Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 9, 2006 " o ~ Cl..6.J ~H-e-n ..:5 ,),,3:-000 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING -MAY 9,2006 The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Daninger on May 9, 2006, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Chairperson Daninger, Commissioners Tim Kirchoff, Rex Greenwald, Michael Casey, Valerie Holthus, Devon Walton and Michael King. Commissioners absent: There were none. Also present: City Planner, Courtney Bednarz Associate Plarmer, Andy Cross Others o APPROVAL OF MINUTES. April 25, 2006 Chairperson Daninger indicated on page 3, fifth paragraph., he stated the minutes note he was not in favor of the location, he was not opposed to the location but he wanted a definite before he made a recommendation of approval. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Casey, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. PUBLIC HEARING: RESIDENTIAL SKETCH PLAN FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RURAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 17700 TULIP STREET NW. Mr. Cross stated the Planning Commission is asked to review a six-lot residential sketch plan called Timber River Trails 2nd Addition proposed by Al Parent. o City Code 11-2 outlines the requirements for sketch plan review. The Planning Commission is asked to formally advise the subdivider of the extent to which the plan conforms to the Comprehensive Plan, design standards of city and possible modification necessary to secure approval of the plan. Submission of a sketch plan does not constitute :formal filing of a plat. o Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - May 9, 2006 Page 2 Mr. Cross discussed the staff report with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he liked to see there was a ghost plat for this but he wondered if the United Power easement could not be built on if the area ghost platted were to develop. Mr. Cross stated United Power would need to tell the developer at the time what could and could not be built within the easement. Typically nothing is to be built within the easement. Commissioner Greenwald asked for clarification on the staff recommendation regarding "modifications to the sketch plan that are needed in order to conform with the City requirements as discussed above". Mr. Cross stated that is a catch all in there to make sure the applicant is very clear that if the County does submit any comments in the future, they will be required to follow those. Motion by Casey, seconded by Walton, to open the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. o Ms. Julie Seydel, 3712 178th Lane, stated as a neighborhood their big concern is the roadway. She wanted to stress that they want the road to come out to Tulip because she does home daycare and during the day there is fifteen to eighteen children in that short of an area the speed limit is 40 mph and there are already a lot of vehicles that come in and out of that area and she felt it was very dangerous to add more yehicles to this road as an exit. She noted they also have the ballpark down the road and it gets very busy there. Ms. Seydel wondered if there were going to be streetlights in the cul-de-sac area. They were concerned with lights shining into their homes and yards. Mr. Bednarz stated at this point the locations for the street lights have not been selected. Ms. Seydel wondered what the proposed value of new homes will be. She also stated they have strict covenants in their development and she would like the new development to have the same kind of covenants as they have because they are backing up to them. She noted the neighborhood does not want pole barns in the new development because it would not be favorable to their neighborhood. Mr. & Mrs. Ryan and Ivette Soto-Cook, 17697 Tulip, wondered where the road will go out of the development. Mr. Cross stated the new road will follow the south lot line and exit out onto Tulip Street. Mr. Soto-Cook indicated it would come out where their driveway is located and he was concerned with lights shining into their home when cars would exit the development. o Mr. Dale Berley, 1773 Tulip Street, wondered if the City will require an EP A study on that. Mr. Cross stated for the past year, the City has been working on an abatement process on the property and will all be cleaned up with this project or prior to the project. o Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - May 9, 2006 Page 3 Motion by Walton, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 7:18 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if there is a requirement to have a covenant in any development or is that guided by the development itself. Mr. Cross stated that is handled strictly on the private side and there are not any City regulations or ordinances regarding this. Mr. Cross stated according to the City Code, lots need to be at least three acres in size before a pole barn can be constructed. These lots are just over two acres so there can not be any pole barns constructed on any of the property. Commissioner Greenwald wondered if this development pretty much matches the ghost plat they have had on the property for a number of years. Mr. Bednarz stated this is about the only option that is left for this property. Commissioner Greenwald asked if 177th Avenue NW would have to move north ten feet, would this be a problem as far as lot size. Mr. Cross was not sure. He stated there may need to be some reworking required if the County decided the road needed to be moved. o Commissioner Walton wondered what impact six more properties would have to adjust the speed limit on 178th Lane. Mr. Bednarz stated they would need to have a speed study requested and authorized by the City Council in order to have the speed limit lowered. Commissioner Greenwald asked if 17Sth Lane was a City road and would it not be limited to the Statutory Speed Limit. He was surprised the speed limit was so high. He wondered if 177tli Lane when extended be the Statutory Speed Limit. Mr. Bednarz indicated it is a rural road and if it is not signed, the speed limit can be quite high if they are not posted. Commissioner Kirchoff cautioned anyone for a speed study because a speed study is based on the actual speeds out there today and there are cases where it can be raised due to the speeds that are going on in a certain area. Commissioner Greenwald wondered if 177th Lane could also be 40 mph. Mr. Bednarz indicated it could. Mr. AI Parent, 14117 Orchid Street, Andover, stated with development costs today being what they are he thought the minimum value for the homes would be $350,000 and he was not sure what the top price for a home would be. He noted they are custom builders and work with clients to build different types of homes. o Commissioner Walton asked if the topography will allow for walk outs. Mr. Parent stated until they get the grading plans, it is hard to tell. He thought there could be a couple of walk outs. o Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - May 9, 2006 Page 4 Commissioner Walton asked if they were planning on saving trees in the development. Mr. Parent stated they are going to try to save as many trees as possible but he thought the plat was pretty sparse. Commissioner Holthus asked if the street was made curvier, would there still be room to create lot one. Mr. Parent indicated he was not sure but there are minimum and maximum radius requirements on a street corner. Chairperson Daninger stated they are concerned with the possible speed of the road and alsoa five hundred foot cul-de-sac if the second connection is not made onto Tulip. Another concern is where the street will come out on Tulip Street. He thought they should look at the speed limit to determine if it could be lowered. Mr. Cross stated that this item would be before the Council at the May 16, 2006 City Council meeting. OTHER BUSINESS. o a. Update on Council Discussion: Buffering rural from urban development. Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on the City Council discussion at their last meeting. Commissioner Walton stated his concern was it needed to be a softer approach. The other question remaining was if it was really necessary as they continued to grow. The question still underlies this, if it is something they really need or necessary in certain cases. Commissioner Kirchoff saw this as more of a policy statement rather than a regulation and he was comfortable with that because it was more of something to guide the developers and not force the developers to do something. o Commissioner Walton wondered if they had a buffering setup on the development and the neighborhood to the farmland, for example, also develops, would they have a case for buffer to buffer or could the buffer be taken down and removed. Is it always the possibility of the landowner where the buffer exists to remove the buffer at any point in time or do they have to petition the City or what would need to be done. Mr. Bednarz stated when property is purchased, the landscaping is also purchased and the owner does have the ability to remove what they want. If there is a wetland, there are more restrictions on what can be done. The intent was to apply this to areas of urban areas that were up against areas that would be permanently rural. This may change over time but that was the intent. ,------ o Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - May 9, 2006 Page 5 Chairperson Daninger thought it was a starting point. Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on related items. ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Casey, to adjourn the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Respectfully Submitted, Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. o o