HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 11, 1994
o
(-....
u
~
II ;l6Iq~
/0
~
CITY of ANDOVER
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - JANUARY 11, 1994
MINUTES
The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and zoning
Commission was called to order by Chairperson Bonnie Dehn on January 11,
1994, 7:30 p.m. at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW,
Andover, Minnesota.
Commissioners present:
Maynard Apel, Bev Jovanovich,
Randy Peek, Jerry Putnam, Jay Squires
Becky Pease
Assistant City Engineer, Todd Haas
City Planner, David Carlberg
Others
Commissioners absent:
Also present:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
December 14, 1993: Page 1, last paragraph, change fifth and sixth
lines to: Mr. Carlberg explained the Comprehensive Plan calls
for that entire area to be Commercial.
()
MOTION by Jovanovich, Seconded by Putnam, to approve the Minutes as
corrected. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, 2-Present (Apel, Peek), I-Absent
(Pease) vote.
PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT, HILLS OF BUNKER LAKE 5TH ADDITION,
SECTION 36, TONY EMMERICH CONSTRUCTION, INC.
7:33 p.m. Mr. Haas reviewed the proposed preliminary plat of Hills of
Bunker Lake 5th Addition which consists of 137 single-family urban
residential lots. The area is proposed to be included in the MUSA and
is in the request before the Metropolitan Council. There are no DNR
protected wetlands, and the developer has the necessary permits from the
Army Corps of Engineers and the Coon Creek Watershed. There are no
variance requests, and the park land is being dedicated per the request
of the Park and Recreation Commission. The grading plan has been
reviewed by TKDA and the Coon Creek Watershed.
Mr. Carlberg stated the Metropolitan Council Committee as a Whole will
discuss the City's request for MUSA expansion on January 20, and the
Metropolitan Council will be making its decision on January 27, 1994.
City approval of the plat is based on the property being incorporated
into the MUSA, and it is the developer's risk if that does not happen.
o
Tony Emmerich, Tony Emmerich Construction, Inc. - stated there are no
plans for monument signs at the entrances of the plat.
Commissioner Peek asked who will retain ownership of the outlots. Mr.
Haas did not know Mr. Emmerich's position on Outlot A, which will
probably handle the drainage on that site. He will maintain ownership
on Outlot B.
. '\
J
( )
. \
\J
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - January 11, 1994
Page 2
J
(Public Hearing: Prelimimary Plat - Hills of Bunker Lake 5th, Cant.)
Mr. Emmerich - didn't have a fixed opinion on that at this point. Mr.
Haas stated they may talk to the Council, as possibly they may want to
include it as park. He did not think Mr. Emmerich would want to hold it
and pay taxes on it. Mr. Haas also reviewed the proposed trail system
and park and ball fields proposed for the southwest corner. There would
be an off-street parking lot for the park.
Mr. Emmerich - stated once the actual park contribution is determined,
they will negotiate the construction of ball fields. The value of the
homes in this development would be comparable or higher than those in
the Hills of Bunker Lake. Commissioner Jovanovich was concerned about
the City's ability to maintain another park. Mr. Haas stated the Park
Board is following the Comprehensive Park Plan. Tot lots are a little
difficult to maintain, so the City does not want so many that they can't
be maintained.
The hearing was then opened for public testimony.
Richard Fuller, property owner to the east of the development - was
representing various public interest groups as well as his own private
interest. He stated there are a number of agencies that feel there are
problems with the development that should be considered. One, Outlot A
and part of Outlot B contain some Type 3 or 5 wetlands. Though the exact
acreage is unknownr there is an excess of 2.5 acres of Type 3 wetland,
which comes under State environmental protection rules involving an
Environmental Assessment Worksheet. A petition is currently being
considered by the Sierra Club. The Anoka County Soil and Water
Conservation District has also advised there are species of special
concern found there, though they are not endangered. These species were
a concern in a lawsuit in whether or not an EAW is required. The court
ruled it was necessary. Mr. Fuller continued that an EAW is also
necessary where the topographical cross sections or drainage is being
changed. He is concerned because Outlot B is part of a swamp that
involves his property and takes drainage from the other side of prairie
Road. Since Outlot B is slightly higher than the pond on his property,
he is concerned that disturbing the drainage area will result in the
possibility of drainage corning onto his land. As a person who has been
requested by various public interest groups and as a citizen, he is
concerned with any interference and alteration of any wetland in the
City of Andover and Anoka County.
'\
)
Mr. Fuller went on that the Anoka County Soil and Water Conservation
District has expressed some concerns of whether the watershed has
properly considered alternatives to the development of the wetlands.
That agency is planning to submit to the Board of Soil and Water
Resources a request that they forward to the Minnesota Attorney
General's office for a legal opinion. He does not speak for the Sierra
Club or Audubon Society; however, they also expressed an interest in
preserving some of this area. They will be meeting this week to
determine whether or not they will join in a petition to BOWSER for an
EAW to be prepared on this area.
,,)
o
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - January 11, 1994
Page 3
. /
(Public Hearing: prelimimary Plat - Hills of Bunker Lake 5th, Cont.)
Mr. Fuller then proposed the following compromise: Because he
understood the Coon Creek Watershed approved this proposal to impinge on
the wetland since there was no alternative presented to allow
development of this section of land, he is willing to commit to granting
to Mr. Emmerich a strip of land across his property on which Mr.
Emmerich can build a road. That will give Mr. Emmerich access to the
northeast portion of his property without disturbing the wetland. He
will give the equivalent deed to put the street through to prairie Road,
which allows access to Prairie Road from two points, and exchange some
of his property on the south end for the building of storm sewer
retention ponds rather than drain the storm water into the wetland. He
would not take money for the land, just an equal exchange of his land
for Mr. Emmerich's land.
, )
Mr. Fuller explained the law is clear that the first concern must be
avoidance of the wetland. If there is a reasonable method of avoiding
the wetland, which he is now proposing, the law requires that it be
considered. He felt his proposal is feasible and meets the State
requirement of avoidance and that the Commission must consider it. He
also noted the concerns of the Sierra Club and Anoka County Soil and
Water Conservation District regarding the parks and the wetland. He
suggested moving the park to the north along the south edge of the
wetland. It would reserve an area of land that would protect a portion
of the species of special concern and leave the last undeveloped glacial
prairie plant and animal life in Anoka County. Plus it is easier to
maintain one larger park than a series of smaller parks.
In addition, Mr. Fuller was concerned that the 139th Lane NW in the plat
is located such that an extension would go right through the living room
of his house, that that road would never go through to prairie Road.
There was a lengthy discussion with Mr. Fuller about his concerns and
proposed compromise, some of it heated and with perceived insults.
Commissioner Apel was not pleased with people who proposed a greater
interest in a turtle and weeds than in people and use them as a weapon
to promote their own personal concerns. The plat has gone through the
sketch plan stage and now the preliminary plat. There has been a lot of
engineering and time spent on it. It is Mr. Emmerich's plat.
Commissioner Apel challenged some of the things Mr. Fuller had said
regarding concerns of the other agencies. The Coon Creek Watershed and
other agencies have said this plat meets all the necessary conditions.
Other than the issue of the location of 139th Lane, which should be
investigated, he felt the plat meets all the regulations.
.I
Mr. Fuller - did not think it is advisable for the Commission to ignore
the compromise, nor did he think this was a joke. Chairperson Dehn
assured Mr. Fuller that they take this responsibility very seriously.
Commissioner Putnam asked if Mr. Fuller has any documents to back up his
claims. Commissioner Squires also noted that heresay doesn't carry a
lot of weight, and they need to hear from the other parties to give
those concerns the appropriate weight.
u
u
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - January 11, 1994
Page 4
\
j
(Public Hearing: Prelimimary Plat - Hills of Bunker Lake 5th, Cont.)
Mr. Fuller - presented a draft of a letter from the Anoka County Soil
and Water Resources District regarding this development. They will be
meeting to decide whether that letter is to be forwarded to the Attorney
General's Office. Mr. Fuller drafted the letter at the request of one
of the District Supervisors, though that office has not yet seen the
draft. If approved by the Supervisors, that office will be signing off
on the letter. Mr. Fuller also noted that now that there is a
reasonable alternative to developing the wetland, which he has
presented, the City and the Coon Creek Watershed are required by law to
consider that alternative. Mr. Haas stated the City has given up that
right to the Watershed. Any consideration or change would be up to the
Watershed. Chairperson Dehn also suggested Mr. Fuller may want to
present the necessary affidavits of concerns or have representatives
from the various agencies at the Council meeting for them to consider.
Dave Erickson, 140th Lane - asked if he will be receiving special
assessments for utilities and street. Mr. Haas explained there are no
plans for the extension of utilities or improving the street for 140th
Lane at this time. Sewer would be extended down 140th when the property
to the east develops; though there would be no assessment until they
hook up because it is a trunk line. He was not sure when the street
will be improved. There are other places where a street was left gravel.
'\
'\.j
Mr. Erickson - was told that because of the size of his lot, he could
get assessed double. That bothers him, as he didn't know how he would
be able to afford to pay for all of that. He felt that should be taken
into consideration. Mr. Haas stated that is possible. If the lot can
be subdivided, he would be assessed for two units.
Mr. Fuller - asked that his concerns be entered into the record, as he
is here in part to build a record; and he asked if the hearing is going
to be transcribed. Is it possible for him t~ get a copy of the tape?
Staff suggested he check with the City Clerk for copies of the tape;
otherwise, copies of the Minutes are available. Commissioner Squires
disagreed with Mr. Fuller's approach. He felt Mr. Fuller has taken the
law and used it for his own purposes, stressing the whole concept of
avoidance and throwing out a proposal which is he thinks is reasonable.
He felt Mr. Fuller is using that concept of avoidance to hook into the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet, which is the reason for building the
record. Commissioner Squires didn't think that is the appropriate thing
to do.
~J
Mr. Fuller - disagreed, stating he has significant concerns about the
environment and that his concerns are honest; and because of those
concerns, he is willing to propose alternatives to try to save some of
the environment. He didn't think anyone had any doubt what this record
will be used for. The Sierra Club will be considering their support of
litigation in this matter, and that is why they asked him to create a
record. But his other purpose was to put before this body a reasonable
alternative to interference with the wetlands. If the Commission
refuses to consider that alternative, the record becomes important.
~.~..
. \
~.)
~)
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - January 11, 1994
Page 5
j
(Public Hearing: Prelimimary Plat - Hills of Bunker Lake 5th, Cont.)
Commissioner Squires didn't consider it reasonable in the concept of
avoidance for the developer and owner of this property to have to
consider some of the uncertain, undefined compromises which Mr. Fuller
had proposed this evening. Commissioner Apel went on record that there
is no way that any developer could possibly contact everybody on his
borders and expect them to corne up with a plan to aid in meeting the
requirements.
Mr. Fuller - stated he wrote to Mr. Emmerich two weeks ago asking to
meet before this hearing. Mr. Emmerich did not respond.
Mr. Emmerich - stated approximately six to eight months ago he contacted
Mr. Fuller attempting to purchase his property to do precisely as he is
suggesting. At that time, Mr. Fuller did not respond. Mr. Emmerich
stated Mr. Fuller is proposing that he develop Mr. Fuller's property and
install his streets for him for nothing, basically. Mr. Emmerich stated
he has met all the requirements of all of the governing bodies.
)
Mr. Fuller - stated copies of that correspondence will show Mr. Emmerich
did not indicate he was going to be developing the area west of his
property, nor that he had an ownership interest of any kind. Mr.
Emmerich indicated he had an interest in developing lots on the north
end of his property and that he wanted to talk to him about it. Mr.
Fuller told Mr. Emmerich at that time he was not interested in
developing his propert, and he still isn't. Chairperson Dehn felt that
since the sketch plan and preliminary plat have been studied in detail
by the Andover Review Committee and the other agencies involved, since
all necessary permits have been received, since Mr. Emmerich has gone
through all the required steps in developing the propertYr since all
criteria and conditions have been met and there are no variances, that
the plat is acceptable. She felt Mr. Fuller's points may be valid,
though the Commission has no substantiation other than hearsay.
Wetlands are a continual concern of the City, and the Commission does
not take this lightly.
Chairperson Dehn then asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Jovanovich, to so move. Motion carried on
a 6-Yes, 1-Absent (Pease) vote.
MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Peek, to move that the Planning and zoning
Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Resolution
presented by Staff approving the preliminary plat of the Hills of Bunker
Lake 5th Addition. I would also like to add that a concern of ours is
to check that road, 139th Avenue NW, to see if it does cause a problem
to Mr. Fuller's house as he so stated. Motion carried on a 6-Yes, 1-
Absent (Pease) vote. This item will be heard by the City Council on
February 1, 1994. 8:22 p.m.
;
\, )
" \
\~/
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - January 11, 1994
Page 6
)
PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: REZONING - R-4 AND LB TO GB, SECTION 34, CITY
OF ANDOVER
8:22 p.m. Mr. Carlberg briefly reviewed the request to rezone property
from R-4, Single Family Urban, and LB, Limited Business, to GB, General
Business. That property is generally located south of the Waste
Disposal Engineering site, west of Hanson Boulevard NW, north of Bunker
Lake Boulevard NW and east of Red Oaks Manor 4th and 6th Additions. At
the December 14, 1993, meeting, Staff was directed to contact the DNR
and Coon Creek Watershed District to determine why they objected to the
rezoning. Letters have been received from both agencies explaining they
have no objection to the rezonings. Also, Mr. Haas has prepared a memo
addressing the storm water issue in the area. Mr. Carlberg continued,
the Staff is recommending that entire area be zoned as one district to
allow the greatest flexibility of uses for a commercial park and to have
large commercial lots to develop.
, '\
" )
The Commission discussion was that there is only a small area zoned LB,
that it would not be good planning to sandwich an R-4 residential
housing zone between the commercial parcels, that it is in the City's
best interest to provide a uniform zone for that entire area, and that
the proposed Comprehensive Plan calls for this area to be zoned
commercial. Mr. Carlberg reviewed the ordinances which requires
screening between the GB and residential areas and the protection of the
wetlands. He also noted that the ordinances do not allow any new auto
recycling businesses in the City.
MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Jovanovich, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried on a 6-Yes, I-Absent (Pease) vote.
MOTION by Peek, Seconded by Jovanovich, that the Andover Planning and
Zoning Commission forward to the City Council the attached draft
Resolution with the recommendation for approval and change the date of
adoption at the bottom of the Resolution to the applicable date. Motion
carried on a 6-Yesr I-Absent (Pease) vote. The item will be placed on
the February 1, 1994, City Council agenda. 8:37 p.m.
DISCUSSION - AMEND ORDINANCE NO.8, SECTION 8.23, RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
STANDARDS, REGARDING 4/12 ROOF PITCH
Mr. Carlberg reviewed the background of an application for a building
permit from Patio Enclosures, Inc., to build a three-season porch for a
homeowner. The permit was not issued because the roof pitch did not
meet the minimum requirement of a 4/12 roof pitch. He asked that the
Commission determine whether to amend the ordinance by excluding three-
season porches, greenhouses, etc., from the 4/12 roof pitch; leave the
ordinance as written and issue variances; or uphold the ordinance as
\ written.
, J
Commissioner Apel recalled the 4/12 roof pitch provision was adopted
when there were concerns with mobile or manufactured homes in the City.
That ordinance was amended with regard to the size of the eaves when the
\
, /
\- )
(~
,
)
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - January 11, 1994
Page 7
(Discussion - Amend Ordinance 8, Seciton 8.23, 4/12 Roof Pitch, Cont.)
salt-box style home became popular. He felt strict enforcement of the
requirement would eliminate many architectural options. Mr. Carlberg
noted the City does have an R-5 zoning district for manufactured
housing, though one is not designated on the map. He also handed out a
brochure of Patio Enclosures r Inc., noting the different designs of
three-season porches. He did not think the variance procedures would be
proper since it has nothing to do with the topography of the land. He
has not noted any other three-season porches in the City which do not
comply with the roof pitch, though there may be some. In discussing
this with the Building Department, they would not recommend changing the
ordinance. Commissioner Putnam was concerned that the roof be sufficient
to handle snow loads and wind currents. Commissioner Peek felt it
would be sufficient if the retailer or manufacturer could provide data
that a different pitch meets the snow loads and wind currents.
\
)
James Wilkerson, local branch manaqer, Patio Enclosures, Inc.
explained the specific structure in question will have a paneled roof.
There are different types of rooms, sun rooms, three-season porches,
solariums, green houses, that are acceptable with 3/12 roof pitches,
curved glass roofs, etc. He stated the various pitches are a norm of
the industry. He represents a nation-wide company in 28 locations,
installing this type of room allover the United States and Canada. He
has engineering data to give to the Building Department that will
substantiate the roof will meet any code with regard to snow loads and
wind loads anywhere in the U.S. or Canada. They can produce the data,
stamped by a registered engineer in Minnesota. He has been with this
company for almost eight years, and this is the first permit he has had
disallowed because of the pitch of the roof. Because their engineering
supports the one-half inch per foot of slope on the paneled roof system
without a shingle for drainage, snow loads, wind loads, etc., it has
never come up. He hasn't found any other communities that adhere to the
4/12 roof pitch.
Mr. Wilkerson stated they can build at any pitch, but this limits the
type of business and cliental he can service because of the expenses
involved. Whether the roof pitch is to match with the home or is put in
as an economic factor will vary on a case-by-case basis. They are an
established, recognized organization. Also, they have had increasing
inquiries for their sun rooms from Andover residents; plus this is not
the first room they have done in the City. He was also under the
impression that a variance was not an option in this situation. Mr.
Carlberg stated he did not research what other communities require. In
discussing this with the Building Department, it was determined the best
thing to do was to bring it to the Commission for consideration since it
may be coming up again in the future. They do have an option to apply
for the variance, but there is no rationale for granting one.
Because it is reasonable to assume this issue will come up again in the
future and because the Commission felt a different pitch on these types
of room additions would be acceptable if the engineering data supported
the required structural codes, the Commission discussed a change to the
ordinance rather than using the variance procedure. They did not want
\. ;'
,
)
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - January 11, 1994
\ Page 8
(Discussion - Amend Ordinance 8, Seciton 8.23, 4/12 Roof Pitch, Cant.)
to deprive the citizens of Andover the ability to install such rooms yet
force them to go to the most expensive style to meet the pitch
requirement. One suggestion was to allow a deviation from the roof
pitch if approved by the Building Official when given the correct
documentation and drawings for the specific projects.
Mr. Boos - brought a few photos of the structure to which he intends to
attach the sun room. The reason the specific design was selected was to
avoid the roof creating a trap for the settling of snow. A 4/12 roof
pitch in this instance would create a trap and he would have a problem.
The dormers on his house are not a 4/12 pitch, alleging he would not be
able to build his house under the current code. He appreciated the
problem with trying to write an all-encompassing code, but they have no
intent to turn the porch into a bedroom. Commissioner Putnam felt this
is a good case as to why the individual situations should be reviewed by
the Building Official.
After further discussion, the Commission then directed Staff to prepare
an amendment to Ordinance No. 8 striking the entire paragraph in
Subsection (C). The result would be the Building Official would review
each structure to be sure the roof pitch is in compliance with State
code for snow loads, etc. Commissioner Peek suggested Subsection (B)
be deleted as well.
\
,
j
Mr. Carlberg stated he will check with the Building Official and
schedule a public hearing with the proposed change. The Commission
suggested he also check the requirements of other communities with
regard to patio enclosures.
DISCUSSION - AMEND ORDINANCE NO.8, SECTION 4.04, LOT PROVISIONS -
STANDARDS OF ACCESS DRIVE TO PRINCIPAL BUILDING
Mr. Carlberg reviewed the recommended amendment to Ordinance No.8,
Section 4.04(C), Lot Provisions, to require an access drive to every
principal building when such building is over 150 feet or more from a
thoroughfare or street. The current requirement is when a building is
over 300 feet from a thoroughfare or street. The Safety Committee has
made the recommendations because the Fire Department has a problem
getting back to these buildings if the driveway is not up to standard or
vegetation removed. It is a safety issue.
The Commission asked if the amendment would be retroactive, as several
indicated they would not support a change if it were retroactive. Mr.
Carlberg felt it would be, but agreed to check with the City Attorney
first. He will schedule a public hearing with the proposed change.
J
,
,
/
, \
',- ..J
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - January 11, 1994
Page 9
,
/
DISCUSSION - ORDINANCE NO. 50, FLOOD PLAIN ORDINANCE
Mr. Carlberg noted the proposed ordinance regulating flood plains in the
City of Andover was drafted from a model ordinance of the DNR. He
explained more definitions have been added, and he felt the proposed
ordinance more clearly outlines the procedures that must be followed.
The Commission had no specific comments on the proposal. Mr. Carlberg
stated the draft will be submitted to the DNR, then forwarded to the
City Council for their action.
OTHER BUSINESS
Screening of SuperAmerica Gas Station - Mr. Carlberg explained the
ordinance requires a wall or fence for commercial areas abutting a
residential area. He noted the specific location of the gas station,
which does not directly abut the residential area, and that portion of
the commercial lot which is next to the residents. The area is heavily
wooded. He asked if the Commission wished to allow additional
landscaping or planting of trees rather than clear an area for fencing.
The Commission felt the residents should be told of the issue and
allowed to provide input before they make a decision.
! \
) Mavor McKelvev - understood there was an agreement reached between the
neighborhood and SuperArnerica that SuperArnerica would clear out the dead
trees in the back and plant new, fast-growing trees to completely screen
the area. He didn't recall that any fencing was to be put up. That being
the case, Mr. Carlberg agreed to talk with the neighborhood group and to
bring the agreement to the next Commission meeting.
MUSA Expansion Request - Mr. Carlberg again reported the Metropolitan
Council Committee of the Whole will be reviewing Andover's request for
MUSA expansion on January 20, with the entire Metropolitan Council
making its final decision on January 27.
Starting Time of Meetings - Since the City Council has changed the
ordinance to begin its meetings at 7 p.m., Mr. Carlberg asked if the
Planning and Zoning Commission would also begin its meetings at 7 p.m.
to be consistent. The Commission agreed, noting the 7 p.m. meeting time
will begin on February 8, 1994.
Selection of Chairperson - Mr. Carlberg noted the City Council wishes to
rotate the position of Chairperson and has asked that anyone interested
in serving in that capacity for the next year contact him this week.
The Council will appoint a new Chair at its January 18 meeting.
MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Peek, to adjourn. Motion carried on a 6-
Yes, I-Absent (Pease) vote. The meeting was adjourned at 9:46 p.m.
) )~SP::d:br>t?L--
Ma~ A. Peach, Recording Secretary