HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC October 17, 2006
o
o
o
r~ ~.,.~-'\.!
't. " _~_ .~; .:
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
Regular City Council Meeting - Tuesday, October 17,2006
Call to Order-7:00 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance
Resident Forum
Agenda Approval
1. Approval of Minutes (9/21/06 Joint Mtg wlPark Comm.; 9/26/06 Workshop; 10/3/06 Regular)
Consent Items
2. Approve Payment of Claims - Finance
3. Award Quote/06-40/Round Lake Boulevard NW & Bunker Lake Boulevard NWffraffic Signal
Improvements - Engineering
Discussion Items
4. Receive Anoka County Sheriff's Department Monthly Report - Sheriff
5. Consider Amendment to PUDI Woodland Crossing - Planning
6. Consider Lot Split/13423 Crooked Lake Boulevard - Planning
7. Consider Lot Split/13533 Jay Street NW - Planning
8. Consider Conditional Use PennitNalley Pools and Spas/3426 Bunker Lake Blvd. - Planning
9. Consider Conditional Use PennitNeterinary Clinic/1574 154th Avenue NW - Planning
Staff Items
10. Schedule EDA Meeting - Administration
11. Administrator's Report - Administration
~ayor/CouncilInput
Adjournment
o
o
o
~,mJ\..~ (UV
Luu~ I \-q~()P
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17, 2006 Page 13
REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 17,2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE..................................................................................................... 1
RESIDENT FORUM ................................................................................................................. 1
AGENDA APPROV AL............................................................................................................. 1
APPROVAL OF lVIlN1JTES ...................................................................................................... 1
CONSENT ITEMS
Approve Payment of Claims ................................................................................................2
Awarding Quote/06-40/Round Lake Boulevard NW & Bunker Lake
Boulevard NW/Traffic Signal Improvements .................................................................2
Resolution R121-06 approving the Resolution for the Municipal Stated Aid Street
Advance ................. ........ ...... ..... ..... ........ ............................... .............. ..................... ....... 2
RECEIVE ANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF DEP ARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
Received................................................................... .................................................. ........... 2
CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO PUD/WOODLAND CROSSING
Motion to Approve (RES. RI22-06)..................................................................................... 3
CONSIDER LOT SPLIT/13423 CROOKED LAKE BOULEVARD
Motion to Table... ............ ................... ... ........ ................................. ....................................... 5
CONSIDER LOT SPLIT/13533 JAY STREET NW
Motion to Approve (RES. RI23-06)..................................................................................... 8
CONSIDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMlTN ALLEY POOLS AND SP AS/3426
BUNKER LAKE BOULEVARD
Motion to deny (RES. RI24-06) ........................................................................................... 9
CONSIDER CONDmONAL USE PERMlTNETERINARY CLINIC/1574 154TH
AVENUE NW
Motion to Approve (RES. RI25-06)..................................................................................... 11
SCHEDULE EDA MEETING................................................................................................... 11
ADMINISTRATORS REPORT ................................................................................................ 11
MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT
City Attorney Introduction ...................................... ........ ........... ...................................... ..... 11
YMCA Halloween Event...................................................................................................... 12
City Department Reports .. .................... ......................... ................ ................................ ....... 12
Nightingale/Crosstown Project ............... ....................... ............................................ ........... 12
Trails ..................................................................................................................................... 12
ADJOURNMENT...................................................................................................................... 12
o
o
o
CITY OF
NDOVE
REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OCTOBER 17, 2006
MINUTES
The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Mike
Gamache, October 17, 2006, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW,
Andover, Minnesota.
Councilmembers present:
Councilmember absent:
Also present:
Don Jacobson, Mike Knight, Julie Trude
Ken Orttel
City Attorney, William Hawkins
Assistant City Attorney, Scott Baumgartner
City Engineer, Dave Berkowitz
City Administrator, Jim Dickinson
Community Development Director, Will Neumeister
Others
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
RESIDENT FORUM
No one wished to address the Council.
AGENDA APPROVAL
Add to the Consent Agenda Item 3a, (Approve the Resolution for the Municipal State Aid Street
Advance).
Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to approve the Agenda as amended above. Motion
carried unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
September 21, 2006, Joint Meeting with Park Commission: Correct as amended.
Councilmember Trude stated on the second page she was making a comment and whatever was
typed did not make sense. She stated they were talking about baseball complexes and parks and she
suggested they strike the paragraph. She stated they were talking about the park plan. Mayor
Gamache thought she had asked if they had enough money to purchase the homes. Councilmember
o
o
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17, 2006 Page 2
Trude stated the sentence should read "Councilmember Trude inquired about the amount to purchase
the houses west of the water treatment plant for a future park."
Motion by Trude, Seconded by Jacobson, approval of the minutes as indicated above. Motion
carried unanimously.
September 26, 2006, Workshop Meeting: Correct as amended.
Councilmember Trude s1:cj.ted on page 4, second paragraph from the bottom, first sentence
"Councilmember Trude asked if they were looking at the outlot area for the higher value homes."
She stated on the next page, middle of the page she made a comment after Councilmember Knight
and it was not clear but important. "Councilmeinber Trude commented the trail connection from the
neighborhoods to the trail along the creek. . . "
Councilmember Trude stated on page 8, third paragraph from the bottom, she was talking about
community education funding and it got mixed up with health insurance. The second sentence
should read "She asked if it would be possible to figure out a special community education. . ." She
stated there was another discussion, "She questioned if there was any money left for the community
center after school and open gym programS".
Motion by Trude, Seconded by Knight, approval of Minutes as indicated above. Motion carried
unanimously.
October 3, 2006, Regular Meeting: Correct as amended.
Councilmember Trude stated on page 7, third paragraph, it says County 7 and should say Lot 7.
Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Trude, approval of Minutes as indicated above. Motion carried
unanimously.
CONSENT ITEMS
Item 2
Item 3
Approval of Claims
Award Quote/06-40/Round Lake Boulevard NW & Bunker Lake Boulevard
NWrrraffic Signal Improvements
Approve the Resolution for the Municipal State Aid Street Advance. (Res. RI21-06)
Item 3a
Motion by Trude, Seconded by Jacobson, approval of the Consent Agenda as read. Motion carried
unanimously.
RECEIVEANOKA COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
The Anoka County Sheriff s Department provided an update on law enforcement activities occurring
o
o
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17, 2006 Page 3
within Andover.
Councilmember Trude appreciated the extra information on the crime prevention programs.
Councilmember Jacobson stated as he looked at year to date calls as compared to last year's, in
almost every category this year they are seeing increased calls and incident reports from just about
everything and he thought that for a number of years they were somewhat isolated from these things.
It is starting to move out from the cities into the suburbs and they are starting to see more. He
thought they did a really good job of patrolling the roads and he thought it would probably be worse
if the Sheriff's Department was not patrolling.
CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO PUDIWOODLAND CROSSING
Community Development Director Neumeister explained Woodland Development is requesting an
amendment to the approved PUD to allow more options for future homeowners.
Mr. Neumeister clarified on the drawing they are seeing some of the units are requesting an
expansion off the back to allow for an expanded living area for the family room as well as a screened
porch. They would like approval for the areas on the left side that they can build to within the
boundaries shown on the lot diagram because Mr. Byron Westlund has had a few buyers since last
Friday indicate they would like to expand some of the living space within there. It would stay within
the architectural character that was approved before.
Councilmember Trude asked if the drawing was in their packet or something else that staffhas. Mr.
Westlund presented the drawing to the Council.
Councilmember Jacobson stated on the .first page, tlllrd paragraph, which reads "an optional deck
from the main floor dinette is also proposed. These decks will cross the lot box property line and
will be partially located on the common area of the association." On the drawings he did not see
that. He wondered which was correct. Mr. Westlund stated the issue it is talking about is the
proposed deck on the side. That would encroach into the open space but under the articles of the
association that is permitted. He stated these would not encroach into the buffer strips or anything
like that.
Councilmember Jacobson stated in the book the distance between homes is shown as 8.4 but on the
other one, it is 5.3. Mr. Neumeister stated it is 8.4 feet. Prior to Mr. Westlund coming in it was 5.3
and what he has agreed to do is there are three two-unit buildings side by side and he has agreed that
only one of the two units would be allowed to be the larger footprint. They would have to stay with
the smaller footprint on the other units that are side by side to allow no less than 8.5 feet between the
units. Prior to that agreement Mr. Westlund was looking at both units being the larger unit and that
would have reduced it to 5.3 feet and staff felt that was too close.
Councilmember Trude indicated there was no other way to reposition them because of the wetland
issues. Mr. Westlund agreed.
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17, 2006 Page 4
Councilmember Jacobson stated on Exhibit E, he counted fourteen units but the resolution indicates
lots 1-15. Mr. Westlund stated lot fifteen is the common space.
Motion by Knight, Seconded by Trude, to approve the attached resolution modifying the PUD
approval.
Councilmember Trude wondered if the resolution is descriptive enough. City Attorney Hawkins
thought it was.
Councilmember Jacobson stated as they go through this, they have a number of exhibits and the
resolution does not refer to any of those.
Councilmember Trude asked if they approved the floor plans. Mr. Neumeister stated they did.
Councilmember Trude indicated they would need to approve new floor plans or they could approve
floor plans that fit within those parameters.
o
Councilmember Trude thought they should add another condition to whatever the new exhibits are.
They should include those as also approved. Mr. Neumeister agreed that they should add the
additional exhibits but Mr. Westlund would like even more options without coming back as long as
they stay within the lot box because if they just stay within these exhibits, they cannot even add the
one they were just discussing. If they agree in concept with what Condition One is in the resolution,
it is saying the lot box area is the maximum structure allowed. To allow flexibility it may be similar
to the floor plans shown on exhibit A or in character with the floor plan shown on exhibits A, B and
C which gives them some flexibility.
Councilmember Trude thought they could add "The previously approved lot and floor plans shall
serve as the minimum" under number two.
City Attorney Hawkins stated as he looked at the language in number one on the exhibit he thought
that showed the maximum size and they may want some flexibility.
Councilmember Jacobson thought they should add in the resolution under item one, insert "exhibit
B".
Mr. Neumeister stated condition number one should reference Exhibit B dated October 12, 2006 that
is labeled "current lot typical" will be the maximum building footprint of a given unit within the
development. All options for front will be limited to those that had been previously approved
however rear modifications may be allowed to fit within this boundary. He thought this was what
they were looking for because Mr. Westlund wants to keep the character the same on the front as
o what they have seen in the packet.
Motion carried unanimously. (RES. RI22-06)
o
o
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17, 2006 Page 5
CONSIDER LOT SPLITI13423 CROOKED LAKE BOULEVARD
Community Development Director Neumeister stated Dennis Steinlicht has applied to split his
property along Crooked Lake Boulevard into two urban residential lots. The existing house, built in
1946, would be removed and two new houses built on the lots.
Councilmember Trude asked for clarification of the crosshatched area Mr. Dickinson showed on the
map the existing buildings on the property.
Councilmember Jacobson asked for the applicant to explain the hardship for this lot split.
Mr. Dennis Steinlicht, 2766 133rd Lane NW, stated there is not a major hardship. He stated he
purchased the house and he put money into it and tried to revamp it and made it into a rental, which
feasibly does not work because of the style and layout of the house. He looked into putting an
addition on it and structurally it is not good enough. The other option is to do a lot split and build
two split entries for single family housing.
Councilmember Jacobson thought that was a financial hardship that they could not grant a variance
for. Mr. Steinlicht indicated he had layouts of the houses and where they would sit on the lots.
Mayor Gamache stated currently they are looking at the variance on just the one lot because it is a
comer lot.
Councilmember Jacobson wondered why Mr. Steinlicht would not just tear the current house down
and build another one. Mr. Steinlicht stated if they looked further down the road, they built a
$380,000 plus home and it is still sitting there vacant. You cannot take that size lot and build a home
on a hundred thousand dollar lot and expect it to sell in that neighborhood. It is not a very high
priced neighborhood.
Mayor Gamache indicated the homes in that area are not in the $300,000 range and probably would
not sell. He stated there is a very similar development on 134th Avenue and Crooked Lake
Boulevard where the corner lot size is ninety feet and should be one hundred and the second lot in is
seventy-five feet wide and should be eighty. The homes were built in the late eighties and at some
point in time there was likely a lot split done.
Mr. Neumeister stated it could have been in 1987 or 1988 there might not have been a one hundred
foot lot requirement. It may have been an eighty-five foot to ninety foot comer requirement and it
may not have justified the need for a variance. He stated ordinances do change over time.
Councilmember Trude indicated she would rather see two single family homes over a duplex.
Councilmember Knight stated his only concern is the precedent for a variance if they do not have a
hardship.
Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to deny the proposed lot split.
o
o
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17, 2006 Page 6
Councilmember Knight stated the Planning Commission took the same position because they could
not find a hardship for the variance.
Mr. Steinlicht showed a layout of the home.
Mr. Jack Nottle stated they did not have an opportunity at the Planning Commission meeting to
convey the concerns of the neighborhood as well as themselves. He thought that vote may have been
different if they had the chance to do so. He stated the hardship issue is always something that
comes up and is not just a financial hardship. He stated almost all hardships come down to being
financial. They have a neighborhood that is in transition and this house does not fit in. He stated
there is a hardship in its physical structure and size, To make that area aesthetically appealing, they
want to tear that house down and make it two single family homes and get rid of the renters which is
one of the things the neighbors have been concerned about and if they do not get rid of the home, it
will continue to be rented. He stated they would like to get two homes that conform to the
neighborhood. They do not want to overprice the homes and get the driveway off of Crooked Lake
Boulevard.
Councilmember Trude wondered if they could use the neighborhood characteristic as a hardship for
the variance. City Attorney Hawkins stated the problem is the ordinance states "economic
considerations alone" and it does not say it cannot serve as a basis there. There must be other
reasons for granting of the hardship. He would have no reasonable use of the property and the
Council needs to make that decision based on the neighborhood conditions and whether or not
something could be done with the lot as it currently exists or is there nothing left that they could do
with it. He was not sure if the characteristics of that neighborhood rose to that level of being a basis
for granting a variance.
Mayor Gamache stated the issue he looked at is they have a parcel that just because it is a comer lot,
they need to have one hundred feet and he did not know why in this situation this is necessary. They
have two similar lots directly south of this lot. He would meet the eighty foot requirements of an R-4
and both fit the lot depth. The only thing they are looking at is because it is on the comer. Mr.
Steinlicht indicated if they looked throughout the neighborhood, a lot of them are not one hundred
foot lots.
Councilmember Jacobson stated this is a mixed neighborhood and there are lots that are smaller but
there are also lots that are this size or even bigger so to keep the lot the size it is right now is not out
of character. What is out of character is the house.
Mayor Gamache stated he was still not clear why they had to have one hundred feet on comer lots.
Mr. Neumeister explained the reasons.
Mr. Scott Waniger, 2740 134tb Lane, stated the property in question has been a major source of
multiple police visits and City violations in the last three years. After the meeting last week the
neighbors had some discussions with the owner in the foyer and he admitted that he did not take
good care of the property and he was not a good landlord. He does not want to be a landlord
anymore and is looking at improving the property value. He thought everyone involved with this
o
o
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes- October 17, 2006 Page 7
issue is in agreement with that statement and he believed in order to improve the value of this
property to the point where it will be attractive to a potential buyer, the house needs to be razed and a
new house or houses needs to be placed on this land.
Mr. Waniger indicated the owner has two options. He either puts one house on one lot or two houses
on two lots. Ifhe builds one house, the price would be higher than the average house price in the
immediate vicinity. Typically in the realty business, this makes the house much more difficult to sell
because it is not similar to the surrounding area. The impact would be that this house would sit
empty for a long period of time possibly and Commissioner Walton last week agreed with this and
no one wants a house to remain vacant. The second option of splitting the lot to build two houses
would create property and structures that would be in the similar price range and appearance to the
rest of the neighborhood. Ibis provides for a scenario for the houses to sell in a much shorter period
of time and thereby being occupied by residents for a long time and would also increase the property
tax base.
Mr. Waniger stated the owner of this property is asking for the option to build two houses on two
lots and the Planning Commission voted four to three to deny this. Chairperson Daninger voted
against the request because by allowing this variance they would see more variance requests coming
in. Commissioner Greenwald agreed with Chairperson Daninger. He indicated he could not agree or
disagree with this statement. To him this statement is based on future variance requests, which no
one knows for sure what those surrounding circumstances will be when the variance is applied for.
He believed that each variance should be analyzed individually and should take into account the
specific circumstances surrounding that property. One variance granted should not open the flood
gates for all other variances to be passed. He stated Commission King voted against this request
indicating one lot would be beneficial to this neighborhood. He disagreed and thought two lots
would have a better chance of fitting in with this neighborhood than one. He believed that two more
reasonably priced houses when compared to the nearby houses would be easier to sell than one very
expensive house.
Mr. Waniger stated Commissioners Kirchoff, Holthus and Walton saw the benefit of the lot split by
creating houses that would fit in to the neighborhood from an aesthetic and commercial value but
they also saw the benefit of removing a driveway from a very fast boulevard. Ibis way the
driveways would be placed on a cul-de-sac and the neighbors would not see any impact. The
Commission also thought the variances seemed minor. He stated ,his family is in favor of the lot split
because they feel this gives their neighborhood the best chance of being improved with two houses
of similar commercial value to the rest of the neighborhood. In a perfect world, they would love to
have one house next to their house because it would not be as crowded and the view from their
bedroom would be better than what it has been the last sixteen years. They believe that two smaller
houses would have a better chance of selling in their neighborhood and they believe that if the lot
split is not granted the owner will reevaluate his options and discover that he cannot afford to put one
house on the property. He stated they do not want this property to be maintained as a rental property
by this owner.
Mayor Gamache stated he understood they were looking for a hardship because of the ordinances
but the facts are pretty clear that they cannot build a house valued at $300,000 or $400,000 on this
o
o
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17, 2006 Page 8
lot. Ibis is the best fit for the neighborhood and he thought the hardship is they will relieve the
property owners surrounding this home. He thought this was the most logical way to do this.
Councilmember Trude stated she discussed this with the City Attorney and if they table this they may
be able to look at some of the hardship options. Her recommendation would be to table this to look at
the hardships and if that does not work to look at another method such as an ordinance to allow this
to work.
Councilmember Knight stated he would withdraw his second. Mayor Gamache asked for a second
on the motion. Hearing no motion the motion was dropped.
Motion by Trude, seconded by Knight, to table this item to November 21, 2006 for further research
on two options; potential hardships related to characteristics in the neighborhood and if there is an
ordinance approach that fits better. .
The applicant agreed to an extension of time on this item.
Motion carried 3 ayes, 1 nay (Jacobson).
CONSIDER LOT SPLIT/13533 JAY STREET NW
Community Development Director Neumeister explained the parcel is owned by Kottke's Bus
Service. They intend to split the lot and sell the west half, while retaining the east half for their
continued business use.
Councilmember Jacobson asked what the purchaser of the new parcel will be doing with it. Mr.
Chuck Peterson, Kottke's Bus Service, stated the idea of splitting the lot is that they want to create
two lots. One they will use for their own business and the other will be for sale or lease, industrial
type.
Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to approve the proposed lot split. Motion carried
unanimously. (RES. R123-06)
CONSIDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMITIVALLEY POOLS AND SPAS/3426 BUNKER
LAKE BOULEVARD
Community Development Director Neumeister stated John Roettger, manager at Valley Pools &
Spas, has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to set up an outdoor display on the west side of the
their building.
Councilmember Jacobson asked if the applicant is leasing the building or owns the building. The
applicant commented that they are leasing the building.
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17, 2006 Page 9
Councilmember Trude asked if the applicant can answer questions left from the Planning
Commission meeting. The applicant stated there were two major points brought up, the issue of
safety and if the gate would be locked from the inside. He stated right now they have in the plans to
leave it so they can open it from the inside and it would be locked from the outside at all times. They
can easily after hours put a chain around so it will be chain locked as well.
Councilmember Jacobson asked what height the fence would be. The applicant indicated the City
requires a four foot restriction around pools and they will do six feet.
Councilmember Trude stated they have already had vandalism. and kids drinking behind the building
and stuff starting on fire. She wondered why they would Want t6 put those types of valuable things
outside if this is the type of neighborhood it is. The applicant stated they have a couple of issues.
One is with having the product with water inside the building. Having two big pools with water
inside poses a number of issues. They have already had issues with liners leaking and plumbing
leaking and their floors are damaged. Their first concern is to get those products out of the retail
space, outside where they actually belong. The second issue is to deal with the neighborhood.
Because the area is not really lit or maintained they have those issues. If they could clean that up, the
problems will hopefully go away.
o Councilmember Trude stated she would rather see them buy retail space and do the display indoors.
She indicated she is concerned with the comments the Planning Commission had and she did not
think they could address them unless they had a roof on it and they build a building.
The applicant indicated there are three other companies that have outdoor displays. He stated of their
three other stores, they will have three outdoor displays and to his knowledge there has never been an
issue or incident with accidents or trespassing or injuries.
Councilmember Knight thought his would be an attractive nuisance that would be a possible
nightmare. Mayor Gamache asked what the difference would be between this and a resident with an
outdoor pool. Councilmember Trude indicated there is a dance studio and park down the road and it
is in a business area. Councilmember Jacobson indicated the ordinance does not allow outdoor
displays.
Mayor Gamache asked what they did for Ace Hardware for their outdoor display. Mr. Neumeister
explained Ace Hardware has a seasonal display of merchandise and was done as part of an approval
for some type of a special permit on that building when it was constructed.
Mayor Gamache asked if they were going to have these displayed in the winter. The applicant
indicated they will need to keep them up and winterized with less water in them. He noted that if a
person could jump a four foot fence they would be able to stand in the pool and be above water to get
o out. The City is concerned with toddlers falling in.
Councilmember Trude wondered about the dance studio and the kids coming and going there. She
thought the children can get in there if they wander over. The applicant stated the outdoor area will
always remain closed and locked and the only access would be with a sales associate. He stated no
o
o
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17,2006 Page 10
one is allowed to remain in the display area without a sales associate present.
Councilmember Jacobson stated right now they are talking about pools and the ordinance says they
cannot have outdoor displays. If this were granted, he thought other businesses would want to have
outdoor displays also. He was looking at a precedent. He thought this was more of a hazard to the
kids, especially in the summer months. He did not see how they could allow this when the ordinance
says it is not allowed.
The applicant indicated staff told him there is an exception to the ordinance with a variance.
Councilmember Jacobson stated he understood that but to him that exception would need to be a
very overpowering one to overrule what the ordinance says.
Mr. Neumeister stated City Code indicates outdoor display is allowed in GB and I Zoning District as
a conditional use. Councilmember Trude asked if this is Neighborhood Business. Mr. Neumeister
indicated it is. He stated there is a section that allows outdoor display only during operating hours in
the Neighborhood Business District.
Councilmember Trude thought staff may have misled the applicant and should refund his fee and say
it is not permitted. City Attorney Hawkins stated this is clearly prohibited and they do have a
catchall section on the front page of the report but he was not real fond of that language and he did
not recall them ever using that to allow a conditional use in a zone that is prohibited.
Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Trude, to deny the proposed Conditional Use Permit because the
use is prohibited and the application fee should be refunded.
Mayor Gamache stated based on what is in section 12-14-6a5 no one really misled anyone because it
is in their ordinance. It says they can have a conditional use permit if they want to. Councilmember
Trude stated staff noted it was only allowed in General Business and Industrial Zones that it was
allowed. Mr. Neumeister stated that is the way it reads in the code book but the paragraph the Mayor
referred to sort of negates all that. It gives them an out to allow an applicant to come before the City
Council and they can decide if they want outdoor displays only in two zones or throughout all the
business districts.
Motion carried 3 ayes, 1 nay (Gamache). (RES. R124-06)
Councilmember Knight suggested they clean up the paragraph the City Attorney mentioned.
CONSIDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMITIVETERINARY CLINIC/1574154TH A VENUE NW
Community Development Director Neumeister stated the applicant is seeking approval of a
conditional use permit for veterinary clinics as required in the Shopping Center Zoning District.
Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Trude, to approve the proposed conditional use permit with
adding point two: no animals shall be kept overnight except for surgery or other medical conditions
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17, 2006 Page 11
deemed necessary and no kenneled animals shall be kept adjacent to interior walls.
Councilmember Trude stated she would like to add: "kenneled animals shall not be kept along
interior walls".
Ms. Karl Wittmer, 1806 Mississippi Blvd, stated the only place she planned to have kennels along an
interior wall was for cats. Ibis would keep them away from activity in the clinic.
Motion carried nmmimously. (RES. RI25-06)
SCHEDULE EDA MEETING
Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Trude, to schedule an EDA meeting for November 8, 2006 at 6:00
p.m. Motion carried nnanimously.
ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
o City Administrator Dickinson updated the Council on Administration and City department
activities, meeting reminders and miscellaneous projects.
City Engineer Berkowitz updated the Council on road improvements projects in the City.
Community Development Director Neumeister updated the Council on development activity in
the City.
MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT
(City Attorney Introduction) - City Attorney Hawkins introduced Scott Baumgartner as an addition
to his firm. Attorney BaUD1gartner stated he is looking forward to working with the City.
(YMCA Halloween Event) - Mayor Gamache stated Saturday, October 28th will be the YMCA's
second annual Halloween event.
(City Department Reports) - Councilmember Jacobson wondered if they should be looking at a
request for the City Departments to come forward and give a ten to fifteen minute report on their
particular division. Mr. Dickinson stated he could get that started.
o
(Nightingale/Crosstown Project) - Councilmember Trude stated they have talked about the
. Crosstown extension at some workshops and she wondered if they are they going to include that in
the Nightingale/Crosstown project. Mr. Berkowitz stated they are looking with the County at
restricting the road in some way, possibly a right in/right out intersection and if the Council is
receptive to that they have talked about incorporating that into the Nightingale/Crosstown project.
o
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - October 17, 2006 Page 12
Councilmember Trude stated the residents she talked to who live there thought some type of change
would be terrific. She thought it would be good to tag that project along with the other one. Mayor
Gamache wondered ifit would be right-in/right-out on both intersections because the issue would be
if you live in that neighborhood, the west side would have a complicated movement to go north. She
thought they should have a workshop where they could invite the residents in the area to come and
discuss this with them.
(Trails) - Councilmember Trude stated they are going to be talking about trails again and she would
like to make a request. She stated two or three years ago they had a list of what trails they will be
doing in the next five years and suddenly the list of trails they are seeing in their recent CIP does not
match what she remembers telling people. She thought some of the trails they talked about three or
four years ago are not on the list and she wanted to make sure they are not overlooking some that
people are anticipating.
Motion by Knight, Seconded by Trude, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 9:02 p.m.
o Respectfully submitted,
Susan Osbeck, Recording Secretary
o