HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 8, 1987
~J
:r ')
'---
\ )
C}
c)
CITY of ANDOVER
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 - AGENDA
7:30 P.M. 1. Call to order
2. Approval of Minutes
3. Ron Smith Lot Split, Cont.
4. Jay Clemens Special Use Permit, Cont.
5. James perunovich Special Use Permit, cont.
6. ABC Mini-Storage Special Use Permit, Cont.
7. Brandon Construction Sketch Plan
8. Revocation of Special Use Permit/Tonson/Public Hearing
9. Andover Commercial Park Preliminary Plat, Cont.
10. Ordinance 8 Amendment Public Hearing
11. Adopt Resolution/Modified TIP District
12. Adjournment
o
o
,/ '\
"-.J
CITY of ANDOVER
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 1987-MINUTES
The Regularly Scheduled Andover Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
was called to order by Chairman Marge Perry at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday,
September 8, 1987 at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard
N.W., Andover, MN.
Commissioners Present:
Commissioners Absent:
Also Present:
Bosell, Jovanovich, Bernard, Pease, Vistad
Jacobson
Daryl Morey, City Planner; others
Approval of Minutes
Auqust 25, 1987
MOTION by Bosell, seconded by Vistad to approve the minutes of August
25, 1987 as written. Motion carried on a 3 yes, 3 present (Jovanovich,
Bernard, Pease) vote.
Ron Smith Lot Split
,,-,
. I
"----/
Chairman Perry noted that she asked the City Council their feelings on
this lot split. They generally felt that since this area is zoned R-4
it doesn't make sense to require 2y, acre lots. The lots should be
39,000 square feet since sewer is not available yet.
MOTION by Bosell, seconded by Vistad that the Andover Planning and
Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the lot
split request of Ron Smith on the property described as the West Half
of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter lying North of the Centerline
of Anoka County Ditch No. 57, Section 26, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka
County, Minnesota, for the following reasons: 1) The lot split will
not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the
occupants of the surrounding area; 2) The lot split will not have an
adverse effect on the scenic and/or property values of the surrounding
properties; 3) The lot split will not have an adverse effect on the
traffic affecting this property; 4) The lot split is not in conflict
with the spirit and intent of the Ordinances of the City of Andover nor
in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan; 5) It has been determined by
the City Council that although this parcel is not within the Metropolitan
Council MUSA, but is within the Andover MUSA area, and the fact this
parcel will be surrounded with properties developed to an R-4 standard
in the very near future, it was concluded that the intent of the City
Council at the time they amended the MUSA map was to assume that this
parcel would be serviced after the year 2000 and, therefore, would make
no sense to require this be developed at an R-l size and density.
Motion carried unanimously.
. "\
~ Jay Clemens Special Use Permit, Cant.
Ron Smith - stated that he would be in favor of this request if the
u u
Regular City Council Meeting
September 8, 1987 - Minutes
Page 2
(Clemens Special Use Permit, Cont.)
parking area is blacktopped and Mr. Clemens puts up a nice neat building.
This item was tabled until later in the meeting as no one was present.
James perunovich Special Use Permit, Cant.
Chairman Perry reopened the public hearing.
Ms. Perry stated that at the last meeting Mr. Perunovich was requested
to provide the Planning Commission with a drawing showing the dimensions
of the two lots.
Mr. Perunovich stated that the drawing has been provided to the city and
the City Attorney has received the party wall agreement.
MOTION by Vistad, seconded by Jovanovich to close the public hearing.
Motion carried.
MOTION by Bosell, seconded by Jovanovich that the Andover Planning and
Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of a Special
Use Permit requested by James Perunovich pursuant to Ordinance 8RR on the
property described as 13427 Round Lake Boulevard N.W. for the following
reasons: 1) The Special Use Permit for the conversion of the parcel from
two rental units to two single family units sharing a common party wall
will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the
occupants of the surrounding area; 2) The Special Use Permit will not
have an adverse effect on the scenic and/or property values of the surround-
ing proeprtiesi 3) The Special use Permit will not have an adverse effect
on the traffic affecting this property; 4) The Special Use Permit is not
in conflict with the spirit and intent of the ordinances of the City of
Andover nor in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan; 5) The Special Use
Permit is subject to the following variances pursuant to Section 6.02 of
Ordinance 8 and its amendments: a) Each parcel will have less than the
80' frontage as required; however, this is a fully developed lot of
record and will change nothing from what is already existing; b) Each
parcel will have a lot depth of 100' rather than the 130' required;
however, the same rationale as noted above must be used.
The Special Use Permit has the following conditions placed on this request:
a) A party wall agreement be prepared and reviewed by the City Attorney
as provided in Amendment 8RR; b) Construction of a fire wall be completed
as required by the Building Official as provided in Amendment 8RR: c)
A survey be completed establishing each lot and the zero lot line; d) Pay-
ment of the park dedication fees of $200.00 per lot be paid.
Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council on September
15, 1987.
ABC Mini-Storage Special Use Permit, Cont.
\
Chairman Perry opened the public hearing.
Robert Varco, representinq the applicant - explained that this was before
the Planning Commission in 1985 for a lot split, which was granted. It
Regular Planning Cc~-)ission Meeting
September 8, 1981-Mlnutes
Page 3
(ABC Mini-Storage SUP, Cont.)
u
has always been intended that in the confines of the business they
wanted to store recreational vehicles, boats, etc.
(Commissioner Jacobson arrived at this time - 7:50 P.M.)
Commissioner Bosell noted that the site plan on this shows that the very
western edge of the property is where the exterior storage is intended
and she asked if that is going to be blacktopped. Mr. Varco noted that
it was his understanding that it would be blacktopped.
Mr. Jacobson expressed concern regarding the fencing and what potential
difficulties a cyclone fence can cause. He asked what type of fence they
are proposing.
Mr. Varco noted that it will be a cyclone fence. He didn't feel there
would be problems with theft and vandalism because there is a caretaker
who lives on the property.
Mr. Jacobson explained that his concern is not because of vandalism, but
for visual.
Commissioner Vistad stated that he would prefer it to be interior storage
as this could be very offensive.
Commissioner Jovanovich agreed because we're trying to get away from
, exterior storage.
/
Mr. Varco noted that everyone is aware of the junkyards in this vicinity.
He felt the Planning Commission needs to look at the individuals involved.
Their property has always been kept neat and clean. He didn't feel they
would operate this business any differently than their other business
(Kottke's Bus Service).
Mr. Jacobson asked if there is a reason for having the storage outside
rather than inside. Mr. Varco stated that most of the vehicles are too
large to be inside and it costs less for outside storage.
Mr. Vistad asked if it would be possible to enclose the area with a high
wall so the storage wouldn't be visible from the roadways.
Daryl Morey, City Planner suggested getting a screening plan that would
be economical for them but that would meet the requirements.
Mr. Varco asked if the Planning Commission could make a recommendation
subject to a satisfactory screenin plan.
Ms. Bosell felt we could make it a condition that adequate screening be
provided as required in Ordinance 78 and subject to the screening plan
being approved by the Andover Review Committee.
j
MOTION by Vistad, seconded by Bernard to close the public hearing. Motion
carried.
MOTION by Bosell, seconded by Vistad that the Andover Planning and Zoning
Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Special Use Permit
\
~
Regular Planning Commission Meeting
September 8, 1987 - Minutes
Page 4
(ABC Mini-Storage SUP, Cont.)
u
request of ABC Mini-Storage to conduct exterior storage on the property
described as 13624 N.W. Hanson Boulevard for the following reasons: 1)
The Special Use Permit will not be detrimental to the health, safety or
general welfare of the occupants of the surrounding area; 2) The Special
Use Permit will not have an adverse effect on the scenic and/or property
values of the surrounding properties provided adequate screening is
established; 3) The Special Use Permit will not have an adverse effect
on the traffic affecting this property; 4) The Special Use Permit is
not in conflict with the spirit and intent of the Ordinances of the City
of Andover nor in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan; 5) There was a
public hearing held and there were no comments offered in support of or
against said request; 6) The Special Use Permit has the following conditions
places on this request: a) That no inoperable vehicles be allowed to be
stored and/or accumulate at this site pursuant to Section 8.02 Refuse of
Ordinance 8; b) That adequate screening be provided to block the view from
adjacent properties as well as the public right-of-way as provided in
Ordinance No. 78 and subject to a screening plan approved by the Andover
Review Committee; c) One year review with the recommendation that the use
be allowed to continue if no complaints are received by the City; d) The
area used for said exterior storage shall be of a bituminous surface.
Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council on October
6, 1987.
Brandon Construction Sketch Plan
Chairman Perry noted that the City Council would like to see this property
platted along with the Sheppard property to the north. However, the
Sheppards are not interested in platting at this time. It was suggested
that a road be shared with the Sheppard property, thereby eliminating
the entrances off of the county road.
Commissioner Vistad noted that the service road is giving him a problem.
It was noted that this is a requirement of the county as they will not
allow all of those accesses onto the county road.
Daryl Morey stated that it was the Council's recommendation to have the
service drive corne in the other way, with the cul-de-sac at the opposite
end. He also felt that the Council didn't intend the cul-de-sac to be
permanent, but only temporary.
Jerry Tollefson, developer - asked what the advantage would be of having
the cul-de-sac going the other way. He didn't feel they should be penal-
ized for someone else's property that may never be developed.
Commissioner Jacobson noted that there is a real water problem in that
area. He also noted that the distance from the intersection to the
driveway is only 455 feet and according to the ordinance, we only allow
driveway accesses every 660 feet.
Mr. Tollefson noted that Todd Haas checked the distance and he said it
was satisfactory.
1. (),. .
Regular P annlng Commlsslon Meetlng
September 8, 1987 - Minutes
page 5
(Brandon Const. Sketch Plan, Cont.)
(.J
. J
Mr. Morey noted that the County has said they will allow one access to
County Road 9.
Discussion was on the pond, who would own it, maintain it and if the
city owns it, how will they get to the pond to maintain it. Mr. Tollefson
stated that they would maintain ownership of the pond so that the
City does not need to obtain easements to get there.
Mr. Jacobson felt this area would make a very nice condominium site with
only a few units.
Commissioner Vistad suggested having the service road come in off of
l44th Avenue and be brought around and have the lots front on the service
road and back up to Round Lake Boulevard.
Ms. Bosell stated that if they did that, we would not be providing any
access to the Sheppard property.
It was suggested that the developers meet with the Assistant City
Engineer and try to come up with either a reconfiguration of the plat
or some reasons why this is the best use of the property.
This item will be continued at the September 22nd meeting.
(Recess 8:58 - Reconvene 9:09)
Revocation of Special Use Permit/Tonson, Public Hearing
Chairman Perry opened the public hearing.
,
--'
Ms. Bosell noted that this is the same thing the Planning Commission acted
on before. She explained that at a meeting with the Waste Management
Board, who now has jurisdiction over solid waste rather than the PCA,
they have granted Tonson 60 days to come into compliance with an agree-
ment between Waste Management, the PCA and Tonson. Mr. LaPanta was asked
why he had not met the stipulations. He said several things, including
broken down equipment, problems with neighbors, etc. Ms. Bosell told
the Board that she visually inspected the property and Sites 1 and 2 south
of the metal building and the wetland area are very close to being completed.
45 days would allow him to come into compliance. Mr. LaPanta wants 6
months for each site. This would make it June'of 1989. The Waste
Management Board was not receptive to this idea. Ms. Bosell noted that
it was her recommendation to give him until October 12th. If the work
is not completed by that date, we will call in the guaranty. The Waste
Management Board accepted that recommendation. They also recommended that
she inspect the site and report back to them. Ms. Bosell also noted
that Mr. LaPanta called the City Hall today to see if he should be at this
meeting and she told him it was not necessary. Environmental Services
has recommended the license for Tonson be granted contingent upon them
having their insurance in proper form. The county has recommended that
the license be granted contingent upon meeting the stipulation agreement
by October 12th. After the meeting, Ms. Bosell met with Mr. LaPanta and
his attorney and she told them there was no mercy if they don't clean up
the sites. She told Mr. LaPanta to concentrate on cleaning up sites 1, 2
" \
U
Regular Planning Commission Meeting
September 8, 1987 - Minutes
Page 6
(Tonson, Cont.)
u
, ,
and the wetlands. Last Friday Ms. Bosell inspected the site and the small
shredder was working but now the crane is broken and the frontend loader
is also down. It was her recommendation that the Planning Commission
act on the revocation of the Special Use Permit with the recommendation
to the City Council that they stay their action until October 12th. Ms.
Bosell explained that previous to January 27, 1987, Tonson was operating
under a solid waste license from Anoka County. Back in October 1986 the
legislature provided for an abatement process for cleanup of tires. That
is when the PCA came on the scene. Mr. LaPanta is paid when the site is
cleaned up. He has not been paid yet because none of the sites are cleaned
up.
Cecil Heidelberqer - felt that if the city and county had done this right
there wouldn't be any tires there now. When the junkyards were being
inspected the Building Inspector was the one doing the inspecting until
it was discovered that he was working at one of the junkyards. He was
replaced by the City Clerk who then did the inspections of the junkyards.
Ms. Bosell's company sells tires to Tonson and Mr. Heidelberger felt that
this is a conflict of interest to have her inspecting the sites. He also
noted that Mr. LaPanta did not put the fire lanes; they were put in before
he took over the business. Mr. LaPanta told Ms. Bosell that he took
tires to Babbitt, which Mr. Heidelberger said was false. He suggested
that the Special Use Permit be revoked tonight.
, "
There was a brief discussion on the question of conflict of interest. The
secretary was directed to obtain an opinion from the City Attorney.
Allan Field - stated that three years ago he started in the tire hauling
business and was hauling tires to Tonson. The tires he hauled to Tonson
were too big for the shredder, but they were accepted anyway. He does
not understand why a man like that is allowed to operate in this county.
MOTION by Vistad, seconded by Bernard to close the public hearing. Motion
carried.
Commissioner Jacobson expressed concern because there is no list of
specific violations in writing and there are no people here to back up
those violations. Because of the legal complexity of this situation, we
need to have some documentation.
Commissioner Bernard questioned whether Mr. LaPanta's inactivity isn't
documentation enough.
Ms. Bosell stated that the only thing we have now is that he has not
cleaned up the sites as agreed to in the stipulation. The Special Use
Permit says he shall be in compliance with the county licensing require-
ments.
Mr. Vistad stated that the one thing he sees as a problem is that the
ordinance says that Mr. LaPanta shall appear at the meeting. He asked
whether Mr. LaPanta could come back at us and say that he was told not
to appear.
o u
Regular Planning Commission Meeting
September 8, 1987 - Minutes
Page 7
(Tonson, Cont.)
Commissioner Bosell stated that the city is the petitioner in this case,
not Mr. LaPanta. Mr. LaPanta was caught with about 13 unshreddable tires
which is definitely a violation of the agreement.
Commissioner Jovanovich agreed that we need to have some documentation.
This item will be continued at the September 22nd meeting.
Jay Clemens Special Use Permit, Cont.
MOTION by Bosell, seconded by Jovanovich to table this item to the next
regular meeting. Motion carried.
Andover Commercial Park Preliminary Plat, Cont.
Daryl Morey - stated that a number of things that were of concern at the
last meeting have been added to the plat. Todd Haas has received the
soil borings, but Mr. Morey has not seen them as yet.
Chairman Perry asked if there is a reason that Lot 1, Block 1 is offset.
Mr. Morey speculated that it may have something to do with the life
estate on Mrs. Sonterre's property.
Mr. Jacobson noted that the existing driveway easement is still on the
'/ plat.
Discussion was on what this property will be zoned as the motion made
at the previous meeting rezoned it to Commercial Park District. It was
noted that if the property is going to be something other than Commercial
Park District, the previous motion needs to be rescinded and a new motion
made.
MOTION by Bosell, seconded by Vistad to rescind the motion introduced at
the regular Planning Commission meeting on August 25, 1987, Page 8, in
regard to Commercial Park rezoning.
Further, to recommend that the city rezone this piece of property to
General Business, contingent upon that district being streamlined by an
amendment to Ordinance 8 so the district allows the uses that are intended
to be included in this particular piece of property.
Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Bosell, seconded by Jovanovich that the City Council stay all
action in regard to rezoning of the Commercial Park to allow for the
amendment to Ordinance 8, Sections 3.02, 7.01, 7.03 and 7.04 to catch
up with this rezoning request.
Motion carried unanimously.
j
MOTION by Jacobson, seconded by Vistad that the Andover Planning and
zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the pre=
liminary plat known as the Andover Commercial Park subject to the following
~ \
Regular Planning Co,_assion Meeting
September 8, 1987 - Minutes
Page 8
(Andover Commercial Park, Cont.)
u
,
/ three conditions: 1) The easement for 136th Avenue n.W. east of Thrush
Street be redrawn to show that it is not being constructed as a half
street but to indicate no construction at all; 2) That legal counsel
consider the driveway easement through Outlot A and Lots 3 and 4 of Block
1 and advise the Council of its legal standing. The Commission has
concerns that as said easement stands, it may impinge on the saleability
of those lots; 3) That the legal description be updated.
Reasons for approval are as follows: 1) The plat has been reviewed by
the Andover Review Committee and the Anoka County Highway Department; 2)
the plat meets the city ordinances and is not in conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan; 3) It will not adversely affect the surrounding
property or scenic values; 4) the plat will not adversely affect the
traffic.
Approval is also subject to the appropriate park dedication fees.
Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council on
September 15, 1987.
Ordinance 8 Amendment Public Hearinq
As the notice for this hearing was to rezone the Commercial Park to
Commercial Park District and the concensus was to rezone it to General
Business, it was decided that a new notice needs to be published and the
hearing held after publication.
,
/
MOTION by Vistad, seconded by Jacobson that no action be taken on
the Ordinance 8 Amendment public hearing pursuant to the joint meeting
between the City Council and Planning Commission of this same date.
Motion carried.
Adopt Resolution/Modified TIF District
Daryl Morey explained that all this does is to include the Sonterre
property in the Tax Increment Financing District.
Several commissioners objected to this item as the resolution states that
the TIF plan has been submitted to them and they have not seen it.
MOTION by Bosell, seconded by Jovanovich that no action on the resolution
presented in regard to the modified TIF be taken for the following reasons:
1) the first Whereas that says the plan had been submitted is not true
as the plan was not submitted to the Planning Commission for review and
comment; 2) the Planning Commission has not had the opportunity to
review the plan to determine whether it is consistent with the Comprehen-
sive Plan.
Motion carried unanimously.
/ Chairman Perry stated that at the last Council meeting a proposal was
brought to the Council for a variance to operate a ceramics business out
o ~~
Regular Planning Commission Meeting
September 8, 1987 - Minutes
Page 9
" of a detached accessory building in Woodland Meadows. The covenants in
Woodland Meadows do not allow home occupations and our ordinance does
not allow home occupations in accessory buildings. The Council feels
that there may be some home occupations that are not objectionable;
therefore, this will be on our agenda for discussion.
Chairman Perry declared the meeting adjourned.
Meeting adjourned at 11:20 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
,UU
Vicki Volk
Commission Secretary
,
/