Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 8, 2002 (j (j / " u o o CITY of ANDOVER ~ 1-~cR-()~ 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.w.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - JANUARY 8,2002 . The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Jay Squires on January 8, 2002, 7:02 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Chairperson Jay Squires, Commissioners Tim Kirchoff, Mark Hedin,. Douglas Falk, Larry Dalien, Rex Greenwald, and Dean Daninger. Commissioners present: Commissioners absent: There were none. Also present: City Planner, Courtney Bednarz Planning Intern, Jason Angell Others APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 27, 2001 . Motion by Daninger, seconded by Hedin, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-present (Dalien), O-absent vote. PUBLIC HEARING: FOXBURGH CROSSING RESIDENTIAL SKETCH PLAN - FOR TOWNHOUSE PROJECT PROPOSED TO BE LOCATEDAT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HANSON BOULEVARD AND ANDOVER BOULEVARD City Planner Courtney Bednarz explained that the Commission is asked to review a residential sketch plan for a detached townhouse project. The project area is approximately 6.25 acres and includes four existing properties between Hanson Boulevard and Ibis St. NW. The proposed site is designated Urban Residential Low Density in the Comprehensive Plan which carries a maximum density of four units per acre.. The proposed project would have a density of between five and six units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan would need to be amended to change the land use designation from Urban Residential Low Density to Urban Residential Medium Density to allow the amount of density proposed with the project. '0 o Regular Andover PlanQ and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 2 The property is currently zoned Single Family Suburban Residential (R-3) which carries a minimum lot size of20,000 square feet. The property would need to be rezoned as well. The most appropriate zoning district for the proposed project is Multiple Dwelling - Low Density (M-I). Although the units are not attached this district most closely reflects the density of the proposed project. This zoning district, however, was crafted to address twinhouses. The minimum lot width is 150 feet, which is intended to provide one lot for both units. The setbacks also are crafted to address twinhouses with a front yard setback of 30 feet and a side yard setback of20 feet. For these reasons, Planned Unit Development Review would be necessary to adjust the development standards to the product that is proposed. The property is located inside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Utilities will need to be established to serve the proposed development. o Mr. Bednarz stated that the proposed project would be provided access from Ibis Street NW. Four existing accesses to Andover Boulevard would be eliminated. A public street would be brought into the project and end in a cul-de-sac. A private street would provide access to lots fronting on Andover Boulevard. The design is similar to an alleyway, as the intent is to maximize the visual appeal of the front of the units by locating the garage to the rear of the unit. He stated that this design allows the perimeter of the project to be free of garages, driveways and roads to preserve this area for the architecture of the structures to be appreciated. The area also remains open to provide adequate distance for landscaping between the units and surrounding properties. Mr. Bednarz stated that the Andover Review Committee had several concerns with the proposed alleyway. The concerns are summarized as follows. Ordinance 10, specifically prohibits private streets. The City Council can choose to uphold this ordinance in which case further discussion of private streets becomes a moot point. Alternatively, the Council could consider an amendment to this ordinance and perhaps some specific criteria for private streets to follow. Another concern was the narrow width of the alleyway, since it's below the City standard for local streets (33 feet) and will provide sufficient width for emergency vehicles to pass if vehicles are parked on the street. The width can also affect snow removal and general street maintenance. Another concern is the private nature of the alleyway, which would require property owners within the development to be responsible for the long-term maintenance and repair the alleyway. If the association isn't managed properly, reserve funds may not be sufficient to pay for repairs in which case a large assessment to property owners or City acquisition are the two likely remedies. Finally, public utilities would serve this development. These utilities are typically run within the right-of-way of public streets. With a private street, there is typically no right-of-way, which means that easements in favor of the City to allow access to the utilities would be necessary. / '\ '-J Mr. Bednarz explained that the proposed project utilizes the alleyway to provide access to units that would face Andover Boulevard as well as the interior of the site. The intent is to maximize the visual appeal of the front of the units by locating the garages to the rear <J Regular Andover PlanQ and Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 3 and facing the alleyway. This approach eliminates the need for perimeter streets and frees up the perimeter ofthe project for well-landscaped open space that provides an attractive edge to the development. Streets should be designed according to their use. Due to the limited amount of traffic that would utilize the alleyway, the design calls for less intensive street construction. Mr. Bednarz stated that double frontage lots are prohibited unless one ofthe frontage faces an arterial street. Hanson Boulevard is the only arterial street adjacent to the proposed project. This means that the double frontage lots proposed along Andover Boulevard as well as the interior of the development conflict with this provision of Ordinance 10. It isn't possible to eliminate access to Andover Boulevard without creating the need for double frontage lots. It may be possible to reconfigure the interior of the development to eliminate double frontage lots in the interior of the development. This approach, however, would depart from the intent of the proposed design, which is generally to maximize the visual appeal of the perimeter of the development and specifically to enhance the front of the townhouse units. <) Surrounding properties have been developed with single-family houses. The Nature's Run townhouse development is beginning to get underway on the south side of Andover Boulevard. A Single Family Urban Residential (R-4) zoning district exists on the north side of Andover Boulevard. A Single Family Suburban District (R-3) also exists on the south side of Andover Boulevard. The construction of 145th Lane for this project would cause the existing lot immediately north ofthe project area on the east side ofIbis Street to become a corner lot. The street as shown would allow the existing house to be setback ten feet from the right-of-way. Comer lots must have a side yard setback of at least 25 feet. Mr. Bednarz stated that the north end of the lot is intended to be platted as an outlot to reserve this area for future residential development. Sketches of this area have included examples of both detached and attached housing. The plan also indicates that a sedimentation pond will be created between the development and Hanson Boulevard to accommodate surface runoff. The developer would be required to meet all applicable ordinances, and obtain all necessary permits. Bill Gleason, the developer, explained that they are trying to avoid the private street idea, however it would only be set up for the residents in the development. He stated that they have done similar projects in surrounding cities and have found that a majority of the buyers are professionals, young couples, or single people without children. He presented the Commission with a visual to give an indication of what the homes would look like. He mentioned that the homes would be priced in the low $200,000's. He also mentioned that they designed them so the same style wouldn't be next to each other. Finally, the association would maintain the yards and roads. / ." V Regular Andover Plan~~ and Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 4 ,~-) Another individual representing the developer stated that there would be 21 feet between each property, which gives more space than what is between the existing single-family homes in the area. He stated that they wanted to hide the garages so they are out of sight, which is the reason for the alleyways. He stated that the road would be built to City specifications, and the only people that would be using it are those living there. He mentioned that to have a driveway out onto Hanson or Andover Boulevard would be very difficult. He also mentioned that there will be sidewalks within the development as well. Commissioner Daninger questioned the size of the homes. The Developer stated that the two-story units would be approximately 1,700 to 2,000 square feet in size and the multi- levels around 2,000 square feet if all levels were finished. Chair Squires questioned as to what the plans are for Outlot A. Mr. Gleason stated that they are planning on doing some type of attached product, however right now there's a moratorium so nothing can be done with it at this time. Chair Squires questioned as to what is an attached product. Mr. Gleason explained that it would be multi-family units that are attached together. He mentioned that it would be 3 four-unit buildings. o Chair Squires questioned if they would be at 65% green space if Outlot A were developed as well. Mr. Gleason stated that that is correct. Commissioner Greenwald questioned the time frame on the development process. Mr. Gleason stated that in today's market it's likely it would take two years. Motion by Daninger, seconded by Falk, to open the public hearing at 7:23 p.m. Motion carried on a 7 -ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Carol Cooper, 1690 l46th Avenue NW, stated that the back of her property faces the proposed townhouse development. She first submitted a petition to the Commission with a number of signatures from residents who are opposed to the project and some who are even considering moving because of the proposal. She mentioned that some of the residents whose property is adjacent to the proposed development didn't even receive a letter regarding the public hearing. She stated that her and her husband have a number of issues with the development. She stated that they could be losing privacy, not to mention all the trees, which add so much to the area. She stated that they are also concerned that the I-mile area surrounding this area is already too densely populated, causing a definite increase in traffic, noise pollution, and safety issues. She also presented the Commission with a written letter of her concerns regarding the proposal. /- "- 'J Mark Hanson, 14724 Bluebird Street, stated that his concern is with the traffic and the importance of a stop light at the comer. He stated that a couple years ago his wife was hurt in an accident at the same comer, and since then they've talked with the county, o Regular Andover Plan~~ and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 5 C,) however are told that there is no money at this time even though the intersection does warrant a stop light. Bill Grunz, 1460 I Grouse Street, stated that if anyone drives on Hanson Blvd. between 3:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. they are aware the traffic is backed up all the way to SuperAmerica. He stated that there is also traffic congestion on Andover Blvd., which will only become worse once the new school opens. He stated that he has children and the reason they moved to Andover was because there weren't apartments and townhomes. Connie Enzmann, 1718 Andover Boulevard NW, stated that two years ago when the school was first discussed a petition was sent to the City. The City did send an analysis to the Hennepin County School District, however the count was totally different then what the City had provided. She stated that she requested staff to provide the Council with accurate information that we have now, which wouldn't include the impact of the school. She also requested the Commission to consider the impact of the new school. She stated that she did appear before the City Council and the Commission previously with concerns regarding the 50 townhomes on Hanson Blvd. She stated that with another development such as this one it will only add to an already major problem regarding traffic. She mentioned that she doesn't see the Council and the Commission acting as the voices of the people. (j John Peterson, 14553 Ibis Street, presented the Commission with a written letter stating his concerns. He stated that his major concern is the safety issues regarding his children. He stated that with the construction of these homes, the entrance road will border his backyard allowing no safe place for his kids to play. He mentioned concerns regarding the removal oftrees, which will generate more noise from the traffic on Hanson Blvd. He stated that putting in this development will increase the traffic on Ibis Street substantially, resulting in a safety issue for the children riding their bikes and walking to and from school and their friends houses. He stated that he was unaware the zoning in the area would be changed to anything but single-family development. He stated that he doesn't want to raise his children in a multi-family development, but instead in a peaceful and quiet development. Finally, he mentioned concerns regarding the property value of his home and the likeliness that it could decrease because ofthe multi-family homes in their backyard. He also mentioned that by putting in this development he would have a road at the end of this deck. Mr. Peterson questioned the reason the property is zoned R-3. Mr. Bednarz explained the reasoning behind it. \~.J Mr. Peterson stated that he doesn't feel this is the appropriate spot for this type of development. He stated that the traffic is a huge problem right now and this would only add to the problem. He questioned who would benefit from the development other than the City and those that would live there. () Regular Andover Plan~~ and Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 6 Tom Enzmann, 1718 Andover Boulevard, stated that the traffic is definitely a concern. He questioned if the density of the project is 6 units per acre. Chair Squires stated that including Outlot A it would be 5.6 units per acre in density. Mr. Enzmann questioned if the density of buildable land is 5.6 units per acre. Mr. Bednarz stated that 5.6 units per acre is taking into consideration the entire site. Mr. Enzmann stated that it could be substantially higher if the wetlands were eliminated. He questioned if any variances will be needed in order for the development to proceed. Mr. Bednarz stated that a special use permit would be necessary in this development. He went on to explain why. Mr. Enzmann stated that the traffic is a huge concern. He stated that all the traffic that comes out onto Ibis Street end up shining their headlights into my house, furthermore the individual that lives on 146th Avenue in the cul-de-sac will have the same problem. He suggested running the cul-de-sac out onto Andover Blvd at the same intersection as the Natures Run Development. He stated that by doing this it won't solve the traffic problem on Andover Blvd., however it will eliminate the extra traffic on Ibis Street. Chair Squires questioned if there is an access from Natures Run that comes out onto Andover Blvd. in that area. Mr. Bednarz stated that there is an access from Natures Run ~_) out onto Andover Blvd. in that area. He pointed out the approximate location. Shannon Peterson, 14553 Ibis Street, stated that their house is the one where the deck faces what would be the future road going into the development. She stated that it will affect the property value of their home, since if they were to sell no one would want to buy their house knowing that road would exist. She requested they put the road somewhere else. Carol Jean Christofferson, 1703, 1653 and 1652 Andover Boulevard, explained that they moved out to Andover in 1982. She stated that when Ibis Street was constructed in 1993, the City put in 3 sewer and water hookups on her property. She stated that she was assessed three times the rate for the hookups. She also stated that her backyard grows as a natural area. She stated that the people who live next to her make no effort to be her neighbors, however they view her property as a private park. She stated that the homes being proposed are beautiful; furthermore there are really only two homes that would be impacted by the development. ;:_J Kelly Grunz, 14601 Grouse Street NW, stated that she has two major concerns. She stated that she stays home with her two children and find that they have lots of wildlife in their backyard and would hate to see that go. She mentioned that they do have friends that live on Ibis Street that their kids ride their bikes to, however with all the traffic on Ibis this won't be safe. She also mentioned that the people living in these type of homes will be fast paced and won't be looking for children playing in the area. Regular Andover PlanQ and Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 7 (~) Diana Severson, 14576 Ibis Street, stated that she didn't have the opportunity to sign the petition, however they do live in the neighborhood and feel the traffic would be a nightmare. Dan Stay, 1668 1 46th Avenue NW, stated that they have a very nice lot that butts up to Outlot A. He stated that there is a very nice tree line between the two. He mentioned that he called the City once and was told that the area was a tree preservation area. He questioned what this means. Mr. Bednarz explained that in a tree preservation area there are certain guidelines that would need to be followed so as many trees are preserved as possible. Mr. Stay stated that if the development is approved and the ground is disturbed in removing some trees most of the oak trees in the area will end up dying if they aren't removed. He stated that the trees are beautiful and act as a sound barrier between their homes and Hanson and Andover Blvd. He mentioned that 100% of the people he spoke with were opposed to the project. He stated that if the proposal does go through that as many trees as possible are preserved. He also stated that he would agree with moving the road to exit/enter onto Andover Blvd. (J Darcy Spielmann, 1678 I 46th Avenue NW, stated that they live just north of Outlot A. He stated that he and his wife don't plan of having any children, furthermore they put their house up for sale about a month ago therefore are present to fight for the neighbors. He stated that what is drawn up on paper is pretty and all, however it really doesn't fit the site. Mike Cooper, 1690 1 46th Avenue, stated that his property backs up to Carol's property. He stated that the biggest issue is what will happen to Outlot A. He stated that based on what they are describing for Outlot A, it will likely look like an apartment building. He stated that having the street go out the other end would help. He mentioned that Carol's property is a nice lot and for that reason they bought their property. Doug Severson, 14576 Ibis Street, stated that the individual who stated that once there is congestion on Andover Blvd. the traffic will deter through our neighborhood. He stated that most of the people in the area moved to Andover to live in a country type setting. Now that the limitations are being reached for building the City is turning to multiple housing, which ends up short changing the people who moved out here first. A member from the audience questioned if the development does go through if the developer could put up an 8- foot fence to separate their property from the development. He also mentioned concerns about the drainage issues. Chair Squires stated that the drainage concerns would be addressed down the road as the proposal progresses. "- <.) o Regular Andover Plan~~ and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 8 , '\ ,,~ Mr. Gleason explained that the reason they aren't proposing anything for Outlot A at this time is because they were told that they couldn't because of a moratorium. He stated that what they have in mind is very attractive. He stated that any time there is a public hearing regarding this type of development there are a lot of questions and concerns. He stated that as in any development trees are always removed. He stated that to him it doesn't make sense to put the road out onto Andover Blvd., however we're willing to work with the City if that is what's desired. Chair Squires suggested Mr. Gleason inform the public of the rough plans for Outlot A, since they have a right to know what is planned for the future. Mr. Gleason stated that he would be happy to review the proposal in the future, however stated that he wasn't prepared to present Outlot A tonight. Chair Squires suggested he discuss it with someone from the neighborhood outside the public hearing to answer some of their questions. There was no further public input. Motion by Falk, seconded by Kirchoff, to close the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. '~J Chair Squires questioned if this type of use is proper for this location. Commissioner Daninger questioned if the Commission is looking at approval of 4 units per acre versus 5.6 units per acre. Mr. Bednarz stated that that is correct, if including Outlot A. Commissioner Dalien questioned what the density would be excluding Outlot A. Mr. Bednarz stated that he is unsure at this time. Commissioner Greenwald questioned how many houses could be built on Outlot A. Mr. Bednarz stated that there maybe could be 4 or 5 single-family homes, but the question remains as to the drainage because of the wetlands. Commissioner Hedin questioned what the City was envisioning years ago when it was originally designated as R-3. He questioned if the vision was 4 lots or 4 houses. Mr. Bednarz explained the reason the zoning was originally set up as R-3. Commissioner Hedin questioned if they envisioned 4 lots with a house on every other lot. Commissioner Kirchoff stated that originally there were 4 lots and two of those were developed. Mr. Bednarz stated that that is correct. :'-) Regular Andover Plan~:1 and Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 9 "'I ',-_J Commissioner Kirchoff questioned ifthe R-3 zoning was intended to be temporary to allow the development to catch up. Mr. Bednarz stated that it seems that way. Commissioner Hedin stated that if these 4 original lots were developed there would be a little over an acre per lot. Mr. Bednarz stated that that is correct. Commissioner Hedin questioned which lots back up to Outlot A. Mr. Bednarz stated that the contingent lots are about 1/4 acre in size. Mr. Bednarz stated that there are additional development restraints that may make a single family development difficult to achieve. He mentioned that there isn't 6.25 acres of high ground and there are existing structures. Commissioner Hedin stated that in reality we're getting back to 4 really nice lots with single-family homes. Commissioner Hedin questioned if there is anything in it that money can be made by developing this proposal. Mr. Bednarz explained that a public street would have to be constructed, however in order to do so there needs to be lots on both sides of the street or it wouldn't be economically feasible. \ \..) Commissioner Greenwald questioned if this development would enhance the City of Andover. Mr. Bednarz stated that this is a tough question to answer because there are different opinions about townhouses. He mentioned that because of the price of the homes there shouldn't be any damage to the property values of the neighboring homes and there would be a dramatic increase in the value of the subject properties. Commissioner Greenwald stated that he is in agreement with a lot of the neighbors. He questioned why the City would want to put in 23 homes on this site. Mr. Gleason stated that the reason they are proposing these type of homes is because it doesn't develop out as a single-family development. He stated that eventually something will be developed on the site. Commissioner Greenwald questioned what the vision is for the City. He questioned if the City would be setting a precedent if this proposal were approved. Mr. Bednarz stated that there is no simple answer. He explained that the Comprehensive Plan location criteria for medium density developments states that there needs to be access out of the neighborhood to handle the traffic for the townhomes, therefore there needs to be higher volume streets. He mentioned that Hanson and Andover Blvd. do meet this criteria. '-) / '\ \.._j Regular Andover Plan~~ and Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 10 Commissioner Greenwald questioned if there is a goal to build townhomes in Andover. Chair Squires explained that there are other factors to consider. He explained that the Metropolitan Council has certain requirements the City must follow. He mentioned that it isn't possible for Andover to build strictly single-family homes. Mr. Bednarz stated that within the MUSA lines the City has to have a few medium or high-density homes to meet all the requirements. Chair Squires stated that he's seen lots of changes in Andover the last nine years he's been on the Commission. He stated that he's aware residents have concerns, however development is going to happen no matter what. It's important for residents to understand that even though trees are beautiful they are someone else's property and a property owner does have the right to develop and cut down every tree if so desired. He mentioned that something to consider is that if this proposal doesn't go through, it's possible the site could develop commercially. He encouraged residents to consider multi- family homes ifit isn't possible to develop the area as single-family. , " ;~ Commissioner Greenwald questioned if the proposal would affect the property values of the surrounding homes. Commissioner Dalien stated that he hasn't seen property values go down in the City as a result of a development such as this. He stated that he likes the concept of the proposal, and feels it's rather attractive. He recommended residents review other proposals or developments similar to this in other cities. He mentioned concerns as to why the developer didn't make Outlot A the same type of homes. He also mentioned that it would be interesting to see if the alleyway could go through as a public street out onto Andover Blvd. He stated that he has concerns that if the site isn't developed as multi-family that it could be developed commercially. He stated that the traffic is an ongoing problem; however not developing this site won't solve the problem. Chair Squires questioned if this development or concept were approved and things pursued would it include Outlot A. Chair Squires questioned if the City could rezone Outlot A and wait for it as a separate request. Mr. Bednarz stated that if Outlot A isn't included in the proposal it would have to come back as a separate sketch plan and move through the approval process separately. Chair Squires stated that it appears that Outlot A may not have as many restraints. He stated that it's possible that it could develop as single-family homes and act as a buffer between the existing residential neighborhoods. " : ) '- ./ Commissioner Falk questioned if the alleyway would be wide enough for a safety vehicle. Mr. Bednarz explained that parking wouldn't be allowed in the alleyway, however if a car were parked on the street an emergency vehicle would be able to get through. He mentioned that the alleyway isn't proposed as a dead end therefore emergency vehicles could enter from opposite ends. / -\ \j o 0 Regular Andover Plannmg and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 11 Commissioner Falk stated that his concern is around lots 12 and 13. He stated that it looks as if it would be tight to get couple trucks in that area. He mentioned that he sides with the residents about the traffic, however reminds the residents that the area will develop at some point. He questioned if the association will maintain 145th Lane for snow removal. Mr. Bednarz stated that 145th Lane would be a public street and maintained by the City. Commissioner Greenwald questioned if the alleyway would be a private street. Mr. Bednarz stated that the alleyway would be a private street. Commissioner Greenwald questioned ifit's possible for the City to tell the property owners that they can't park along the alleyway. Mr. Bednarz stated that indeed the City can tell them that no parking is allowed along the alleyway. .~ )' ~- Commissioner Kirchoff stated that the site plan is rather novel. He stated that the site is limited in terms of what can be developed; furthermore many times this type of property ends up being developed as commercial. He stated that the traffic is definitely a problem; however eventually there will be a light at that intersection one day. He mentioned that the amount of cars this development would produce won't have a huge impact on what already exists. He stated that he tends to believe that the R-3 zoning was intended to be temporary. He mentioned that this proposal would be better than apartments, especially since the homes are garage free. W"6ff'\ -th -e S -h'''c C- t ( G-fIY\encl e.q (-~d.. -(j a- ') Commissioner Falk questioned ifthere would be room to put a public street through the development instead of an alleyway. Mr. Bednarz stated that the idea was to clean up the appearance. He stated that it is possible, however it may not be possible with the style of townhouses proposed. Commissioner Daninger stated that the first question is what the transition will be. He stated that he likes the idea of talking about homes instead of the site being developed commercially. He suggested staff talk with the county regarding a stoplight, which may help to accelerate the process. He stated that after these questions are answered he may be more likely to discuss a development with a private alleyway. Mr. Bednarz stated that the intersection has been identified as a need, however there are also many others in the county. Chair Squires stated that if the homes would occupy professional people without kids, he would tend to believe that the trips a parent makes with 2 or 3 kids far exceeds a professional without children. / "- , i .....---j Commissioner Kirchoff questioned where there is a development similar to this around the metro area. Mr. Gleason stated that there is a development very similar to this in Brooklyn Park. : "\ \ ./ Regular Andover Plan~l~ and Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 12 Commissioner Hedin stated that the density is higher than what is in the Comprehensive Plan, therefore we would have amend it. He stated that the property is currently zoned R- 3, which is the highest density in the area; therefore he feels it isn't appropriate. He stated that to him the concept of an alleyway doesn't make a lot of sense, and double front lots are prohibited which means it would have to change if this were approved as a PUD. He mentioned that the proposal is very nice but feels this site isn't appropriate, however the residents will be risking the chance that something commercial could be developed on the site. Commissioner Greenwald stated that he agrees with many of Commissioner Hedin's points, however mentioned he does like the concept of an alleyway. Commissioner Daninger stated that he isn't in favor of any private streets or alleyways. Commissioners Falk, Hedin and Daninger were all opposed to private streets. Chair Squires and Commissioners Greenwald, Dalien, and Kirchoff liked the alleyway concept, but feel it needs to be discussed in greater detail. " '\ ,-,.-J Commissioners Falk, Daninger, and Hedin felt that this type of development is not appropriate for this location. Chair Squires and Commissioners Greenwald, Dalien, and Kirchoff felt that this site is appropriate for this type of development. Chair Squires stated that the Commission is divided and feel that further issues need to be addressed and explored. He stated that the idea of changing the alignment of the road to take it off of Ibis Street is worth researching, furthermore he encouraged the developer to work with the City to see if it's economically feasible to develop Outlot A now with single-family homes. Commissioner Greenwald stated that in his mind Outlot A can't be left as a separate issue. Mr. Bednarz stated that what is preventing the developer from including Outlot A is the moratorium on multi-family housing. Chair Squires explained that that is why he is suggesting single-family homes to buffer the townhomes from existing development. Commissioner Daninger stated that he could agree with single-family homes on Outlot A, since it would act as a transition to the multi-family homes. He also stated that he would like to see the private streets eliminated. Chair Squires questioned if there is anyone on the Commission is opposed to forwarding the discussion to the Council once those issues have been researched. , <-) ( '\ ,,-_.J ) () Regular Andover Plan~~g and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 13 Commissioner Hedin stated that he feels the Council will have a good idea how the Commission feels. He stated that unless the density was decreased and the alleyways were removed he won't support the proposal. He agreed that if there were single-family homes in Outlot A that it may help. Mr. Bednarz stated that in order to do the sketch plan process justice, it's best to forward this on to Council to receive their comments first to find out ifthe proposal is even a possibility. The Commission agreed. Chair Squires encouraged the residents to drive out to Brooklyn Park to view the other development that is similar to the one being proposed. Commissioner Greenwald questioned if the developer comes back with a revised plan would there need to be another public hearing. Mr. Bednarz stated that yes there would need to be another public hearing. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be discussed at the February 5,2002 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL USE PERMIT (02-01) - FOR A WATER TREATMENT FACILITY TO BE LOCATED AT 1813 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD ~_) NW FOR THE CITY OF ANDOVER Mr. Bednarz explained that the Commission is being asked to recommend approval of a special use permit to allow a water treatment facility to be located at 1813 Crosstown Boulevard. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (R-I). Public utility uses including water treatment facilities require a special use permit to be located in any residential district. Bolton and Menk have been selected as the design consultant for the project. They have provided a boundary survey and letter summarizing the project. He stated that due to the fact that the final design of the project hasn't been completed, the Commission is asked to identify criteria to be used in the design of the project to prevent conflicts with surrounding properties and to promote efficient site design. :~) Mr. Bednarz went on to review the items that have been identified by staff as components of review that will be conducted as information becomes available. The first is the relationship with the residential properties to the north and west of the property. Building setbacks, screening and prohibiting the location of loading areas or external traffic generators, such as an above ground fuel tank, on these sides ofthe building. Another issue is the overall design of the project. The design of the building will largely be guided by functionality. It's also important to ensure that the architectural design ofthe structure maintains the campus style look that has been identified for the City Center campus. Finally the efficient design of the project. The water treatment facility will have a relatively small number of operators considering the size of the building. Therefore, the design will incorporate shared parking with the Public Works site and a parking area that - '\ \J o Regular Andover Plan~l~ and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 14 provides a bus drop off for tours and a number of parking stalls based on the number of workers at the site. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Dalien, to open the public hearing at 9:21 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Dalien, seconded by Kirchoff, to close the public hearing at 9:21 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Chair Squires questioned if it's really necessary to get the special use permit in place at this time. He questioned how the Commission is able to judge the affect on the neighboring properties when not all the information is available. Mr. Bednarz stated that the Commission may reserve the right to a recommendation at this time if so desired. He mentioned that the Commission does have two meetings a month; therefore there should be enough time to review the item at a later date when all the information is available. r ') '- ..I Mr. Bednarz mentioned that the Commission may still make comments on the request even though action isn't taken. Commissioner Dalien stated that some of his concerns are whether or not the plant will generate noise, steam, and the impact of the facility on the neighbors. Chair Squires stated that he would also like to see an elevation of the facility to make sure it will fit into what already exists. Commissioner Greenwald questioned the reason they are requesting the permit now. Mr. Bednarz explained that they are requesting the permit early because of the time frame they are under. Commissioner Hedin questioned if this facility would be treating well water. Mr. Bednarz stated that that is correct. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Falk, to table the request of a Special Use Permit (02- 01) for a Water Treatment Facility to be located at 1813 Crosstown Boulevard NW until more information is available. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. OTHER BUSINESS , " " ) ,.J Mr. Bednarz updated the Commission on upcoming planning items. r '\ \J Regular Andover Planf:nf and Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - January 8, 2002 Page 15 Commissioner Hedin commended Mr. Bednarz on doing an excellent job on the annual report. Mr. Bednarz explained that it was a project Mr. Angell completed. Chair Squires reminded the Commissioners to turn in their conflict of interest forms. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Hedin, seconded by Daninger, to adjourn the meeting at 9:36 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Respectfully Submitted, Sara Beck, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Of/Site Secretarial, Inc. "\ '..j / - ') '0__/