Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 13, 1981 o o 0 ~ ~ ANDOVER o o REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1981 7:30 P.M. Call to order Approval of Minutes l. Corom. #8-81-8 2. Corom. #9-81-2 3. Corom. #9-81-3 4. Corom. #9-81-4 5. Corom. #3-81-6 6. Corom. #6-81-1 Lakeside Estates Preliminary Plat Public Hearing Flood Plain Ordinance Amendment Public Hearing Emmerich/Hand Sketch Plan Mark Omann variance Agricultural Preserve Ordinance Public Hearing Review of Neighborhood Business Zones Report, Cont. o o o Q ~ ~ ANDOVER o o REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1981 MINUTES The regularly scheduled Andover Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was called to order by Acting Chairman Jerry Johnson at 7:31 P.M., Tuesday, October 13, 1981 at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W., Anoka, Minnesota. Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Also Present: Anstett, Lobb, Kishel, Scherer Apel, Bosell Mark Schumacher, T.K.D.A: Jerry Windschitl; residents Tony Emmerich, interested ad/oft/V' ft4e Approval of Minutes September 22, 1981 Page 4, delete Commissioner Scherer's comment "people who think that way should have moved 50 miles..." Page 4, delete the last sentence of the 1st paragraph "He didn't feel the properties...." Commissioner Anstett asked the secretary to check the tape regarding her question to Bob Peach as to where the heart of the city is. This will be continued to October 27, 1981. September 29, 1981 MOTION by Kishel, seconded by Anstett to approve the minutes of September 29, 1981 as written. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Anstett noted that she received a brochure in the mail regarding a planning seminar in November that she would like to attend. She questioned whether the City Council would reimburse the $17.00 fee. The secretary will check with the City Clerk to see if this is the city policy. Lakeside Estates Preliminary Plat Public Hearing (Comm. #8-81-8) Acting Chairman Johnson opened the public hearing. The commissioners received revised copies of the plat prior to the meeting. Mark Schumacher reviewed his letter regarding the plat. Following are his comments: 1) The property to the northwest of the plat should be labelled "Park" in lieu of Programmed Land; 2) The existing 24' wide surfacing on 153rd Avenue and 152nd Lane should be shown (this has been provided); 3) Utility easements should be shown along the property lines (There is a typical lot shown on the revised plat showing the easements); 4) The floodplain maps for the City show the 100 year flood plain of Round Lake to exist to elevation 870. Lots 1, 2, 3 of Block 1 and Lots 1,2,3,4,5 of Block 2 contain areas below 870. Easements and/or variances on these lots will be required by the Flood Plain Ordinance; 5) The street grades should not dall below elevation 872; 6) Lot frontage on Lot 4, Block 1 is less than 300 feet; 7) Minimum \adius is 60' on cul-de-sacs (The radius on the plat is shown as 65'); 8) The street grade on 152nd where the match with the existing road is should be shown; 9) The Vintage Street cul- de-sac is in excess of 500'; 10) a turnaround at 152nd Lane at its westerly terminus should be shown; 11) 153rd Avenue N.W. and 152nd Lane should be connected along the east line of the Planning and Zoning, /nmissi / Meeting october 13, 1981 - Minutes Page 2 '---~/ ,~ Lakeside Estates Preliminary Plat, Cont. ,lat to provide street continuity and reduce the exceptionally long dead end length of l52nd Lane N.W.; 12) A copy of the soil borings should be provided for review; 13) The total street length should be shown on the preliminary plat (this is shown on the revised preliminary plat) . Mr. Schumacher noted that items I, 2, 3, and 13 have been taken care of; items 5 and 8 can be taken care of on the street construction drawings. He stated that he made the recommendation in item #11 because a road will not be constructed through this plat to Andover West. Mr. Windschitl might be interested in extending l52nd Lane over to Andover West which would be of benefit to the city; however, if this connection is never made, the developer might want to redesign the plat. Jerry Windschitl, 2312 South Coon Creek Drive - stated there are only 2 possibilities of getting an east-west street from Round Lake Boulevard to 7th Avenue; one would be through Auditor's Subdivision 82 and the other would be through this plat. One problem with the street going through this plat is that the clay pits are adjacent to the plat. He stated that extending l53rd Avenue down to l52nd Lane is economically unfeasible. It would be 700 feet long, serve six lots and cost approximately $21,000 to construct. If constructing this street is so important, it should have been asked for when LakeRidge was platted. He noted that the Fire Department is trying to get an east-west street from Round Lake Boulevard to 7th Avenue. Mark Schumacher noted that if l52nd Lane is extended, the result will be a long east-west street with no north-south street. Commissioner Anstett asked if people for flood insurance. to 870 elevation. this plat is approved with variances, what would that do to Mr. Windschitl stated that the lots would have to be brought up Commissioner Kishel noted that the city has to give the developer a permit to put fill in a flood plain. Acting Chairman Johnson asked if the developer has to apply for variances on these lots. (The Flood plain Ordinance will be checked to see what procedures need to be followed.) Mr. Windschitl stated that he is only going to final a portion of the plat to begin with. He will be doing Lots 3, 4 and 5 of Block 1 and Lots 5 and 6 of Block 2. Vintage Street will not be constructed at this time. commissioner Kishel noted that an alternative to extending l53rd Avenue to l52nd Lane would be to extend the cul-de-sac shown in the re-subdivision through Lots 3, 4, and 5 of Block 1 up to l53rd Avenue. The major items left on this plat are: soil borings should be looked at by the 3) Is a north-south street necessary. 1) Do we need a street running east and west; 2) The Engineer as they are important in this type of land; Acting Chairman Johnson stated that the Commission would like to get the City Council's opinion of this plat before anything about the streets is decided. Mark Schumacher felt that the Flood Plain Ordinance should be checked to see what's required and set that into motion right away. This will be continued to October 27, 1981. lood Plain Ordinance Amendment Public Hearing (Comm. #9-81-2) Acting Chairman Johnson opened the public hearing. Planning and Zoning nmissj October 13, 1981 - M~nutes Page 3 Meeting / / Flood Plain Ordinance Amendment, Cont. ,ommissioner Scherer noted that the flood plain doesn't exist; it was created by dredging. Someone dug a ditch and it ended up with a little bit of wet area. The part being added on the south doesn't have water in it and the north side is all sand. MOTION by Kishel, seconded by Lobb to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Lobb, seconded by Kishel that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of an amendment to Ordinance 50, adopted September 12, 1980, known as the Flood Plain Ordinance. Section 2.2 is hereby amended to read: The attached material shall include the floodway boundaries and Floodway Map, Panel 0015A, as amended by TKDA study, dated September 3, 1981. Approval is recommended for the following reasons: 1) The DNR and Federal Insurance Management Agency are requiring this change prior to construction of the bridge for Hanson Boulevard; 2) This has been checked by the DNR for wording and meets with their approval. Vote on motion: Yes - Kishel, Anstett, Lobb Johnson; Present - Scherer (He is involved in the Hanson Boulevard project). This will go to the City Council on November 3, 1981. Emmerich/Hand Sketch Plan (Comm. #9-81-3) Tony Emmerich, 2579 South Coon Creek Drive - stated they would like to do this plat in phases. Phase 1 will be single family homes on the east; Phase 2 will be half of the multiples; and Phase 3 will be the rest of the plat. A lift station will be required in Phase 3. He noted that they have not talked with the Park Board yet; however, the proposed park will be dedi- cated to the city. The single family dwellings on the east will serve as a buffer from the multiples. The sewer stubs are already in for the 10 lots. He noted that it was the City Council's opinion that a lift station be put in. Acting Chairman Johnson stated that this area is pretty low. going to require a lot of work but it has a lot of character. the units so they end up with some walkouts. Mr. Emmerich noted that it's They have tried to locate Mark Schumacher noted that the developers incorporated into this plat what the City Council wanted. He didn't see any real problems with it other than the filling. It was noted that. Mr. Hand will nave to. apply fora Special Use Permit-. as .this is a PUD. This will be continued at such time as a preliminary plat is filed. Recess 8:56 - Reconvene 9:09 Mark Omann Variance (Comm. #9-81-4) Mark Omann, 3711 - 145th Avenue N.W. - stated that he would like to build a detached garage which will be in front of his house. Acting Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Omann what the lay of the land is behind his house. Mr. Omann noted that along the house there is a slope to the lake. There is an existing garage ;.n front of the house which will be torn down. He further noted that the new garage will e built 65 feet off the boulevard. He cannot build an attached garage as the well is in the way. Commissioner Scherer felt that granting of this variance should be contingent upon the removal of the existing garage. Planning and Zoning. _->InmissL / Meeting October 13, 1981 - Minutes Page 4 \__ I , J Mark Omann Variance, Cont. MOTION by Scherer, seconded by Lobb that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the variance requested by Mark Omann, 3711 - 145th Avenue N.W., to construct a garage in front of his house for the following reasons: 1) Pursuant to Ordinance 8, Section 4.05(f), it would be a hardship on the part of the owner to ~conform~ /.0/3 to the ordinance that requires that the garage be built behind the house due to the fact tha~~l the well is drilled in front of the house and the driveway to a garage behind would necessitate driving over a water line; 2) The variance be granted on the condition that the existing garage on the property be removed within one year of the issuance of the building permit to build the garage in question. The reason for this condition being so that we don't end up with multiple accessory buildings. Motion carried unanimouSly. This will go to the City Council on November 3, 1981. Agricultural Preserve Ordinance Public Hearing (Comm. #3-81-6) Acting Chairman Johnson opened the public hearing. Commissioner Anstett noted that a letter has been received from the City Attorney proposing some changes in the ordinance. For the benefit of those in the audience, Commissioner Anstett reiterated what happened at a special meeting on September 29th, noting that AgP-2 has been completely deleted from the ordinance; the intent of farm dwelling and non-farm dwelling is the same; recreation area will be changed to outdoor recreation area. The Commissioners then reviewed the letter from Bill Hawkins making the appropriate changes in the ordinance. Commissioner Anstett: ,wted blat we will have to come up with a definition for agricultural and agricultural preserve. She also stated that when we send this to the City Council we should preface it with the reasons for what we did. Commissioner Anstett will prepare a preface for the City Council and the secretary will prepare a map to go with the ordinance. Leroy Johnson, 125 Bunker Lake Boulevard agricultural, can the adjoining property cannot, it would have to be requested by the rezoning. - asked if the zoning on a property is changed to owners change it. Commissioner Kishel noted they the property owner or the City Council could initiate The Commissioners decided that in order to have a public hearing on an amendment to Ordinance 8 setting forth definitions for agricultural and agricultural preserve districts and setting forth minimum requirements for those districts, an amendment should be put together. The first item considered was the minimum requirements for agricultural and agricultural preserve. The following was decided on: Lot area per dwelling unit - 10 acres for agricultural and agricultural preserve; Floor area per dwelling unit - 960 square feet for both; Garage single for both; Non residential lot area - 10 acres for both; Lot width at front setback line - 300 feet for both; Side yard setback - 30 feet for both; Residential garage from interior lotline - 10 feet for both; From interior lotline - 10 feet for both; Rear yard set back - 50 feet for both; height - none; Land coverage - N/A; Lot depth - 300 feet for both; Front yard set back - 100' from centerline for both; Setback along major arterial street - 50 feet for both. .~ction 7.01, Permitted Uses - Add agricultural, agricultural service establishments and single family and under agricultural preserve add agricultural service establishments and single family. Marge Perry, 17337 Roanoke - stated that in the Agricultural Preserve Ordinance, agricultural Planning and Zoning' "0mmissi.....' Meeting October 13,1981 - Minutes Page 5 '. / "- ./ ~gricultural Preserve Ordinance, Cont. service establishments are listed as a conditional use. Asked if it would be more appropriate to put them under 7.02 in Ordinance 8. The Commission decided that Mrs. Perry's suggestion would be correct. Section 6.01 Definitions - Agricultural will be defined as: "This district is intended to preserve productive land for agricultural use~ Agricultural Preserve will be defined as: "This district is intended for long term agricultural use." A public hearing on this amendment will be held on October 27th along with the continuation of the public hearing on the Agricultural Preserve Ordinance. Review of Neighborhood Business Zones Report, Cont. (Comm. #6-81-1) Acting Chairman Johnson presented his report on the NB zones. The Commissioners also received Commissioner Scherer's report. It was the concensus of the Commission that the Commissioners should review the reports and at the next meeting make recommendations as to what to do with these properties. Continued to October 27, 1981. MOTION by Lobb, seconded by Anstett to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, L.i~b vicki Volk, Commission Secretary