Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 23, 1999 ,- -, '-.J o ;\ V o o CITY of ANDOVER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 23,1999 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthiy Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Jay Squires on November 23, 1999,7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Maynard Apel, Larry Dalien, Dean Daninger, Douglas Falk, Mark Hedin, Bev Jovanovich, and Jay Squires. None Community Development Director, Dave Carlberg City Planner, John Hinzman Planning Intern, Megan Barnett Assistant City Engineer, Todd Haas Others Commissioners absent: Also present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES. November 9, 1999 Commissioner Hedin requested a correction to the vote tally listed on Page 1, to indicate the October 6, 1999 Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes were approved on a "~ayes, O-nays, I-abstain (Hedin), a-absent vote." Motion by Dalien, seconded by Jovanovich, the Minutes be approved as corrected. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, a-nays, a-absent vote. PUBLIC HEARING: SKETCH PLAN - ANDOVER STATION, BLOCK 3 - PROPOSED RETAIL, OFFICE, AND COMMERCIAL SPACE - RYAN COMPANIES. Community Development Director, Dave Carlberg stated the Planning and Zoning Commission is requested to table this item. He explained that negotiations for the sale of the property to Ryan Companies are still underway, and in light of this, staff felt it would not be appropriate to bring the Sketch Plan forward until such time as there is an agreement on the sale of the property. He indicated this item will be rescheduled for consideration when an agreement has been reached. Motion by Daninger, seconded by Falk, to Table the Andover Station Sketch Plan. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, a-nays, O-absent yote. ,- , \ '. ) , \ Regular Andover Planning\..Jd Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 2 , , ./ Mr. Carlberg stated staff will re-advertise the public hearing, and will re-notify within 350 feet, when this item is re-submitted for consideration. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (REZ 99-03_ REZONE FROM 4-1, SINGLE FAMILY RURAL TO R-4, SINGLE FAMILY URBAN - SHDOWBROOK 6lli ADDITION - BUNKER, LLC - SECTIONS 25 & 32. Planning Intern, Megan Barnett stated the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review the rezoning request of Bunker LLC to rezone approximately 29.40 acres from R-l, Single Family Rural to R-4, Single Family Urban. The proposed area is generally located east of Prairie Road in Section 25, next to Shadowbrook 5th, 3rd 2nd, and 1st Addition. Ms. Barnett reviewed the applicable ordinances and the criteria presented. She indicated that Ordinance No.8, Section 6.03 establishes the minimUm lengths, widths and size of property in the R-4, Single Family Urban Zoning District, which are 80 feet lot width at the front setback, 130 feet lot depth, and 11,400 square feet lot area per dwelling. Ms. Barnett stated the adjacent zoning and land use includes R-l, Single Family Rural to the north and west, and the property to the east and south is zoned R-4, Single Family Urban, and includes the Shadowbrook 5th and 2nd Addition. \ , ) Ms. Barnett stated the proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and the current R-4 zoning ofthe adjacent properties. The proposed rezoning fits into the projected time frame for development and connection to city sewer and water, which is planned for the year 2000. The property proposed to be rezoned is also within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) 2000-2005 boundary. Ms. Barnett outlined the Commission's options for action. She indicated staff recommends approval of the rezoning from R-l, Single Family Rural, to R-4 Single Family Urban, for the Shadowbrook 6th Addition. Motion by Jovanovich, seconded by Daninger, to open the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Jenny Olefsun, 14367 Prairie Road stated she did not see how any benefit could come from this proposal. She commented that the City continues to build, yet she sees no reward from this. She indicated the roads are in disrepair, and traffic must be detoured. Sh~ stated her children, who are in the elementary school system, have been required to change schools four times during the five years they have lived in the area. She stated her property taxes continue to increase, however, she has not reaped any rewards from this. , , ,-.J ) "-- Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23. 1999 Page 3 i-J \ ) Ms. OIefsun stated the developers of the previous Addition had indicated they would keep all of the trees they possibly could, therefore, she questions why every new homeowner in that Addition has to plant ten trees. She reiterated that she did not see any benefit from this proposal. She stated the City was growing too fast, and should put a hold on new development. Jason Newman, 333 139th Lane NW stated when he purchased his property the previous summer he was informed by the developer that the subject property is wetland and could not be developed. He stated he was not aware of the source of the developer's information, however, this was explained to other residents of the area, as well. He requested clarification regarding the current zoning of the property . Mr. Newman reiterated the developer and the builders of his home indicated that he need not be concerned about development of the proposed site, as it was wetland, and would not be touched. He indicated he had chosen his property because of the scenic views, and the point of his moving away from the Twin Cities was to relocate into an area such as this. , ) Mr. Carlberg advised the Commission that the first item for consideration is the rezoning of the property from R-l, Single Family Rural, which is the City's standard septic-involved rural lot of2.5 acres. He stated the developer has requested to rezone the property to R-4, Single Family Urban, which is the standard 80-foot by nO-foot lot with City sewer and water. He stated the matter before the Planning and Zoning Commission was to determine if the property should be rezoned, based upon its consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and the criteria set forth for rezoning. Mr. Carlberg .advised that the next item to come before the Commission is the Preliminary Plat, and the Plat will indicate the areas that are proposed to be developed, and the areas of wetlands that will be undisturbed. He pointed out there was a Department of Natural Resources protected wetland on the site, which must be protected. He explained that consideration of the plat would provide more detail in terms of the appearance of the proposed development. Commissioner Apel advised that this property was incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan that was drawn nearly 20 years prior. He stated the Comprehensive Plan is currently being updated, and he was not certain if the new plan has received approval from the Metropolitan Council at this point, however, their criteria must also be considered. He explained that this property has been scheduled for City sewer service in the year 2000-2005, and is well within the Comprehensive Plan limits, having been designed for this many years ago. He indicated at this time, it would be proper to rezone the property, as it was unlikely the Metropolitan Council would look favorably upon the development of large lots in the area. Motion by Hedin, seconded by Jovanovich, to close the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. CJ u 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 4 :J Motion by Apel, seconded by Hedin, to forward to the City Council a resolution recommending approval of the rezoning from R-I, Single Family Rural, to R-4, Single Family Urban, Shadowbrook 6th Addition, and adoption of Ordinance No. 8 , an ordinance amending Ordinance No.8, Section 6.03, Zoning District Map of the City of Andover. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, 0- absent vote. Mr. Hinzman stated this item would be considered at the December 7,1999 City Council Meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT - SHOWBROOK 6T// ADDITION - BUNKER, LLC - 35 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES - SECTIONS 25 & 32. Mr. Carlberg stated the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to discuss and recommend to the City Council the approval of the Preliminary Plat of Shadowbrook 6th Addition, located in Sections 25 & 36, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, as proposed by Bunker, LLC. Mr. Carlberg indicated the Commission's previous action recommended approval to the City Council of the rezoning request. He stated the proposed project is planned to develop in 2000, in the MUSA phase, within the Development Policy Guidelines. He pointed out the property was originally indicated within the 1995-2000 time frame, for development in 2000. . \ , .J Mr. Carlberg stated the proposed subdivision consists of 35 Single Family Urban residential lots. He indicated that during the original Sketch Plan phase, in 1995/1996, fifty-two (52) twin homes were proposed for the site, however, the developer is currently proposing to construct thirty-five (35) Single Family homes. Mr. Carlberg stated this area will develop with sanitary sewer and water service, and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the City's Development Policy Guidelines. He advised there are two variances being requested. He indicated Ordinance No. 10, Section 9.03 (G) establishes a maximum 500-foot cul-de-sac street length. He explained that the cul-de-sac located on 14151 Avenue NW exceeds the 500-foot maximum by 250 feet, as do the street sections of Cottonwood Street and 142nd Avenue. He stated that both street sections are approximately 750 feet in length, and two variances of250 feet are being requested on the cul-de-sac lengths. Mr. Carlberg advised that all of the subject lots conform to the minimum lot size requirements for the R-4 Zoning District. He stated the Andover Review Committee has reviewed this proposal, and staff has gone through the project a number of times with the developer to insure it meets the ordinance requirements. He advised that a geotechnical route review was being conducted on this project, and the report will be subject to City review and approval. Mr. Carlberg stated a question was raised in the audience related to the filling of wetlands, and the general perception appears to be that the entire wetland would be filled and developed. He referred (. ) to the plat, which indicated the undisturbed areas, which are wetlands, flood plains, or flood fringe, Regular Andover Planning Qd Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 5 " ) and the shaded areas on the plat represent the areas that cannot be developed. He noted the grading plan indicates areas that are being mitigated for the crossing of Cottonwood Street. He advised that the developer will actually be reducing some of the buildable area on the site, and a stormwater pond will be constructed on the high knoll of a peninsula on the site, prior to the discharge of any water into the wetlands. Commissioner Apel inquired if the peninsula was where the mitigation would occur. Mr. Carlberg indicated that a piece of land would be utilized from the buildable area for the mitigation, and that would become a wetland area. He noted the Sketch Plan of 1995/1996, indicated two unit town homes around the entire peninsula, and a street coming out into the area. He pointed out that the current project represents significantly less development of the area than the previous proposal. Mr. Carlberg stated the Parks and Recreation Commission would review the preliminary plat at their December 2 meeting, to determine park dedication, and whether that will be cash or land. He noted that during the Sketch Plan process on June 17, the Park Board was leaning toward cash in lieu of land, and it was expected this would be their recommendation. ~ ) Commissioner Dalien noted a small stub of property between 142nd Avenue and Shadowbrook 5th Addition, and inquired if this was originally intended to go through as a street to service twin homes in that area. Mr. Carlberg stated this was correct. He pointed out that this has been an item of discussion, in that it was proposed to be a connection between the two Additions. He explained the Shadowbrook 5th Addition utilizes a private street system, and the City's concern, at the time this was changed from twinhomes to single family, was that they would reduce street width in this area, and were bringing a public street through, into a private residential subdivision. He pointed out that this might result in some difficulties in terms of snowplowing, which is maintenance performed through the Homeowners Association, therefore, it was decided through the Sketch Plan process and staffs review, not to proceed with that connection. Mr. Carlberg stated the City will have easements through the area, as the utilities run through the property, however, there would not be a street connection, but rather a cul-de-sac, to separate the single family residences from the twin homes in the area. He advised that in the portion coming from the private development, there would just be a driveway to the two units, to deter traffic from driving through the area to reach the cul-de-sac. Commissioner Dalien inquired if this represented a trade off between less density and a longer cul- de-sac. ~.) U (J Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 6 " ,j Mr. Carlberg stated this was correct. He added that the Department of Public Works was concerned regarding the private and public issue, in terms of turning around in the private area, and if an agreement with the Homeowners Association would be necessary in order to plow in the area. He explained that now vehicles can enter, turn around in the cul-de-sac, and go right back out. Commissioner Dalien inquired if there had been any thought given to constructing some twin homes on that end, and making the cul-de-sac shorter, forcing the twin homes residents to enter from 142nd Avenue, yet still having the cul-de-sac available for use by the single family homes. Mr. Carlberg stated the only discussion have been in terms of where the street should be connected through or shortened. Commissioner Jovanovich inquired if the Fire Department would encounter any difficulties in the area, in the event that a vehicle must turn around in the cul-de-sac. .. \ ,) Mr. Carlberg stated the Fire Chief would prefer streets to connect. He stated, however, with the cul- de-sac and street length, there is the ability to turn around, and this does meet the requirements. He pointed out if there were issues with the area, such as blockage, there could be an additional access created through the area for fire vehicles, in the event of emergencies. He stated, however, there are a number of these cul-de-sacs in the community, 500 to 750 feet in length, and it is not uncommon to allow variances in these cases. Motion by Daninger, seconded by Dalien, to open the public hearing at 7:22 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Commissioner Apel explained that mitigation was required with this development, and with this, many standards that must be met. He noted that developers are more able to meet mitigation standards than individuals, because they have more land to work with. A resident inquired if the developer had originally proposed a 500-foot cul-de-sac along the peninsula. Mr. Carlberg referred to the Sketch Plan, which indicated the area of the peninsula that was originally planned for a road system, and the cul-de-sac, that was located more to the south. He explained the proposed cul-de-sac is somewhat longer, however, it was similar to the original proposal. Commissioner Apel noted that the density of the property had been lowered with the current proposal. , ' ,-.J () , ') ~- Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 7 " ~_.....' Mr. Carlberg stated the density was lowered from fifty-two (52) units to thirty-five (35) units. He explained that the street coming out of the peninsula is the same length as originally proposed, and the street located to the north is slightly longer. There was no further public input. Motion by Falk, seconded by Jovanovich to close the public hearing at 7:25 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, a-absent vote. Commissioner Falk inquired how many more Additions were proposed for this area. Mr. Carlberg stated to staff's awareness, this project would be the completion of the Shadowbrook development. He indicated there are three large properties on Prairie Road that could be developed with sewer and water service, however, this would be the decision of those property owners. Mr. Hinzman pointed out that those developments would be served from the Prairie Road area because of the large wetland. He explained there is a break off of buildability between the Shadowbrook 6th Addition and the Prairie Road properties because of the wetland. \ Mr. Carlberg noted the resolution before the Commission requires a modification to Item No.1, in 'j that 140th Avenue should be 14151 Avenue, and it should further indicate Cottonwood Street and 142nd A venue. He advised there should also be a condition that provides for a geotechnical engineering report to be reviewed and approved by the independent geotechnical engineer and the City. He stated staff has received and reviewed the report, however, the ordinance requires the City hire a consultant, at the expense of the developer, to verify the geotechnical report. Commissioner Apel inquired if the geotechnical report pertained to each lot specifically, or to the entire project. Mr. Carlberg stated the report pertained to the landlocked pond areas, and this was done to insure that the water would not enter into the basements as it percolates down with the pond. Assistant City Engineer, Todd Haas indicated the developer was attempting to have slightly less separation from the ground water table than the required three feet. He eXplained that the ordinance allows this, as long as an independent consultant reviews and agrees with the report that is submitted to the City. He stated with the exception of these areas, the other lots are all above the lOa-year flood elevations for the ponds and Coon Creek. ; , '---) Motion Jovanovich, seconded by Daninger to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. ----22, a resolution approving the preliminary plat of Shadow brook Sixth Addition by Bunker, LLC in Sections 25 & 36, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County Minnesota, legally described in Exhibit A, with changes to the draft resolution to indicate that Item No.1 be modified to () Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 8 ! 1 \.,-' change l40'h Avenue to 141" Avenue, and further indicate Cottonwood Street and l42nd Avenue, and to include a condition which provides for a geotechnical engineering report to be reviewed and approved by the independent geotechnical engineer and the City. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, 0- nays, O-absent vote. Mr. Hinzman stated this item would be considered at the December 7, 1999 City Council meeting. Chair Squires stated at this time, the Commission would consider Item 8. PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUP 99-29) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT -SUNRIDGE -DH LAND COMPANY -13440 JAY STREET NW. Mr. Carlberg introduced Kevin Stanton and Doug Hanson of DH Land Company, the developers of the project, and Stephen Johnston from Landform Engineering, who is the Engineer and designer of the project. He requested the proposal be presented to provide an understanding of the project, prior to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Rezoning. ; \.. ; Stephen Johnston of Landform Engineering Company stated the project consists of thirty-four (34) two-unit townhome buildings, and one single fanlily detached home, which is the existing home on the property. He indicated the project is essentially the same as was originally presented, however, a few changes have occurred since that time. He explained that with the original application this development was an allowed use in the R-4 Zoning District, with a conditional use permit. He stated the City Council has since changed this, and removed this use from that zoning category, therefore, they are requesting to rezone the property to M-2, which requires the rezoning and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Mr. Johnston indicated the Planned Unit Development was being requested as this process provides an easier means to deal with some of the variances involved in the M-2 ordinance. He explained that the M-2 Zoning District indicates some setback and lot size requirements that are more in keeping with larger scale buildings than those being proposed. He noted there are larger front yard and sideyard setback requirements, than those in the R-4 district for single family use, which is comparable to the proposed use. Mr. Johnston stated one of the critical elements of this plan is that a Homeowners Association will control this project. He explained that the Association would have control over the common elements of the project, including the use of the lots, the conduct of the occupants, and anything that might jeopardize the health, safety and welfare of the other occupants, including noise, disturbing activity, and damage to the common elements. Mr. Johnston indicated the Homeowners Association also prohibits some animals from the area, and regulates changes in the appearance of the common elements, and the exterior appearance of common interest community including balconies, patios, window treatments, signs, displays, and I '-~ Regular Andover Planning~?d Zoning Commission Meeting U Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 9 " '-oj landscaping. He stated the Association is self-governed and membership in the Association is mandatory. The Association also provides, through a professional management company, lawn service, snow removal, irrigation, maintenance, sanitation and any required exterior maintenance. Mr. Johnston stated that in order to remain viable, the Association collects funds from all of the residents, and uses those funds to provide for the maintenance and upkeep of the area. He explained that the residents of this project would pay a montWy fee of approximately $98 dollars, to cover those expenses. Mr. Johnston stated there are three groups of people that typically reside in this type of development. One group consists of young professionals, who are on the go, have limited free time, and do not generally enjoy home maintenance or being around the home. He explained these residents desire a nice home, however they do not share the same interests as those who reside in single family homes. Mr. Johnston stated another group of residents are the "empty nesters," who do not require the larger home, and do not wish to spend their free time on home maintenance. He explained that these residents also like the idea that they can update their home with modern amenities. \ j Mr. Johnston stated the third group that purchases into these projects are the senior citizens, who are unable to maintain a large home anymore. He indicated that many of these people often have dual homes, and like the idea that their property will be maintained in their absence. He stated all three of these groups have above average incomes, and are able to support community businesses. He added that these people are an asset to the community. Mr. Johnson stated that one of the buzz words often heard is that townhomes provide "life-cycle" housing, which is a home for people who are starting out, and also a place where they can move when they no longer require a larger detached single family residence. Mr. Johnston stated they chose this site for these types of units. He explained that the major roadway to the north of the site will over time, produce more traffic, as will the redevelopment area, and this higher traffic volume is better tolerated by townhome residents than detached housing residents. He explained that the reason for this is that the groups described tend to be more focused upon activities either away from, or inside of their home. He commented they desire a well kept exterior, however, do not generally utilize the outdoor area for recreational purposes. He added that the commercial area is better tolerated for the same reasons. Mr. Johnston stated that one of the benefits of this type of development to the City and its residents is the diversification of housing types. He pointed out there is not a significant amount of this type of housing in Andover, although there is in other communities in the Metropolitan area. He explained that this development will provide life-cycle housing and options for some of the residents who would otherwise have no opportunities for housing in the City. . \ . I ,_/ o 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 10 , " 'oj Mr. Johnston stated this project will provide an improved image at the front door of the City's commercial area. He commented that the detached housing typically provides limited landscaping, and certainly no continuity between the homes. He provided the Commission with pictures that indicated what occurs when each resident along an open roadway decides independently how they will address the privacy factor, whether it be with landscaping or fencing, etc. Mr. Johnston stated the backyards of the proposed project are all screened in a uniform manner with berming and vegetation, and the Homeowners Association will maintain the area. He indicated that they will provide $3,500 for the landscaping of the units, which will be professionally designed, maintained, and installed. He added that irrigation will be installed on all green spaces on the project to maintain the landscaping in top condition. Mr. Johnston stated the restrictions on outdoor storage, kennels and parked vehicles, as well as regular maintenance by the Homeowners Association, will maintain the appearance of the back areas of the residences. ~J Mr. Johnston indicated that the final benefit the developer has identified for the City is decreased traffic generation. He stated the Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trip Generation Report demonstrates that there are approximately 5.8 trips per day on average, for two bedroom town homes, whereas there are an average of 10.9 trips per day, for single family detached homes. He explained that although this development has a higher density than a single family R-4 subdivision, it would generate less traffic and less impact to the streets and other residents in the neighborhood. Mr. Johnston advised that the project will connect into the existing street system at the- same three locations that the previously proposed and approved project utilized. He indicated the previous single family project proposed twenty-seven (27) homes, each a separate building. He pointed out the current proposal includes seventeen (17) buildings, plus the existing single family home, therefore, there will be eighteen (18) buildings on the site, as opposed to the original plan for twenty- seven (27). Mr. Johnston stated nine homes will be constructed in the area where the property backs up to the existing residential area. He indicated that eleven (11) homes are proposed, however, those are consolidated into a total of six buildings, therefore there are fewer buildings adjacent to the residences than there would be with the single-family units. He indicated there are two buildings comprised of two units located on the comer of the site, and around the perimeter there will be fifteen (15) homes. He explained that while they will increase the density over that of the previously approved single family project, they are decreasing traffic and the .number of units, while greatly increasing the attractiveness and screening of the project. Mr. Johnston provided the Commission with the landscape plan for the development. He stated they were proposing a significant amount of landscaping along Commercial Boulevard. He indicated that ! '\ since the landscape drawing was prepared, some of the landscaping along the back area of the ~ ) U Regular Andover Planning~md Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 11 '. ,j development has been removed to provide maintenance to the storms ewer system, however they have attempted to pull some of that back towards the units to provide a landscape buffer. He explained that each of the homes will have landscaping between them to provide privacy, and there will be ample landscaping in the front yard areas as well. The landscaping will be installed with the homes, and the units will be sodded, with irrigation to provide for maintenance. Mr. Johnston stated from an engineering standpoint, the infrastructure has been partially installed on 135'h Avenue, and the sanitary sewer lines were installed under previous projects. He stated there would be a very small construction project extending sewer and water down 135'h Avenue, and then the paving of the streets. He advised that the storm sewer is directed to the west, first to a treatment facility, and then to the wetland ponding area west of the site. , \ '- / Mr. Johnston stated with regard to the Planned Unit Development, they will have to meet the challenge of defining this project as a Planned Unit Development, and whether or not they are providing Planned Unit Development attributes. He indicated a Planned Unit Development should encourage innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety and type design, siting of structures by conservation, and more efficient use of the land in such developments. He noted the fact that all three typical groups of residents of these types of homes generally have above-average incomes and the ability to support the community businesses. Mr. Johnston stated that average price of these homes is expected to be approximately $200,000 per side, therefore, each of the units will have a value of approximately $400,000. He pointed out that in order to justify that price, the individuals purchasing the homes would have to have a fair amount of income. He noted these are not entry level or rental units. He explained that at this amount of value, the owners would have to obtain rents of approximately $2,000 per month, which makes it very unlikely that many of these homes would turn into rental units. Mr. Johnston indicated the Planned Unit Development requires higher standards of site and building design through the use of trained and experienced land planners, architects, and landscaping architects. He advised that Landform Engineering Company develops a number of these projects every year, and their firm has prepared the proposed plan based upon this experience. He reiterated that the landscaping has been professionally designed and will be professionally installed, which will be of benefit to the residents around the site, as well as all residents of the City Mr. Johnston stated that through this proposal, there is more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. He explained that this type of density located directly adjacent to a commercial area makes sense from a siting standpoint, and provides a good buffer to the detached homes, and also provides services to the residents of the development. Mr. Johnston stated they were required to demonstrate the preservation and enhancement of ,\ desirable site characteristics such as natural topography, geologic features and the prevention of soil ,~) ! ~ ' ) 'J ~_ Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 12 " -- j erosions. He noted the landscaping plans, and indicated they will be saving as many of the trees as they can around the perimeter of the site, however, they will certainly not be able to save all of the trees. He explained that many of the trees that can be moved will be relocated prior to earthwork. He pointed out that only one developer will perform the work on the site, and therefore, will assume sole responsibility for protecting the site, in terms of soil erosion. Mr. Johnston stated they are required to demonstrate a development pattern and harmony with the Andover Comprehensive Plan. He explained that the Comprehensive Plan specifically states the Planned Unit Development is not intended as a means to vary applicable Planning and Zoning principles. He stated this project reflects the accepted planning principle of transitional zoning from low density residential to commercial property. He explained the Planned Unit Development is used to blend the proposed project into the Zoning District, which is typically designed for larger multiple buildings. He indicated they have been forced by the change in the Zoning Ordinance to rezone to M-2, and when they attempt to apply the standards of M-2 to this type of project, it is not a very good match. He explained that through the Planned Unit Development, they can address some of those issues, and still provide a good project, while meeting the needs of the developer and the community. , "1 ,_ J Mr. Johnston stated he hoped the Commission would look upon this project favorably. He stated they were hoping to forward this item to the City Council with a recommendation of approval that date, so that they could proceed with construction of the project next year. Commissioner Jovanovich inquired if the developer had constructed any of these projects in any other cities. Mr. Johnston stated his firm likely constructs six of these types of projects per year. Commissioner Jovanovich inquired if the purchase price of $200,000 was intended per unit, or per building. Mr. Johnston stated this was $200,000 per unit, and approximately $400,000 per building. Commissioner Dalien inquired if the original proposal required any variances to the current City ordinances. Mr. Johnston stated the original proposal required two variances. One pertained to lot width, and that was to avoid an existing sanitary sewer and water main as they were crossing the site. He stated by relocating those utilities, they could eliminate that variance, however, staff recommended that the variance was better than relocating the utilities. He stated the second variance was for lot depth adjacent to Commercial Boulevard. He explained that the site is not deep enough to obtain a full right-of-way and meet the setbacks under the R-4 zoning requirements. He stated they were five feet short of meeting that requirement. He indicated they otherwise met all of the lot size, density, and lot width requirements, and these were the only two variances requested. ., Commissioner Dalien inquired if the developer had planned to construct all of the homes themselves :) in the original proposal. Mr. Johnston stated this was correct. 'j o u " ,/ Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 13 Commissioner Dalien inquired what the proposed price range for those home would have been. Mr. Johnston stated they would have been within the same price range. He added that the City currently has rules regarding similar home styles within 300 feet of each other. He stated by nature, townhome communities are almost singular in design. He explained there is some variation in the design, however, for general aesthetics, sales, and maintenance purposes, the design tends to remain consistent throughout the project. He stated this was also an element of the Planned Unit Development that will be examined with the process that would have also required a variance with the original project. Commissioner Hedin inquired what effect the increased run off into the wetlands would have, with the new density of the project. Mr. Johnston stated he had not calculated the exact change in impervious surface. He indicated they were required to match rates, and the total volume of this project versus the volume of the original project would not represent a very significant change. He explained there would be fewer buildings, and two-car garages, instead of a number of three-car garages, so the overall building footprint is very similar to that of the original project. He advised there will be an increase in the volume of runoff to the wetland, however, he did not think it would be any more significant than that of a single-family project. " Mr. Carlberg stated the Commission was currently considering Item 8, the Planned Unit 'J Development. He explained the intention of considering this item at this time was to allow the developer to present the project so the public is aware of what they should comment upon. Commissioner Apel stated there would be no point in acting upon this item if one of the previous items were not approved. Mr. Carlberg suggested the Commission table this item, and take up consideration of Item 6, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, at this time. Commissioner Dalien inquired if it would be appropriate to allow the residents to provide their input at this time, as the concept has just been presented. Mr. Carlberg indicated it would be appropriate to hold the public hearing on the Planned Unit Development, and take the testimony of the public at this time. Chair Squires noted that with five additional public hearings on the project, there would be ample time for additional input at a later point. Motion by Falk, seconded by Jovanovich to open the public hearing at 8:00 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, a-nays, a-absent vote. , -\ '. ) () 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 14 , \. j Gene Strande, 1993 134'h Lane stated his house is located in the comer of the site, next to the pond. He inquired how far the proposed buildings would be from the lot lines, and how large they would be in terms of square footage. He stated one of the reasons he purchased his home was because of the trees and natural area behind his property. He stated this area was very nice and he hoped that they could maintain some of the continuity that exists there. He added that whoever purchases the property would probably like to see it remain as is, as well. Mr. Strande noted the comment regarding a separation between each unit, and inquired if this would be apply to the units adjoining the existing single family homes. Mr. Johnston stated the proposed units are anticipated to be 1,400 square feet per side. He stated they would have a two-car garage, and two and three-bedroom units would be available. He explained that the setbacks in the R-4 district are ten feet, and in the M-2 district they are thirty (30) feet. He advised there are a few lots that would require a ten-foot setback, and the majority of these are drawn at slightly over fifteen (15) feet. :J Mr. Johnston stated there will be landscaping between the units to provide separation which will extend out into the street. He explained the original plan indicates landscaping across the south end of the site, which was required by the City to be removed for maintenance of the existing storm sewer lines. He stated they will attempt to do their best to provide landscaping in this area, however, there is a twenty-foot (20') strip ofland that is not available to them at this time. Chair Squires inquired if a fence would be constructed along the south property line. Mr. Johnston stated there is currently no fence proposed. He indicated they could consider a fence, however, they would prefer to provide the screening in this area via landscaping materials. Mr. Johnston stated the trees are located across Lots 21 and 22. He indicated they were proposing to keep a portion of the trees in the comer, however, they are unable to keep all of the trees due to the grading. He added that there is no practical way to develop the project and save all of the trees. Commissioner Hedin inquired if the developer could provide pictures to indicate the anticipated appearance of this project in the next five years. Mr. Johnston stated his firm develops a number of multi-family dwellings and attached projects, however, this townhome was designed specifically for this project, therefore, and they did not have any projects that were similar in appearance. Commissioner Jovanovich inquired if the developer has constructed any of the projects located in the city of Coon Rapids. Mr. Johnston stated this was the first townhome project they have proposed. \ '. ) U L) Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 15 .' '\ ,~) Commissioner Jovanovich noted they look very much similar to those developments located off of Round Lake and Northdale Boulevards. Mr. Johnston indicated the project would be similar to the developments located on Hanson Boulevard and Highway 242, although many of those buildings are linked together by more than two units per structure. Motion by Dalien, seconded by Daninger to continue the public hearing and table this item until consideration of Items 6 and 7. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, a-nays, a-absent vote. PUBLIC HEARING: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA 99-03) - RU, RESIDENTIAL URBAN SINGLE FAMILY TO RM, RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY - SUNRIDGE -DH LAND COMPANY -13440 JAY STREET NW. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (REZ 99-04) REZONE FROM R-4, SINGLE FAMILY URBAN TO M-2, MULTIPLE DWELLING-SUNRIDGE-DH LAND COMPANY -13440 JAY STREET NW. Mr. Hinzman requested the Commission consider the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Rezoning in combination, as they are interrelated. " , / City Planner, John Hinzman stated the proposed site is slightly less than ten acres in size. He indicated the property is currently designated R-U, Residential Urban Single Family, and the developer proposes to re-guide that under the Comprehensive Plan for R-M, which is the Residential Medium Density land use district. He stated in conjunction with this, the developer is requesting the property by rezoned from R-4, Single Family Urban, to M-2, Multiple Dwelling. Mr. Hinzman reviewed the applicable ordinances and the criteria presented. He noted that the zoning of a district could not be changed without changing the Comprehensive Plan designation. He advised that some of the criteria considered for the Comprehensive Plan and the Rezoning are similar. He indicated these criteria include the effects upon the health, safety and general welfare of the occupants of the surrounding land, the traffic and property valuation effects, etc. He advised the land use plan is more general in nature, and the zoning itself is more specific. Mr. Hinzman provided the Commission with pictures of the site, which indicated the general adjacent land use. Mr. Hinzman stated the City's Comprehensive Plan of 1991 is currently being utilized for these considerations. He pointed out that the City was proceeding to update the Comprehensive Plan, however, most of the comments related to residential developments are similar within the two plans. ,- "- ,_J Mr. Hinzman stated that specific to this development, the City is experiencing a significant amount of growth and desires to provide opportunities for a variety of housing types. He indicated the City is concerned with maintaining high standards of quality and aesthetics. He stated, as high quality U Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 16 () - \ '_J residential development occurs, the City is concerned with providing appropriate buffers between any incompatible land uses, and also providing for adequate public services and facilities. Mr. Hinzman indicated the Comprehensive Plan identifies policies related to housing and residential land use which indicate the City shall encourage a variety of housing types, including multiple family dwellings. The planning and development of residential neighborhoods as units is encouraged, as well as continuity in street patterns. Mr. Hinzman indicated that residential neighborhoods shall be protected from adverse environmental impacts including noise, air and visual pollution. He stated residential neighborhoods shall be protected from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible uses. He advised that mid-density development shall be encouraged on a planned unit basis and shall specifically include provisions for traffic circulation that would mitigate adverse affects on existing single-family residential neighborhoods. Mr. Hinzman outlined the Commission's option for action, and indicated that staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Rezoning of the property. He noted the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is subject to final approval by the Metropolitan Council. \ , ./ Mr. Hinzman advised that at this time the Commissioners have before them the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning for Sunridge, which require two separate actions. He suggested the respective public hearings be held simultaneously. Commissioner Hedin inquired how staff believes the Metropolitan Council will view the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Hinzman stated he believed the Metropolitan Council would view this in a favorable light, as they have been examining creating more life cycle housing opportunities in the City, if they fit in well with transitional zones between the higher density commercial zones and the lower density residential zones. Motion by Daninger, seconded by Dalien, to open the public hearing for Item 6, Comprehensive Plan Amendment at 8:15 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Motion by Daninger, seconded by Falk, to open the public hearing for Item 7, the Rezoning from R- 4 to M-2, at 8:15 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. There was no public input. / "- , ) Motion by Daninger, seconded by Jovanovich, to close the public hearing for Item 6 at 8: 16 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. .- '\ '-j Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 17 t. ') , \ '-) Motion by Daninger, seconded by Falk, to close the public hearing for Item 7 at 8:16 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Motion by Falk, seconded by Hedin to forward to the City Council a recommendation of approval of Resolution No. R -99, a resolution amending the Comprehensive Land Use Plan of the City of Andover to change the Land Use District designation from RU, Residential Urban Single Family, to RM, Residential Medium Density for DH Land Company at 13440 Jay Street NW Lot 5, Watts Garden Acres (PIN 34-32-24-43-0001). Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Chair Squires stated this appeared to be an appropriate use for this piece of property. He stated he has always personally believed that multiple family housing is a good transition between commercial and single family residential, and this is a good example of where that transition is appropriate. He added that the developer has demonstrated how the proposal is also compatible with the existing single family residential uses to the south, and does not present a greater detriment to them than even a single family use might. / '\ , _.J Motion by Dalien, seconded by Hedin, to recommend to the City Council approval of the Rezoning from R-4, Single Family Urban, to M-2, Multiple Dwelling, and adoption of Ordinance No. 8_, and ordinance amending Ordinance No.8, Section 6.03, Zoning District Map ofthe City of Andover. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Mr. Hinzman stated these items would be considered at the December 7, 1999 City Council Meeting. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUP 99-29) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT -SUNRIDGE -DH LAND COMPANY -13440 JAY STREET NW. At this time, the Commission continued consideration of Item 8, Planned Unit Development. Chair Squires asked if anyone would care to comment on this item. There was no further public input. Motion by Hedin, seconded by Jovanovich, to close the public hearing at 8:20 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Commissioner Apel stated this area was a good use for the Planned Unit Development option. He indicated it was unlikely the area could be developed in good form. without some concessions, and the developer has shown his efforts are worthwhile. Mr. Carlberg advised that with this item, the development standards, or variances, are a part of the Planned Unit Development. He indicated that the proposed development standards pertained to the ~_) R-4 Zoning District, therefore, when the Commission recommends approval of the Planned Unit u 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission },{eeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 18 \ '-j Development, they are also recommending those standards be utilized, rather than listing each vanance. Commissioner Hedin inquired regarding staffs recommendation. Mr. Carlberg stated there is no recommendation from staff on this item. He indicated that staff simply presents the facts to the Commission, and the Commissioners can determine if the proposal meets those requirements. Commissioner Jovanovich stated she was familiar with a similar development off of Round Lake Boulevard, as well as the townhomes located behind the Sears building, and knew people who resided in both of these developments. She stated the.City of Andover has a need for these types of developments, and this appears to be a good project. Motion by Hedin, seconded by Jovanovich, to recommend to the City Council approval of the Special Use Permit request for the Planned Unit Development for Sunridge located at 13440 Jay Street NW. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Mr. Hinzman stated this item would be considered at the December 7, 1999 City Council meeting. /, ,_/ PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT - SUNRIDGE - DH LAND COMPANY - 34 TWIN HOMES, ONE EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOME -13440 JAY STREET NW. Mr. Carlberg stated the Commission is familiar with this development. He pointed out that the City is looking for a twenty-foot (20') trail easement on the eastern side of Lot 1, at the location of Jay Street and 135th Avenue. He stated there would be a ten-foot (10') wide bituminous trail system in that area, and staff has indicated this should be provided as part of the development. He noted the theater was located in this area, as well as a banquet facility, an office warehouse, and some proposed restaurants. He stated the City would like to insure that pedestrians in this residential area have means to connect with a sidewalk and trail system in the commercial area to the north. Chair Squires requested clarification of the location of the proposed trail easement. Mr. Carlberg referred to the site plan, and stated the easement would be located along east side of lot I, right from the street to the north along Commercial Boulevard. He indicated as the area develops there will be a network of sidewalks and trail systems that people can tie into, to access the commercial development. Chair Squires inquired if a walkway would be constructed along the south side of Commercial Boulevard, through the site. ,-- '\ , J Regular Andover Plannin~ i1~d Zoning Commission Meeting U Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 19 :- '\ \ Mr. Carlberg advised the City will probably be re-constructing Commercial Boulevard in the future, and installing a sidewalk and trail system. He indicated that a sidewalk is currently planned along Jay Street to provide access to the theater property. He explained there were plans for some trial systems along Commercial Boulevard, however, this would be the City's project, and not part of the current development proposal. Chair Squires inquired if the developer should be required to provide a walkway along the south side of Commercial Boulevard. Mr. Carlberg explained that this area is all City right-of-way, and any project in the area would be the City's undertaking. Commissioner Hedin inquired if the southern portion of the trail would end at the street, or if there was additional bituminous surface to the south. ( \ ". / Mr. Carlberg stated the trail would be connected to the street, and there would be a curb cut. He indicated the trail would go from there to Commercial Boulevard. He explained that Jay Street previously went through to Commercial Boulevard, north to Kottke's Bus, then to Bunker Lake Boulevard, however, that was abandoned to keep the residential area separate from the commercial area, which has worked very well. He stated an easement should have been retained for trails along the area, however, the City vacated the right-of-way, and kept the drainage and utility easement. He advised that it is not pennissible to construct a trail on a drainage and utility easement unless they have taken a trail easement from the property, therefore, they were proposing to shift the location of the trail, and require it as a part of this development. Commissioner Hedin inquired if the trail ended at the roadway, and if someone walking south on the trail would ultimately have to walk along the side of the road. Mr. Carlberg stated there were no sidewalks in this development, therefore, they would have to walk along the edge of the curb. He stated they do not typically see sidewalks in the residential developments, although this has been an issue of much discussion. Commissioner Daninger inquired if the trail could continue south on Lot I, and then cut into the street in that area. Mr. Carlberg stated this area is already developed, therefore, anyone attempting to access the area would be coming from the street. He stated there were existing single family homes in the area, and the trail would only dead end on another property. He indicated there is no network of trails in this area. Commissioner Hedin inquired if there was another trail located on the west end of the development. , \ , \.._./ Regular Andover Plannini-Jd Zoning Commission Meeting 0 Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 20 I' '\ " I Mr. Carlberg stated this area was examined for a potential trail, however, it was determined since the Jay Street intersection would be a good place to cross, they would keep the trails to the east side of the development. He added that they would not be significantly extended at this time, however, it was hoped they would extend to Jay Street where there are sidewalks. Commissioner Hedin inquired if the intersection on Jay Street utilized a four-way stop sign, or a traffic signal. Mr. Carlberg stated currently there is no plan for signalization at this intersection. He noted Commercial Boulevard is currently through-traffic. Commissioner Hedin stated Jay Street was a fairly busy roadway. Mr. Carlberg stated this was correct. He indicated there will be pedestrian ways, however, there will not be a controlled light at this time. He pointed out that if it was determined that a traffic signal was warranted in the future, the City Council could address the issue. He explained that typically traffic signals are not utilized on a 'T" intersection, however, this matter can be evaluated as the development occurs, and the item may be revisited in the future. o Commissioner Hedin stated the area was going to be very well developed in commercial uses, and if the businesses obtain the traffic they desire, the pedestrian traffic will be unable to travel from the south to the businesses. Mr. Carlberg stated staff would research the travel patterns in this area. He stated Commercial Boulevard is currently under-traveled. He indicated there would be very good access to Bunker Lake and Hanson Boulevards from this area, however, they would have to see how the traffic patterns occur, and may have to consider some signalization and pedestrian crosswalks in this area. Commissioner Falk inquired if a portion of Lot I was an easement. Mr. Carlberg stated this was correct, for sewer and water utilities. Commissioner Falk inquired if there was a previous proposal to construct a trail in that area. Mr. Carlberg stated they had considered this, however, they determined to extend the trail to an area that has no links. He noted the easement is for utility purposes, and a trail can not be constructed on top of the utilities. He stated the interest currently is to place the trail on the east side of the development. Commissioner Daninger stated with the first proposal on this site, the Commission expressed their concerns regarding the curve on Martin Street. He stated this proposal appears to be unchanged, / ."\ however, the Planning and Zoning Commission requested this matter be addressed at that time. \.J () Regular Andover Plannin~d Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 21 , ') \. __I Assistant City Engineer, Todd Haas stated a tangent has been installed in a 50-foot section between the reverse curve to meet the requirements, and they would post the roadway with signage indicating the appropriate speed limit. He stated the City Engineer approved of this proposal. Mr. Carlberg advised that this item would require a potential geotechnical review, therefore there should be a condition in the resolution that indicates a geotechnical engineering report shall be reviewed and approved by the independent geotechnical engineer as accepted by the City. He stated that condition should be added to the Preliminary Plat, and this may be corrected and removed in the future, however, at this point it appears there is a need for this review. He noted there may be a few housekeeping items that require attention, however, for the most part, the preliminary plat meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Apel inquired if some of these details can be addressed during the design of the developmen~al contract. :j Mr. Carlberg stated this was correct. He pointed out there will also be Association documents and by-laws with the Planned Unit Development, which will all be reviewed prior to final approval of the development. He indicated there would be covenants that restrict the uses on the property, and Association documents that regulate the ongoing maintenance and landscaping of these facilities. He advised that the City Attorney and the City Council would review these documents, prior to Council approval of the development. He added that there is a provision that in the event maintenance is not continued, the City has the ability to come in and perform that maintenance, and assess the cost back to the property owner. Commissioner Hedin inquired if the minimum purchase price for these units would be included in the agreement. Mr. Carlberg stated they have established the minimum costs per unit, as per association fees that would be tied to these documents. Commissioner Hedin inquired if the purchase price would be specifically indicated in the document itself. Mr. Johnston stated he was not certain they could include the purchase price in the document. Commissioner Hedin inquired what would prevent them from lowering the purchase price of the units. Mr. Carlberg suggested the purchase price of the homes could be indicated in the covenants. Mr. Johnson eXplained that in the covenants they could specify minimum square footage requirements, which would have the same effect as indicating the value. He explained they were submitting their best estimate of the purchase price, based upon what they believe the market value will be. He indicated this would likely be the most appropriate manner to achieve their objective, as the value of the units will fluctuate over time. , '\ 'J r '\ Regular Andover Plannin;a/.zd Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 22 ": ) Chair Squires inquired if they could condition their approval by incorporating some of the submittals that were provided by the developer, and require that the units constructed be substantially similar to those represented in the presentation. He noted the concern was if the Commission approves the rezoning, the developer might come in and construct rental units that are quite different than the Commission envisioned, based upon the approval. He inquired if this would be an appropriate means to address this concern. Mr. Carlberg stated this could be done. He explained however, with the Planned Unit Development, the developer has indicated these would be 1,400 square foot units, which is the project the Commission would be approving, and this is not to be varied from. He stated this was why the development standards indicated by the developer were the standards that the Commission was recommending approval for, and that should cover it. He noted there are developments that indicate in their covenants a minimum price value, and another means would be to indicate the square footage of the building and the two-car garage. He advised that through the Planned Unit Development, those standards are addressed and must be adhered to. Commissioner Hedin explained that he is not a real estate agent, and therefore, 1,400 square feet is somewhat meaningless to him, in terms of the value of the homes. / " \.J Chair Squires stated one option would be to include in the resolution a specific item that indicates that the developer is required to construct the dwelling units in a manner that is consistent with the plans that were presented to the City. He stated this would clarify the matter, and address the concern. Commissioner Falk advised that the purchase price would already be indicated in the development contract. Mr. Carlberg advised that unit size could be specified in the development contract. He stated it would be wise for the Commission to add a condition which indicates that this is the project they approved according to the standards, and if the developer varies from that, they would have to amend the special use permit and come back through the process. Commissioner Hedin indicated he was not concerned about the purchase price of the homes in the future, as this could not be controlled, however, if it varies greatly at the beginning of the project, he would be concerned. Chair Squires stated this was a legitimate concern, and the Commission should always hold the developer to the conditions that were presented. Commissioner Daninger stated he was concerned that in five years the development is not faIling apart. ,- '\ o , \ U \.. . Regular Andover Planning-and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 23 , " ',.../ Mr. Carlberg stated from staffs perspective, the concern of the City is that there are provisions in the covenants and Association documents that provide that the City does not inherit the problems that may occur. He stated in this case, they would like to insure the maintenance is ongoing in this development. He commented that the Commission has the right to condition the presentation as a part of the approval. Mr. Carlberg indicated the Parks and Recreation Commission would review this item on December 2, and will most likely recommend accepting cash in lieu ofland. Motion by Dalien, seconded by Jovanovich, to open the public hearing at 8:36 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Mr. Johnston stated he could not imagine it would take ten years to complete this project, which would be a nightmare from the developer's standpoint, however, if it did, and there was a fixed $200,000 purchase price on the units, it would only cover a very minimal building. He explained that with inflation, in ten years the building constructed for $200,000 would be substantially different than what is seen today. !:Ie stated that addressing this by tying the requirement to what has been submitted through the Planned Unit Development would be much more prudent. " ,-.J Motion by Falk, seconded by Jovanovich to close the public hearing at 8:40 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Motion by Jovanovich, seconded by Falk, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. -99, a resolution approving the preliminary plat of Shadowbrook Sixth Addition by Bunker, LLC located in Sections 25 7 36, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A, with a condition which provides for a geotechnical engineering report to be reviewed and approved by the independent geotechnical engineer and the City, and the addition of a specific provision that the developer shall construct dwelling units consistent with those units described in the plans presented to the City. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Mr. Hinzman stated this item would be considered at the December 7,1999 City Council Meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUP 99-30) TWO AREA IDENTIFICATION SIGNS - SUNRIDGE - DH LAND COMPANY -13440 JA Y STREET NW. Planning Intern, Megan Barnett stated the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a Special Use Permit request by DH Land Company to allow for the placement of two (2) area identification signs for the Sunridge Development located at 13440 Jay Street NW. Ms. Barnett provided an overview of the applicable ordinances, and the criteria presented. . \ '-J Regular Andover Planninl-..~d Zoning Commission Meeting U Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 24 ,,- " 1 \... _./ Ms. Barnett stated the applicant is requesting to erect two (2) permanent monument area identification signs for the Sunridge Subdivision. The applicant has submitted a picture that indicates the possible design they wiII be utilizing for the area identification signs. The identification signs wiII be located on both sides of Jay Street, the main entrance into the subdivision. Ms. Barnett stated DH Land Company has not decided on an exact identification sign style at this time, however, they are looking at a sign dimension of2' x 2.5' (5 square feet) mounted onto brick columns. She advised that the applicant would be required go through the sign permit process. Ms. Barnett outlined the Commission's options for action. She indicated staff recommends approval of the proposal subject to the provisions of the resolution. Commissioner Hedin requested clarification of the location of the proposed signs. Mr. Hinzman stated the sign would be located at the entrance to Jay Street. Commissioner Daninger inquired if the applicant was clear regarding the structure of the signs, however, had not decided upon the logo design. Ms. Barnett stated this was her understanding. Commissioner Falk inquired if the matter would come back before the Commission if the sign was " to exceed the stated square footage. ",_..J Mr. Carlberg eXplained that the applicant would go through the sign permit process, and the square footage would be regulated based upon that process. He stated the special use permit allows them to construct the area identification signs, and the number of signs, however, the actual detail will be resolved with staff through the sign permit process. Motion by Hedin, seconded by Dalien to open the public hearing at 8:45 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Dalien, seconded by Hedin to close the public hearing at 8:46 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Motion Daninger, seconded by Hedin, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. R -99, a resolution approving a special use permit request of DH Land Company to erect two (2) area identification signs on the property located at 13440 Jay Street NW, legally described as Lot 5, Watts Garden Acres. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Mr. Hinzman stated this item would be considered at the December 7, 1999 City Council meeting. , ,_J o 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission lv/eeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 25 . , ,) OTHER BUSINESS. Mr. Hinzman stated at the November 16 City Council meeting, there was discussion regarding the Snowmobile Ordinance and the designation of snowmobile routes in the urban areas of the City. He explained a public hearing would be held on December 2, at 7:00 p.m., at City Hall, to examine the proposed routes in detail. Mr. Hinzman indicated there was final conclusion to the Special Use Permit request of Northern Natural Gas Pipeline. He advised that the Council voted to deny the permit, based upon safety, and the aesthetics and devaluation of the surrounding properties, however, FERC has approved the route, and it is currently under construction in the city of Ramsey. The City has not appealed FERC's decision, therefore, it appears the matter will proceed, regardless of the Council decision. Mr. Hinzman stated the Council approved the request for a variance from fence height at 831 Crosstown Boulevard, on a 3-2 vote. He indicated there was approval of the Amended Special Use Permit requests for Bulk Storage of Liquid Fuels at Kottke's Bus Companies, and for portable classrooms at Church of Christ, as well as approval of the Special Use Permit for a real estate sign for Woodland Meadows 3rd addition. / ~ ,_J Mr. Hinzman stated at the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, a public hearing will be held for consideration of the Zoning Ordinance, which has been an ongoing process for approximately two years, and staff was looking forward to getting that ordinance in place. He stated the Commission would consider a lot split proposal and a variance request on that agenda as well. Commissioner Dalien stated he had reviewed the City Council meeting minutes Of November 2. He stated he took exception to the statement of Steven Mangold, the Regional Real Estate Manager for US West Wireless, which indicated that some of the Commissioners voted against the application, because the cell tower would be in their backyards. He stated for the record that none of the Commissioners had stated this. Commissioner Apel added that he did not believe the proposed site was located in close proximity to any of the Commissioners' homes. There was no other business to come before the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Hedin, seconded by Jovanovich, to adjourn. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. The meeting adjourned at 8:52 p.m. , \ ,_/ , ) -, J , \ I , . . , (j 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - November 23, 1999 Page 26 Respectfully submitted, Trish Pearson, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.