HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-07-08
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
MeetingAgenda
July 8, 2025
Andover City Hall
Council Chambers
7:00 p.m.
1.Call to Order
2.Pledge of Allegiance
3.Approval of Minutes –June10, 2025, Regular Meeting
4.Public Hearing:Consider City Code Amendment –City Code 12-7: Fences and Walls –
City of Andover (Applicant)
5.Other Business
6.Adjournment
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #3
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Peter Hellegers, City Planner
SUBJECT:Approval of Minutes
DATE: July 8, 2025
REQUEST
The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to approve the June 10, 2025, regular meeting
minutes.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING – JUNE 10, 2025
8
9
10 The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
11 called to order by Chairperson Loehleinon June 10, 2025, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City
12 Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
13
14 Commissioners present:Chairperson Nick Loehlein, Commissioners Roger Grout,
15 Scott Hudson, Chuck Naughton, Jonathan Weinhold, and
16 Ryan Winge.
17
18 Commissioners absent: Commissioner Pat Shuman Jr.
19
20 Also present: Community Development Director Joe Janish and Associate Planner Aidan
21 Breen.
22
23
24 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
25
26 APPROVAL OF MINUTES – May 13, 2025, Regular Meeting
27
28 Commissioner Naughton corrected the fact that “Jr.” should not follow his name.
29
30 Motion. The Chair assumed a motion to approve the May 13, 2025, Andover Planning and
31 Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes as corrected. The motion carried on
32 unanimous consent with Commissioner Winge voting Present.
33
34 PUBLIC HEARING: Consider a Front Yard Setback Variance – 13797 Jay Street NW,
35 Randall & Sheryl Hubin (Applicants).
36
37 CD Director Joe Janishreviewed the applicant's request for a variance to City Code 12-3-
38 5: Minimum District Requirements, specifically the variance to the minimum front yard
39 setback. The subject property is located within the GB: General Business District, and
40 City Code 12-3-5 establishes a minimum front yard setback of 40 feet. The table below
41 compares the City Code requirements to the variance request.
42
City Code Variance RequestDifference
Requirements
Front Yard Setback40 feet24 feet -16 feet
43
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 2
1 The applicant is proposing a building addition that will be on the west side of the existing
2 building, which is called the “front” for setback purposes,as that side is the shortest on a
3 public street by 1.6 feet.
4
5 The planned building expansion, while encroaching into the setback, will still be the same
6 or further distance from the back of the curb from Jay Street’s curb as Walmart is from Jay
7 Street’s curb. The following information was provided by the applicant:
8
9 Curb Setback Comparisons
10
LocationBldg. to Width of Sidewalk to Total Distance
SidewalkSidewalkCurb Bldg. to Curb
Walmart30’5”8’7”2’4”41’4”
Applicant 24’7”5’0” 12’6” 42’1”
11
12 The applicant’s expanded building would be further from Jay Street NW curb line than the
13 Walmart building. However, the applicant is requesting the same 41’4” requirement that
14 Walmart has from the curb line to be applied to their expansion just in casethere are any
15 slight variations from the current plans to the final, build-ready, City-approved
16 construction blueprints.
17
18 Mr. Janishnoted that the parking spots currently visible on the right, by Pizza Ranch,
19 would become a drive lane as part of the expansion. All of the current grass, trees, shrubs,
20 sidewalk, and other areas would remain, followed by the drive lane, and then the expanded
21 edge of the building.
22
23 Mr. Janishreviewed the review criteria from the applicant. Also provided for Commission
24 consideration were drawings of the area, a draft resolution of approval, and a draft
25 resolution of denial. This will come before the City Council on June 17, 2025.
26
27 Commissioner Grout asked if the comparison of the setbacks is the front, and Mr. Janish
28 stated they are comparing the Jay Street setback. The WalMart property complies.
29
30 Commissioner Winge asked if Staff has done any evaluation on parking and is there a
31 need for overflow parking. Mr. Janish stated that the applicant has come before the
32 Economic Development Authority and did have a parking share agreement with STI.
33
34 Commissioner Weinhold referred to the aerial photos and asked what is considered the
35 front street setback for Pizza Ranch and Mr. Janish stated that would be Jay Street. The
36 parameters of Jay Street have not changed.
37
38 Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
39
40 Mr. Kris Thielen, Lino Lakes, the architect for the project, stated thatworking with City
41 Staff, this is the best solution for the expansion.
42
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 3
1 Commissioner Winge asked the applicant why this is the best location for the addition.
2 Mr. Thielen stated that this plan makes the most sense. This layout provided the least
3 impact on the layout and parking.
4
5 Motion by Commissioner Hudson, seconded by Commissioner Naughton, to close the
6 public hearing. Motion carried on a 6-ayes, 0-nays vote. Chair Loehlein closed the public
7 hearing at 7:15 p.m.
8
9 Commissioner Weinhold referred to the Jay Street curvature. He recalls Jay Street being a
10 “T” when Povs was there. He asked when Jay Street was extended. Mr. Janish stated he
11 does not recall.
12
13 Chair Loehlein stated this is a reasonable request for a variance and reasonable use of the
14 property.
15
16 Motion by Commissioner Hudson, seconded by Weinhold, to recommend the City
17 Council approve a Resolution approving a Front Yard Setback Variance –13797 Jay
18 Street NW, Randall & Sheryl Hubin (Applicants).Motion carried on a 5-ayes, 1-nays
19 (Grout) vote.
20
21 Public Hearing: Consider a Sketch Plan for a master planned development, using a
22 Planned Unit Development (PUD), on an 800-plus acre portion of the Rural Reserve,
23 Artemis Development (Applicants).
24
25 Mr. Janishreviewed Artemis Development Company LLC is proposing to develop 804.91
26 acres of the Rural Reserve. The applicant is proposing to use a master plan by utilizing a
27 Planned Unit Development (PUD). This sketch review is the first step in a multi-step
28 development process. Due to the size of the proposed development, a type of
29 environmental review known as an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) is
30 expected.
31
32 The applicant is proposing approximately 1,370 units over the 804.91-acre property.
33 When removing what is expected to be “water” and “green space,” the proposed density is
34 approximately 4 units per acre. As part of Imagine 2050, the Met Council will require the
35 City of Andover to develop at 3.5 units per acre as a base density within the existing
36 Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). The City has limitations in sewer capacity that
37 may impact meeting the requirement of 3.5 units per acre within the MUSA; therefore, the
38 rural reserve is the only location to make up the density to bring the base density to 3.5
39 units per acre. The applicant has expressed interest in having a lower density closer to 3.5
40 units per acre.
41
42 Mr. Janishreviewed the Purpose of a PUD, what is a Sketch Plan, what is the Rural
43 Reserve, what is an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR), and what will be
44 included in the AUAR.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 4
1 The applicant has indicated that the concept has been developed with the following
2 criteria:
3 Existing surrounding land uses and street connections.
4 Existing natural features.
5 Existing soil conditions,including deep peat areas greater than 10 feet in depth.
6 Wetland delineation, including private and public ditches.
7 Preservation of Public Ditch 37 flow through, new water features, and water
8 quality improvements.
9 Existing floodplain preservation.
10
11 The applicant has indicated the expectation is to grade roughly the southern half of the
12 development at first and construct100 to 150 homes a year. The expectation is that the
13 total build-outof the proposed development will be 10 to 15 years.
14
15 Street improvements were reviewed and indicated on the sketch, showing connections to
16 existing local streets that have been proposed to continue as part of future development.
17 Three roundabouts will be constructed within the development. Additional access to
thth
18 Round Lake Boulevard will be constructed (157 Avenue NW & 154 Avenue NW).
th
19 Access at 149and Round Lake Boulevard will also be provided.
20
21 The applicant is proposing “parkways” that will consist of 100 or 80-foot right-of-way
22 with possible medians in the middle. The applicant is proposing a 52’ right-of-way for
23 Neighborhood roads. For the detached townhomes and three-story row homes, the
24 applicant is proposing private drives.
25
26 Currently, the City of Andover does not allow boulevard trees. The applicant proposes the
27 use of boulevard trees and acknowledges that additional discussion is needed regarding
28 benefits, concerns, short-term, and long-term maintenance responsibilities.
29 Benefits:
30 o Reduction in traffic speeds.
31 o Safer walking environment.
32 o Create a pleasant walking environment that leads to neighbor interaction.
33 Concerns
34 o Tree roots may cause curbs and sidewalks to buckle.
35 o Tree trimming expense and concerns related to replacement.
36 o Reduced effectiveness of street lighting, snow storage, street sign blockage,
37 and potential for sightline issues at intersections.
38
39 The sketch shows approximately 258.4 acres of active, passive, and nature preserve open
40 spaces, representing 32% of the total proposal. Approximately 7 miles of trails connect the
41 open space elements internally and externally. The PUD Sketch Plan provides a
42 designated HOAAmenity Area of approximately 6 acres in size. This is expected to
43 include a private (HOA) clubhouse and an aquatic center.
44
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 5
1 The applicant intends to evaluate the use of native trees/shrubs, ground covers, and other
2 native landscape materials in park and boulevard areas to lower maintenance expense and
3 improve water quality.
4
5 Currently, the City’s Master Park Plan does not include the Rural Reserve area and will
6 need to be updated citywide to reflect the inclusion of this area. The Park and Recreation
7 Commission reviewed the concept on June 5, 2025. Comments received from the Park and
8 Recreation Commission included:
9 The Master Park Plan will need to be updated to include this area.
10 Staffing impacts if the City accepted all of the park area, and the numberof
11 additional staff needed.
12 Questions related to the classification of park areas.
13 Comment on including trails that could access the commercial area.
14 If areas are open to the public to consider parking stalls for those park areas.
15
16 Mr. Janishreviewed the proposed lot standards along with sample housing styles.
17
18 The applicant is proposing approximately 30 acres of General Commercial to provide
19 opportunities for office, retail, and services. The applicant would like to provide a Town
20 Center type area to allow for a gathering spot for broader community events (i.e., farmer’s
21 market; creating a historical tie to the current agricultural use of the property). The
22 commercial area is expected to be the last portion of the plan to develop, as proposed
23 homes and higher density around this area are needed in order to drive the investment for
24 businesses to locate in this area. The development team is proposing to collaborate with
25 City Staff in developing a conceptual plan for the commercial area.
26
27 The following were reviewed:
28 City Utilities
29 Water: As part of the AUAR,a comprehensive water study related to the
30 municipal water system will need to be prepared to determine what type of water
31 improvements are needed.
32 Sewer: A sanitary sewer trunk line would be constructed, extending from Crooked
33 Lake Boulevard to this development.
34
35 Private Utilities –Connexus Energy has indicated they will need to locate a substation
36 within this property. They are currently having conversations with the applicant on the
37 location for this substation. A substation requires a Conditional Use Permit and would be a
38 separate review process from the development proposal tonight.
39
40 Schools – The applicant spoke with the Anoka Hennepin School District #11 related to
41 school needs in this area. The School District has indicated they are not expecting another
42 school in the area currently.
43
44 Wetlands/Floodplains/Stormwater –The sketch shows approximately 175.6 acres of
45 ponding, waterway areas, floodplain, and wetlands, representing about 22% of the
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 6
1 proposal. The applicant has been and is working with Coon Creek Watershed District
2 related to these items along with water quality improvements.
3
4 Mr. Janishreviewed the Met Council requirements. The next Comprehensive Plan will
5 require an increase in density community-wide from 3 units per acre to 3.5 units per acre.
6 This development is currently planned at 4 units per acre. Met Council indicated that with
7 a planned density of 4 units per acre, this would bring Andover to 3.27 units per acre.
8 Andover is still short of housing units within the existing MUSA and the proposed
9 development area to achieve 3.5 units per acre./
10
11 The applicant held a Neighborhood Open House Meeting on April 2, 2025, at Bunker
12 Hills Activity Center. The applicant mailed notices to those within 700 feet of the
13 proposed development area. On this public hearing on this sketch plan City staff mailed
14 notices to those within 700 feet (440 notices, non-duplicate owners). The Public Hearing
15 notice was also placed in the official city newspaper and nine Public Hearing signs were
16 placed around the proposed development area as well.
17
18 Mr. Janish reviewed Staff Comments:
19 Continue to work through and review additional street connection points, internal
20 and external to the proposed development.
21 Dead-end roads should be no greater than 500 feet in length.
22 A full park dedication study will need to be done, which includes the Rural
23 Reserve to determine park space needs for development and park dedication fees.
24 Determine ownership and maintenance for sidewalks, trails, parkways, boulevard
25 trees, and landscaping.
26 Storm siren coverage will need to be evaluated to determine if additional siren(s)
27 are needed.
28 A Comprehensive Plan Amendment will be required.
29 Environmental review will be required.
30 Work through the Met Council density.
31
32 The Future Actions required if the applicant proceeds include:
33 Alternative Area Wide Review (AUAR).
34 Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development.
35 Preliminary Plat(s).
36 Final Plat(s). (City Council Action only).
37
38 The Planning and Zoning Commission is requested to conduct the public hearing for
39 residents to provide comments and provide feedback to the applicant related to the
40 proposed project.
41
42 Also included for Commission consideration were Staff Review, Public Hearing
43 Comments received, Slides Narrative, and Maps.
44
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 7
1 Commissioner Naughton referred to the 7 miles of trails and asked how many miles of
2 roads will be put in. Mr. Janish stated he does not have that number. Commissioner
3 Naughton’s concern is snow plowing, etc. Mr. Berkowitz is expecting to add 1 additional
4 park employee, 1 additional streets employee, and 1 additional utility employee.
5 Commissioner Naughton asked if there would be an impact on the equipment also? Mr.
6 Janish stated he believes some additional equipment would be needed. Commissioner
7 Naughton asked if the current water treatment system would be sufficient. Mr. Janish
8 stated that a water study would be needed.
9
10 Commissioner Weinhold noted it appears the Met Council is requiring 3.5 units per acre.
11 Mr. Janish stated that the Met Council gives permits for sewer line expansions, and they
12 could say no more permits, which would cause urban development to stop.
13
14 Commissioner Winge asked if the study is completed, and if the current capacity for water
15 treatment is not sufficient, would the developers need to help pay for a new system? Mr.
16 Janish noted water/water treatment would be covered in the AUAR. Commissioner Winge
17 asked what the impact would be for the expansion of the sanitary sewer. Mr. Janish stated
18 that the City has easements for the expansion of the sanitary sewer line, and this has been
19 in the plans for some time. Mr. Janish stated that connection charges would be paid by the
20 developer. Commissioner Winge stated there will be additional maintenance costs, and
21 Mr. Janish stated there are three options for maintaining boulevard trees. Long-term
22 maintenance will be further discussed with the applicant.
23
24 Chair Loehlein noted that the purpose of the public hearing this evening is to receive
25 public comments.
26
27 Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m.
28
29 Mr. Todd Stutz, Artemis Development,and Mr. Jake Walesch of Artemis Development,
30 10850 Old County Road 15, Plymouth, appeared as the applicant. They have been
31 working on this development for 2 years. This is a unique development with 805
32 contiguous acres. Only 342 acres of the site will be developed with relatively low density.
33 He reviewed the connections to existing roads. There will be a north-south parkway within
34 the development. A ghost plat of the surrounding areas was also provided. They are
35 suggesting a variety of housing types with a wide range of price points. They will focus
36 primarily on local builders. Mr. Jake Walesch noted that the sewer will need to be brought
37 to the site. 80% of those costs will be paid by the developer. The maintenance dependson
38 what comes out of the park study. Allthe trails are proposed to be public. Maintenance of
39 the trails will need further discussion with the City and County. This is a 10-15-year
40 project. There is a $900M tax base for the City. The Commercial development will be
41 done last.
42
43 Commissioner Weinhold asked about the need for a substation and where that may be
44 located. Mr. Walesch stated the power company has indicated a preferred location for a
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 8
1 substation, and it would be along alignment with the power lines on the south border,
2 cutting across east to west.
3
4 Commissioner Grout asked about connection to Andover Boulevard in the future. Mr.
5 Stutz stated the right-of-way has not yet been determined.
6
7 Commissioner Winge asked about the construction timeline and when construction would
8 begin,and what the trucking situation would look like. Mr. Waleschstated that there have
9 been severalsoil borings done, and the site will balance. This is a concept sketch plan. The
10 environmental study will take 9 months. The Preliminary Plat should be presented next
11 year. The property will be developed from south to north. Construction would begin in the
12 spring of 2027, tentatively with the commencement of the grading. Commissioner Winge
13 noted that in the comments the developer noted 80% of the sanitary sewer would be
14 covered by the developer. Mr. Waleschstated the urban reserve is 1000 acres, and the
15 developer of the remaining 20% acres would pay for their portion of the sanitary sewer.
16
17 Mr. Janishreviewed the emailcomments received in writing beforethe meeting:
18
19 From Address
20 Terry McDonald 14459 Kerry Street NW
21 Abby Kupka Not provided
22 Michele Roskowiak Not provided
th
23 Daniel Kloek 3118 149 Lane NW
24 Joe Churchich Not provided
25
26 Mr. Mike Olson, 3052 153rd Avenue, asked if the final plat would encompass two
27 different service roads. He has lived there for 30 years. His concern is the transition zone
28 between the existing homes and the new homes. It appears the 50-foot-wide lots is high
29 density to abut a rural neighborhood. He would like to see more screening/buffering in the
30 project. He hopes the City hears the neighbors' concerns.
31
rd
32 Mr. Ken Seifert, 2987 153Avenue, stated that the major density will be in his backyard
33 and there is no buffering offered. He believes the County will have an issue with the
34 access road.
35
th
36 Mr. Brent Miller, 3140 149 Avenue NW, has lived there for 18 years. He supports the
37 rights of the property owners to do with their property as they desire. He read the City
38 Code regarding buffering needed, along with other sections of the Code. He does not see a
39 transition or buffer. There is no mention of solar energy in the sketch plan. He reviewed
40 the right-of-way at the north of his property. He asked where the 34 feet in the sketch plan
41 is indicated. He is concerned about the impact this development will have on his right to
42 move freely. Mr. Miller asked about the active/passive open areas. He is concerned about
43 his water quality during and after the development. Another concern is the use of fertilizer
44 by the new residents. Mr. Miller made many references to the sketch plan. He was
45 planning to remodel his kitchen, but that is now on hold as they are not certain if they will
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 9
th
1 remain in their home given this development. He is concerned about 149 Avenue
th
2 becoming an acceleration lane, and he would like to see a 25-mph speed on 149 Avenue.
3
th
4 Mr. Mike Parrish, 2975 149Avenue NW, has a lot of the same concerns as Mr. Miller
5 did. He asked about the status of the State Aid road. He has a drainage ditch on his
6 property with his own pond at the end of his driveway. He asked if the developer would be
7 speaking with current residents.
8
rd
9 Mr. Scott Hager, 3045 153 Avenue NW, noted that the transition needs to be taken into
10 consideration. There will be 27 houses around his and two other properties. He would like
11 larger lots in the development.
12
13 Mr. Bill Leach, 15307 Verdin Street, asked if the land will continue to be farmed for the
14 next 2 years. He asked about the farmer’s access road not being used for the past couple of
15 years. He asked what the status of that road is and asked if property owners can extend
16 their yards.
17
18 Mr. Don Eveland, 2575 Andover Boulevard, is most concerned about the water runoff.
19 There have been problems with water in the past. The City took care of the problem. He
20 wants to make sure if problems occur in the future the City will take care of the problem.
21
22 Ms. Mai Xiong, 15557 Round Lake, her property will be surrounded by Commercial on
23 three sides. This makes no sense to her. She has considered moving. Her concerns are
24 about the commercial development.
25
nd
26 Mr. Jason Huisheere, 3241 152Lane NW, agrees with the previous comments made. He
27 lives closer to the lake on the west side of Round Lake Blvd. He is concerned about air
28 pollution during construction. He is also concerned about sound pollution during the 10
29 years of construction. He suggested area 5 and area 3could be switched.
30
st
31 Mr. Dennis Picotte, 2978 151 Lane NW, lives in a cul-de-sac. His concern is he is 20 feet
32 elevated above the field elevation. He showed a picture of the view out of the back of his
33 house. After development is done he will only see rooftops unless there is a buffer of 50-
34 foot trees.
35
st
36 Mr. William Corn, 3001 151 Lane NW, stated that if this is looked at conceptually, this
37 plan is moving north to south, urban to rural, and west to east, urban to rural. This does
38 not match the Comprehensive Plan and Code call for. The transition and buffering of 37
39 homes abutting 3 existing properties. The back of those new homes will be too close to the
40 existing homes. He is concerned about the traffic and the addition of 8000+ vehicle trips a
th
41 day. 149 only has access to northbound Round Lake Blvd. There is a safety problem.
42 Round Lake Blvd was just reconstructed last year. The Commercial property is shown as
43 G1 and does not understand how that fits with the Comp Plan. There are no other
44 Commercial sites in the area.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 10
rd
1 Mr. Mike Olson, 3052 153 Avenue, noted that the City is trying to shift densities in the
2 development from the Shift50 Met Council plan. To make up for a shortfall in densities in
3 this area is a mistake.
4
5 Ms. Mary Harrell, 14955 Ivywood Street, stated she is doubly impacted, as are some of
6 her neighbors. The major thoroughfare will be behind her property. She has lived here for
7 30 years. This is very serious. At previous meetings she attended, it seemed everything
8 had already been decided. The road behind her designation was to be changed. The
9 designation rural reserve implies something other than what it was. There are many things
10 to be considered.
11
12 Ms. Lynette Bauers, 14570 Jonquil Street, lives in Creekridge Estates, is mostly concerned
13 about the traffic. She has lived there for 38 years. She asked why the entrance to City Hall
14 was moved. It was due to traffic. When she has her windows open, all she hears is noise.
15 The Met Council does not live here, yet they have control. She is concerned about all the
16 traffic on Round Lake Blvd. It is very dangerous. There are not sufficient bus drivers,and
17 how will all these kids be picked up? Taxes will increase with the need for new schools.
18
rd
19 Mr. Matt Vorhees, 3122 153 Avenue NW, commented on the lack of space in their
20 neighborhood. There will be 27 new homes abutting 3 properties. He referred to the
21 Comprehensive Plan Goal 5 with policies on commercial nodes. #10 on the sketch plan
22 conflicts with that goal. He asked that a commercial market study be done.
23
th
24 Ms. Laura Miller, 3140 149 Avenue NW, the boulevard will go through the front yard of
25 their home. They were looking forward to retirement. Her husband built a workshop and a
26 deck on their home. They love where they are and their view. She has emotions on this
27 issue. She asked that the layout be flipped so that high density is not next to their property.
28
th
29 Mr. Jason Barnes, 2333 155 Lane NW, has lived in Andover for 13 years. He is
30 concerned about how the math works out and asked about the requirement to hook up to
31 City water and sewer. Can they remain Residential Reserve Lots? He suggested leaving
32 more open space. He wants to leave as many of the large trees in place as natural buffers.
33 He has well concerns and asked how that affects the depth of his well. He should not have
34 to pay to drill deeper. The current schools are not adequate for this growth. The appeal of
35 Andover is the residential reserve feel.
36
st
37 Mr. William Corn, 3001 151 Lane NW, referred to a workshop in 2024 with the Met
38 Council to discuss density. At 3.5 density, that would be 175 fewer units. He hopes the
39 plan does not change when moving to the north side.
40
41 Chair Loehlein mentioned that no action will be taken this evening.
42
43 Motion by Commissioner Hudson, seconded by Naughton, to close the public hearing.
44 Motion carried on a 6-ayes, 0-nays vote. Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 9:05
45 p.m.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 11
1
2 Mr. Todd Stutz, Artemis Development,and Mr. Jake Walesch of Artemis Development,
3 10850 Old County Road 15, Plymouth, thanked all present who expressed their concerns
4 and provided input. These comments were like those heard at the public open house. Mr.
5 Stutz stated they are not prepared to answer every question asked this evening. He said an
6 honest attempt was made to respect the existing homes regarding density. A change was
7 made on the western portion of the property to match the existing development pattern.
8 They will look at the buffers and density along the easterly property line. Mr. Walesch
th
9 referred to the right-of-way. They recognize that 149 Avenue is a 66-footright-of-way.
th
10 They cannot comment on whether the functions of the road can fit on 149 Avenue.They
11 will have further discussions with staff about the access connections. They are following
12 the City’s plan regarding connections to existing roadways. He would not encourage
13 anyone to extend their property on the farm access road. They are developing from the
14 south to the north. They would be starting approximately in May of 2026. The land will
15 continue to be farmed until construction begins. They will look at the buffer areas further.
16 No conversations have been held with any property owners other than the 3 farmers. The
17 water runoff is controlled by the ditches. There will be stormwater runoff systems
18 installed, which will improve water quality. Mr. Walesch stated in area 5 that they will
19 look at maintenance, buffer, and types of buildings. The AUAR study will include a traffic
20 study component. The different access points will be looked at by that study.
21
th
22 Chair Loehlein referred to the discussion on 149 Avenue,and he sympathizes with
23 residents, as this is the main exit in/out of this area. When Round Lake Blvd. was
24 reconstructed, there was to be another designated entrance to the south. Mr. Janish stated
25 that the access to the south has a significant flood plain, which is why the access was
th
26 moved to 149 Avenue for alignment. Mr. Janish also noted the AUAR will include a
27 traffic study.
28
29 Chair Loehlein asked about active/passive space versus park. Mr. Stutz noted that a
30 portion is to remain a minimal maintenance natural area. The passive space will have
31 trails. An active park may have equipment and programming as well as formal and
32 informal play. This would be a public park. These areas are subject to change as far as
33 labeling. They do not want to cause a maintenance problem for the HOA or the City. Mr.
34 Walesch stated that the only private amenity would be the HOA amenity in #11 on the
35 map (6 acres).
36
37 Mr. Janish stated that the City has been working with the Met Council on density. There
38 were work sessions that occurred relating to density. The Met Council wanted4 units per
39 acre. The City has been at 3.11 units per acre currently. Some communities do not support
40 the 4 units per acre. Met Council droppedthe densityfrom 4 to 3.5 units per acre. The
41 City had a policy that would be made up in the rural reserve. The Met Council indicated
42 that with this development, Andover would be at 3.27 units per acre. Met Council is
43 becoming strict with density requirements. The development needs to be at 4 units per
44 acre.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – June 10, 2025
Page 12
1 Chair Loehlein asked if a market study wouldbe required. Mr. Janish stated the City
2 Council is hearing residents are looking for more Commercial areas in the City.
3
4 Commissioner Weinhold stated there are more questions to be answered. He asked when
5 the AUAR will be conducted. Mr. Janish stated this is a 9-month process and would be
6 updated to the Planning and Zoning Commission, and a press release done. It will also be
7 posted on the City website.
8
9 Commissioner Winge stated that access to the development is of most importance with
10 respect to the existing property owners. He urged the developer to take strong
11 consideration ofthat along with the City. Traffic in and out will be a big concern.
12
13 Commissioner Weinhold commented on Zone #5 and appreciated that the developer will
14 take another look at that area.
15
16 Chair Loehlein stated he appreciates the developer’s flexibility in being responsive to the
17 neighbors’ requests. The environmental concerns (noise, air, water) plans should be
18 addressed along with traffic. He appreciates the developer’s responsiveness.
19
20 OTHER BUSINESS- NONE.
21
22 ADJOURNMENT
23
24 Chair Loehlein adjourned the meeting at 9:35 p.m.
25
26
27 Respectfully Submitted,
28
29
30 Debbie Wolfe, Recording Secretary
31 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO:Planning & Zoning Commissioners
CC:Joe Janish, Community Development Director
FROM:Emma Remillard, Planning Intern
SUBJECT:Public Hearing:Consider City Code Amendment –City Code 12-7: Fences and
Walls –City of Andover (Applicant)
DATE:July8, 2025
DISCUSSION
At the May 27, 2025,City Council workshop, the Council discussed a residential fencing
proposal for additional language to allow for fabric privacy screens on chain link fences. After
discussion, the Council directed City staff to draft a City Code Amendment that would clarify
that this type of materialis allowed and provide conditions for its use. In response, City staff
have drafted the attached City Code Amendment for review and discussion.
The attached ordinance includes:
1.Language to allow fabric privacy screens on chain link fences.
2.Specifications on fabric color and maintenance.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to hold a public hearing and make a
recommendation on the City Code Amendments to the City Council.
Respectfully submitted,
Emma Remillard
Planning Intern
Attachments
Draft Ordinance
Privacy Screen Examples
1
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. XX-XX
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE TITLE 12: ZONING REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 7:
FENCES AND WALLS
CHAPTER 7
FENCES AND WALLS
SECTION:
12-7-1: Permitted Use
12-7-2: Locations
12-7-3: Fence Height
12-7-4: Performance Standards
12-7-5: Barbed Wire and Electric Fences
12-7-6: Exemptions From Provisions
12-7-7: Appeals
12-7-1: PERMITTED USE:
Fences, walls, hedges and similar barriers (herein referred to as fences) shall be permitted in all
yards subject to the provisions of this chapter. A permit is required for the construction of all
fences or walls that are located on, in, or near any property line, drainage and utility easement, or
wetland in the City of Andover. A permit application shall be submitted for review by the
Engineering Department and an application fee shall be paid as outlined in Chapter 1-7-3 of this
code prior to the issuance of any permit. (Amend. 12/6/05, Ord. 317)
12-7-2: LOCATION:
A. Fences shall be located entirely on the private property of the individual constructing the
fence. Fences may be placed up to the property line. It is the responsibility of the property
owner to determine the location of property lines. Fences may be located in any private
yard or along a side or rear property line, except as follows:
1. No fence shall be placed in the public right-of-way.
2
2. Fences shall not be placed in underground utility easements. Fences may be placed in
other utility easements if they do not interfere with existing utilities. The existence and
location of private utility easements and equipment must be determined by contacting
Gopher State One Call. (Amended 4/19/11, Ord. 405)
3. Fences shall not be constructed or placed in drainage areas, ponds, or wetlands. Fences
shall not be placed in easements that provide vehicle access for the maintenance of
drainage, ponding, or wetland areas. (Amended 4/19/11, Ord. 405)
4. For fence placements on 2.5 acres and larger lots, the City may permit non-restrictive
fencing in drainage, wetland or ponding areas as long as they do not restrict the flow
of water. Access to ponds, wetlands and other such areas may be required by the City
for maintenance purposes. (Amended 4/19/11, Ord. 405)
5. Fences in any area shall not enclose, hinder or restrict access to utility boxes, fire
hydrants or other above ground utilities. (Amended 4/19/11, Ord. 405; Amended
7/21/20, Ord. 510)
6. Fences on corner lots shall not encroach upon the Sight Triangle as defined in Section
12-2-2 of this code. (Amended 7/21/20, Ord. 510)
B. Any fence placed in violation of this section shall be the liability of the property owner
who constructed it. The City, or any other agency having authority to work in a right-of-
way or easement area, shall not be liable for repair or replacement of such fences in the
event they are moved, damaged, or destroyed by virtue of the lawful use of that area. Any
damage caused by the illegal placement of a fence shall be the responsibility of the property
owner who constructed it.
12-7-3: FENCE HEIGHT:
A. In the rear and side yards up to the front façade of the principal structure, fences up to a
height of six (6) feet are allowed. (Amended Ord. 386, 8/5/09)
B. Fences located closer to the front property line than the principal structure, shall not exceed
four (4) feet in height except as follows:
1. In the RR Single-Family Rural Reserve, R-1 Single-Family Rural Residential and R-2
Single-Family Estate zoning districts, “ornamental fences”, as defined in Section 12-2-
2 of this title, of up to six (6) feet in height are permitted in all yards, provided the fence
does not encroach upon the Sight Triangle as defined in Section 12-2-2 of this code.
(Amended Ord. 386, 8/5/09; Amended Ord. 468, 6-6-17; Amended 7/21/20, Ord. 510)
2. On properties located in the I: Industrial zoning district and located outside of the
Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary, the City may approve a fence in
the front yard of up to six (6) feet in height through the Commercial Site Plan (CSP)
process, provided that:
A. The fence is to provide screening for an approved use of the property.
3
B.Landscaping as approved through the Commercial Site Plan shall be utilized
to break up the mass of the fence line. (Amended 7/21/20, Ord. 510)
C. Fences that are required for screening of ground mounted mechanical equipment, through
a required commercial site plan (CSP), may exceed the height otherwise required by City
Code, provided that:
1. Location of fencing meets Building Setbacks for a principal structure.
2. Fencing is to screen ground mounted mechanical equipment.
3. Fencing shall be the minimum height needed to screen the equipment and no
taller than ten (10) feet.
4. Fencing shall not be taller than the height of the adjacent building wall.
5. All other screening requirements are met. (Amended 3/21/23, Ord. 550)
D. Fence post caps may exceed the maximum height of a fence by up to six inches (6”).
(Amended Ord. 561, 5/7/24)
12-7-4: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS:
A. Construction and Materials: Every fence shall be constructed in a workmanlike manner.
For all fences constructed after the adoption of this title, all posts, supports, and framework
shall be placed on the inside of the fence, with the finished side facing the abutting property
or street. Chain-link fences shall be constructed in such a manner that the barbed end is at
the bottom of the fence.
Fences in all districts shall be constructed of materials widely accepted in the fencing
industry. No fence may have boards, planks, or panels larger than twelve (12) inches in
width except as otherwise permitted by this Chapter. The following materials are expressly
prohibited from use as fencing materials:
Plywood boards
Canvas
Plastic sheeting
Metal sheeting including corrugated steel
Chicken wire (except for use on permitted chicken coops)
Drywall
Cardboard
Particle board
Pallets
Chopped wood
Netting
Paper
Reflective surfaces
4
Jersey barriers and similar products
Silt fences, snow fences, orange construction fencing and similar materials
Any material that is not manufactured or originally intended to be used as fencing
Silt fences, orange construction fencing, and similar materials shall only be allowed on
construction sites or where deemed necessary to prevent soil erosion. Snow fences shall
stth
only be allowed between November 1 and April 15.
Wire fencing shall only be allowed as a part of a panel fence. These fences shall be rigid
and self-supporting, without the need for external guide wires or stakes. Wires shall be
woven to run horizontal and vertical and be welded at their intersections to form a
checkerboard like design. The wire shall utilize gaps that do not exceed four inches by
four inches (4” x 4”) in size so as to prevent external footholds and handholds. Each
panel shall be framed with wood or decorative metal finishes and be no more than eight
feet (8’) in length. Unframed rolls of fencing or unframed fence panels shall be
prohibited. The wire fencing material shall be framed on both sides so that the fencing
material is centered within the frame. (Amended Ord. 567, 10/15/24)
Privacy screens shall be allowed when attached to a permitted chain link fence.
Privacy screens must be:
Made of a fabric or mesh intended for use as a fence privacy screen.
Solid in color, with no patterns or designs. Only black, grey, green, brown, or
tan colors are permitted.
Taut, securely fastened to the fence according to manufacturer instructions,
free from any rips or tears, and otherwise in good repair.
The installation of privacy screen(s) requires a fence permit and is subject to review
by the Andover Review Committee. Privacy screens are intended for privacy only
and do not fulfill screening obligations as established in City Code 12-14-5.
B. Maintenance: All fences shall be maintained in good condition and vertical position. Any
missing, broken, incomplete, or deteriorated sections of fencing material or structural
elements shall be replaced with the same quality of material and workmanship.
All exterior wood surfaces, other than decay resistant woods, shall be protected from the
elements and decay by a protective covering or treatment. If twenty-five percent (25%) of
the surface is peeling, cracked, chipped, blistered, or weathered beyond effectiveness, the
exterior surface shall be refinished. The entire surface shall be uniformly treated and
maintained with the same quality of workmanship. (Amend. 12/6/05, Ord. 317)
Any fence not in conformance with this subsection shall be declared a nuisance and
repaired so as to be in conformance or removed by the property owner.
12-7-5: BARBED WIRE AND ELECTRIC FENCES:
5
A. A security arm for barbed wire to a maximum of eight (8) feet may be permitted by
Conditional Use Permit in industrial or business districts, or in any district when used
exclusively for enclosing utility and substation sites. (Amended 7/21/20, Ord. 510)
B. Barbed wire and electrical fences may be permitted on residential lots of two and one half
(2.5) acres or greater and shall be exclusively for the use of containing farm animals, or
pleasure/recreational animals, as defined in City Code. (Amended 7/21/20, Ord. 510)
12-7-6: EXEMPTIONS FROM PROVISIONS:
Fences that are for the sole purpose of containing farm animals are not subject to the provision of
this title. (Ord. 8PPPPPP, 8-20-2002; amd. 2003 Code; amd. Ord. 314, 10-4-2005)
12-7-7: APPEALS:
The Andover Review Committee of the City shall be and is hereby appointed the Board of Design
Control for fences. The Board shall review all Fence Permit applications referred to it by the City
of Andover Engineering Department upon a determination that the design, materials, or plan may
violate the provisions of this Chapter or in situations where no such determination could be made
by the Engineering Department. The Board may approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the
design, materials, or plan of any fence referred to it as it may deem necessary to carry out the
purpose and intent of this Chapter. Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Andover Review
Committee may take an appeal there from to the City Council.
6
Privacy Screen Examples
7