Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING – AUGUST 12, 2025 The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Loehlein on August 12, 2025, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Chairperson Nick Loehlein, Commissioners Roger Grout, Scott Hudson, Chuck Naughton, Jonathan Weinhold, and Ryan Winge. Commissioners absent: Commissioner Pat Shuman Jr. Also present: City Planner Peter Hellegers and Associate Planner Aidan Breen PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES – July 8, 2025, Regular Meeting Motion. The Chair assumed a motion to approve July 8, 2025, Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes as corrected. The Motion passed with five ayes. Present – Naughton. PUBLIC HEARING: Consider Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Automobile Service nd Station – 3118 162 Ln NW; PID#16-32-24-23-0023 – Equipment Engineering Services (Applicant). Associate Planner Aidan Breen reviewed that the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an Automobile Service Station for nd the subject property located at 3118 162 Ln NW. The subject property is currently zoned Industrial. Andover City Code 12-11 and 12-12-4 requires a conditional use permit for auto service stations in all allowable districts. The applicant is proposing to operate a heavy machinery and diesel truck repair business at the site. This will entail removing and replacing broken or worn-out parts on units. There will obviously be some overnight parking for units getting repaired, but they will be 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 be a zero tolerance for units being left on the property that are an eyesore to anyone, especially when a decent amount of money has been put into this facility to meet the CUP. The applicant has indicated that they may be interested in applying for CUPs for additional use, 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 Permits 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 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 a CUP. In granting a CUP, 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, morals, 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 shall comply 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. 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 the City Code. E. Pump islands are subject to setback requirements. Exterior storage and sales shall only be allowed as approved through the Conditional Use Permit. F. Exterior storage and sales shall only be allowed as approved through the Conditional Use Permit. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 3 Mr. Breen stated the Planning Commission is asked to conduct a public hearing and to make a recommendation on the proposed Conditional Use Permit to the City Council. The City Council is expected to review this item at its meeting on Tuesday, August 19, 2025. Also provided for Commission review are Draft Resolution of approval, Draft Resolution of denial, Location Map, Applicant’s Narrative, and Site Plan with Proposed Improvements. Commissioner Winge asked about traffic and parking on adjacent land and whether there have been any accidents in the area, as there is no turn lane present. Mr. Breen stated he is not aware of any complaints at that intersection. Commissioner Weinhold asked if this property is on City water, and Mr. Breen stated it is well and septic currently. Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 7:11 p.m. Mr. Aaron Sonsteby, 6868 Highway 95 North Branch, property owner, stated that all parking spaces will be on asphalt. The existing rock will remain with landscaping done for the water flow. Commissioner Winge asked if there would be any interior renovations to update the facility with septic. Mr. Sonsteby stated that the previous owner told him the septic was up to standards. They plan to repaint the exterior and resurface the concrete floors on the inside, along with some painting. Commissioner Weinhold asked how traffic will be managed, storage, and what the turnaround time is expected to be. Mr. Sonsteby stated that customers have 7 days to retrieve their vehicle; otherwise, they are charged storage. After 30 days, they are subject to tow. This could be modified to meet the 10-day turnaround. Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 7:16 p.m. Chair Loehlein asked Mr. Breen about the duration of the CUP, and Mr. Breen stated that the CUP runs with the land. The IUP has a 5-year expiration, and in this case, it would last until City sewer and water were brought to the property. Motion by Commissioner Winge, seconded by Commissioner Naughton, to recommend that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Automobile Service nd Station – 3118 162 Ln NW; PID#16-32-24-23-0023 – Equipment Engineering Services (Applicant). Motion carried on a 6-ayes vote. PUBLIC HEARING: Consider Interim Use Permit (IUP) for Interim Performance nd Standards – 3118 162 Ln NW; PID# 16-32-24-23-0023 – Equipment Engineering Services (Applicant). Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 4 Mr. Breen reviewed that the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review an Interim Use Permit (IUP) for Interim Performance Standards for the subject property nd located at 3118 162 Lane 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. Deviations to performance standards under 12-14 will be considered in the following areas:  Parking and Impervious Surface Areas. o Screening, landscaping, visual appeal, and lighting of parking lot areas. o Paving of parking areas for customers. o Dust control measures for unpaved parking and storage areas.  The amount, type, location, and screening of exterior storage as a part of any IUP.  Screening of mechanical equipment and trash bins/dumpsters.  Other factors, as the City Council deems relevant. Mr. Breen reviewed the Review Criteria along with comments about this case. 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 – The site is located on the southern nd side of 162 Lane NW. It is a former trash hauling site that currently hosts an 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 the City Staff’s knowledge, there have not been any previous requests for interim performance standards at this property. The City Council discussed the types of site improvements they would like to see at the Workshop on February 25, 2025. After reviewing initial plans for proposed improvements, Council indicated they 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 – Several properties in the Hughs/Westview industrial park Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 5 area 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 like 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 an 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 – The proposed use provides for additional landscaping and screening and is at a level of site improvement like other 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 hurt values of property and scenic views – City staff do not anticipate the proposed use will hurt 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 provided for review. City staff does not recommend any financial surety for the proposed use. The Planning Commission has been asked to conduct a public hearing and to make a recommendation on the proposed Interim Use Permit to the City Council. The City Council is expected to review this item at its meeting on Tuesday, August 19, 2025. Also provided for Commission consideration are Draft Resolution of approval, Draft Resolution of denial, Location Map, Applicant’s Narrative, and Site Plan with Proposed Improvements. st Commissioner Grout noted the resolution says the parking lot is to be paved by August 1, st 2025, and Mr. Breen stated that it would be corrected to August 1, 2026. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 6 Commissioner Weinhold asked how large the property lot size is in acres, and Mr. Breen stated he does not have that information. Commissioner Weinhold asked about paving less than an acre, and Mr. Breen stated it would be less than an acre of pavement. Replacing or redoing existing pavement is not included in that total. Commissioner Naughton noted there is no excess burden on streets, but this is a heavy nd equipment repair shop. He asked if there are any weight restrictions on 162, and Mr. Breen stated he does not know if there are any weight restrictions in that area. The idea of no excess burden is based on current traffic. Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Mr. Aaron Sonsteby, 6868 Highway 95 North Branch, stated that County Roads have 10 10-ton limit. Chair Loehlein asked how many vehicles would be repaired in a month. Mr. Sonsteby stated 10-20 per month for trucks and 5-10 pieces of equipment. This will vary by month. nd Commissioner Winge stated based on the City’s website, 162 is a 7-ton weight limit road. Mr. Sonsteby stated that the weight would not be exceeded. Commissioner Weinhold asked if any environmental reports were scheduled. Mr. Sonsteby stated soil borings will be made in the first week of September. There was a history of contamination on that site which the State has provided a clean certificate. Commissioner Hudson asked if the new pavement would be under 1 acre. Mr. Sonsteby stated they are planning on paving under 1 acre. Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 7:36 p.m. Commissioner Grout commented on the Interim Performance Standards and expressed appreciation to the proposed landowner. Commissioner Winge noted this request seems to be in line with the Hughes area. Motion by Commissioner Hudson, seconded by Commissioner Winge, to recommend that the City Council approve the Interim Use Permit (IUP) for Interim Performance Standards nd – 3118 162 Ln NW; PID# 16-32-24-23-0023 – Equipment Engineering Services (Applicant) and changing the date on item one to 2026. Motion carried on a 5-ayes 1-nay (Weinhold) vote. Commissioner Weinhold voiced a concern about whether it would be injurious to the surrounding area, and there is a question about the status of the septic system and the condition of the soil. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 7 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). City Planner Hellegers reviewed the applicants' request for a variance for a second freestanding sign and a corresponding variance for additional signage for their property located at 14220 Inca Street NW. Automobile Service Stations are allowed to have one freestanding sign by the City Code. Properties located in the Neighborhood Business (NB) Zoning District are limited by City Code to three 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 that the City must consider when reviewing a variance request. If a variance is approved, it becomes a property right that runs with the land. Mr. Hellegers provided the background, including location, vehicular access, development area, public hearing notice, and signage standards. The applicants are requesting a variance from the City Code to allow a second freestanding sign, where the Code would only allow one freestanding sign for an Automobile Service Station. The applicants also request a corresponding variance from the maximum aggregate signage area for the subject property. In order to discuss the aggregate signage area, it is helpful to understand how signage is calculated. There are two sides of the proposed building that front on a public street: the east side and the west side 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 sf of signage, but that would have exceeded the allowable signage area for the property. The second freestanding sign, which is 89.6 sf, was removed, which brought the signage just below the requirement, and the City approved a signage permit for 296 sf of signage. The proposed variance would bring the signage to 385.7 sf, which would exceed the maximum aggregate signage area by 85.7 sf. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 8 Mr. Hellegers presented a chart showing the currently approved signage and proposed additional signage, along with a drawing of the property and sign locations. A map showing Vehicular Access was also shown. The 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 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 was provided for review, as well as other materials submitted by the applicants in support of their request. 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 has drafted 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. Commissioner Grout asked Staff if the shared drive on the north was a public street, and what the aggregate would be for the signage. Mr. Hellegers stated that they only use public streets to calculate signage. Commissioner Naughton asked if there is additional signage allowed for Taco Bell, and Mr. Hellegers stated they only have one free-standing sign. Also provided for Commission consideration were Location map, City Code §12-8 – Signs, City Code §12-15-9 – Variances, and Applicant’s Application Materials. Chair Loehlein referred to the purple intersection indicated on the drawing and whether a right turn off Inca would be allowed. Mr. Hellegers clarified. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 9 Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 8:00 p.m. Mr. Ben Dehayes, 5563 North Elston Avenue, Chicago, IL, applicant, noted from an access standpoint, they do not want Holiday traffic coming in at the purple access (as noted on the map). They want to route the traffic to the red circle access, which is the only full access to the site. The lot is atypical. Commissioner Naughton asked if there was a less intrusive sign that could be constructed to mark the entrance. Mr. Dehayes stated from a branding standpoint, it would match, and if desired, the same-looking sign could be shrunk. Commissioner Winge referred to #2 in the review criteria; the calculation could have been recalculated if measuring the long side of the building. He would appreciate an alternative. Mr. Dehayes stated they are open to an alternative. They want to steer traffic away from the shared access with Taco Bell. It is a clear demarcation of where traffic should turn. Commissioner Winge suggested shrinking the height of the signage. This is a residential area, and residents don’t want to see an illuminated sign coming into their windows. Mr. Dehayes stated the entire sign size would shrink. Chair Loehlein stated he was surprised to see Holiday and thought they would all be Circle K. Mr. Dehayes stated it is a slow conversion, and they are sensitive to brand loyalty. Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 8:20 p.m. Commissioner Hudson stated that another item is whether to allow a second sign. Commissioner Grout stated in looking at the unique access to the site, additional directional signage would be an advantage to the public. Chair Loehlein stated that if the driveway between Taco Bell and the site the calculation would be different. Commissioner Winge stated he could get on board for adding a second sign, but he does not know how a motion could be approved for that. He is in support of reducing the size of the sign and placing it at ground level, but that may obstruct getting in/out of the site. Mr. Hellegers suggested the Commission could recommend an appropriate size, or the applicant could be directed to come back with revisions. Because there are two variances, the findings need to be noted for each of the items. They both need to meet the same standards. Mr. Hellegers explained the ground signs and locations. These are not counted against the square footage. These are directional signs. These were already approved as part of their signage plan. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 10 Commissioner Weinhold asked if the Commission could offer a motion to approve the second sign with the condition that the owner meet the signage maximum of 300 sf. Mr. Hellegers stated that would be removing one variance from the applicant’s request. The Commission is directed to review the request that is provided. Mr. Dehayes stated that this could be conditioned upon the applicant coming back with a 60-square-foot sign that is 15 feet in height. Chair Loehlein asked the Commission if they support the additional sign or would they like to see the applicant come back with a revised sign plan. Commissioner Grout stated he would support a smaller sign that is more appropriate for Inca. He sees the need for the additional sign. Commissioner Winge stated he would struggle with approving the second sign. Commissioner Naughton stated he agrees, and there is already a lot of signage, and he would not support the second sign. Motion by Commissioner Naughton, seconded by Commissioner Winge, to recommend that the City Council deny the 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) per the proposed resolution for denial. Motion carried on a 5-ayes, 1- nay(Grout) vote. 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). Mr. Breen reviewed that 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 ramblers and two-story homes with basements, and the existing home at 888 Crosstown Blvd NW will be preserved. This amounts to 2.5 units/acre net density. Mr. Breen reviewed the background, including Conformance with Local Plans and Ordinances, Lots, Street Access, Sewer and Water Access, Coon Creek Watershed District, Coordination with other Agencies, Tree Preservation/Trees/Landscaping, Stormwater Requirements, Park and Trail Dedication, and Public Notice. Mr. Breen reviewed the Site Topography, noting that it is part of the Coon Creek Watershed District, there are no existing floodplain or wetlands, and Staff recommends preserving or planting trees on the southern end of the property, and grading may not allow for tree preservation. There is no requirement for tree preservation. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 11 This site was already guided for development, so there is no Comprehensive Plan amendment required. The site will have two primary accesses – Crosstown Access – Four- legged uncontrolled access. Crosstown Blvd and Prairie Rd with right and left turn lanes. Prairie Rd Access – Three-legged access. No dedicated turn lanes, new bypass lane north on Prairie Rd. A future access – Temporary cul-de-sac at the SW end with a road stub for properties to the northeast. Future trails are planned on Crosstown Blvd and Prairie Rd. All the properties will have city water and sewer connecting to the north end at Sycamore Street. The site can be served by existing capacity, and grading will create 4 infiltration basins. The Park and Recreation Commission recommended cash-in-lieu of land to the City Council. A trail easement to be provided on the south side of Crosstown Blvd. The Budget Impact would be added tax revenue generated from additional properties. The Planning and Zoning Commission has been asked to hold a public hearing related to the preliminary plat and to make a recommendation to the City Council. Also provided for Commission review were Draft Resolution of Approval, Draft Resolution of Denial, Exhibit A – Underlying Legal Description, Location Map, Andover Review Committee Comments, and Preliminary Plat Plan Set. Commissioner Naughton asked about access point B had a stop sign coming out of the neighborhood, and asked if that is the same for access point A and Mr. Breen stated there would be stop signs at both. Commissioner Naughton asked what the impact would be on City Staff to maintain those roads, and Mr. Breen stated he would need to confer with Public Works. It has been part of the plan for some time. This has already been budgeted for. Commissioner Weinhold asked about the trails, noting the trail is on the south side of Crosstown Blvd, and asked if the trail on Prairie Rd will be on the west side. Mr. Breen stated he does not know if that has been determined yet. Mr. Hellegers stated the trail on Prairie Road would be on the west side. Commissioner Winge asked what was being approved or denied. Mr. Breen stated that this is the Preliminary Plat about whether the development should be constructed. The Final Plat will come before the Commission in the future. A variance is required for one of the lots as well as zoning approval. Commissioner Hudson asked if zoning would come back to the Planning and Zoning Commission, and Mr. Breen stated it will come back at the next meeting. Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 8:35 p.m. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 12 Mr. Jason Rude, EG Rude and Sons, Land Surveyors, 6776 Lake Drive, Lino Lakes, this plan went through a comprehensive review in February. At that time, a PUD was requested but not approved. The lot count has been reduced by four. They have received approval from Coon Creek Watershed on the drainage and stormwater design. Commissioner Weinhold stated last time there was concern from the residents living on th Prairie Rd. The visibility of the 3-way intersection on Prairie and 155 would be a concern because the headlights would shine in their living rooms. Mr. Rude stated the intersection is the same. The applicant has visited with the residents about their concerns. Mr. Brandon Riedel, 938 Crosstown Blvd, lives on Prairie and will be surrounded by the houses being constructed. His house was built in 1976 and has a horseshoe driveway. It is surrounded by trees. He purchased the property for privacy. Will there be any problems with the rezoning in the future? Code would not allow for a horseshoe driveway currently, due to needing it for his truck and trailer. Ten of the new houses will be in his backyard overlooking his home. They were assessed for Crosstown Blvd. The current residents have paid for things that the developments did not have to pay for. He asked what the future looks like for all the existing residents. He is not against the development going in. He does not want to be forced to decide to sell his home. He indicated his property on the map. He is trying to get information on zoning changes. Only two people sold their properties for this development. Ms. Edith Tray, 838 Crosstown Blvd, stated that there is a telephone pole, and she was told it was a wetland years ago on the site. She has a driveway at the back of her lot that goes to her pole barn, which she has used for over 50 years. She asked if that would be grandfathered in. She asked if the applicant had reviewed the statements from the last meeting and which statements were considered. Most of the current residents moved here to the country. It is now making it City. She does not feel like the residents have been listened to. She is concerned about the lack of a playground for the children. It is dangerous for her to exit and enter her driveway. 54 cars will be added to that traffic area. Mr. David Franzen, 15527 Prairie Rd. stated that the driveway will be in line with his living room window. He suggested a bypass lane. The speed limit is 50mph, and this needs to be lowered on Prairie Rd. Ms. Edith Tray, 838 Crosstown Blvd, noted that the sewer and water would be added to 888 Crosstown Blvd and asked if they would be charged for that. If it is being given to 888, it should be given to her and others on Crosstown Blvd. Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 8:50 p.m. Chair Loehlein asked for Staff to address the concerns about rezoning and sewer/water. Mr. Breen stated the rezoning process is based on the Comprehensive Plan. The next one 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 based on the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use. Included in the Comprehensive Plan for this area, because it is in the MUSA, it is guided to develop at a higher density. The current property owners control their properties. No change will ever happen to the properties unless they choose to develop/sell them. No changes are forced on the current properties. Buffering and screening are incorporated into the subdivision process. Compliance with the City Code will only come into play until a request to build another building is submitted. There is infrastructure involved in connecting to the City water and sewer. He is not aware of the agreement between the developer and 888 Crosstown. A water main has been added to this area, and if services are brought to an area, there is an opportunity to connect. Residents can speak with the engineering department to see if they are eligible to connect. Chair Loehlein stated the City does not force rezoning on residents. He asked if a traffic study is needed. Mr. Breen stated that it was discussed at the Sketch Plan stage. He does not have a traffic study as part of the application. Mr. Rude stated Brian Jansen, Boulder Contracting, will be speaking with the residents regarding their concerns. The connection cost to 888 Crosstown is covered by the developer and part of the infrastructure, and is part of the development. The requirement for the turn lanes came out of a traffic study. Prairie Road has a proposed bypass lane that was accommodated on the east side. Commissioner Weinhold asked if there would be any easement needed, and Mr. Rude stated that it is in the existing right-of-way. Commissioner Weinhold stated that traffic is going to be a concern in this area. He suggested a traffic study be done to reduce the speed on Prairie Rd. going into Crosstown. Commissioner Winge asked the Staff to confirm where the utilities are brought in. Mr. Breen stated at the intersection of Crosstown and Sycamore. Commissioner Winge thinks people will use this intersection instead of Crosstown and Prairie Rd. He does not feel it is appropriate to add a bypass lane and shift traffic further east and would prefer a designated turn lane. Mr. Breen stated that it will be added to the notes for the City Council. th Commissioner Weinhold asked if there wasn’t a roundabout planned for 157, Crosstown, and Prairie as part of a future study. Mr. Breen stated he believes there is a proposal for that, but it was caught in a funding issue. Motion by Commissioner Hudson, seconded by Commissioner Weinhold, to recommend that the City Council approve the Preliminary Plan 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). Commissioner Winge stated approval of this motion is contingent on the variance request. Mr. Breen stated that the approval of the Preliminary Plat is conditioned on the approval of the variance request. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 14 Motion carried on a 5-ayes vote. CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST FOR MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACKS – Lot 1 Block 3, Boulder Prairie Estates – Boulder Contracting, LLC (Applicant). Mr. Breen reviewed that the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a Variance request for Block 3 Lot 1 of the proposed plat for Boulder Prairie Estates. The request is for a reduced side yard setback of 25 feet (from 35 feet) for an R-4 residential lot that is not a back-to-back lot. 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 may be reduced to 25 feet if the lot is back-to-back with another lot, such as Lots 1 and 2 of Block 4. The applicant is requesting a 25-foot setback for Lot 1 of Block 3. 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” are used in connection with the granting of a variance, which means: 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by official control. The requested Variance would reduce the minimum side yard setback of one lot to the amount allowed for back-to-back lots. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to their property, not created by the landowner. The street needs to be adjusted to the north to accommodate an adequate 100-year flooding infiltration basin. The proposed layout of the development also provides a road stub to accommodate the future development of the property to the north. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The lot with the Variance will have the same setback as the other back-to-back lots along the street. The lot will meet all other R-4 zoning requirements. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The requested variance maintains a straight road alignment, avoiding additional road curvature while accommodating the unique shape of the property and allowing for future development of adjacent properties. 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 was submitted by the applicants was provided as well as other materials submitted by the applicant in support of their request. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 15 The applicants’ responses to the Variance criteria included:  We needed to adjust the street over to North for stormwater ponding on the south side of the project to cover adequate 100-year flooding, in situations of rainfall when the side of the 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, Lots 1-2 of Block 4, that back up to each other and meet the same width. Since it is not back-to-back, it will require a variance.  Layout also designed for the future 4 undeveloped not sold homes to the north for development in the future. The Planning and 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. This will come before the City Council at their August 19, 2025, meeting. Also provided for Commission consideration are Draft Resolution of Approval, Draft Resolution of Denial, Location Map, and Letter from Applicant. Chair Loehlein opened the public hearing at 9:22 p.m. No one appeared to address the Commission. Chair Loehlein closed the public hearing at 9:23 p.m. Commissioner Winge stated he struggles to see the plight of the landowner. This could have been configured in a manner that would not need a variance. Commissioner Grout stated he has similar concerns and asked why a variance is needed. Mr. Rude stated that this request lines up the 3 lots. If not passed, the lot will be built 10 feet narrower. This is a unique lot and not a deal breaker. It allows houses to line up. Mr. Breen noted the applicant could have applied for a PUD for this single deviation. That would have allowed for reduced side setback across the development. Chair Loehlein stated that this request seems reasonable. He does not see the benefit of reducing the size of the home constructed. Commissioner Hudson concurred that this is reasonable. Motion by Commissioner Weinhold, seconded by Commissioner Hudson, to recommend that the City Council approve the Variance Request for Minimum Side Yard Setbacks – Lot 1 Block 3, Boulder Prairie Estates – Boulder Contracting, LLC (Applicant). Motion carried on a 4-ayes, 2-nays (Naughton and Winge) vote. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – August 12, 2025 Page 16 OTHER BUSINESS - NONE. ADJOURNMENT Chair Loehlein adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Debbie Wolfe, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.