Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 11, 1983 o 0 ~ ~ ANDOVER o REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1983 MINUTES The regularly scheduled Andover Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman d'Arcy Bosell at 7:35 P.M., Tuesday, October 11, 1983 at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W., Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners Present: Knutson, Rogers, Spotts Commissioners Absent: Perry, Apel Also Present: Lyle Reynolds, Caine & Associates; Joel Sorgdrager Approval of Minutes September 20, 1983 MOTION by Spotts, seconded by Rogers to approve the minutes of September 20, 1983 as written. Motion carried unanimously. Ivywood Estates Preliminary Plat Review (Comm. #7-83-4) Lyle Reynolds, Caine & Associates - noted that they made the changes to the plat as recommend- ed by the Planning Commission. A number of variances are required because of those changes that were made. There will be a bituminous flume coming off the mat and a sodded swale going down to Outlot A for drainage. Chairman Bosell asked if the flume can be bituminous because of the DNR regulations. Mr. Reynolds noted that it can be. Chairman Bosell stated that according to the DNR, the smallest the non-riparian lots can be is 12,500 square feet and the riparian lots cannot be subdivided. This will have to be written into the restrictive covenants. The secretary was asked to mail a copy of the letter from the DNR to Caine and Associates for their records. Mr. Reynolds stated that they are requesting a variance because of the frontage on two of the lots. Commissioner Rogers felt that by designating Mr. Hennen's lot as a holding pond, we are going to run into problems later. Chairman Bosell questioned where the ordinary high water mark is on the plat. Mr. Reynolds noted that it is on the plat and showed where it is. Chairman Bosell noted that the plat is in order and will be on the City Council agenda for October 18th. C=>G. Denning Special Use Permit Public Hearing (Comm. #9-83-2) As no one was present for this item, it will be continued to October 25, 1983. R 1 Pl . C . . (}t. egu ar anmng ommlSSlon [.~C lng October 11, 1983 - Minutes Page 2 Joel Sorgdrager Variance (Comm. #10-83-1) '-'/Joel Sorgdrager, 2935 - 167th Lane N.W. - noted that he is requesting a variance to allow him to build a pole building, which is not allowed by the ordinance because he only has 2! acres. u Chairman Bosell asked Mr. Sorgdrager what he intends to use the pole building for. Mr. Sorgdrager stated it will be used for storage of a boat, camper, cars. etc. Chairman Bosell asked how big his ho~se is. Mr. Sorgdrager stated it is 1500 square feet. Chairman Bosell asked if Mr. Sorgdrager owns the lot on either side of his lot. He stated that he does not. He also noted that the lot to the west of him is a low swampy area. It was also noted that in the area that Mr. Sorgdrager lives in, there are already several pole buildings. Chairman Bosell asked if the cost is that much greater to build something different than a pole building. Mr. Sorgdrager noted that it costs several thousand dollars more. It was the concensus of the Planning Commission that this building should be allowed on Mr. Sorgdrager's lot; however, according to the variance procedure. none of the reasons to. allow a variance pertain to this situation. MOTION by Spotts, seconded by Knutson that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council denial of a variance requested by Joel Sorgdrager, 2935 - 167th Lane N.W., to construct a pole building on a 2! acre parcel of land which is varying from Ordinance 8U, Section 4.05 (K). The accessory building would adhere to all the other provisions of Section 4.05 as far as that type of building on a residential parcel. The only thing it does not conform with is Section 4.05 (K). This property was purchased prior to the adoption of this ordinance. The surrounding land is already owned by other individuals. There are other similar pole buildings in the area and the cost would be exhorbitant to construct an accessory building the size he wants for a pole building. This request has no variance as far as the placement of the building. It meets the setback requirements. There was no community input in regard to this item and there was no opposition. Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council on November 1, 1983. Commissioner Rogers asked if the whole problem is that the siding is horizontal instead of vertical. He stated that this should be a requirement in the urban area, but not in the rural area. Recess 8:37 - Reconvene 8:50. At this time, the Planning Commission worked on the update of Ordinance 8, beginning with Vacated Streets. The word alley will be stricken from this section and a procedure for the vacation of streets and easements will be written and put into the Administration Section. The procedure will include notification requirements. Development of Unplatted Land, will be deleted as this is covered in Ordinance 10. , )welling Units Prohibited - 'This shall not apply to earth sheltered structures' will be , -added. Section 4.11, Relocated Structures - The first paragraph will be changed to read: 'All I \ U Regular Planning Commission Meeting October 11, 1983 - Minutes Page 3 u , ) relocated buildings shall comply with Ordinance #4 regulating the moving of buildings over city streets.' Ordinance 4 should be amended to include a notification procedure so that the residents know what is happening. All of the rest of this section will be deleted. 4.12 Front Setbacks - this will be deleted and the amendment to Ordinance 8 regarding front setbacks will be inserted. Side and Rear Setbacks - will be changed to read: 'In all "B" Districts and all "I" Districts, the side and rear setback requirements may be excluded provided zero lot lines are used. Such exclusion from side and rear setbacks shall be permitted only after issuance of a Special Use Permit.' A definition for zero-lot line needs to be added to the ordinance. Commissioner Spotts will check into party walls and zero lot lines. 4.15 Setbacks Adjacent to Residential Areas - in the second sentence, after industrial district. adjacent to a residential district should be added. MOTION by Knutson to adjourn. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10: 15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, U. i~.b Vicki Volk Commission Secretary '-