Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 22, 1981 o o o o 0 ~ 01 ANDOVER o REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 22, 1981 AGENDA Call to order - 7:30 P.M. Approval of Minutes - December 8, 1981 1. Comm. #11-81-1 2. Comm. #10-81-6 3. Comm. #6-81-1 4. Comm. #12-81-1 Firearms Committee Report Ordinance 8, Sec. 6.02 Amendment Public Hearing, Cont. Review of Neighborhood Business Zones, Cont. Noise Control Ordinance o o o 0 0 ~ 01 ANDOVER o o o REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 22, 1981 MINUTES The regularly scheduled Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson d'Arcy Bosell at 7:36 P.M., Tuesday, December 22, 1981 at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W., Anoka, Minnesota. Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: A 1 so Present: Anstett, Johnson, Kishel, Scherer Apel, Lobb City Engineer, James E. Schrantz Approval of Minutes December 8, 1981 MOTION by Kishel, seconded by Anstett to approve the minutes of December 8, 1981 as written. Motion carried on a 4 yes, 1 present (Johnson) vote. Firearms Committee Report (Comm. #11-81-1) Inasmuch as Commissioner Apel is the committee chairman and he is not present this evening, this item will be continued to January 12, 1982. Ordinance 8, Section 6.02 Amendment Public Hearing, Continued (Comm. #10-81-6) Chairperson Bosell reopened the public hearing. Commissioner Kishel noted that a letter has been received from the County Engineer outlining what the county would like to have for planned right-of-way widths and setbacks. That coincides with the proposed amendment to Ordinance 8. Commissioner Kishel stated that he and the City Engineer met and they agreed that the amendment to the ordinance that they came up with is something that could be incorporated into the ordinance. The amendment proposes a 110 foot setback from centerline on county roads and MSA streets. Chairperson Bosell asked if all county roads are state aid roads. Commissioner Kishel stated that they are not. City Engineer Schrantz noted that what the amendment says is that the county wants 60 feet from the centerline for right-of-way. Normally, the setback would be 50 feet from the right- of-way. Our MSA streets would be between 80 and 100 feet. The setback on our local streets (minor arterial or collector) would be 40 or 50 feet. Chairperson Bosell asked what streets in the city are classified as MSA streets. Commissioner Kishel noted that the following are MSA streets: 161st Avenue; Tulip Street; a portion of 173rd Avenue. Chairperson Bosell asked if there is any way, with the amendment, that there could be a map showing the MSA streets. Commissioner Kishel stated no; the amendment was written with the intent that the MSA system will change. Commissioner Kishel noted that Section 4.15 of Ordinance has been ignored by the Building c==>Inspector and the Planning Commission with regard to setbacks on major thoroughfares. Chairperson Bosell asked whose responsibility it will be to determine if a plat is on a minor, collector or MSA street. Commissioner Kishel noted that it is the Planning Commission's responsibility. City Engineer Schrantz felt that all of the Commissioners should have a map showing those streets. u o u u o o o Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 22, 1981 - Minutes Page 2 ~Commissioner Anstett noted that besides planning for cars on our streets, we should also be planning for people who are riding horses, hiking and riding bicycles. City Engineer Schrantz noted that Ordinance 10, Section 9.03(a) establishes right-of-way widths. He felt that this section should also be revised. Chairperson Bosell concurred but felt that we could eliminate Major Arterial and put in MSA Street instead. Discussion continued on whether or not Ordinance 10 should be changed to be consistent with the amendment to Ordinance 8. It was noted that Ordinance 10 refers to a 'service road'. This could also be changed to 'frontage road' as that is what we refer to them as. Commissioner Scherer noted that the more our community develops, the wider the arterial streets will have to be. Commissioner Kishel and City Engineer Schrantz will continue to work on this item; discussion will be continued at the January 12th meeting. Review of Neighborhood Business Zones, Continued (Comm. #6-81-1) Commissioner Johnson presented a memo that he felt should be sent to the City Council regarding the Nemeth and Hockinson properties. He also felt that a copy of the memo should be sent to those two property owners. The memo states that since these property owners have intentions of reopening a business in 1982, formal action will be withheld until late in 1982. Commissioner Anstett asked when in 1982 the Commission would be reviewing these properties. It was decided that it would be November 1, 1982. Commissioner Scherer noted that he read the file on the Conroy property rezoning. It includes a report done by Midwest Planning. Some of the things they pointed out are: the property is too large for Neighborhood Business and too small for Shopping Center; it's too close to the nearest other Neighborhood Business; there are problems with soil suitability; it's too near a conservency area; there are problems with the traffic. Commissioner Scherer felt that this rezoning was an example of the City Council being unable to say no. Commissioner Johnson suggested that Mr. Conroy be involved in the process if the Planning Commission is going to rezone his property. Commissioner Anstett thought this property should be pursued, but the other properties should be talked about also. City Engineer Schrantz noted that the Land Use Plan in the Comprehensive Plan should be revised prior to any rezoning. Without revising the Plan, there is no basis for rezoning. Commissioner Kishel felt that the Conroy and Sonsteby properties should both be looked into. He thought the Nemeth and Hockinson properties should be left as is until November 1, 1982. Commissioner Scherer felt that the Land Use Plan should be revised. Commissioner Anstett stated that the Commission should make a statement to the City Council saying we have reviewed these properties and what we decided and in these particular cases (-)we decided that we should rezone them and revise the Land Use Plan. '- City Engineer Schrantz suggested that on the Rosella Sonsteby property, the Neighborhood Business classification could be eliminated and the business (Slim's Auto Repair) could be an existing non-conforming use. u u (' ,-) () ( , ...J o o Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 22, 1981 - Minutes Page 3 - " I , \...j NB Zones, Cont. Chairperson Bosell felt that maybe the Sonsteby property could be rezoned to General Business. City Engineer Schrantz will check to see what the process is for revising the Comprehensive Plan. The secretary will send Commissioner Johnson's memo to the City Council and copies to the property owners. This item will be continued on January 12, 1982. Recess: 9:25 - Reconvene: 9:40 Noise Control Ordinance (Comm. #12-81-1) The secretary explained that the city attorney sent this to the Planning Commission as he is having trouble in court prosecuting people because we have nothing in our ordinance regarding noise. Chairperson Bosell noted that Ordinance 8, Section 8.19 contains a chart showing sound level in decibels. She asked why this section is non-enforceable. The secretary will check with the attorney to see why he can't use Ordinance 8, Section 8.19 in court. This item will be continued on January 12, 1982. MOTION by Anstett, seconded by Kishel to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, [i'I/;!j Vicki Volk, Commission Secretary , '- J