The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11/12/02CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -3100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda November 12, 2002 Andover `City, Hall Council Chambers 7:00 p.m. L Call to Order `. 2. Approval of Minutes — October 8, 2002 ' 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (02 -04) to change the land use designation from Urban Residential Low Density (URL) to Limited Commercial (LC) on property located at 13730 Crosstown Drive NW for Pinewski Builders. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning (02 -04) to change the zoning designation from Single Family Urban Residential (R -4) to Limited Business (LB) on • property located at 13730 Crosstown Drive NW for Pinewski Builders. 5. Variance (02 -11) Variance 16 Ordinance -9, Section 6.02 for side setback to allow addition to existing house far property located at 2860,135 Avenue NW. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Residential "Sketch Plan fora townhouse project for Creekside Homes on property located at 14220 Crosstown Boulevard NW.,. 7. PUBLIC HEARING: Residential Sketch Plan fora detached townhouse project to be known as "City View Farm" located.at 13313'Round Lake Boulevard NW: 8. PUBLIC HEARING: Discuss proposed amendments to Ordinances 4109 and #230 regulating dirt bikes in the City of Andover. 9. Adjournment --- ------ --------- .1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304.(763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 ----~-- Mr. Bednarz discussed the survey ofthe proposed 10tsplit,wi'Ui the Cornmissjon; Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 2 . 3. Placement of any new structures, which conform to all City building and zoning, codes. 4. Locations for two 5,000 square foot (10,000 square foot total) septic areas. 5. Legal descriptions of the new properties. The Committee has three options: 1. Require the applicant to submit all necessary materials before the Commission reviews the application. 2. Recommend approval of the lot split, but require the applicant submit all necessary materials before this proceeds to the City Council. 3. Recommend approval of the lot split, but require the applicant submit all necessary materials before the lot split is recorded with Anoka County. Commissioner Greenwald asked what they were approving. Acting Chairperson Daninger stated they would be making a recommendation of approval or denial of the lot split based on the survey. Commissioner Greenwald asked if this would be coming back to them. Mr. Bednarz stated it depended on the decision made in their recommendation. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Falk, to open the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Commissioner Gamache stated per the Ordinance the only problem with this is that there is not a survey. Mr. Bednarz stated this is correct and per the staff review it seems the lot can hold all the requirements, but they need the survey to prove this. Commissioner Greenwald stated he could see why the owner would want to do this because they could put a lot of expense into it and not get approved. Mr. Bednarz stated that is part of the reason because it is expensive but they do want to look ahead and set a firm policy on how they want to review the lot splits. Commissioner Greenwald asked if it meets all requirements, do they not need to see it again. Commissioner Falk stated he would like to see everything in front of him before approving it in the future but he would move forward with this one. Acting Chairperson Daninger stated for this applicant Commissioner Falk would like to use option two and in the future look at option number 1. Commissioner Falk agreed and so did the rest of the Commission. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 3 Motion by Falk, seconded by Gamache, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the Lot Split (02 -10) to create two rural residential properties from property located at 16287 Makah Street NW. And that the applicant have all necessary paperwork in hand and to the City Council before the presentation and they must meet all requirements. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item could be before the Council at the November 6, 2002 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (02 -02) TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM R -1 SINGLE FAMIL YRURAL RESIDENTIAL TO R-4 SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RESIDENTIAL ON OUTLOT C OF WOODLAND ESTATES 2ND ADDITION FOR WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT ONPROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF WOODLAND ESTATES SECOND ADDITION. Mr. Bednarz explained the Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed rezoning to allow the Woodland Estates Third Addition Project to move forward. As with all rezonings, the City must meet one of the two following findings that are provided by state statute: 1. The original zoning was in error. 2. The character of the area or times and conditions have changed to such an extent to warrant the Rezoning. The City Council approved a Comprehensive Plan Amendment on July 2, 2002 to bring the subject property into the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). As a part of this approval the City Council acknowledged that times and conditions have changed to such an extent as to warrant the extension of utilities to this property. It is therefore appropriate to allow the property to be rezoned to R -4 Single Family Urban Residential to allow the proposed project to move forward. Commissioner Greenwald asked what the size of the property is. Mr. Bednarz stated it is a little over five acres. Commissioner Greenwald asked how many houses they would get out of it. Acting Chairperson Daninger stated it looked like thirteen lots. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Kirchoff, to open the public hearing at 7:18 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 7:18 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes— October 8, 2002 Page 4 Motion by Falk, seconded by Gamache, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the rezoning (02 -02) to change the zoning designation from R -1 Single Family Rural Residential to R -4 Single Family Urban Residential on Outlot C of Woodland Estates 2nd Addition for Woodland Development. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the November 6, 2002 City Council meeting. PUBLICHEARING: PRELIMINARYPLAT OFA SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWNAS WOODLAND ESTATES 3 RD ADDITIONFOR WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT ONPROPERTYLOCA TED WEST OF WOODLAND ESTATES SECOND ADDITION. Mr. Bednarz explained the Planning Commission is asked to review the preliminary plat of Woodland Estates 3 Addition. Mr. Bednarz discussed the preliminary plat with the Commission. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Larsen, to open the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Commissioner Gamache stated the plan shows two outlots and the variance is calling for one. Mr. Bednarz stated this is correct and the outlot B is a similar situation that would be connected to property to the north when extended. Commissioner Gamache asked if this would be included in the variance or would there be separate variances for each lot. Mr. Bednarz stated they could include both outlots in one variance. Commissioner Gamache stated on item five on the agenda regarding boulevard sodding, did they not already pass the new ordinance regarding the black dirt over the entire yard and sod to the front setback. Mr. Bednarz stated those requirements typically fall to the homeowner unless there is an agreement with the builder. The sodding of the boulevard is the developer's responsibility. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he wanted to make it clear that this is a temporary cul -de- sac because they have come up across this in the past and he liked how it was shown that way in the map. Mr. Bednarz stated it is the City's policy to put up a temporary sign indicating this. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 5 Commissioner Gamache asked if the parcel north of the parcel being discussed was still outside of the 2020 boundary. Mr. Bednarz stated this is correct. Commissioner Gamache stated it would appear that they would still be looking at rezoning this in the future if the Met Council agrees to that. Mr. Bednarz stated utilities would not be brought to the property until 2020 or beyond according to the sewer staging plan. Commissioner Falk asked what the length of the cul -de -sac need to be. Mr. Bednarz stated the typical maximum is 500 feet. Commissioner Falk asked if it were five hundred feet, would this road be half of this. Mr. Bednarz stated it is close but less than 500 feet. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if a temporary cul -de -sac is a dead end or is there room for emergency vehicles to turn around. Mr. Bednarz stated they provide eyebrows at the edges of the typical street for the temporary cul -de -sac and there is room to turn around. Motion by Larsen, seconded by Gamache, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the Preliminary Plat of a single - family residential development. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Commissioner Greenwald asked when the plat is approved if the boulevard sodding requirements are based on it being approved on what the ordinances say today or what they are when developed. Mr. Bednarz stated the sodding requirement is part of the development agreement and not part of the resolution that is approved with the plat. Commissioner Gamache asked if the Ordinance passed also include homeowners. Mr. Bednarz stated the homeowner would be responsible for the sod or seed in the front yard to the front property line and from the front property line to the curb is the developer's responsibility. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the November 6, 2002 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (02 -03) TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATIONFROMR -3 SINGLE FAMILYSUBURBANRESIDENTL4L TOR -4 SINGLE FAMILY URBANRESIDENT]AL ON PROPERTY LOCA TED AT 1703, 1663 AND 1653 ANDOVER BOULEVARD. Mr. Bednarz explained that this rezoning is necessary to allow the Foxburgh Crossing housing development to move forward. As with all rezonings, the City must meet one of the two following findings that are provided by state statute: 1. The original zoning was in error. 2. The character of the area or times and conditions have changed to such an extent to warrant the Rezoning. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 6 It is staff's position that time and conditions have changed such to warrant a rezoning due to the following: 1. The subject properties are located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) 2. The R -3 Single Family Suburban Zoning District was created to accommodate future urban development at the time when utilities became available. 3. Utilities are available to service the property. Commissioner Kirchoff asked how many units were in the original proposal. Mr. Bednarz stated it was thirty -five units. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Larsen, to open the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Kirchoff, to close the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Falk, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the rezoning (02 -03) to change the zoning designation from R -3 Single Family Suburban Residential to R -4 Single Family Urban Residential on property located at 1703, 1663 and 1653 Andover Boulevard. Motion carried on a 5- ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the October 15, 2002 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARYPLAT OFA SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWNAS FOXBOROUGH CROSSING FOR GRAND TETONDEVELOPMENT ONPROPERTYLOCA TED AT] 703,1663 AND 1653 ANDOVER BOULEVARD. Mr. Bednarz explained that the Planning Commission is asked to review the preliminary plat of Foxburgh Crossing containing 13 single - family lots. Mr. Bednarz reviewed the preliminary plat with the Commission. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Larsen, to open the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. There was no public input. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 7 Motion by Gamache, seconded by Kirchoff, to close the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. Commissioner Kirchoff stated that looking at some of the issues brought forward the last time this was before them, there was a lot of concerns from the neighborhood and he wanted to commend the developers for coming forward with this proposal because it seems to alleviate all the concerns in the neighbor. It has minimized what can be done and still makes some good use of this property. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he liked the looks of the plans. Commissioner Falk stated he agreed that they had a very good plan because the previous plan was very dense and this one is not. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Larsen, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the Preliminary Plat of a single family residential development to be known as Foxburgh Crossing for Grand Teton Development on property located at 1703, 1663 and 1653 Andover Boulevard. Motion carried on a 5- ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. Commissioner Greenwald stated it said somewhere that they would be required to move trees, if need be and he asked if the couldn't just take a tree down and replant new ones, because some of them were pretty large. Mr. Bednarz stated the developer has indicated they would try to move and save as many trees as possible but some larger trees would be removed. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the October 15, 2002 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: RESIDENTIAL SKETCH PLAN FOR A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWNAS WOODLAND CREEK GOLF COURSE VILLAS LOCATED AT 3200 SOUTH COON CREEK DRIVE. Mr. Bednarz explained that the Planning Commission is asked to review a sketch plan for a housing development containing 11 urban residential lots. Mr. Bednarz stated the proposed site is designated Urban Residential Low Density in the Comprehensive Plan which carries a maximum density of four units per acre. The proposed housing development would have a density of 3.96 units per acre. He went on to summarize the staff report and indicated the following: The property is located outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). A minor Comprehensive Plan Amendment will be necessary to allow the project to move forward. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 8 2. The property is currently zoned Single Family Urban Residential (R -4), which carries a minimum lot width of 80 feet and a minimum lot size of 11,400 square feet. The proposed project would require Planned Unit Development Review to reduce the lot sizes and setbacks from the typical R -4 standards. Commissioner Gamache asked if the needed to approve a variance for each lot because they are under square footage and lot width. Mr. Bednarz stated this is not the approach they would propose. If the Commission and Council is amenable to a smaller lot size, that could be achieved by allowing planned unit development review, which essentially would set different standards for this development. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Larsen, to open the public hearing at 7:39 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. Mr. Gary Thielen, 3324 South Coon Creek Drive stated there were going to be two homeowners properties affected by this. He stated he is concerned with the value of his property and according to the tax assessor; he would have at least a thirty thousand -value loss in his property if this development were to occur. He stated he has been a resident of Andover for fourteen years and he thought they had an Ordinance that stated no two houses by each other can have the same house front and is this one of the many waivers they would need to get in order to get this approved. He stated the road is on private property and he was told many times before that the City couldn't do any thing to improve the value of someone's property. Mr. Thielen stated they are also talking about putting a restaurant and bar in the clubhouse, which is next to a City park. He stated the lift station is a concern because it is a property value concern. He stated he talked to Mr. Bednarz last week regarding the letter he received regarding the hearing and Mr. Bednarz told him at that time that this was the first he had heard of the development and then at the meeting last night Mr. Bednarz told them the City had been working with them since April. Mr. Bednarz stated that what was indicated on the phone was when they received the proposal, they send out a public notice. Mr. Thielen asked how many projects is he working on now without the residents knowing. Mr. Bednarz stated he gets inquiries daily regarding a variety of properties. Mr. Thielen stated when Mr. Charen had his public hearing on getting permits to add to his house a couple of months ago, obviously they have been working on this since April, a lot of the permits had to be issued over the four month period and why was Mr. Charen not informed at that time of a proposed development going in behind them. Mr. Bednarz stated there was not consideration of a development at that time. Mr. Mike Charen, 3336 South Coon Creek Drive, stated he would be the other property directly affected by the rezoning and he also has a golf course lot and if this goes in, they will be directly cut off from the golf course. He is concerned about what this will do to the value of his property. Other concerns are the positioning of the lift station, which will Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 9 be less than 100 feet away from his property. He stated he has a lot of questions about the sewer being shallow and possibly backing up into his property. Another concern is the traffic increase around his house and disruption of wildlife. When he took his permit out, he would have appreciated a notice of this then. There are other areas on the club property to place the units. The size of the units would create a wall instead of a nice view from his property to the golf course. He stated he did understand development and their concerns in wanting to develop the property, but if this does move forward, he would like some help with property values instead of being cut off. Mr. Jonathan Jasper, 14197 Orchid Street, stated he is in one of the two houses located closest to the development and he has grave concerns regarding this plan. He stated the lots and houses are larger than average for this community and they have a lot invested in where they are living. All the lots are substandard and smaller in size and width than the neighborhood and they are incompatible with the neighborhood. He stated that adding eleven small townhouses that are identical and built on slabs, takes away from that development and takes away the value of development. He stated there is concern with the length of the cul -de -sac and the overall plan of the City. He stated that what they end up with is eleven smaller houses on eleven smaller lots that are going to directly affect the value of their development. Mr. Jasper stated that the meeting last night was very informative and he appreciated it. He stated there were some specific concerns that he raised last night and one was neighbors were concerned about values. He stated he researched the cost of different golf courses with townhomes on them. He stated that townhomes on Majestic Oaks sells for $69 a square foot and if a basement were not included would sell for $139 a square foot on a better golf course. He stated he was told that this would enhance the value of the neighborhood because these would be high -end townhouses but he did not know how they could charge more for their townhouses than a better golf course could. He stated that based on his research today, they cannot meet the evaluations. He stated he did not buy his house only to have a development built by him on the golf course. He stated this was not the intention of the original developer on this property. Mr. Ron Vanelli, developer along with Mike Olsen stated they have been in the Golf Course and restaurant business since 1989. He stated that what they are trying to do with Woodland Creek Golf Course is to upgrade and improve the course. He stated they purchased the property this spring and he did not know what the development that was already there was like. He stated their long -term goal is to create a restaurant facility on this property. He stated there is expense involved with this because the original facility was never set up to be used as a restaurant/club house. He stated they wanted to make this a community beacon the community can look up to. He stated that after they were involved for a while, they started to look at the possibilities of upgrading the property and one option that came up was the possibility to put some houses on the golf course. He stated they have gone to considerable expense with surveying. He stated these are not townhomes; they are single - family villa style homes, directed at retired persons. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 10 Acting Chairperson Daninger left the meeting at 8:00 p.m. Commissioner Kirchoff stepped in as Acting Chairperson for the rest of the meeting. Mr. Brian Johnson, Hawkins & Anderson, stated the Villas are laid out on the north edge of the golf course and the entrance that is used for the golf course would be improved and the street installed would be a City designed and installed project and so would the utilities under a public improvement project. The parking lot for the golf course will be improved along with the improvements to the roadway. The utilities, sanitary sewer and water way would hook up in the northeast corner of the existing city park and would require a lift station. He stated the City would design the lift station and install it. The design of the development is very compact for detached townhomes. The setbacks are ten feet to the living areas, six foot to the garage areas, similar to other developments in the City. The public street length is approximately 700 feet. He stated its features would be an association maintained development and the private property would be maintained by the association and there would be standards for building materials and treatments for the exteriors and treatments of the landscaping. He stated the drainage in the City park would be maintained by a pipe system and ponding which would be located to the south side of the project to control the flood elevations and increased runoff from this site. Commissioner Greenwald asked for this development to work out, would they need it to be eleven townhomes. He also asked if the street needed to be seven hundred feet in length and where would the lift station be situated. Mr. Johnson stated with the design it would be a single loaded street and there would be eleven units on the street. He stated the city park would never be developed, as far as he knew. The utility costs for this project and the addition of a lift station are unique to this site. In regards to the lift station and speaking to Mr. Haas, if a lift station were placed on the west side, it could be a permanent lift station and a temporary lift station placed on the east side, depending on future decisions by the City Council. Mr. Vanelli stated the driving number is the utilities. Ms. Sharon Harris - Vanelli, Edina Realty, stated in regards to the values of these homes, they would be looking at a unique buyer for these homes. She stated these homes would have a lot of nice amenities which would dictate a little higher price and there would only be a few of them so this would bring the demand up. She stated she did some research on townhomes around other golf courses in the area and they range from $275 to $325 in price. She stated she thought these homes would be very saleable. Commissioner Gamache asked if the homes that have sold are twenty -four foot on slab townhomes. Ms. Harris - Vanelli stated most are slab on grade with no basements and most sold have only a two -car garage where these have three car garages. Commissioner Greenwald asked if they have done any valuation studies within the area. Ms. Harris - Vanelli stated that with the homes around the golf course, there is nothing like Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 11 this there so it is difficult to find a comparable for this but she thought the market would be there for them. Commissioner Greenwald stated one of the residents that came up would lose $30,000 value in property because no longer would his lot be on the golf course. Ms. Harris - Vanelli stated she did not know, but it is a possibility. Commissioner Larsen asked Ms. Harris - Vanelli if she had done some comparables to Majestic Oaks or other golf courses. Ms. Harris - Vanelli stated she had done some comparables on Majestic Oaks and other areas in the area such as Ham Lake. Mr. Byron Westlund, Woodland Development Corporation, stated the cost per square foot is not what Mr. Jasper indicated, he stated they are well over $100 per square foot and does not include the lot. He stated that Mr. Bednarz has done an excellent job and he called on him many times for advise on properties. He stated he is not for or against the development. He stated that the residents have issues about property values but the golf course owner also has the right to use their property as they see fit. Mr. Mike Olsen, part owner of the golf course, stated when they designed this unit, they took into consideration everything around the golf course. They tried to design a unit that would be compatible with all the houses around the golf course. He showed a sketch of the units proposed. He stated that with a well- designed landscape plan for all the units, it will not look like a row of villas and they feel this would be a nice addition to the community. Commissioner Greenwald asked if this design is like the ones they developed in Forest Lake. Mr. Olsen stated it is not and this plan is original to this development. Commissioner Larsen asked where the proposed restaurant would be in respect to the plan. Mr. Olsen stated it would remain in the same clubhouse and they are looking at remodeling. Commissioner Greenwald stated he liked the looks of the units. Mr. Vanelli stated when they developed this, they did not look at the houses that were affected by this and they would like to work with the people in the development. Ms. Vicky Larsen, 14229 Quay Street NW, stated she had some comments and one regarding property value. She stated they just refinanced their home and the appraiser told them that they did not need the full appraised amount because if they would sell the house, they would not have a problem because they have a lot on the golf course. She stated she did not understand why the City would make so many waivers to the current ordinances to allow this project. She stated that what she was told the maintenance building would be moved and there would be a service road put in and she wanted to know where it would go. Mr. Olsen stated it is proposed for the far west part of the property. He stated they have a twenty -foot easement coming out of the fifth addition of Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 12 Woodland Development and they would propose to make a cart path for the workers to get to work because the maintenance building would be put in the far northwest corner of the property. Commissioner Gamache asked if this road was part of the proposal. Mr. Bednarz stated it was not but it would force the utility building to move because that is where the proposed structures are to go. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if the road would be tied into any outside streets. Mr. Olsen stated they would have to come off of 142 and it is already set up for that. Ms. Larsen stated that this land is not all swamp and wetland because her house is back there. Ms. Larsen stated this is not a large golf course in that area and the proposed houses would be close to the fairway and she did not know if there were any regulations regarding this. She stated there is value in the fact that you live on the golf course and she does not like the idea of a service road butting up to their property and she does not like all the variances proposed for the development of the houses. Commissioner Kirchoff stated this is a Planned Unit Development and with a Planned Unit Development, there is some give and take and the City has some authority with a PUD. Mr. Bednarz stated planned unit development is intended to get a better product than if they used a straight zoning district. He stated the City does have the ability to require amenities or landscaping or different features through the PUD that they would not have with a straight zoning district. He stated the purpose of Planned Unit Development is not to abuse the lot sizes to cram units in. Mr. Jasper stated the access road, the cart path is where all the neighborhood storm drains drain and his concerns are the golf course floods two to three times a year already and there will be a road with additional traffic coming off of 142 Avenue. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 8:34 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Daninger and Squires) vote. Commissioner Gamache asked what is the area zoned. Mr. Bednarz stated the current zoning is R -4. Commissioner Gamache asked if there is a variance needed for the service road. Mr. Bednarz stated they would need to get a building permit to reconstruct the building in a different area. He stated the City with a Commercial Site Plan review of the project could put conditions or require screening. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if the entire golf course zoned R -4. Mr. Bednarz stated this is correct. Commissioner Kirchoff stated in theory the entire golf course could be residential and turned into a housing development. Mr. Bednarz stated most of the golf course is in the flood plain so most of it could not be built upon. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 13 Commissioner Greenwald stated he would never approve this based on the fact that road is over seven hundred feet and also because it is affecting residents values on their homes. He stated he would suggest they move the driveway east and he would recommend the developer look at two things, a shorter cul -de -sac and if there was any way to work with Mr. Bednarz so they could change the entrance and move it down a hundred feet. Commissioner Gamache stated as a golfer he hates the idea of having houses on a golf course but they do have the right to develop their property and he sympathizes with the residents. Commissioner Kirchoff stated the precedent has been set with the longer cul -de -sacs approved previously. Commissioner Greenwald stated that he did not think they ever approved a longer cul -de -sac when it affected the surrounding properties so much. He stated to approve a variance of that, knowing that they are affecting two citizens is tough. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he would agree with Commissioner Gamache on this. Commissioner Larsen asked as a citizen what would be their legal rights against the City. Commissioner Gamache stated if the plan were approved down the road, is there any legal recourse the citizens have against the City. Mr. Bednarz stated it would be a question for the City Attorney. Commissioner Falk asked if they wanted to table this for more information. He stated he wanted to recommend they remove one structure to get the lots back to what they should be in an R -4 development. Commissioner Kirchoff stated that if they were going down to ten units, there would not be a PUD. Commissioner Greenwald asked if it increases the value to Andover by putting the homes in. Commissioner Gamache stated that it would bring more taxes into the City. Commissioner Kirchoff stated it could also bring in more revenue by having the restaurant in the clubhouse and may be a plus to the neighborhood. Commissioner Greenwald stated if it did not affect the residents around this, he would not have a problem with approving this. Commissioner Larsen stated she agreed and would like to have the development moved a little closer to the clubhouse. Commissioner Gamache asked if by taking one home out of the plan, could they meet the R -4 requirements. Mr. Bednarz stated they likely could with a variance to cul -de -sac length. Commissioner Gamache asked if it would also take away the PUD on the property. Mr. Bednarz stated there would be no reason to pursue PUD review if the development were required to meet the R -4 standards. He stated that staff believes the lot size is appropriate for this type of development and that although the developer has used that reduced lot size to shoehorn in another unit, one unit could be removed and the space gained could be used to create a better development Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 14 Commissioner Kirchoff asked how long the golf course has been there. It was noted the course has been there fourteen years. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Falk, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the Residential Sketch Plan for a single family development to be known as Woodland Creek Golf Course Villas located at 3200 South Coon Creek Drive and to remove a house from sketch plan and have the developer make the lots conform under the R -4 zoning district. Motion failed with 2 -ayes ( Gamache, Falk), 3 -nays (Greenwald, Larsen, Kirchoff), 2- absent (Daninger and Squires) vote. Commissioner Kirchoff stated that by eliminating a lot, they could still be under the PUD. Commissioner Gamache stated he would like the developer to make the lots eighty feet wide and the only variance needed would be for the longer cul -de -sac. Mr. Thielen stated he is sitting in a house that cannot be sold and if the development happens, he may as well burn it down because he will be economically bankrupt if this goes through. Commissioner Falk asked Mr. Thielen to sit down. Commissioner Gamache stated what his informal advisement would be is to see if there is anything that can be done to make this work without affecting the two residents. Commissioner Larsen agreed. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the November 6, 2002 City Council meeting. DISCUSSION. • METROPOLITAN COUNCIL'S "DRAFT "2030 BLUEPRINT. Mr. Bednarz stated the Metropolitan Council has prepared a "Draft" 2030 Blueprint for growth and development for the Twin Cities. The document has major policy areas that are being revised including: • Allocation of Forecasted Growth • MUSA Policy • Rural Growth Policies • Housing • Natural Resource Protection • Implementations/Benchmarks Mr. Bednarz discussed the policy areas that were summarized in the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) summary. OTHER BUSINESS. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 15 There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Daninger and Squires) vote. Respectfully Submitted, Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. • � CITY of ANDOVER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING — OCTOBER 8, 2002 The Regular Bi- Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Acting Chairperson Dean Daninger on October 8, 2002, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Commissioners Tim Kirchoff, Douglas Falk, Tony Gamache, Rex Greenwald, Dean Daninger and Paula Larsen. Commissioners absent: Chairperson Jay Squires. Also present: City Planner, Courtney Bednarz . Others APPROVAL OFM]NUTES. September 24, 2002 Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 0- present, 1- absent vote. 0 PUBLIC HEARING.- LOT SPLIT (02 -10) TO CREATE TWO RURAL RESIDENTL9L PROPERTIES FROM PROPER TY L OCA TED AT 16287 MA.KAH STREET NW FOR SANDRA AND SCHUYLER WALLACE. Mr. Bednarz explained that the applicant is seeking approval of a proposal to divide the subject property into two rural residential lots. An existing house on the western half of the property will remain and one new lot will be created on the eastern half. Mr. Bednarz discussed the survey of the proposed lot split with the Commission. Mr. Bednarz stated in an attempt to minimize any costs before the lot split has been approved, the applicant has not submitted all of the necessary materials_ The materials to be included include 3- signed original copies of the survey, which show: L Placement of the new property line. 2. A 10 -foot easement around the perimeter of both properties. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 1W Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 2 3. Placement of any new structures, which conform to all City building and • zoning, codes. 4. Locations for two 5,000 square foot (10,000 square foot total) septic areas. 5. Legal descriptions of the new properties. The Committee has three options: 1. Require the applicant to submit all necessary materials before the Commission reviews the application. 2. Recommend approval of the lot split, but require the applicant submit all necessary materials before this proceeds to the City Council. 3. Recommend approval of the lot split, but require the applicant submit all necessary materials before the lot split is recorded with Anoka County. Commissioner Greenwald asked what they were approving. Acting Chairperson Daninger stated they would be making a recommendation of approval or denial of the lot split based on the survey. Commissioner Greenwald asked if this would be coming back to them. Mr. Bednarz stated it depended on the decision made in their recommendation. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Falk, to open the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1 - absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Kirchof� seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Commissioner Gamache stated per the Ordinance the only problem with this is that there is not a survey. Mr. Bednarz stated this is correct and per the staff review it seems the lot can hold all the requirements, but they need the survey to prove this. Commissioner Greenwald stated he could see why the owner would want to do this because they could put a lot of expense into it and not get approved. Mr. Bednarz stated that is part of the reason because it is expensive but they do want to look ahead and set a firm policy on how they want to review the lot splits. Commissioner Greenwald asked if it meets all requirements, do they not need to see it again. Commissioner Falk stated he would like to see everything in front of him before approving it in the future but he would move forward with this one. Acting Chairperson Daninger stated for this applicant Commissioner Falk would like to use option two and in the future look at option number 1. Commissioner Falk agreed and so did the rest of the Commission. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 3 • Motion by Falk, seconded by Gamache, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the Lot Split (02 -10) to create two rural residential properties from property located at 16287 Makah Street NW. And that the applicant have all necessary paperwork in hand and to the City Council before the presentation and they must meet all requirements. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item could be before the Council at the November 6, 2002 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING. REZONING (02 -02) TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNA TION FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILYRURAL RESIDENTIAL TO R-4 SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RESIDENTLAL ON OUTLOT C OF WOODLAND ESTATES 2 ND ADDITION FOR WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF WOODLAND ESTATES SECOND ADDITION. Mr. Bednarz explained the Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed rezoning to allow the Woodland Estates Third Addition Project to move forward. As with all rezonings, the City must meet one of the two following findings that are provided by state statute: 1. The original zoning was in error. 2. The character of the area or times and conditions have changed to such an extent to warrant the Rezoning. The City Council approved a Comprehensive Plan Amendment on July 2, 2002 to bring the subject property into the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). As a part of this approval the City Council acknowledged that times and conditions have changed to such an extent as to warrant the extension of utilities to this property. It is therefore appropriate to allow the property to be rezoned to R-4 Single Family Urban Residential to allow the proposed project to move forward. Commissioner Greenwald asked what the size of the property is. Mr. Bednarz stated it is a little over five acres. Commissioner Greenwald asked how many houses they would get out of it. Acting Chairperson Daninger stated it looked like thirteen lots. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Kirchoff, to open the public hearing at 7:18 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 7:18 p.m. . Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 4 Motion by Falk, seconded by Gamache, to recommend to the City Council approval of • Resolution No. , approving the rezoning (02 -02) to change the zoning designation from R -1 Single Family Rural Residential to R-4 Single Family Urban Residential on Outlot C of Woodland Estates 2 " Addition for Woodland Development. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the November 6, 2002 City Council meeting. PUBLIC IIEARING: PRELIMINARYPLAT OFA SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE ANOWNAS WOODLAND ESTATES 3 RD ADDITION FOR WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTYLOCATED WEST OF WOODLAND ESTATES SECOND ADDITION. Mr. Bednarz explained the Planning Commission is asked to review the preliminary plat of Woodland Estates P Addition. Mr. Bednarz discussed the preliminary plat with the Commission. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Larsen, to open the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. Motion carved on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Commissioner Gamache stated the plan shows two outlots and the variance is calling for one. Mr. Bednarz stated this is correct and the outlot B is a similar situation that would be connected to property to the north when extended. Commissioner Gamache asked if this would be included in the variance or would there be separate variances for each lot. Mr. Bednarz stated they could include both outlots in one variance. Commissioner Gamache stated on item five on the agenda regarding boulevard sodding, did they not already pass the new ordinance regarding the black dirt over the entire yard and sod to the front setback. Mr. Bednarz stated those requirements typically fall to the homeowner unless there is an agreement with the builder. The sodding of the boulevard is the developer's responsibility. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he wanted to make it clear that this is a temporary cul -de- sac because they have come up across this in the past and he liked how it was shown that way in the map. Mr. Bednarz stated it is the City's policy to put up a temporary sign indicating this. • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 5 • Commissioner Gamache asked if the parcel north of the parcel being discussed was still outside of the 2020 boundary. Mr. Bednarz stated this is correct. Commissioner Gamache stated it would appear that they would still be looking at rezoning this in the future if the Met Council agrees to that Mr. Bednarz stated utilities would not be brought to the property until 2020 or beyond according to the sewer staging plan. Commissioner Falk asked what the length of the cul-de -sac need to be. Mr. Bednarz stated the typical maximum is 500 feet. Commissioner Falk asked if it were five hundred feet, would this road be half of this. Mr. Bednarz stated it is close but less than 500 feet. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if a temporary cul -de -sac is a dead end or is there room for emergency vehicles to turn around. Mr. Bednarz stated they provide eyebrows at the edges of the typical street for the temporary cul -de -sac and there is room to turn around. Motion by Larsen, seconded by Gamache, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the Preliminary Plat of a single - family residential development. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Commissioner Greenwald asked when the plat is approved if the boulevard sodding requirements are based on it being approved on what the ordinances say today or what they are when developed. Mr. Bednarz stated the sodding requirement is part of the development agreement and not part of the resolution that is approved with the plat. • Commissioner Gamache asked if the Ordinance passed also include homeowners. Mr. Bednarz stated the homeowner would be responsible for the sod or seed in the front yard to the front property line and from the front property line to the curb is the developer's responsibility. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the November 6, 2002 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (02 -03) TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATIONFROMR 3SINGLEFAMILYSUBURBANRESIDENTLgL TOR-4 SINGLEFAMILY URBANRESLOENTLIL ONPROPERTYLOCATEDAT 1703, 1663 AND 1653 ANDOVER BOULEVARD. Mr. Bednarz explained that this rezoning is necessary to allow the Foxburgh Crossing housing development to move forward. As with all rezonings, the City must meet one of the two following findings that are provided by state statute: 1. The original zoning was in error. 2. The character of the area or times and conditions have changed to such an extent to warrant the Rezoning. • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 6 It is star s position that time and conditions have changed such to warrant a rezoning due • to the following: 1. The subject properties are located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) 2. The R -3 Single Family Suburban Zoning District was created to accommodate future urban development at the time when utilities became available. 3. Utilities are available to service the property. Commissioner Kirchoff asked how many units were in the original proposal. Mr. Bednarz stated it was thirty -five units. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Larsen, to open the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Kirchoff, to close the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Falk, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the rezoning (02 -03) to change the zoning designation from R -3 Single Family Suburban Residential to R-4 Single Family Urban Residential on • properly located at 1703, 1663 and 1653 Andover Boulevard. Motion carried on a 5- ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the October 15, 2002 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARYPLAT OFA SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTMgL DEVELOPMENT TO BE SNOWNAS FOXBOROUGH CROSSING FOR GRAND TETON DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1703,1663 AND 1653 ANDOVER BOULEVARD. Mr. Bednarz explained that the Planning Commission is asked to review the preliminary plat of Foxburgh Crossing containing 13 single - family lots. Mr. Bednarz reviewed the preliminary plat with the Commission. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Larsen, to open the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), I- absent vote. There was no public input • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 7 • Motion by Gamache, seconded by Kirchoff, to close the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. Commissioner Kirchoff stated that looking at some of the issues brought forward the last time this was before them, there was a lot of concerns from the neighborhood and he wanted to commend the developers for coming forward with this proposal because it seems to alleviate all the concerns in the neighbor. It has minimized can be done and still makes some good use of this property. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he liked the looks of the plans. Commissioner Falk stated he agreed that they had a very good plan because the previous plan was very dense and this one is not Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Larsen, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the Preliminary Plat of a single family residential development to be known as Foxburgh Crossing for Grand Teton Development on property located at 1703, 1663 and 1653 Andover Boulevard. Motion carried on a 5- ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. Commissioner Greenwald stated it said somewhere that they would be required to move trees, if need be and he asked if the couldn't just take a tree down and replant new ones, . because some of them were pretty large. Mr. Bednarz stated the developer has indicated they would try to move and save as many trees as possible but some larger trees would be removed. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the October 15, 2002 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: RESIDENTIAL SKETCHPLAN FOR A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWNAS WOODLAND CREEK GOLF COURSE VILLAS LOCATED AT 3200 SOUTH COON CREEKDRIVE Mr. Bednarz explained that the Planning Commission is asked to review a sketch plan for a housing development containing 11 urban residential lots. Mr. Bednarz stated the proposed site is designated Urban Residential Low Density in the Comprehensive Plan which carries a maximum density of four units per acre. The proposed housing development would have a density of 3.96 units per acre. He went on to summarize the staff report and indicated the following: 1. The property is located outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). A minor Comprehensive Plan Amendment will be necessary to allow the project to move forward. Cl Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 8 2. The property is currently zoned Single Family Urban Residential (R-4), which • carries a minimum lot width of 80 feet and a minimum lot size of 11,400 square feet. The proposed project would require Planned Unit Development Review to reduce the lot sizes and setbacks from the typical R-4 standards. Commissioner Gamache asked if the needed to approve a variance for each lot because they are under square footage and lot width. Mr. Bednarz stated this is not the approach they would propose. If the Commission and Council is amenable to a smaller lot size, that could be achieved by allowing planned unit development review, which essentially would set different standards for this development. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Larsen, to open the public hearing at 7:39 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 1 -nays (Daninger), 1- absent vote. Mr. Gary Thielen, 3324 South Coon Creek Drive stated there were going to be two homeowners properties affected by this. He stated he is concerned with the value of his property and according to the tax assessor, he would have at least a thirty thousand -value loss in his property if this development were to occur. He stated he has been a resident of Andover for fourteen years and he thought they had an Ordinance that stated no two houses by each other can have the same house front and is this one of the many waivers they would need to get in order to get this approved. He stated the road is on private property and he was told many times before that the City couldn't do any thing to • improve the value of someone's property. Mr. Thielen stated they are also talking about putting a restaurant and bar in the clubhouse, which is next to a City park. He stated the lift station is a concern because it is a property value concern. He stated he talked to Mr. Bednarz last week regarding the letter he received regarding the hearing and Mr. Bednarz told him at that time that this was the first he had heard of the development and then at the meeting last night W. Bednarz told them the City had been working with them since April. Mr. Bednarz stated that what was indicated on the phone was when they received the proposal, they send out a public notice. Mr. Thielen asked how many projects is he working on now without the residents knowing. Mr. Bednarz stated he gets inquiries daily regarding a variety of properties. Mr. Thielen stated when Mr. Charen had his public hearing on getting permits to add to his house a couple of months ago, obviously they have been working on this since April, a lot of the permits had to be issued over the four month period and why was Mr. Charen not informed at that time of a proposed development going in behind them. Mr. Bednarz stated there was not consideration of a development at that time. Mr. Mike Charen, 3336 South Coon Creek Drive, stated he would be the other property directly affected by the rezoning and he also has a golf course lot and if this goes in, they will be directly cut off from the golf course. He is concerned about what this will do to • the value of his property. Other concerns are the positioning of the lift station, which will ' Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 9 • be less than 100 feet away from his property. He stated he has a lot of questions about the sewer being shallow and possibly backing up into his property. Another concern is the traffic increase around his house and disruption of wildlife. When he took his permit out, he would have appreciated a notice of this then. There are other areas on the club property to place the units. The size of the units would create a wall instead of a nice view from his property to the golf course. He stated he did understand development and their concerns in wanting to develop the property, but if this does move forward, he would like some help with property values instead of being cut off. Mr. Jonathan Jasper, 14197 Orchid Street, stated he is in one of the two houses located closest to the development and he has grave concerns regarding this plan. He stated the lots and houses are larger than average for this community and they have a lot invested in where they are living. All the lots are substandard and smaller in size and width than the neighborhood and they are incompatible with the neighborhood. He stated that adding eleven small townhouses that are identical and built on slabs, takes away from that development and takes away the value of development. He stated there is concern with the length of the cul -de -sac and the overall plan of the City. He stated that what they end up with is eleven smaller houses on eleven smaller lots that are going to directly affect the value of their development. Mr. Jasper stated that the meeting last night was very informative and he appreciated it. He stated there were some specific concerns that he raised last night and one was • neighbors were concerned about values. He stated he researched the cost of different golf courses with townhomes on them. He stated that townhomes on Majestic Oaks sells for $69 a square foot and if a basement were not included would sell for $139 a square foot on a better golf course. He stated he was told that this would enhance the value of the neighborhood because these would be high-end townhouses but he did not know how th ey could charge more for their townhouses than a better golf course could. He stated that based on his research today, they cannot meet the evaluations. He stated he did not buy his house only to have a development built by him on the golf course. He stated this was not the intention of the original developer on this property. Mr. Ron Vanelli, developer along with Mike Olsen stated they have been in the Golf Course and restaurant business since 1989. He stated that what they are trying to do with Woodland Creek Golf Course is to upgrade and improve the course. He stated they purchased the property this spring and he did not know what the development that was already there was like. He stated their long -term goal is to create a restaurant facility on this property. He stated there is expense involved with this because the original facility was never set up to be used as a restaurant/club house. He stated they wanted to make this a community beacon the community can look up to. He stated that after they were involved for a while, they started to look at the possibilities of upgrading the property and one option that came up was the possibility to put some houses on the golf course. He stated they have gone to considerable expense with surveying. He stated these are not • townhomes; they are single - family villa style homes, directed at retired persons. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 10 It Acting Chairperson Da left the meeting at 8:00 p.m. Commissioner Kirchoff • stepped in as Acting Chairperson for the rest of the meeting. Mr. Brian Johnson, Hawkins & Anderson, stated the Villas are laid out on the north edge of the golf course and the entrance that is used for the golf course would be improved and the street installed would be a City designed and installed project and so would the utilities under a public improvement project. The parking lot for the golf course will be improved along with the improvements to the roadway. The utilities, sanitary sewer and water way would hook up in the northeast corner of the existing city park and would require a lift station. He stated the City would design the lift station and install it. The design of the development is very compact for detached townhomes. The setbacks are ten feet to the living areas, six foot to the garage areas, similar to other developments in the City. The public street length is approximately 700 feet. He stated its features would be an association maintained development and the private property would be maintained by the association and there would be standards for building materials and treatments for the exteriors and treatments of the landscaping. He stated the drainage in the City park would be maintained by a pipe system and ponding which would be located to the south side of the project to control the flood elevations and increased runoff from this site. Commissioner Greenwald asked for this development to work out, would they need it to be eleven townhomes. He also asked if the street needed to be seven hundred feet in length and where would the lift station be situated. Mr. Johnson stated with the design it • would be a single loaded street and there would be eleven units on the street. He stated the city park would never be developed, as far as he knew. The utility costs for this project and the addition of a lift station are unique to this site. In regards to the lift station and speaking to Mr. Haas, if a lift station were placed on the west side, it could be a permanent lift station and a temporary lift station placed on the east side, depending on future decisions by the City Council. Mr. Vanelli stated the driving number is the utilities. Ms. Sharon Harris - Vanelli, Edina Realty, stated in regards to the values of these homes, they would be looking at a unique buyer for these homes. She stated these homes would have a lot of nice amenities which would dictate a little higher price and there would only be a few of them so this would bring the demand up. She stated she did some research on townhomes around other golf courses in the area and they range from $275 to $325 in price. She stated she thought these homes would be very saleable. Commissioner Gamache asked if the homes that have sold are twenty -four foot on slab townhomes. Ms. Harris - Vanelli stated most are slab on grade with no basements and most sold have only a two -car garage where these have three car garages. Commissioner Greenwald asked if they have done any valuation studies within the area Ms. Hams- Vanelli stated that with the homes around the golf course, there is nothing like • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 11 • this there so it is difficult to find a comparable for this but she thought the market would be there for them. Commissioner Greenwald stated one of the residents that came up would lose $30,000 value in property because no longer would his lot be on the golf course. Ms. Harris - Vanelli stated she did not know, but it is a possibility. Commissioner Larsen asked Ms. Harris -Vanelli if she had done some comparables to Majestic Oaks or other golf courses. Ms. Hams -Vanelli stated she had done some comparables on Majestic Oaks and other areas in the area such as Ham Lake. Mr. Byron Westlund, Woodland Development Corporation, stated the cost per square foot is not what Mr. Jasper indicated, he stated they are well over $100 per square foot and does not include the lot. He stated that Mr. Bednarz has done an excellent job and he called on him many times for advise on properties. He stated he is not for or against the development. He stated that the residents have issues about property values but the golf course owner also has the right to use their property as they see fit. Mr. Mike Olsen, part owner of the golf course, stated when they designed this unit, they took into consideration everything around the golf course. They tried to design a unit that would be compatible with all the houses around the golf course. He showed a sketch of • the units proposed. He stated that with a well- designed landscape plan for all the units, it will not look like a row of villas and they feel this would be a nice addition to the community. Commissioner Greenwald asked if this design is like the ones they developed in Forest Lake. Mr. Olsen stated it is not and this plan is original to this development. Commissioner Larsen asked where the proposed restaurant would be in respect to the plan. Mr. Olsen stated it would remain in the same clubhouse and they are looking at remodeling. Commissioner Greenwald stated he liked the looks of the units. Mr. Vanelli stated when they developed this, they did not look at the houses that were affected by this and they would like to work with the people in the development. Ms. Vicky Larsen, 14229 Quay Street NW, stated she had some comments and one regarding property value. She stated they just refinanced their home and the appraiser told them that they did not need the full appraised amount because if they would sell the house, they would not have a problem because they have a lot on the golf course. She stated she did not understand why the City would make so many waivers to the current ordinances to allow this project. She stated that what she was told the maintenance building would be moved and there would be a service road put in and she wanted to know where it would go. Mr. Olsen stated it is proposed for the far west part of the property. He stated they have a twenty-foot easement coming out of the fifth addition of Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 12 Woodland Development and they would propose to make a cart path for the workers to i get to work because the maintenance building would be put in the far northwest comer of the property. Commissioner Gamache asked if this road was part of the proposal. Mr. Bednarz stated it was not but it would force the utility building to move because that is where the proposed structures are to go. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if the road would be tied into any outside streets. Mr. Olsen stated they would have to come off of 142 and it is already set up for that Ms. Larsen stated that this land is not all swamp and wetland because her house is back there. Ms. Larsen stated this is not a large golf course in that area and the proposed houses would be close to the fairway and she did not know if there were any regulations regarding this. She stated there is value in the fact that you live on the golf course and she does not like the idea of a service road butting up to their property and she does not like all the variances proposed for the development of the houses. Commissioner Kirchoff stated this is a Planned Unit Development and with a Planned Unit Development, there is some give and take and the City has some authority with a PUD. Mr. Bednarz stated planned unit development is intended to get a better product than if they used a straight zoning district. He stated the City does have the ability to . require amenities or landscaping or different features through the PUD that they would not have with a straight zoning district He stated the purpose of Planned Unit Development is not to abuse the lot sizes to cram units in. Mr. Jasper stated the access road, the cart path is where all the neighborhood storm drains drain and his concerns are the golf course floods two to three times a year already and there will be a road with additional traffic coming off of 142 Avenue. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 8:34 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Daninger and Squires) vote. Commissioner Gamache asked what is the area zoned. Mr. Bednarz stated the current zoning is R-4. Commissioner Gamache asked if there is a variance needed for the service road. Mr. Bednarz stated they would need to get a building permit to reconstruct the building in a different area. He stated the City with a Commercial Site Plan review of the project could put conditions or require screening. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if the entire golf course zoned R-4. Mr. Bednarz stated this is correct Commissioner Kirchoff stated in theory the entire golf course could be residential and turned into a housing development Mr. Bednarz stated most of the golf course is in the flood plain so most of it could not be built upon. U Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 13 • Commissioner Greenwald stated he would never approve this based on the fact that road is over seven hundred feet and also because it is affecting residents values on their homes. He stated he would suggest they move the driveway east and he would recommend the developer look at two things, a shorter cul-de -sac and if there was any way to work with W. Bednarz so they could change the entrance and move it down a hundred feet. Commissioner Gamache stated as a golfer he hates the idea of having houses on a golf course but they do have the right to develop their property and he sympathizes with the residents. Commissioner Kirchoff stated the precedent has been set with the longer cul-de -sacs approved previously. Commissioner Greenwald stated that he did not think they ever approved a longer cul-de -sac when it affected the surrounding properties so much. He stated to approve a variance of that, knowing that they are affecting two citizens is tough. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he would agree with Commissioner Gamache on this. Commissioner Larsen asked as a citizen what would be their legal rights against the City. Commissioner Gamache stated if the plan were approved down the road, is there any legal recourse the citizens have against the City. Mr. Bednarz stated it would be a question for the City Attorney. • Commissioner Falk asked if they wanted to table this for more information. He stated he wanted to recommend they remove one structure to get the lots back to what they should be in an R-4 development. Commissioner Kirchoff stated that if they were going down to ten units, there would not be a PUD. Commissioner Greenwald asked if it increases the value to Andover by putting the homes in. Commissioner Gamache stated that it would bring more taxes into the City. Commissioner Kirchoff stated it could also bring in more revenue by having the restaurant in the clubhouse and may be a plus to the neighborhood. Commissioner Greenwald stated if it did not affect the residents around this, he would not have a problem with approving this. Commissioner Larsen stated she agreed and would like to have the development moved a little closer to the clubhouse. Commissioner Gamache asked if by taking one home out of the plan, could they meet the R-4 requirements. Mr. Bednarz stated they likely could with a variance to cul -de -sac length. Commissioner Gamache asked if it would also take away the PUD on the property. Mr. Bednarz stated there would be no reason to pursue PUD review if the development were required to meet the R-4 standards. He stated that staff believes the lot size is appropriate for this type of development and that although the developer has used that reduced lot size to shoehorn in another unit, one unit could be removed and the space • gained could be used to create a better development Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —October 8, 2002 Page 14 Commissioner Kirchoff asked how long the golf course has been there. It was noted the course has been there fourteen years. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Falk, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the Residential Sketch Plan for a single family development to be known as Woodland Creek Golf Course Villas located at 3200 South Coon Creek Drive and to remove a house from sketch plan and have the developer make the lots conform under the R-4 zoning district. Motion failed with 2 -ayes ( Gamache, Falk), 3 -nays (Greenwald, Larsen, Kirchoft), 2- absent (Daninger and Squires) vote. Commissioner Kirchoff stated that by eliminating a lot, they could still be under the PUD. Commissioner Gamache stated he would like the developer to make the lots eighty feet wide and the only variance needed would be for the longer cul-de -sac. Mr. Thielen stated he is sitting in a house that cannot be sold and if the development happens, he may as well burn it down because he will be economically bankrupt if this goes through. Commissioner Falk asked Mr. Thielen to sit down. Commissioner Gamache stated what his informal advisement would be is to see if there is anything that can be done to make this work without affecting the two residents. Commissioner Larsen agreed. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the November 6, 2002 • City Council meeting. DISCUSSION: METROPOLITAN COUNCIL'S "DRAFT" 2030 BLUEPRINT. Mr. Bednarz stated the Metropolitan Council has prepared a "Draft" 2030 Blueprint for growth and development for the Twin Cities. The document has major policy areas that are being revised including: • Allocation of Forecasted Growth • MUSA Policy • Rural Growth Policies • Housing • Natural Resource Protection • hnplementationsBenchmarks Mr. Bednarz discussed the policy areas that were summarized in the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) summary. OTHER BUSINESS • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — October 8, 2002 Page 15 • There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to adjoum the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Daninger and Squires) vote. Respectfully Submitted, Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary Timesaver Q ff Site Secretarial, Inc. 0 n LJ r • CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CLANDOVER.MN.US TO: Planning and Zoning Commission Members FROM: D. Tyler Mckay, Associate Planner P /" r SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (02 -04) to change the land use designation from Urban Residential Low Density (URL) to Limited Commercial (LC) for property located at 13730 Crosstown Drive NW. DATE: November 12, 2002 INTRODUCTION The Comprehensive Land Use Plan of the City of Andover was adopted in December of 2001. As required by State Statute, any proposed changes to the Land Use Plan shall be reviewed at a public hearing and approved by the local elected officials. The proposed change is considered a minor amendment of the Comprehensive Plan due to the size being less than 40 acres. The applicant has requested a change in land use from Urban Residential Low Density (URL) to Limited Commercial (LC). DISCUSSION , The area that is proposed to be changed from Urban Residential Low Density (URL) to Limited Commercial (LC) is approximately 1.48 Acres in size (see attached map). There are already a number of businesses located adjoining and nearby along Crosstown Drive in similar Business zones. Just off of Bunker Lake Boulevard, and directly on Crosstown Drive, this is a location along major roads which, would accommodate the amount of increased traffic and the parking demands. These issues will be addressed during the commercial site plan process. This will not have a negative impact on the property values or scenic views of the surrounding area. ACTION REQUESTED Staff requests the Planning Commission discuss and approve the suggested changes to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan to change the land use from Urban Residential Low Density (URL) to Limited Commercial (LC) for the 1.48 acre area located 13730 Crosstown Drive on the attached map. The basis of the change is explained in the paragraph above and also appears in the proposed resolution approving the change. Reryer ly submitted, L D. ckay K Attachments • Proposed Resolution e CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA • STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. R- AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER, TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF LAND FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (URL) TO LIMITED COMMERCIAL (LC) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13730 CROSSTOWN DRIVE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: That part of the Southwest '' /< of the Northeast '' /n of Section 33, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the East '/< corner of said Section 33, thence South 88 degrees, 56 minutes, 30 seconds East along the South line of the Northeast '/a of said Section 33 a distance of 1808.12 feet to the intersection of centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 18, thence North 2 degrees, 36 minutes, 30 seconds. East along said centerline a distance of 130.18 feet; thence Northeasterly on said centerline and on a tangential curve, concave to the Southeast having a radius of 583.95 feet for a distance of 18.25 feet to the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be hereby described, thence continuing Northeasterly on said centerline and curve a distance of 256.57 feet; thence North 29 degrees,.34 minutes, 25 seconds East along said centerline and tangent to said curve a distance of 7.31 feet; thence North 63 degrees, 38 minutes, 40 seconds West a distance of 281.14 feet; thence South 29 degrees 16 minutes 50 seconds West a distance of 257.18 feet; thence South 63 degrees 22 minutes, 30 seconds East a distance of 335.29 feet to the actual point of beginning. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the land use designation of the parcels described above and recommend that the land use plan be amended to change the designation of the land from Low Density Residential (URL) to Limited Commercial (LC); and WHEREAS, the basis for the change in land use is that the nature of the area is conducive to office development; and WHEREAS, the development of office land use also serves as a buffer area of low density residential located to the west and north from Crosstown Drive. WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendation of the Planning Commission. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE AREA DESCRIBED ABOVE BE CHANGED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (URL) TO LIMITED COMMERCIAL (LC). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this day of , 2002. CITY OF ANDOVER Attest: • Michael R. Gamache — Mayor Victoria Volk — City Clerk FROM: CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVERMN.US Planning and Zoning Commissioners D. Tyler Mckay, Associate Planner 0 1 ?] SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning (02 -04) to rezone property located at 13730 Crosstown Drive NW from Single Family Urban Residential (R -4) to Limited Business (LB). DATE: November 12, 2002 INTRODUCTION The applicant is requesting that the property be rezoned from Single Family Urban Residential (R -4) to Limited Business (LB) to allow a new professional office building adjacent to the Molly professional building. This external materials change would allow a proposal to incorporate the two buildings into one site with integrated parking. The color, style, and stone of both buildings would be similar. • DISCUSSION As with all rezonings, one of the two following findings must be made to justify the rezoning: 1. The original zoning/land use was in error. 2. The character of the area or times and conditions have changed to such an extent to warrant the Rezoning/Comprehensive Plan Amendment. In this case the character of the area has changed through the installation of municipal utilities, increased traffic along Bunker and Crosstown and resulting commercial development near the intersection. Other elements to be taken into consideration are: 1) The effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, morals and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands. 2) Existing and anticipated traffic conditions including parking facilities on adjacent streets and lands. 3) The effect on values of property and scenic views in the surrounding area. 4) The effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan. There are already a number of businesses located nearby in similar Limited Business zones. Since the subject property is located just off of Bunker Lake Boulevard, and directly at Crosstown Drive, this is a location along major roads which, would accommodate the amount of increased traffic and the parking demands. These issues will be addressed during the commercial site plan process. This will not have a negative impact on the property values or scenic views of • the surrounding area. The rezoning must be contingent upon a change to the Comprehensive Plan from URL to Limited Commercial. Attachments Resolution Location Map Property Survey Public Notice ACTION REQUIRED The Planning Commission is asked to recommend approval of the rezoning request. Respectfully submitted, Ty , r Mckay Cc: Dettinger/Pinewski 1902 5'' Ave So Suite # 4 Anoka. 0 0 CITY OF ANDOVER • COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO.8 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 8, SECTION 6.03, ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER HEREBY ORDAINS: Ordinance 8, Section 6.03, The Zoning District Map of the City of Andover is hereby amended as follows on land legally described as (PIN 33- 32- 24 -13- 0005): That part of the Southwest's /4 of the Northeast' /4 of Section 33, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the East 'I /4 comer of said Section 33, thence South 88 degrees, 56 minutes, 30 seconds East along the South line of the Northeast `/4 of said Section 33 a distance of 1808.12 feet to the intersection of centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 18, thence North 2 degrees, 36 minutes, 30 seconds East along said centerline a distance of 130.18 feet; thence Northeasterly on said centerline and on a tangential curve, concave to the Southeast having a radius of 583.95 feet for a distance of 18.25 feet to the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be hereby described, thence continuing Northeasterly on • said centerline and curve a distance of 256.57 feet; thence North 29 degrees, 34 minutes, 25 seconds East along said centerline and tangent to said curve a distance of 7.31 feet; thence North 63 degrees, 38 minutes, 40 seconds West a distance of 281.14 feet; thence South 29 degrees 16 minutes 50 seconds West a distance of 257.18 feet; thence South 63 degrees 22 minutes, 30 seconds East a distance of 335.29 feet to the actual point of beginning. 1) Rezone land from Single Family Urban Residential (R-4) to Limited Business (LB) 2) All other sections of the Zoning Ordinance shall remain as written and adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this _ day of 2002. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Michael R. Gamache, Mayor Victoria Volk, City Clerk n E Project Location Map M M-,( E Andover Planning Rezoning Single Family Urban Residential (R4) to Limited Business (LB) a \ S2 • �� / \ O �Y .� 6:8 ' -< L= 20.06 \ 9 3a , 10 tly 3 �� 8•' �h G i fop Z o / � V 0 m ; � •- - . X �" �� 633.95 � ' �, �' . � , ; ,t�� : 1 �,9� 4t,+.ca— 1 F , ! d' so - - - - - -' ko ; o _ - -- X74.69 - - - - r - o ;l I COUNTY STATE AID Ln I � r I ' HIGHWAY NO. -_ - - - - - -� � � 349.09 - - - - - -- - - - - -- :: 9 i -S.86 6 56'3 0 "W.: • .. r - fhe N•E. %4 of See. 33, T. 32, R. 24 South line off' M 5. 5 eat. CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Andover will hold a public hearing at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as can be heard, on Tuesday, November 12, 2002 at Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Blvd NW, Andover, to review a Rezoning request to change'the zoning designation from Single Family Urban Residential (R-4) to Limited Business (LB) for Pinewski Builders for property located at 13730 Crosstown NW, described as: In the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 33, Township 32 Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota All written and verbal comments will be received at that time and location. A copy of the proposed application will be available for review prior to the meeting at City Hall. Please con Co a ednar.gr City Planner with any questions at (763) 767 -5147. urine riy PI Publication Dates: November 1, 2002 CURRENT RESIDENT 13725 CROSSTOWN DR A,NpOVER, MN 55304 24130046 CURRENT RESIDENT 13769 NORTHWOOD DR ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130068 CURRENT RESIDENT 13730 CROSSTOWN DR ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130005 CURRENT RESIDENT 13777 NORTHWOOD DR ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130067 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 13784 CROSSTOWN DR 13785 NORTHWOOD DR ANDOVER, MN 55304 ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130060 333224130066 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 13809 NORTHWOOD"DR 2619 138TH AVE ANDOVER, MN 55304 ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130022 333224130015 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 2600 138TH AVE 2635 138TH AVE ANDOVER, MN 55304 ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130041 333224130023 *ZRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 2634 138TH AVE 2670 138TH AVE ANDOVER, MN 55304 ANDOVER, MN 55304 - 333224130062 333224130065 CURRENT RESIDENT 2658 138TH AVE ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130064 CURRENT RESIDENT 2733 BUNKER LAKE BLVD ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130044 CURRENT RESIDENT 13761 NORTHWOOD DR ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130069 CURRENT RESIDENT 13778 NORTHWOOD DR ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130054 CURRENT RESIDENT 13786 NORTHWOOD DR ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130053 CURRENT RESIDENT 2622138TH AVE ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130061 CURRENT RESIDENT 2646138TH AVE ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130063 CURRENT RESIDENT. 2725 137TH IN ANDOVER, MN 55304 333224130055 0 CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Courtney Bednarz, City Plann SUBJECT; Variance (02 -11) Variance to Ordinance 8, Section 6.02 to vary from the side yard building setback for addition to existing house at 2860 135` Avenue NW. DATE: November 12, 2002 INTRODUCTION The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the side yard setback for a proposed addition to the existing house. DISCUSSION The applicant intends to finish the existing garage to add additional finished square footage to the existing house. A new garage with living space above would be added to the east side of the is existing garage. The addition would extend to 8.5 feet from the side property line. The side yard setback for the new garage would exceed the six foot setback requirement. The living space above the garage would be 1.5 feet below the 10 foot side yard setback for houses. Applicable Ordinances Ordinance 8 Section 5.04 requires findings to substantiate variance requests. State Statute provides review criteria that are used to determine the merit of variance cases. In all cases the applicant must demonstrate undue hardship. The considerations for undue hardship include: There are circumstances unique to the property that were not created by the landowner. Unique conditions may include the physical characteristics, including topography or water conditions that may exist on the property. 2. The property, if the variance is granted, will not be out of character with other properties in the same neighborhood. 3. The applicant has exhausted all reasonable possibilities for using his/her property or combining a substandard lot due to size, shape or lot line dimensions, with an adjacent vacant lot. 4. Economic considerations may not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use of the • property exists with application of the minimum standards of this chapter. Findings . The applicant has provided a letter (attached) to provide findings to substantiate the variance. The applicant has also indicated the following: 1. The east wall of the existing garage will provide structural support for the renovation of the existing garage as well as the addition. It would be a hardship to the applicant to remove and relocate the existing structural wall to provide an additional 1.5 foot setback. 2. The property line is angled slightly away from the structure allowing the setback to increase to 9.5 feet at the rear of the proposed structure. 3. A fence exists between the proposed addition and the adjacent property. 4. The neighboring property owner to the east is in favor of the proposed project. 5. The garage is on the west side of the property on the neighboring property to the east. 6. The applicant is seeking to improve and modernize the existing house as other neighbors on the block are beginning to do and would like to remain in this neighborhood. 7. The existing house does not provide adequate living space for his growing family. Previous Cases is Staff researched previous variance applications and found that a number of variances to the side yard setback have been granted in the past. Typically these variances have been for decks, house additions or detached accessory buildings adjacent to streets on corner lots. Four variances have been granted for garage or house additions from interior property lines. The most recent of these cases was in 2001 for a garage addition that encroached 0.5 feet into the side yard setback at 3924 139"' Lane NW. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the variance be approved based on the case history and the findings provided by the applicant. ACTION REQUIRED The Planning Commission is asked to recommend approval or denial of the variance. Attachments Resolution Location Map Property Survey Front Elevation as Proposed Applicant's Letter 4a: d, e Jon Olson 2860 r5 NW CITY OF ANDOVER . COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR JON OLSON TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 10 FEET TO 8.5 FEET FOR A PROPOSED ADDITION TO EXISTING HOUSE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2860 135 AVENUE NW WHEREAS, John Olson has petitioned to vary from the rear yard setback requirement as described in Ordinance 8, Section 6.02 for property located at 2860 135 Avenue NW legally described as follows: Lot 5, Block 1 Mattson and Degardner's Crooked Lake Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed addition will not have a detrimental effect on neighboring properties due to the minimal encroachment into the side yard setback, the location of a fence between the proposed addition and the property to the east, and the fact that the living space between the two properties will be separated by a garage, and; WHEREAS, the east wall of the existing garage will provide structural support for the renovation of the existing garage as well as the addition and a hardship would be created if the applicant were required to remove and relocate the existing structural wall to provide an additional 1.5 foot setback, and; WHEREAS, The property line is angled slightly away from the structure allowing the setback to increase to 9.5 feet at the rear of the proposed structure, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover approves the proposed variance request to allow a side yard setback of 8.5 feet for a proposed addition to existing house at 2860 135 Lane NW. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this day of 2002. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Michael R. Gamache, Mayor Victoria Volk, City Clerk 0 Variance to Building Setbacks 2860 135th Avenue NW • Project Location Map wE a Andover Planning I V 0 %00 a ■ m %0 1 %W OWS r%1m&0 Ar mftw 10731 Mississippi Blvd. N.W. pfloer'azry Coon Rapids, MN 55433 Phone MIll AICATE OF SURVEY: N OLSON 0 • 0—=— E4 5 r— f 0,10 II o I. X N 0 2 R r ; 34-.7 SrORAGJE ITPXA,7 64CH 10 o G CHAIN /-INK yC_,ff1YCe Z i 10 Lan( SCALE: 1 it O O. is IY Denotes Iron foul Denotes Iron set 110 34-.7 SrORAGJE ITPXA,7 64CH 10 o G CHAIN /-INK yC_,ff1YCe Z i 10 Lan( SCALE: 1 it O O. is IY Denotes Iron foul Denotes Iron set n. 2960 135' Ave. NW Andover, MN 55304 763- 755 -3883 C 1695 Cross Town Blvd. NW Andover, MN 55304 To Whom It May Concern: My family has lived in Andover at 2860 135' Ave. NW for the past ten years, and we love living here. We enjoy the city, have good and established relationships with our neighbors, and have no desire to move to another area. With the desire to stay 'at our current location, we are in need of a variance to the side yard of our property, in order to construct a quality addition. With a family of three growing daughters, we have become very limited in our spat . TT, house is a split -level and cramped. We would like to rectify this pobltn by converting our current garage into living space, build a new garage next to the old, and add living space above. We have been working with a home designer to ensure a quality and pleasing home will be the finished product. We feel it would compliment the neighborhood, while solving our concerns with our limited living The addition we are proposing would require a variance on the distance to the property line on the side yard. The new garage would be within compliance with the property line guidelines, but the living space above is closer than allowed (by 1 1 /2 feet at the closest point). Our neighbor does have a wooden privacy fence, which separates the yards. in designing the house, we have tried various combinations to meet our needs, but find this final design the best. There is more room on the side of the home to build, than depth to the lot. We feel that attempting to alter the design of the addition would negatively change the aesthetics of the structure, become cost prohibitive, and cause restrictions to the wisest use of space available. Therefore, our desire and need for a variance. Sincerely, Jon and el Olsoo ` 6 16( z) CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Courtney Bednarz, City Planner SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Residential Sketch Plan for a townhouse project to be located at 14220 Crosstown Boulevard NW. DATE: November 12, 2002 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission is asked to review a sketch plan for a residential development containing 24 townhouses on an approximately 4 acre property. The proposed development would require planned unit development review to provide alternative development standards as described below. Review Criteria Ordinance 10, Section 6 outlines the requirements for sketch plan review. The Planning Commission is asked to informally advise the subdivider of the extent to which the plan conforms to the Comprehensive Plan, design standards of city, county, state and federal agencies and possible modification necessary to secure approval of the plan. Submission of a sketch plan does not constitute formal filing of a plat. Conformance with Local and Regional Plans and Ordinances 1. The proposed project would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from URL, Urban Residential Low Density to URM, Urban Residential Medium Density to accommodate the proposed density for the project (6 units per acre). 2. If the Planning Commission and City Council agree with the proposed density and accompanying Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the proposed project would also require a Rezoning from R -4, Single Family Urban Residential to M -1, Multiple Dwelling Low Density to align the zoning designation with the proposal. The City Council must also agree to allow Planned Unit Development Review to create development standards that are different from the M -1 Zoning District. This is accomplished with a Special Use Permit. Neighborhood Business Study The subject property was included in a study of undeveloped properties conducted by Northwest Associated Consultant. The consultants recommendations for the site were as follows: "The area surrounding Site C -1 has developed with an urban single family character. The . introduction of a commercial use on this site could be incompatible within this area due to its existing character and lack of physical features to create a transition. As noted in previous sections, the Comprehensive Plan discourages commercial development away from concentrated nodes or major intersections to avoid intruding into residential areas. It is recommended that the Future Land Use Plan be amended to designate Site C -1 for Urban Residential Low Density Uses and that the current R -4 District zoning be maintained. Alternatively, the City may consider designating the site for Urban Residential Medium Density Use to ensure full utilization of the site, provided that the site design provides proper orientation and transition to the adjacent single family residences. Overall density should be near the lower end of range prescribed by the Comprehensive Plan for medium density uses and developed under the City's M -1 Multiple Dwelling Low Density Zoning District to ensure compatibility". The City Council subsequently approved a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the Land Use Designation from Neighborhood Commercial (NC) to Urban Residential Low Density (URL)• Unit Style The proposed project would consist of 12 twinhouse structures. The structures would be either two story or split entry depending upon the water table. A list of amenities is included in the attachments. The exterior would be a combination of brick and maintenance free siding. Site Designs • This project has been discussed for nearly two years. Adjustments were made based on the two neighborhood meetings and input from the City Council. The principle concerns addressed were: 1. No through street that would connect 141 Lane and 142 Avenue. 2. Closing of the unimproved access onto Crosstown Boulevard 3. All of the driveways face the interior of the development 4. There is only one access point to control traffic onto 142 Avenue. 5. The number of units has been reduced 6. The unit style has been improved to increase the sale price of the units to make the project feasible. • A previous design is included in the attachments for review. This site layout prevents backyards from facing Crosstown Boulevard, which is desirable, but results in three of the twinhouses (six units) with driveways onto 141 Lane. Also, the turnaround may need to be modified to improve emergency vehicle access. • If the site was developed under an R -4, Single Family Urban Residential neighborhood and without planned unit development review, the site would likely yield seven lots arranged around a cul -de -sac with backyards facing Crosstown Boulevard. • 2 Access (currentproposal) Access would be provided from 142 " Avenue with a private driveway. A cul -de -sac with a landscaped median would be provided at the end. The private driveway would extend approximately 440 feet into the site. This driveway would be maintained by the homeowners association. A drainage and utility easement would need to be provided to allow access to the public utilities that will service the proposed development. Lot Size (current proposal) The proposed lots would be just large enough to encompass the foundation of each unit. The remainder of the property would be common property owned and maintained by the homeowners association. Planned Unit Development review would be necessary to allow lots that are smaller than the typical M -1 requirements. Neighboring Properties Single family homes exist to the north, east, south and across Crosstown Boulevard to the west. • six foot berm presently exists between the subject property and adjacent properties to the east. • combination of berming and landscaping would be needed to buffer the proposed development from surrounding properties and streets. Planned Unit Development Review Ordinance 112 provides the requirements for Planned Unit Development review. This ordinance requires proposals to meet the following criteria: 1. Attaining a higher standard of site design and development that cannot be accomplished under strict adherence to development ordinance provisions. 2. The preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics such as natural topography, woodlands, geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion; 3. A more efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lowering the development costs and public investments; 4. A development pattern in harmony with the Andover Comprehensive Plan. (PUD is not a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.) Staff Recommendation The City Council will need to determine if they will accept a medium density development on rthe subject property. The proposed design results in a number of backyards facing public streets. Although the common open space would prevent the units from being double frontage lots, the effect is the same. Staff would not recommend this design unless a significant amount of berming and landscaping is provided to shield the backyards from surrounding public streets. • . Other Ordinances The developer is also required to meet the following City Ordinances and all other applicable ordinances: Ordinance No. 8, the Zoning Ordinance Ordinance No. 10, the Platting and Subdivision Ordinance Ordinance No. 107, Shoreland Management Ordinance Ordinance No. 108, Flood Plain Management Ordinance Ordinance No. 114, Wetland Buffer Ordinance Ordinance No. 214, Diseased Shade Tree Ord. & Tree Preservation Policy Coordination with other Agencies The developer and/or owner is responsible to obtain all necessary permits (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Coon Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, LGU and any other agency that may have an interest in the site). Initial contact shall be made with the City Engineering Department regarding this item. Park and Recreation Commission Comments The Park and Recreation Commission will review this item at their November 21" meeting. ACTION REQUIRED The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to informally advise the applicant on adjustments to the proposed project to conform with local ordinances and review criteria. Attachments Location Map Sketch Plan (Full Size in Packet) Previous Sketch Plan Townhouse Amenities E :.V I W O Cc: Dave Harris, Creekside Homes, 241 Jackson Street, Anoka, MN 55303 �J Residential Sketch Plan 14220 Crosstown Boulevard NW 0 Project Location Map W- a Andover Planning ' N tp � s n M ^ awn - _ 142ND AVE. NW 4 Op 2 : �\ N32'02'38 "W .. 253.67 1 4 s -------- - - - - — — -- - - - - -- -- �� _ — U • 1 1 1 1 � 1 1 1 ► Lo "' 1 ► I 1 C O W I O Z , ► I _ 1 1 1 Q I 1 1 1 11 1 1 / 1 1 , 1 1 1 0 1 m ` m 1 1 1 1 1 ,ten N43'19�18'W � -- 1 L 1 �``� 141ST LA NE NW 1 O 1 < 1 1 ► - '-� t 1 1 U-) 1 C(- 1 - -- - -- 280.70 1 CI 9 Cl 0 !` n Nw 7 X11 y ! N3202.38 -W 25 L, N —•.. 1 W O • o in .h z I I I I ,I a r -� i f� In LO 0 3 8 0 in I I I I I I 11 I 1 I I �s8 N431 9'18 "W 280.70 ----- -------------- - --- -- - -� 141ST LANE NW Nov 07 02 11:54a Randi Erickson 763- 427 -1424 p.2 r � L_J KENSINGTON ESTATES TOWNHOMES FEATURES LIST MAINTENANCE FREE EXTERIOR REFRIGERATOR, RANGE, MICROWAVE, DISHWASHER & DISPOSAL WASHER & DRYER WHIRLPOOL TUB STAND ALONE LARGE SHOWER FULL BASEMENT WITH LOOK -OUT WINDOWS ? LARGE ATT. GARAGE WTfH PTL INSUL & FULL SHEETROCKED WALLS CAT - 5 WIRED COMPUTER RESOURCE DESK BUILT IN VETTER CASEMENT WINDOWS TIMBERLINE 30 YEAR SHINGLES GARAGE DOOR OPENER WITH 2 REMOTES DELUXE CABINETRY BY MAJESTIC WOODWORKING)* UPGRADED CARPET BY ABBEY CARPET* THIRD BATH - ROUGHED -IN FOR A 3 /4 BATH LARGE 10 X 12 DECK WIDE BLACKTOP DRIVE • PROFESSIONALLY LANDSCAPED WITH UNDERGROUND SPRINKLERS HALF BRICK FRONTS SITTING /STORAGE BENCH IN ENTRY CITY SEWERIWATER LENNOX* 2 TON CENTRAL AIR AND ENERGY EFFICENT FURNACE SECURITY LOCK MAILBOXES $130.00 MONTHLY ASSOCIATION FEES INCLUDES: HAZARD INSURANCE, LAWN MAINTENANCE, SNOW REMOVAL, SECURITY LIGHTS, AND UNDERGROUND SPRINKLING SYSTEM 1 SMALL DOG OR CAT OK UNDER 20 LBS. CREEKSIDE HOMES, LLC, 241 JACKSON ST., ANOKA MN 55303 763 - 427 -4878 11 NOV 07 2002 11:57 763 427 1424 PRGE.02 i Nov KENSINGTON ESTATES TOWNHOMES Standard Features • Interior 100 Amp Service Casement Windows Central Air Conditioning Decorator Lighting Double Bowl Stainless Steel Kitchen Sink Large Vanity in Master Bath Full Basement ? Gas Fireplace with Oak Mantel Garage Door Opener w/Remote Garbage Disposal GE Washer/Dryer GE Glass Top Electric Self Cleaning Range GE 18 cu. Ft. No -Frost Refrigerator GE Dishwasher GE Microwave Oven Keyless Entry System Oak Custom Kitchen Cabinetry Oak Custom Kitchen Desk Oak Custom Roll — Out Shelving Pantry Oak Flush Doors Oak Railings Oak Trim Sheet Rocked Garage / Side walls Insulated Up- Graded Berber Carpet Vinyl Flooring in Kitchen/Entry & Bathrooms Whirpool Tub in Master Bath Exterior 2x6 Exterior Wall Construction 10x12 Deck/Patio %z Brick Garage Front Asphalt Driveway Common Area Lighting Exterior Water Faucets Insulated Steel Entrance Door Low Maintenance Steel Garage Door Maintenance Free Exterior Oversized Two -Car Attached Garage Private Streets Professionally Designed Common Area Professionally Designed Landscaping Underground Sprinklers Underground Utilities Weather - Proof Electrical Outlets Energy Features 40 -Gallon Hot Water Heater Energy Efficient Windows Energy Efficient Sliding Glass Doors R -19 Fiberglass/Exterior Walls R -40 Fiberglass/Ceilings White Vinyl Clad Window Jambs Floor plans, prices, standard and optional features are subject to change without notice. • Creekside Homes, LLC, 241 Jackson St., Anoka MN 55303 NOV 07 2002 11:57 763 - 427 -4878 763 427 1424 PAGE.03 i1e] TO FROM: CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CLANDOVER.MN.US Planning and Zoning Commissioners Courtney Bednarz, City Plannew SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Residential Sketch Plan for a detached townhouse project to be known as "City View Farm" located at 13313 Round Lake Boulevard NW. DATE: November 12, 2002 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission is asked to review a sketch plan for `City View Farm', an urban residential development containing seven single family lots on an existing 1.34 acre property. The proposed development would require planned unit development review to provide alternative development standards as described below. Review Criteria Ordinance lb, Section 6 outlines the requirements for sketch plan review. The Planning Commission is asked to informally advise the subdivider of the extent to which the plan conforms to the Comprehensive Plan, design standards of city, county, state and federal agencies and possible modification necessary to secure approval of the plan. Submission of a sketch plan does not constitute formal filing of a plat. Conformance with Local and Regional Plans and Ordinances 1. The proposed project would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from URL, Urban Residential Low Density to URM, Urban Residential Medium Density to accommodate the proposed density for the project (5.22 units per acre). If the Planning Commission and City Council agree with the proposed density and accompanying Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the proposed project would also require a Rezoning from R -4 Single Family Urban Residential to M -1 Multiple Dwelling Low Density to align the zoning designation with the proposal. The City Council must agree to allow Planned Unit Development Review to create development standards that are different from the M -1 Zoning District. This is accomplished with a Special Use Permit. 0 t Unit Style The proposed project would consist of seven two -story houses oriented to face Round Lake • Boulevard. A porch would be provided on the front and rear of the structure to provide both public and more private spaces. Garages would be detached and located to the rear of the properties. The interior of the units would be completely finished and the exterior of the unit would provide a high level of detail and quality materials. The applicant will describe the units in more detail. Access The proposed development would be served with a private driveway. Individual driveways would provide additional parking beyond the two stalls within each garage. A turnaround is shown on the sketch plan. This type of turnaround would be similar to the emergency entrance at the end of the Nature's Run cul -de -sac in that a base material is installed to support the weight of emergency vehicles and grass is allowed t grow over it. The Fire Department policy for turnarounds is attached. The proposal is similar to the first alternative to the 120 foot hammerhead design but will need to be modified somewhat. No parking in the turnaround area would need to be required. Alternatively, there may be an opportunity to work with the City of Coon Rapids to improve emergency access for both this project and a Coon Rapids townhouse project to the south. The fire departments from the two cities will need to review the situation to determine the best course of action. Lot Size The proposed lots would be 6,204 square feet which exceeds the 6,000 square foot minimum lot • size requirement for the M -1 Multiple Dwelling Low Density Zoning District. The Lot Depth would be 141 feet which is slightly below the minimum 150 foot minimum lot width requirement of the M -1 Zoning District. The Lot Width of the properties would be 44 feet. This would be significantly below the 150 foot minimum lot width requirement of the M -1 Zoning District. Planned Unit Development review would be necessary to provide alternative development standards. It is important to note that the 150 foot lot width and depth requirements of the M -1 Zoning District were created to address multiple dwellings on a single property. If individual properties were not created for the units, the proposal would meet these requirements. For comparison, the following table illustrates the typical lot dimensions of townhouse developments in the City: Townhouse Projects City View Farm Nature' s Run Red Pine Fields Shawdow- brook Sunridge TH of Woodland Creek Devonshire Estates Aztec Estates Avg Lot Area 6,204 sf 3,550 sf 2,550 sf 6,000 sf 9,856 sf 3,850 4,938 2,867 Avg Lot Width 1 44 feet 147 feet 1 41 feet 1 57 feet 1 63 feet 70 feet 33.5 feet 47 feet Avg Lot Depth 141 feet 75 feet 62 feet 110 feet 140 feet 70 feet 64 feet 52 feet • Fa Neighboring Properties . The site is located at the southwest corner of the City. To the north and east exist single family homes in the City of Andover. To the west and south exist townhouse developments in the City of Coon Rapids. Buffering the proposed development from the three single family lots that share a property line with the site is obviously important. The applicant has indicated that he will provide whatever type of screening the neighbors feel is necessary. Planned Unit Development Review Ordinance 112 provides the requirements for Planned Unit Development review. This ordinance requires proposals to meet the following criteria: 1. Attaining a higher standard of site design and development that cannot be accomplished under strict adherence to development ordinance provisions. 2. The preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics such as natural topography, woodlands, geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion; A more efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lowering the development costs and public investments; 4. A development pattern in harmony with the Andover Comprehensive Plan. (PUD is . not a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.) Staff Recommendation Due to the fact that access can only be provided from 133` Lane NW, the development potential of the property is limited. If the property were developed under the R -4 Zoning District standards and with a typical public street the result would be three single family lots. These lots would likely be double frontage lots with backyards facing Round Lake Boulevard. This is not desirable as the view entering Andover would be of fences or possibly cluttered backyards or, even worse, a combination of the two. If the street were designed as a frontage road to allow the three houses to face Round Lake Boulevard, the access at 133` Lane would need to be dangerously close to Round Lake Boulevard. In either scenario, the project would make poor use of the land, would hold down the value of the land, and may be cost prohibitive as a result. The proposed project is a better alternative. With attention to detail during Planned Unit Development Review, the project can become an attractive addition at this entrance to the City Other Ordinances The developer is also required to meet the following City Ordinances and all other applicable ordinances: Ordinance No. 8, the Zoning Ordinance Ordinance No. 10, the Platting and Subdivision Ordinance Ordinance No. 107, Shoreland Management Ordinance • Ordinance No. 108, Flood Plain Management Ordinance Ordinance No. 114, Wetland Buffer Ordinance Ordinance No. 214, Diseased Shade Tree Ord. & Tree Preservation Policy Coordination with other Agencies • The developer and/or owner is responsible to obtain all necessary permits (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Coon Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, LGU and any other agency that may have an interest in the site). Initial contact shall be made with the City Engineering Department regarding this item. Park and Recreation Commission Comments The Park and Recreation Commission will review this item at an upcoming meeting. ACTION REQUIRED The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to informally advise the applicant on adjustments to the proposed project to conform with local ordinances and review criteria. Attachments Location Map Sketch Plan (11x17 in Packet) Building Elevations (11x17 in Packet) Floor Plan (11x17 in Packet) Fire Department Turnaround Policy Kill I BO N N / Cc: Mike Bann, 13313 Round Lake Boulevard • • Residential Sketch Plan 13313 Round Lake Boulevard NW M Project Location Map w�E Andover Planning pt O . � � a C14 � � 2 � � ■ \ \ � | ! 2 22 j] -I Id q A! _ ! . is | � § ..a �'a | d | } A ■q / m C 'n 1 tk |� s d'm ! = o y , E} ■ :. ! � � � 9 0 � S \ 2 ) | k f�! ■ k | QE . |!a ■ $ .�� { LU 0 \\ gs C §¢ \§ _ "[ | � ■ \ \ � | ! 2 22 j] -I Id q A! _ ! . is | � § ..a �'a | d | } A ■q / m C 'n 1 tk |� s d'm ! = o y , E} ■ :. ! � � � 9 0 � S \ 2 ) | k f�! ■ < |!a { LU 0 \\ gs C _ | ■ \ \ � | ! 2 22 j] -I Id q A! _ ! . is | � § ..a �'a | d | } A ■q / m C 'n 1 tk |� s d'm ! = o y , E} ■ :. ! � � � 9 0 � AA F-T I r I III II f L ■f. A �3 C � M lI I 3 M O r y 0 z x 0 V• m m 0 0 m r z Z N 11 T < r 0 0 A 7 z m Y ;1 m 11 O m r T 0 PO m V N ;1 D � E ti F - � i m m z A • L c A x Y i ➢ i E [ R c T T i A 11/07/2002 17:11 612 - 755 -9583 ANI)UVLK r L) I LJ ANDOVER FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY FIRE DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVED TURNAROUNDS ON FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ROADS AS REQUIRED BY MIN n g ORM FIRE CODES Any of the following are acceptable turnaround alternatives: ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE TO 120' HAMMERHEAD • �pRT -►2Cr l 20' ? • z ?y T � 1 1 27 1 - ►20'e- Il 120 HAMMERHEAD ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE TO 120' HAMMERHEAD L NOV 07 2002 15:54 W DIAMETER CUL- DE-SAC Nti I 612 755 9583 PAGE.01 I mffx-- I 51 %P&SF-D PRIVAmE DRIVE Alk ar I 20 1 AP, 7, p V�l �w I AG - 0 41 Fl+ P� Fw mffx-- I 51 %P&SF-D PRIVAmE DRIVE Alk ar I 20 1 AP, 7, p V�l �w m . I AG - 0 41 Fl+ P� F A . ta. F'N , � m . Fl+ P� F A . ta. • CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: D. Tyler Mckay, Associate Planner SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Discuss amendment to Ordinance #109 to regulate dirt bikes and ATV's in the City of Andover. DATE: November 12, 2002 INTRODUCTION A number of Andover residents have requested changes to Ordinance 4109 (Regulating All Terrain Vehicles and Snowmobiles) be amended to also regulate the use of dirt bikes and to increase the regulation of ATV's in the City of Andover. There have also been other complaints by Andover residents about the noise, dust and fumes associated with the racing of dirt bikes, ATV's and other vehicles on and off tracks on residential lots. The City Council directed this to . be discussed by the Planning Commission and requested for more information in regard to the Ham Lake ordinance, the ATV Taskforce and a confirmation of the number of complaints filed to the Sheriffs office. DISCUSSION Sherburne County Ordinance Sherburne County had a history of problems with racetracks on private lots. These tracks raced dirt bikes, ATV's as well as cars and other vehicles. To respond to citizen complaints, the County made these tracks a conditional use requiring a permit. The residents who owned or used the racetracks then complained that the County was being too restrictive. The County then made the tracks a permitted use with certain conditions. The purpose of this was to take the enforcement of this ordinance out of zoning department and into the Sheriffs department due to their stronger enforcement abilities. Ham Lake Noise Ordinance Ham Lake City Code Article 4 — Nuisances and Offenses subsection 700 Noise. This ordinance defines an excessive noise as: Noise received by a Residential Area which exceeds an L10 of 65dB(A) during daytime, an LIO of 55dB(A) during nighttime, an L50 of 60dB(A) during daytime, or an L50 of 50db(A) during nighttime. Ham Lake defines Noise Nuisances are by section 720 as: "Personal Recreational Vehicle Noise — Noise generated by Personal Recreational Vehicles which is received by any Residential Area, either as a Stationary Source, a Mobile Source, or a • Circulating Mobile Source, and which exceeds 60dB(A) for any period of five consecutive minutes. " The City of Andover Ordinance # 230 has a similar purpose. It states: "Exhaust. No person shall discharge the exhaust, or permit the discharge of the exhaust of any steam engine, motor boat, motor vehicle, or snowmobile except through a muffler or other device that effectively prevents loud or explosive noises there from and complies with all applicable state laws and regulations. (230A, 8118198) " The Planning and Zoning Clerk for Ham Lake, Dawnette Shimek, has said that the enforcement of this ordinance is primarily through the Sheriffs department. She also stated that Ham Lake will mail individuals a copy of the ordinance if there is a complaint, but they do not test to find if the noise involved is actually above the decibels allowed. One major problem with enforcement of this ordinance is if the activity is for a short duration, it will be over before an officer can reach the residence. Sheriff Calls In numerous discussions with the Anoka County Sheriffs deputies, many similar problems have been found with the enforcement of this aspect of Andover's noise ordinance. Certain loud noises are allowed during the day if they are for short durations, such as a chain saw. Usually, • these activities are over before an officer can make it to the location. Otherwise, the officer will simply ask the resident to stop. Deputylvory remarked that most of their calls on dirt bikes and ATV's are in regards to the driving of these vehicles on City streets. For the months of July, August and September, the Sheriffs office recorded 19 complaints in regards to ATV's. Code enforcement staff was told that they do not differentiate between ATV and dirt bike complaints, and do not specify if they are from noise or other kinds of complaints. ATV Taskforce The ATV taskforce was formed to answer questions in regard to recreational use of ATV's on forest land. It mainly is about increasing the number of ATV trails and the enforcement of the use of trails. It will not complete that report until January 15 of 2003, although preliminary findings will be available December 15 2002. Residents Concerns Resident, Tom Danczyk, has submitted the changes he suggests be made to the ATV and Snowmobile Ordinance. This is to be considered separate from the changes requested previously by Mary Hilke who is primarily interested in the regulation of Dirt Bikes. RECOMMENDATION The ordinance dealing with ATV's & Snowmobiles has been modified to include some additional restrictions as they have requested. I have had a number of complaints about the racing of vehicles on and off tracks in the City of Andover. I believe some combination of these approaches might be most useful to addressing resident's complaints, while still allowing other residents use of their property in ways they have grown accustomed to. As you can see in the 2 • attached Sherburne County ordinance, a minimum distance from other residences may be a good step. It should be debated whether 1,000 feet is too restrictive, and if the use of these vehicles within the distance should be limited to less than 10 miles per hour rather than a complete prohibition. The Planning and Zoning Commission is recommended to discuss this issue and give staff direction. Attachments Previous Reports Letter from Mary Hilke City Council Minutes Suggested Resolution Changes by Tom Danczyk Sherburne County Private Motor Sport Vehicle Track Ordinance Ham Lake Noise Ordinance ATV Taskforce information Res ct ly submitted, D. Tyler • 0 SUGGESTED CHANGES BY TOM DANCZYK Draft 11/5/02 Underlined is new language, strike out it to be removed. • CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 109C AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR THE OPERATION OF ALL - TERRAIN VEHICLES, DIRT BIKES, AND SNOWMOBILES WITHIN THE CITY OF ANDOVER The City Council of the City of Andover hereby ordains: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the words, combinations of words, terms, and phrases as used in this section shall have the meanings set forth in the subdivisions of this section, which follow. a. Snowmobile - a self propelled vehicle designed for travel on snow or ice • steered by skis or runners. b. All- Terrain Vehicle - a motorized flotation -tired vehicle of not less than (3) low pressure tires, but not more than six (6) low pressure tires, that is limited in engine displacement of less than 800 cubic centimeters and total dry weight less than 600 pounds. c. Owner - means a person other than a lien holder, having the property in or title to snowmobile, dirt bike or all- terrain vehicles, and entitles to the use or possession thereof. d. Operate - to ride in or on, and control the operation of, a snowmobile, dirt bike or all terrain vehicle. e. Operator - means every person who operates, or is in actual physical control, of a snowmobile, dirt bike all- terrain vehicle. f. Roadway - means that portion of a highway improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel; including the shoulder, but not including the boulevard. g. Boulevard - is that portion of the street right -of -way between the curb line and the property line. -y- • h. Right -of -Way - means the entire strip of land traversed by a highway or street in which the public owns the fee or an easement for roadway purposes. i. Urban District - means the territory contiguous to and including any street which is built up with structures devoted to business, industry, or dwelling houses situated at intervals of less than 100 feet, for a distance of a quarter mile or more. j. Public Lands - public parks, playgrounds, trails, paths, and other public open spaces; scenic and historic sites; schools, and other public buildings and structures. k. Safety or Deadman Throttle - is defined as a device which, when pressure is removed from the engine accelerator or throttle, causes the motor to be disengaged from the driving track. 1 Dirt Bike - a motorized off - highway vehicle traveling on two wheels and having a seat or saddle designed to be straddled by the operator and handlebars for steering control. SECTION 2. PERSONS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE. No person under 14 years of age shall operate on streets or highways, or make a direct crossing of a street or highway, as the operator of a snowmobile. A person 14 years of age or older, but less than 18 years of age, may operate a on streets or highways as permitted under this ordinance, and make a direct crossing thereof, only if he /she has in his immediate possession a valid snowmobile safety certificate issued by the Commissioner of Natural Resources, as provided by Minnesota Statutes Section 84.46, as amended. It is unlawful for the owner of a snowmobile to permit the snowmobile to be operated contrary to the provisions of this section. SECTION 3. General Operation. Prohibited Areas. No person shall operate an all- terrain vehicle, dirt bike, or snowmobile south of the following line legally described as shown in Exhibit A, with the exception of designated snowmobile or ATV trails or areas that have been approved by the City Council and private property provided permission is granted by the owner, occupant, or lessee of such land except as noted below: No person shall operate an all- terrain vehicle dirt bike or snowmobile on private property within the City of Andover for recreational purposes: • a) Within 350 feet of an adjacent property owner without written permission. -S- b) Within 500 feet of an adjacent residence without written permission. • Permitted Areas. The operation of all- terrain vehicles or snowmobiles is permitted north of the described line as shown in Exhibit A. The following designated trails or areas south of this line are permitted: 1) On Round Lake (when frozen) when access can be legally obtained. 2) On Crooked Lake (when frozen) when access can be legally obtained. (10913, 11/2/99) SECTION 4. OPERATION ON PUBLIC PROPERTY. a. Operation Generally. No all- terrain vehicle, dirt bike, or snowmobile shall be operated on public property within the City of Andover in violation of the following provisions: 1. No person shall operate an all- terrain vehicle, dirt bike, or snowmobile within the City of Andover including but not limited to: school grounds, park property, playgrounds, recreation areas and golf courses, except; snowmobiles may be operated on designated snowmobile trails or designated access thereto. 2. No person shall operate an all- terrain vehicle, dirt bike, or snowmobile upon the roadway, shoulder, inside bank or slope of any trunk, county state aid, or county highway within the City of Andover; and in the case of a divided trunk or county highway, on the right -of -way between the opposing lanes of traffic. 3. No person shall operate an all- terrain vehicle, dirt bike, or snowmobile on city streets; except on the shoulder of the roadway, or in the absence of an improved shoulder, of the right -hand -most portion of the roadway (not on boulevard areas), and in the same direction as the street traffic on the nearest lane of the roadway adjacent thereto. In addition, snowmobiles or ATV's shall take the shortest route on any city street to access any county road, county state aid highway, or any designated snowmobile or ATV trails. 4. On a public sidewalk or walkway provided or used for pedestrian travel. 5. At any place, while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or controlled substance. 17J -6- • 6. At any speed in excess of 15 miles per hour on any public city street, or elsewhere at a rate of speed greater than reasonable or proper under all the surrounding circumstances. 7. At any speed in excess of 15 miles per hour on any county road, or county state aid highway in an urban district. All other county roads and county state aid highways not in an urban district must comply with Minnesota statues; or elsewhere at a rate of speed greater than reasonable or proper under all the surrounding circumstances. 8. At any place in a careless, reckless, or negligent manner, so as to endanger the person or property of another, or to cause injury or damage thereto. 9. So as to tow any person or thing on a public street or highway, except through use of a rigid tow bar attached to the rear of the snowmobile. 10. At a speed greater than 15 miles per hour when within one hundred (100) feet of any riverbank or lake shore; or within one hundred (100) feet of fishermen, ice houses, or skating rinks; nor shall operation be permitted within one hundred (100) feet of any sliding area; nor where the operation would conflict with the lawful use of property, or would endanger other persons or property. 11. In a manner so as to create loud, unnecessary, or unusual noise which disturbs, annoys, or interferes with the peace and quiet of another. 12. On any days between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.; except on Saturday and Sunday the restriction shall be between 1:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. 13. Such operation is not permitted within fifteen (15) feet of any public sidewalk, walkway, or trail. 14. It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or operate an all- terrain vehicle, dirt bike, or snowmobile in a tree nursery or planting in a manner which damages or destroys growing stock. 15. Authorized snowmobiles and all- terrain vehicles or dirt bikes may be used on any public property within the City for rescue, emergency, or law enforcement purposes. 16. A snowmobile all- terrain vehicle or dirt bike may make a direct crossing of a street or highway provided: 0 a. The crossing is made at an angle of approximately ninety (90) degrees to the direction of the street or highway, and at a place where no is obstruction prevents a quick and safe crossing. b. The all- terrain vehicle, dirt bike, or snowmobile is brought to a complete stop before crossing the shoulder or main traveled way of the highway. c. The driver yields the right of way to all oncoming traffic which constitutes an immediate hazard. d. In crossing a divided street or highway, the crossing is made only at an intersection of such street or highway with another public street or highway. e. If the crossing is made between the hours of one -half (1/2) hour after sunset to one -half (1 /2) hour before sunrise, or in conditions of reduced visibility, only if both front and rear lights are on. f. A snowmobile may make a direct crossing of a street or highway; provided a snowmobile may be operated upon a bridge other than a bridge that is the main traveled lanes of an interstate highway, when required for the purpose of avoiding obstructions to travel when no other method of avoidance is possible; provided the snowmobile is operated in the extreme right -hand lane, the entrance to the roadway is made within one hundred (100) feet of the bridge, and the crossing is made without undue delay. 17. No all- terrain vehicle, dirt bike or snowmobile shall enter any controlled intersection without making a complete stop. The operator shall then yield the right of way to any vehicles or pedestrians which constitute any immediate hazard. (109B, 11/2/99) 18. An all- terrain vehicle dirt bike or snowmobile may be operated upon any public street or highway in any emergency during the period of time when and at locations where the condition of the roadway renders travel by automobile impossible. (109B, 1112/99) SECTION 5. EQUIPMENT. It is unlawful for any person to operate a snowmobile, dirt bike, or all- terrain vehicle any place within the corporate limits of Andover unless it is equipped with the equipment set forth as follows: 1. Standard mufflers which are properly attached and in constant operation, and which reduce the noise of operation of the motor to the minimum necessary for operation. No person shall use a muffler cutout, by -pass, straight pipe or similar _X_ • device on a snowmobile motor, and the exhaust system shall not emit or produce a sharp popping or crackling noise. 2. Brakes adequate to control the movement of, and to stop and hold, the snowmobile or all- terrain vehicle under any conditions of operation. 3. A safety or so- called "deadman" throttle in operating condition, as that when pressure is removed from the accelerator or throttle, the motor is disengaged from the driving track. 4. At least one clear lamp attached to the front, with sufficient intensity to reveal persons and vehicles at a distance of at least one hundred (100) feet ahead during the hours of darkness under normal atmospheric conditions. a. Such head lamp shall be so aimed that glaring rays are not projected into the eyes of an oncoming vehicle operator. b. It shall be equipped with at least one red tail lamp having a minimum candle power of sufficient intensity to exhibit a red light plainly visible from a distance of five hundred (500) feet to the rear during the hours of darkness under normal atmospheric conditions. c. Such equipment shall be in use when the vehicle is operated between the hours of one -half (1/2) hour after sunset, or one -half (1/2) hour before sunrise, or at times of reduced visibility. SECTION 6. LEAVING SNOWMOBILE UNATTENDED. Every person having snowmobile in a public place shall lock the ignition, remove the key and take the same with him. SECTION 7. CHASING ANIMALS FORBIDDEN. It is unlawful to intentionally drive, chase, run over, kill, otherwise take or attempt to take, any animal, wild or domestic, with a snowmobile, all- terrain vehicle, or dirt bike. SECTION 8. PENALTY. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $700.00, or by imprisonment of not more than 90 days, or both, plus costs of prosecution in either case. SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force upon its passage and publication as required by law. SECTION 10. ENFORCEMENT. The City's enforcement agency or the Anoka County Sheriff s Department in order to provide enforcement, shall be exempt from the • requirements of this ordinance. (109A, 1/5/99) —9- Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this th day of. • CITY OF ANDOVER J.E. McKelvey, Mayor ATTEST: Victoria Volk, City Clerk Amended 109A, 1/5/99 Amended 10913, 11/2/99 40 • _1Q S � 4 'fit 7 ON 16.6 s , tr 1i7�.�Y�+YRSIl,1 WeW4 i F ...�` f YN t All Vl "UM i y 3 Y _ M1 x f q Jti v "� ° s a x ly qi Of N �l o W ' A µ4 : ytr +'. r ,,ma�yy °"" - " "� �r -� :• -�' � x �' tMAI Q µ t ' t i tim is a ...A A0 � yqqyyy y ,„�q , � , tk il �. v xt t. 4 At 4 I ¢ r x r d f e • s� 7L ''x a �rrSS r a I de 9 r . � 1 s a' •' �SSY , 'S LSE+ „� r r, <a .�, t4 '� y l y , u 4 ' y F F in ' 4 s k i `Fk Pt s 47lj r TOW k d4: y, y a (10) w e er 1 aft f -; , follov�it�g,�`gu�lty -oi "m 110ft N the J , fo kl img am boW GawfU H** WOO g : or right -c►f- � z..K {3�, �e.StWhy of OR F ;�ezat r TOW k d4: y, y a (10) All pftc expoium perso I ,*v .-(1 Y) Any offensive tr board of hcaft as^ "m 110ft N The J , fo kl img am boW cY- ` w (l) ' a daces, GawfU H** WOO h (3) Akl . houses lo .. ; interRwurse, (4) places where inb Y 4. ,of law m whets ` O r t 'purpose Ol ' , �s of SaIC Or of L ' usod for lnain#1#�:Bi1Gh 'e ti k1` . aI F A N:yyy Y US tS a � , CI wil } f{h ,F '- xT a ~ ' M1 kt 4 - ijf: w� p' �l `w 'e ti k1` . aI F A N:yyy Y US tS a � , CI wil '- xT a ~ ' kt y '- xT ~ ' &,1;;:': ".1,;",,"'.',"" ~:~rr f~.:~ · ~, .'" ~""_: I; ~'r"~$- ~.;?~~it \t'~, ',' ~1*i', (:/.i-):..:~. Ii< t~\,C ~t.,~,~", ~,ot-~ ~1t'. , ~- ;.~';, - ~;!::-~~~t< ~", , g!2f{...::,", "..S,', ".' ~'*~(i:;~l ",~~"" ' , l~~>, . ' ,-, ;> ';::;'::;" ,....,--. (}~~0",_,--" '-r. '. ~~lt~\:. '. p,- -', " ~'.., .,-. ),- , ',' ," i'>,!~~>. ' ~~':t';.\' . ,;", ",.,...~ ~f~!'::::' :-.;. ":-'~:;, '-,,:\:<~< .,'/' ~ ';' ,1,;;:i:~,';.,. ,., ~,~~."... "", .~ ✓ a ro. b a� , 1'� y .ytl - 3 y Yy `� r� ..' �' �'N ✓ .. .. fi r. ":rF.:: 4: e s ?F r' - i ar, o 41 f , ! ; ;_;,'i.-::_t;----- : ,~~~({~t\;; l~~'~' )J~' c), fl~, . .<'~ "C.<_:~:- [~~:;~i< ~t;; ~ -."c:,' II:' L ,".:# ,'_: ' ' ;~ .", -Xr ~~. ' :,',t "'~;"~: ,. ," '.;; i~': ~.;~; :.,,~, '~ '-<;,~~-:,,'. ~-"" '~-' hZ ;° t MW F - � f f � I I, 4.. A i at f i , hZ ;° t MW F - � f f � I I, 4.. A i i , ,rf; if;" ~~i' ;~~(" , 'JNFOltMA1't~BluIJ' , ," If , j;;~" "<',;:, ,. -/ Mbmesota B:8uM ot~1JJLUJ~ ~ IUlseareh De,partlQeBt ,; .:', , '.", ," '600 S_ Office B~'" J!~f:. ;~,?;: St.PauJ...MN.sSl.sS,"f.,"'~ ' .)#~~ 1;: __~~~1it~ 651-296-5039 ,.' if' "'..~"'.>, ~.., ',-" ,',; ',;.-.'> ~,.' .'. . i'~' _ ,0 :!i?f;:',i Ii :~;:-~_;:-" '_:,:t?:: (:i., '-:' .:.. ,~,; ~,,o.-. 1'<.1'-_-,--', *,-:, ,,':-i[:\j.-~"-, Cha~.351:~r,,'1'.j~~~,0 , -''''_ . ;>,..~~}:;._..-\ -_'-_':, ':i','" :---"._;_,-." _ ,,-,:,:-";_ '{.:'<~"-,;.'; This chapter, part~."~ip:"~h'lawlt~~", ofNaWral R.esouroei_ij,1ihoff"wlyvohido_~, . of .. ts aa._fCitCld'Dad~IHiluttf"l" ;01 "" ^':, participan OIl '",,', "<"~, "" noted" By January lSi_.~'tafk~...:..,~~.~, ~, ,..~": cdmmissione.r and legiJlati_~tIleIIon' ". ","; ;',,:,,;\,'v" :.;if~",.}: _ , ' ,:_ , ~ . \,',' " . '..' -'-~<'r1F" '''JI''''~~'~/'''lfl'f<','-: " . _,' ,',"'" ,.', c _. _ .~..,...",;".__ :,' ~ .<, :;'~,~ffP"::'~:~0~::{~f: . the number _~tm of~ ~ aD Itidt; , , \ "',' :fiainofot1ifaif~i ,,:,,; :'i:, ':"",,:{j{) . a~tortn(~~Jlj~~~lI,,,'lk<~f~~\!!,~ · cL11'Mt ~'1U_~_~;JIt\.f1,~)i;~:;tj; . changes 1D;forestt\eC'l~ft1es. ", ,',; , ; , "{'~(;"~' . ' 'W~ '..,' ',", .:.~\">;;~t:;r,';:;; ~<j,' -. . cost estil!l~ fur It. .. ;~ ( ;....,..,l<'i?,;:';"; ";~'" ,'" ~'"r';~ . ~~luer_ofjd ti~fomUllli.~':; 'f'~ft;;:,;",,~r . . ~~~~_hn,~__ii~ '..' , , ," ,,','" , ",' ';,'" ,C ''''''' ~;",l.if: itl'. . any reJafod....)~I.~l~~:die _loree.\~~:;',' :;~~" ~~lt;:~:; " , , " ','~; ..~:.', ;~''f~::;;)';: :'L"i!~ All oftbese ATV study~are enn.. itt~~~~~~;,;':fii~:\2,~ .v-~; " ;- - '-- - - ",,;'t"~~.M~'" p?~.,:"~. ~-~ ~ . ~ ~ ~!-I~.;:~:';)J. j\~\~F'( It" ' , .... .. ",' 'f::~' , Thb publica~n can be made avaid in ~ formaIS~ ~-" ' (voice): or the Minnesot:iJ &.ate 'Rela, SeMci.~;t8IO.Q~.~S 9' (t:ri1 q '. ,~i"-.. .~,--_~':<~; Department publications are ~_l1abte 00 , '~et~tr,www.oouse., ,,," j' - - '- ~> -, " , ;- t, 'i ~~;!f.~~ ~:~~r~~~ ,) ''';'fdd1l:if;' ,"'"''*~' ; ,,', .."~\ ;.t; ,~".sr'" i , 4",~<t,,;,_ "I' , . ,tr;;~,1ir:7'';;:~~, ,,' .~ :i ~ ;1~.~~'~~~j)\'" l '_;\. " . . '!l'~ j.i....J.f~i;!t4r ...- ~ ~~ -~ I.- ....,~l ''';:>,~~; > ,~*,F ~'<I ~! . _', ., ~ >f~~' ' ,ftvv,>", ' ,,' /~1 ';~~ !: .::, ."'-< .J~' ;� �•. _ r 5 �'i' 3� '�' , .ai :"�` + � a � a < .. _... F'�: �.. e...x .. h..... �� r xi� ._ �� R s lq � Mks � fie, s a �, +�� aT, �z � , . _ �� tt� � � ' ,� � +.; t� �, ar, _r_ � !y 5S �,,� � x �. '� �� .(� a w .r�.3 �i YF y f ��yyY �{ ��p YY ^''ytj , � d ^!} _ �3�. y 'i {" �l"'b add ° . � � s s y y r�� t'i' M1��G 4.� }y . L 4 �. ��. -�� t.. �izt„ h. � {1 '' '�e t �•1,� F S eta 7 idk*s the D f2wTa s '? »-aiinlw�i�sincvi}�l�e 4j :, 1 � K .ate 1 S yy, and On (c) R E ExcepY�s pravic l lII (b)`a es C9x�gte a53c . (d) A AUo" motoe "m. > j IY AUOM 8 T � Mbar laud% i W* � n,r F S eta 7 idk*s the D f2wTa s '? »-aiinlw�i�sincvi}�l�e 4j :, a � r ' ,r4 at sr r e t r v`r trails thief ere. cloegd; ;' On lti d 111 S l� and On (c) R E ExcepY�s pravic l lII (b)`a es %meat Ulm wlz� lull " g (d) A AUo" motoe "m. > j je) A AUOM 8 st Mbar laud% i W* � n,r _ M enf k 4 L 4 { y $ } x �� V � ��•,7 F R �r�k,�s aT /' ��ys "r r ft r "'I {Y p ia � F A i }f• 'r M S y o` S t S� i � 4 � r Cep I� y e ♦ i rS � ` s� al Yer �j i 9 -} :'dr ,• s «r Yg 4 t r t f 4 aN �d y y tie ..S'e« '~_;~2~~ tf';' C ~",- ~ /' ~r ~( i>;j" ~tF~' 'if" . r: ':,,,,",,-~ ~;~~:~,: " ~""" -., --t>;.,~ - " ~ ~ii~~:':_:'>~i ;:; - . ~ -t\ .- ~ /?; ry Y i ff .-"M h� avl e rt a� S d eg' • ,'J .,e .�. � T k�� ' x' c. Il k Y�C. f 1 7 'sYY )�^Vd J �t M ol A Z 17 a n � t s M y ui _r M •T safoty to wdhft of*" pato'lq valm. :z i h -.Yi t ah Patrick Robarb do Mary Hilke s 18030 Upintdor Court y Andover, UN 55304 763.453-043S (oveem S 3 A t SS S� 763 - X14-3500 � S a w � `' __�M�) F Y Y �y k i k x F r G fm M I A own A"N out n IV NOT 1 AW id r on jq Zvi Tom hill mlar , , ID:;"'" 1, iT~~:, : "... . :cr;');~.'::,.- , '-:;..."" :~~~.:.;. ~,:'''''':,,>;~~ :.~;,:.ttf' "~!:' ":_ i; i/.. _' ,-r~A" ",.,'-;" ;;~>.,"., +,", ~;.t.~; -, ~~:~:j: , ",:-">' ~jE':~\ :;; !:_ :,~ i." _ ~ ~~1CL::,:y , ~it~~: :' ~: ,<-; , . ~:*;,; 'tt"~~}:t~,~ .:. . '-'.- ;)',.-""- ~.- ''''''-\.- - ~,,' ~~c,. , "" e.;:.:.: 'j:.::, ,~). -:<-. <..-,; ,,.~-;, - ~I~:',;" ~).,' ,.L~. !:'f~'~f':'.,' ~t"j"''', ' il'd'p~ ~l~~';-~:~ '\ ' ~~..F~'"-,-:;.-'''- . ~1-~~-;:' :~-' . ~'}~~",' ',;:,:,.:'","'" ~'.. , )!-a;:'1" F ` { 3nos I prt& td deal t 6aaoompomlle w howyEiI; 11t f an't 9 ti j , lv� � � - � ( Add doorctl We �aever the we <woukl ask s . ' , otttt we leave ber,glaced on the iatOtie te1' otr home. Mua issue of ding t• r trarre ntaulZ'�or trfetorcr+oeB ts. in his track y�'d end it's � Sf1 s and tho fastac ffiay girths more fumes. Seca home is with SQ � 4 " W t able to tags tin .the ph to t, ; . Basically after a few IV lca2a€d PVC bC V diheir bilta. Most limas it °� n� aeCt a $o OU,,,1 WOUla UV ttx n# 3 11*k=w&Wbt?11C BMW 41 A &w is a rawly grov&g ' your_ houso -ta t}ttat'6 ' tuSAe, p **am dwm is apace bates, d members haven't A " yilRFt D�VltDl tdlnwM With dltb 4f tT 17CQ4, y�tll> ` and ,*= is naming our h ire onlinmoa regulating dirthikes on misuses his flght'ia using own home. We're not asking you to ban the wort and hm e� a am siu�cst af�'bbii��tu�s: N sontbttfdutbikes. l:ier go*bis 4ti z muffler only for shoat l# i this neiAW_ tWs his ditNke'tt it etat Perm uvwag4w respect the rwo ofa 4 i 4 fas l ow x �✓ tl _g,++'& I C 4 ;y rNi ! rA` b ��F Y? rt y �d a( 5 4 1 4 w 4 l y t f'c a hi- . M Rq• � ' \ x i . f'c A ug �t guidelbw& k YOU €or fur rime 66 DD �-� a .�R a� F �y 4 ' 011pl ander CkAu t l� Andover, Mini. ;53304 . rq v Ts - 763- 753 -0435 phone: r ' X �. P }i {e kk { .e� ila� N r.Yg r u k 1 Y k i2; y : V b • t .. iklw i* Y t u, r � t m`0' 4t�'i t i C r j ai - �� {e kk { .e� ila� N r.Yg r u k Y � w {e R ✓ 'lam. C 5 :e p h i kk �` p ��HyY ,�mayy Pa W , { 4 1 `u 1 a Ap w O gg AW F w; wo k IP Jo gr 1 � cv v� t q � 4r 11 1 5; J . 1, ;, £" " - s 3 " q e f -' a v.iygi 3 N ` r'L -T;~- . ~~'_~".;~:-':' .' :. "', _~"'<o' , '_i':~,{'~"!,~:(>;,,-< ~~. -~, .. . ;-.;- .t~: :.. ;.'oj"!:,,,: r:t:~~f:': ~~~ .!~;~-~;::. . . '-~" ,_J~,V- { - . to :,;. f>:'~;i-'-~"!4 i$'~;'" ~l:-t~':..;\~ ""lit " ' '. -""lJ'Ji'l- r<; ';,,'Y ~;.;~..~:- ~ ~ ~~"V .".,' ~~~::~,:: ~:' ..':1 ~i' :a;f,' ~ . ~~l:;.:~;' ri\;,. ~,., . : ::.tt:~;::~. Pi~r~' ~}f::;- "'.;i';"- ;&-.-,,~' ~I" ;f;.'~--~-- % ",'h " t~~, ~[;,;-- ',:,," ~~?i"'" >-'~ All �{. cps a- x All � � 1 } � f) 3 fi s I~/Y~:{:~~:'::~ . - --~- ..":~';: f ~ ~~,.€ ~~"", ~ " '" 7 ->- ." c r ~'>~ .-;, '- " :L;:",;-):,:- 'V~f:';.:* <f~t.)~~: . ;" [~;./ ~:~(" j~~~', ~:.:'~ i&" -, ~ ~ '. f- - ~f~', ? .. ~" ~:--,"_'o< J~i~J\; " "."~.,., 1~~:~J~: 'i' ,~.,l'f" , ' ;,.,'-{,. '~,' . ;". ~ ' I~,", :Jr'/f:, , . y,,- -". ;r~~ .",'-:' l. . ''it'" . " , ~}' , \., , ,~-,} ;tl~:~ ',,-.- '.i-~5':>; '~<,;: " ;-,.{ W " t a, s � M At Sketch Plan CITY VIEW FARM ROW PREPARED FOR MIKE BAHN � y VICINITY MAP Property Description: Lot 1, Block 1, WEISE'S SECOND ADDITION, Anoka County, Minnesota, except the east 355 feet thereof as measured parallel with the south line of said lot. Benchmark: Top of hydrant at south end of Silverrod Court. Elev.= 880.20 Northwest corner of top of bottom step at the most westerly house. Elev. = 877.35 Notes: 1. Drainage and Utility Easements Shall Be Provided As Needed 2. Lot dimension are rounded to the nearest foot. 3. Lot areas are rounded to the nearest 100 sq. ft. J RECEIVED Jcks: 0 J —mod It: 30 feet to Round Lake Boulevard I�-I 30 feet 50 0 50 too yard: yard: 3 feet to living area 35 feet to 133rd Avenue CITY OF ANDOVER SCALE IN FEET lands: There are no wetlands on the site. Oct 09, 2002 - 9:29am K: \cad_en9 \land projects \2525.02 \dwq \252502— SK.dri I Hereb certNy that this pion. specifcot:on, °` `!port r= prepared by me or under a du my direct sePSrviaion� and I I a Licensed sio duly Licensed of t the State of 1Gnnesoto. Engineer under the fors of he Stl DATE REVISION k B,iJ Hokonson Anderson Assoe.,�ne. ti=ll Engineers and Land Sur "ors 301 ThuMo- Art., AnpYq Yinnesob %303 ]fi3_u]_casn Car ]s3_!o]_na]n SKETCH PLAN VIEW FARM Row I FR MIKE CITY OF XXXXXX, MINNESOTA SHEET 1 °F 1 SHEETS :CKP BRIAN J. JOHNSON Do 10i09i02 Rea. No. 21529 s &IJ DATE 10/09/02 TFU Ia. 2525.D2 A'4 L4 Io. OWNER /DEVELOPER: MIKE BAHN 13311 Round Lake Boulevard Andover, MN 55304 763- 213 -8200 DESIGNER, ENGINEER Hakonson Anderson Associates, Inc. & SURVEYOR: 3601 Thurston Ave. Anoka, MN 55303 763- 427 -5860 Charlie R. Christopherson, RLS Brion J. Johnson, PE Municipality. City of Andover Watershed District: Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization Street lighting: as required Proposed Utilities: Sewer: City Utilities (available) Water: City Utilities (available) SITE DATA: Proposed use: Zoning: Existing Zoning: Proposed Zoning Area Summary. Parcel area: Lot summary. Number of lots: Largest lot: Smallest lot: Average lot area: Density. Residential R4 (Single Family Urban) M1 (Multiple Dwelling Low Density) Planned Unit Development 58,369 sq.ft. 1.34 acres 7 Residential Lots 11,780 sq. ft. 7,70D sq. ft. 8,300 sq. ft. 5.22 Lots Per Acre Setb Fro Rec Sidi Sidi We N U W IL a J z a SIDE ELEVATION Z O W T O W N H O USES mesota I "'P � �;I wigl�lniu l�_ I i��I � , � i ffi SUN l ' -- www I i - 1—"( low —111 N r V - 826 S.F. : O W lesota REAR ELEVATION WALK-IN CLOSET OWNER'S SLATE 15'-8 x 14' -2' ® O O O BATHROOM LOFT 7'- 4'x7' -2 n it - -- BEDROOM LL — — 12' -4' x 13' -6' O . EN 9'2'x9 ' SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN - 827 S.F. T O W N H O U S E S w W a 2 x Q U J a BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN - 816 S.F. Cl TV VIEW MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAI F A R M E Andover, Mini