Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 26, 1980 o o 0 ~ ~ ANDOVER o o REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 26, 1980 7:30 P.M. Call to order Approval of minutes 1. Comm. 1F7-80-4 2. Comm. 1F7-80-5 3. Comm. #8-80-3 4. Comm. #8-80-4 5. Comm. #8-80-5 6. Comm. fF8-80-6 7. Comm. fF8- 80-7 8. o Party Ordinance Public Hearing Doc E. Sales & Service Special Use Permit Public Hearing Robert Peach Variance Wayne Koeplin Lot Split Dog Bite Ordinance Cross Streets Ordinance (Ordinance #10) Ordinance 8 Amendment, Sec. 8.20, Visual Standards Bids/Updating Ordinances o o 0 ~ 01 ANDOVER o MINUTES o REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 26, 1980 The Regularly Scheduled Andover planning and Zoning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson d'Arcy Bosell at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, August 26, 1980 at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W., Anoka, Minnesota. Commissioners Present: Apel, Kishel, Scherer, Anstett, Johnson, Lobb Commissioners Absent: None Also Present: Sgt. Dennis Smolich, Anoka County Sheriff's Department; Norman Aaberg; Robert Peach; interested residents Approval of Minutes August 12, 1980 Page 1, under Michael Caouette's remarks, "not" should be changed to "no". Page 2, under Richard Volbruck' s remarks, ''not'' should be changed to ''no''. MOTION by Kishel, seconded by Anstett that the minutes of August 12, 1980 be approved as corrected. Motion carried on a 6 yes - 1 present (Lobb) vote. Chairperson Bosell mentioned that because of the primary elections, the September 9th meeting will be moved to September 11, 1980. Party Ordinance Public Hearing (Comm. #7-80-4) Chairperson Bosell opened the public hearing. Sgt. Dennis Smolich, Anoka County Sheriff's Department - Stated that he was asked to come to the meeting to answer any questions. Noted that Ham Lake's ordinance has a provision for a permit for a field party. There was a party recently in Ham Lake where the Sheriff's office was called to investiga~e. The owner of the property was asked if he had a permit; he did not. At that point, the owner started yelling and screaming and a fight broke out. Subsequently, more fights broke out. Chairperson Bosell asked Sgt. Smolich what would have happened if Ham Lake's ordinance was not in effect. Sgt. Smolich stated that in this particular situation, the same thing would have happened. However, the ordinance gave them grounds to do something. Usually the Sheriff will wait until after three complaints before something is done. With an ordinance, you have something to enforce. Feels that Ham Lake's ordinance is not out of line. Since the last big party in Ham Lake, they have cited two more people. o Chairperson Bosell asked if the Sheriff's Office has more trouble with cities that have a lot of open space. Sgt. Smolich noted the biggest problem areas are Andover, Ham Lake and East Bethel. Commissioner Lobb asked if the violation provision of the Ham Lake ordinance was ever Planning and~ng C""-'ission Meeting '/' 'I August 26, 198u - Minu~es Page 2 o o (j enforced. Sgt. Smolich stated that two of the people that were cited paid fines but there is another case where the people involved are suing the city. The problem with the parties is that generally they respond to the first call and talk to the people; after the second call, the people are more drunk and when they respond to the third call they're dealing with people who are not willing to leave a party. At these parties, there is always criminal damage to the squad cars. By having a licensing requirement you know who is giving the party and someone is then responsible. When a person applies for a license, he will make every effort to keep the party under control. Since Ham Lake's ordinance went into effect, the number of parties has dropped. Chairperson Bose11 stated that she has talked to the County Attorney's office and they would rather have each municipality adopt their own ordinances rather then the county having one. Sgt. Smo1ich noted that the reason Ham Lake decided on 50 as the number of people to require a permit is because there are only 8 County squad cars that would be available at one time if needed. Sgt. Smolich then related that during the 4th of July party on Constance Boulevard in Andover, only one complaint was received while he was on duty and that was anonymous. The complaint was not about the party but the people milling around on the road. The cars were parked along the road as good as they could be. He also noted that half of the people attending these parties are juveniles. Stan Carlson, 680 Constance Boulevard N.W. - lives across the road from where the 4th of July party was held and stated that he didn't complain because he didn't want 200 motorcyclists coming to his house. Stated that with an ordinance, something could be done to control the parties before they get out of hand. Commissioner Johnson stated that with juveniles drinking at these parties, that is breaking the law in itself. Commissioner Lobb asked about parties in a house and how the ordinance would affect them. Sgt. Smo1ich stated that according to the ordinance, only one person has to be outside of the house in order for the Sheriff to do something. Maxine Caskinette, 13852 Round Lake Boulevard - Asked does that make the owner of the property responsible? person applying for the permit would be responsible. if the ordinance is adopted, Sgt. Smo1ich noted that the Joe Caskinette, 13852 Round Lake Boulevard - stated that Ham Lake's ordinance sounds like something Andover should have. Sgt. Smolich stated that Ham Lake's ordinance was sent to the Attorney General's office and was approved. He also noted that none of the deputies like going to these parties; they are getting to be like domestics. Also, a good share of the people at these parties are from other cities, such as Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center. Discussion on this item was discontinued until the next item on the agenda was taken care of. /\ Doc E. Sales & Service Special Use Permit Public Hearing (Comm. #7-80-5) V Chairperson Bosel1 opened the public hearing. Planning and (~ng C:-)ission Meeting August 26, 1980 - Minutes Page 3 o o u Norman Aaberg, 606 - 110th Avenue N.R., Blaine - stated that the purpose of the tower he wishes to install is to provide radio communications for businesses to be able to get in touch with their employees. It is an FM type of radio service for business use only. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Aaberg if he has this type of operation in use at other locations. Mr. Aaberg stated that he has one at his residence; however, because of city ordinance, it is not very high and the range is not very far. Chairperson Bosell asked if this tower would be similar to WCCO's tower. Mr. Aaberg stated it would be the same except it will be not as tall and will be lighter weight. The wind velocity that the tower is tested at is 120 MFH. Discussion centered on where on Anoka Auto Wrecking's property the tower will be located. (Recess 8:50 - Reconvene 9:00) Chairperson Bosell questioned what the proposed building under the tower would be used for. Mr. Aaberg stated it will house the transmitter. The building will be insulated, water tight and will be kept locked. The guy wires will be at 35 foot intervals so that if it happens to fall over, it will fall in sections, not in one piece. MOTION by Anstett, seconded by Kishel to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Lobb, seconded by Apel, that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of a Special Use Permit for Doc E. Sales & Service to erect a tower in excess of 45 feet on the property located at 1775 Bunker Lake Boulevard N.W., Andover, for the following reasons: 1) A public hearing was held and no opposition was met as to the Special Use Permit; 2) The use would be compatible with the surrounding area as there are other towers in the vicinity; 3) The Special Use Permit would not be contrary to good planning; 4) It would not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the general public; 5) It is in a commercial area, not residential; 6) The need for the height of the antenna, being 183 feet, is to stay within the FAA regulations as anything over 200 feet would have to be lighted; 7) The height of the tower is that UHF communications are directly line of sight. Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council September 16, 1980. Party Ordinance, Continued Commissioner Scherer felt that our ordinance should require the permit be applied for 10 days before the party, not 30 days. Discussion was on whether Section V, a) & b), regarding clubs and bona fide clubs should be deleted. Commissioner Anstett felt it should be. Commissioner Apel stated that a party permit is just to recognize that a person is having a party. o Joe Caskinette - he is looking for something that would prohibit juveniles from having parties. He also questioned whether something should be added regarding sanitary facilities. 1. d (" ,--.. P ann~ng an ~ ~ng C ~ss~on August 26, 198U - Minti(;~s Page 4 Meeting () () o It was decided that an op~n~on from the City Attorney should be sought regarding: 1) requiring sanitary facilities; 2) the fact that Andover only has a non-intoxicating liquor license. Stan Carlson - felt that if something was in the ordinance regarding the penalty, fewer people would have parties. Commissioner Anstett stated that at the last meeting, security being provided was discussed. Chairperson Bosell noted that this could also be brought to the City Attorney's attention. Commissioner Johnson felt the title of the ordinance should be changed to "Outdoor Party Ordinance". The commission concurred. MOTION by Scherer, seconded by Anstett to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Scherer, seconded by Anstett that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the "Outdoor Party Ordinance" as shown on the attached copy, for the following reasons: 1) It was at the City Council's direction that the Commission draft said ordinance; 2) Many complaints have been received from the residents regarding parties; 3) The Commission received favorable comments from the Sheriff's Office regarding said ordinance; 4) There was considerable citizen input. Motion carried unanimous~y. This will go to the City Council on September 16, 1980. Bids/Updating Ordinances Chairperson Bosell noted that the firm in Florida only gave a bid on codifying the ordinances, not updating them. Commissioner Scherer felt that Wehrman-Chapman would be good because of their back- ground. The person that would be working with the city has a good background in planning. Their proposal was right to the point. BRW's proposal impressed him more with their graphics than what they have done. Commissioner Anstett liked Wehrman-Chapman because they considered both the rural and urban areas where the others didn't recognize the rural section at all. Chairperson Bosell stated that Design Exchange's bid was $3500' plus printing costs. She asked them what the printing costs would run and was told $350.00 for a total of $3,850.00. Commissioner Kishel stated that if we spent $3,500.00 for Design Exchange's proposal, we would not get the job done. The Commissioners stated their preferences: () Commissioner Kishel - Northwest Associated Consultants or BRW Commissioner Apel - Northwest Associated Consultants or Wehrman Chapman Commissioner Johnson - Wehrman Chapman or Northwest Associated Consultants Commissioner Lobb - Northwest Associated Consultants or BRW Commissioner Scherer - Northwest Associated Consultants or Wehrman Chapman Pl. d (~ C/ -.. . . M . ann1ng an ~ng ~SS1on eet1ng August 26, 1980 - Min~t~s Page 5 c) o 1 ~) Commissioner Anstett - Wehrman Chapman or Northwest Associated Consultants Chairperson Bosell - Wehrman Chapman or Design Exchange. MOTION by Anstett, seconded by Johnson that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council consideration of the Wehrman Chapman proposal as primary recommendation with Northwest Associated Consultants as a second consideration for the updating of the City's ordinances for the follOWing reasons: 1) After discussion, the Commission felt that Wehrman Chapman's representative was more highly qualified but Dave Licht (Northwest Associated Consultants) has also worked with the City and has considerable knowledge about the city; 2) The firm from Florida was not to be considered because of the distance and expense involved. Vote on motion: Yes - Bosell, Johnson, Apel, Anstett, Scherer; No - Lobb, Kishel. Lobb and Kishel stated they voted no because their first choice would be Northwest Associated Consultants as they have worked with the city and know Andover's problems. Motion carried on a 5 yes - 2 no vote. This will go to the City Council on September 16, 1980. Cross Street Ordinance (Comm. #8-80-6) It was the concensus of the Commission that the Recording Secretary type in ordinance form what the City Council recommended. MOTION by Apel, seconded by Lobb that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the attached amendment to Ordinance #10 as directed by the City Council, attaching Mr. Kishel's motion of July 8, 1980. Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Ccuncil on September 16, 1980. Ordinance 8, Section 8.20 Amendment, Visual Standards (Comm. #8-80-7) Chairperson Bosell read a memo from the Building Inspector regarding agri-buildings. It was noted that the Building Inspector said that whatever side of the building faces the street must be color coded. Basically, what the Council wants is to prohibit unfinished metal being used on pole buildings. MOTION by Johnson, seconded by Anstett that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the attached amendment to Ordinance 8, Section 8.20 Visual Standards. Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council on September 16, 1980. (Recess 10:48 - Reconvene 10:56) Dog Bite Ordinance (Comm. #8-80-5) Chairperson Bosell noted that according to the City Council minutes, there are some things contained in the Ham Lake ordinance that could be deleted from Andover's ordinance. She would like to talk to the attorney regarding those items. Commissioner Apel felt that letting a dog bite three times is too much; twice should - " be enough. Commissioner Anstett felt that one bite should be enough. ., \...../ Commissioner Kishel asked why the city should have a dog bite ordinance when the leash law can't even be enforced. /'\ ~, Planning and l.. ,/ng C}.ssion Meeting August 26, 198U - Mintces Page 6 r ) \,-" o \ '--.: Commissioner Apel will attempt to condense Ham Lake's ordinance into one that would be suitable for Andover. This will be continued to the September 11, 1980 meeting. Wayne Koeplin Lot Split (Comm. #8-80-4) Wayne Friday, 15540 Prairie Road, representing Mr. Koeplin - stated that Mr. Koeplin would like to split his lot so that he can sell one parcel to Mr. Friday. Chairperson Bosell asked if there would be enough space for a house and septic system on the newly created lot because of the wetlands. Mr. Friday stated that he considers it buildable. It was noted that if a driveway is over 300 feet in length, it will have to be hard surfaced. Mr. Friday asked what the park dedication fee would be. Chairperson Bosell stated that the City Attorney said it would be $100.00. She noted that a letter had been received from one of the adjacent property owners stating they had no objections to the lot split. MOTION by Kishel, seconded by Lobb, that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of a lot split for Wayne Koeplin on the property described as the North 660 feet of the SE~ of the NE~ of Section 33, Town- ship 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, for the following reasons: 1) All of the necessary provisions of the lot split ordinance have been met; 2) It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; 3) The lot split would not be contrary to good planning; 4) It would not be contrary to public interest; 5) It does not nullify the intent of the ordinance; 6) Park dedication fees in the amount of $100.00 would be required. Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council on September 16, 1980. Robert Peach Variance (Comm. #8-80-3) Robert Peach, 15830 University Avenue Ext. - would like to construct a pole building in what is actually his back yard but by ordinance definition is the front yard. It will be 25 - 40 feet from the north property line. The neighbor to the north has no objections. Commissioner Scherer asked Mr. Peach how he would get to the pole building from his house. Mr. Peach noted that there is a path through the woods. He would only be storing a small tractor in the building. MOTION by Apel, seconded by Anstett that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the variance requested by Robert T. Peach, 15830 University Avenue Ext. (Plat 65913, Parcel 9500-1) to construct a pole building closer to University Avenue Ext. then the front of his primary structure, for the following reasons: 1) Due to the lay of the land, a hardship was created, thus requiring a variance; 2) The applicant appeared before the Commission; 3) It would allow reasonable use of the land; 4) It would not adversely affect the adjacent land; 5) There was no opposition at the meeting. " Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council September 16, 1980. .--./ MOTION by Lobb, seconded by Johnson to adjourn. adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting Respectfully submitted, U' !:&J Vicki Volk, Recording Secretary