HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 8, 1979
" )
,'j
C)
c{)y of J!NDOVERCJ
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
MAY 8, 1979
AGENDA
Call to order - 7:30 p.m.
Approval of Minutes.
l. Comm. #4-79-2 Klatke Lot Split
2. Comm. iF3-79-S Faddler Lot Split
3. Comm. #4-79-5 Paul Marystone Discussion
4. Comm. iFl-79-5 Comprehensive plan Review
5. Comm. #3-79-7 Swinnning pool Ordinance
6. Corom. iF9-78-6 Rum River Ordinance (Motion)
7. Comm. #5-79-1 Strawberry Connnons Sketch plan
Revised 5/7/79
u
o
o 00
~ ~ ANDOVER
o
168'5 e'l.~~e.,.... 't1U 1t.1<1. . ri....u, ?Hut..euM 55303
p~ (612) 755-5100
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
MAY 8, 1979
MINUTES
The Regular Meeting of the Planning and zoning
7:32 p.m., by Chairperson d'Arcy Bosell on May
1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota.
Commission was called to order at
8, 1979, at the Andover City Hall,
~JJ.1r
Ralph Kishel, Jeannine Pyron, RalpR Kisfle~, R~chard .
Okerlund, George Lobb and Larry Retzlaff
Commissioners Present:
commissioner Absent: Byron copley
Also Present: Paul Marystone, LeRoy Granstrom, Julius Faddler, ..James Neilson
and others
Approval of Minutes
April 24, 1979:
Page 2, second paragraph, the Paul Jenson comment.
"that no docks except preexisting ones are allowed~should
to the best of the Commissions' knowledge no other docks
information Mr. Jensen should contact the DNR.
The Commissions' comment
be corrected to say that
are allowed but for further
Page 4, third paragraph, "The Commission advised Mr. Skeim that multiple
dwellings would be out because of the Comprehensive Plan, and it is not a sewered
area." The sentence should read, The Commission advised Mr. Skeim that multiple
dwellings would be out because of the Comprehensive Plan, City ordinances and
it is not a sewered area.
Page 4, fourth paragraph, "Lobb suggested that the Commission back the
City Council on the funding and accounting....., should be corrected to say,
Lobb suggested that the commission back the Park Commission on the funding and
accounting. . .
Page 4, fourth paragraph, where it says, "Lobb noted Page 59 and 61 can be
used to back up these issues." After Page 59 and 61 should be inserted, of the
Park System Master plan 1977 can be used to back up these issues.
Page 5, second line, "He reported that the
not be regulating the sanitary conditions,..."
and the word should inserted.
Commissions' main concern would
The word would should be deleted
Page 5, fifth line down, the title National Institute on the Spa should
be corrected to be, The National Institute on Residential Swimming Pools and Spas.
o
Page 5, the end of the first paragraph, "...whereby a fence of at least
four feet should be erected." The correction would be to insert, .....whereby a
fence of at least four feet in heiqht should be erected.
Pl' d () . n .
ann1ng an Z~{1ng Comm1~on Meet1ng
Minutes - May 8, 1979
Page 2
(j
o
o
(Approval of Minutes continued)
Page 1, Approval of Minutes, referring to Page 2, Number 3, Motion by
Law should be corrected to be Motion by Lobb.
Page 1, 5 lines up from the bottom, .....which do not meet the dimensional
requirements of this ordinance shall be allowed at building sites provided:".
The word at should be deleted and the word as inserted. Further on in the
same sentence, .....on the date of this enactment of this ordinance; and all
sanitary and dimensional requirements of this ordinance be delivered as far
as practicable." This should be corrected to say, .....on the date of enactment
of this ordinance; and all sanitary and dimensional requirements of this
ordinance be complied with as far as practicable."
Page 2, fifth paragraph, "Rather than ascending it,". The word ascending
should be deleted and the words, us sending inserted.
Page 2, sixth paragraph, the word currier should be corrected to courier.
Motion by Retzlaff, seconded by Lobb, to approve the Minutes as corrected of
April 24, 1979. Motion carried unanimously.
Chairperson Bosell asked that Item No. 3 be moved before Item No. 2 on the Agenda.
No one was present for the first three items on the Agenda so we moved on to Item 6.
Rum River Ordinance (Comm. #9-78-6)
There were no questions or comments on the Ordinance.
that the revised Scenic River Ordinance be sent to the
has been reviewed and that the public hearing has been
The Commission agreed
City Council, that it
held.
Motion, by Retzlaff to the Andover City Council that the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends adoption of the Scenic River Ordinance, Ordinance
No. 45, for the following reasons: (1) That the proposed Ordinance is in
compliance and consistant with Minnesota Statutes 104.31 - 104.40 and
Minnesota Regulations NR78-81 and the Management Plan for the Rum River
hereby referred to as NR2700; (2) That a public hearing was held and input
was received and considered. Motion seconded by Kishel.
Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Council on May 15, 1979.
Paul Marystone Discussion (Comm. #4-79-5)
Paul Marystone, 4930 Marystone Lane - would like to sell two and a half acres
of his total 5.9 acres. He asked what would be required to do this in order
to comply with the ordinances for the lot split.
The Commission advised Mr. Marystone that he would have to have at least
300 feet of road frontage; a 120 foot cul-de-sac with a 60 foot radius so
that the City plows would be able to turn around and maintain the road and
meet all the City Ordinances, namely Ordinances 40 and 40A.
,- '\
U
Planning and ~ing commi(~)on
Minutes - May 8, 1979
Page 3
Meeting
GO
/~-\ Paul Marystone Discussion cont I d.
\.J
The Commission also told Mr. Marystone that if he doesn't believe that the
Ordinances are logical, that he could petition it, giving his reasoning and
present his case before the City Council. Another approach suggested to
Mr. Marystone would be to contact the surrounding neighbors and maybe come
up with a cooperative effort for a road.
James Neilson, Attornev. Babcock, Locher, Neilson & Mannella, 118 East
Main, Anoka - Mr. Neilson stated that he was here for the discussion too.
His only concern is for the adjoining neighbors. They do not care about
the division of Mr. Marystone's property, but are interested in the present
road that goes into the property and what will be done with it. The
adjoining neighbors do not want to lose any of their property for a road.
They do not want any changes made in the present road either.
The Commission suggested to Mr. Marystone that he come back to City Hall with
a drawing of what he wants to do, giving actual dimensions of how big this
piece of property would be, whereabout he would put the road, how long the
road would be, how wide it would be, how you would turn around in the property,
the names of all the property owners within 300 feet of his property; actually
just following all the provisions of Ordinance 40 and 40A.
Ulrey Granstrom, 4860 Harystone lane - wanted to know if it is possible to
keep the road the way it is now and still maintain it. The Commission advised
Mr. Granstrom that if Mr. Marystone 'Were to put a road on to his land, the
road would probably have to be a more proper, up-to-date road than Mary-stone
Lane, but that 'Wouldn't have an affect on the adjoining properly owners.
Again the Commission suggested to Mr. Marystone that he digest all that was
said on the matter, go home and make a drawing and list his reasons for
wanting to do the lot split his way.. A good selling point suggested was
that he would want to be keeping nature and the environment the way it is.
Recess at 8:47; reconTened at 9:00 p.m.
Chairperson Bosell asked if there was anybody present at this time for the
Klatke Lot Split. No one was present so Item No. 3 on the Agenda was called.
Faddler Lot Split (Comm. #3-79-5)
James Neilson, Attorney, Babcock, Locher, Neilson & Mannella, 118 East
Main, Anoka - is representing Dorothy and Julius Faddler who presently
reside in California. They are the landowners of the property in question
for a lot split. The intention of the landovmers is to sell their house
together with 3.01 acres, which would result in two other parcels being
37107 acres on the east and )68.37 acres to the north of Sylvester Addition.
The owner would be willing to dedicate the easterlY extention of 170th
Lane northwest. There is also a possible sale of the balance of the property
to a developer who would plat the balance of the property including l70th
Lane northwest. Three parcels will be corrected.
,r'"'\
'-J
,/j
,--'
(1 ()
Planning and:G_ g Commi~ Meeting
Minutes - l~y 8, 1979
Page 4
UU
Faddler Lot Split cont'd.
Chairperson Bosell noted that the land in question is already a separate
parcel of record. It is listed in the County's records and also shows up
on the map of June 178 as a separate parcel. Also the Lot Split Ordinance
only allows the creating of two pieces of property and Faddler would be
creating three. Mr. Neilson noted that they could waive that Ordinance.
Chairperson Bosell asked the other commissioners if they thought there was
clear title on the property or if they shoUld reconunend that the property
be increased. Commissioner Pyron agreed that it would be better to increase
the property. All other conunissioners were in agreement that this would be
the most practical and logical way to go. Chairperson Bosell advised
Mr. Faddler that they would need to have the names of all neighbors wi thin
350 feet of his property_ Mr. Faddler explained that he has already given
City Hall a list and the neighbors have received their letters. Chairperson
Bosell noted that there was no record of this. The next thing to be cleared
up was the fact that under Ordinances 40 and 40A, whenever a lot split occurs,
each lot created under five acres be required to have a $100 park fee paid.
There would be a cost of $200 to Mr. Faddler. Mr. Neilson stated that
Mr. Faddler would be willing to pay this cost. Mr. Faddler would also have.fo
extend l70th Lane to meet the City codes. Mr. Faddler would only be
responsible for the new part of the road since the other is dedicated to
the City. The new road would have to be dedicated to the City also.
Chairperson Bosell requested another legal description that will describe
the piece of property created by the lot split. Mr. Neilson stated that
he could describe that.
~
5_.,;>,).7'1
The parcel immediately to the north of Sylvester Addition and
to the west of the present house and lot owned by Julius Faddler
would be described: That part of the southwest quarter of the
northeast quarter, Section 8, Township 32, Range 24 in Anoka
County Minnesota, lying north of Sylvester Addition according
to the recorded plat thereof, and lying west of the northerly
extension of the east line of Block 1, Sylvester Addition.
Motion by nshel, that the Planning and Zoning Commission reconunend to the
City of Andover approval of the lot split on Mr. Faddler's property creating
one lot that has 500 feet on 170th Lane northwest extended easterly, with
a depth of 4.36.87 feet more or less, resulting in the further creation of
a parcel of land fronting on Tulip Street having an area of approximately
3.6 acres for the following reasons: 1) There is a home constructed on
the lot being created on l70th Lane northwest, which has been in existence
^ Ar:.~ since 1972. 2) The land does have a: hardship in that it does not have
~4" 300 feet fronting on Tulip Street. 3) This seems to be the llPst practical
5-)).1} subdivision of the property due to its physical measurements. 4) Property
owner is willing to dedicate the extention of 170th Lane northwest to the
east across the entire lot being created and provid;ng ~or a temporary
cul-de-sac. 5) The owner is also Willing to grandjafi"'ease;td- along
Tulip Street for an additional 17 feet to conform with the line of
Block 1, Sylvester Addition. 6) The owner is willing to donate $100
each for these two parcels being creat,,'1.d.!.?:'.tp,~k fees_ 7) The lot split
0.'- does not impair the neighboring 1'e8i4ent.a:. .Lt;s in conformance with the
surrounding area. 8) Creating the parcel of land fronting on Tulip Street
would require a variance from Ordinance 40 A, in that the parcel contains
less than 300 feet frontage. 9) Both tracts of land contain well over the
(-j ()
Planning and Zoning Commi:;~.lon Meeting
Minutes - May 8, 1979
Page 5
00
U Faddler u,t Split cont'd.
2.5 acres required by Ordinance. Motion seconded by Pyron.
Motion carried unanimously. This will go before the City Council on June 5th.
SWimming Pool Ordinance (Cemm. #3-79-7)
Commissioner u,bb had a couple of changes to make on the proposed ordinance.
First, Section 2D, no pool or spa should be located within 20 feet of any part
of an on site sewer system. Second, Section 4A on retroactivity; the date
would be set for July 1, 1980, for all pools and spas to comply with City
ordinances. This would give people who presently have pools a year I s time
to meet requirements. Subsection 5 shall not apply unless such pool or spa
is disassembled. It was suggested that the retroactivity would apply only
to fencing and latching requirements.
Commissioner Okerlund suggested that there be an option for spas (hot tubs)
of a latchab1e cover. He said that after talldng with a few dealers, the best
type would be a two inch thick cover so that it would support the weight of
anyone who walks on it. Okerlund also suggested that the fencing around
hot tubs be an option. He said that the dealers recommended that the electrical
units for the hot tubs be located at least five feet from the tub, otherwise
use the battery operated device. Commissioner Okerlund recommended that
the language for the Ordinance on spas read something like ~s: All outdoor J
spas shall have either a fence as described in Section 3.82'.B or a latchable ~..l';:>-77
cover and come under the fencing section. The cover should be constructed of
wood or fiberglass and be capable of holding a certain amount of weight.
Another wording of the cover requiremant wmld be, inpenetrable by toddlers
and subject to inspection by the City inspector.
Motion. by Lobb that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of
Andover recommend to the City Council the adoption of Ordinance No. 46
regulating building and construction of residential swimming pools and spas
as submitted. 1) Andover does not have an ordinance governing residential
swimming pools and spas. 2) The recommendation by the Planning and Zoning
Commission is in the best interest of the safety and lielf'are of the citizens
of Andover. Motion seconded by Okerlund.
Motion carried unanimously. This will go to the City Counail on June 5th.
Comprehensive Plan Review (Comm. #1-79-5)
There will be a special meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission on
May 15th to discuss this matter. 7:30 p.m.
The Klatke Lot Split will be moved to the next meeting.
Motion by Lobb, seconded by CIlcei'lund..'1;o adjourn. . Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 10:47 p.m.
o
Mary H. Kiley
Recording Clerk