materials
Part
K10423 -M
0rwWSd ew,BO'
A21165 -D60
HSSZ 75'ODF.Oix
A21165-120
11552.375'ODR rRpe
A21168-112
2875'ODE/W Rpe Beam,112'
A50164-066
H55EIWTube Brxe
A50164-092
HSSH/STube Brxe
A20288 -168 -ML
Hello RaIIHR300.16B'
K10343,004
25"RrpeULlamp Kit
K10341-002
23' PiWT-Cap Kit
K10219-001
2"Rpe Oamp KR
K10222-001
--25'Plpe Clamp Kis -
K10448 -001
2V IPIM5piKe Kit
K1018P001
UnWmIMid Clamp Kit
K10224-140
End Clamp Kit
K10179-002
0raundm Ln
A20297-001
RAIEnd Cap
K10363-001
Minoimerter Hardware Kit
A20380-001
Pipe End Cap
5parea Total Qty
62
31
31
44
6
31
62
124
62
68
6
38
186
124
3
124
124
12
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/OV219:03 AM PST 2 of 15
P25
m
D
D
0
m
D
m
:i G c
� �a
m U U
ig gsg we �im`= i
a=
ag
is
a�
D
0
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11101/219;03 AM PST 3 of 15-
P26
G
g
Sii
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST - 4 of 15
ORS
N
C
D
.. ...
c&=
�g
ppF
opi�
x
t
3ZA
Oo
n0 o
01
0
x D
x. n Z
5�Z—
or
N
'0 z
� G1
r
N Z
m
i r
_-- 3
D
Z
C
T
O
0
C
i m
I
t
�
r
'Ile:
#i W
Sii
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST - 4 of 15
ORS
N
C
D
n m m o n m n a m 8gg iEj
a
C r
E r
1
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 111011219:03 AM PST 5 of 15
�:?
D
- O r
12' TYP. INSERTION
I..
c
YY
G)
m
- E
N�yNou
tO T
Z
O
0
6MAX
0
Z
—I
_.__-. .....-...
\ x
Y..
12TYP. INSERTION
r
�
0
117
t
_vm
0
\\
pZ
6MAX-
'`
3
n
Gf m
p,
\
z
3Z
z-
-4
r ' 6 MAX
\
Q
-
G
m
m
N
F
4...
m
T
C r
E r
1
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 111011219:03 AM PST 5 of 15
�:?
D
6 MA
12' TYP. INSERTION
c
YY
G)
m
Gf
at
tO T
Z
O
0
0
Z
—I
_.__-. .....-...
V »
Y..
L
0
P
D
C r
E r
1
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 111011219:03 AM PST 5 of 15
�:?
D
- 6 MAX
p... _ _.... _ ...... - _ ..
- G
w I
0
1 L
D
r -
1
O
a
mk;
Q
Z
-3
\\ Dy;
3
O\X
71
O
C
t
2
� t
O @
6 MAX - \\
y
"
n m - 3
\`�
a
P
z
m
3 M T
\\\
O
\C
2
C
2
\ ,
- 6 MAX
p... _ _.... _ ...... - _ ..
- G
w I
0
I
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/O3/219:03 AM PST 6 of 15-
P29
a
1 L
D
r -
1
O
A T
Q
Z
O
3
O
C
2
� t
0R -
a
P
I
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/O3/219:03 AM PST 6 of 15-
P29
a
0
m
D
D
4 N
iF
IMF
ANNE ;4gAt ^1s
T TS - i; i y RPE
t L y`sie� A sig£ L ks A
SER
"a
a�
O
m all ) _
_/
0
m
-i
D
n
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/011219:03AM PST 7 of 15
P30
1
W
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST 8 of 15
P31
93
A
z z zz�
00y3y
D0xm
0
0 0 9
N z
r-
N0
CD
0>
_
!" l)
j
mZ
v
i,
z
m
r
z
C
D
n
c
m
m
m
I I
I
1
1
T j
_'Fj
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST 8 of 15
P31
- c
E-
,
6 MAX - w,
y3y
12TYP. INSERTION
1--.-_....—.__ �\
- _.. _.__
c
z/
� 6MAX'-- �
A
60
sc T
O
O \�
Z �
- - 6 MAX
3 P O
S 8 -
-F— G
b 9p o
h =X N
O
- o
D
3
Z
I
P32
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST Sof 15
nmmonw a � ppmL�
S3
- E
F
as
6 MAX
-
\ 3S€
12' TYP. INSERTION
t
.0
Z
O
A
6 MAX ,
-
3
\
_
O
pP'
CO
—
Z
\
- - 6 MAX
\.\
-
O
-
G
0
Dom__
v�
T
- c
E-
,
6 MAX - w,
y3y
12TYP. INSERTION
1--.-_....—.__ �\
- _.. _.__
c
z/
� 6MAX'-- �
A
60
sc T
O
O \�
Z �
- - 6 MAX
3 P O
S 8 -
-F— G
b 9p o
h =X N
O
- o
D
3
Z
I
P32
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST Sof 15
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST _ 10 of 15
P33
D
FGC
-
C
x- x n r m o n m a�
.. H. .' E
E
m
..
o.+\
F
2
0
0 6 MAX
\\
n
..3
�m
m \•.
�m
O
\�C:
9
0
7
\0
+\
6 MAX
G
r
3c
z
W
N
O
v
\.
'••,
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST _ 10 of 15
P33
D
C
-
E
m
rn
6 MAX
Q 0
3c
z
v
\.
'••,
3
-�
O
c
Z
gl
R
Q - 1
6 MAX
sg
�s8i
g
a
-
m
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST _ 10 of 15
P33
D
.....��......
/).
F:
�.
)
in
_ _.w Leah Johnson on a _ 11of 15
Pao
ix)/�¢ {
�
.....��......
/).
F:
�.
)
in
_ _.w Leah Johnson on a _ 11of 15
Pao
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST 12 of 15
P35
I
X
bS X
s a
OOn
to m
r)0D N
r
v --11 0
oma
it z
o0
z—
C) N
>,a
T n
TZ
XM
V
o
D
Z
r
Z
C
T
�C
Tei i
I i
I
i
I
r
i
fl,
fl is
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST 12 of 15
P35
I
a
3
z
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03AM PST 13 of 15
P36
r
C-
E
�mm ommn °g x4.VIP.
+
6 MAX
C
€-c
12'TYP. INSERTION
- \.
?4
a
6 MAX
m
m
12' TYP. INSERTION
- �t
tip
A
m
A
nunffim =
6MAX,
`\
z1
\\\
Q
m
6MAX,/ —
a
p
�•
3
m
z
3D
T
\
�O
XX
C
z
D
e
3
N
°c
r-nuummmnmr--
- = 6 MAX
i
- 6 MAX
\•\
Ft
S e
t
S
D
-
g - g
G
G
C
D
e,sQ
O
m
a
T
a
3
z
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03AM PST 13 of 15
P36
r
C-
E
+
+
6 MAX
12'TYP. INSERTION
- \.
a
\
m
m
A
6MAX,
`\
O
^aa
+n T
Scz
O
c
;
z
- = 6 MAX
R S
+ D
Ft
S e
S
g - g
G
C
e,sQ
O
m
a
9 � a
a
3
z
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03AM PST 13 of 15
P36
r
+ C�g.
... a s
—3 \Mg
•a-,
o •,� t 3
z @ - 6 MAX �\ y
0
� z
G)
O
Z \
c \z
- 6 MAX
D
G
0
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST 14 of 15
P37
D
i
+ m
+ C -
- E -
\ m
i
�\ t
765MAX
�
�O
x T
OO
z
O
tiS�
0
O
z
- I
-- - 6 MAX
G
m
N
d
v
m
.
C)
9 0 0
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST 14 of 15
P37
D
i
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST 14 of 15
P37
D
[D d Z
Waco
•
' D
a
0
a
. v 3
w
v
m
v
O
7 •Nv ry L
m d N r
d d 9 C
N rp 4
I
O
v
V j
v
4G
do
ON
SL
=Vv
u
m
m o as
n a=
m
n
c
n
a 3
w a'
�.
»
d
N
S
Diwlaimer:
nw information from this configurator is not to be used for construction unless reviewed and approved by adesign professional recognized by the project's
a uthorltyhavingjurisdictlon WHl)
Last edited by Leah Johnson on 11/01/219:03 AM PST 15 of 15
P38