HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 23, 2024
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING – JULY 23, 2024
The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
called to order by Chairperson Godfrey on July 23, 2024, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City
Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
Commissioners present: Chairperson Karen Godfrey, Commissioners Scott Hudson,
Nick Loehlein, Chuck Naughton, Jon Shafto, Pat Shuman
Jr., and Ryan Winge.
Commissioners absent: None
Also present: Community Development Director Joe Janish, City Planner
Peter Hellegers, Planning Intern Abigail Turner
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
June 11, 2024, Regular Meeting
City Planner Hellegers noted on page 2 line 19 it should read: “Mr. Janish . . . “.
Motion by Loehlein, seconded by Shuman, to approve the minutes of the June 11, 2024,
Regular Meeting as presented. Motion carried on a 5-ayes, 0-nays, 2-present (Shafto and
Winge), 0-absent vote.
PUBLIC HEARING: Sketch Plan Review – Unaddressed Property 16xxx Ward Lake
Drive NW; PID#11-32-24-41-0003 – SW Wold Construction, Inc. (Applicant)
City Planner Hellegers stated that the Planning Commission is asked to review a sketch
plan for a single-family PUD residential development by SW Wold Construction Inc. The
staff report for the proposed Sketch Plan was provided for Commission consideration.
The City received an application for a sketch plan showing a 21-lot single-family rural
residential on the site. The site is in the northeast quadrant of the community,
st
approximately three quarters of a mile north of the intersection of 161 Avenue NW and
Crosstown Boulevard NW. The site is bordered by the railroad tracks on the west side of
the site and Ward Lake Drive on the east side of the property. The Country Oaks North
residential development is just west of the railroad tracks and the homes from that mixed
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – July 23, 2024
Page 2
urban/rural residential development back up to the development site. The site also abuts
the Deerwood Estates rural residential development along the southerly side of the
proposed development site.
Mr. Hellegers reviewed conformance with local and regional plans and ordinances. The
entire 33.7-acre site (11-32-24-41-0003) is located outside of the Metropolitan Urban
Service Area (MUSA) boundary. The property is guided in the 2018 Comprehensive Plan
as Rural Residential, a designation that calls for densities of 0.0 to 0.4 units per acre. The
proposed 21-lot development would exceed that standard with a density of 0.6 units per
acre. The proposed development includes deviations from City Codes that are proposed to
be addressed through the PUD process.
The site would have two access points; one at the south end of the development on
Sycamore Street, and the other at the northeastern portion of the development accessing
Ward Lake Drive. The proposed access points were identified on a map. Future
development to the north (not proposed) would provide another possible connection point
which also was shown on a map.
The subject property is zoned R-1 Single Family Rural and there is not a request to change
the zoning of the property. City Code requirements for the R-1 zoning district include a
minimum lot size of 2.5 acres and minimum lot width of 300 feet measured at the front
yard setback line. The applicant is proposing to have a range of lot sizes, some of which
would deviate from the R-1 standards with both lot size, lot width and depth. Comparable
single-family lot widths for these reduced size rural lots can be found at the north end of
the Country Oaks North development, located just west of the railroad tracks.
Each of the lots will be served by private well and septic systems. The sketch shows septic
drain field locations for each lot. The City Code requires two drain field locations with a
combined area totaling 5,000 square feet per lot.
There are a significant number of trees at the southeasterly portion of the site that the
developer is proposing to preserve as a wooded buffer between the development and the
existing residences to the south. As part of the PUD process, the applicant is required to
submit a tree protection plan showing trees to be preserved. This will be required during
the preliminary plat process.
The 2013 National Wetlands Inventory (NWI 2013) does not indicate wetlands on the
property. However, a wetland delineation will be required if the applicant continues to
move forward.
The developer is responsible to obtain all necessary permits (Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Lower Rum River Watershed
Management Organization, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and any other agency
that may have an interest in the site). Initial contact shall be made with the City
Engineering Department regarding this item.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – July 23, 2024
Page 3
Once the overall layout of the sketch has been agreed upon and direction provided, the
applicant will prepare a grading plan, hydrology calculations and a soils report that will be
reviewed by the City, an engineering consultant, and the Lower Rum River Watershed
Management Organization. The LRRWMO will need to review the preliminary plat and
the applicant will need to address any items.
The Andover Review Committee (ARC) conducted an initial review of the sketch plan
and has submitted their comments to the applicant. Staff suggests the comments be
reviewed as part of the sketch plan process.
The current Master Park Plan does not identify parkland in this area. The applicant is
requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) as part of this development and flexibility
in the bulk area standards including size, dimension, and density. The proposed conceptual
PUD standards were reviewed.
Mr. Hellegers reviewed the City Code standards for PUD Review that the proposed
development would need to be addressed at the Preliminary Plat/PUD review stage. This
sketch plan requires a Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit
Development and Final Plat.
The sketch plan will be forwarded to the City Council for their feedback on August 7,
2024. Based on the feedback received throughout the sketch plan process, the developer
would modify the layout and make applications for Preliminary Plat, PUD and Final Plan
and submittals to seek their desired outcome.
The Planning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing this evening, take public
feedback on the proposed Sketch Plan/Concept PUD, and informally advise the applicant
through feedback on the proposed project. Attached for Planning Commission
consideration were the Location Map, City Staff Comments dated July 15, 2024, Public
Comments Received (None), Sketch PUD Narrative and Sketch Plan/PUD Concept Plan.
The City Council is expected to review this sketch plan at their scheduled meeting on
Wednesday, August 7, 2024.
Commissioner Shafto referred to the list of staff comments sent back to the applicant and
asked if the sketch plan was before or after receiving the comments. Mr. Hellegers stated
the sketch plan being reviewed is the one that the comments were based on.
Chair Godfrey opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
th
Mr. Dean Marquette, 727 170 Lane, presented a signed petition from the residents. They
are opposed to the PUD as presented with four points of concern. The concerns are zoning
and compliance, pedestrian and biking safety, road speed limit, road maintenance on Ward
Lake Drive, assessments, future development, lot sizes, adherence to the comprehensive
plan, overgrowth in rural areas, traffic impact, increased traffic, access to development,
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – July 23, 2024
Page 4
2½ acre lot minimum. There are 17 signatures on the petition representing 13-14
residences.
Mr. Christopher Wik, 16683 Sycamore Street NW, stated he signed the petition. His
entrance onto Sycamore is very private and quiet. He does not see a reason for a through
street as there is an entrance from Ward Lake Drive. He suggested creating an entrance
from Ward Lake and having 2 cul-de-sacs. He has three small children. He wants lots to
be 2 ½ acres. His other concern is there is an easement on his property. If the City is not
going to use that they should relinquish that in the future.
rd
Ms. Rhonda Ganske, 2159 153 Lane NW, stated if this is going to remain R-1 zoned
property these are large deviations from the City Code. Much smaller deviations have
been requested by private citizens and have not been granted. It is not fair they would be
approved for a developer. She does not see it necessary for the properties to blend with the
existing properties.
Mr. Jeff Sims, 16526 Sycamore Street NW, stated the purpose of the 2½ acre lots was to
support the septic systems. He wants to have the City research this.
Mr. Josh Delich, 17265 Ward Lake Drive, stated he was astonished when he heard what
was going on. He recently built a home in Andover. They followed all the requirements of
the City. They seem to be going backwards as to what previous residents were asked to
do. He asked what the future is of the dirt road. There are safety concerns. He has reported
speeds on the road to the Police Department. This will increase the flow and the amount of
traffic in the area. He wants to see 2½ acre lots. Decisions are being made based on
economics rather than the safety of residents.
Ms. Erica Dahlin, 16825 Ward Lake Drive, stated she has lived there for over 30 years.
She agrees with everything that has been said. She does not see any green space, or a park
identified on the PUD. No drainage ponds either.
Ms. Laurel Schedin, 16642 Ward Lake Drive, stated she has lived in Andover for 40
years. She understands change is going to happen. She appreciates them leaving the trees.
She thinks it could be worse. She asked about the right-of-way to the south of this
th
development and the 167 Avenue easement.
Mr. Luke Sims, 16526 Sycamore Street NW, stated he has lived in Andover his whole life.
The concerns that parents have for their children, the children feel the same way. He has
never had to worry about safety concerns in his neighborhood. It would be sad to see the
neighborhood compromised with the development.
Ms. Kari Hefnider, 17011 Ward Lake Drive, stated they have lived there for 18 years.
They moved to Andover for the rural aspect. A precedent is being set which will be
detrimental to the area.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – July 23, 2024
Page 5
st
Mr. Craig Wensmann, Bogart, Pederson & Associates, 13076 1 Street in Becker,
representing the developer, stated he took notes during the resident comments. They
looked at Mr. Wold’s request for developing the land and at the zoning map. He shared a
zoning map of the entire area and explained that they look at how the development will
affect the community. They focused on the rural residential areas and analyzed the
remaining undeveloped acreage. They looked at growth potential looking forward, noting
there is limited space available for the future. They wanted to be good stewards of the
remaining land and to minimize the impact to the adjacent landowners. He stated they
wanted to limit traffic on Ward Lake Drive, move houses as far away from the neighbors
as possible and to preserve the trees. With the general zoning, if working within the rules,
he noted they cannot control how these lots are built on. On a PUD, the City and
developer can determine where the growth occurs to preserve the natural elements. The
concept provided is slightly outdated. He stated the cul-de-sac was reduced in length and
driveways were eliminated on Ward Lake Drive. Storm water ponds were placed to
restrict homes to be too close to the neighbors.
Mr. Wensmann explained the second design they came up with makes more of a rural feel.
They will use more frequent rain gardens and storm water basins, the basins are scattered
to preserve the natural habitat, and the new concept shows .6 per acre. He noted that Ward
Lake Drive may need some maintenance but there will be more taxpayers to share the tax
burden for maintenance on the road. Twenty-one lots are proposed. It is difficult to fund
projects with aging roads. He explained the lots will generate approximately $5,000 per lot
for the City. $500,000 over ten years. The PUD flexibility will cover costs for the
infrastructure and help pay for road maintenance across the City. He noted that Sycamore
Street has the hammerhead style easement and could be vacated back to the property
owners. They are not opposed to a second cul-de-sac. He stated they do a lot of rural
developments and all 2½ acre lots do not have 2½ acres of buildable area. This is a prime
piece of property where 100% of the land could support a septic system. He explained that
all open space is not developable, and rules and laws do change, and they need to be
forward looking.
st
Mr. Scott Wold, SW Wold Construction, 2260 221 Avenue NW in Oak Grove, stated
they were the developer of the adjacent property across the railroad tracks. They worked
with the same landowner and with the City to amend the Comprehensive Plan to push 150
units through the area. They want to do the same thing in the R-1 zoning, noting the
wildlife will remain. Mr. Wold stated this is a prime piece of land for development and the
best use of this property is to grow roofs. There is a big wetland off Ward Lake that cannot
be built on as it is a wetland. He stated one of the first plans was for 29 lots and they are
looking forward to working with the Andover Staff and Council.
Mr. Harry Haluptzok, 16971 Ward Lake Drive, stated he owns the 117 acres across from
this project. He suggested keeping the 2½ acre lots and adding a loop to the road.
Ms. Lauren Schedin, 16642 Ward Lake Drive, asked about the loop road and how would
the trees be preserved and be good stewards of the land. She asked how it would work
with the two cul-de-sacs. She is concerned about preserving the natural environment.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – July 23, 2024
Page 6
Community Development Director Janish said typically as developments occur there have
been temporary cul-de-sacs with the intentions for those roadways to connect in the future.
The Fire Department and emergency services like to pursue having multiple accesses to
developments for when there are issues and one of the accesses is blocked. A connection
at Sycamore provides another access for the development to the south as well as this
proposed development to have access for emergency services. Sycamore has been slated
as a temporary cul-de-sac with the intention that it would be connected as some time in the
future. The U-shaped road idea would deviate from that.
Commissioner Loehlein asked how 11 lots doubled and why there is so much more
density. Mr. Wensmann stated the difference is 300-foot lot width and 80-foot.
Commissioner Loehlein wondered why 20 lots are in the PUD. He sees both preservation
and increased density. Mr. Wensmann stated they want to be good stewards of the land
and reduce the tax burden.
Chair Godfrey closed the public hearing at 8:05 p.m.
Commissioner Shafto addressed why there is no park in this development, noting the Park
Commission is recommending cash in lieu of land. He thanked everyone for coming to the
meeting. He has some concerns about the density. He is not against using it as a PUD. He
is struggling with 21 houses. He does not see it as a transition because of the railroad. It
does not match the density on the other side of the railroad tracks.
Commissioner Loehlein stated he agrees with Commissioner Shafto’s comments. He
encouraged the developer to listen and implement the comments heard this evening. If the
straight City Code were followed, the brownies approach from Mr. Wensmann’s sketch,
that would be worse. This plan is better since it preserves the trees, but it is too dense.
Commissioner Hudson stated the way this is currently zoned it would be for 12-13 lots. If
lots were combined the developer could end up with 12-13 lots and still preserve the trees.
The density is too high. There is not a 1-acre lot anywhere in this area. There are too many
deviations from the Code in his opinion. The lots need to be bigger and there needs to be
less lots.
Commissioner Winge stated he would like to see 2½ acre lots.
Chair Godfrey stated she appreciates everyone coming to provide their feedback. She
thinks this is a little too dense, noting there are guidelines for a reason. She is concerned
about the number of variances. She looks forward to more specifics on the PUD. She
would like to see what is included in the PUD.
The City Council is expected to review this sketch plan at their scheduled meeting on
Wednesday, August 7, 2024.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – July 23, 2024
Page 7
PUBLIC HEARING: City Code Amendments – City Code 11-3-6-B-2: Residential Lots
Lacking Municipal Sanitary Sewer – City of Andover.
Planning Intern Abigail Turner reviewed in administering the City Code, City staff
recently found an outdated requirement relative to residential lots lacking municipal
sanitary sewer which states: “The building pad shall be required to have a finished grade
of at least six feet above the seasonal high-water mark.” Since the adoption of this City
Code requirement in the early 2000s, there have been changes to the floodplain and
groundwater regulations that make this requirement obsolete. Accordingly, the City of
Andover Engineering Department is recommending that this requirement be deleted from
the City Code. As this City Code requirement has been outdated for some time, deleting it
will not create any substantial policy change. Attached for Commission consideration
were a draft Resolution of Approval and a draft Summary Ordinance for Publication.
Chair Godfrey opened the public hearing at 8:17 p.m.
No one appeared to address the Commission.
Chair Godfrey closed the public hearing at 8:19 p.m.
Motion by Loehlein, seconded by Shafto, to recommend the City Council approve the
Resolution and Summary Ordinance for Publication Amendments to City Code Title 11:
Subdivision, Chapter 3: Lots, Section B: Buildability Requirements. Motion carried on a
7-ayes, 0-nays vote
OTHER BUSINESS.
Mr. Janish stated the Comprehensive Plan Amendment went before the City Council and
the Council made a recommendation to submit the amendment to the Met Council. Met
Council provided their thumbs up on the project. The adoption of the amendment and the
bids were then approved at the same City Council meeting.
Chair Godfrey asked about the AT&T Tower. Mr. Janish stated AT&T has reached out to
City Staff and indicated they want to add more antennas to the tower which would require
going back through the Conditional Use Permit process.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Godfrey adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Debbie Wolfe, Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.