Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 10, 1996 -.., j '-) (~) o u CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.w. . ANDOVER. MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda September 10, 1996 8:01 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes - August 27, 1996 3. Public Hearing: Amend Ordinance No.8, Section 4.30, Home Occupations - Regarding Non-conforming Home Occupations Being Allowed by Special Use Permit. 4. Public Hearing: Variance (V AR 96-08) - Setback from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) Mark Per Ordinance No. 52, Scenic River Ordinance - 15628 Potawatomi Street NW - Mike Foth. 5. Public Hearing: Special Use Permit (SUP 96-13) - Antenna Tower in Excess of thirty-five (35') Feet - 3017 161st Avenue NW - SBA, Inc. 6. Other Business 7. Adjournment o ~) :J u u CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.w. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Jay Squires on September 10, 1996, 8:01 p.m. at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Lynnette Barry, Jeffrey Luedtke, Randy Peek, Lorna Wells Maynard Apel, Jerry Putnam Planning Intern, John Hinzman City Planning, Jeff Johnson Community Development Director, Dave Carlber~ Others Commissioner absent: Also present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 27, 1996: Page 5, third paragraph, add after first sentence, "Lawrence Carlson, representing Woodland Development, has lived in the community for 25 years and developed and worked wi th the City for about 30 years. He now resides. in Ham Lake." Page 8, last paragraph, correct, "Commissioner Wells provided maps of the Anoka-Hennepin School District elementary, middle school and high school attendance areas." MOTION by Luedtke I Seconded by Wells, approval of the Minutes as amended. Motion car~ied on a 5-Yes, 2-Absent (Apel, Putnam) vote. PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL USE PERMIT - ANTENNA TOWER IN EXCESS OF 35 FEET - 3017 161ST AVENUE NW - SBA, INC. The Commission agreed to move this Hearing to Item 3 on the agenda an] to table it per the request of Staff. Mr. Carlberg stated Staff is asking for more time to obtain further information. When the hearing is to be held, it will be republished in the paper and abutting property owners will receive another written notification of it. MOTION by Wells, Seconded by Barry, to move Agenda No. 5 to No. 3 and table it for further notification of information for Staff. Motion carried on a 5-Yes, 2-Absent (Apel, Putnam) vote. PUBLIC HEARING: AMEND ORDINANCE NO.8, SECTION 4.30, HOME OCCUPATIONS -REGARDING NON-CONFORMING HOME OCCUPATIONS BEING ALLOWED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT Mr. Johnson reviewed the proposed amendment to Ordinance No.8, Section 4.30 - Home Occupations. provisions have been added to accommodate , '. \ U c.J Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - September 10, 1996 Page 2 / (Public Hearing: Amend Ordinance 8, 4.30, Home Occupations, Continued) those home occupations that have been conducting business at their residences prior to May 15, 1990, which is the last ordinance amendment date, and who do not comply with the home occupation ordinance. Those businesses would be allowed to continue at their residences in the same manner with an approved Special Use Permit. Based on the Commission's discussion at the August 27 meeting, the following two changes have been proposed: Page 4, D, 1, was added to require written proof that an operation has conducted business at the current address prior to May 15, 1990. Page 5, E, 1, second paragraph, was added for the process when the Permit holder dies or moves to a new location. Mr. Johnson also explained the process to receive the Permit. Revocation of the permit may be initiated by the Planning and Zoning Department or by any three residents within 350 feet of the parcel where the home occupation is being conducted. Commissioner Wells asked if the compliance provision is business or calendar days. She felt that should be specified in the ordinance. Mr. Johnson stated it is calendar days, though Staff will research the policy of all other compliance provisions. This one would follow the same procedure. Chairperson Squires stated typically that is not wri t ten in the ordinance. The Commission agreed the procedure should be the same as the City's policy in other instances. MOTION by Wells, Seconded by Barry, to open the public hearing. Motion carried on a 5-Yes, 2-Absent (Apel, Putnam) vote. 8:20 p.m. John Backum. 134th Lane and Crooked Lake Boulevard - asked what types of businesses the City would allow to continue. He felt there are those that are not consistent with the residential community. Councilmember Kunza owns a tire business about one-half block from him. He complained of the noise of the equipment and the number of cars going in and out, plus he felt there is potentially a serious safety issue. He stated the business is definitely not in compliance with OSHA safety conditions. There are commercial tires in the garage and in another storage area that could be a big problem if there was a fire. He felt the homogeneous area of the neighborhood is being disturbed which creates a commercial climate in a residential neighborhood. The City h3.S an obligation to correct those kinds of home businesses. He would not like to see a Special Use Permit which allowed the addition of buildings in residential areas for additional storage. The City should look toward businesses that are more compatible with the residential areas. James Junker. 13503 Crooked Lake Boulevard - stated this started as a result of his business. His concern was to keep Staff from making false statements. He alleged the Staff stated he had a manufacturing business with employees building doors, but he does not build doors at his residence. He installs them on site. Mr. Carlberg indicated Staff said there was a possibility of manufacturing on site and storage. \ \. ) \ 'J Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - September 10, 1996 Page 3 I (Publ i c Hearing: Amend Ordinance 8, 4.30, Home Occupa ti ons, Con tinued) Mr. Carlberg continued that once a Permit is granted, the Planning Department could initiate a revocation, but it would be based on the violation of the conditions of the Permit. Staff cannot revoke or deny a Special Use Permit. Staff makes recommendations and the City Council ultimately makes the decision. The Commission explained that the proposed amendment is intended to help people like himself to continue to operate their businesses. Mr. Junker - stated the City gave him a building permit to build a garage and office in 1982. He had to put a fire door between the garage and the house. The City allowed him to build it and is not holding to the contract now. He asked how many businesses are legal since 1990. Mr. Carlberg explained this amendment affects all those businesses operating between 1971 and 1990 that are outside the ordinance requirements. He estimated two to three home occupation permits are granted every year. That does not include those home occupations that are permitted by ordinance and are not required to have a Special Use Permit. Again, this amendment has been created to allow businesses such as the Junker's to continue operation. Mr. Backum - again asked the Commission to be concerned with the types of permits that are not homogeneous with the residential neighborhoods. / MOTION by Luedtke, Seconded by Wells, to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Wells wondered if the businesses should be required to show proof of insurance. Mr. Carlberg stated that can be looked at on an individual basis and added as a condition of the Permit. Worker's Com~ liability is not a local issue. Chairperson Squires also stated insurance isn't a common provision in land use regulations. He too preferred to handle insurance on an applicant-by-applicant basis. Commissioner Wells did not feel an automobile repair service is compatible with residential areas, though repair shops of electrcnics, clocks, etc., would be acceptable. Mr. Carlberg stated the ordinance considers repair services of small items, not auto repair. That would have to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis as well. If the use is not compatible with the neighborhood, it is a cause for denial. Commissioner Wells asked what happens if the City knowingly issued a building permit for a garage in which an automotive repair service was to be conducted. Mr. Carlberg stated that is a difficult situation which would have to be addressed. Generally the City does not consider use when issuing building permits, as the intended use is not disclosed in that process. During the course of the dicussion, the following changes were agreed to: / Page 4, D, 1: Chairperson Squires suggested that oral testimony be allowed as proof that a business has been active at their current address prior to May 15, 1990. Other Commissioners disagreed, statin~ \ " J ,.) Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - September 10, 1996 Page 4 / {Public Hearing: Amend Ordinance 8, 4.30, Home Occupations, Continued} that the business should have tax statements or other written items of proof, which could also include written testimony of people who have done business with the applicant in that time period. Under those conditions, Chairperson Squires agreed with the statement as written, though he hoped the Council will discuss it further. No change was suggested. Page 4, D, 2: There was a concern with the time period in which the Staff shall conduct an inspection of the business site, noting the 60- day time limitation from the date of application to approval of Special Use Permits. It was agreed that the intent is Staff will make th~ inspections prior to the public hearing so all information is available for the Commission. It was agreed that the process should be the owner make application for the Special Use permit. Staff should then respond promptly to do the inspection and get the item on a Commission agenda for a public hearing. Mr. Carlberg stated the inspection then must be done at least 10 days before the public hearing, which is consistent with the practice of the City. The inspections will be uniformly applied according to City policy. The second sentence of the section should be changed to: "The inspection shall be conducted at least ten days prior to the public hearing." \ / Page 4, D, 2, g): Reletter g) to h). address potentially in the beginning. Change subsection g) to "Life safety The Commission felt this item should be hazardous operations so all information is issues". added to received Page 6, E, 4: Commission discussion was on added verbiage to clarify the conditions under which a Permit would be revoked. Mr. Carlberg stated the Planning and Zoning Department would initiate that process if the conditions of the Permit are being violated. After further discussion, the Commission agreed to add the following: ".. .may be initiated by the Planning and Zoning Department if it has reason t} believe that revocation may be warranted and/or any three residents within 350 feet..." Page 6, E, 5: There was considerable discussion on the 30-day time frame in which businesses have to apply for the necessary Special Use Permit. Concerns noted were getting the word out so people are made aware of the fact that they should apply for the Permit; the process of notifying the City, the inspection, and then application for the Permit; and the time period in which all of this could be done. Suggestions were to require the person make application before the inspection takes place, extending the 30-day window to 60 days, 90 days or even up to one year. Mayor Jack McKelvey - asked that the Commission consider requiring the applicant apply for the Permit before the Staff makes its inspection. In , that way if the Staff would deny the request, the applicant would be / able to appeal to the Council. Otherwise the applicant would have no recourse. Mr. Carlberg stated the Staff does not have the right to deny a request. Chairperson Squires felt that as written, the ordinance , .J , \. ) --- Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - September 10, 1996 Page 5 (Public Hearing: Amend Ordinance 8, 4.30, Home Occupations, Continued) gives the applicant the right to apply for the Permit no matter what the Staff says. The Commission agreed to the change proposed to Page 4, D, 2. In subsection 5 on Page 6, the Commission agreed to change the 30 days to 90 days, the time frame after the effective date of the ordinance in which applications must be made for the necessary Special Use Permit. MOTION by Peek, Seconded by Luedtke, to forward to the City Council with the recommendation for approval the draft for Ordinance No.8, Section 4.30, Home Occupations as contained in the Staff packet and with the revisions as noted. A public hearing was held and comment as part of the public record. Motion carried on a 5-Yes, 2-Absent (Apel, Putnam) vote. This will be placed on the October 1 City Council agenda. 9:10 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE - SETBACK FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK PER ORDINANCE NO. 52, SCENIC RIVER ORDINANCE - 15628 POTAWATOMI STREET NW - MIKE FOTH 9:10 p.m. Mr. Hinzman reviewed the variance request of Michael Foth to encroach 47 feet into the 150-foot setback from the Ordinary High Water Mark at 15628 Potawatomi Street NW. The property is 2.5 acres, zoned for R-2, Single Family Estates and is located in the Rum River Scenic River District. He noted the applicable ordinances and conditions to consider when granting a variance to the Scenic River Ordinance. The DNR has inspected the property and indicated the construction of a home at the proposed setback would not be detrimental to the protected waterway, slope or view from the bluff line. The lot has extreme slopes of 10 percent and greater plus the bluff. The house will not be constructed on eroding slopes and would be screened from the river with natural vegetation. The location of the house is proposed to be on the most level portion of the lot. A similar setback variance of 105 feet was granted to the adjacent property at 15684 Potawatomi in 1983. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. Commissioner Wells noted the lot is all wooded. By moving the house se far back to the bluff line, many trees will be lost. Plus many of the homes in the area have in and out driveways. Mr. Hinzman stated the trees along the river would not be disturbed. The variance is from the ordinary high water mark in the back yard. The house will be in compliance with all other building setbacks except for the variance being requested. A public hearing is needed on the variance as a part of the Scenic River Ordinance. MOTION by Barry, Seconded by Wells, to open the public hearing. Motion carried on a 5-Yes, 2-Absent (Apel, Putnam) vote. 9:18 p.m. There was no public testimony. } MOTION by Luedtke, Seconded by Wells, to close the public hearing. Motion carried on a 5-Yes, 2-Absent (Apel, Putnam) vote. 9:18 p.m. \. , , "". _/.1 Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - September 10, 1996 Page 6 (Public Hearing: Variance - Setback from Odinary High Water mark - 15628 Potawatomi Street NW, Mike Foth, Continued) Commissioner Peek felt it is important to note that a similar variance was granted in 1983 to the adjacent property. Commissioner Barry agreed. She also felt that the aesthetics of the woods and waterway are not being compromised. Mr. Hinzman addressed the swale toward the rear of the lot which is two to three feet deep and 10 feet wide. The soils would not be disturbed and the natural vegetation would remain. Commissioner Peek asked the applicant if he anticipated the construction of an accessory building. Michael Foth - stated no. There would be some landscaping toward the river side of the property. MOTION by Peek, Seconded by Luedtke, to forward the Staff prepared Resolution to the City Council as recommended for approval with no additions. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, 1-Present (Wells), 2-Absent (Apel, Putnam) vote. This will be placed on the October 1 City Council agenda. OTHER BUSINESS September 3 City Council meeting - Mr. Carlberg updated the Commission on the actions taken by the City Council at its September 3 meeting. ; Externalities - Mr. Carlberg stated Staff will try to schedule a date for the Planning Commission and Council to meet. At the Commission's next meeting he will also be updating the Commission on the goals and objectives and progress to date on externalities. Election candidates - Mr. Carlberg reported the names of those people who have filed to run for Mayor and Council. Neighborhood Business construction project at 139th and Hanson - Mr. Carlberg explained the proposed project for a Bill's Superette at 139th and Hanson Boulevard. A Special Use Permit was granted by the City in about 1988 for the storage of underground bulk fuel tanks. That Permit did not have a sunset clause, so it is the City Attorney's opinion that the Permit is still valid. The main issue now is with the storm drainage. Mr. Carlberg provided the background and details of that issue, noting the City is working with the developer to resolve it. Filling at the corner of Round Lake Boulevard and CoRd 58 - Commissioner Wells noted there has been some filling in that vicinity and a rumor that some land is owned by Bill's Superette. Mr. Carlberg stated Staff will look into the question of filling. MOTION by Wells, Seconded by Barry, to adjourn. Motion carried on a 5- Yes, 2-Absent (Apel, Putnam) vote. The meeting was adjourned at 9:38 p.m. Or~ing Secretary PUG