HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-08-12
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
MeetingAgenda
August 12, 2025
Andover City Hall
Council Chambers
7:00 p.m.
1.Call to Order
2.Pledge of Allegiance
3.Approval of Minutes –July 8, 2025, Regular Meeting
4.Public Hearing:Consider Conditional Use Permit (CUP)for Automobile Service Station –
nd
3118 162Ln NW; PID# 16-32-24-23-0023–Equipment Engineering Services(Applicant).
5.Public Hearing:Consider Interim Use Permit (IUP)for Interim Performance Standards –
nd
3118 162Ln NW; PID# 16-32-24-23-0023–Equipment Engineering Services(Applicant).
6.Public Hearing:Consider Variances for Signage –14220 Inca Street NW; PID# 30-32-24-
43-0073–Holiday Stationstores, LLC c/o Karen Dodge of Municipal Resolutions LLC
(Applicant).
7.Public Hearing: Consider Preliminary Plat for Boulder Prairie Estates –888 Crosstown
Blvd NW and 15540 Prairie Rd NW; PID# 23-32-24-11-0007and 23-32-24-11-0002 –
Boulder Contracting, LLC(Applicant).
8.Public Hearing: Consider Variance Request for Minimum Side Yard Setbacks –Lot 1
Block 3, Boulder Prairie Estates –Boulder Contracting, LLC(Applicant).
9.Other Business
10.Adjournment
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #3
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Peter Hellegers, City Planner
SUBJECT:Approval of Minutes
DATE: August 12, 2025
REQUEST
The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to approve the July 8, 2025, regular meeting
minutes.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING –JULY 8, 2025
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, Jonathan Weinhold, and Ryan Winge.
16
17 Commissioners absent: Commissioners Chuck Naughton and Pat Shuman Jr.
18
19 Also present: Planning Intern Emma Remillardand Associate Planner Aidan Breen.
20
21
22 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
23
24 APPROVAL OF MINUTES – June 10, 2025, Regular Meeting
25
26 Motion. The Chair assumed a motion to approve the June 10, 2025, Andover Planning and
27 Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes as corrected. The Motion passed on
28 unanimous consent.
29
30
31 PUBLIC HEARING: Consider City Code Amendment –City Code 12-7 –Fences and
32 Walls – City of Andover (Applicant)
33
34 Planning Intern Emma Remillardreviewed at the May 27, 2025,City Council workshop,
35 the Council discussed a residential fencing proposal for additional language to allow for
36 fabric privacy screens on chain link fences. After discussion, the Council directed City
37 staff to draft a City Code Amendment that would clarify that this type of material is
38 allowed and provide conditions for its use. In response, City staff have drafted the City
39 Code Amendment for review and discussion. A copy of the draft was provided for
40 Commission review. The Ordinance includes:
41
42 1. Language to allow fabric privacy screens on chain link fences.
43 2. Specifications on fabric color and maintenance.
44
45 Staff requests that the Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to hold a public
46 hearing and make a recommendation on the City Code Amendments to the City Council.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – July 8, 2025
Page 2
1 Commissioner Hudson asked if someone had an existing chain link fence; they would
2 need to obtain a permit, and Ms. Remillard stated they would for the fabric privacy screen.
3 Commissioner Hudson asked if the screening would be put on the inside or the outside of
4 the fence,and Associate PlannerBreen stated there is noprovision in the Code,but it
5 would make sense to put it on the inside of the fence.
6
7 Commissioner Winge asked for clarification on the height of the screen and assumed it
8 would not change the height of the fence. Ms. Remillard stated it would have to follow the
9 manufacturer’s instructions for installation. The dimensions of the fence cannot be altered.
10
11 Commissioner Grout asked what drove the amendment and asked if there had been a
12 demand for screening. Ms. Remillard stated that a local business made a request.
13
14 Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 7:07 p.m.
15
16 Mr. Breen stated that no comments have been received regarding this matter. No one
17 appeared to address the Commission during the public hearing.
18
19 Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 7:08 p.m.
20
21 Commissioner Grout stated he believes there is some confusion about the height of the
22 screening. The wording gives the impression that the screening could be higher than the
23 fence height. He recommends that the wording be revised.
24
25 Commissioner Winge stated he would like to see that the screening cannot be higher than
26 the fence. Mr. Breen stated he will add a clause before it is brought to Council that the
27 dimensional standards of the fence do not change. Mr. Breen stated that a permit is
28 required and will be reviewed when the application is received.
29
30 Chair Loehlein asked if there would be a consideration that the fabric needs to be in the
31 dimensions of the existing fence, and we do not allow fences to be supplemented by
32 adding height.
33
34 Commissioner Weinhold stated the permit process would address some of the concerns
35 that have been mentioned.
36
37 Commissioner Hudson questioned if any other Commissioners are concerned with the side
38 of the fence the screening is installed on, and Mr. Breen stated it makes most sense to be
39 on the property owner’s side of the fence (inside). Commissioner Hudson recommended
40 that the wording be added so that it be installed on the inside of the fence. Mr. Breen
41 stated it would need to be maintained. Mr. Breen noted that in their research the screening
42 fits betteron the flat side of the fence than the interior where there are posts. He also noted
43 that the City allowed fence maintenance, and the fence and screening would need to be
44 maintained.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – July 8, 2025
Page 3
1 Motion by Commissioner Winge, seconded by Commissioner Weinhold, to recommend
2 that the City Council approve the City Code Amendment – City Code 12-7: Fences and
3 Walls – City of Andover (Applicant)to include that the screen must be the same height as
4 the existing fence and that the existing dimensions of the fence do not change with the
5 application of the screening fabric/mesh. Motion carried on a 5-ayes vote.
6
7
8 OTHER BUSINESS.
9
10 Chair Loehlein invited all residents to Andover Family Fun Fest.
11
12
13 ADJOURNMENT
14
15 Motion by Commissioner Grout, seconded by Commissioner Winge to adjourn the
16 meeting. Motion carried on a 5-ayes vote.
17
18
19 Chair Loehlein adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m.
20
21
22 Respectfully Submitted,
23
24
25 Debbie Wolfe, Recording Secretary
26 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
1
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #4
TO:Planning and Zoning Commissioners
CC:Joe Janish, Community Development Director
FROM:Aidan Breen, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:PUBLIC HEARING:Consider Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Automobile
Service Station –3118 162nd Ln NW; PID# 16-32-24-23-0023 –Equipment
Engineering Services (Applicant).
DATE:August 12, 2025
INTRODUCTION
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an
nd
Automobile Service Station for the subject property located at 3118 162Ln NW. The subject
property is currently zoned Industrial.Andover City Code 12-11 and 12-12-4requires a
conditional use permit for auto service stationsin all allowable districts.
DISCUSSION
The applicant is proposing to operate a heavy machinery and diesel truck repair business at the
site. Per the applicant:
This will entail removing and replacing broken or worn out parts on units. There will
obviously be some over night parking for units getting repaired but will be charged or towed
away if customers decide to abandon units on property. I will have a zero tolerance for units
(things that need repair work) being left on property that are a sore eye to any one,
especially when I will have a decent amount of money into this facility to meet the cup \[IUP\]
standards.
The applicant has indicated that they may be interested in applying in CUPs for additional uses,
but will only be applying for the Automobile Service Station at this time. No liquid fuel storage
will be present on the property.
Staff research indicated that no Special Use Permit or Conditional Use Permits existed for
vehicle repair at the site.The classification as an “Automobile Service Station” is the closest
applicable category from the zoning use table in City Code 12-11. Specific requirements for
Automobile Service Stations are detailed in City Code 12-12-4.
This property is located in the Hughs Industrial Park, which means that this Conditional Use
Permit triggers the Interim Performance Standards required by City Code 12-14-18. The
applicant has submitted an Interim Use Permit application for those standards.
City code 12-15-7-B provides the following general review criteria to consider when granting
CUP. In granting a Conditional Use Permit, the City Council shall consider the advice and
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and:
1. The effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, moral and general welfare of
occupants of surrounding lands.
2. Existing and anticipated traffic conditions, including parking facilities on adjacent streets
and land.
3.The effect on values of property and scenic views in the surrounding area, and the effect
of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan.
City Code 12-12-4 also provides the following criteria for Automobile Service Stations:
A. All new buildings, the site, tanks, piping and dispensing stations, shallcomply with the
current provisions of the Minnesota State Building Code, Minnesota State Fire Code, and
all provisions related to underground liquid storage systems required in Section 12-12-2
of this code. (Amended Ord. 438, 6-3-14; Amended Ord. 463, 6-21-16)
B. Building permits shall not be issued for new construction or remodeling of facilities
unless Fire Department approval has been received.
C. Hours of operation will be approved by the City Council.
D. The site plan shall show parking areas for customers, employees, service vehicles and
those needing repair and no other areas of the site will be allowed vehicle parking. No
vehicle shall be parked awaiting service longer than ten (10) days. Inoperable vehicles are
regulated per section 6-5 of City Code.
E. Pump islands are subject to setback requirements.
F. Exterior storage and sales shall only be allowed as approved through the Conditional Use
Permit. (Amended Ord. 314, 10-4-2005)
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning Commission is asked conduct a public hearing and to make a recommendation on
the proposed Conditional Use Permit to the City Council.
Attachments: Draft Resolution of approval
Draft Resolution of denial
Location Map
Applicant’s Narrative
Site Plan with Proposed Improvements
2
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. RXXX-25
A RESOLUTION approving the Conditional Use Permit requested by Equipment Engineering
nd
Services for an Automobile Service Station for the property at 3118 162Ln NW, legally
described as:
The East 250 feet of the West 650 feet of the South 433 feet of the 2184.99 feet of the
West 1/2 of the Northwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County
Minnesota.
WHEREAS, Equipment Engineering Services has requested a Conditional Use Permit for an
Automobile Service Station for the property at 3118 162nd Ln NW, and;
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof the Planning and Zoning
Commission has conducted a public hearing on said conditional use permit at the August 12,
2025 regular meeting, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request meets the criteria of City Code 12-15-7; and would not have a detrimental effect
upon the health, safety, general welfare, values of property and scenic views in the surrounding
area, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request meets the criteria of City Code 12-12-4; and therefore achieves compatibility
with the adjacent and abutting land uses, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council the approval
of the Conditional Use Permit request, and;
WHEREAS, the City Council of Andover has received the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, and reviewed the request and has determined that said request meets the criteria of
City Code and 12-15-7, and;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover does
hereby approve the Conditional Use Permit for an automobile service station with bulk fuel
storage and exterior storage on the above legally described property with the following
conditions:
1) Approval of the conditional use permit shall be contingent upon approval of Interim
Use Permit for Interim Performance Standards pursuant to Andover City Code 12-14-
18.
2) The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from appropriate agencies.
3) The hours of operation shall be 8:00am to 6:00pm on Monday through Friday
4) If the City Council determines that no significant progress has been made in the first twelve
3
(12) months after the approval of this resolution, the CUP will be null and void. as defined in
City Code 12-15-7D.
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 19 day of August 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest: ________________________________
Jamie Barthel – Mayor
_______________________________
Michelle Hartner – City Clerk
4
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. RXXX-25
A RESOLUTION approving the Conditional Use Permit requested by Equipment Engineering
nd
Services for an Automobile Service Station for the property at 3118 162Ln NW, legally
described as:
The East 250 feet of the West 650 feet of the South 433 feet of the 2184.99 feet of the
West 1/2 of the Northwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County
Minnesota.
WHEREAS, Equipment Engineering Services has requested a Conditional Use Permit for an
Automobile Service Station for the property at 3118 162nd Ln NW, and;
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof the Planning and Zoning
Commission has conducted a public hearing on said conditional use permit at the August 12,
2025 regular meeting, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request does not meet the criteria of City Code 12-15-7; and would have a detrimental
effect upon the health, safety, general welfare, values of property and scenic views in the
surrounding area, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council the denial of
the Conditional Use Permit request, and;
WHEREAS, the City Council of Andover has received the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, and reviewed the request and has determined that said request does not meet the
criteria of City Code and 12-15-7 because:
1.
2.
3.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover does
hereby deny the Conditional Use Permit on the above legally described property for a
Conditional Use Permit for an Automobile Service Station with bulk fuel storage and exterior
storage due to the following findings:
1.
2.
3.
5
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 19day of August 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest: _______________________________
________________________________
Jamie Barthel – Mayor
_______________________________
Michelle Hartner – City Clerk
6
nd
Site Location –3118 162Ln NW
N
N
SITE
Date CreatedJuly 31,2025
Disclaimer: The provider makes no representation or warranties with respect to the reuse of this data.
7500 205tH Ave. N.W.
Nowthen, Minnesota 55330
KELLY A. PEARO, DRAFTER
612-804-7063 | kapearo79@gmail.com
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #5
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
CC: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
FROM: Aidan Breen, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Consider Interim Use Permit (IUP) for Interim Performance
Standards – 3118 162nd Ln NW; PID# 16-32-24-23-0023 – Equipment
Engineering Services (Applicant).
DATE: August 12, 2025
INTRODUCTION
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review an Interim Use Permit (IUP) for
nd
Interim Performance Standards for the subject property located at 3118 162 Ln NW. Andover
City Code 12-14-18 establishes Interim Performance Standards for properties within the Hughs
Westview Industrial Park, which are triggered when a property expands the commercial
structures on a property or the permitted uses at the property via a Conditional Use Permit
(CUP). The applicant has applied for a CUP for an Automobile Service Station to conduct diesel
engine and heavy machinery repair at the subject property, requiring an IUP application for
Interim Performance Standards.
DISCUSSION
The applicant is proposing to operate a heavy machinery and diesel truck repair business at the
site.Per the applicant:
This will entail removing and replacing broken or worn out parts on units. There will
obviously be some over night parking for units getting repaired but will be charged or towed
away if customers decide to abandon units on property. I will have a zero tolerance for units
(things that need repair work) being left on property that are a sore eye to any one,
especially when I will have a decent amount of money into this facility to meet the cup \[IUP\]
standards.
This property is located inthe Hughs Industrial Park, which means that this Conditional Use
Permit triggers the Interim Performance Standards required by City Code 12-14-18. The
applicant is requesting thisan Interim Use Permit application for those standards.
Review Criteria
City Code 12-14-8-C-2 states that applications for interim performance standards shall be
reviewed based on the following review criteria:
a. Existing appearance of the building and site;
nd
The site is located on the southern side of 162Ln NW. It is a former trash hauling
site which currently hosts a engine machining shop. The site has a small paved
customer parking area, an existing primary structure with a shop and small office
space, and another accessory shop building. There is a concrete apron paved
between the buildings. The remainder of the fenced-in yard is unpaved. To City staff’s
knowledge their have not been any previous requests for interim performance
standards at this property.
Tbe City Council discussed the types of site improvements they would like to see at
the February 25, 2025 Workshop. After reviewing initial plans for proposed
improvements, Council indicatedthey would like at least ¾ of the site to be paved,
including the customer parking area. Some area of dirt or gravel would be
acceptable. Curbing would not be required. Stormwater mitigation would be the
jurisdiction of the Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization, whose
regulations are triggered with disturbances of an acre or more of new pavement.
b. Compatibility of the proposed site development plan with the other industrial
properties in the area;
There are a number of properties in the Hughs/Westview industrial park area that
have gravel parking areas and parking lots with no curbing, though recent Interim
Performance Standards have emphasized paving these sites when possible. Proposed
landscaping and screening would also be similar to other properties in the area.
There is one other Automobile Service Station in the Industrial park that is a
consumer auto repair business which has a fully paved parking area.
c. Effect of the proposed use and the proposed site development plan on the adjacent
residential neighborhood, including traffic, noise, glare, buffers, and environmental
impacts.
Minimal impact due to existing screening and current uses.
City Code 12-15-8-D states that the Planning Commission shall recommend an interim use
permit and the Council shall issue such interim use permit only if it finds that such use at the
proposed location:
1. Will not create an excess burden on parks, streets, and other public facilities;
The proposed use will not create an excess burden on parks, streets, or other public
facilities.
2. Will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise harm the public
health, safety, and general welfare;
2
The proposed use provides for additional landscaping and screening and is at a level
of site improvement similartoother industrial properties in the area. The pavement
of the parking area and the use of no curbing is not anticipated to be injurious to the
surrounding neighborhood or to otherwise harm the public health, safety, and
general welfare.
3. Will not have a negative effect on values of property and scenic views;
City staff do not anticipate the proposed use will have a negative effect on the values
of property or scenic views.
4. Will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public;
City staff do not anticipate the proposed use will impose additional unreasonable
costs on the public.
5. Will be subjected to, by agreement with the owner, any conditions that the City
Council has deemed appropriate for permission of the use, including a condition that
the owner may be required to provide an appropriate financial surety to cover the cost
of removing the interim use and any interim structures upon the expiration of the
interim use permit.
A draft resolution of approval with conditions is attached for review. City staff do not
recommend any financial surety for the proposed use.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning Commission is asked conduct a public hearing and to make a recommendation on
the proposed Interim Use Permit to the City Council.
Attachments: Draft Resolution of approval
Draft Resolution of denial
Location Map
Applicant’s Narrative
Site Plan with Proposed Improvements
3
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. RXXX-25
A RESOLUTION approving the Conditional Use Permit requested by Equipment Engineering
nd
Services for an Automobile Service Station for the property at 3118 162Ln NW, legally
described as:
The East 250 feet of the West 650 feet of the South 433 feet of the 2184.99 feet of the
West 1/2 of the Northwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County
Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the applicant, Equipment Engineering Services, requested an Interim Use Permit for
Interim Performance Standards pursuant to Andover city Code 12-14-18; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 12, 2025;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request meets the standards of City Code 12-15-8; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of
the interim use permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby
approves the interim use permit to allow for interim performance standards on said property with
the following conditions:
1. Parking lot paving and striping shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City by
August 1, 2025.
2. Adequate accessible parking meeting all applicable requirements (number of stalls,
van access lane, signage) shall be provided.
3. Electric gate to south parking area shall be installed.
4. Dense foliage and trees shall be trimmed and pruned.
5. Turf and irrigation shall be installed in the unpaved northwestern section of the
property and the boulevard next to the road.
6. The applicant shall be responsible for the cleaning of material from the public
roadways as needed.
7. The Permit shall only provide for deviations to the City Code relative to the lack of
curbing and gravel/unpaved portion of the south parking area, as well as lack of
irrigation in the southern portion of the property. All other requirements of the City
Code are required to be fully complied with.
4
8. The Permit may continue until City sewer and water are extended into the
Hughs/Westview industrial park area. At that time, any future expansion or
redevelopment of the subject property shall be required to fully conform to the City
Code.
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 19 day of August 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest: ________________________________
Jamie Barthel – Mayor
________________________________
Michelle Hartner – City Clerk
5
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. RXXX-25
A RESOLUTION approving the Conditional Use Permit requested by Equipment Engineering Services for
nd
an Automobile Service Station for the property at 3118 162Ln NW, legally described as:
The East 250 feet of the West650 feet of the South 433 feet of the 2184.99 feet of the
West 1/2 of the Northwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County
Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the applicant, Equipment Engineering Services, requested an Interim Use Permit for
Interim Performance Standards pursuant to Andover city Code 12-14-18; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 12, 2025;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined
that said request does not meet the standards of City Code 12-15-8; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council the denial of
the Interim Use Permit, and;
WHEREAS, the City Council of Andover has received the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, and reviewed the request and has determined that said request does not meet the
standards of City Code and 12-15-8 because:
1.
2.
3.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover does
hereby deny the Interim Use Permit on the above legally described property for a Interim
Performance Standards due to the following findings:
1.
2.
3.
6
th
day of August 2025.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this19
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest: ________________________________
Jamie Barthel – Mayor
_______________________________
Michelle Hartner – City Clerk
7
nd
Site Location –3118 162Ln NW
N
N
SITE
Date CreatedJuly 31,2025
Disclaimer: The provider makes no representation or warranties with respect to the reuse of this data.
7500 205tH Ave. N.W.
Nowthen, Minnesota 55330
KELLY A. PEARO, DRAFTER
612-804-7063 | kapearo79@gmail.com
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #6
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
CC: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
FROM : Peter Hellegers, City Planner
SUBJECT:PUBLIC HEARING: Variance Requests for Signage on the property located
at 14220 Inca Street NW, (PID#: 30.32.24.43.0073) submitted by Holiday
Stationstores, LLC c/o Karen Dodge of Municipal Resolutions, LLC
(Applicant).
DATE: August 12, 2025
INTRODUCTION
The applicants are requesting a variance for a second freestanding sign and corresponding variance
for additional signage for their property located at 14220 Inca Street NW (“subject property”)
Automobile Service Stations are allowed one (1) freestanding sign by City Code.
Properties located in the Neighborhood Business (NB) Zoning District are limited by City
Code to three (3) square feet of signage per front foot of building.
A variance is a way that cities may allow for an exception to part of an ordinance for a specific
property. Minnesota State Statute and City Code provide specific review criteria the City must
consider when reviewing a variance request, these criteria are included later in this report. If a
variance is approved, it becomes a property right which runs with the land.
BACKGROUND
Location
The subject property is located within the NB: Neighborhood Business Zoning District. Abutting
properties to the north and south are also located in the NB Zoning District. The subject property
th
abuts 7 Avenue NW at its westerly side and Inca Street NW on its easterly side.
Vehicular Access
On the northerly side of the subject property there is a shared driveway between the subject
th
property and the Taco Bell property to the north. The shared driveway allows right-turns from 7
Avenue onto the shared driveway which then provides access to both the Taco Bell and the
th
Holiday. In addition to the right-in access from 7 Avenue NW. The site has a full access point
directly to the site at Inca Street NW, a second full access point where the shared driveway
intersects with Inca Street NW and would have easement access to another shared driveway on the
properties to the south when the future development occurs on those sites. Signalizedaccess to the
rdth
entire development is located north of the subject property at 143 Avenue NW and 7 Avenue
NW.
1
Figure 1-Site Location Figure 2-Vehicular Access(see reference table below)
Table 1 –Vehicular Access( also see mapabove)
Figure 3–Aerial Photo of Subject Property
2
Development Area
The subject property is located within the Andover Crossings development. The first phase of the
development included an apartment building and a senior residential buildingwhich arelocated
east of Inca Street NW and the Taco Bell property which sits directly to the north of the subject
property. The second phase of the development includes the subject property and two other
properties to the south of the subject property which would be developed at some point in the
future. These parcels were also recently platted as Andover Crossings Two. A Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) for anAutomobile Service Station was also approved for the subject property.
Figure 4–DevelopmentLayout From PUD(for parcels in Andover Crossings Two)
Public Hearing Notice
Public hearing notices were sent to the owners of properties within 350 feet of the subject property
and published in the City’s official newspaper, the Anoka County Union Herald. In addition signs
noting of the potential zoning change were placed on the property to alert the public of the public
th
hearing for the proposed variance. Public hearing signs were placedon both the 7Avenue side
and Inca Street sides of the property.
SignageStandards
The Andover City Codeallows for signage through standards provided in Section 12-8 of the City
Code.There are two sections of City Code which are directly related to the application:
3
Section 12-8-7-D: Performance Standards; Size and Placement Standards
D. Automobile service stations may erect one pylon or pedestal sign not
to exceed twenty-five feet (25’) in height in a setback area, provided no
part of any such sign shall be closer to the side lot lines than the
required side yard setback, nor within five feet (5’) of the rear lot line or
any street right of way.
Section 12-8-8: Permitted Signs and Standards by Zoning District
B. Shopping Center (SC) and Neighborhood Business (NB) Districts:
1. Type: Area identification, ball field advertising, business identification,
institutional, scoreboard advertising, temporary, any sign exempted in
section 12-8-4.
2. Style: Combination, flashing, freestanding, illuminated, wall.
3. Size:
a. The aggregate square footage of sign space per lot shall not exceed
the sum of three (3) square feet per front foot of building.
b. No single sign shall exceed one hundred (100) square feet except
area identification signs, which shall not exceed three hundred (300)
square feet.
4. Height: No taller than the highest outside wall or parapet or twenty-five
feet (25'), whichever is less.
DISCUSSION
Freestanding Signage
The applicants are requesting a variance from City Codeto allow a second freestanding sign
(referred to as “MID B”) where Code would only allowone freestanding sign for an Automobile
Service Station.
Aggregate Signage
The applicants are also requesting a corresponding variance from the maximum aggregate signage
area for the subject property. In order to discuss aggregate signage area it is helpful to understand
how signage is calculated. There are two sides of the proposed building which front on a public
street; the east side and the west sides of the building. As the north side of the building is a
common property line with a shared driveway serving the subject property and the Taco Bell to the
north, it does not count as frontage.
The east and west sides of the proposed gas station building have approximately 50 feet of
frontage on each side. Given the two sides, which would be 100 feet times the three-square feet of
signage allowed per front foot in the NB Zoning District that would allow for an aggregate signage
area of 300 square feet for the subject property.
The applicant previously applied for a signage permit with 385.7 square feet of signage but that
would have exceeded the allowable signage area for the property. The second freestanding sign
(“MID B”), which is 89.6 square feet was removed which brought the signage just below the
requirement and the City approved a signage permit for 296.1 square feet of signage. The proposed
variance would bring the signage to 385.7 square feet, which would exceed the maximum
aggregate signage area by 85.7 square feet.
4
Currently Approved Signage -Holiday
SignageSignage (in s.f.)
#1 -Freestanding (“MID Sign A”)98.6
#2 -Building Wall Sign (A) -north63.5
#3 -Building Wall Sign (B) -west25.0
#4 -Building Wall Sign (C) -south40.6
#5 -Fuel Canopy Sign -north34.2
#6 -Fuel Canopy Sign -west34.2
N/A
#7 -Directional
N/A
#8 –Directional
APPROVED TOTAL296.1
(300 sf is max)
Proposed Additional Signage -Holiday
#9 –PROPOSED Freestanding (“MID Sign B”)89.6
PROPOSED TOTAL 385.7
Table 2 - Signage (the numbers for the signs on this table are displayed below inFigure 5)
Figure 5 - Signage Locations( see signage descriptions on table above)
5
Review Criteria
City Code 12-15-9 establishes review criteria for considering variance requests and states that
variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of
the official control and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances
may be granted when the applicant for the variances establishes that there are practical difficulties
in complying with the official control. “Practical difficulties” as used in connection with the
granting of a variance, means:
1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
an official control.
2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to their property not created by
the landowner.
3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
The City Council may also impose reasonable conditions on the granting of a variance request. A
condition must be related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the
variance.
As practical difficulties must be established by the applicants, a letter submitted by the applicants
is attached for review as well as other materials submitted by the applicant in support of their
request.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning and Zoning Commission is requested to:
1. Conduct a public hearing on the proposed request, and
2. Compare the variance requests with the review criteria of City Code 12-15-9 and make a
recommendation to the City Council based on findings of fact.
Staff have drafted the attached resolutions for approval or denial of the variance request. Specific
findings related to the variance criteria need to be adopted by the City Council when they approve
or deny the request.
Attachment(s):
6-1: Draft Resolutions of Approval and Denial
6-2: Location Map
6-3: City Code § 12-8 – Signs
6-4: City Code § 12-15-9 – Variances
6-5: Applicant’s Application Materials
CC: Karen Dodge - Municipal Resolution, LLC
6
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO. XXXX
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 14220
INCA ST NW; PID# 30-32-24-43-0073 LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDOVER CROSSINGS TWO
WHEREAS, Holiday Stationstores, LLC are the owners of a parcel of land located at 14220 Inca
Street NW, Andover, Minnesota with Parcel ID Number 30-32-24-43-0073; and,
WHEREAS, Holiday Stationstores, LLC c/o Karen Dodge of Municipal Resolutions, LLC have
submitted an application for Variances for additional signage area beyond what is permitted by
City Code to allow for a second freestanding sign, for the property at 14220 Inca Street NW in the
City of Andover, Minnesota; and,
WHEREAS, the use of the property is considered an Automobile Service Station under City Code,
and City Code Section 12-8-7-D establishes specific standards for Automobile Service Station
signage including allowing one (1) pylon or pedestal sign which is not to exceed twenty-five feet
(25’) in height; and
WHEREAS, the property is located in the Neighborhood Business Zoning District, and City Code
Section 12-8-8-B allows an aggregate signage area for properties in the Neighborhood Business
Zoning District for up to three (3) square feet per front foot of the building and a maximum
individual signage size of one hundred (100) square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the building planned for the property at 14220 Inca Street NW has two sides fronting
the public street and the property has one side facing a shared private driveway easement, and
WHEREAS, the two sides of the building frontage on those public streets are a combined 100 feet,
which pursuant to City Code Section 12-8-8-B would allow for up to 300 square feet of signage for
the property; and
WHEREAS, the City of Andover has approved a signage permit for the property allowing one
freestanding sign (“MID A”) that would be 98.6 square feet in area and 25 feet in height, and the
aggregate signage area for the property would be 296.10 square feet; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to add a second freestanding sign (“MID B”) of
approximately 89.6 square feet, and the proposal would vary from City Code Section 12-8-7-D
with regard to the number of freestanding signs, and would also vary from the maximum signage
area, as established in City Code Section 12-8-8-B, exceeding that number by approximately 85.7
square feet; and,
7
WHEREAS, City Code Section 12-15-9, as authorized by Minnesota Statute Section 462.354,
subdivision 2 and Minnesota Statute Section 462.357 subdivision 6, provides that a variance from
the requirements of the zoning ordinance may be granted when:
(1) the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this ordinance; and
(2) when the variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan; and
(3) when the applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the
ordinance.
“Practical difficulties” as used in connection with the granting of a variance means that:
a) the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
the zoning ordinance; and,
b) the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner; and,
c) the variance, if granted will not alter the essential character of the locality; and,
d) economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning
Commission held a public hearing on August 12, 2025; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council (approval)of
the variance request; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council, at their meeting on August 19, 2025, completed a review of the
variance request, all materials presented, along with the recommendation of the Planning and
Zoning Commission; and,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Andover, Minnesota that it
(agrees) with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and (approves) the
variance requests to (a) allow for an additional freestanding sign for an Automobile Service
Station, and (b) allow additional signage area of no more than 86 square feet, based upon the
findings pursuant to City Code Section 12-15-9. The City Council’s findings related to the
standards are as follows:
WHEREAS, based on the criteria for granting variances under City Code 12-15-9, the City
Council finds the following findings of fact to support the (approval) of the variance requests:
1. There (are) practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance:
a. Reasonableness:_____________________________________
b. Unique Circumstance:________________________________
c. Character of the Locality:_____________________________
2. The proposal (is) in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance:
a. ____________________________________________________________
3. The proposed variance (is) consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
a. _______________________________________________
4. The application for the variance (would) meet the required standards of the ordinance
because:
8
a. ____________________________________________
FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby (approves)
the variance requests with the following conditions:
1. All necessary permits shall be obtained from any agency having an interest in
improvements constructed on the property.
2. An approved Commercial Site Plan shall be required for all proposed improvements to the
property.
3. Pursuant to City Code 12-15-9-E-6, if the City Council determines that no significant
progress has been made within the first twelve (12) months after the approval of the
variance, the variance will be null and void.
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 19day of August 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER CITY OF ANDOVER
Michelle Hartner, City Clerk Jamie Barthel, Mayor
9
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO. XXXX
A RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 14220
INCA ST NW; PID# 30-32-24-43-0073 LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDOVER CROSSINGS TWO
WHEREAS, Holiday Stationstores, LLC are the owners of a parcel of land located at 14220 Inca
Street NW, Andover, Minnesota with Parcel ID Number 30-32-24-43-0073; and,
WHEREAS, Holiday Stationstores, LLC c/o Karen Dodge of Municipal Resolutions, LLC have
submitted an application for Variances for additional signage area beyond what is permitted by
City Code to allow for a second freestanding sign, for the property at 14220 Inca Street NW in the
City of Andover, Minnesota; and,
WHEREAS, the use of the property is considered an Automobile Service Station under City Code,
and City Code Section 12-8-7-D establishes specific standards for Automobile Service Station
signage including allowing one (1) pylon or pedestal sign which is not to exceed twenty-five feet
(25’) in height; and
WHEREAS, the property is located in the Neighborhood Business Zoning District, and City Code
Section 12-8-8-B allows an aggregate signage area for properties in the Neighborhood Business
Zoning District for up to three (3) square feet per front foot of the building and a maximum
individual signage size of one hundred (100) square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the building planned for the property at 14220 Inca Street NW has two sides fronting
the public street and the property has one side facing a shared private driveway easement, and
WHEREAS, the two sides of the building frontage on those public streets are a combined 100 feet,
which pursuant to City Code Section 12-8-8-B would allow for up to 300 square feet of signage for
the property; and
WHEREAS, the City of Andover has approved a signage permit for the property allowing one
freestanding sign (“MID A”) that would be 98.6 square feet in area and 25 feet in height, and the
aggregate signage area for the property would be 296.10 square feet; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to add a second freestanding sign (“MID B”) of
approximately 89.6 square feet, and the proposal would vary from City Code Section 12-8-7-D
with regard to the number of freestanding signs, and would also vary from the maximum signage
area, as established in City Code Section 12-8-8-B, exceeding that number by approximately 85.7
square feet; and,
10
WHEREAS, City Code Section 12-15-9, as authorized by Minnesota Statute Section 462.354,
subdivision 2 and Minnesota Statute Section 462.357 subdivision 6, provides that a variance from
the requirements of the zoning ordinance may be granted when:
(1) the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this ordinance; and
(2) when the variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan; and
(3) when the applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the
ordinance.
“Practical difficulties” as used in connection with the granting of a variance means that:
a) the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
the zoning ordinance; and,
b) the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner; and,
c) the variance, if granted will not alter the essential character of the locality; and,
d) economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning
Commission held a public hearing on August 12, 2025; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council (denial) of
the variance request; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council, at their meeting on August 19, 2025, completed a review of the
variance request, all materials presented, along with the recommendation of the Planning and
Zoning Commission; and,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Andover, Minnesota that it
(agrees) with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and (denies) the
variance requests to (a) allow for an additional freestanding sign for an Automobile Service
Station, and (b) allow additional signage area of no more than 86 square feet, based upon the
findings pursuant to City Code Section 12-15-9, The City Council’s findings related to the
standards are as follows:
WHEREAS, based on the criteria for granting variances under City Code 12-15-9, the City
Council finds the following findings of fact to support the (denial) of the variance requests:
5. There (are not) practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance:
a. Reasonableness:_____________________________________
b. Unique Circumstance:________________________________
c. Character of the Locality:_____________________________
6. The proposal (is not) in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning
ordinance:
a. ____________________________________________________________
7. The proposed variance (is not) consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
a. _______________________________________________
11
8. The application for the variance (would not) meet the required standards of the ordinance
because:
a. ____________________________________________
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 19day of August 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER CITY OF ANDOVER
Michelle Hartner, City Clerk Jamie Barthel, Mayor
12
13
1
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #7
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
CC: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
FROM : Aidan Breen, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:PUBLIC HEARING:Consider Preliminary Plat for Boulder Prairie Estates –
888 Crosstown Blvd NW and 15540 Prairie Rd NW; PID# 23-32-24-11-0007 and
23-32-24-11-0002 – Boulder Contracting, LLC (Applicant).
DATE: August 12, 2025
INTRODUCTION
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a Preliminary Plat for Boulder Prairie
Estates, a proposed 28-lot residential subdivision on the 14.24 acre properties at 888 Crosstown
Boulevard NW and 15540 Prairie Road NW. The plat includes 27 new homes and the existing
home at 888 Crosstown Blvd NW.
BACKGROUND
Conformance with Local Plans and Ordinances
1.The entire 14.24-acre site is located within theMetropolitan Urban Service Area
(MUSA) boundary.
2.The site is guided in the 2018 Comprehensive Plan as Transitional Residential, a
designation that calls for new developments to be platted under urban residential
guidelines, calling for a density of 2.4 to 4 units per acre. The proposed 32-lot
development would meet that standard with a density of 2.95 units per acre
Figure 1- Zoning and FLU Maps
3.A 2024 Comprehensive Plan Amendment under Resolution R062-24 has already adjusted
the sewer staging map for the site location, categorizing the site for development in 2021-
2025. No Comprehensive Plan Amendment will be required for this development.
4.The properties will be rezoned from R-1 Single Family Rural to R-4 Single Family
Urban.
Lots
27of the 28lots meet the minimum lot width, depth,and area requirements of the R-4 zoning
district. Block 3 Lot 1 will require a variance for reducing the side yard setback to 25 feet from
35 feet, which is the requirement for any parcel that is not a back-to-back lot.
Figure 2-Boulder Prairie Estates -Proposed Preliminary Plat
Street Access
The development would have two access points, one from Crosstown BoulevardNW and
another from Prairie RoadNW.
Crosstown Boulevard Access(A): The proposed access from Crosstown would align with the
existing Sycamore Street and consist of afour-legged, uncontrolled access (right and left turn
lanes into the development). This would also create a new left-turn lane to turn north on
Sycamore St NW to access the neighborhood north of the development.See
Prairie Road Access(B): FromPrairie Rd NW, there would be a three-legged access without
dedicated turn lanes. A bypass lane would be constructed for vehicles traveling north on Prairie
Road.
2
Other Access Points (C):The plat proposes a temporary cul de sac on the west side of the
development which will connect to another road when the property to the west develops later. No
additional connection to Crosstown Boulevard NW would be allowed at that location, but the
connection may serve as a secondary access point for the development depending on future
development to the south of this plat.A road stub for a future cul de sac on the property to the
northeast is also proposed.
A
C
B
C
Figure 3-Access Points
A
Figure 4 –Proposed access point at Crosstown Blvd NW
3
PRAIRIE RD NW
B
Figure 4 –Proposed access point at Prairie Rd NW
Sewer and Water Access
Each of the lots will be served by City of Andover municipal water and sewer. City water and
sewer would be provided to the site from the north at Sycamore Street NW.The applicant will
also provide stubs at the temporary cul de sac and road stub to provide access for future
developments.
CoonCreek Watershed District(CCWD)
CCWD staff recommended approval for the project at their July 28, 2025 board meeting.
Coordination with other Agencies
The developer and/or owner are responsible to obtain all necessary permits (Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, CCWD, 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.
Tree Preservation/ Trees / Landscaping
The applicant has not yet provided a tree protection plan. Per the recommendation of city staff, a
tree protection plan shall be provided,and it is recommended to protect as many trees as
possible. There are many high quality mature trees existing on the site.
City code requires fourtrees to be placed on the property of all new construction homes. Existing
trees may count toward this total if they are preserved. This shall be indicated in the tree
protection plan.
Stormwater Requirements
Stormwater ponding and infiltration basins are proposedfor Block 4 Lot 6, the westernportion
of Block 1, and the entire southern portion of the site along Block 2.
Park and Trail Dedication –(Park and Recreation Commission)
The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed this site during the Sketch Plan process at the
January 16, 2025 meeting and recommended cash in lieu of land. A bench will be graded for a
future trail on Crosstown Boulevard NW, and a trail is planned along Prairie Road at some point
in the future.
4
Public Notice
In accordance with City Code, public hearing notice was published in the Anoka County Union
Herald and mailed notice was provided to properties within 350 feet of the site, which is located
within the MUSA boundary, using GIS data provided by Anoka County. In addition, signs have
been posted to alert passersby on Crosstown Boulevard and Prairie Road of the public hearing.
BUDGET IMPACT
Added tax revenue generated from additional properties.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing related to the
preliminary plat and to make a recommendation to the City Council.
Attachments: Draft Resolution of Approval
Draft Resolution of Denial
Exhibit A – Underlying Legal Description
Location Map
Andover Review Committee – Review #2 Comments from July 21, 2025
Preliminary Plat Plan Set
5
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO XXX-25
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF “Boulder Prairie Estates”
FOR THE PROPERTYLEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
(See attached Exhibit A)
WHEREAS, Boulder Contracting, LLC, has requested approval of a preliminary plat for Boulder
Prairie Estates; and
WHEREAS, the Andover Review Committee has reviewed the preliminary plat; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the Planning Commission has
th
conducted a public hearing on said plat at the August 12, 2025 Regular Meeting; and
WHEREAS, as a result of such public hearing, the Planning Commission recommends approval
of the preliminary plat to the City Council; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby
agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approves the
Preliminary Plat of Boulder Prairie Estates with the following conditions:
1. City of Andover staff comments dated July 21, 2025.
2. The property must be rezoned from R-1 to R-4. This requires a rezoning application,
public hearing, and city council approval.
3. The applicant shall be responsible for the cost of construction of all improvements
proposed as a part of the preliminary plat.
4. One building permit may be issued for the proposed platted area after demolition of the
existing home on the property at 15540 Prairie Rd NW, however no additional building
permits will be issued until the final plat has been recorded with Anoka County.
5. Prior to final plat recording at Anoka County, a development agreement acceptable to the
City Attorney must be executed by the Developer.
6. Separate documents shall be required for each Vehicle Maintenance Access Area.
7. Such plat approval is contingent upon the rezoning.
8. Such plat approval is contingent upon approval of the Variance for a reduced side yard
setback for Block 3 Lot 1.
9. Applicant shall construct access improvements as reviewed and approved by the City of
Andover
10. Applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from appropriate jurisdictions and agencies
in order to develop the property.
11. Applicant shall provide Homeowners Association documents, if any, at time of final plat.
6
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 129 day of August 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest: ________________________________
Jamie Barthel – Mayor
_______________________________
Michelle Hartner – City Clerk
7
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO RXXX-25
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF “Boulder Prairie Estates” FOR
THE PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
(See attached Exhibit A)
WHEREAS, Boulder Contracting, LLC, has requested approval of a preliminary plat for Boulder
Prairie Estates; and
WHEREAS, the Andover Review Committee has reviewed the preliminary plat; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the Planning Commission has
th
conducted a public hearing on said plat August 12, 2025 Regular Meeting; and
WHEREAS, as a result of such public hearing, the Planning Commission recommends denial of
the preliminary plat to the City Council; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby
agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denies the
Preliminary Plat of Boulder Prairie Estates due to the following reasons:
1.
2.
3.
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 19 day of August 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest: ________________________________
Jamie Barthel –Mayor
_______________________________
Michelle Hartner –City Clerk
8
4-21-25
EXHIBIT A
BOULDER PRAIRIE ESTATES
UNDERLYING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 23, Township 32,
Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Section 23; thence South 58 degrees
52 minutes 30 seconds West along the approximate centerline of County State Aid
Highway No. 18 a distance of 1260.88 feet; thence South 0 degrees 04 minutes 12
seconds West and parallel with the West line of said Northeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter a distance of 240.0 feet to the actual point of beginning of the
tract of land to be hereby described; thence South 89 degrees 55 minutes 48
seconds East a distance of 100.0 feet; thence North 58 degrees 52 minutes 30
seconds East and parallel with said centerline a distance of 315.88 feet; thence
South 31 degrees 07 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 224.17 feet; thence
East on a line having a bearing of East and West, a distance of 593.38 feet, more or
less, to the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence
South, on a line having a bearing of North and South, along the East line of said
Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, a distance of 384.42 feet, more or less,
to the Southeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence
North 88 degrees 25 minutes 49 seconds West along the South line of said
Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 1080.53 feet, more or less,
to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with the West line of said Northeast
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter from the actual point of beginning; thence North 0
degrees 04 minutes 12 seconds East along said parallel line a distance of 383.56
feet, more or less, to the actual point of beginning.
AND
That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 23, Township 32,
Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Section 23; thence South 58 degrees
52 minutes 30 seconds West along the approximate centerline of County State Aid
Highway No. 18 a distance of 983.77 feet to the actual point of beginning of the tract
of land to be hereby described; thence North 58 degrees 52 minutes 30 seconds
East along said centerline a distance of 369.91 feet; thence South 31 degrees 07
minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 268.49 feet; thence South on a line having a
bearing of North and South a distance of 373.35 feet and being parallel with the East
line; thence West on a line having a bearing of East and West a distance of 260.67
feet, more or less, to the point of intersection with a line drawn South 31 degrees 07
minutes 30 seconds East from the point of beginning; thence North along said line
to the point of beginning a distance of 481.26 feet.
Site Location –888 Crosstown Blvd NW & 15540 Prairie Rd NW
N
SITE
N
Date CreatedJuly 31,2025
Disclaimer: The provider makes no representation or warranties with respect to the reuse of this data.
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
MEMORANDUM
TO:Brian Jansen, Boulder Contracting
FROM:Aidan Breen, Associate City Planner
SUBJECT: Review #2–Boulder Prairie Estates: Preliminary Platfor propertiesat 888 Crosstown
BlvdNW (PID: 23-32-24-11-0007)and 15540 Prairie Rd NW (PID: 23-32-24-11-0002)
DATE:July 21, 2025
City staff havecompleted an initial review of the Preliminary Platof the property at 888 Crosstown
BlvdNWand 15540 Prairie Rd NW.
Engineering Department
Engineering Department commentsfor Review #2are attached.Redlines are available for pickup at
City Hall.
1.See attached document for comments 1-49. Additional comments pending further review and
plan revisions.
Natural ResourceTechnician
Natural Resource Techniciancomments from Review #2are as follows:
50.Please provide a Tree Protection Plan as a part of the plan set. This shall include tree clearing
limits and tree protection areas. This can be included on the same sheet as the Grading, Drainage,
and Erosion Control Plan.
51.The property has a lot of high quality trees. It’s recommended to save as many trees as possible.
52.Additional comments pending further review.
Please note that it isa requirement that the Developer respondsto each of these items in writing
when re-submitting the revised plat to the City. A digital copy will be emailed to you so that so that
you can type responses below the original comments. If you have any questions, feel free to contact Aidan
Breen, Associate City Plannerat 763.767.5142or a.breen@andovermn.gov
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO:Aidan Breen, Associate City Planner
FROM: David Berkowitz, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Jason Law, Asst. City Engineer
DATE: July 18, 2025
REFERENCE: Boulder Prairie Estates/ Preliminary Plat / Review #2
The following comments are regarding Review #2of the Preliminary Plat:
1.(Review #1) The developer is responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the CCWD,
MnDNR, MPCA, MCES, MDH, or any other agency that is interested in the site. Comment noted,
kept for tracking.
2.(Review #1) Provide estimated quantities and cost estimate with pay item descriptions consistent with
MnDOT Trns*port list. Break quantities out into separate sections for Sanitary Sewer, Watermain, Storm
Sewer and Streets.Comment noted, kept for tracking.
3.(Review #1) All Sheets: Remove “Preliminary” from title block and have appropriate individual sign all plan
sheets prior to final City approval. Not done.Developer’s engineer stated this will be done once City
approves plan.
4.All sheets: add house numbers onto house outline or somewhere in parcel for lots adjacent to project.
5.Sheets C0, C1.7, C1.8, C3.1, & C3.2: Remove “Schematic” from sheet name. Design details need to be
finalized with this plan set to verify grading limits and design all are acceptable.
6.Sheet S2 and all applicable sheets: Revise D&UE in rear of Lots 4-6, Block 4 to encompass the low area
HWL and to project path for EOF for Low area 7 to the north. Minimize width of D&UE for EOF as much
as possible to maximize useable rear yard.
7.(Review #1) Sheet C1.1: Depict grading for a future 8’ wide bituminous trail along the north and east sides
of the plat starting 2’ inside of the ROW. Label as “Future Trail Grading.” Not done. Along Prairie Road,
need to provide a 10’ wide area at 10:1 inside plat boundary as a safety bench for future trail. Proposed
contours are not shown along Crosstown Blvd. These will need to tie into the proposed contours for the
pavement wideningand depict the ditch as well. Contours for pavement widening to be based upon
Crosstown Blvd typical section (see comments for sheet C3.1).
8.Sheet C1.1 and all applicable sheets: Show ped ramps at Crosstown / Sycamore intersection coming to the
mid radii. Extend curb to south end of ped ramps and construct ped ramps with this project. Trail will be
constructed at a future date.
9.Sheet C1.1: Call out the EOF elevations for Basin 4 as well as the low point in the road just east of Basin 4.
10.Sheet C1.1: Provide spot elevations along with revised D&UE in rear of Lots 4-6, Block 4 that protect the
EOF for FES 7.
11.Sheets C1.1 and all applicable sheets: For FES 107 and CB 104, only label the 100-Year HWL and use this
as the design HWL in these locations. This is reasonable as they are smaller ditching areas and the 100-Year
HWL is still above the 10-Day Snowmelt event in the downstream discharge location of Basin 1. Providing
EOF’s at the HWL is still crucial (or as close as possible to the HWL). For CB 104, an EOF may be able to
be provided just southeast of the structure at 902.4 +/-.
12.Sheet C1.1: For the grading along the east side of Basin 1, provide a 10’ wide bench at 10:1 maximum slope
starting at the right of way. This will provide a safer design when immediately adjacent to a future trail.
13. Sheets C1.1, C2.2 and all applicable sheets: Revise design so there is not an increase in the proposed HWL
for Pond EP as currently identified. Potential option may be to add a catch basin on south side of valley
th
gutter at 155
Lane / Prairie road that would tie into proposed storm sewer into Basin 1 instead of draining to
Pond EP.
14. Sheets C1.1, C1.3: Lot 1, Block 3 and Lots 1-3, Block 4 do not meet the low floor separation requirement in
being 2’ above the HWL. Either revise low floors or provide Darcy’s Law calculations in stormwater report
verifying they will not be impacted by HWLprior to drawdown.
15. (Review #1) Sheet C1.1: Depict 20’ wide Vehicle Maintenance Accesses at ponds where marked up in
plans. Need to provide separate recordable documents for each location. VMA on west side of L9 B1 was
not added. This VMA could be vacated in the future if development occurs to the west.
16. Sheet C1.2: Add note to “Coordinate with City” or similar anywhere an existing sign is proposed to be
relocated. City crews will relocate any signs that are in the way of construction.
17. Sheet C1.2: Add note to remove existing septic tanks, which are the two manholes in the front yard of 888
Crosstown Blvd.
18. Sheet C1.3: Fill out table for L1, B1. Revise table as redlined. For lots not meeting the 2’ low floor
separation requirement, add a double asterisk in the low floor elevation cell with the following note below
the table “** Denotes low floor elevation verified with Darcy’s Law calculations.”
19. Sheet C1.6: Move stop sign and street sign at Crosstown / Sycamore intersection to not conflict with ped
ramps.
20. Sheet C1.6: Add barricades (Detail 509) to Quince St stub.
th
21. Sheet C1.6: Label 20’ radii for Quince St / 155 Lane intersection.
22. Sheet C1.7: Extend street profile at west end to westerly curb line on cul de sac and show how grading will
be tied into the existing ground profile.
23. Sheet C1.8: Extend street profile at north end of Quince St to edge of bit and show how grading will be tied
into the existing ground profile.
th
24. Sheet C2.1: Insulate water main (4”) where water main crosses storm sewer at 155 Lane / Sycamore
intersection.
25. Sheet C2.2: It appears CB 204 and 205 could be better served sliding east one lot and having double catch
basins at the low point in the street. This would also eliminate the conflict with the mailbox cluster and storm
sewer catch basin.
th
26. Sheet C2.2: Per other comments in this letter, review feasibility of adding a CB on south side of 155 Lane
along west side of Prairie Road to direct some runoff away from Pond EP and into Basin 1. This would help
with the currently shown increase in HWL at Pond EP.
27. Sheet C3.1: Add a typical section for the pavement widening consistent with City As-Built 4909 (attached to
redlines).
28. Sheet C3.1: Need to generate proposed contours (using typical section discussed above) and incorporating
an 8’ wide trail 2’ inside the ROW along Prairie Road. Grading outside of the plat boundary for pavement
widening would be limited to only that as required for pavement widening on Crosstown Blvd. Within the
plat boundary, a 10’ wide bench for an 8’ future trail shall be graded beginning 2’ inside of the ROW. Verify
all construction limits and removals along Crosstown Blvd once contours / construction limits are generated.
29. Sheet C3.1: Widening improvements should stay outside of the railroad ROW. To achieve this, begin the
eastbound left turn lane at Sycamore St at the same location the right turn lane begins. Change tapers at both
sides of the Sycamore Street / Crosstown intersection to 10:1 as marked up (mainly impacts gore areas).
30. Sheet C3.1: For Crosstown Blvd, show stationing, pavement inset (mixes and thicknesses in red lines).
31. Sheet C3.1: For constructability and a quality paving job, depict the edge of bituminous for the pavement
widening areas based on a full width paver instead of paving just a sliver. Incorporate this into the generated
proposed contours.
32. Sheet C3.2: In the top view, call out removal of existing fog line and show the lip of the gutter for the next
curb.
33. Sheet C3.2: Show proposed contours and verify construction and removal limits along corridor.
34. Sheet C3.2: Call out new 4” white dashed line in bypass lane.
35. Sheet C3.2: Match existing pavement section for widening as redlined.
36. Sheet C4.2: Add Detail 401L for 27” structure.
37. Sheet C4.4: Add to note for infiltration basin detail “Post construction infiltration rates shall not exceed
8.3”/hr nor be less than design rates assumed for each basin. If post construction rates are outside of these
limits soil amendments must be completed and infiltration rates retested.”
38. Once the preliminary plat plans / grading plan is approved and developers agreement executed a pre-
construction meeting can be scheduled for grading. For street and utilities, a final street and utility plan needs
to be prepared. Majority of the work is completed, but would need to include utility profiles and final turn
lane / bypass lane plans along with a project specification. The City would allow Plowe Engineering to
prepare this is acceptable with the developer’s engineer. Submittal of any permits forutility construction
would also be required.
39. (Review #1) Once approved by the City and recorded at the County, provide AutoCAD (dwg) drawings
for the approved final plat, and all construction drawings including the grading plan. Noted, comment
kept for tracking.
40. Return red lined plan set from this review with the next submittal.
41. Additional comments pending further review and plan revisions.
The following comments are regarding Review #2 of the Stormwater Management Plan:
42. Revise proposed design so Pond EP HWL does not increase under proposed conditions. Update narrative,
stormwater models, tributary areas, storm sewer calculations, and plans accordingly based upon proposed
solution.
43. On page 4 of the narrative, correct calculations for infiltration volume required.
44. On page 6 of narrative, add Darcy’s Law calculations for L1B1 and Lots 1-3, Block 4 or raise up low floors
to meet 2’ above adjacent HWL.
45. For 10-Day Snowmelt analysis, 0.1”/hr of infiltration was used in models. Per City guidelines, you can use
half of the rate assumed for 100-year event up to a maximum of 0.5”/hr. This could reduce some design
HWL’s in basins governed by the 10-Day Snowmeltevent. City staff sent an email to the CCWD on
7/18/25 to verify this would meet their requirements. If so, revise existing and proposed models accordingly.
46. For the proposed conditions models for Basin 3 and Basin 4, 8.1”/hr was used in the stormwater model for
infiltration rate. While this is acceptable, and as pointed out by CCWD comments as well, post construction
infiltration rate testing would need to be between 8.1”/hr and 8.3”/hr which could prove difficult to achieve
with a tight range. Recommend utilizing a lower proposed infiltration rate for design purposes.
47. Revise basin HWL’s in report and plan set based upon above comments.
48. Return red lined copy of Stormwater Report from this review with the next submittal.
49. Additional comments pending further review and plan revisions.
Note: It is a requirement that the Developer respond to each of these items in writing (get digital copy
from City and type responses below original comment) when re-submitting the revised plat to the City.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact Jason Law, Assistant City Engineer at (763) 767-5130 or
David Berkowitz, Director of Public Works/City Engineer at (763) 767-5133.
1
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #8
TO:Planning and Zoning Commissioners
CC:Joe Janish, Community Development Director
FROM:Aidan Breen, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:PUBLIC HEARING:Consider Variance request for minimum side yard
setbacks –Lot 1 Block 3, Boulder Prairie Estates –Boulder Contracting, LLC
(Applicant).
DATE:August 12, 2025
INTRODUCTION
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a Variance request for Block 3 Lot 1of
the proposedplat for Boulder Prairie Estates. The request is for a reduced side yard setbackof 25
feet (from 35 feet)for an R-4 residential lot that is not a back-to-back lot.
BACKGROUND
A variance is a way that cities may allow for an exception to part of an ordinance for a specific property.
Minnesota State Statute and City Code provide specific review criteria the City must consider when
reviewing a variance request, thesecriteria areincluded later in this report. If a variance is approved,it
becomes a property right which runs with the land.
DISCUSSION
The applicant is requesting a variance for a reduced minimum side yard setback on Lot 1 Block 3 of the
proposed Boulder Prairie Estates plat. Andover City Code 12-3-5 requires a minimum side setback of 35
feet for lot lines adjacent to a street. Side setbacks adjacent to a street maybe reduced to 25 feet if the lot
is back-to-back with another lot, such as Lots 1 & 2 of Block 4. The applicant is requesting a 25 foot
setback for Lot 1 of Block 3.
Review Criteria
City Code 12-15-9 establishes review criteria for considering variance requestsand states that variances
shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official
control and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted
when the applicant for the variancesestablishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the
official control. “Practical difficulties” as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means:
1.The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an
official control.
2.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to their property not created by the
landowner.
3.The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
4.Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
The City Council may also impose reasonable conditions on the granting of a variance request. A
condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the
variance. As practical difficulties must be established by the applicants, a letter submitted by the
applicants is attached for review as well as other materials submitted by the applicant in support of their
request.
Below are the applicant’s responses to the Variance criteria from a letter provided on July 30, 2025:
We needed to adjust the street over to North for stormwater ponding on south side of project ot cover
adequate 100-year flooding, in situations of rain fall when need side of pond is very large and is
designed for the 100-year events.
This lot does not have a back-to-back lot like the other 2 lots, Lot1-2 of Block 4 that back up to each
other and meet the same size width. Since it is not back-to-back it wil \[sic\] require a variance.
Layout also designed for future 4 undeveloped not sold homes to the north for development in future
times.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to hold a public hearing on the variance requests,
compare the variance requests to the review criteria of City Code 12-15-9, and make a recommendation
based on findings of fact to the City Council.
Attachments: Draft Resolution of Approval
Draft Resolution of Denial
Location Map
Letter from Applicant
2
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO. RXXX-25
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE UNADDRESSED PROPERTY
LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 1 BLOCK 3 BOULDER PRAIRIE ESTATES
WHEREAS, Boulder Contracting LLC has applied to the City for a variance to the minimum
side yard setback requirements based on R-4 zoning on the subject property; and,
WHEREAS, the property will be re-zoned to an R-4 district; and,
WHEREAS, the proposal would vary from City Code 12-3-5, which requires a minimum 35 foot
side yard setback when adjacent to a city street in R-4 districts; and,
WHEREAS, the proposal would establish a 25 foot minimum side yard setback for Lot 1 of
Block 3 of Boulder Prairie Estates; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning
th
Commission held a public hearing on August 12, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of
the variance request; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council completed a review of the variance request along with the
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning
Commission and approves the variance request to permit the construction of an accessory
structure that is not architecturally compatible with the principal structure and is not constructed
of masonry or its equivalent; and,
WHEREAS, based on the criteria for granting variances under City Code 12-15-9, the City
Council finds the following findings of fact to support the approval of the variance requests:
1.
2.
3.
4.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby
approves the variance request with the following conditions:
1. The property be rezoned from the R-1 zoning district to the R-4 zoning district.
3
2. All necessary permits shall be obtained from any agency having an interest in
improvements constructed on the property.
3. An approved Preliminary Plat shall be required for all proposed improvements to the
property.
4. Pursuant to City Code 12-15-9-E-6, if the City Council determines that no significant
progress has been made within the first twelve (12) months after the approval of the
variance, the variance will be null and void.
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 19 day of August, 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest: ________________________________
Jamie Barthel – Mayor
_______________________________
Michelle Hartner – City Clerk
4
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO. RXXX-25
A RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE FOR THE UNADDRESSED PROPERTY
LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 1 BLOCK 3 BOULDER PRAIRIE ESTATES
WHEREAS, Boulder Contracting LLC has applied to the City for a variance to the minimum
side yard setback requirements based on R-4 zoning on the subject property; and,
WHEREAS, the property will be re-zoned to an R-4 district; and,
WHEREAS, the proposal would vary from City Code 12-3-5, which requires a minimum 35 foot
side yard setback when adjacent to a city street in R-4 districts; and,
WHEREAS, the proposal would establish a 25 foot minimum side yard setback for Lot 1 of
Block 3 of Boulder Prairie Estates; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning
th
Commission held a public hearing on August 12, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council denial of the
variance request; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council completed a review of the variance request along with the
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning
Commission and denies the variance request to permit the construction of an accessory structure
that is not architecturally compatible with the principal structure; and,
WHEREAS, based on the criteria for granting a variance under City Code 12-15-9, the City
Council finds the following findings of fact to support the denial of the variance requests:
1.
2.
3.
4.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby
denies the variance request for a reduced minimum side yard setback on the subject property.
5
th
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 19 day of August, 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest: ________________________________
Jamie Barthel – Mayor
_______________________________
Michelle Hartner – City Clerk
6
Site Location –888 Crosstown Blvd NW & 15540 Prairie Rd NW
N
SITE
N
Date CreatedJuly 31,2025
Disclaimer: Theprovider makes no representation or warranties with respect to the reuse of this data.
Site Location –888 Crosstown Blvd NW & 15540 Prairie Rd NW
N