The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAugust 27 1991 o o o o o ~ CITY of ANDOVER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - AUGUST 27, 1991 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and ZonIng CommIssIon was called to order by Chairperson Randy Peek on August 27, 1991, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover CIty Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, MInnesota. Commissioners present: Maynard Apel; Bonnie Dehn, Steve Jonak, Bev Jovanovich, Marc McMullen (arrived at 7:34 p.m.), Becky Pease None CIty Planner, DavId Carlberg; and others CommIssioners absent: Also present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 13, 1991: Page 4, Lot SpIlt for 14122 PraIrIe Road NW was forwarded to the CIty CouncIl at theIr August 20, 1991, meetIng. Page 5, Second Item In Motion: Ordinance 8, SectIon 5.03d. MOTION by Jonak, Seconded by Jovanovich, to approve the Minutes as amended. Motion carried on a 6-Yes, 1- Absent (McMullen) vote. DISCUSSION - RAISING OF DOMESTIC AND NON-DOMESTIC ANIMALS WITHIN THE CITY OF ANDOVER Mr. Carlberg explaIned the CIty Council has asked the Planning CommIssion to revIew the keeping and raisIng of domestic and non-domestIc animals within the CIty of Andover, noting the two resident complaints regardIng their receipt of Ordinance Violation letters. He reviewed the current ordinance regulation of rural and urban agricultural uses. The zonIng district and number of contIguous acres is used to determIne whether a resident can raise and keep non-domestIcated animals. There must be five contiguous acres in the R-1 zone before non-domestIcated anImals and rural agricultural practices are allowed. Urban agriculture is allowed on five acres or less in R-2, 3, and 4 areas. Another question is to determine the difference between a domestIcated and a non-domestIcated anImal. In researching what other cIties have done, he found that each city does somethIng dIfferent. (CommIssIoner McMullen arrived at this time, 7:34 p.m.) u C) , ) Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 27, 1991 Page 2 (Discussion - RaIsIng of Domestic and Non-Domestic Animals, Continued) Mr. Carlberg then summarized the two situations presented to the Council that brought this issue to light: a resident on 2 1/2 acres wants to keep three ducks as pets and the Padulas have been raising sheep on their more than 20 acres for a number of years. The area is zoned R-2 which does not allow the raising of non-domesticated anImals. Mr. Carlberg stated one option in the Padula situation may be to rezone R-2 zones to R-1 since R-2 is no longer used. Any subdivision within an R-2 zone would have to meet R-1 regulations. Staff has some concerns with the rezoning and possible repercussions MIke Kniaht. 4622 175th Avenue NW - explained the reason for the R-2 zone originally was to provide for river lots. That R-2 zone is no longer a viable classIfication since It would have to be developed into 2 1/2-acre lots. It seems to him that any rules for the R-2 zone wouldn't apply either. In further discussion with the CommIssioners, it was pointed out that the Shoreland Zoning Ordinance now regulates lots along the river, which must be a minimum of four acres. ,) Mr. Carlberg suggested one alternative to rezoning the R-2 and R-3 zones would be to allow rural agricultural practices on properties of five acres or more within those districts. Commissioner Apel felt that is a reasonable solution, and any problems that may come up could generally be handled by the nuisance ordinance. There was discussion on rezoning the R-2 and R-3 zones to R-1, on what other cities do such as using the unit method to determine the number of animals allowed per acre, on the perceived unreasonableness of allowing three horses on 2 1/2 acres but not allowing three ducks, on a more accurate definition of domestic animals, and on possible solutIons to the two Issued raised by residents. Robert Padula. 4630 173rd Avenue - did not belIeve horses should have a special classification. To him they are farm animals Just like cows and sheep. In looking at the body size of the animal, the defecation, etc., the animal density should be the same. Mr. Kniaht - stated the PCA regulations of basing densIty on units Is to prevent feed lots. That isn't the situation here. He suggested that R-l rules be applIed to any fIve-pius acre parcels In the R-2 and R-3 zones outside of the MUSA. He questioned whether the current sItuation of requirIng R-2 areas to develop to R-l requirements but not allowing the same rights would hold up legally. .) ChaIrperson Peek was concerned about what effect that would have on the buffer zone being proposed in the Comprehensive Plan which would have a density of 1 for 40. / \ o <) '\ / Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 27, 1991 Page 3 (DIscussion - Raising of DomestIc and Non-Domestic Animals, Continued) CommissIone~ Dehn noted the City has become an u~ban/~u~al a~ea whe~e comp~omIses have to be made so the two can co-exist as neighbo~s. Commlssione~ Apel ag~eed but also felt that the City must be ~easonable and not a~bIt~a~lly take away ~ights to make othe~s mo~e comfo~table. He ag~eed with Chai~pe~son Peek that any changes must keep the updated Comp~ehenslve Plan In mind. Discussion then tu~ned to the definitions of domestic and non-domestic animals. Some felt "domestic animals" a~e those whIch can be kept In in the house. Othe~s disag~eed. Commissione~ McMullen felt the Cente~ville o~dinance on domestIc and non-domestic animals may be close to what would wo~k fo~ Andove~. Commissione~ Jonak wonde~ed if it is feasible to deal with non-domestic animals on all pa~cels of 2 1/2 ac~es and la~ge~ ~athe~ than five ac~es as is done with the ho~ses. M~. Ca~lbe~g stated a p~oblem is allowing ag~lcultu~al p~actices in ~esidentiai a~eas which can be dis~uptive. Some develope~s have ~est~ictive covenances against that. M~. Kniaht - again noted that if the~e is a complaint, it can be \ handled th~ough the nuIsance o~dinance; and usually the ~esldent will ) co~~ect the p~oblem without having to go to cou~t. He felt that kids should be allowed to ~aIse chIckens o~ ducks o~ a fa~m anImal as pets, fo~ 4-H p~oJects, etc. They should be treated the same as horses. M~. Carlberg stated the Equestrian CouncIl Is In charge of ho~ses, and sIte plans a~e requIred on parcels less than fIve ac~es. He dldn/t think the CIty wanted to get Into that fo~ cows, sheep, etc. The Commission then ~ecommended Staff look at allowing R-l practices in the R-2 and R-3 zones outsIde the MUSA area on pa~cels of fIve ac~es o~ mo~e. Mr. Ca~lberg stated he will also review the ordinances of othe~ cIties and recommend an o~dInance change definIng domestIc and non-domestic animals. He will also look at what the City may want to do with non-domestIc pets on the 2 1/2-ac~e lots. He thought the item could be placed on the September 24, 1991, agenda. M~. Ca~lbe~g also stated the two complaInts which ~aIsed this issue will ~emaln on hold until the matte~ is ~esolved. OTHER BUSINESS \ ~ M~. Ca~lberg ~eviewed the CouncIl actIon on the Neh~lng lot spilt on P~ai~ie Road. It was approved, but the item to exclude the right-of-way easement In the lot calculation was deleted. In the futu~e, no va~iances will be g~anted fo~ lot splits; and lot calculatIons will Include roadway easements on metes and bounds pa~cels in the rural area. '\ , ) / " u \.J '\ ) PlannIng and Zoning CommIssIon MeetIng MInutes - August 27, 1991 Page 4 (Other BusIness, ContInued) Mr. Carlberg also reported the CouncIl approved the driveway encroachment at 3223 138th Lane NW per the CommIssIon's recommendatIon. Staff Is addressIng the cuI de sac problem as a result of the ordInance change on sIdeyard setbacks. The Comprehensive Plan Task Force Is scheduled to meet on Thursday, August 29, 1991, to revIew the entIre draft of the Plan. There beIng no further business, ChaIrperson Peek declared the meeting adjourned at 8:46 p.m. Respectfully submItted, \\\~~~t~L Marcella A. Peach RecordIng Secretary )