HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP May 19, 1980
~ 01 ANDOVER
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
MAY 19, 1980
MINUTES
A Special Joint Meeting of the Andover City Council and the Andover Planning and
Zoning Commission was called to order by Acting Mayor Kenneth Ortte1 on May 19, 1980,
7:35 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, for the purpose
of discussing the City's Comprehensive Development Plan.
Councilmen present: Lachinski, Peach
Mayor Windschit1 (arrived at 8:30 p.m.)
Councilman absent: Jacobson
P & Z Commissioners present: Chairman Bose11, Ape1, Anstett, Kishe1, Lobb
A 1 so present: City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist
The Council and Planning Commission discussed various changes to the proposed Development
Framework Comprehensive Plan, recommending the following changes be made:
Discussion was on making a determiniation of the percentage of land remaining in the
City that can potentially be developed; that this can also be graphically shown with
a series of overlay maps showing agricultural, wetlands, floodplains, and peatland
areas in the City (a soils limitation map is shown on Page 31 of the Inventory Update),
and areas that have already been or are in the process of being developed; that the
overall plan should be justifying the City's position of allowing 2~-acre lot develop-
ment in the rural area. It was also suggested that ordinances be written to prohibit
development in the wetland areas.
Page 106, Community Facilities Issues map: Delete "in 1981" in notation on CAB
interceptor. Also correct CAB sanitary sewer service area as per Council motion to
be shown for that area one 40 west of Round Lake Boulevard. Also correct the SAC
charge limit boundary to be verified by the Clerk.
Page 43: Discussion was that this should be reworded to justify the City's position
for 2~-acre lots within the rural area; that it is written assuming the rural area
will eventually be sewered and the City is assuming and planning that there will not
be sewer in the rural area; that the City allows 2.5 acres in developable areas
because such a large portion of the City is not developable, which means that the average
lot size still comes out to be a very high average per house; that the City doesn't want
the 2.5 acre lot sizes to be an issue, as it considers the lot sizes an uncontested
matter; that the gross lot size density in the rural area is actually 3.3 acres per
homesite. It was agreed that this page should be rewritten in its entirety, putting
in why the City feels 2.5 acres is adequate, having a paragraph show that when un-
developable areas -- park1ands, open spaces, streets setbacks, thoroughfares, etc. --
are eliminated, the lot size equates to approximately 7 acres (make a determiniation
of accurate gross density of lot sizes in the rural area); that a 2.5 minimum acre lot
size would create a gross density of 111- acres.
Page 46: Last paragraph, delete "while sandy soils make the installation of septic
systems difficult." Suggested the first portion of that paragraph be moved to "Lot
Size Issues" on page 43, as that is the reason for the 2.5-acre building sites.
After ". ..peat soil s and wet 1 ands pose the most severe deve 10pment 1 imitat ions."
add: "Therefore, these areas will be protected from development and would tend to
increase the average lot size in the City On a gross basis." Change second sentence
to: "Wetlands, other soil, slope, and water restrictive conditions are common, in-
dicating a total of 50 percent (determine correct percentage) of the land is un-
developable." It was also agreed that the wording in this paragraph should relate to
the fact that these areas of the City will be protected and not developed. Therefore,
if the City were developed in its entirety to 2.5-acre lot size, these areas having
been excluded within the City, actually develop to a five-acre density, and with
-
Special City Council/Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
May 19, 1980 - Minutes
Page 2
parks, streets, etc., each lot size would be closer to 6 or 7 acres. Show that the gross
average lot size is more than 2.5 acres. Last paragraph, last sentence, change to
read: "A benefit of the undevelopable land is that they will play an important
role in maintaining the City's rural, open space character."
Page 38, Environmental Protection Overlay map: Include all three overlay maps as
presented as an update by the Planner. It was later suggested that transparent
overlays be provided, with colored sections of the various factors, and that a
transparency overlay of p1attedc: areas sbou1d be updated, including preliminary
plats that are in process.
Page 70: Change title to: AGRICULTURAL/VACANT/ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTED LANDS.
Discussion was On whether the figures indicated in the last two paragraphs are in
conflict with what is stated on page 43; questioned the accuracy of 18,862 acres of
agricu1turaVvacant areas in the City; that the paragraph should make reference to the
overlays; that this section should be corrected to adequately reflect the corrected
graph on page 65 and the update to be done on page 43.
Page 45: First paragraph: delete entirely. Last paragraph, last sentence, correct to
read: "The decision to preserve the agricultural and commercial farming economy will
have an impact upon community growth patterns."
Page 48: Last paragraph, change sentence in middle to read: "Fees collected in the
non-sewered rural service area are held in escrow until SAC boundaries are corrected.
The 1979 SAC charge is $425..." Delete last sentence, "It is up to the City to
determi ne.. .d i rect the community's deve 10pment."
(Mayor Windschit1 arrived at this time)
Page 49: Delete sentence "It would appear that this scheme.. .even within the scope of
this plan."
Page 51: Objective 3, should read: "Retain Andover's general rural/open space
character in the rural service district."
Page 59: Industrial, 1, Change to read: "Industrial development shall be confined to
the industrial area; and if additional industrial development takes place, it should
be within the sewered area of the City."
Page 64, Staged Provision of Urban Service map: To be corrected to reflect accurate
study area for CAB interceptor service and the accurate SAC charge limit boundary.
Also questioned the study area for CAB interceptor service north of the urban service
area.
Page 62, Existing Land Use map: Needs to be updated to show all plats, plus areas
shaded should include the entire platted area, squaring up the plats, including pre-
liminary plats that are in the process. The proposed Hanson Boulevard extension should
also be shown.
Page 63: This will be updated when the rezoning of the urban service area is finalized.
The rezoning changes in the southwest portion of the City should be shown. The maps
should also reflect "Special Use Permit issued for mobile home park per Supreme Court
ruling" on that affected property southwest of Round Lake.
Page 65: The percentages of each of the categories appear to be in error. It was
directed that the Planner verify the accuracy and correct the percentages..
Page 66: Second paragraph, last sentence, change to read: "The size of the individual
lots will vary due to the existence of some small lots that were developed prior to the
adoption of the zoning ordinance." Last paragraph, fourth line, change "3.4 units" to
"2.5 units." Last paragraph, eighth line, delete "in 1981". Also delete last sentence
in paragraph: "In addition to the PUD suggested...site of the present landfill."
Special City Council/Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
May 19. 1980 - Minutes
Page 3
Page 68: Will need to be updated for the rezonings that the City makes in the near
future.
Pages 72, 73, 74, and 75, Existing zoning district and proposed zoning districts:
"AG" District: It was agreed that the district should be created by the City,
but to have property owners apply for the zoning.
"R-2" Single Family Estate: Is no longer allowed by the City, but there are
existing R-2 districts. Suggested rewording to: "This district was intended to
provide for suitaó1e areas of a residential atmosphere in a single family neigh-
borhood of large suburban density. Minimum lot size was one acre. This use is
no longer allowed for new development." (page 73)
"R-7" Manufactured Housing District: end of paragraph, add: (This was formerly
the R-5 District). (page 74)
"R-4" Single and Two-Family Suburban: Discussion was on whether or not double
family residential uses should be deleted from this district and allowed only
in R-5 districts in which the developer would need to apply for a rezoning, or
whether double family residential uses should remain in the R-4 definition and
be allowed by Special Use Permit only. It was agreed to leave double family
residential uses in the R-4 zone, that conditioBS should be set forth for
granting Special Use Permits for doubles, and that Ms. Bose11 confer with Dave
Licht to see if criteria can be set up that would be protective of existing
residents. If not, a separate district should be set up for doubles.
"GR" General Recreation, which is an existing zoning district, should also
remain as a proposed zoning district. (page 72)
Proposed Zoning District "B-3", Highway Business, be changed to "Thoroughfare
Business District ". (pages 72 and 74)
OVERLAY DISTRICTS, also include "**Peat1ands" (page 72 and add definition on
page 75)
*P1anned Unit Development: should be split between Residential PUD and
Commercial PUD (page 72) and both definitions be included (page 75).
Page 86, Transportation Issues map: Graphics of the extension of Hanson Boulevard
should be corrected to go straight north from County Road 20 as was agreed to by the
City. Discussion was also on planning an east-west road through the City,
particularly in the area west of Round Lake Boulevard and north of County Road 20. It
was suggested a conceptual east-west route be marked on page 86 from Hanson Boulevard
westward in the general area of 167th to 165th. It was also suggested a statement
be made to the effect that the City recognizes the need for and is searching for a
location for building a major east-west thoroughfare west of County Road 9 to provide
adequate fire and police protection.
Page 89, No. 10: Reword to "The City shall work with the County in the planning of
additional transportation links crossing the Rum River."
Page 98: First paragraph under STREET CONDITION/MAINTENANCE: Ray Sowada is to obtain
the accurate figure for the number of miles of sand and gravel streets in the City.
Page 106, Community Facilities Issues map: Correct SAC charge limit boundaries.
Also correct CAB interceptor boundary.
Page 125, Existing Parks map and Page 126, Park System Master Plan map: Update to
include recent parks accepted by the City. A more recent map should also be used
which would indicate all streets in recently accepted plats as well.
Special City Council/Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
May 19, 1980 - Minutes
Page 4
Page 133, Planning Districts map:: Needs to be changed to reflect the accurate
seweredarea with the proposed change of the MUSA line by the City after that change
is formally adopted.
Pages 134 through 146, Planning Districts: All districts should show shaded areas
on the maps to indicate platted areas or define boundaries of platted areas, including
those preliminary plats that are pending before the City. Each district should also
reflect the percentage of developable land remaining.
DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED RAMSEY ICE ARENA
Mayor Windschitl explained that the City of Ramsey has asked for and received $4,000
from the County for preparation of a grant application for an ice arena to be built
On parkland dedicated to the County within the City of Ramsey. There are several
Andover residents on their committee and the name "City of Andover" has appeared
in some of their documents as using the arena, assuming the Rum River Crossing is
constructed. In the past, Andover has denied Ramsey's request to serve. on the
committee. The problem that arises is that the County's original plan called for the
next ice arena to be constructed at Bunker Hills Park. The Council needs to decide
whether to support Ramsey's proposal, oppose Ramsey's proposal, or whether to apply
for simi1iar funds from the County and work a joint effort with Coon Rapids, Ham
Lake, and Blaine, all of which border Bunker Hills Park, to obtain a similiar grant
for an ice arena at Bunker Hills.
After further discussion, it was generally agreed by the Council that an ice arena
at Bunker Hills Park would be preferable and agreed to have the Mayor contact the
Mayors of Ham Lake, Blaine, and Coon Rapids to find out their feeling on such a joint
proj ect.
MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, to adÖourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 10:16 p.m.
Respectfully SUb~~
~~ CA . tccu~
Mar 11a A. Peach
Recor °ng Secretary
---- -,