The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC July 6, 1999 vvyr'''v''&\. '/dU/"l'ì CITY of ANDOVER , t:::---.. 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER. MINNESOTA 55~ (512) 755-5100 , Regular City Council Meeting - Tuesday, July 6, 1999 agenda Call to Order Resident Forum Bookmark Agenda Approval Name Consent Agenda Approval of Minutes minutes Discussion Items I. Variance/1297-142nd Avenue NW/Dan DeKok Continued dekok 2. Accept Petition/99-271M00re's Estates & Adjacent Areas pet9927 3. Award Bid/Chesterton Commons N. (98-36)/Cambridge Estates 2nd (98-33)/ award bid Chesterton Commons 3rd (98-34) 4. Approve Preliminary Plat/Woodland Meadows Third Addition/Woodland Development Corp.woodland 5. Review Sketch Plan/Sunset Ridge/D.H. Land Company sunset 6. Discuss Grey Oaks Issues greyoaks 7. Select Interview Date for Fiscal Consultant fiscal 8. Discuss Intersection of Bunker Lake Blvd. & Crooked Lake Blvd. intersec Staff, Committe, Commission 9. Reschedule Special City Council Meeting/Zoning Ordinance Task Force/Zoning Ord. Review reschedule 10. Schedule EDA Meeting eda Non-Discussion/Consent Items I I. Temporary Mobil Home Permit Extension mobilhome 12. Approve Waiving Fees/Softball ToumamentlNorth Suburban Mutual Aid softball 13. Approve Plans & Specs/98-22A/Well Pumphouse #7 apr9822a 14. Award Bidl98-27/Fox Hollow bid9827 15. Approve Plans & Specs/94-30C/City Hall Parking Lot Lighting apr9430c 16. Approve Plans & Specs/94-30B/City Hall Parking Lot Reconstruction apr9430b 17. Approve Plans & Specs/98-ll A/Jay Street NW /Landscaping apr9811a 18. Approve Amended SUP/ 1657 161st Avenue NWIPrairie Oak Community Church prairie 19. Approve Meeting Date Change/ASUPIBecks Auto becks 20. Approve Ordinance No. 229B AmendmentlParks parks 21. Approve Comprehensive Plan Submittal Extension compplan 22. Approve Purchase of Public Hearing Notification Signs signs 23. Amend Fee Schedule fee 24. Approve Purchase of Half Section Map Books halfsect 25. Approve Auto Recycling Yard License/Anoka Auto Wrecking/I 775 Bunker Lake Blvd. NW Autoyard 26. Personnel Policy Sec. 12. (a)/Work Hours workhours 27. Approve Final Payment/97-12/Wells #7 & #8/Test Wells fpay9712 28. Approye Garbage Hauler License license 29. Accept Partnership Award for Tri-City GIS gis 30. Approve Quote/Howard R. Green/Water Distribution System Model Update water 31. Update on Lakeview Terrace Traffic Neighborhood Meeting/99-26 updt9926 32. Accept DNR Community Forest Health Grant grant Mayor/Council Input Payment of Claims Adjournment .. . ~ Y\,II.\"I...:V\ ' { .JV l qcz REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 6,1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS AGENDA APPROVAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. I CONSENT AGENDA Temporary mobile home permit extension (7816 Yellowpine Street) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. I Resolution R141-99 approving plans & specslIP98-22A1Well Pumphouse #7 .. . . . . .. I Resolution R142-99 approving plans & specsIIP98-30C/City Pall parking lot lighting. I Resolution R143-99 approving plans & specsIIP94-30B/City Hall parking lot reconstruction ....................................................... I Resolution R144-99 approving plans & specslIP98-1 lA/Jay StreetlLandscaping ..... I Resolution R145-99 approving amended Special Use Pennitll657 161st Avenue/ Prairie Oak Community Church ........................................ 1 Approve meeting date change/Amended Special Use PermitlBeck's Auto. . . .. . . .. .. I Resolution R146-99 approving Comprehensive Plan submittal extension ........... I Approve purchase of public hearing notification signs .......................... 2 Resolution R147-99 amending fee schedule (to include public hearing signs) ........ 2 Approve purchase of half section map books. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 Approve auto recycling yard license/ Anoka Auto Wrecking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 Personnel Policy Section 12(a)/Work hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 Resolution R148-99 approving final payment/IP97-12/Wells #7 and #8/Test wells.. .. 2 Approve garbage hauler license (Corrow Sanitation) ........................... 2 Accept Partnership Award for Tri-City GIS ................................... 2 Approve quotelHoward R. Green/Water Distribution System Model update. .. . . . . .. 2 Update on Lakeview Terrace traffic neighborhood meeting/IP99-26 ............... 2 Accept DNR Community Forest Health Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 Approve kennel licenses (Dover Kennels, Rescue St. Bernards) . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . . .. 2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES .................................................. 2 V ARIANCE/1297 142ND A VENUE NWIDAN DEKOK, CONTINUED .............. 2 Resolution R149-99 denying variance request. . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ... 3 Motion to redirect setbacks on corner lots to Planning Commission and allow temporary structure to remain until the issue is resolved ..................... 4 ACCEPT PETITIONIIP99-27IMOORE'S ESTATES AND ADJACENT AREAS Resolution R150-99 recognizing nonsufficient petition/ordering feasibility. . . . . . . . .. 4 AWARD BID/CHESTERTON COMMONS NORTH (IP98-36)/CAMBRIDGE ESTATES 2ND (IP98-33)1CHESTERTON COMMONS 3RD (IP98-34) ResolutionRl51-99awardingbid .......................................... 5 PRELIMINARY PLAT/WOODLAND MEADOWS 3RD ADDITION Resolution R152-99 approving the preliminary plat ............................ 5 REVIEW SKETCH PLAN/SUNSET RIDGEID.H. LAND COMPANy................ 5 DISCUSS GREY OAKS ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 Resolution R153-99 approving green space variance ........................... 9 SELECT INTERVIEW DATE FOR FISCAL CONSULTANT (August 10) . . .. . . . . . . . .. 9 DISCUSS INTERSECTION OF BUNKER LAKE & CROOKED LAKE BOULEVARDS. 9 RESCHEDULE MEETING/ZONING ORDINANCE TASK FORCE (August 12).. . . . .. 10 SCHEDULE EDA MEETING (July 13) ... ................ ..................... 10 - _0 Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6. 1999 Table of Contents Page ii WAIVE FEES/SOFTBALL TOURNAMENTINORTH SUBURBAN MUTUAL AID Motion to waive fees ................................................... 10 AWARD BIDIIP98-27/FOX HOLLOW and ACCEPT FEASIBILITY REPORT/ORDER PLANS AND SPECS/IP98-29/GREY OAKS Resolution R154-99 awarding bid for IP98-27/Fox Hollow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. II Resolution R155-99 accepting feasibility report and ordering plans & specs/ IP98-29/Grey Oaks ................................................. I I ORDINANCE NO. 229B AMENDMENTIPARKS Motion to approve ..................................................... I 1 MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT Entrance monuments ................................................... I I Council evaluations .................................................... 12 Andover fun Fest ...................................................... 12 APPROVAL OF CLAIMS .................................................. 12 ADJOURNMENT ......................................................... 12 CITY of ANDOVER REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JULY 6,1999 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jack McKelvey, July 6, 1999,7:01 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmembers present: Don Jacobson, Julie Johnson, Mike Knight, Ken Orttel Councilmembers absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins City Engineer, Scott Erickson Community Development Director, Dave Carlberg City Administrator, Richard Fursman Others AGENDA APPROVAL Add Item 33, Approve Kennel Licenses, and Item 34, Accept Feasibility Report/Order Plans and SpecsIIP98-29/Grey Oaks. Remove from Consent Agenda for discussion Item 12, Approve Waiving Fees/Softball TournamentINorth Suburban Mutual Aid; Item 14, Award BidlIP98-27/Fox Hollow; Item 20, Approve Ordinance No. 229B AmendmentlParks; and Item 34, Accept Feasibility Report/Order Plans and SpecsIIP98-29/Grey Oaks. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, the Agenda as amended. CONSENT AGENDA Item II Temporary Mobile Home Permit Extension (I 7816 Yellowpine St) Item 13 Approve Plans and SpecslIP98-22A1Well Pumphouse #7 (Resolution R141- 99) Item 15 Approve Plans and SpecsIIP98-30C/City Hall Parking Lot Lighting (Resolution RI42-99) Item 16 Approve Plans and SpecsIIP94-30B/City Hall Parking Lot Reconstruction (Resolution R143-99) Item I 7 Approve Plans and SpecslIP98-1 lA/Jay Street NWlLandscaping (Resolution R144-99) (The updated prepared Resolution presented by Staft) Item 18 Approve Amended Special Use PermitlI657 I6Ist Avenue NWIPrairie Oak Community Church (Resolution R145-99) Item 19 Approve Meeting Date Change/Amended Special Use PermitlBeck's Auto Item 2 I Approve Comprehensive Plan Submittal Extension (Resolution RI46-99) - . Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 2 (Consent Agenda, Continued) Item 22 Approve Purchase of Public Hearing Notification Signs Item 23 Amended Fee Schedule (to include a fee for Public Hearing Notification Signs) (Resolution R147-99) Item 24 Approve Purchase of Half Section Map Books Item 25 Approve Auto Recycling Yard License/Anoka Auto Wrecking/I 775 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW Item 26 Personnel Policy Section 12 (a)/Work Hours Item 27 Approve Final Payment/IP97-12/Wells #7 and #8/Test Wells (Resolution R 148-99) Item 28 Approve Garbage Hauler License (Corrow Sanitation) Item 29 Accept Partnership A ward for Tri-City GIS Item 30 Approve QuotelHoward R. GreenIWater Distribution System Model Update Item 31 Update on Lakeview Terrace Traffic Neighborhood MeetinglIP99-26 Item 32 Accept DNR Community Forest Health Grant Item 33 Approve Kennel Licenses (Dover Kennels, Rescue St. Bernards) Motion by Knight, Seconded by Johnson, approval of the Consent Agenda. Motion carried unanimously. APPRO V AL OF MINUTES June 8, 1999, Special Meeting: Correct as written. June 15, 1999, Regular Meeting: Correct as written. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, approval of the June 8 Minutes. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, I -Present (Jacobson) vote. Motion by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, approval of the June 15 Minutes. Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I -Present (Johnson) vote. VARIANCE/1297 142ND A VENUE NWIDAN DEKOK, CONTINUED Councilmember Orttel stated in contemplating this request, the Council was elected to do what is right for the residents of the City. Sometimes what is right for the majority isn't right for the individual. On this item, the Planning Commission didn't feel the request was wrong. The request doesn't seem to be wrong, but the ordinance says it is not allowed. The Council is elected to uphold the laws. But in his opinion, there is no victim in this issue, so possibly a review ofthe ordinance by the Planning Commission is in order. He didn't see a hardship in this situation, but possibly there should be a provision in the ordinance regarding the difference between temporary and permanent buildings. - -- ..-,-. - . Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes.. July 6, 1999 Page 3 (Variance/1297 142nd Avenue NW/Dan DeKok, Continued) Mayor McKelvey agreed, feeling this is an unusual situation. The ordinance was written to prevent the blocking of the sight line; however, in this case, the building is behind an existing six-foot fence and will not be seen by anyone. He understands the Planning Commission will be considering a change to require shorter fences on corner lots; however, that will not affect this case because the fence exists. It would be legal for Mr. DeKok to put the building on an 8-foot snowmobile trailer and park it in the back yard. That would be much more unsightly to the neighbors and not something he would like to see done. Councilmember Johnson felt there is no hardship as defined in the ordinance. She has checked on the certificate of survey for the house and pool and the dates. This ordinance was in place before the pool was installed. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Johnson, the Resolution denying the variance request, with a correction on the fourth paragraph, which should read: WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the variance request. (Resolution R I 49- 99) DISCUSSION: Dan DeKok, 1297 142nd Avenue - argued the hardship is due to the size of the lot. The City changed the ordinance on the width of corner lots from 90 to 100 feet because it recognized a 90- foot lot is too small for three-car garages or other uses in the back yard. He has the smallest lot allowable in Andover, which is now required to be larger. There are other lots with the same width, but those have greater lengths. He felt this should be taken into consideration. The Planning Commission felt he met the qualifications for a variance. At the Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner Apel felt the ordinance dido't apply here because the fence already interferes with the sight lines. There were only three other requests for this variance in the past 25 years and none with the same situation as his. One was approved. One was denied because there was another location for the building. In his case, there is no other place to put the shed. He felt the Council should look at the individual cases and ask if this is a legitimate problem. Mr. DeKok stated he probably doesn't meet the requirements of the variance having to do with the topography, but he is doing as much as he can. Attorney Hawkins advised the ordinance is clear that the hardship must be due to the physical characteristics of the land, not having to do with the design of the structure or buildings or size of the lot. Overbuilding on a smaller lot doesn't mean one can argue the lot is too small. Mr. DeKok stated since he has been coming to meetings, he has seen the Council approve variances for decks when the house is built too close to the property line. How do they differentiate between that and his situation? He purchased an existing house. When talking about creating one's own hardship, how is allowing a deck to encroach 7 feet into a 10-foot setback any different than putting a building too close to the lot line? Councilmember Johnson asked where he was planning to store the chemicals when he installed the pool. - -~ -- - .. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6, ] 999 Page 4 (Variance/] 297] 42nd Avenue NW/Dan DeKok, Continued) Mr. DeKok stated when talking to the company that installed the pool and with his neighbors, he was told there would be no problem. He acknowledged, however, that he should have talked with the City first. He was assuming that the ordinance applied to permanent buildings that were on footings or on a slab. This shed can be moved and is not permanent, so he assumed the ordinance did not apply to it. Vote on motion: Motion carries on a 3- Yes, 2-No (McKelvey, Orttel) vote. The Council generally agreed the hardship involving the land did not apply in this situation, yet the request does seem to be reasonable. Because of that, they suggested the ordinance provision be reviewed to consider whether these types of items would be acceptable. If there are acceptable situations, they should be written into the ordinance so the item does not have to come to the Council. Mr. Carlberg stated he will add the item to the July 27 Planning Commission Agenda, and it will then be brought back to the Council some time in August with a recommendation. The Council generally agreed to allow Mr. DeKok to keep the shed until the ordinance issue is resolved. Motion by Orttel, Seconded by Knight, that the Council redirect the issue having to do with setbacks on corner lots to the Planning Commission for formal review, not this specific case, but in general; and that until such time that this is returned back to the Council for final consideration, that the temporary structure on this property would be allowed to remain. Motion carried unanimously. ACCEPT PETITIONIIP99-27IMOORE'S ESTATES AND ADJACENT AREAS The Council noted the petition for municipal sewer and water, storm sewer and streets in Moore's Estates. Several older septic systems in the neighborhood are failing. It was also pointed out that the City has never leap frogged when providing those utilities; and at the moment, those utilities are not available to this area. Also, those with larger lots skew the petition to the negative. Mr. Erickson felt a feasibility study could be done in-house at the cost of Staff's time. Mr. Carlberg stated the area east of the railroad tracks is designated for potential development in the years 2005 to 20 10. The Council felt the development phasing would not be considered if there are failing septic systems; however, they also felt that the costs for extending the utilities to that area should be determined. While it may be premature to run utilities to that area now, both the City and the residents should know the costs and the issues to be addressed. Motion by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that the Council recognize the nonsufficient petition which has been received for the municipal improvements in the area around Crosstown and the railroad tracks, and that we order Staff to prepare an in-house feasibility report on those improvements requested for future reference knowing the trunk is not available at this time for the extension of sewer and water; but that feasibility report will be available for future reference. (Resolution RI 50- 99) Motion carried unanimously. - " ---.-. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 5 AWARD BID/CHESTERTON COMMONS NORTH (IP98-36)/CAMBRIDGE ESTATES 2ND (IP98-33)/CHESTERTON COMMONS 3RD (IP98-34) Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, the Resolution rejecting the bids and order the readvertising as recommended by Staff. (Resolution R151-99) Motion carried unanimously. APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT/WOODLAND MEADOWS THIRD ADDITION/ WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Councilmember Jacobson noted the drainage and utility easement on the south edge of the plat appears to go off to the property to the south. He asked ifthere is an agreement with that property owner for the drainage to go to that property. Byron Westlund, Woodland Development, stated it is a natural drainage area. There is no agreement with the property owner to the south. Their post run-off will be less than what goes to that property now because of the sedimentation ponds before the water is discharged. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Jacobson, the Resolution approving the preliminary plat. (Resolution R152-99) Motion carried unanimously. There was a brief discussion on the ordinance requirement on the length of cul-de-sacs, as it seems as though there are frequent variances to that length. It was pointed out that ifthe road is brought to the property line and stopped, it would not be considered a cul-de-sac, but the road would be even longer. The Council asked that in the future Staff provide more clarification as to why a variance to the length of a cul-de-sac is being requested. REVIEW SKETCH PLAN/SUNSET RIDGE/D.H. LAND COMPANY Steve Johnston, site and engineering design for the project, introduced Kevin Stanton, association living, and Jeff McDonell, landscape design and image. D.H. Land Company has purchased the property, Lot 5, Watt's Garden Acres. They have presented a sketch plan for two-unit townhomes that are allowed in that district with a Special Use Permit. He reviewed the background of the project area, noting that when discussing the deadlines with Staff, they were not aware of the July I deadline for submittal of the preliminary plat. They did submit a preliminary plat before the deadline, but they are willing to hold up with that preliminary plat to work through some of the issues the Council may have with the proposal. They are proposing to construct 17 two-unit townhomes, a total of34 units, with a homeowners' association. The proposed townhomes are 1,400 square feet with an attached two-car garage. Two- and three-bedroom versions will be available. Mr. Johnston provided a handout outlining the main points of his presentation, and then reviewed the reasons for and advantages ofa homeowners' association, the groups of people who generally --, , -- -.-0-- .. -- ----- Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 6 (Review Sketch Plan/Sunset Ridge/D.H Land Company, Continued) live in association based developments, a comparison oftownhome units in other cities compared to those in Andover, why this site is ideally suited to the proposed development, the benefits to the City and how the proposal meets all of the criteria for approving Special Use Permits. He pointed out that having 34 two-unit townhomes in the development is key to making the homeowners' association function financially. Any less than that could mean there would not be funds built up for maintenance, etc. The association is also the first line of defense for the property owners as opposed to coming to the City first. Young professionals, empty nesters and senior citizens are more likely to want this type of housing, which generally means fewer children in the school system and fewer trips per day than if this were developed as single family residential. The proposal is also vel)' suitable for the location because townhome residents better tolerate high traffic volume and commercial districts. Those users tend to be more focused on the interior and well designed passive outdoor spaces, noting the extensive landscaping that will be done along the perimeter and within the development itself. Each townhome is estimated to sell for $200,000 to $230,000 assuming a finished basement. It will provide an increased tax base as opposed to single family homes. Mr. Johnston also showed a cross section of the landscaping from Commercial Boulevard to the end of the development and suggested MNDot landscaping be used along Commercial Boulevard, which encourages traffic to slow down. There will be a 50-foot separation between the units, with fewer buildings on the site than if it were single family residential. Councilmember Jacobson felt there are two issues, the sketch plan itself and the issue of the submittal of the plat by the deadline. Mr. Carlberg stated the deadline for submitting preliminary plats for development in the year 2000 was July I. The developer did bring in a preliminary plat on this parcel before the deadline, but Staff did not feel comfortable accepting it because the sketch plan had not been officially completed. He could not recall whether or not Staff had discussed the July I submittal date with the developer. Attorney Hawkins advised that unless there is something in the policy that says the sketch plan must be approved before submitting the preliminary plat, the developer did meet the letter of the policy and submitted the preliminary plat prior to the July I deadline as required. Councilmember Jacobson stated the sketch plan phase is merely to get an opinion from the Planning Commission and City Council of what would be acceptable. Technically the developer can submit a preliminary plat for any type of development; however, that doesn't mean it will be approved. Councilmember Orttel felt the policy may need to be reviewed regarding at what point a preliminary plat will be accepted. Councilmember Jacobson asked what is different in the sketch plan from the April 6 meeting. Mr. Johnston stated nothing, except they have provided additional information so the Council can visualize the project better. To reduce the density makes the association position weaker, reduces income to the association and reduces the amount that can be put into design and landscaping. It also is not practical to have townhomes on one side of the road and single family homes on the other side to abut the existing single family homes. The association would have no control over what happens on the other side of the street. -...-. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 7 (Review Sketch Plan/Sunset Ridge/D.H Land Company, Continued) Council member Jacobson stated nothing has changed, and he has heard nothing to change his opinion of the proposal. He didn't know if there was enough support on the Council to approve the Special Use Permit needed for this proposal. Councilmember Knight still didn't think this type of development is what Andover wants. The location is within five minutes of many similar developments. Association or not, once it is in, the developer is no longer in control; and the association is only as good as the people in it. After writing his article in the Andover Today, he received many calls from residents stating they are not in favor of multiple housing. Councilmember Orttel felt this is a good proposal for buffering the commercial area; however, his greatest concern is the repercussions of allowing this density in the R-4 zone. Once it is allowed, he felt the City would be inundated with similar requests for high density without having to rezone; and there will be nothing the Council can do to stop it. They are coming in with nice buildings, but the next developer may not. Also, Andover is different from other communities. One of the main reasons for not wanting higher density development is because there is no public transportation available. It will also affect the schools and City services, and Andover cannot afford this type of dense development. If it was senior developments, he would have no problem with it. Councilmember Johnson was concerned with the impact high density housing will have on the schools. There is no guarantee that the families moving into these multiples will not have children, especially units with two or three bedrooms. She also had a problem with townhomes in general. Councilmember Knight was also concerned with the effect of multiple housing on the schools. Mr. Johnston agreed there is no guarantee, but it would be less of an impact on the schools than if developed as single family homes. He thought the Council may want to adjust the ordinance. By design of the project, they cannot get this any more dense. It is at the low end of the density for any kind of attached housing. There will be a lot of traffic on Jay Street, but he did not think it would be any more than if this was single family development. Mayor McKelvey stated the association documents do not prevent someone from moving out after a year and renting their unit to someone else. Mr. Johnston stated nothing legally prevents someone from renting a unit after living there for 12 months. But with a sales price of$200,000+, the quality of renter having to pay $2,000 per month rent is high; and the regulations of the association must still be upheld. He didn't think that would be a concern. The Council continued to discuss the merits and concerns of the project and high density housing in general. Councilmember Orttel noted multiple family housing is an acceptable type of living today, and he felt this would be a good location for it; however, Andover's residents are generally uncomfortable with high density housing. It becomes an issue of safety and general quality of life. Again, his concern is not having control over rampant development of high density developments once it is approved. The Council needs to know what can be done to protect the City. He noted there are 17 doubles and one single home proposed; whereas there would be 35 homes if developed as single family. - ." ...-,-. -- Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 8 (Review Sketch Plan/Sunset Ridge/D.H Land Company, Continued) Mr. McDonell stated the definition of urban sprawl is developing more land with less density. If the residents are saying they do not want urban sprawl, they are asking for higher density on less land. There is an appropriate place for this type of development. This is very low density for an association and a concern is that there be enough financing to sustain it. At the value of these units, it is likely the people will be a lot more active in the association. Also, there is probably no other residential development that would have the aesthetics that this development will have. The idea of double fronting a single family unit on a busy commercial road is another planning issue. The idea of high density townhome associations came about as a level of buffer from freeways to move single family homes away from the dangerous and heavily used areas. This development will increase the aesthetics of the entire area with greater landscaping and a greater separation between buildings. With the maintenance of the landscaping being contracted out and the idea of MNDot plantings along Commercial Boulevard, it becomes a very low maintenance buffer. With all of the plantings, it will be very difficult to tell this is higher density. The fear of opening the flood gates for high density is something that needs to be addressed; however, this development on this site with this landscaping will be the best, most aesthetic this property will see. Attorney Hawkins advised the Council they may want to look at changing the ordinance regarding the special uses in the R-4 district so this doesn't result in a flood of requests. After further discussion and with no apparent consensus on the proposal, the Council noted each one of them has some concerns. It was suggested that the developers talk to each Councilmember individually. They also felt the language in the ordinance should be reviewed as well as the language in the development policy regarding the submittal of preliminary plats. DISCUSS GREY OAKS ISSUES Jerry Windschitl, Chesterton Partnership, asked what was the intent in the Resolution regarding the age restriction. With a 30-unit building, the federal and state guidelines require 24 units that would have age restrictions and 6 units that would not. Calculating Grey Oaks with 3 10 total units, 20 percent or 62 units would not be age restricted. His research has indicated that the buildings be segregated. Then there would be two 30-unit buildings in the age restricted category and one 30-unit building that would not be restricted. He is also looking to the Council regarding the 38 townhomes and two single family homes. Would the 80-20 percent apply to them as well? In other developments of single family and townhomes, there have been no restrictions. Mr. Windschiti stated the other issue is the Resolution does not specifically cover the 20- foot green space requirement on the commercial area. This variance has been granted many times in the City. The proposal did not comply to the 20-foot green space, encroaching one foot on the west end to about five feet on the east end for about 300 feet to allow for adequate parking in the commercial area. The parking issue has been compounded with the change in the road in the motion. They have been able to move the bulk of the road north but cannot move it any more because of the DNR wetlands. There may also be a section along Hanson Boulevard that does not meet the 20-foot green space requirement. - . ~ , - -..... ,- -- - -- - Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 9 (Discuss Grey Oaks Issues, Continued) Mr. Carlberg stated Mr. Windschitl was proposing a variance to the green space at the time of the preliminary plat, and Staff was recommending that green space be maintained. With the change of the two driveways, some parking spaces were lost. The plat still complies with the ordinance. The direction of the Council at the time of the preliminary plat was to maintain the 20-foot green space area. Mr. WindschitI explained he would lose 15 to 17 parking spaces without the variance. His professionals have allowed a lot of parking because parking is generally deficient at convenience stores. It was a judgement to add parking stalls. This is a larger store than most convenience stores. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to approve the green space variance from one foot to a maximum of five feet on the other end to allow for additional parking spaces along 155th Lane. (Resolution R153-99) Motion carried unanimously. The Council and Attorney all agreed the intent has always been the entire 60-acre project would be a senior/empty nester development. They felt the 80-20 percent rule should apply to the entire development; however, the split of those units can be done any way Mr. Windschitl wishes. SELECT INTERVIEW DATE FOR FISCAL CONSULTANT The Council agreed to interview fiscal consultants on Tuesday, August 10, 1999, 7 p.m. at the City Hall. DISCUSS INTERSECTION OF BUNKER LAKE BOULEVARD AND CROOKED LAKE BOULEVARD Mr. Erickson stated a traffic signal at the intersection of Bunker Lake and Crooked Lake Boulevards has been discussed many times with the county and with the neighborhood residents. The county will not install a traffic signal because the intersection does not meet warrants, though the conduit is being put in with the Bunker Lake Boulevard project so lights can be added when the warrants can be met. If the City wishes to have a traffic signal installed now, it would have to pay the entire cost, estimated to be $150,000, and would have to assume the yearly maintenance costs. If the City puts in the signal now and warrants are met at some future date, the county would not reimburse the City. Also, there may be a question ofliability for installing an unwarranted traffic control device. The Council recognized that is a dangerous intersection and felt the amount of traffic will not change significantly because the area along Crooked Lake Boulevard is totally developed. A suggestion was to use the money to construct a service road between Crooked Lake Boulevard and Heather, which would be the permanent solution. Mr. Erickson stated the neighborhood has discussed the possibility of closing off Gladiola to Bunker Lake Boulevard pennanently. A petition is being circulated in the neighborhood to see ifthere is any interest in doing that. ... - - ..- ~ Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 10 (Discuss Intersection of Bunker Lake and Crooked Lake Boulevards, Continued) Charlie Veiman lives on that corner and sees the volume of traffic. He stated it is essential that there be a traffic signal at that intersection. Getting onto that street will be even worse once Bunker Lake Boulevard is upgraded to four lanes, particularly next year when Main Street will be closed for reconstruction. The Council directed Staff to ask the county to install a temporary traffic control at that intersection at least through next year while Main Street is being upgraded. They also asked for an estimated cost to construct a service road along the south side of Bunker Lake Boulevard between Crooked Lake Boulevard and Heather. RESCHEDULE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING/ZONING ORDINANCE TASK FORCE/ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW The Council agreed to reschedule the meeting for Thursday, August 12, 1999,7:00 p.m. at the Andover City Hall. SCHEDULE EDA MEETING The Council agreed to schedule an Economic Development Authority meeting for Tuesday, July 13, 1999, 7 p.m., to review issues relating to the Andover Station development with the developer. If the developer is unable to attend, the Council agreed to hold a special meeting to discuss planning issues. APPROVE WAIVING FEES/SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT/NORTH SUBURBAN MUTUAL AID Councilmember Jacobson pointed out the written statement indicates the Andover Lions will serve nonintoxicating beer, but he didn't see that application. Mayor McKelvey stated the Andover Lions have been approached but have not yet held a meeting to discuss the request. If they agree to the request, they will make the application. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, Item 12 as presented (to waive the tournament fees for North Suburban Mutual Aid tournament on August 2 I, 1999). Motion carried unanimously. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 11 A WARD BIDIIP98-27/FOX HOLLOW and ACCEPT FEASIBILITY REPORT/ORDER PLANS AND SPECSIIP98-29/GREY OAKS Councilmember Jacobson stated the feasibility report for Grey Oaks talks about a raw watermain extension for a well that will be placed in Grey Oaks down to a water treatment plant near the City Hall complex for an estimated cost of $37,000. He felt that is agreeable as long as everyone understands a water treatment plant has not yet been approved. The raw watermain is also included in the Fox Hollow bid as an alternate, but that is not being included. Mr. Erickson explained the water would go into the normal main line. They are recommending the alternate bid for Fox Hollow. He understands this is premature but it is more cost effective to put it in now. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to approve Items 14 and 34 as appeared on the Non- Discussion Consent Agenda (Resolution R154-99 awarding bid for lP98-27/Fox Hollow and Resolution R155-99 accepting feasibility report and ordering plans and specsIIP98-29/Grey Oaks) Motion carried unanimously. APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 229B AMENDMENT/PARKS Councilmember Jacobson noted the bottom paragraph on Page I should include language that allows City vehicles to travel within the parks when necessary. Discussion was also on the last paragraph of Page 2 relating to persons being charged with a misdemeanor for interfering with a Park and Recreation Commissioners or their appointed representatives in the perfonnance of their duty. The Council questioned the meaning of the paragraph and why it is in the ordinance. Dave O'Toole, Park and Recreation Commissioner, stated that paragraph has been in the ordinance for some time but is now being moved to Section 4, Penalty. He did not know the background relating to the provision. Attorney Hawkins advised there are other statutes to cover this such as assault or disorderly conduct. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, approval of Item 20 on Non-Discussion, with the following two changes: Last paragraph, bottom of Page I, include verbiage to allow City vehicles to get into the parks to work; and on Page 2, last paragraph starting with "Any person, finn or corporation...", delete the paragraph. Motion carried unanimously. MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT Entrance monuments - Mr. Carlberg stated Staffhas been focusing on the billboard sign on Hanson Boulevard and Crosstown, which will be under construction the next three to four weeks. They will then be working on entrance signs. He expected to bring a concept to the Council shortly. - .. -- -.-.-. ." -- - ---~ -- ' Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 12 (Mayor/Council Input, Continued) Council evaluations - Councilmember Jacobson clarified at the last meeting he did not mean that each Councilmember would be evaluated individually. He was talking about evaluating how the Council works with Staff, how they schedule their time, improvements that could be made and other items in terms of rules, regulations and procedures. Andover Fun Fest - Mr. Fursman invited everyone to the Andover Fun Fest being held this coming weekend. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Johnson, payment of Claims as presented by Staff. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Jacobson, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, '^ ~2X;:J M~lla A. Peach Recording Secretary -. ..- ~ - -- - -. - - - ---