Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 27, 2007 ~. O/.V C I T Y o F wuA{(1\ 3~;;>.1 ~D1 NDOVE 0 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755.5100 FAX (763) 755-8923. WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - FEBRUARY 27,2007 The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Daninger on February 27, 2007, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Chairperson Daninger, Commissioners Tim Kirchoff, Michael Casey, Valerie Holthus, Devon Walton, Douglas Falk and Dennis Cleveland. Commissioners absent: There were none. Also present: City Plarmer, Courtney Bednarz Associate Plarmer, Andy Cross Associate Plarmer, Chris Vrchota 0 Others APPROVAL OF MINUTES. February 13, 2007 Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Casey, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried on a 7 -ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (07-04) TO ALLOW DRY CLEANING IN THE NOQ.THPOINTE PLAZA RETAIL BUILDING AT 13783 IBIS STREET NW. Mr. Vrchota stated the applicant wants to operate a dry-cleaning facility in the Northpointe Plaza retail building, located in Andover Station North. Mr. Vrchota reviewed the staff report with the Commission. Commissioner Walton wondered if there were vast differences between them and Anoka 0 regarding dry cleaning standards that the applicant mayor may not experience. Mr. Vrchota stated he did not look closely at the City of Anoka's requirements. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - February 27, 2007 0 Page 2 Commissioner Kirchoff asked if the comer lot was the proposed site and the dance studio was currently there. Mr. Vrchota stated they were looking at one of the end spots of the building and the dance studio is in the middle of the building. Motion by Walton, seconded by Casey, to open the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. No one wished to address the Commission. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Motion by Walton, seconded by Casey, to recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed Conditional Use Permit subject to the conditions in the attached resolution. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Mr. Vrchota stated that this item would be before the Council at the March 6, 2007 City Council meeting. 0 PUBLIC HEARING: RESIDENTIAL SKETCH PLAN TO REVIEW SITE PLAN FOR MULTIPLE DWELLING AT 14430 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. Mr. Bednarz explained the property owner would like to construct a new home on the subject property that would contain an additional dwelling unit for rent. This is considered a multi-family structure. By applying for sketch plan review the applicant is attempting to get a reaction to whether the necessary approvals described in the report would be supported. Mr. Bednarz discussed the staff report with the Commission. Chairperson Daninger asked if the proposed structure was all one unit but part of it would be rental. Mr. Bednarz indicated that was what was understood by him. Commissioner Holthus indicated she had a question regarding the site plan and exception. She wondered if the exception portion of that property was bought in 2003. Mr. Bednarz stated that part of the parcel was sold off to allow a lot to be created in 2002. Commissioner Holthus asked if the exception property was included in this. Mr. Bednarz indicated it was not. Motion by Walton, seconded by Casey, to open the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. Motion 0 carried on a 7 -ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - February 27, 2007 0 Page 3 Ms. Sarah Doughty, 14381 Osage Street, stated her concern was the space that the home will take up. She stated she was also concerned about the rental part of the home because this is a single family neighborhood and she liked it that way and was concerned about renters coming in and out when it is only the one house being rented. Chairperson Daninger indicated this was a sketch plan and they would take her comments into consideration when discussing this. Motion by Walton, seconded by Falk, to close the public hearing at 7:15 p.m. Motion carried on a 7 -ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Mr. Jack Knoedl ofNK Financial indicated he was representing the owner, Mr. Stephen Butler at 14430 Crosstown Boulevard, gave the Commission some background regarding the property along with a presentation as to why they should allow this type of housing. Commissioner Falk wondered if this was well and septic. Mr. Knoedl stated the property is not connected to City water and sewer. Mr. Bednarz stated they would be required to connect to municipal water and sewer if this went forward. Commissioner Kirchoff wondered if it would be two separate connections. Mr. Bednarz stated if they are talking about one structure there would be one connection. If there 0 would be a twinhome there would be two connections. Mr. Knoedl indicated the property owner is willing to look at this as either a twin home or as a duplex with one connection. Commissioner F alk wondered if a twin home would fit into the buildability of the land. Mr. Knoedl stated the shown drawing fits in well. With a twin home, it makes the layout a little different and takes up more land so he did not know if it would fit the property. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if this was to become a twin home, would they have to have two separate lots with a lot split. Mr. Bednarz indicated they would either have to have two separate lots that conform to the Ml requirements or they would need a variance or PUD review. He thought they were looking at the latter because the site is not large enough to meet the Ml requirements for two properties. Chairperson Daninger asked how much the lot is worth without a structure on it. Mr. Knoedl stated the initial appraisal was at the $95,000 to $110,000 range but it is hard to say in this market with the view across the road. It is a very large lot but is not desirable to high priced single-family homes because of the view. Chairperson Daninger stated he saw a sketch plan of one house in the packet but Mr. Knoedl brought a sketch plan of a twin home. He wondered which plan they were supposed to look at. Mr. Knoedl indicated the plans were the same as what is in the 0 Commissions packets. He presented different building elevations to the Commission. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - February 27, 2007 0 Page 4 Chairperson Daninger asked if they were looking at two driveways with two separate entrances. Mr. Knoedl indicated there were two driveways but they could be connected for one entrance or remain separate. Commissioner Falk wondered what the square footage would be per unit. Mr. Noble stated the upper unit would be approximately 2400 square feet and the lower unit would be approximately 1400 square feet. Commissioner Holthus asked if they do this the way the applicant is requesting, they would have to rezone and do a comp plan amendment along with a lot split with variances. Mr. Bednarz indicated they could do it that way. Commissioner Cleveland wondered how the square footage of this home compared to others in the neighborhood. Mr. Noble stated the homes along Osage were built in 2001- 2002 and most are split entries and the upper level square footage is approximately 960 to 1,200 and it would be doubled underneath. Mr. Steve Butler, 14430 Crosstown Boulevard NW, stated with his disability, he plarmed on putting a handicap accessible home where it is wide open because eventually he will be in a wheelchair. 0 Commissioner Kirchoff wondered if a single family home could be modified for a person with certain needs. Mr. Bednarz stated that was correct and a mother-in-law apartment scenario was something they spoke with the applicant about. The key is that the structure is open through out and does not have separate entrances but in this case the applicant wants separation between the units. Commissioner Kirchoff wondered if they could have a door that could be closed. Mr. Bednarz stated that would not qualify as a mother-in-law apartment. Commissioner Kirchoff wondered if they could have two different levels, one for each person. Mr. Bednarz stated that would be ok as long as there was not a door or wall that separated the two areas. Chairperson Daninger understood where Commissioner Kirchoff was getting at but he thought the concern of the owner was if the other person was not a relative so he would want separate units. Commissioner Walton wondered what connection fees would be for sewer and water. Mr. Bednarz stated that would need to be determined. Other connections along Crosstown Boulevard have approached $30,000. Commissioner Walton stated in his experience he thought a larger lot anywhere in 0 Andover is a desirable lot and in this case there was a possibility to make a very nice single family home here. He disagreed with the idea of not being able to build a high priced home because he was not sure what "high" really meant. He somewhat agreed Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - February 27, 2007 0 Page 5 that being on Crosstown Boulevard is not as desirable as a lot down Osage Street but it is a larger lot than the others. He thought if the home were built closer to the neighboring house they may have a lot and product that could be more desirable to a resale situation. He thought with the increased traffic on that street, two driveways would not be desirable to him and he did not think a twin home would fit into the neighborhood. He indicated he was not in favor of the sketch plan for those reasons. Chairperson Daninger asked if a park dedication fee be included. Mr. Bednarz stated if a new lot is created then park dedication would apply. Chairperson Daninger asked what the regulations were to renting out a room in a single- family home. Mr. Bednarz stated the City does not regulate this because they only regulate two or more units, not single-family homes. Chairperson Daninger stated there was a discussion on a special PUD and he wondered what the Council's decision was on that. Mr. Bednarz stated the Council did approve a redevelopment PUD ordinance at their last meeting. He indicated that while this proposal may qualify for this new provision it still would require a rezoning and a land use change. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he was not comfortable with changing the character of the 0 neighborhood. This is a single-family neighborhood and he felt that spot zoning should not be enacted here because it would be setting precedent elsewhere in the City. He stated this is the fIrst attempt to do something with this lot and he did not feel this is the way to go. He thought the idea of modifying the house to accommodate the owner's needs would have value for others if sold later on. Commissioner Holthus thought the applicant was wise to get a reaction from the Commission but she thought it was too far of a reach from their City Ordinances to have to do a rezoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment and then a lot split with variances. She thought it was too far away from what the neighborhood is now and it should stay a single-family neighborhood. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the March 6, 2007 City Council meeting. WORK SESSION: A. Consider Amendment to City Code 12-14-6A.5 Discretionary Conditional Use Permits. Mr. Cross stated the City Council directed the Planning Commission and staff to simplify the attached proposed amendment to the City Code regarding Conditional Uses. 0 Mr. Cross discussed the proposed amendment with the Commission. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - February 27, 2007 0 Page 6 Commissioner Kirchoff wondered if the City Attorney felt this was too open ended. Mr. Cross stated the City Attorney thought it was too ambiguous. He stated the paragraph has never been out of the code but the City Attorney has recommended it be deleted. Commissioner Falk asked how the City Attorney felt about the revised paragraph number five. Mr. Cross stated he has not seen the changes yet but he did not like the original paragraph five and thought it should be deleted. Commissioner Walton wondered what version of 14-6a.5 the Council looked at. Mr. Cross stated they looked at staff s new proposed changes. Commissioner Kirchoff thought it was their understanding that the last time they looked at this, they wanted to leave the paragraph in to allow some leeway for the Council to be able to grant conditional use permits. If the paragraph was not in there, it may limit them. Commissioner Holthus thought originally it was too open ended, so their directive was to tighten things up and make it so the decisions could be more consistent. Mr. Cross stated that was correct. They were asked to make more criteria. 0 Mr. Cross explained what the Council requested the Planning Commission try to do with the paragraph. Mr. Bednarz stated when the Council and Attorney reviewed this with the six criteria, they found it to be too loose and open ended. The attorney did comment that they have a footnote in the uses table that does allow them to consider a use based on the similarity of others allowed. The City Attorney felt the flexibility already existed in the footnote. The six criteria are predicated by a commercial or industrial district, which is pretty open and could be any use. The footnote in the table allows them to compare similar uses strictly within the same zoning district. Mr. Cross indicated the proposed changes were meant to replace paragraph five. Commissioner Cleveland did not think it was a really good idea to rely on a footnote to a table ifhe was an applicant. He would not be looking at footnotes to tables; he would be looking at codes. He noted he would be more comfortable if this were in the code instead of a footnote in a table. Mr. Cross stated one important thing is that .the table is an official part of the code. Commissioner Falk wondered if the Valley Pools and Spas applicant was confused by the existing language in the Code. Mr. Cross stated he was not and saw very clearly an opportunity to present his proposal under paragraph 5. Chairperson Daninger sensed they were trying to find that one idea to move this forward. He thought maybe Commissioner Cleveland's idea to move some verbiage and delete the 0 paragraph would work. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - February 27, 2007 0 Page 7 Commissioner Kirchoff wondered if they should repeat the footnote elsewhere in the ordinance and leave the footnote where it is. Chairperson thought that might work and delete paragraph five along with items one through six. Commissioner Kirchoff stated anyone coming in for a Conditional Use Permit may want to look at the table to see if their proposal would apply and then later look at specific language. He thought this may be an easier way to do this. Commissioner Kirchoff stated in looking at the table footnotes, where else would footnote one exist besides the table. Mr. Cross stated that is the only place it exists. Commissioner Kirchoff thought it did not stand out very well and thought they could bring it forward in order to find it easier. Commissioner Holthus wondered if when an applicant comes in, does staff help them with questions regarding the code or do they look at the code by themselves. Mr. Cross stated staff helps them as much as they need. Commissioner Cleveland asked if they eliminate paragraph five, what they will do with the six criteria. Mr. Cross stated the criteria were meant as a full replacement to paragraph five. 0 Commissioner Walton thought they needed to restructure the line regarding Christmas tree sales to include other outside sales. He stated conditional use sales are the only thing that is ambiguous but that is the flexibility they need. He wondered if they reiterated footnote one under permitted conditional and prohibited uses before they get to any of the boxes. Everything else is pretty much black and white. Permitted uses have discretion by the Council and there is flexibility but the Council has the final decision. Then they could delete paragraph five. Councilmember Holthus thought they should keep all the footnotes together because people know what a footnote is and will go to the footnote when needed. Chairperson Daninger asked if the Commission was in agreement with taking out paragraph five and leaving the six proposed changes. Commissioner Walton thought they decided at the first meeting they wanted to leave paragraph five in but wanted some changes to it but now that the City Attorney has thought the language works for him and there is some flexibility they want. He thought as long as they agree with the City Attorney and they find something to replace it, they could delete paragraph five. Chairperson Daninger would rather leave this as a footnote and make them more visible such as highlighting them or an easier path to find. 0 The Commission discussed how they could make the footnotes more prominent such as reformatting the text to make it more readable. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - February 27, 2007 C Page 8 Chairperson Daninger thought the Commission was in agreement to delete paragraph five. He indicated staff could look at how they could simply this or make it more readable to the public. OTHER BUSINESS. Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on related items and decisions by the City Council on previous Planning Commission items. Mr. Bednarz mentioned that they will have a Joint Worksession with the City Council in April. ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Falk, to adjourn the meeting at 8:35 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Respectfully Submitted, 0 Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 0