Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 24, 2000 o o o CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.w.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - OCTOBER 24, 2000. The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Jay Squires on October 24,2000,7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Chairperson Jay Squires, Commissioners Larry Dalien, Douglas Falk, Mark Hedin, and Dean Daninger. Commissioners absent: Commissioners MaynardApel and Tim Kirchoff. Also present: City Planner, John Hinzman Zoning Administrator, Jeff Johnson Others o APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Motion by Hedin, seconded by Daninger, the Minutes be approved as amended. Motion carried on a 4-ayes, O-nays, I-present (Falk), 2-absent (Apel and Kirchoff) vote. PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUP 00-10) - OPERATION OF AN OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUSINESS FROM AN ACCESSORY BUILDING - 3928 168TH A VENUE NW - PAUL AND MARSHA DZIEDZIC. City Planner John Hinzman explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing and review the Special Use Permit (SUP) request by Paul and Marsha Dziedzic to allow the operation of an office/warehouse business from an accessory building (detached garage) on the property located at 3928 168th Avenue NW. This property is zoned R-I, Single Family Rural. o Mr. Hinzman noted the applicable ordinances and criteria that are to be examined in consideration of a SUP. He presented the site plan depicting the location of the proposed accessory building, noting it meets minimum setback requirements. He then displayed the floor plan and exterior elevations. Mr. Hinzman explained that Paul and Marsha Dziedzic are currently operating an in-home office/warehouse business selling caulking products in the community of Coon Rapids. They have been operating at this address for several years and no public disturbances have been reported to the City about this C (j Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 2000 Page 2 C) operation. The applicants are currently in the process of building a new home in Andover, located in the Echo Hill Second Addition, and the proposed office/warehouse establishment would be relocated to a garage on the northeast portion of the property. Staff reviewed the nine conditions contained in the proposed resolution and indicated staff has no concerns with the request as proposed. Commissioner Dalien inquired regarding the number of employees allowed with a home occupation. Mr. Hinzman stated one employee is allowed outside the immediate family. Commissioner Dalien suggested that language be included in Condition I to indicate it is "outside the immediate family." Mr. Hinzman stated staff will clarifY that condition in the resolution. Chair Squires asked how this use relates to defined home occupations as contained in the ordinance. Mr. Hinzman reviewed the three permitted uses and stated staff reviewed the applicant's proposed businesses and felt it met provision (d) as being a similar use. He noted that cabinet and woodworking uses are construction-supply related activities and the applicant's business falls in line with that similar use. Commissioner Daninger asked if there are any issues related to hazardous materials. City Planner John Hinzman stated the applicant is storing the product which then goes out to /- '\ the job site so use of hazardous products is not a concern. \_) Commissioner Dalien noted the barrels depicted in the photograph of the applicant's current house. He asked if it is intended to store the caulking material in the existing garage beyond the 800 square foot limit. Mr. Hinzman suggested that question be asked of the applicant. Motion by Falk, seconded by Dalien, to open the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. Motion carried on as-ayes, O-nays, 2-absent vote. Commissioner Daninger asked how long the material is stored and how often it leaves the site. Marsha Dziedzic, applicant, stated they have a small quantity of caulk on hand but they do not have customers coming to this site. Commissioner Daninger asked if the garage will be constructed of brick. Ms. Dziedzic stated the picture shows shakes, not bricks, and the garage will match the house. Commissioner Daninger asked if there are homes on either side of this property. Mr. Hinzman stated the lots to the east and west are vacant at this time. ,'\ '--) Mr. Dziedzic advised the material is window caulk. ~\ () Regular Andover Plann~and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 2000 Page 3 ~ -, --oj Commissioner Dalien asked if the entire garage will be used for ston~ge. Ms. Dziedzic stated the garage will also hold other items such as ladders. Chair Squires asked how many vehicles will be in and out of the site on a given day. Ms. Dziedzic stated the delivery truck comes once to twice a month and employees would come, perhaps, five times a week to drop off time cards or pick up supplies. She explained that for big jobs, the caulk material is delivered directly to the job site. Mr. Dziedzic stated they currently have a 24' by 24' garage and one-half is being used for storage. But, they would like a little more space to store the ladders indoors. Commissioner Hedin asked about Condition 1 and if five employees who never came to the house would have an impact. Mr. Hinzman stated this condition relates to the home . occupation. If there is one employee working on site, it would be acceptable. But if it exceeds more than one employee, then it would be a violation. Mr. Hinzman added that employees at ajob site have not been included in the equation in the past. Ms. Dziedzic stated she is the only employee in the office to do the paper work. Mr. Dziedzic stated he visits the job sites during the day and bids out the jobs. , ~ Chair Squires noted this is more of a contractor-type of use since the work is taking place off site. He asked ifthe City has ever granted a SUP for contractor-related uses. Mr. Hinzman estimated five or so such SUPs have been granted over the past ten years for uses such as cabinet making, woodworking, repair business, and a pottery barn. Chair Squires asked if any had been denied. Mr. Hinzman stated he cannot recall any being denied. There was no additional public input. Motion by Hedin, seconded by Dalien, to close the public hearing at 7:15 p.m. Motion carried on a 5-ayes, O-nays, 2-absent vote. Commissioner Falk stated he sees no objection to this request and asked if the appearance of the garage will match the house. Mr. Hinzman stated while that is not a requirement of the Code, it appears that is the applicant's intention. Mr. Johnson stated this parcel is more than three acres so a pole barn could be constructed but the applicant chose to have a garage that matches the exterior of the house. , \ l.. 1 o 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 2000 Page 4 ~J Chair Squires stated he sees this as a close call in trying to define this home occupation to be similar to a woodworking business. However, a SUP for a cabinetmaker, who is a contractor, has been approved in the past. Chair Squires stated he does not see this as being as clear cut as is being assumed. He suggested giving thought to what this will do in terms of setting a precedent, i.e., to allow contractors to set up their business from a residential lot. He noted that other contractors have their office in a business district. Chair Squires stated it is the City's goal to guide those types of uses to business and retail districts and while the applicant has a nice proposal and had no problems in the past, that may not be the case with the next application. Commissioner Dalien stated the difference is in the type of contracting involved. In this case, there is not a lot of traffic. However, with a homebuilder there may be many clients coming to review plans, etc. He noted that with this applicant's business, there is virtually no traffic coming tothe home. He stated the level of traffic is a consideration for him but he is unsure how it could be governed unless a number of trips per day is included in the restrictions. , '\ '-..J Chair Squires agreed traffic is the overriding consideration but stated he wanted to point out this is probably as liberal as the Commission has gotten in considering this type of use as being similar to the list of three that are acceptable. He stated he is not suggesting the request be denied, but wanted all to understand the implications of this interpretation. Commissioner Falk asked if this ordinance should be reviewed in that regard. Chair Squires stated if this type of operation is considered to be allowable, then the Commission needs to recognize that as similar applications are received, this precedent will have a role in the decision making process. He stated he finds this to be a liberal . interpretation of the ordinance. Zoning Administrator Jeff Johnson noted the criteria restricting the use to 800 square feet. He stated staff shares the concern if the business expands beyond 800 feet as being better suited to a retail or commercial district. He suggested the ordinance be reviewed if additional similar requests are received. Chair Squires noted the ability to place restrictions on the nature of the use related to size and setbacks which make it more narrowly defined. /, ~J Commissioner Hedin asked if the neighbors were notified. Mr. Hinzman stated the map in the report identifies the extent of notification. He estimated 10 to 15 people were notified plus a sign was posted on the property. He stated one resident stopped by with questions. CJ 2. 3. 4. (J 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. () () Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 2000 Page 5 Commissioner Hedin asked about signage for this use. Mr. Hinzman stated signage is restricted to four square feet but none has been requested. . Motion by Daninger, seconded by Hedin, to forward to the City Council a recommendation to approve the request for a Special Use Permit submitted by Paul and Marsha Dziedzic based on the rationale that the Commission finds the request meets the criteria established in Ordinance No.8, Section 5.03, including: the use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community; the use will not depreciate the surrounding property; and the use is in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission also finds the use meets the provisions specified in Ordinance No.8, Section 4.30, Home Occupations. This recommendation is subject to the following conditions: 1. The home business shall be limited to one (1) employee outside the immediate family and shall comply with all other home occupation regulations as stated in Ordinance No.9, Section 4.30. No more than eight hundred (800 s.f.) square feet of the accessory structure can be used for the home business as stated in Ordinance No.8, Section 8.08. Parking requirements shall be met as per Ordinance No.8, Section 8.08. Prior to any business being conducted on the premises an on-:;ite inspection shall be conducted by city staff to assure the business complies with City ordinances. The residence shall be owner occupied. Hours of operation shall be daily from 8:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m. Upon sale of the premises for which the Special Use Permit is granted, such permit shall terminate. The Special Use Permit shall be subject to annual review and site inspection by City Staff. The Special Use Permit shall be subject to a sunset clause as stated in Ordinance No.8, Section 5.03(D). Motion carried on as-ayes, O-nays, 2-absent vote. Chair Squires stated that this item would be considered at the November 9, 2000 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: AMEND ORDINANCE NO, 112, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS. City Planner John Hinzman explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing and review the proposed amendments to Ordinance No. 112, Planned Unit Development (PUD). He explained this ordinance has been in place for about four years but some problems were found related to the definition of "buildability," ~ o 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 2000 Page 6 r ) '.-/ to provide more clear indications of the purpose of the ordinance, and reasons to grant a density change. Mr. Hinzman noted the change to pages 4 and 5 related to density provisions reducing it from 20% to 15% and eliminating the multiple family mixed use provision. He stated a few questions were posed to the City Attorney who indicated the language is adequate as the ordinance is written. The question was also raised about the need for a super majority to approve a PUD. The City Attorney felt that by rezoning the underlying zoning district, a super majority is already taken into consideration and is again comfortable with the language as the ordinance is written. Motion by Daninger, seconded by Falk, to open the public hearing at 7:28 p.m. Motion carried on a 5-ayes, O-nays, 2-absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Daninger, seconded by Hedin, to close the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. Motion carried on a 5-ayes, O-nays, 2-absent vote. (J Commissioner Dalien stated his questions have been answered and he is comfortable with the ordinance as revised. Chair Squires agreed that discussions have been held regarding this ordinance. Motion by Daninger, seconded by Dalien, to forward to the City Council a recommendation to approve the amended Ordinance No. 112, Planned Unit Development. Motion carried on a 5-ayes, O-nays, 2-absent vote. Chair Squires stated that this item would be considered at the November 9, 2000 City Council meeting. ORDINANCE REVIEW: ORDINANCE NO. 270 -ANTENNAS AND TOWERS. o Zoning Administrator Jeff Johnson explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review Ordinance No. 270, An Ordinance Regulating the Construction and Maintenance of Private and Commercial Antennas and Towers. He reviewed that a temporary one-year moratorium was adopted on January 4, 2000 to protect the planning process and prevent the construction and enlargement of towers in the City. During this one-year time period, a task force committee was formed made up of two Planning Commissioners, two Park and Recreation Commissioners, and several residents to review the ordinance, conduct research, and prepare a new ordinance regulating the construction and maintenance of antennas and towers. C_) () (j Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 2000 Page 7 Mr. Johnson presented the recommendation of the task force committee and staff to minimize the effects and impacts on surrounding properties, provide effective siting standards, and maximize the use of existing and approved towers and buildings to accommodate new antennas in order to reduce the number of towers needed to serve the community. He advised that the Park and Recreation Commission met on September 7, 2000 and discussed the intention to locate some antennas in rural parks. The Park and Recreation Commission recommends approval of the ordinance. Mr. Johnson reviewed the ordinance requirements, noting an antenna would require the SUP process and public hearing. There would be height requirements in each zoning district, co-location requirements, and to allow for a 20-foot extension by SUP to allow for an additional providers once co-location was maximized. Mr. Johnson extended his appreciation to all who served on this task force and provided input. He stated staff s support for the proposed ordinance which locates antennas in commercial and rural areas and gets them out of residential areas. Commissioner Daninger asked about safety or access to the monopole antenna. Mr. Johnson stated the issue of safety and access will be addressed during the site plan review process. He stated there is usually a requirement for fencing around the monopole. .' ') \. . -' Commissioner Daninger asked for a clarification on the location of such an antenna and how siting is addressed for larger parcels, such as 20 acres, to assure it cannot be located on the edge of the parcel. Mr. Johnson noted the setback requirements to equal at least the height of the tower plus ten feet. Chair Squires noted the setback exception allowed if a "qualified professional structural engineer specifies in writing that the collapse of the tower will occur with a lesser distance under all foreseeable circumstances." Commissioner Daninger stated his impression that the tower could be located at the edge of the parcel rather than in the middle of a 10-acre parcel. Commissioner Dalien stated the issue is one of aesthetics and commented on the difficulty in locating a tower in the middle of such a large parcel. Commissioner Daninger asked about the potential for interference with the expansion of the public safety system. Commissioner Dalien stated the main objective is to make co-location possible. He stated they did not make a special provision for public safety but included a condition for co-location. .- " \- ...J (1 "- j () U Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 2000 Page 8 Commissioner Daninger asked if this will jeopardize public safety communications or if that can be accommodated into the future. Commissioner Falk stated he believes it can be accommodated. Commissioner Dalien asked if it was being suggested they have to provide an accommodation for public safety communications. Commissioner Daninger stated he wants to assure the needs of public safety communications can always be met. Chair Squires noted the ability to consider a variance which could be brought into consideration should such a situation occur. Commissioner Hedin thanked the task force for the excellent job they did. He asked about ham radio operators and their rights to erect poles in residential districts. He also asked if this ordinance would limit those rights. Mr. Johnson stated if the height exceeds 35 feet, it requires a SUP. C) Chair Squires asked if this substantially restricts antennas including ham radio towers to five specific areas within residential zones. He noted those locations may not meet the need of a ham radio operator so this ordinance could prohibit their ability to erect a tower in their back yard. Chair Squires suggested that the City Attorney be asked to address if this ordinance is compatible with the Telecommunications Act and if it prohibits the rights of the ham radio operator for an antenna. Mr. Hinzman stated this ordinance regulates towers over 35 feet in height and does not differentiate between the types of towers. Chair Squires stated he believes the task force did an excellent job, the ordinance is tightly written, and concise. Motion by Hedin, seconded by Dalien, to forward to the City Council a recommendation to approve the amended Ordinance No. 270, An Ordinance Regulating the Construction and Maintenance of Private and Commercial Antennas and Towers, with the City Attorney being asked to review the language and assure it is in compliance with federal law. Motion carried on a 5-ayes, O-nays, 2-absent vote. Chair Squires stated that this item would be considered at the November 9, 2000 City Council meeting. OTHER BUSINESS. :r) '--- Mr. Hinzman updated the Commission relative to Council actions on planning items. " ," "\ ,- , I I . \ ~. ,~ Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 2000 Page 9 I Mr. Hinzman reported the Commission will be reviewing six residential subdivision plats which will be divided between the two November meetings. ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Falk, seconded by Daninger, to adjourn. Motion carried on 5-ayes, O-nays, 2- absent vote. The meeting was adjourned at 7:53 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Carla Wirth, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc r-~ _ '- .' --, J _J'