HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-08-26
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 26, 2025
Andover City Hall
Council Chambers
7:00 p.m.
1.Call to Order
2.Pledge of Allegiance
3.Approval of Minutes –August 12, 2025, Regular Meeting
4.Public Hearing: Consider Rezoningfor 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).
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: August 26, 2025
REQUEST
The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to approve the August 12, 2025, regular
meeting minutes.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING –AUGUST 12, 2025
9
10 The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
11 called to order by Chairperson Loehleinon August 12, 2025 7:00 p.m., at the Andover
12 City 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: City Planner Peter Hellegers and Associate Planner Aidan
21 Breen
22
23
24 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
25
26 APPROVAL OF MINUTES – July 8, 2025 Regular Meeting
27
28 Motion. The Chair assumed a motion to approve July 8, 2025, Andover Planning and
29 Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes as corrected. The Motion passed with five
30 ayes. Present –Naughton.
31
32
33 PUBLIC HEARING: Consider Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Automobile Service
nd
34 Station – 3118 162 Ln NW; PID#16-32-24-23-0023 – Equipment Engineering
35 Services (Applicant).
36
37 Associate Planner Aidan Breen reviewed that the Planning and Zoning Commission is
38 asked to review a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an Automobile Service Station for
nd
39 the subject property located at 3118 162 Ln NW. The subject property is currently zoned
40 Industrial. Andover City Code 12-11 and 12-12-4 requires a conditional use permit for
41 auto service stations in all allowable districts.
42
43 The applicant is proposing to operate a heavy machinery and diesel truck repair business
44 at the site. This will entail removing and replacing broken or worn-out parts on units.
45 There will obviously be some overnight parking for units getting repaired, but they will be
46 charged or towed away if customers decide to abandon units on the property. There will
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 2
1 be a zero tolerance for units being left on the property that are an eyesore to anyone,
2 especially when a decent amount of money has been put into this facility to meet the CUP.
3
4 The applicant has indicated that they may be interested in applying for CUPs for
5 additional use, but will only be applying for the Automobile Service Station at this time.
6 No liquid fuel storage will be present on the property.
7
8 Staff research indicated that no Special Use Permitsor Conditional Use Permits existed
9 for vehicle repair at the site. The classification as an “Automobile Service Station” is the
10 closest applicable category from the zoning use table in City Code 12-11. Specific
11 requirements for Automobile Service Stations are detailed in City Code 12-12-4.
12
13 This property is in the Hughs Industrial Park, which means that this Conditional Use
14 Permit triggers the Interim Performance Standards required by City Code 12-14-18. The
15 applicant has submitted an Interim Use Permit application for those standards.
16
17 City Code 12-15-7-B provides the following general review criteria to consider when
18 granting a CUP. In granting a CUP, the City Council shall consider the advice and
19 recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and:
20
21 1. The effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, morals, and general welfare
22 of occupants of surrounding lands.
23 2. Existing and anticipated traffic conditions, including parking facilities on adjacent
24 streets and land.
25 3. The effect on values of property and scenic views in the surrounding area, and the
26 effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan.
27
28 City Code 12-12-4 also provides the following criteria for Automobile Service Stations:
29
30 A. All new buildings, the site, tanks, piping, and dispensing stations shall comply
31 with the current provisions of the Minnesota State Building Code, Minnesota State
32 Fire Code, and all provisions related to underground liquid storage systems
33 required in Section 12-12-2 of this code.
34 B.Building permits shall not be issued for new construction or remodeling of
35 facilities unless Fire Department approval has been received.
36 C.Hours of operation will be approved by the City Council.
37 D. The site plan shall show parking areas for customers, employees, service vehicles,
38 and those needing repair, and no other areas of the site will be allowed vehicle
39 parking. No vehicle shall be parked awaiting service longer than ten (10) days.
40 Inoperable vehicles are regulated per section 6-5 of the City Code.
41 E. Pump islands are subject to setback requirements. Exterior storage and sales shall
42 only be allowed as approved through the Conditional Use Permit.
43 F. Exterior storage and sales shall only be allowed as approved through the
44 Conditional Use Permit.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 3
1 Mr. Breen stated the Planning Commission is asked to conduct a public hearing and to
2 make a recommendation on the proposed Conditional Use Permit to the City Council. The
3 City Council is expected to review this item at its meeting on Tuesday, August 19, 2025.
4
5 Also provided for Commission review are Draft Resolution of approval, Draft Resolution
6 of denial, Location Map, Applicant’s Narrative, and Site Plan with Proposed
7 Improvements.
8
9 Commissioner Winge asked about traffic and parking on adjacent land and whether there
10 have been any accidents in the area, as there is no turn lane present. Mr. Breen stated he is
11 not aware of any complaints at that intersection.
12
13 Commissioner Weinhold asked if this property is on City water, and Mr. Breen stated it is
14 well and septic currently.
15
16 Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 7:11 p.m.
17
18 Mr. Aaron Sonsteby, 6868 Highway 95 North Branch, property owner, stated that all
19 parking spaces will be on asphalt. The existing rock will remain with landscaping done for
20 the water flow.
21
22 Commissioner Winge asked if there would be any interior renovations to update the
23 facility with septic. Mr. Sonsteby stated that the previous owner told him the septic was up
24 to standards. They plan to repaint the exterior and resurface the concrete floors on the
25 inside, along with some painting.
26
27 Commissioner Weinhold asked how traffic willbe managed, storage, and what the
28 turnaround time is expected to be. Mr. Sonsteby stated that customers have 7 days to
29 retrieve their vehicle; otherwise, they are charged storage. After 30 days,they are subject
30 to tow. This could be modified to meet the 10-day turnaround.
31
32 Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 7:16 p.m.
33
34 Chair Loehlein asked Mr. Breen about the duration of the CUP, and Mr. Breen stated that
35 the CUP runs with the land. The IUP has a 5-year expiration, and in this case, it would last
36 until City sewer and water were brought to the property.
37
38 Motion by Commissioner Winge, seconded by Commissioner Naughton, to recommend
39 that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Automobile Service
nd
40 Station – 3118 162 Ln NW; PID#16-32-24-23-0023 – Equipment Engineering Services
41 (Applicant). Motion carried on a 6-ayes vote.
42
43 PUBLIC HEARING: Consider Interim Use Permit (IUP) for Interim Performance
nd
44 Standards – 3118 162 Ln NW; PID# 16-32-24-23-0023 – Equipment Engineering
45 Services (Applicant).
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 4
1
2 Mr. Breen reviewed that the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review an
3 Interim Use Permit (IUP) for Interim Performance Standards for the subject property
nd
4 located at 3118 162LaneNW.
5
6 Andover City Code 12-14-18 establishes Interim Performance Standards for properties
7 within the Hughs Westview Industrial Park, which are triggered when a property expands
8 the commercial structures on a property or the permitted uses at the property via a
9 Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The applicant has applied for a CUP for an Automobile
10 Service Station to conduct diesel engine and heavy machinery repair at the subject
11 property, requiring an IUP application for Interim Performance Standards.
12
13 Deviations to performance standards under 12-14 will be considered in the following
14 areas:
15 Parking and Impervious Surface Areas.
16 o Screening, landscaping, visual appeal, and lighting of parking lot areas.
17 o Paving of parking areas for customers.
18 o Dust control measures for unpaved parking and storage areas.
19 The amount, type, location, and screening of exterior storage as a part of any IUP.
20 Screening of mechanical equipment and trash bins/dumpsters.
21 Other factors, as the City Council deems relevant.
22
23 Mr. Breen reviewed the Review Criteria along with comments about this case. City Code
24 12-14-8-C-2 states that applications for interim performance standards shall be reviewed
25 based on the following review criteria:
26
27 a. Existing appearance of the building and site – The site is located on the southern
nd
28 side of 162Lane NW. It is a former trash hauling site that currently hosts an
29 engine machining shop. The site has a small, paved customer parking area, an
30 existing primary structure with a shop and small office space, and another
31 accessory shop building. There is a concrete apron paved between the buildings.
32 The remainder of the fenced-in yard is unpaved. To the City Staff’s knowledge,
33 there have not been any previous requests for interim performance standards at this
34 property.
35
36 The City Council discussed the types of site improvements they would like to see
37 at the Workshop on February 25, 2025. After reviewing initial plans for proposed
38 improvements, Council indicated they would like at least ¾ of the site to be paved,
39 including the customer parking area. Some area of dirt or gravel would be
40 acceptable. Curbing would not be required. Stormwater mitigation would be the
41 jurisdiction of the Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization, whose
42 regulations are triggered with disturbances of an acre or more of new pavement.
43
44 b. Compatibility of the proposed site development plan with the other industrial
45 properties in the area – Several properties in the Hughs/Westview industrial park
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 5
1 area have gravel parking areas and parking lots with no curbing, though recent
2 Interim Performance Standards have emphasized paving these sites when possible.
3 Proposed landscaping and screening would also be like other properties in the area.
4 There is one other Automobile Service Station in the Industrial Park that is a
5 consumer auto repair business, which has a fully paved parking area.
6
7 c. Effect of the proposed use and the proposed site development plan on the adjacent
8 residential neighborhood, including traffic, noise, glare, buffers, and environmental
9 impacts. – Minimal impact due to existing screening and current uses.
10
11 City Code 12-15-8-D states that the Planning Commission shall recommend an interim
12 use permit, and the Council shall issue such an interim use permit only if it finds that such
13 use at the proposed location:
14 1. Will not create an excess burden on parks, streets, and other public facilities – The
15 proposed use will not create an excess burden on parks, streets, or other public
16 facilities.
17 2. Will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise harm the
18 public health, safety, and general welfare – The proposed use provides for
19 additional landscaping and screening and is at a level of site improvement like
20 other industrial properties in the area. The pavement of the parking area and the
21 use of no curbing is not anticipated to be injurious to the surrounding
22 neighborhood or to otherwise harm the public health, safety and general welfare.
23 3. Will not hurt values of property and scenic views – City staff do not anticipate the
24 proposed use will hurt the values of property or scenic views.
25 4. Will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public – City staff do not
26 anticipate the proposed use will impose additional unreasonable costs on the
27 public.
28 5. Will be subjected to, by agreement with the owner, any conditions that the City
29 Council has deemed appropriate for permission of the use, including a condition
30 that the owner may be required to provide an appropriate financial surety to cover
31 the cost of removing the interim use and any interim structures upon the expiration
32 of the interim use permit –A draft resolution of approval with conditions is
33 provided for review. City staff does not recommend any financial surety for the
34 proposed use.
35
36 The Planning Commission has beenasked to conduct a public hearing and to make a
37 recommendation on the proposed Interim Use Permit to the City Council. The City
38 Council is expected to review this item at its meeting on Tuesday, August 19, 2025.
39
40 Also provided for Commission consideration are Draft Resolution of approval, Draft
41 Resolution of denial, Location Map, Applicant’s Narrative, and Site Plan with Proposed
42 Improvements.
43
st
44 Commissioner Grout noted the resolution says the parking lot is to be paved by August 1,
st
45 2025, and Mr. Breen stated that it would becorrected to August 1, 2026.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 6
1
2 Commissioner Weinhold asked how large the property lot size is in acres, and Mr. Breen
3 stated he does not have that information. Commissioner Weinhold asked about paving less
4 than an acre, and Mr. Breen stated it would be less than an acre of pavement. Replacing or
5 redoing existing pavement is not included in that total.
6
7 Commissioner Naughton noted there is no excess burden on streets, but this is a heavy
nd
8 equipment repair shop. Heasked if there are any weight restrictions on 162, and Mr.
9 Breen stated he does not know if there are any weight restrictions in that area. The idea of
10 no excess burden is based on current traffic.
11
12 Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 7:31 p.m.
13
14 Mr. Aaron Sonsteby, 6868 Highway 95 North Branch, stated that County Roads have 10
15 10-ton limit.
16
17 Chair Loehlein asked how many vehicles would be repaired in a month. Mr. Sonsteby
18 stated 10-20 per month for trucks and 5-10 pieces of equipment. This will vary by month.
19
nd
20 Commissioner Winge stated based on the City’s website, 162 is a 7-ton weight limit
21 road. Mr. Sonsteby stated that the weight would not be exceeded.
22
23 Commissioner Weinhold asked if any environmental reports were scheduled. Mr.
24 Sonsteby stated soil borings will be made in the first week of September. There was a
25 history of contamination on that site which the State has provided a clean certificate.
26
27 Commissioner Hudson asked if the new pavement would be under 1 acre. Mr. Sonsteby
28 stated they are planning on paving under 1 acre.
29
30 Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 7:36 p.m.
31
32 Commissioner Grout commented on the Interim Performance Standards and expressed
33 appreciation to the proposed landowner.
34
35 Commissioner Winge noted this request seems to be in line with the Hughes area.
36
37 Motion by Commissioner Hudson, seconded by Commissioner Winge, to recommend that
38 the City Council approve the Interim Use Permit (IUP) for Interim Performance Standards
nd
39 –3118 162Ln NW; PID# 16-32-24-23-0023 – Equipment Engineering Services
40 (Applicant) and changing the date on item one to 2026. Motion carried on a 5-ayes 1-nay
41 (Weinhold) vote.
42
43 Commissioner Winge voiced a concern about whether it would be injurious to the
44 surrounding area, and there is a question about the status of the septic system and the
45 condition of the soil.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 7
1
2 CONSIDER VARIANCES FOR SIGNAGE – 14220 Inca Street NW; PID#30-32-24-43-
3 0073 – Holiday Stationstores, LLC c/o Karen Dodge of Municipal Resolutions LLC
4(Applicant).
5
6 City Planner Hellegers reviewed the applicants' request for a variance for a second
7 freestanding sign and a corresponding variance for additional signage for their property
8 located at 14220 Inca Street NW.
9
10 Automobile Service Stations are allowed to have one freestanding sign by the City Code.
11 Properties located in the Neighborhood Business (NB) Zoning District are limited by City
12 Code to three square feet of signage per front foot of building.
13
14 A variance is a way that cities may allow for an exception to part of an ordinance for a
15 specific property. Minnesota State Statute and City Code provide specific review criteria
16 that the City must consider when reviewing a variance request. If a variance is approved, it
17 becomes a property right that runs with the land.
18
19 Mr. Hellegers provided the background, including location, vehicular access, development
20 area, public hearing notice, and signage standards.
21
22 The applicants are requesting a variance from the City Code to allow a second
23 freestanding sign, where the Code would only allow one freestanding sign for an
24 Automobile Service Station.
25
26 The applicants also request a corresponding variance from the maximum aggregate
27 signage area for the subject property. In order to discuss the aggregate signage area, it is
28 helpful to understand how signage is calculated. There are two sides of the proposed
29 building that front on a public street: the east side and the west side of the building. As the
30 north side of the building is a common property line with a shared driveway serving the
31 subject property and the Taco Bell to the north, it does not count as frontage.
32
33 The east and west sides of the proposed gas station building have approximately 50 feet of
34 frontage on each side. Given the two sides, which would be 100 feet times the three square
35 feet of signage allowed per front foot in the NB Zoning District, that would allow for an
36 aggregate signage area of 300 square feet for the subject property.
37
38 The applicant previously applied for a signage permit with 385.7 sf of signage, but that
39 would have exceeded the allowable signage area for the property. The second freestanding
40 sign, which is 89.6 sf, was removed, which brought the signage just below the
41 requirement, and the City approved a signage permit for 296 sf of signage. The proposed
42 variance would bring the signage to 385.7 sf, which would exceed the maximum
43 aggregate signage area by 85.7 sf.
44
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 8
1 Mr. Hellegers presented a chart showing the currently approved signage and proposed
2 additional signage, along with a drawing of the property and sign locations. A map
3 showing Vehicular Access was also shown.
4
5 The City Code 12-15-9 establishes review criteria for considering variance requests and
6 states that variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general
7 purposes and intent of the official control and when the variances are consistent with the
8 comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variances
9 establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the official control.
10 “Practical difficulties,” as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means:
11 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not
12 permitted by official control.
13 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to their property, not
14 created by the landowner.
15 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
16 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
17
18 The City Council may also impose reasonable conditions on the granting of a variance
19 request. A condition must be related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the
20 impact created by the variance. As practical difficulties must be established by the
21 applicants, a letter submitted by the applicants was provided for review, as well as other
22 materials submitted by the applicantsin support of their request.
23
24 The Planning and Zoning Commission is requested to:
25 1. Conduct a public hearing on the proposed request, and
26 2. Compare the variance requests with the review criteria of City Code 12-15-9 and
27 make a recommendation to the City Council based on findings of fact.
28
29 Staff has drafted resolutions for approval or denial of the variance request. Specific
30 findings related to the variance criteria need to be adopted by the City Council when they
31 approve or deny the request.
32
33 Commissioner Grout asked Staff if the shared drive on the north was a public street, and
34 what the aggregate would be for the signage. Mr. Hellegers stated that they only use
35 public streets to calculate signage.
36
37 Commissioner Naughton asked if there is additional signage allowed for Taco Bell, and
38 Mr. Hellegers stated they only have one free-standing sign.
39
40 Also provided for Commission consideration were Location map, City Code §12-8 –
41 Signs, City Code §12-15-9 – Variances, and Applicant’s Application Materials.
42
43 Chair Loehlein referred to the purple intersection indicated on the drawing and whether a
44 right turn off Inca would be allowed. Mr. Hellegers clarified.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 9
1 Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 8:00 p.m.
2
3 Mr. Ben Dehayes, 5563 North Elston Avenue, Chicago, IL, applicant, noted from an
4 access standpoint, they do not want Holiday traffic coming in at the purple access (as
5 noted on the map). They want to route the traffic to the red circle access, which is the only
6 full access to the site. The lot is atypical.
7
8 Commissioner Naughton asked if there was a less intrusive sign that could be constructed
9 to mark the entrance. Mr. Dehayes stated from a branding standpoint, it would match, and
10 if desired, the same-lookingsign could be shrunk.
11
12 Commissioner Winge referred to #2 in the review criteria; the calculation could have been
13 recalculated if measuring the long side of the building. He would appreciate an alternative.
14 Mr. Dehayes stated they are open to an alternative. They want to steer traffic away from
15 the shared access with Taco Bell. It is a clear demarcation of where traffic should turn.
16 Commissioner Winge suggested shrinking the height of the signage. This is a residential
17 area, and residents don’t want to see an illuminated sign coming into their windows. Mr.
18 Dehayes stated the entire sign size would shrink.
19
20 Chair Loehlein stated he was surprised to see Holiday and thought they would all be
21 Circle K. Mr. Dehayes stated it is a slow conversion, and they are sensitive to brand
22 loyalty.
23
24 Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 8:20 p.m.
25
26 Commissioner Hudson stated that another item is whether to allow a second sign.
27
28 Commissioner Grout stated in looking at the unique access to the site, additional
29 directional signage would be an advantage to the public.
30
31 Chair Loehlein stated that if the driveway between Taco Bell and the site the calculation
32 would be different.
33
34 Commissioner Winge stated he could get on board for adding a second sign, but he does
35 not know how a motion could be approved for that. He is in support of reducing the size of
36 the sign and placing it at ground level, but that may obstruct getting in/out of the site.
37
38 Mr. Hellegers suggested the Commission could recommend an appropriate size, or the
39 applicant could be directed to come back with revisions. Because there are two variances,
40 the findings need to be noted for each of the items. They both need to meet the same
41 standards. Mr. Hellegers explained the ground signs and locations. These are not counted
42 against the square footage. These are directional signs. These were already approved as
43 part of their signage plan.
44
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 10
1 Commissioner Weinhold asked if the Commission could offer a motion to approve the
2 second sign with the condition that the owner meet the signage maximum of 300 sf. Mr.
3 Hellegers stated that would be removing one variance from theapplicant’s request. The
4 Commission is directed to review the request that is provided. Mr. Dehayes stated that this
5 could be conditioned upon the applicant coming back with a 60-square-foot sign that is 15
6 feet in height.
7
8 Chair Loehlein asked the Commission if they support the additional sign or would they
9 like to see the applicant come back with a revised sign plan.
10
11 Commissioner Grout stated he would support a smaller sign that is more appropriate for
12 Inca. He sees the need for the additional sign.
13
14 Commissioner Winge stated he would struggle with approving the second sign.
15
16 Commissioner Naughton stated he agrees, and there is already a lot of signage, and he
17 would not support the second sign.
18
19 Motion by Commissioner Naughton, seconded by Commissioner Winge, to recommend
20 that the City Council deny the Variances for Signage – 14220 Inca Street NW; PID#30-
21 32-24-43-0073 –Holiday Stationstores, LLC c/o Karen Dodge of Municipal Resolutions
22 LLC (Applicant)per the proposed resolution for denial. Motion carried on a 5-ayes, 1-
23 nay(Grout) vote.
24
25 CONSIDER PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR BOULDER PRAIRIE ESTATES – 888
26 Crosstown Blvd NW and 15540 Prairie Rd NW; PID#23-32-24-11-0007 and 23-32-24-
27 11-0002 – Boulder Contracting, LLC (Applicant).
28
29 Mr. Breen reviewed that the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a
30 Preliminary Plat for Boulder Prairie Estates, a proposed 28-lot residential subdivision on
31 the 14.24-acre properties at 888 Crosstown Boulevard NW and 15540 Prairie Road NW.
32 The plat includes 27 new ramblers and two-story homes with basements, and the existing
33 home at 888 Crosstown Blvd NW will be preserved. This amounts to 2.5 units/acre net
34 density.
35
36 Mr. Breen reviewed the background, including Conformance with Local Plans and
37 Ordinances, Lots, Street Access, Sewer and Water Access, Coon Creek Watershed
38 District, Coordination with other Agencies, Tree Preservation/Trees/Landscaping,
39 Stormwater Requirements, Park and Trail Dedication, and Public Notice.
40
41 Mr. Breen reviewed the Site Topography, noting that it is part of the Coon Creek
42 Watershed District, there are no existing floodplain or wetlands, and Staff recommends
43 preserving or planting trees on the southern end of the property, and grading may not
44 allow for tree preservation. There is no requirement for tree preservation.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 11
1 This site was already guided for development, so there is no Comprehensive Plan
2 amendment required. The site will have two primary accesses – Crosstown Access – Four-
3 legged uncontrolled access. Crosstown Blvd and Prairie Rd with right and left turn lanes.
4 Prairie Rd Access –Three-legged access. No dedicated turn lanes, new bypass lane north
5 on Prairie Rd. A future access – Temporary cul-de-sac at the SW end with a road stub for
6 properties to the northeast. Future trails are planned on Crosstown Blvd and Prairie Rd.
7
8 All the properties will have city water and sewer connecting to the north end at Sycamore
9 Street. The site can be served by existing capacity, and grading will create 4 infiltration
10 basins.
11
12 The Park and Recreation Commission recommended cash-in-lieu of land to the City
13 Council. A trail easement to be provided on the south side of Crosstown Blvd.
14
15 The Budget Impact would be added tax revenue generated from additional properties.
16
17 The Planning and Zoning Commission has been asked to hold a public hearing related to
18 the preliminary plat and to make a recommendation to the City Council.
19
20 Also provided for Commission review were Draft Resolution of Approval, Draft
21 Resolution of Denial, Exhibit A –Underlying Legal Description, Location Map, Andover
22 Review Committee Comments, and Preliminary Plat Plan Set.
23
24 Commissioner Naughton asked about access point B had a stop sign coming out of the
25 neighborhood, and asked if that is the same for access point A and Mr. Breen stated there
26 would be stop signs at both. Commissioner Naughton asked what the impact would be on
27 City Staff to maintain those roads, and Mr. Breen stated he would need to confer with
28 Public Works.It has been part of the plan for some time. This has already been budgeted
29 for.
30
31 Commissioner Weinhold asked about the trails, noting the trail is on the south side of
32 Crosstown Blvd, and asked if the trail on Prairie Rd will be on the west side. Mr. Breen
33 stated he does not know if that has been determined yet. Mr. Hellegers stated the trail on
34 Prairie Road would be on the west side.
35 Commissioner Winge asked what was being approved or denied. Mr. Breen stated that this
36 is the Preliminary Plat about whether the development should be constructed. The Final
37 Plat will come before the Commission in the future. A variance is required for one of the
38 lots as well as zoning approval.
39
40 Commissioner Hudson asked if zoning would come back to the Planning and Zoning
41 Commission, and Mr. Breen stated it will come back at the next meeting.
42
43 Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 8:35 p.m.
44
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 12
1 Mr. Jason Rude, EG Rude and Sons, Land Surveyors, 6776 Lake Drive, Lino Lakes, this
2 plan went through a comprehensive review in February. At that time, a PUD was
3 requested but not approved. The lot count has been reduced by four. They have received
4 approval from Coon Creek Watershed on the drainageand stormwater design.
5
6 Commissioner Weinhold stated last time there was concern from the residents living on
th
7 Prairie Rd. The visibility of the 3-way intersection on Prairie and 155 would be a concern
8 becausethe headlights would shine in their living rooms. Mr. Rude stated the intersection
9 is the same. The applicant has visited with the residents about their concerns.
10
11 Mr. Brandon Riedel, 938 Crosstown Blvd, lives on Prairie and will be surrounded by the
12 houses being constructed. His house was built in 1976 and has a horseshoe driveway. It is
13 surrounded by trees. He purchased the property for privacy. Will there be any problems
14 with the rezoning in the future? Code would not allow for a horseshoe driveway currently,
15 due to needing it for his truck and trailer. Ten of the new houses will be in his backyard
16 overlooking his home. They were assessed for Crosstown Blvd. The current residents have
17 paid for things that the developments did not have to pay for. He asked what the future
18 looks like for all the existing residents. He is not against the development going in. He
19 does not want to be forced to decide to sell his home. He indicated his property on the
20 map. He is trying to get information on zoning changes. Only two people sold their
21 properties for this development.
22
23 Ms. Edith Tray, 838 Crosstown Blvd, stated that there is a telephone pole, and she was
24 told it was a wetland years ago on the site. She has a driveway at the back of her lot that
25 goes to her pole barn, which she has used for over 50 years. She asked if that would be
26 grandfathered in. She asked if the applicanthad reviewed the statements from the last
27 meeting and which statements were considered. Most of the current residents moved here
28 to the country. It is now making it City. She does not feel like the residents have been
29 listened to. She is concerned about the lack of a playground for the children. It is
30 dangerous for her to exit and enter her driveway. 54 cars will be added to that traffic area.
31
32 Mr. David Franzen, 15527 Prairie Rd. stated that the driveway will be in line with his
33 living room window. He suggested a bypass lane. The speed limit is 50mph, and this
34 needs to be lowered on Prairie Rd.
35
36 Ms. Edith Tray, 838 Crosstown Blvd, noted that the sewer and water would be added to
37 888 Crosstown Blvd and asked if they would be charged for that. If it is being given to
38 888, it should be given to her and others on Crosstown Blvd.
39
40 Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 8:50 p.m.
41
42 Chair Loehlein asked for Staff to address the concerns about rezoning and sewer/water.
43
44 Mr. Breen stated the rezoning process is based on the Comprehensive Plan. The next one
45 will be published in 2028. There is an element of community engagement. Rezoning is
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 13
1 based on the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use. Included in the Comprehensive
2 Plan for this area, because it is in the MUSA, it is guided to develop at a higher density.
3 The current property owners control their properties. No change will ever happen to the
4 properties unless they choose to develop/sell them. No changes are forced on the current
5 properties. Buffering and screening are incorporated into the subdivision process.
6 Compliance with the City Code will only come into play until a request to build another
7 building is submitted. There is infrastructure involved in connecting to the City water and
8 sewer. He is not aware of the agreement between the developer and 888 Crosstown. A
9 water main has been added to this area, and if services are brought to an area, there is an
10 opportunity to connect. Residents can speak with the engineering department to see if they
11 are eligible to connect.
12
13 Chair Loehlein stated the City does not force rezoning on residents. He asked if a traffic
14 study is needed. Mr. Breen stated that it was discussed at the Sketch Plan stage. He does
15 not have a traffic study as part of the application.
16
17 Mr. Rude stated Brian Jansen, Boulder Contracting, will be speaking with the residents
18 regarding their concerns. The connection cost to 888 Crosstown is covered by the
19 developer and part of the infrastructure, and is part of the development. The requirement
20 for the turn lanes came out of a traffic study. Prairie Road has a proposed bypass lane that
21 was accommodated on the east side.
22
23 Commissioner Weinhold asked if there would be any easement needed, and Mr. Rude
24 stated that it is in the existing right-of-way. Commissioner Weinhold stated that traffic is
25 going to be a concern in this area. He suggested a traffic study be done to reduce the speed
26 on Prairie Rd. going into Crosstown.
27
28 Commissioner Winge asked the Staff to confirm where the utilities are brought in. Mr.
29 Breen stated at the intersection of Crosstown and Sycamore. Commissioner Winge thinks
30 people will use this intersection instead of Crosstown and Prairie Rd. He does not feel it is
31 appropriate to add a bypass lane and shift traffic further east and would prefer a designated
32 turn lane. Mr. Breen stated that it will be added to the notes for the City Council.
33
th
34 Commissioner Weinhold asked if there wasn’t a roundabout planned for 157, Crosstown,
35 and Prairie as part of a future study. Mr. Breen stated he believes there is a proposal for
36 that, but it was caught in a funding issue.
37
38 Motion by Commissioner Hudson, seconded by Commissioner Weinhold, to recommend
39 that the City Council approve the Preliminary Plan for Boulder Prairie Estates – 888
40 Crosstown Blvd NW and 15540 Prairie Rd NW: PID#23-32-24-11-0007 and 23-32-24-11-
41 0002 – Boulder Contracting, LLC (Applicant).
42
43 Commissioner Winge stated approval of this motion is contingent on the variance request.
44 Mr. Breen stated that the approval of the Preliminary Plat is conditioned on the approval
45 of the variance request.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 14
1 Motion carried on a 5-ayes vote.
2
3
4 CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST FOR MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACKS –Lot
5 1 Block 3, Boulder Prairie Estates – Boulder Contracting, LLC (Applicant).
6
7 Mr. Breen reviewed that the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a
8 Variance request for Block 3 Lot 1 of the proposed plat for Boulder Prairie Estates. The
9 request is for a reduced side yard setback of 25 feet (from 35 feet) for an R-4 residential
10 lot that is not a back-to-back lot.
11
12 The applicant is requesting a variance for a reduced minimum side yard setback on Lot 1,
13 Block 3 of the proposed Boulder Prairie Estates plat. Andover City Code 12-3-5 requires a
14 minimum side setback of 35 feet for lot lines adjacent to a street. Side setbacks adjacent to
15 a street may be reduced to 25 feet if the lot is back-to-back with another lot, such as Lots 1
16 and 2 of Block 4. The applicant is requesting a 25-foot setback for Lot 1 of Block 3.
17
18 City Code 12-15-9 establishes review criteria for considering variance requests and states
19 that variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
20 and intent of the official control and when the variances are consistent with the
21 comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variances
22 establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the official control.
23 “Practical difficulties” are used in connection with the granting of a variance, which
24 means:
25 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not
26 permitted by official control. The requested Variance would reduce the minimum
27 side yard setback of one lot to the amount allowed for back-to-back lots.
28 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to their property, not
29 created by the landowner. The street needs to be adjusted to the north to
30 accommodate an adequate 100-year flooding infiltration basin. The proposed
31 layout of the development also provides a road stub to accommodate the future
32 development of the property to the north.
33 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The
34 lot with the Variance will have the same setback as the other back-to-back lots
35 along the street. The lot will meet all other R-4 zoning requirements.
36 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The
37 requested variance maintains a straight road alignment, avoiding additional road
38 curvature while accommodating the unique shape of the property and allowing for
39 future development of adjacent properties.
40
41 The City Council may also impose reasonable conditions on the granting of a variance
42 request. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to
43 the impact created by the variance. As practical difficulties must be established by the
44 applicants, a letter was submitted by the applicants was provided as well as other materials
45 submitted by the applicant in support of their request.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 15
1
2 The applicants’responses to the Variance criteria included:
3 We needed to adjust the street over to North for stormwater ponding on the south
4 side of the project to cover adequate 100-year flooding, in situations of rainfall
5 when the side of the pond is very large and is designed for the 100-year events.
6 This lot does not have a back-to-back lot like the other 2 lots, Lots 1-2 of Block 4,
7 that back up to each other and meet the same width. Since it is not back-to-back, it
8 will require a variance.
9 Layout also designed for the future 4 undeveloped not sold homes to the north for
10 development in the future.
11
12 The Planning and Zoning Commission is requested to hold a public hearing on the
13 variance requests, compare the variance requests to the review criteria of City Code 12-15-
14 9, and make a recommendation based on findings of fact to the City Council. This will
15 come before the City Council at their August 19, 2025,meeting.
16
17 Also provided for Commission consideration are Draft Resolution of Approval, Draft
18 Resolution of Denial, Location Map, and Letter from Applicant.
19
20 Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 9:22 p.m.
21
22 No one appeared to address the Commission.
23
24 Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 9:23 p.m.
25
26 Commissioner Winge stated he struggles to see the plight of the landowner. This could
27 have been configured in a manner thatwould not need a variance.
28
29 Commissioner Grout stated he has similar concerns and asked why a variance is needed.
30 Mr. Rude stated that this request lines up the 3 lots. If not passed, the lot will be built 10
31 feet narrower. This is a unique lot and not a deal breaker. It allows houses to line up.
32
33 Mr. Breen noted the applicant could have applied for a PUD for this single deviation. That
34 would have allowed for reduced side setback across the development.
35
36 Chair Loehlein stated that this request seems reasonable. He does not see the benefit of
37 reducing the size of the home constructed.
38
39 Commissioner Hudson concurred that this is reasonable.
40
41 Motion by Commissioner Weinhold, seconded by Commissioner Hudson, to recommend
42 that the City Council approve the Variance Request for Minimum Side Yard Setbacks –
43 Lot 1 Block 3, Boulder Prairie Estates – Boulder Contracting, LLC (Applicant). Motion
44 carried on a 4-ayes, 2-nays (Naughton and Winge)vote.
45
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes – August 12, 2025
Page 16
1 OTHER BUSINESS- NONE.
2
3 ADJOURNMENT
4
5 Chair Loehlein adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
6
7
8 Respectfully Submitted,
9
10
11 Debbie Wolfe, Recording Secretary
12 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #4
TO: Planning & Zoning Commissioners
CC: Joe Janish, Community Development Director
FROM:Aidan Breen, Associate City Planner
SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Consider Rezoning 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 – Rezone Properties from R-1: Single Family Rural Residential to R-4:
Single Family Urban Residential – Boulder Contracting, LLC (Applicant).
DATE: August 26, 2025
INTRODUCTION
Boulder Contracting has requested to rezone two properties located at 888 Crosstown Blvd NW
(PID# 23-32-24-11-0007) and 15540 Prairie Rd NW (PID: 23-32-24-11-0002) from R-1: Single
Family Rural Residential to R-4: Single Family Urban Residential.
DISCUSSION
Boulder Contracting has submitted a Preliminary Plat application for a development titled
Boulder Prairie Estates.
A map showing the location of the subject properties is attached. The subject properties are
within the Metropolitan Utility Service Area (MUSA). The 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update
guides the subject properties as Transitional Residential. The Comprehensive Plan designates
Transitional Residential areas as Rural Residential areas that must follow Urban Residential
guidelines when they are subdivided. The rezoning request is consistent with the Transitional
Residential guidelines and Sewer Staging map from the 2018 Comprehensive Plan.
Current ZoningFuture Land Use Guidance
Comprehensive Plan – Sewer Staging Map
Times and conditions have changed due to the applicant’s proposal for a residential subdivision,
requiring a rezoning to urban residential guidelines under the 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update.
City sewer and water was also recently extended to the subject property at 888 Crosstown Blvd
NW.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning & Zoning Commission is requested to hold a public hearing and make a
recommendation to the City Council regarding the rezoning request.
Attachment(s): Draft Resolution of Approval
Draft Resolution of Denial
Exhibit A – Legal Descriptions
Site Location Map
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE XXX-25
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE 12-3-4, ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF
THE CITY OF ANDOVER. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER HEREBY
ORDAINS:
City Code 12-3-4, The Zoning District Map of the City of Andover is hereby amended as
follows:
1. The zoning designation of the following parcels are hereby amended from R-1: Single
Family Rural Residential to R-4: Single Family Urban Residential:
Parcel 1 – 888 Crosstown Blvd NW – PID 23-32-24-11-0007 – legally described as:
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.
Parcel 2 – 15540 Prairie Rd NW – PID 23-32-24-11-0002 – legally described as:
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.
2. The findings for the rezoning are that the property is located within the Metropolitan
Urban Service Area (MUSA). Times and conditions have changed with the extension of
municipal sewer and water availability to the subject properties, as well as the receipt of
an application for a Preliminary Plat to subdivide the properties. The Comprehensive
Plan guides the subject properties for Transitional Residential land use, which requires
subdivisions to be developed under urban residential zoning standards.
3. All other sections of the Zoning Ordinance shall remain as written and adopted by the
City Council of the City of Andover.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 2nd day of September, 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest: ________________________________
Jamie Barthel – Mayor
_______________________________
Michelle Hartner – City Clerk
CITY OF ANDOVER
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION XXX-25
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE REZONING REQUEST TO REZONE PID #23-32-24-11-
0007 AND PID #23-32-24-11-0002 FROM R-1: SINGLE FAMILY RURAL RESIDENTIAL
TO R-4: SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RESIDENTIAL
WHEREAS, the City of Andover has received a request to rezone the properties located at 888
Crosstown Blvd NW (PID# 23-32-24-11-0007) and 15540 Prairie Rd NW (PID: 23-32-24-11-
0002) from M from R-1: Single Family Rural Residential to R-4: Single Family Urban
Residential; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the Planning Commission has
th
conducted a public hearing on said rezoning request at the August 26, 2025 Regular Meeting;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council denialof the
rezoning as requested; 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
Rezoning request; for the following reasons:
1.
2.
3.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 2nd day of September, 2025.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Attest: ________________________________
Jamie Barthel – Mayor
_______________________________
Michelle Hartner – City Clerk