HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 11, 2003
() 0 . C1YutLe*- Q..6....
LLrtèttvl 3·a5-ó3
" '\ CITY of ANDOVER
'---.-/
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - March 11, 2003
The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
called to order by Acting Chairperson Kiichoff on March '11, 2003, 7 :00 p.m., at the
Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
Commissioners present: Acting Chairperson Tim Kirchoff, Commissioners Tony
Gamache, Rex Greenwald, Dean Vatne, Jonathan Jasper
and Michael Casey.
Commissioners absent: Chairperson Daninger.
Also present: City Planner, Courtney Bednarz
Assistant City Engineer, Todd Haas
Community Development Director, Will Neumeister
Others
~-)
OATH OF OFFICE
Commissioner Casey read the Oath of Office to himself
APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
February 25,2002
Motion by Jasper, seconded by Greenwald, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion
carried ona 5-ayes, O-nays, I-present (Casey), I-absent vote.
PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (03-01) TO CONSIDER
AMENDING ORDINANCE 10 TO INCORPORATE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM
THE NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS PARK STUDY.
Mr. Haas explained that this item is in regards to a public hearing to consider amending
Ordinance 10 to incorporate recommendations from the Northwest Associated
Consultants, Inc. (NAC) regarding Section 9.07 (parks, Playground, Open Space and
\ Public Use).
"---/
0 0
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - March 11, 2003
Page 2
r'
,,)
Mr. Haas discussed the information and Ordinance changes with the Commission.
Commissioner Greenwald asked who wrote the amendments. Mr. Haas indicated that
staff wrote them based on the recommendation of the City CounciL
Commissioner Greenwald asked if the City had any standards in regards to establishing
the interest rate. Mr. Haas stated when the developer comes in to record their final plat,
they have to pay all of their fees. The ordinance also allows the developer to pay the fee
at a later date and interest would be based on the banks current rate.
Commissioner Jasper stated in the cash contribution in lieu of land in the Ordinance, it
indicates the fee per lot unit set by the City Council but he does not see in the Ordinance
how the City Council sets the per lot fee. It also states the fee is set at the time of the
preliminary plat but it also states any park contributions are based on the value at the time
of fmal plat and this seemed inconsistent. Mr. Haas stated the only time they are based
on market value is for commercial and industrial because it is a unit charge. Mr. Bednarz
explained this section of the Ordinance is referencing State Statute which allows the City
to collect ten percent of the value per lot for park dedication and the formula the City
uses to arrive at the park dedication rates is based on trying to get close to the ten percent
of the market value. Commissioner Jasper stated what he was getting at was what
-, appeared to be inconsistencies in the Ordinance.
( )
\.--/
There was discussion in regards to dedicated land and how it is worded in the Ordinance
and the fees associated with it.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to open the public hearing at 7:23 p.m.
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent vote.
There was no public input.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 7:24 p.m.
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent vote.
Commissioner Greenwald stated it was hard because they have not seen the entire study
but through discussion, he thought some of the items were explained and Mr. Haas saw
where the Commission wanted clarification.
Commissioner Jasper stated he thought several things needed to be clarified on ordinance
9.07.1. He stated the additional language being added talks about cash contributions
based on market value and the rest of the Ordinance as he read it says with residential
property, it is either ten percent land or it's a per lot fee so the additional language should
be amended to read "based on market value of commercial/industrial property." He
C) noted the Ordinance does not currently address how a part land and part cash dedication
is handled. Also how the City Council sets the per lot fee is not clear. He stated in the
0 0
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - March 11, 2003
Page 3
'\,
'J Ordinance, there is not any formal guidance for the City. He suggested language be
added to the Ordinance regarding these two items.
Commissioner Gamache stated the lot fee is set with a separate Ordinance the City
already has and it is separate from what they are looking at. He stated what they are
looking at is not necessarily what the fee is but what changes are to be made in the
Ordinance. Mr. Bednarz stated with a simple fix they can explain the fees are established
with the city's fee ordinance.
Commissioner Vatne stated asked for language that speaks to actions on the part of the
Council to resolve a partial land/partial cash transaction. Acting Chairperson Kirchoff
stated in the case of part cash/part land, he thought that it was usually by the direction of
the City. Mr. Haas stated how he interpreted the Ordinance; it has to be agreed upon by
both parties.
The commission also discussed how a new park dedication rate will apply if the applicant
seeks to extend an approved preliminary plat beyond the 1 year timeframe.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to recommend to the City Council
approval of Resolution No. _, approving the Ordinance amendments with the changes
made by the Planning Commission. Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent vote.
CJ ;
Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the Aprill, 2003 City ,
I
Council meeting. ,
PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL USE PERMIT (03-04) FOR TEMPORARY
GREENHOUSE OPERATION AT 2218 BUNKER LAKE BOULEVARD NW.
Mr. Bednarz explained the EDA decided the temporary structure would not be allowed in
the Andover Station development.
Commissioner Greenwald stated he thought this would be a great place for one and he
asked why the EDA voted against this. Mr. Neumeister stated the design standards do
not allow for such a temporary structure and they were not willing to change the design
standards. He stated the vote was four to two so there was some acceptance, but not
overwhelming acceptance. He explained there was also one statement that the location in
terms of reducing the number of parking stalls in a prime area of the parking lot was also
the reason they did not want to see this there because it would take about twenty stalls
near the front door.
Commissioner Jasper asked if the EDA decides on an issue, is the Planning Commission
prohibited from making a decision on that issue. Mr. Neumeister stated the EDA is the
, -" party to the covenants and the controlling interest in the covenants at this point because
'~ they are the controlling interest in terms of the number of properties still owned by the
u 0 .
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - March 11, 2003
Page 4
/ -"
, ) EDA at this time. He stated that when they established the design standards, those were
'-...J
some of the guidelines or covenants that people that owned property in the area had to
abide by so when they made this decision, they would be making this as a group
reviewing their own covenant documents to see if this would allow for it and they felt it
did not and they were not willing to change it.
Commissioner Gamache asked if Knowlans, when they built the store, knew they were
not allowed to set up a greenhouse per the covenants when they moved in there. Mr.
Neumeister stated they had to agree to the guidelines when they moved in but he did not
think anybody read these. Commissioner Gamache stated they are putting one of their
grocery stores at a competitive disadvantage for the summer because of this. Mr.
Neumeister stated there was some mention by one of the EDA Commissioners about
other greenhouse operations in the City that are taxpaying entities and that this would not
be a taxpaying nursery or greenhouse operation because it is considered temporary and
not taxed as such.
PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (03-02) TO CONSIDER
AMENDING ORDINANCE 266 TO MODIFY EXISTING RENTAL LICENSING
REQUIREMENTS. i
() Mr. Neumeister explained that the Council discussed this issue in October 2002 and ¡
directed staff to provide additional research on potential changes to the Rental Housing
Ordinance. The City Council reviewed a draft of the potential changes on February 26,
2003. Council directed staff to bring it forward to a public hearing at the Planning
Commission on March 11, 2003.
During preparation of the changes, staff reviewed other cities that have adopted more
stringent ordinances. The City of New Brighton was contacted, since they made such
changes to their Rental Housing Ordinance in February 2001. There have been no legal
challenges to their ordinance, at this point in time. This is partly due to significant
discussions they had with the landlords before they adopted it in 2001.
Mr. Neumeister discussed the information with the Commission.
Commissioner Gamache asked if it was automatic according to the Ordinance being
amended that it would automatically go to a provisional license after the second call or at
the next renewal. Mr. Neumeister stated it is listed under provisional licenses in the
Ordinance. He stated the fire indication under this section in the Ordinance, should be
stricken. He stated the Ordinance does allow for an exemption of certain calls.
Discussion ensued in regards to the number of calls per unit in the Ordinance before a
license can be revoked.
, '\
)
"J
0 ()
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes-March 11,2003
Page 5
/ "-
'J Commissioner Greenwald asked if the City expected any more rental units coming into
the City in the future. Mr. Bednarz stated he did not expect anymore than what has
already been approved.
Commissioner Greenwald asked if the $75.00 fee was arbitrary or was it taken from
another Ordinance. Mr. Neumeister stated about a year ago they worked through the
building department, fire department and they arrived at the $75.00 fee is an accurate
number for the amount of time spent doing inspections on the units and when there are
problems and violations, they have to inspect the units again. He stated they did a very
detailed analysis and it was determined the number was correct.
Commissioner Jasper asked if it was the intent when drafted. That it would be two calls
to any apartment as opposed to any building. Mr. Neumeister stated it is two calls to any
unit. Commissioner Jasper stated there needed to be clarification in regards to the use of
units. He stated there were too many different ways dwelling/rental units are being used :
and is very confusing.
Discussion ensued in regards to the wording in the Ordinance in reference to the different
units and the wording that should be used.
Commissioner Jasper stated they exempt domestic assaults so the statute would not apply
/ ') if they had a single woman living in an apartment and the estranged husband came over
U and assaulted her but the Statute would apply if a stranger would come and threatened the
woman. Mr. Neumeister stated that was his understanding.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to open the public hearing at 7:59 p.m.
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent vote.
Mr. Eric Nyland, 2110 140th Lane NW stated he was an owner occupant of a rental unit
on the street. He stated he would like to clarify a couple of things. He asked if the copy
of the Ordinance he received was the final copy. Mr. Neumeister stated this was the
latest version.
Mr. Nyland stated to his understanding, he would pay seventy-five dollars to rent out one
unit in his building. Mr. Neumeister stated he would not pay any fee because he would
be exempt. Mr. Nyland stated he believed he should have to hold a license so he would
be covered under the Ordinance. Commissioner Gamache stated he agreed. He stated if
a person is renting out a unit in Andover, they should hold a license on the property.
Commissioner Vatne stated he understood exempt units to be different than what was
discussed. Mr. Neumeister explained the definition of exempt units.
;
There was discussion in regards to exempt units in owner occupied rental houses.
(~
\..J i
!
;
;
(-) ~,
, \ )
. .. ----
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - March 11, 2003
Page 6
, ')
\---./ Mr. Nyland stated he was assuming that after adoption of this Ordinance, there would be
inspection of all the units, would they be inspected immediately after this. Mr.
Neumeister stated every two years they would be inspected with the license renewal
except owner occupied units. Mr. Nyland stated he would like all units inspected,
including his. He stated as far as conduct on licensed property, holding the landlord
responsible is tough to do when the landlord can not even evict for these types of
violations, how can his license be taken away from him on those grounds. Acting
Chairperson Kirchoff stated this Ordinance is being used as a backup to help with
evictions. Commissioner Greenwald stated Dave Almgren stated they can evict and the
ordinance is only backup so the resident is making a valid point. Mr. Nyland asked if
they knew what the State Statute says because he does not think they should write this
Ordinance without knowing what the Ordinance states.
Commissioner Jasper stated it would be advisable to put into a rental agreement
regarding this Ordinance. He stated it was a legitimate concern because the Ordinance
does not make it a violation of the Ordinance to have a disorderly juvenile.
Mr. Nyland stated on section 14, landscape conditions, are these different standards than
that of the single family home in Andover. Mr. Neumeister stated the units have to be
kept up and are not necessarily the same as the single family homes. Commissioner
Gamache stated his understanding of this was that any deviation to species or material be
" " equal or better than what was previously approved. Mr. Nyland stated different standards
,
\__j for rental units are fine but they need to be fair.
Commissioner Greenwald stated there is a difference with residential in landscaping
because they approve each one on a case by case basis.
Mr. Jason Shutz, 1970 147tl1 Court stated there is a lot of emphasis on what the landlord
should do and he was wondering when there is police incidence, how soon would the
owner be contacted to an occurrence. Mr. Neumeister stated if they are going to institute
these changes, they need quicker report from the Sheriffs' Department which the
Sheriffs' Department agreed to.
Commissioner Greenwald asked if they should put in the Ordinance a requirement for
timely reports from the Sheriffs' Department. Mr. Neumeister stated they could do this.
Commissioner Gamache asked if they could put into the Ordinance that the owner of a
building would have a police report in their possession within thirty days. Commissioner
Greenwald indicated they would probably need to find out from the Sheriffs if this
would be possible. Commissioner Gamache stated he did not know if this would be
possible because of possible investigation in a case.
Mr. Shutz stated he would like a report within five days every time there would be an
incident because then he could issue an eviction notice and have time to clean up the unit
/ , and try to rent it out again with a minimal loss of income.
, ,
~
0 0
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - March 11, 2003
Page 7
r--',
,-_J Mr. Bednarz recommended putting the information and reports on a shared website for
the owners to see. Commissioner Jasper stated he did not know if this would be possible
because of privacy concerns and laws involving privacy. Mr. Bednarz stated he agreed
that there were privacy issues and that would need to be addressed.
Discussion ensued in regards to privacy and sharing information with the owners.
Commissioner Vatne stated he believed the Ordinance was a database issue also with
fairly complex reporting they were talking about and they need to have it work rapidly.
Mr. Neumeister stated in New Brighton, the owners of the buildings formed a co-op to
share information with each other regarding the tenants. Mr. Shutz stated he did not
know if thirty-six owners would want to form a co-op.
Mr. Neumeister suggested they could continue this item until they received more
information from the sheriff and Mr. Amdahl regarding this discussion. Acting
Chairperson Kirchoff stated this was a good idea.
Mr. Matt McBride, 2600 138th stated he lived in one of the units for four years. He stated
he was concerned about telling a tenant they were being held responsible for police calls,
which would be grounds for eviction, what is going to stop them from calling the police
F' -, two or three more times before they are evicted and making him lose his license.
, \
~,> Commissioner Gamache stated it indicates in the Ordinance that if the owner is working
on an eviction, the owner would not have any adverse license action brought against the
owner.
Mr. McBride asked if there is a problem with a building down the block and they called
the police, would the call count against the caller. Commissioner Gamache stated it
would not count against the caller; it would count against the offender, which is in section
seventeen of the Ordinance.
Motion by Vatne, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 8:51 p.m. Motion
carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent vote.
Acting Chairperson Kirchoff stated he thought it would be advisable to have the City
Attorney and the Sheriff come to help them with this before it is sent to the City Council.
Commissioner Greenwald stated he would not feel comfortable passing this onto the City
Council without more information. He asked in regards to the landscape condition, do
they need to be more specific. Commission Gamache stated he did not think any of the
properties have an approved landscape condition. Commissioner Greenwald stated it was
brought up in the public hearing and thought it should be looked at.
r\ Commissioner Vatne stated when he reviewed this, the discussion with the process in
I I New Brighton, it took extra time to put this in place, but it saved time by reducing the
"-...J
0 O·
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - March 11, 2003
Page 8
r)
. - number of calls. He thinks there is a fixed process that would be similar for Andover to
install but the problem is they would not get the benefit by the number of call reduction
because of the number of units. He stated there is a cost involved and he would like to
get a better understanding of what the cost would be. He stated he would also like to fmd
out what the turn around time would be for reports.
Commissioner Vatne stated he was concerned with the strictness of the Ordinance on the
landlord when the landlord can not be that strict with the tenants.
Commissioner Jasper stated he is concerned with the reference to all the different units
and he would like these better defined in the Ordinance. He stated he would support
tabling this for further information.
Commissioner Jasper stated in section eleven, it talks about violation of State law relating
to possession of controlled substance, the State law differentiates between possession and
sale and he would add this because a person can sell controlled substances without
actually having them. He stated they should give a notice within a certain number of
days and then give a certain amount of days to take the preventative steps. He thought it
should be explicit and it should be a second incident after a notice is given.
Commissioner Gamache stated he thought they should not require a landlord to respond
~ - any quicker to a notice than the City can respond to them.
~
\ I
Commissioner Jasper stated they need to clarify the number of police calls to a building.
It should be "two police calls per unit" and not "two police calls per building".
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Casey, to table this item for further discussion after
revisions are made and to have a representative from the Sheriff's Department and City
Attorney at the meeting. Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent vote.
OTHER BUSINESS.
Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on related items.
ADJOURNMENT.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to adjourn the meeting at 9: 1 0 p.m.
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent vote.
Respectfully Submitted,
." Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary
, .
, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
'~,