Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 7, 1991 o u . '\ ,---,J CITY of ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING AND ZONING CONMISSION MEETING MARCH 7. 1991 - MINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Mayor Ken Orttel on March 7. 1991: 7:30 p.m.. at the Andover City Hal I. 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW. Andover. Minnesota. Councilmembers present: McKelvey, Jacobson (left at 9:17 p.m.), Perry. Smith None ChaIrperson FerrIs, Dehn, Janak, JovanovIch. Pease, Peek McMu I I en Representative of Urbanalysis. Bob Wuornos: City AdminIstrator. Jim Schrantz: City Planner, David Carlberg: City Zoning AdmInistrator. d'Arcy Bosell: Gretchen Sabel: Peter Rauen: and Wayne Bachman Councilmembers absent: Commissioners present: Commissioner absent: Also present: r '\ . J VARIANCES - DUAL STANDARDS Chairperson Ferris explained the Planning Commission does not feel there are dual standards being applied when consIdering variance requests: however, they feel the end result is different with a request made by a resident versus one made by a developer. They feel the tendency is that it is more difficult for a resident to get a variance than it is for a developer. Mayor Orttel explained that most cities do not have variances for developers because the plat itself is considered a variance. He reviewed the changes to the platting ordinance that have evolved over the years, noting the developer has to work around some of the problems of wetlands, easements, size and shape of the land. And if there is a problem. it seems responsible from a city standpoint to allow the variance and an extra lot. Councilmember Jacobson preferred that the developer not get the extra lot and that there be more open space. He would rather see a strict interpretation of the ordinance. It was the Mayor's opinion that when the Council overturns the Commission's recommendation, the Commission had done exactly what it was supposed to do: but the Council found something that was unique enough to take the opposite position. It may be that there is some history attached to the issue that the Commission was not aware of. or it may be a different interpretation of the ordinance. In any event, the Council generally felt that the Planning Commission was doing their part as an advisory body. :J ) / Special CIty CouncII/P & Z Minutes - March 7. 1991 Page 2 (VarIances - Dual Standards. Continued) ChaIrperson Ferris stated the Commission has heard statements that they are to stringent in their Interpretation and applIcation of the ordInance. The Council in general didn't feel that was the case. poInting out that it Is beneficial for them when makIng a decisIon to receIve the Commission's research and interpretation of the ordInance. DiscussIon continued on the Issuance of variances. Mayor Orttel noted one advantage the Council has is the City Attorney is present to gIve a legal opinion. He also felt to eliminate the problem of residents receIvIng Inaccurate Information from City Hall, that such inquIrIes should be directed to the BuIldIng Department and the resident asked to bring In sketch plans and make applicatIon for approval. 1/10. 4/40 RURAL DENSITY POLICY ChaIrperson Ferris explaIned the Comprehensive Plan Task Force needs dIrectIon from the Council regarding the density In the rural area. The Task Force has been proceeding with the 2 1/2-acre rural lot sIze. If there is to be a change in that, it would impact the Plan. Ms. Basel I also briefly reviewed the 1/10, 4/40 Rural Density Policy, noting the recommendation to the Metropolitan Council wil I be to retain that policy. She felt the City must decide if it will follow that policy or retain the 2 1/2-acre rural lot size which may risk the expansion of the sanitary sewer facilities in the MUSA area. Councilmember Jacobson preferred the 2 1/2-acre lot size in the rural area, but would reluctantly accept five-acre lots if necessary. Councilmember Smith felt the control for zoning needs to be retained by the City, not by an outside authority. He agreed the 2 1/2-acre lot size works well In Andover. CouncIlmember McKelvey dId not believe in the 1/10, 4/40 density. The Met Council was established as an advisory board and has been gIven no legIslative authority to Impose those restrIctions. Councilmember Perry felt the 1/10, 4/40 density was an excel lent concept and has worked well to effectIvely regulate servIces; however, the CIty Is already out of compliance with that density. The 2 1/2- acre development in Andover has worked quite well, but she felt there is merIt to maintaining some land which would be available for MUSA expanSion in the future. Mayor Orttel preferred the clustering concept rather than 10-acre lots if the CIty went with 1/10, 4/40 density because it facilitates further development in the future. He also felt it is good planning to try to maintain an open zone around the MUSA area whIch would walt for development until sewer is available. The Mayor thought the 2 1/2- acre density is a good one, and he'd prefer to see it remain that way. Chairperson Ferris stated they will proceed with the Comprehensive Plan with a 2 1/2-acre lot density in the rural area. y~i R1) CI') ~Y\ \11. \;, \ I q / ) I / Special City Council/P & Z Minutes - March 7, 1991 Page 3 CENTRAL CITY CONCEPT - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Mr. Wuornos summarized the Central City concept, which is an attempt to establish a community identity with the City Hal I as the focus. He reviewed several options regarding the expansion of the sanitary sewer system as it will naturally occur or as it Is directed in an orderly, planned fashion. During the discussion that followed, the Council generally liked the idea of the Central City concept with some reservations, Councilmember Jacobson generally opposed medium- to high-density housing, preferring to have open green sf-aces instead, He indicated he would not like to see a density ~~~h~n that of the current R-4 zone. He didn't feel a big shopping center is needed, though some Neighborhood Businesses are desireable to serve the local areas. Councilmember Smith felt what draws people to Andover is already here, and that is its small-town flavor with a general closeness to everything they need. The idea of a centralized city al lows that to continue and provides a plan to work for; however, he would not like to see another major shopping center In the City. Councilmember McKelvey liked the idea of having a plan to go by. Mayor Orttel was concerned with the high density. It is not on a major highway or mass transit system and is at the end of the City's sanitary sewer line. There has not been a demand for high density in the City, noting that in all cases of higher density zoning, the developer has asked to have it rezoned to R-4. The Mayor also worried about basing the center on other city or governmental facilities. There has also been some mention of building another school in that area north of Andover School. In addition, the orientation of the City is to the south, and this calls for the center to be at the northern end of the urban area. Chairperson Ferris felt there is a need for rental units in the City. This is a plan of what is desired for that area prior to development occurring, and he felt the development will take place around the center and to the north. The Mayor stated he had no problem reserving the land or with the overall plan other than the high density. Mr. Wuornos stated the Intent is that the overall density would not exceed what it would be for single family developments. Ms. Bosell pointed out the City has received several inquiries about commercial development along Hanson Boulevard, especially for the area of 161st and Hanson. She felt the City needs to plan for the development along the Hanson Boulevard corridor so direction can be given to people making those inquiries. No specific action was taken other than noting the Council's concern with the proposed high-density housing. , / , / Special City Council/P & Z Minutes - March 7. 1991 Page 4 DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL ON ITEMS SENT TO P & 2 Chairperson Ferris stated that sometimes things are directed to the Planning Commission, but they do not know which direction they should take. He referenced the Alarm Ordinance in which they did months of research in developing an ordinance, but the Council did not approve it. In discussing the item, the Council noted that often they do not know which direction to go and that they appreciate the research, opinions and recommendations from the Planning Commission. The Council indicated they preferred not trying to direct the Commission but rather that the Commission would do the research and make a recommendation independent of the Council's opinions. Chairperson Ferris asked that if, when reading the Commission's Minutes. they find the Commission going in the wrong direction, that they would make their opinions known. (Councilmember Jacobson left the meeting at this time, 9:17 p.m.' The Council recalled that the Alarm Ordinance was more than they wanted for the City and that they did not want to have all alarms registered with City Hall. It was suggested that possibly the ordinance should have been sent back to the Planning Commission for revisions and that the P & Z should look at it again. P & 2'S ROLE IN THE SITE PLAN REVIEW - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Commissioner Peek stated when the Commission was reviewing the site plan for Clemens Corner on Bunker Lake and Hanson Boulevards, they were told that they should only look at the subdivision of the property, not the development of the property. The Commission felt that the two went hand in hand. He asked if the Planning Commission should be receiving more information in the site plan of a commercial development. The discussion noted that the ordinance calls for the Planning Commission to review the subdivision of the property itself, and the Andover Review Committee is charged with reviewing the use of the parcel. It was determined that in this particular case, the Planning Commission actually received too much information, that the subdivision of the lots were to be reviewed regardless of the use being considered for the lots. That use could be changed by the owner without having to come back to the Councilor Planning Commission. I Special City Council/P & Z Minutes - March 7. 1991 Page 5 (P & Z's Role in the Site Plan Review - Commercial Development, Cont.) There was also some discussion on the City's procedure when a use is proposed for a commercial lot in that it does not come to the Planning Commission or Council if it is an al lowed use. It was then agreed that the preference is that those items dealing with the use be dealt with by Staff who have that expertise. Mr. Schrantz also stated that on the Staff level he would discuss whether the Council and Planning Commission are receiving everything they should relative to proposed commercial uses. MUSA - ORDER Chairperson Ferris asked the Council how they expected to submit the requests for MUSA expansion and whether the Nedegaard proposal would be included with the rest or submitted separately. Mayor Orttel stated the Nedegaard proposal is on the Hay property, which was actually requested in 1973. He felt that request should be treated separately since it is a special case, though he didn't know whether it would be a temporary or permanent connection to the Coon Rapids Interceptor. The Council concurred. Council also asked Mr. Carlberg to prepare a map showing the areas Mr. Nedegaard is aSking to be served with sanitary sewer. It was also agreed the other requests wil I need to be dealt with in the Comprehensive Plan and a determination made as to which ones are for the area within the 2000 MUSA line and which ones are outside of it. HANSON BOULEVARD CORRIDOR/FUTURE PLANS The Council generally felt that clustering development at the major intersections in the rural area is preferable. They did not favor commercial development all the way up Hanson Boulevard. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Mayor Drttel stated Andover does not license all businesses as other cities do. He didn't particularly want to do so; but he did want a way to be sure that when businesses change hands, the building is brought up to code before a new tenant comes in. After some discussion on the pros and cons of licensing businesses, the Staff was directed to research what other cities do, especially Fridley which does not license businesses but does require buildings to be brought up to code prior to a new business starting up. , / , ) Special City Council/P & Z Minutes - March 7. 1991 Page 6 SET NEXT MEETING It was tentatively agreed to hold the next joint meeting on Tuesday, April 30. 1991. to discuss one or more Chapters of the Comprehensive Plan. There being no further business. Mayor Orttel declared the meeting adjourned dt 10:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, \\~~~~~~L Marcella A. Peach Recording Secretary