Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 9, 1998 u u o CITY of ANDOVER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - JUNE 9,1998 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Jay Squires on June 9, 1998, 7:35 p.m. at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Maynard Apel, Mike Gamache, Jeff Luedtke, Randy Peek, Lorna Wells (arrived at 7:37 p.m.) None City Planning, John Hinzman Others Commissioners absent: Also present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES o May 26,1998: Correct as written. Motion by Peek, Seconded by Luedtke, for approval as written. Motion carried on a 5- Yes, I. Absent (Wells) vote. (Commissioner Wells arrived at this time, 7:37 p.m.) PUBLIC HEARING: LOT SPLITIV ARlANCE - 697 141ST LANE NW - ELLIS/ SCHENEMAN 7:37 p.m. Mr. Hinzman reviewed the request of Tracy and Mike Ellis and Linda and Ken Scheneman for a lot split and variance to divide a vacant lot at 697 141 st Lane NW located between them and combine it with their respective lots. A variance is needed to the minimum lot size requirements. He noted the applicable ordinances. The lot has remained vacant since its creation in 1995 and is retained by the original developer, Ashford Development Corporation. The applicants proposed to equally divide the lot between the two parties, creating two 40 x 142.5-foot remnant parcels that would be combined with the adjoining lots. Because this is a platted area, this would be the procedure to do what the applicants want without replatting the parcels. The City has done this in the past to rearrange property lines on platted lots. Staff is recommending approval contingent upon the combination with the adjoining parcels., o The Commission questioned the ability of the lot owners on either side to utilize these remnants as long as the original lot lines remain in place. Mr. Hinzman explained the remnant pieces would be legally attached to the applicants' parcels on either side of the vacant lot and filed with the Anoka '\ \ J / '\ \....J , ) Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - June 9, 1998 Page 2 (Public Hearing: Lot Split/Variance - 697 l41st Lane NW - Ellis/Scheman, Continued) County auditor's and surveyor's offices. There would be one property identification number for each log to include the original parcel and the attached remnant. The original maps will not be amended, but the City's map will show new lot lines. The original lot lines will show on the plat maps with tie bars. Commissioner Peek questioned the ability of the applicants to utilize the remnant pieces to add an addition onto their existing structures. How can one build across a property line? Or can an accessory building be placed on the remnant piece? He had a concern with this process, not with the splitting of the lot. The applicants need to be aware that the more expedient and economical split and combination for tax purposes may not give them the flexibility they may want to further develop their property. Mr. Hinzman stated the only other way to do this would be to replat the area, which is more costly. He did not have the answers to Commissioner Peeks' concerns at this time. Commissioner Apel pointed out this is the procedure that has been used in the past. It is a common sense issue. No one has been required to replat in the past. '\ , ) Motion by Luedtke, Seconded by Wells, to open the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. 7:52 p.m. One of the applicants stated he wanted to attach the 40-foot strip to his lot to add value to his house and to provide a place for his children to play. He has no plans to build onto it at this time. Commissioner Gamache stated as long as the applicants understand the potential limitations, he does not have a problem with the proposal. Mr. Hinzman stated he would have to research the ramifications of this process on the potential future use of the remnants. The item will be placed on the July 7 City Council agenda whether acted on tonight or tabled to the next meeting for action. Before taking action, the Commission asked for clarification on the cost difference between this process and replatting, whether or not the current lot lines will dictate what can be done with the remnant parcels, and how setbacks will be measured for future use of the parcels. Another issue that may be of concern to the applicants is how will the mortgage companies view the combination. The Commission asked for an interpretation from both the county and the City Attorney. The applicants asked that the item be tabled to allow Mr. Hinzman to do the research. Mr. Hinzman stated he will do the research and discuss options with the applicants and will bring the item back to the June 23 meeting. The Commission agreed to leave the public hearing open until this is discussed again. Motion by Wells, Seconded by Gamache, to continue the public hearing to the next meeting. \ Motion carried unanimously. 8:02 p.m. , J \ " / '- ) Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - June 9, 1998 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARING: AMEND ORDINANCE NO.8, SECTION 4.21, FENCES 8:02 p.m. Mr. Hinzman explained the proposed amendment would require a "good neighbor" policy when constructing a fence by requiring the finished side of a fence to be on the outside facing the abutting or adjoining properties. All posts or structures supporting the fence shall be on the inside of the fence. About half of the other communities Staff surveyed have a provision similar to this. Staff has received two complaints on this issue recently. All existing fences would be grand fathered in. Commissioner Wells asked to consider a revision in the new Item G, thinking the Commission had discussed increasing the acreage for barbed wire fences to five acres. The Commission did not feel they should be discussing any other changes because of the review taking place by the Zoning Ordinance Review Task Force. Motion by Peek, Seconded by Luedtke, to open the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. 8:06 p.m. There was no public testimony. '\ ) Motion by Peek, Seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Peek found it hard to support this proposal as a matter of principle. He cited instances where neighbors have worked together and flipped the fences for consistency, He felt this provision is unnecessary. Commissioner Apel agreed. He didn't feel the ordinance should be changed because of a complaint from one or two people. Chairperson Squires also found it hard to believe neighbors can't work something out between them, and that someone would construct a fence with the poles and posts on the outside. People have different definitions of aesthetics; however, he didn't think it is wrong to have an ordinance saying the construction of a fence has to be like what 99 percent ofthe people already do. Motion by Peek, Seconded by Ape!, to forward the Staff prepared amendment to Ordinance NO.8 GGGGG on to the City Council with the recommendation for denial. A public hearing was held and there was no comment. Motion carried on a4-Yes, 2-No (Squires, Wells) vote. This will be placed on the July 7 City Council agenda. VIDEO PRESENTATION - "THE FUTURE IS NOW" - DEPICTING THE TWIN CITIES DWINDLING LAND SUPPLY AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUES - BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF THE TWIN CITIES The Commission watched the video, "The Future is Now". Following that, Commissioner Gamache noted a Pioneer Press article about the open spaces in the City of Woodbury. There were no further comments. / \. ) , \ . J -' Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - June 9, 1998 Page 4 OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Hinzman reviewed the actions taken by the City Council at the June 2, 1998, meeting. He also noted Staff is advertising for applicants to fill the vacancy on the Commission. The closing date for those applicants is June 19. Commissioner Wells asked about the resolution on the easements and storm water issue for Hamilton Square and Chesterton Commons. Mr. Hinzman thought the issue is still unresolved. The City Council denied the preliminary plat of Chesterton Commons 2nd Addition because the developer refused to provide the easements for the drainage easements. That has also stopped the developments of Burr Oak Run, Cambridge Estates and Andover PUD for this year. Motion by Luedtke, Seconded by Apel, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:27 p.m. -- / Respectfully submitted, \~~7i\0- Marcella A. Peach Recording Secretary /