Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/11/03CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda February 11, 2003 Andover City Hall Council Chambers 7.00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes - January 28, 2003 3. PUBLIC HEARING Special Use Permit (03 -02) for addition to the Constance Evangelical Free Church located at 16150 Crosstown Boulevard NW. 4. PUBLIC HEARING Revocation of Special Use Permit (03 -03) to revoke • previously granted Special Use Permit (88 -10) for installation of gas tanks, motor fuel and propane tanks on property located at 14320 Crosstown Boulevard NW. 5. Adjournment CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Courtney Bednarz, City Planner SUBJECT: Item 2. Approval of Minutes - January 28, 2003 DATE: February It, 2003 Request The Planning and Zoning, Commission is asked to approve the minutes from the January 28, 2003 meeting. • } CITY of ANDOVER PLANNINGAND ZONING COMMISSIONMEETING —JANUARY 28, 2003 The Regular Di-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Dean Daninger on January 28, 2003, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Chairperson Dean Daninger, Commissioners Tony Gamache, Rex Greenwald, Jonathan Jasper, Tim Kirchoff, and Dean Vatne. Commissioners absent: Commissioner Douglas Falk Also present: City Planner, Courtney Bednarz APPROVAL OFMINITES. January 14, 2003 Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Jasper, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, I- present ( Kirchoff), 1- absent (Falk) vote. VARIANCE (03 -02) TO VARYFROM THE BUILDING SETBACK FROM COUNTY ROADWAYS FOR EXISTING STRUCTURE ONPROPERTYLOCATED AT 3595 I43" AVENUE NW Mr. Bednarz explained that the applicant is requesting a variance to accommodate an existing house that is adjacent to Round Lake Boulevard (CSAH 9). The existing house has a 39 -foot setback from the existing Round Lake Boulevard right -of -way. The proposed county roadway improvement project will take ten feet from the subject property for additional right -of -way. The existing house will be left with a 29 foot setback from this future right -of -way line. Fortunately the house is angled such that only a portion of the garage encroaches into the building setback area. Mr. Bednarz stated the existing structure is legal non - conforming. This means that the structure may continue to be used as a residential dwelling until it is damaged beyond 50% of its assessed value. At that time the structure would be required to be Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting mutes — January 28, 2003 Page 2 To k reconstructed in conformance with the current setback requirements. Additionally, the city will not issue building permits to expand non - conforming structures. This means that the homeowner would be limited to maintenance of the existing structure and could not construct an addition to the house or garage. This also affects the marketability of the Commissioner Kirchoff asked for explanation of the temporary status. Mr. Bednarz indicated it is considered temporary due to the condition that if the home is damaged beyond 50% of its assessed value it could not be rebuilt as it is today, it would have to be moved back on the property. Commissioner Kirchoff noted there are 71 properties affected by the reconstruction on County Road 9. He asked if the Commission would need to look at all 71. Mr. Bednarz stated that the number of properties affected by this project that are currently conforming, and would become non - conforming as a result of the project, is only three. He indicated the Commission may see variance requests for these. He stated that the city worked with the county to evaluate all affected properties and made preliminary recommendations on whether variances would be necessary or warranted for each property within the project area. Staff subsequently hosted a neighborhood meeting with the county to answer questions. He indicated the number the Commission will see that are related to the project will be fairly small, and will need to be considered separately. Commissioner Greenwald asked why the variance was being requested at this time. Tami Gnat, 3595 143` Avenue NW indicated the road is close to their house now and will be even closer with the widening. They have considered changing the garage into a living room and building a new garage on the back of the house. Chairperson Daninger asked if the applicant was comfortable with the temporary status and the verbiage staff has used. Ms. Gnat stated she didn't know the setback was currently 50 feet, they thought it was 40 feet, so that was a surprise to her that they are already so far out of conformance. Mr. Bednarz indicated the property location on the zoning map. He stated that the zoning is R -3, Single Family Urban, whereas it was originally believed to be R -4, which provides a setback of 40 feet versus the 50 feet required in R -3 zoning. Commissioner Greenwald asked if when the county does a project that puts a house out of conformance, does it put it in jeopardy if 50% of the house suffers damage such as a fire, He questioned that the County just says `we're expanding and putting in a sidewalk', then a whole row of houses become non- confonning. Mr. Bednarz indicated that can happen. He indicated there were three properties in that scenario with this project. i Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 28, 2003 Page 3 • Commissioner Greenwald asked if those homeowners were aware of this. Mr. Bednarz indicated they were. He stated the county and city have been in contact with the homeowners so they are aware of the change. Commissioner Greenwald indicated it would be a little difficult for the Commission to deny a variance request under these circumstances. Mr. Bednarz reminded the Commission that this particular property was non-conforming before the County project was proposed. He indicated staff was recommending approval in this case to encourage reinvestment and to avoid a red flag for mortgage companies. Commissioner Greenwald indicated the only reason he would not want to approve this request is to not set a precedence for the next one or two or a dozen. Commissioner Vatne asked if Ms. Gnat was the original owner of the home. She indicated they had purchased it 3% years ago. Commissioner Vatne asked if they were aware it was non - conforming when they purchased the home. Ms. Gnat indicated if it was in the papers, they did not read that far. Commissioner Vatne asked if they only recently became aware of the situation. Ms. Gnat stated yes, when the County project came up is when they became aware. Commissioner Greenwald asked under what circumstances the home became non- conforming, whether it was a change in ordinance or what. Mr. Bednarz indicated the home was constructed before a setback from county roads was adopted. Commissioner Jasper stated Staff is suggesting that if the home is damaged more than 50 %, it must be rebuilt to be conforming. He asked if the applicant was okay with that scenario. Ms. Gnat indicated she was. Commissioner Jasper asked if there was room on the property to do that. Mr. Bednarz indicated the same home could be built to meet the setbacks, but a significantly larger home may be a problem. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Greenwald, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. 03 -02, approving the Variance Request for Joel and Tammy Gnat to Reduce the Building Setback from County Roadways to 29 Feet for the life of the Existing Structure Located at 3595 143` Avenue NW (PID. 29- 32 -24 -42 -0062) Legally described as: Lot 4, Block 2, Andover Boundary Corrmussion Plat No. 1, Anoka County, Minnesota. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes. 0 -nays, 1- absent (Falk) vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the February 4, 2003 City Council meeting. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 28, 2003 Page 4 PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (03 -02) TO CHANGE THE ZONING • DESIGNATIONFROM SINGLE FAMILYRURALRESIDENTIAL (R -1) TO SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RESIDENTIAL (Rd) FOR PROPERTY LOCA TED A T 1021 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. Mr. Bednarz explained that this application had been withdrawn. He stated the property is north of Crosstown Boulevard. He indicated that the application was withdrawn in large part because it would not meet the January 31 ' approval to receive public approval this year. He indicated the process was started late last year and didn't make the timeline required. He added that the application may be back before the Commission later this year. OTHER BUSINESS. Mr. Bednarz indicated the Commission had been sent away with some homework at the last meeting. He stated each Commissioner had been asked to drive around and give some thought to their neighborhood, determining what they like or do not like. He asked if the Commission would review those thoughts now. Commissioner Kirchoff mentioned that he is on the Transportation Advisory Committee, and stated the traffic study is almost complete in draft form. He stated they would be holding an Open House in February at City Hall. Mr. Bednarz indicated he will get that • information on the web site. Commissioner Greenwald stated he likes how recent developments have been laid out. He sees a lot of nice corner lots and thinks the developers have done a nice job. He indicated it is a unique area being built in Andover and he likes the big yards, but has noticed many big garages, which aren't as pleasing to the eye. He would like to see more house and less garage. Chairperson Daninger stated that when looking at accessory structures the Commission talked about garages. Commissioner Greenwald indicated many of the new garages have three or four stalls and when you drive up that is all you see. He added that lie thinks the City has done a nice job with the streetlights. Chairperson Daninger stated this is all important when the Conunission is looking at roads. He encouraged the Commissioners to look closely at the plat proposals that come before them. Commissioner Greenwald stated more and more developments are being completed abutting wetlands and developers are being creative on how they get in. He indicated one pet peeve he has is how Andover Boulevard is 50 miles per hour until you hit Hanson, • then it becomes 3 0 miles per hour between Hanson and Crosstown. He stated people Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —January 28, 2003 Page 5 • need to watch their speed through there and there should be better posting of the speed limit as well. Currently there is only one sign about the lower limit, and he would hate to see an accident through there that was so unnecessary. Chairperson Daninger agreed that speed on that road is an issue. He stated that while that may not be a Planning and Zoning Commission issue, they could look at not having such straight roads in the new developments. He indicated it was something for the Commission to be aware of. Commissioner Vatne indicated that the Transportation Study will be of great interest to him. He stated that development to the north commutes through Andover and is a real challenge. Commissioner Greenwald indicated he has friends and family in St. Francis and the intersection at Hanson and Andover Blvd. is horrible already. He would hate to see it get worse. Commissioner Kirchoff indicated the Commission needed to provide guidance for developers on road design. Commissioner Greenwald advised that an article in the paper discussed the Osseo School • District, and how that area controlled commercial development, consequently the homes had to cover the school districts costs. He indicated Andover needs to look at this also. Chairperson Daninger stated he would like Commissioner Kirchoff to update them regularly on traffic developments. He indicated he would like to look at ghost plots, which give the Commission opportunity to look at feeder streets and traffic around the area. Commissioner Greenwald stated that in front of City Hall where the street has been fixed, cars can no longer turn around. He questioned if the City was receiving calls, since cars have to go through a neighborhood in order to turn south. Mr. Bednarz stated when the open house is held all of the improvements contemplated by the updated transportation plan will be brought to light. Chairperson Daninger indicated they needed to brainstorm, maybe more general rather than local. Commissioner Kirchoff thanked Mr. Bednarz for the 2002 annual report. Chairperson Daninger clarified for the new Commissioners that the document referred to was a type of a grading on how the Commission did last year. Mr. Bednarz indicated attendance was shown in the back, adding that the document was prepared by Jon Sevald, a City Intern. Commissioner Jasper indicated there seems to be abrupt changes where it goes from • urban growth to rural. He feels the City can be better at transition. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 28, 2003 Page 5 • need to watch their speed through there and there should be better posting of the speed . limit as well. Currently there is only one sign about the lower limit, and he would hate to see an accident through there that was so unnecessary. Chairperson Daninger agreed that speed on that road is an issue. He stated that while that may not be a Planning and Zoning Commission issue, they could look at not having such straight roads in the new developments. He indicated it was something for the Commission to be aware of. Commissioner Vatne indicated that the Transportation Study will be of great interest to him. He stated that how traffic pulls through Andover is a real challenge. Commissioner Greenwald indicated he has friends and family in St. Francis and the intersection at Hanson and Andover Blvd. is horrible ah-eady. He would hate to see it get worse. Commissioner Kirchoff indicated the Commission needed to provide guidance for developers on road design. Commissioner Greenwald advised that an article in the paper discussed the Osseo School District, and how that area controlled commercial development, consequently the homes • had to cover the school districts costs. He indicated Andover needs to look at this also. Chairperson Daninger stated he would like Commissioner Kirchoff to update them regularly on traffic developments. He indicated he would like to look at ghost plots, which give the Commission opportunity to look at feeder streets and traffic around the area. Commissioner Greenwald stated that in front of City Hall where the street has been fixed, cars can no longer turn around. He questioned if the City was receiving calls, since cars have to go through a neighborhood in order to turn south. Mr. Bednarz stated when the open house is held all of the improvements contemplated by the updated transportation plan will be brought to light. Chairperson Daninger indicated they needed to brainstorm, maybe more general rather than local. Commissioner Kirchoff thanked Mr. Bednarz for the 2002 annual report. Chairperson Daninger clarified for the new Commissioners that the document referred to was a type of a grading on how the Commission did last year. Mr. Bednarz indicated attendance was shown in the back, adding that the document was prepared by Jon Sevald, a City Inter. Corrunissioner Jasper indicated there seems to be abrupt changes where it goes from 40 urban growth to rural. He feels the City can be better at transition. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —January 28, 2003 Page 6 Chairperson Daninger indicated the plat discussed at the last meeting, off Round Lake • Boulevard, showed good transition. Commissioner Jasper indicated Commissioner Greenwald had talked about overrun garages. He stated that the City View Farm development was also a good example of using the lot to fit the house. Commissioner Gamache referred to the Neighborhood Business Study, indicating it stopped with the area south of City Hall. He indicated the Commission needs to look at zoning and future commercial development north of City Hall. Mr. Bednarz indicated there was approximately 20 acres across Hanson from City Hall zoned commercial. He indicated City Hall is at the north end of the commercial development, and they have the development by the grocery store to fill in as well. He doesn't feel they should go into rural areas and give business designations to sites yet, he would rather see current areas filled in first, then he feels the Commission will have interested parties asking for additional commercial zoning in the future. Commissioner Vatne indicated Andover Station is a beautiful project. He would like to see more streets with biking and hiking trails. He thinks the new developments have been very well laid out. He indicated that while driving around, the residential parks stand out. You cannot drive very far without seeing one, even if it is small. He also • loves Andover's trees and open space. He indicated that distracters to the landscape include some junky areas that could be cleaned up better, which are accentuated with winter; also some rural lots with junked out cars. Other distracters are natural landfills and power lines, though he noted on landfills many trees have been planted to try and disguise the areas. He doesn't like the strip mall plans for older business developments, and would like to see some enhancements to Andover Center, similar to the Maple Grove downtown area. He stated that he hasn't seen many offices with manufacturing areas attached like you see in Champlin. He feels that Andover has the open space to accommodate this type of business and it would be good for the tax base. Chairperson Daninger indicated the reason for limited industrial development could be a matter of the transportation system. Businesses need to be able to get their people there, which Champlin has. He indicated that one of the items mentioned, junk cars, could be re- looked at. He asked if that was regulated by ordinance. Mr. Bednarz indicated that the city has an ordinance on vehicles that regulates where they can be parked, and that they need to be currently licensed. He stated that city policy is that when enforcing these, staff reacts to a complaint. He indicated this is a long- standing policy. Chairperson Daninger indicated that if it is based on complaint only, citizens may not know that. Chairperson Daninger mentioned it may be time to revisit the snowmobile regulations. While it is not a good year for snowinobiling, there may still be time. He indicated that Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 28, 2003 Page 7 they had previously had a large discussion on snowmobiling but was looking for Commission input on whether it was time to revisit. Commissioner Greenwald indicated he was an avid outdoorsman, but he was okay with the current ordinance. He stated that with the number of children in Andover and the way the City has grown, he is glad for the ordinance for safety reasons alone. He added that the hunting ordinance scares him. Chairperson Daninger indicated he doesn't know if it is time again to discuss these ordinances but asked the Commission to keep them in mind. Chairperson Daninger stated he also loves the trails. He indicated a lot of people are attracted to Andover because of the trail system. Co Greenwald indicated the parks are important to keep in mind as well. He stated it is difficult to get park time for sports right now. Commissioner Vatne stated he is happy with the hunting ordinance, adding he lives in a rural area and can wake up and hear shots during hunting season, however he hasn't heard of any problems or complaints by his neighbors. Chairperson Daninger asked if he was north of 160 Commissioner Vatne indicated he was. • Mr. Bednarz stated he would take the Commissions comments back and keep them in mind. Mr. Bednarz advised that the City Council had approved the Woodland Creek Golf Course project and City View Farm from the last meeting. He indicated that the next meeting would include a request from Constance Free Church and a revocation of a Special Use Permit for the Rademacher site on Crosstown Blvd., as a result of the Neighborhood Business Study. He indicated the study showed this was not an appropriate use of the land, and this is the last step to return it to residential. Commissioner Greenwald asked about the schedule for building of the new water site. Mr. Bednarz indicated it was to be completed by early summer. He stated it was taller than he had thought it would be. Commissioner Greenwald asked if there was any news on the sports complex. Mr. Bednarz stated the City was in the process of interviewing respondents to their request for design proposals. He stated they put out the RFP to determine how it could fit on the site, v, -hat it would look like, etc. He stated seventeen firms were being interviewed during an extensive two -week process, then it will go back to the City Council with updates. ADJOURNMENT. 1°✓M©tion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to adjourn the meeting at 7:46 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, l- absent (Falk) vote. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 28, 2003 Page 8 • Respectfully Submitted, Karen Whaley, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. CI • • 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 Plann4 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING Special Use Permit (03 -02) for addition to the Constance Evangelical Free Church located at 16150 Crosstown Boulevard NW. DATE: February 11, 2003 INTRODUCTION The Constance Evangelical Free Church is proposing to expand the use of their site with construction of a new auditorium as well as expansion of the existing parking and storm water drainage areas. Expansion of the use of the property requires an amendment to the existing Special Use Permit. DISCUSSION 09 Uses of Property I. Church The primary component of the current proposal is a new auditorium with a seating capacity of 1,000 people. This addition will accommodate the increasing congregation that is outgrowing the existing 600 seat auditorium. Classrooms The classroom space is located on the east side of the existing building as indicated in the attachments. This space provides an educational experience for approximately 600 students from elementary through senior high aged children. 3. Fellowship Hall /Cafe The existing 600 seat auditorium is proposed to be converted to a less formal gathering area where activities other than worship services can be conducted. The existing kitchen will be relocated and updated as indicated in the attached plans. Licensing for the kitchen facility is provided by Anoka County Human Services. 4. Daycare The applicant would also provide daycare services that would be open to the public. The facility would be located on the second floor of the education wing on the east side of the existing structure and may also include the new children's rooms adjacent to the proposed auditorium. The facility would accommodate up to 200 children between the ages of two and twelve years. Licensing for the facility is needed from the Minnesota State Department of Human Services. This agency provides the requirements for both the facility and caregivers. Additional description can be found n the applicants letter. Additional information on licensing requirements can be found at www.daycare.com/minnesota/ • Access The site presently has an access to both Crosstown Boulevard and 161 st Avenue NW. Anoka County has indicated that a median will likely be constructed along 161 Avenue NW. This median may extend past the church's existing access. A potential future access is shown along the shared property line with the property to the west of the church. An agreement between the property owners would need to be reached for this to occur. This access would align with the future entrance to the Constance Corners residential development to the south. At the present time the applicant is intending to widen the existing access to provide one inbound and two outbound lanes. Parking area The number of required parking stalls is based on the seating capacity of the auditorium (1 stall per three seats). Additional parking spaces may be required if the site will be used for other purposes (i.e. daycare, classrooms, fellowship hall, etc.) if these uses occur at the same time that the auditorium will be used. The proposed auditorium addition will have a seating capacity of 1,000 people which yields a parking requirement of 333 parking stalls. The parking area currently provides 330 stalls and the proposed parking expansion would increase the total of 457 parking stalls. This is 124 stalls above the required number of parking stalls which should provide adequate parking for all of the proposed uses of the site. An area of concern is the width of the proposed parking stalls. Ordinance 8, Section 8.08 requires stalls to be ten feet wide. The stalls shown in the new parking area are only nine feet wide. Screening of Parking Area Ordinance 8, Section 8.08(F) requires parking areas to be screened from adjacent residential properties. This screening can consist of berming, landscaping and/or fencing at the discretion of the Planning Commission and City Council. The attached landscaping plan illustrates a combination of deciduous and evergreen trees along a portion of the west property line, but the proposal does not provide screening from residential property to the west of the new parking area. The applicant has indicated that they are willing to construct a beml along the west side of the parking area to provide screening from the property to the west. Staff is amenable to this approach provided that landscaping will be installed on the berm if the property to the west is converted to an urban residential development. A condition has been added to the resolution. Storm Water Treatment/Retention A second storm water pond is proposed to be constructed at the northwest corner of the site, adjacent to an existing wetland. The pond will allow surface water to be treated before it enters the wetland. The capacity of the storm water facilities will be examined in more detail during Commercial Site Plan Review to ensure the ponds will be adequately sized and prevent adverse impacts on existing wetlands or surrounding properties. . Signage Ordinance 8, Section 8.07 limits institutional uses in residential zones to a maximum of 100 square feet of signage. The site currently has a 24 square foot monument entrance sign at each entrance (48 square feet total). The proposal indicates two additional wall signs with lettering that measures approximately 50 square feet each. The applicant is requesting an additional 52 square feet of signage for the potential future expansion of the monument signs to include advertising for the daycare. All of the signs would total 200 square feet. The applicant has provided findings for the proposed variance on page two of the attached letter from Miller Dunwiddie dated January 27, 2003. Staff believes that the proposed wall signs will be a positive addition to the proposed project. Staff would not support expansion of the monument signs without having information to review on what they would look like. The Planning Commission is asked to determine the total square footage of signage that will be permitted on the site. Architecture Elevations of the existing and proposed structures and site photographs are included in the attachments. The existing structure is primarily finished with EIFS (similar to stucco) as • indicated in the attached photographs. The roof is also a major feature of the south elevation of the structure. The proposed structure would be constructed almost entirely using pre -cast concrete panels with two colors that will match the theme of the existing structure. The panels will be finished with exposed aggregate, a rough surface that will complement the existing EIFS material. Six inch wide reveals are proposed between horizontal rows of concrete panels to provide some relief. This approach will blend the addition as it sits in the background of the existing south and east elevations. Utilities The site is currently served by private (on -site) sewer and water. The applicant has indicated a strong interest in connecting to City sewer and water as it becomes available with the public improvement project for Constance Corners on the south side of 161 s ` Avenue NW. The 2020 Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MU SA) boundary presently runs along 161 Avenue and the subject property is located in the Rural Reserve Study Area. For these reasons, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment would be necessary to extend the 2020 MUSA boundary to include the subject property and to remove the property from the Rural Reserve Study Area. The applicant has indicated that the existing private system could be expanded to accommodate the proposed addition if public utilities are not made available. 0 STAFF RECOMMENDATION • Staff recommends approval of the proposed Special Use Permit subject to the conditions in the attached resolution. Attachments Resolution Location Map Applicants Letters Site Photographs Site Plan (Full Size in Packet) Special Use Permit Application Package (11x17 set in packet) GNP i/ /, Cc: Jim Barber, Constance Evangelical Free Church, 16150 Crosstown Blvd NW Andover, MN 55304 • • CITY OF ANDOVER • COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. R A RESOLUTION AMENDING SPECIAL USE PERMIT 99 -16 TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF THE CONSTANCE EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH LOCATED AT 16150 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW.(P.I.D. 14- 32- 24 -14- 0001,0003,0004,0005 and 0006) LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT A; WHEREAS, The Constance Free Evangelical Church has requested an amendment to Special Use Permit 99 -16 to allow the expansion of the existing use of the property including a 1,000 seat auditorium, 127 parking stalls and expansion of storm water retention facilities for property located at 16150 Crosstown Boulevard NW; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined that said request meets the criteria of Ordinance No. 8, and; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds the request would not have a detrimental effect upon the health, safety, and general welfare of the City of Andover, and; is WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a variance to the 100 square foot maximum sign area allowed for institutional uses in residential zoning districts provided in Ordinance 10, Section 8.07, and; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the special circumstances for the proposed variance are as follows: 1. The 100 square foot maximum does not provide adequate signage for the subject property as a result of the following; a. Substantial setback of the structures on the property b. Limited visibility at the intersection of 161 Avenue and Crosstown Boulevard c. The 55 mile per hour speed limit of both adjacent roadways d. The site is a corner lot with two major entrances WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the Special Use Permit request; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby agrees with the recommendation of the Ptamung and Zoning Commission and approves the Special Use Permit to permit addition of a 1,000 seat auditorium. 127 parking stalls and expansion of storm water retention facilities subject to the following conditions; 1. Successful completion of the Commercial Site Plan Review process with the City of Andover. 2. Including a variance to the maximum sign square footage for institutional uses in a residential zoning district to allow two monument signs and two wall signs totaling square feet. 3. Screening from the undeveloped residential property to the west shall be provided with a berm. In the event the property to the west is developed, the applicant shall be required to provide additional landscaping to conform with screening requirements in effect at that time. 4. The Special Use Permit shall be subject to a sunset clause as defined in Ordinance No. 8, Section 5.03(D). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this ____ day of , 2003. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Victoria Volk, City Clerk Michael R. Gamache, Mayor U • Exhibit A • P�i ONE The RC east 198 feet of the north 330 feet of the south 495 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 14, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, except Parcel 53. ANOKA COUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT -OF -WAY PLAT NO. 20, filed as Anoka County recorder document No. 655265. PARCEL T1A/� That ;part of the east 971.35 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 14, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, lying southerly of the north 103.00 feet thereof, except the following four described parcels: 1. The east 330 feet of the south 660.20 feet of the north 763.20 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 14, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota. 2. The east 198 feet of the north 330 feet of the south 495 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 14, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota. 3. The east 396 feet of the south 165 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 14, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota. 4. Parce 15 1, ANOKA COUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT -OF -WAY PLAT NO. 20, filed as.Anoka County recorder document No. 655265. • PARCEL THREE Th e east 111 feet of the south 165 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 14, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, except parcel 53, ANOKA COUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT -OF -WAY PLAT NO. 20. filed as Anoka County recorder document No. 655265. All that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows' . Beginning at a point on the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter distant 103 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof; thence South along the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter for a distance of 660.20 feet; thence West and parallel with the North line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter for a distance of 330 feet; thence north parallel with the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter for a distance of 660.20 feet; thence East and Parallel with the North line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter to the point of beginning, Anoka County, Minnesota. Abstract Property 16234 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota Constance Evangelical Free Church Special Use Permit Amendment • 0 an 4 Project Location Map K--�-E Andover Planning gave o PA • 0 an 4 Project Location Map K--�-E Andover Planning . C Free Church 3)434-5995 Fax (763) 434 -8080 16150 Crosstown Blvd. NW • Andover, MN 55304 • w,rww.constancefree.org January 17, 2003 s Courtney Bednarz City Planner City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Blvd. NW , Andover, MN_ o 55304 ' Dear Courtney: Brent Visser indicated that in the course of your informal review of our future plans, the subject of our planned public child care operation came up. The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a quick overview of our plans as they stand today. The earliest that we would offer public child care would be fall of 2003. It is possible •• to funding constraints, staffing, and other programming considerations, that, our implementation would not begin until the completion of our Phase 3 construction project. With regard to childcare versus private schooling our intent is public child care only. We would however be open to exploring facility leasing to either public or private schools in the area. The ages we ate considering are above the age of 30 months. Infants up to 30 months are not being considered in either our short or long range plans. Hours we are planning to offer child care are Monday through Friday from 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM. When we open our public child care operation we expect the following number of children by age group: 30 -60 months not to exceed 75 during any onetime block 5 -12 year olds not to exceed 125 during any one time block Please contact me with any questions or concerns. Sjloe7,ly, J _M Barber Sr. Associate Pastor 123 North Third St., Suite 104 i Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 te1: 612.337.0000 fax: 612.337.0031 www.millerdunwiddie.com January 27, 2003 Mr. Courtney Bednarz City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W. Andover MN 55304 RE: Constance Free Church MDA# R00O201 Dear Mr. Bednarz: Miller Dunwiddie Architects is submitting this application for a Special Use Permit on behalf of Constance Free Church. Andover's ordinances require this submittal for expansion of a church located in a Residential (R1) district. With this application there are three distinct issues submitted for consideration, as follows: First, growth of Constance Free Church has expanded beyond the capacity of the current structure to • accommodate all of the regular members in attendance at a single service. Instead, continued growth has resulted in the need for three separate services on Sunday mornings to serve the needs of the congregation. Therefore, we have been asked to design a new sanctuary space that will seat approximately 1,100, increasing by approximately 500 the existing capacity of 600. Because of the increased sanctuary size, education, circulation and support spaces will also need to be expanded; and the existing sanctuary space will be converted into a fellowship hall. The total area of the currently proposed sanctuary addition will be approximately 34,000 SF on the first level and 11,000 SF on the second level. The sanctuary has been located on the site where it will be easily accessible from both major streets, Constance and Crosstown Boulevards, thus permitting parking to be distributed around the site. Church members can then access the sanctuary space quickly from multiple directions without interrupting the flow of children to and from their respective classroom spaces. Storm water management concerns also impacted the location of the sanctuary, influencing that it be placed on the west side of the building rather than on the east side. Second, Constance Free Church desires to establish a Licensed Day Care facility within their current building that will be open and available for public use. The church wants to be involved in the community and has identified a need for quality day care facilities in the area. In response to this need, they are seeking approval to establish a Licensed Day Care center for children above 30 months of age within their expanded facility. Please review the attached letter from Constance regarding their intended operation for this facility. Third, signage proposed for the building must be reviewed and approved under a Special Use Permit as defined by the City ordinances. In addition to the Special Use permit, Constance Free is also seeking a variance on the signage area limits imposed by the City ordinances due to the unique • nature of their site. A strict interpretation of the zoning ordinance appears to limit the total aggregate Selected 2001 Firm of the Year By the Minnesota Chapter, American Institute of Architects Mr. Courtney Bednarz Constance Free Church, MDA# R00O201 January 27, 2003 Page 2 area of signage to 100 SF for institutional uses within a residential district. This limit does not take into consideration several significant factors that impact this site. First, the site is a corner lot located at an intersection of two significant county roads where speed limits are 55 MPH. Because of this, we feel that larger text sizes are required to make the message legible for passing vehicles. Corner lots must also address multi - directional traffic and provide identification in four directions rather than two. Portions of the signage ordinances in other districts address this issue by permitting increases for corner lot locations, and /or increases based upon frontage. However, the paragraph addressing institutional signage in a residential district does not appear to grant any increase for corner lots. Secondly, the site is buffered from the intersection by the wooded cemetery in the southeast corner, thus limiting the exposure of the building to the intersection. While the City is benefiting from the natural wooded appearance of the corner, the church's presence and visibility from the corner is diminished. Currently the church has two monument signs located at the entrances from Constance and Crosstown to aid in locating the entrance to the church. Together these signs take up approximately 48 SF of the allowable sign area. This leaves 52 SF of allowable area for other signs on the church building. Since there are four directions, two signs will be required to identify the building. A sign of 26 SF is not large enough to be useful on the facade of the church. We therefore ask that the aggregate limit of 100 SF be increased to 200 SF, with a maximum size of 100 SF on either lot frontage. The signage shown on the attached documents is 75 SF per lot frontage, giving a total of 150 SF for the entire site. The additional signage area up to 200 SF would be reserved for use by the day care center when it is placed in operation. On the submission, we have also indicated future educational and worship spaces that will be required as the church continues to grow. The church is aware that this current submittal is not for approval of the future additions and that they will need to resubmit for revisions to the Special Use Permit as future projects are implemented. However, Constance Free Church considers it essential that the City be informed of their intentions on future development on their site. A Planning and Design Summary Memo is attached to this letter for more specific information on these future plans and the impact they have on the current submittal. Please review the attached information and plans concerning the design for the proposed current sanctuary expansion and future expansion possibilities, and please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Brent R. Visser Project Manager Enclosures Copy Jim Barber, CFC Jeff Wellman Chuck Liddy, MDA Ryan Freeze, MDA Ben Newlin, MDA (UAR0C \R00O201 \Documentation\A - Architects\A5 Code Review \L - 030127 -city submittal.doc) - � q { \� ��\ k . j \ �\ .- .,: /y J [--.,I ��\ k J [--.,I Ll 0 . »�. . =,a \ INN �� 4,s ---------- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - .. .. ... .... i Z6 gg h k 1-hil HUHN p I I M1 EA �z Sy z 1 2 z 2S m > 0 m d z HUHN p I I M1 1 1 1 llg� ii' $ ail 1 1 1 1 1 ,j, Ail k .- i I I 11h 'I '• oli I ° 0 A OT.'nN LWAA -. € A R� A pp@ �� pE g a 'MW 7AV IQ Im 'ki1aL iI 'm 3sGI f 4 g� �R Y y g „Y loll x x� YS° ir, • L an c1 z r) �c N W V g 1 N -{ O t W o i> yy gc 6 yO2 � ag � nrmn2 ' ddi ' r N I S ys F� r Oy�Clm _ E \ � . '-�L- - -, ;I 11 1 I Im /� � ( j ( \ 9 • O-Z 2ffl I iii • 9 FMI Fx i is f II II III I IlN C i e i a� [ [6 c o IN IN ii 1 i Him Ff IN 0 0 0 0 1 r^ e� i 7 { f i m V t r N31 Ca 1 tl f fi.c: i y[Sda D C t A °n3� t oimz i [Are. _ N . ... w.Jl' _ ... .... It ~i ~ - ~ t - t - t t t - t - l': - , - t e ii ~ i i.-l i, i i I i i i I: Irv I I I I ,~\ I 1 i i! I ~ 111; 'L.i i I ~i /'\ Ii'" I I ~ I : ~! I!=" -- I' :; 1 \ ' '!' I 'I .' g I Ii, , I I I,g . .... 'iEl, , \ ' "I~ . ,. . : -' -' '1 - I 1 I ' I \~ I _.__..i.i___ ,---~=~ ----~ I /, .r ' '. 7,'n~_'nn ~\\]=..__ ----~ '.... " . ' . . l~ I . l:::::: .- I I I I' , I .' I ' I '" /~ i .' ; , , ' ..... <,' , I ' ", ~ I '1' i :1 Ii, ;~' i *, i "~, i !' , " 'I ' , ~s~ ", - I '1' 1;1 'I I ' I 'I' I """'!'I I , j ~' I j ~ . /\ ~ ,\\ 'f!Y (',,'" i 1:1 i ,li!8 ! i . '~~'!' T ~\~,: i' , i , __ _ ____ fV1 ~ ' ! ~\'''''AoII :" I~~i! 'lI I .'" ' " III"" I' '~~~ "I ! ~ ,I' r--II, ";{ ~ "If ' . ili~?--H------- - - . & "'- /' ~ ~ 1 Lll,~~ '! ..-..-..-,.-' ,'::~~ ''; ., ..11-,-, ~~, _..' ,---..-..-..-..- '-"1"-' i '=' 1"/0= n_. -- ~ -, -'~,..~.'"" ~~..n-...- , --~'-\\', ^ r'=' . '. v" ~..............r. ~ r:u 0\\.... "<?' I ! I j, ~ 'I: ~<>.. ,~4:.i,~'" I ~ [i;P'-'~";\~"'>' : I, , , , i ' I r~ .,... )::!......~ '~~~., I. I I > i : : '~._..~,~~.. l~il ;,-,,-,,:' ': __..___.._.._.._,_,_.._1'-0 , ,,.;:~i ~ :~~ ;'~~i"1 i l I ' , , ,_.._.. _ _ n' ,__, _ " ,..___.._n_"_" .._, -..-, - . I u" ! '-"- '-"-'! .. ~~ _' ..-..-=.. "j ., 18 i '! ::I~\~~' : ; _.._.._.._..n.._="_ '--p > , I '~ I ~-""'" .' ~ r ' ' I : I ...~,o:> ~I {i!i ,= ! , . '"' ~I .~. """, - i I I '<Q , ~ \ <p'.' --.--- 1-- I -';I,--r-",-~T - !I~~,;,i-r" ----Ii e' · I::"! ,~ 11!7, ( '-0 , , U -': : ~ ' \. P' _ _ -+rru .. " ,u_u U-'1 ", i ! ';;;;;;;;;;; m : :,.j~ . Q:m..1 w;;Qr,~'::::\,,___, '_ ..L ,_u , u_.. u_uL..D: ; , p ~ .~ ~ I l----v~ I '~:-----l~--': ~i' " ..~- :-..-.. T' _ i_ _ '! ",-,:=,;:)-, -~'i~i~li8 .., -'-l-'l~: I , '_ I' 'Jr' , -" I ' : " I 8' " ' " . ! I'~' ! 118 ,g~k' ! iQ! 1 I' Jf' --- ----.~..c. , : / ! . i j' 'tJ i ~ I . ' nu u-,:"'.V : " " ",;,'-_.._..,:-:= -.. i, '1" ";;f:- - l' u u, ---j--"------i"---~-'-~' '___," ,,-u_;z..u1y-uft-G" !-.--~Ll----~,.- '" - 1'----- --18- -,- __-----_---u - -+-- --,~- .., il~ '/' I "..1 \' 'I i i . i I . [, '"'II ~ , I ......... ',.. ...' ,. ''', " ,,' i ' :i:" ,n:'. . .' .;1::;,.., I '. ~ I 1 . ;::;f:;z I n:J : ~ I / ".' ",!~ ' , 'l...l"~l.l ..,; ___n':'u - n,!.:.-e .' ~ 6j;!l "~LJ' f _ ',,- r- .0' . ! .1 c-Fl . (<1.;0 ! " . lll,g II 11Q Ix -if=i= ~ WlllIT I,g. ,0/ 10, 1,\ -;, II , : r ,y i /' '. '~!ll ":ii:ll/, I \I11111' "ll ' " ~ ;"; f' ::- , -..-n'''2-7'':-, "-.."",, '.."..' n_n_,'_,,_, u .. u , u .. "~'\," .. ..2u n_____"7_~_{jI-.'u ~ '.' I ',' ',' i-- ' .. i" , 'i ." :. "X----~ 1----- I--,'~ '" -1-- - . ---~. f---i-----J --, I I ' , ,I.' /' '''". ~' , g rr' ~I" , I / /' II.' i'l j l~ ".~ ; I ,." '.., i i 'I , '18 ' , ':, u ' u ." , 'u ; '.. '-I--,lm-u ',,-,-u-I,nO '. i, ' I Lf.1 jlfn ,II i!~ ~i; i i ~; Ii '!', ,-..- __"!Ejn-j -u-"_':_"-"-r-..-.._____..-n-n-u-u-u-u~:,-..-u" jlll/<>" ":-n ;-..nu-ui!l--nunu-i-;,; I' I., 'h I e, , ~ I ".." 'u" u=.:0' II '~"> ')Y"l 'I . , ,. , -' ~, I i n ! '-::i:.,'-~l1fJ..-u-,: _.._u_.._..___..~u_u_u__~~:___u_.._.._.._.._.._.._.._, ' = u uT u .. ,':::;\'11 ;>;;, . '., I Q '" ,i'!'T" ' [' I ===; ~~; " .. ._,,-- . i . -- i ---: ., I ' 0,,1 .... .)~' ~ ~ Il~. >,- <; i' ,Y_ <,I,. '. I !.@ I f', ~:: I~...dl l i ..~CJ I it \J !~DJ ~ ~ ~ II n, .!: i- ; I ~ >T_''''. l' ~.!;l' Q ~. ~. ,; , ~, I ~ I~ I I~..., ,.., g lo!" ~!~;~ I~!~ I~ ii l~ iffij I~ , I , I~ 115!~~~ ": I _ I r 1\ ,jJ "'I!~" ^ I;- J :: I;-~ , I ,~ ,~ ~ I .. ""'1,1 I , i co_, n Ii I I~ I: I~ in' '~i:' ! . II! II A ~I e 11I111I1il. 'y L ~,r=;111 III Ii II II I II I I It 11 I: II ilV=-1 I 1 I" ! Ii f 'I 1 'I I I i I I n 'i t ~ :t> i, ! ~~ ~ ~, t~ f-" I I . 8 ~ 'I '" O ~ $ )>> :!;ji , ' " ~ ' ;;0 W " ! m : c , ,,~~ ~ ;;:, "~l!. , l !i~ J I~ , l , . j~ ,..--.l -..-.. - ,/ / / / !~ t I / .( / / .- / I ~ I ,/ / / ~ m~ l ~~~ >~m ~~~ "'l 'I' ~~~ ' p OZ~O I I 3 ~ ~ ~ 1 ~I ~rn i ~ ~ ~~B~ .:i _" 1: ! • 0 • "cz V e s 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 Plann4 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING Revocation of Special Use Permit (03 -03) to revoke previously granted Special Use Permit (88 -10) for installation of gas tanks, motor fuel and propane tanks on property located at 14320 Crosstown Boulevard NW. DATE: February 11, 2003 INTRODUCTION This item concerns revocation of a special use permit granted in 1988 to permit fuel storage tanks to be located as part of a commercial development on the subject property. DISCUSSION No significant progress has been made since the permit was granted in 1988. Unfortunately, at the time the permit was approved there was not a sunset clause (expiration after a period of time of inaction) either in the Zoning Ordinance or included in the approved resolution. As a result the permit will not expire on its own. Therefore, the approval granted with the permit will continue indefinitely unless revoked. Neighborhood Business Study As a part of the 2002 Neighborhood Business Study conducted by Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc., a number of undeveloped commercial properties were evaluated to determine whether a commercial designation was appropriate given a number of factors including, the Comprehensive Plan, site location, access and the surrounding development pattern. It was determined that the subject property was no longer appropriate for commercial development based on the location of the property and the fact that the property is completely surrounded by single family residential development. The Plaiming Commission is asked to make findings for revocation of the previously granted special use permit. The following findings from the Neighborhood Business Study are recommended. Please see the attached section of the Neighborhood Business Study for more information. The current Zoning Designation of the site and all adjacent properties is Single Family Urban Residential (R -4). 2. The site is completely surrounded by single family residential development. 0 3. No physical features exist that serve to provide a transition between a commercial use and the surrounding single family uses. • 4. The site is located approximately one mile from the intersection of arterial roadways. 5. The Comprehensive Plan discourages commercial development away from concentrated nodes or major intersections to avoid intruding into residential areas. 6. Direct property access to minor arterial roads is to be limited except for concentrated commercial nodes, whereas this site is a single isolated property. 7. Single family residential uses have direct access to the local streets across from the site. Directing commercial traffic onto these streets would be intrusive to the established residential character of the area. Applicable Ordinances Ordinance 8 Section 5.03 regulates special use permits. The process for revocation of a special use permit is the same as for granting the permit. A public hearing must be held by the Planning Commission and the permit must be revoked with a majority vote by the City Council. Staff Recommendation 0 The Neighborhood Business Study and the lack of significant progress on the site provide a basis for the special use permit to be revoked. Attachments Resolution Location Map Excerpt from Neighborhood Business Study ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is asked to recommend to the City Council that the special use permit for installation of gas tanks, motor fuel and propane tanks be revoked. Respgctfu}l� s,4initted, Po Art 11 Ae ", F Cc: Grant Rademacher, Rademacher Companies Inc. 6274 Boone Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 i CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. A RESOLUTION REVOKING SPECIAL USE PERMIT 88 -10 PERMITTING THE INSTALLATION OF GAS TANKS, MOTOR FUEL AND PROPANE TANKS TO PROHIBIT THE INSTALLATION OF GAS TANKS, MOTOR FUEL AND PROPANE TANKS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 14320 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW (P.I.D. 27- 32- 24 -33- 0072) LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: OULOT A KENSINGTON ESTATES THIRD ADDITION, ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing to review Special Use Permit 88 -10 and determined that no significant progress has been made, and; WHEREAS, the City of Andover commissioned a Neighborhood Business Study to evaluate the appropriate zoning and land use designations for undeveloped commercial properties throughout the City, and; WHEREAS, the findings of the Neighborhood Business Study indicated the following: 8. The current Zoning Designation of the site and all adjacent properties is Single Family Urban Residential (R -4). 9. The site is completely surrounded by single family residential development. 10. No physical features exist that serve to provide a transition between a commercial use and the surrounding single family uses. 11. The site is located approximately one mile from the intersection of arterial roadways. 12. The Comprehensive Plan discourages commercial development away from concentrated nodes or major intersections to avoid intruding into residential areas. 13. Direct property access to minor arterial roads is to be limited except for concentrated commercial nodes, whereas this site is a single isolated property. 14. Single family residential uses have direct access to the local streets across from the site. Directing commercial traffic onto these streets would be intrusive to the established residential character of the area. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission concurs with the findings of the Neighborhood Business Study_ and: WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the installation of gas tanks, motor fuel and propane tanks on the subject property would have a detrimental effect upon the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood, and; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council that Special 1✓se Permit 88 -10 be revoked. and: WHEREAS, the City Council agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, and; • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby revokes Special Use Permit 88 -10 to prohibit the installation of gas tanks, motor fuel and propane tanks on the subject property and to reaffirm the Single Family Urban Residential (R -4) Zoning Designation of the property: Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this of , 2003. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Victoria Volk, City Clerk Michael R. Gamache, Mayor 0 0 Revocation of Special Use Permit 88 -10 Project Location Map p -4�- E Andover Planning City of Andover N'3 - Nai'ovI bon BJSi;7ess JJSI: - iQi Sfuav Area C - Crosstown Boulevard and 141 Lame Existing Conditions Area C consists of one undeveloped parcel located along Crosstown Boulevard between 141 Land and 142 Avenue. The City's 1991 Comprehensive Plan guided the property for Residential - Urban Single Family Use. The current Comprehensive Plan guides the site for Neighborhood Commercial. However, the property is zoned R- 4, Residential Urban Single Family District, but a PUD allows for commercial use. The site is within one mile of the NB District commercial area at Crosstown Boulevard and Bunker Lake Boulevard. The property is flat with no existing vegetation. The following table illustrates the dimensions of Site C -1: Lot Area Lot Width Lot Depth Site d 2.8ac. 300ft. 550ft. I (amended by City Staff on 4/03/02) Pa 24 Surrounding Land Uses Site C -1 is surrounded on all sides by developed single family uses. The single family uses to the north and south are separated from Site C -1 by local streets, but the residences face the subject site. The site abuts the rear yards of the single family uses to the east. The single family uses to the west are across Crosstown Boulevard with rear yards adjacent to the roadway. The character and configuration of surrounding land uses raises question as to the planned neighborhood use of Site C -1. The only physical feature that exists to provide a transition between a commercial use and the surrounding single family uses is a small earth berm along the easterly property line. t 9 • P L Existing Use Existing Zoning Comprehensive Plan Land Use North Single Family Residential R -4, Single Family- URL, Urban Residential Urban LD East Single Family Residential R-4, Single Family- URL, Urban Residential Urban LD South Single Family Residential R -4, Single Family- URL, Urban Residential Urban LD West Single Family Residential R -4, Single Family- URL, Urban Residential Urban LD The character and configuration of surrounding land uses raises question as to the planned neighborhood use of Site C -1. The only physical feature that exists to provide a transition between a commercial use and the surrounding single family uses is a small earth berm along the easterly property line. t 9 • P L 0 � F p Z <F Q J I, U O U) OQO o 0 . ^.naov=r St NEED - l'iSldf'GOhi00G t3LSfir9SS JiSlli % JlUO; � Access • Site C -1 has frontage to Crosstown Boulevard, which is designated as a "B" minor arterial by the Anoka County Transportation Plan. Direct property access to minor arterial roads is to be limited except for concentrated commercial nodes, whereas this site is a single isolated property. Access to Crosstown Boulevard from Site C -1 is subject to review and approval by Anoka County. Site C -1 also has frontage to 141 Lane and 142 " Avenue, which are local streets. As noted above single family residential uses have direct access to these streets across from the subject site. Directing commercial traffic onto these streets to access Site C -1 may be intrusive to the established residential character of the area. h k I Utilities Site C -1 is within the 2020 MUSA and existing gravity sewer service boundaries. Municipal water service is also available to the property. Recommendat 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. Staff recommends that the Land Use Plan be amended to designate Site C -1 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. Alternatively, the site could be designated URL and allow the zoning to remain R -4. (amended by City Staff on 4/03/02) Page 26