Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 28, 1981 o o () Call to order Approval of minutes l. Comma #3-81-1 2. Comma #7-81-1 3. Comma #8-80-12 4. Comma #6-81-1 5. Comma #5-81-6 6. 7. o 0 ~ 01 ANDOVER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 28, 1981 7:30 P.M. o Creekside Preliminary Plat Public Hearing, Cont. Wm. C. Rademacher Rezoning Public Hearing Multiple Conversion Ordinance, Cont. Review of Neighborhood Business Zones Mixed Uses in Single Family Residential Areas Farm Tour Report - Commissioner Anstett Oak Grove Comprehensive Plan, Cont. . . o o 0 ~ 01 ANDOVER o o REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 28, 1981 MINUTES MEETING ~I/<{/. meeting was called to order by at the Andover City Hall, 1685 c--' The regularly scheduled Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Chairperson d'Arcy Bosell at 7:31 P.M., Tuesday, July 28, 1981 Crosstown Boulevard N.W., Anoka, Minnesota. Commissioners Present: Apel, Kishel, Scherer, Anstett, Lobb Commissioners Absent: Johnson Also Present: Larry Winner, City Engineer; Jerry Green; Wayne Anderson; interested residents Approval of Minutes July 14, 1981 Page 1, Ordinance 8 Amendment, after ......a restaurant with liquor included", add "if and when it became approved". Page 2, in the motion on the amendment to Ordinance 8, change "mainly" to namely. MOTION by Lobb, seconded by Kishel, to approve the minutes of July 14, 1981 as corrected. Motion carried unanimously. Creekside Preliminary Plat Public Hearing, Continued (Comm. #3-81-1) Chairperson Bosell reopened the public hearing. a revised preliminary plat dated July 23 and Mr. another revised plat. She stated that the Commission had received Winner's comments and tonight they received City Engineer Larry Winner reviewed his letter regarding the latest preliminary plat. He noted that Lot 11, Block 2 is a double frontage lot and requires a variance; a variance is required for Lots 1 and 10, Block 2 which front on C.R. 18; Lots 10 and 11, Block 2 are more than twice the average lot size of 25, 130 square feet and will require a variance; the name of the east-west portion of Crocus Street N.W. should be changed to 137th Lane N.W. (Mr. Green would like it to remain Crocus Street); a 30 foot right-of-way must be acquired across city property for Crocus Street N.W. as indicated on the revised preliminary plat (Mr. Winner noted that he will have to talk to the City Attorney regarding this item); show house location and minimum basement elevation on Lot 10, Block 2 (Mr. Green has stated that he does not want to show this as he does not know what kind of building will be on this lot). Mr. Winner noted that the ordinance states that the house location and minimum basement elevation must be shown for all proposed buildings and since Mr. Green doesn't know what he is going to put on that lot, Mr. Winner didn't feel it was necessary to show it. Chairperson Bosell felt that it should be shown as the whole plat as drawn, is for single family dwellings. Jerry Green, 2733 Bunker Lake Boulevard N.W. - apologized for getting the revised plat to the Commission so late. Felt that if he had to show the placement of a house on Lot 10, Block 2, it would be a commitment and he does not know what he is going to do with that lot. ~hairperson Bosell asked the City Engineer to check to see if Lot 10, Block 2 would fall in with the resubdivision part of the ordinance. She told Mr. Green that at the meeting on June 8th, the Commission directed him to change Crocus Street to 137th Lane N.W. Mr. Green stated that this street would serve only 3 or 4 houses; the County Highway Engineer felt , ' Planning July 14, Page 2 and ZOning~iSS;~Meeting 1981 - Minutes ? "\ \.J o .r ":'eekside, Cont. ,-..i it would be best to leave it as Crocus street. 137th Lane, it would be very difficult to find. ~ 7J/~i Mr. Green felt that if it was changed to Commissioner Kishel didn't see any problem with leaving Crocus Street as it is. Commissioner Apel felt the same, noting that it would be difficult to find if it was 137th Lane N.W. commissioner Scherer stated that the proposed house location should be shown on Lot 10, Block 2. Mr. Green asked what purpose it would serve to show it. Commissioner Scherer stated that it would complete the plat to show some consistency. commissioner Apel noted that it should be shown so that it's in the proper area and not where fill will be needed. City Engineer Winner stated that the ordinance says that whenever a portion or a tract of land is proposed for subdividing and is intended for future subdivision, a plan for the future subdivision should be shown. Jim Elling, 13829 Northwood Drive - stated that he is against the plat regarding the size of the lots adjoining the already platted area. The other thing is that there will be 26 more homes with all of the cars coming out on 138th Avenue. There have been a lot of accidents on that corner already. He noted that this area is zoned R-4 which he doesn't feel is right. People moved out here for country size lots and not city lots. Chairperson Bosell noted that the Commission tried to figure out how to get another access from that area out to Crosstown Boulevard, but were unable to come up with anything. Bill Sironen, 2635 - 138th Avenue N.W. - stated that he is opposed to the plat. He noted that there are a lot of lots inside the plat that are 100'xl02', suggested that Mr. Green make the lots along the edge of the plat bigger and the ones inside the plat smaller. He also noted that it is inappropriate to mention the County Highway Department when talking about naming streets as they don't name any streets in the county. Jerry Green - stated that every lot in the plat meets the criteria of the ordinance in regard to the size of the lots. The area north of Creekside was platted before the sewer came in, that is why they are larger lots. City Engineer Winner noted that in looking at the ordinance, he couldn't tell if the resub- division plan was for the whole plat or for individual lots. MOTION by Kishel, seconded by Lobb to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Apel, seconded by Kishel that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat known as Creekside, legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Northwoods Addition and part of the North 1/2 of Section 33, Township 32, Range 24, and notes the following: 1) A public hearing was held. There was considerable public opposition to the plat from those people directly north of it regarding the size of the lots. They were concerned about the traffic flow from 138th Avenue onto Crosstown Boule- vard. Reasons for approval: 1) The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan in its intent and purpose, 2) The plat has been reviewed by the City Engineer and except for some of the variances, he finds it to be suitable for this purpose; 3) The plat has been reviewed by and we have received a letter from the Anoka County Highway Department stating (~'1ey had no objections to the plat as presented, 4) We have received a letter of approval ~~~om the Coon Creek Watershed Board. The Watershed Board has obtained a 60 foot easement on the Northeast side of the creek on Lot 11 and that has been shown on the plat, 5) The Park Board recommendation has been received and they recommended that the City Council accept cash Planning July 28, Page 3 C r~ , '..f' , and zon1ng m1ss1'-r1eet1ng 1981 - Minutes -, U o Creekside, Cont. ~~b lieu of land in the amount of $5,000.00 per acre. 6) The plat meets the city ordinances with the following variances to be granted: a) Lot 11, Block 2, which is a double frontage lot [Ordinance 10, Section 9.06(f)];b) A variance is required for Lots 1 and 10, Block 2 which front on County Road 18 [Ordinance 10, Section 9.02(c)]; c) Lots 10 and 11, Block 2 which are more than twice the average lot size of 25,130 square feet [Ordinance 10C, Section 9.06(a) (1)]; 7) Approval is contingent on the following items being completed: a) Resolving the 30 foot right-of-way that must be acquired across city property for Crocus Street as included on the revised preliminary plat; b) The house location and minimum basement elevation should be shown on Lot 10, Block 2; c) The southwesterly lot line should be shown on Lot 1, Block 1 to note the dimension of that lot. The Planning Commission concurs with the developer that the east- west portion of Crocus Street should remain Crocus and not 137th Lane. Motion carried unani- mously. This will go to the City Council on August 18, 1981. Wm. C. Rademacher Rezoning Public Hearing (Comm. #7-81-1) Chairperson Bosell opened the Public Hearing. Wayne Anderson, 1018 N.E. Main Street - stated that the total development is basically one contiguous strip of retail business. It was their intention to place in the north end an off-sale liquor store if the city decided to have liquor. They also offered to build the municipal liquor store if that was the way the city was going to go. They have proposed a small office building on the very north end to buffer that area from the residential area. Mr. Anderson noted that in order to build the superette, they had to rezone that property to Neighborhood Business as there was no sanitary sewer and city water available at that time. They would like to have the north 10 acres rezoned to Shopping Center. Commissioner Scherer asked what the process will be for licensing individuals for liquor. Chairperson Bosell noted that in the recommendation that was sent to the City Council, the Planning commission recommended that a Special Use Permit be required. MOTION by Kishel, seconded by Lobb to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Kishel, seconded by Scherer that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the rezoning requested by the owner of Lot 1, Block 1 and Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2 of the Andover Community Shopping Center be rezoned from Neighborhood Business to Shopping Center, pursuant to Ordinance 8, Section 5.02 and Ordinance 8G, Section' 5.02. It should be noted that a public hearing was held and there was no opposition to the request for rezoning. It was also noted that it has always been the intent and plan of the owner to develop this property to serve the community as a Neighborhood Business because of no sewer being available. Since that time, the sewer has been placed to serve this property and the logical use of the property would be for Shopping Center. The rezoning is recommended for the following reasons:l)The property could be put to its highest and reasonable use as a Shopping Center rather than Neighborhood Business which has limited uses as a restriction; 2) It is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; 3) It would not have an adverse affect on the adjacent property or depreciate its value. Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council on August 18, 1981. Recess: 8:49; Reconvene 9:03. Multiple Conversion Ordinance, Continued (Comm.#8-80-12) ~2ommisSioner Apel stated that when you use something with the word condominium in it, you're not qetting into our problem. We're more concerned with duplexes and four-plexes. He felt that-by requiring a Special Use Permit, we could control th1s. Planning July 28, Page 4 /'\ ~, d ,(), () . an Zon1ng'-.nm1ss~Meet1ng 1981 - Minutes l) o ~Multiple Conversion Ordinance, Cont. ./ 'j '-Chairperson Bosell noted that we have several people waiting for the Commission to come up with something. Commissioner Apel stated that new construction is no problem; it's the existing doubles that we have to deal with. He noted that with a condominium you do not own the land that it's on; with a townhouse, you do own the land. Chairperson Bosell noted that the City Attorney said that we could probably amend Ordinance 8, Sections 4.18 and 4.19 to accomplish what we want. We could also add to Section 6.01. She also noted that we could adopt by reference, Chapter 582 but then we wouldn't have any control. Commissioner Apel felt that we would have control as Chapter 582 states that the owner has to comply with city codes. Chairperson Bosell noted that if a person sells off one half of a double at the present time, he is in violation of the lot split ordinance. She would like to see them have individual sewer stubs and individual wells. In a condominium we would need an agreement to deal with the common elements of the property. She felt that our ordinance should be more specific on what we want to say. The letter from the City Attorney could be used as a guideline in amending Ordinance 8. Someone on the Commission will have to draft the amendment. After some discussion, Commissioner Apel volunteered to draft an amendment for the next meeting. This will be continued on August 11, 1981. (Commissioner Scherer stated that he will not be at the August 11th meeting.) Review of Neighborhood Business Zones (Comm. #6-81-8) Commissioner Lobb explained that the Neighborhood Business zones belonging to Joe Chutich and Jim Conroy have had no development occur on them for over 2 years. According to our ordinance, they should revert back to their original zoning. Chairperson Bosell stated that if we initiate this rezoning, we have to cite why it should be rezoned back to its original zoning. Ordinance 8, Section 4.l7(c) states that if no construc- tion has begun within 24 months, it reverts back to the original zoning. Commissioner Anstett felt that maybe we should notify the owners of these properties and tell them what we're going to do and see what they want to do. Commissioner Lobb stated that the letters should be sent either registered or certified so that we know they receive them. The secretary will send out the letters. Chairperson Bosell noted that some of our Neighborhood Business zones are developed. She listed the following NB zones in the city: 1) 7th Avenue and County Road 58-Tom Thumb store; 2) 7th Avenue & l4lst Avenue - Slim's Auto Clinic - appears to be 10 acres there; 3) Bunker Lake Boulevard and Underclift Street - undeveloped - this is the Chutich property; 4) County Road 9 and l40th Lane - Bill's Superette; 5) County Road 116 and Poppy Street - this is the new medical center; 6) Another parcel next to the medical center - this is owned by Mr. Chapman and was grandfathered in-not developed; 7) The Speedy Market on County Road 116 & Crosstown ,-Boulevard has 4 parcels - one is developed - also grandfathered in. She felt that if the ~)ommission is going to do something with the Chutich and Conroy properties, we should also look at these other properties. Commissioner Scherer suggested that one of the Commissioners look at these properties and come back with a report. After that is done, the Commission can decide what to do. . - /\ -, d Z ' \ ), [)' . an on~ng \..",mm~ss~1.._. Meet~ng 1981 - Minutes o o Planning July 28, Page 5 _N.B. Zones, Cont. /" \ ',,- ) Chairperson Bosell noted that the Conroy property is large and undeveloped. Also on Crooked Lake Boulevard and 134th was Nemeth's Market which has burned down. That is a large piece of property that is zoned NB. Also, across from Nemeth's is the old Hockey Inn, which is now being used as a residential dwelling. Commissioner Scherer, along with Commissioner Lobb, will look at these properties and come back with a report for the August 25th meeting. Mixed Uses in Single Family Residential Areas (Comm. #5-81-6) Chairperson Bosell noted that the Commission made a recommendation to the City Council that we deal with this by Special Use Permit. The Council did not really like that recommendation. They didn't feel that 7,000 square feet per unit is sufficient. Commissioner Scherer noted that the Metropolitan Council has been having a lot of discussion on making lot sizes smaller because of the economy. There was considerable discussion on why the city would or would not allow a double in a residential area of single family dwellings. Commissioners Scherer and Kishel felt that a Special Use Permit would be sufficient as each case can be dealt with individually. Commissioner Anstett didn't feel the Commission was doing what the City Council wants if the same recommenda- tion goes back to them. She felt that the City Council sees a problem that the Commission doesn't. Chairperson Bosell felt that more research and background work should go into the agenda items. If this was done, items would not have to be continued from meeting to meeting. MOTION by Kishel, seconded by Lobb that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission reiterate their previous motion to the City Council regarding mixes uses in single family residential areas. Vote on motion: Scherer - abstain; Anstett, Lobb, Bosell, Apel, Kishel - yes. Motion carried on a 5 yes; 1 abstain vote. This will go to the City Council on August 18, 1981. Farm Tour Report Commissioner Anstett presented her report on the tour of farms on June 30, 1981. The report will be made a part of the record. Commissioner Anstett stated that we have farmers interested in the agricultural preserve act, we have a sample ordinance, we have land that we have considered, and we also have farmers who don't know what we're doing. The next step is to decide what land we're going to recommend. Then we need to amend the Comprehensive Plan. She felt that an article could be put in the paper to inform all the farmers of what we're doing. Chairperson Bosell stated that the Commission has to initiate the rezoning at the same time the Comprehensive Plan is amended. Commissioner Anstett will send letters to the farmers asking them to respond indicating they want their land in the agricultural preserve. f This item will be continued on August 25, 1981. ,--J Oak Grove Comprehensive Plan, Continued Commissioner Apel reviewed the plan and noted that this plan is not any different than the . . o (\ d Z . 'C . .J t' an on~ng omm~ss~on Mee ~ng 1981 - Minutes ~\ U o Planning July 28, Page 6 " ) ~ak Grove Comprehensive Plan, Cont. others the Commission has reviewed. He stated that the parts of Oak Grove that border the City of Andover are mainly agricultural with some park land to the east. They only have a little industrial land and that isn't close to the City of Andover. The secretary will send a letter to Oak Grove saying that we have reviewed their plan. MOTION by Apel, seconded by Lobb to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:25 P.M. Respectfully submitted, U.W Vicki Volk, Commission Secretary \ . '-.J'