Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/27/04C I T Y O F N 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda January 27, 2004 Andover City Hall Council Chambers 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes — January 13, 2004 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning (03 -09) to change the zoning from Single Family Rural Residential (R -1) to Single Family Urban Residential (R -4) for property located at 1021 Crosstown Boulevard NW. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat of Sophie's Manor, a Single Family Urban Residential development located at 1021 Crosstown Boulevard NW. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Residential Sketch Plan for a single family residential 40 development located at 13309 Jay Street NW. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit (04 -02) for drive through and variance to parking setbacks at proposed CVS pharmacy /convenience store at 3631 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW. 7. Other Business 8. Adjournment 10 • 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: Item 2. Approval of Minutes - January 13, 2004 DATE: January 27, 2004 Request The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to approve the minutes from the January 13, 2004 meeting. 0 9 i 1 0 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING — JANUARY 13, 2004 The Regular Bi- Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Daninger on January 13, 2004, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota Commissioners present: Commissioners absent: Also present: APPROVAL OFMINUTES. December 9, 2003 Chairperson Daninger, Commissioners Tim Kirchoff, Tony Gamache, Dean Vatne, Jonathan Jasper and Michael Casey. Commissioner Rex Greenwald. City Planner, Courtney Bednarz Associate Planner, Andy Cross Others Motion by Vatne, seconded by Kirchoff, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carved on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- present ( Gamache), 1- absent vote. PUBLIC HEARING: RESIDENTL4L SKETCHPLAN TO REVIEWA SINGLE FAMILY URBANRESIDENTL4L DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 15955,15827,15803, AND 15773 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD. Associate Planner Cross explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review a residential sketch plan for a 43 -acre development located along Crosstown Boulevard between 157 b Avenue and 161" Avenue. The proposed sketch plan is located in an R -1, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. A rezoning to R-4, Single Family Urban Residential, will be necessary to process a formal plat. Mr. Cross discussed the staff reports for items 3 and 4 with the Commission. Commissioner Kirchoff questioned where the two nonconforming lots were at. Mr. Cross showed a map and explained the locations. • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 2 Commissioner Gamache asked if there would be a second access to the site. Mr. Cross stated it does provide a second access. He showed the location on the map. Commissioner Vatne wondered how 159th would be routed through the properties to be joined. Mr. Cross stated he did not have the specifics and he referred them to the developer for this question. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Vatne, to open the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Ms. Mary Hammett, 524 159"' Avenue, explained her concern was the fire chief saying they needed 159` open for fire access for safety and the majority of them have lived in their development for twenty years and there has not been any concern prior to this for fire safety. There is one way in and one way out. She feels like they are disrupting so many families by bringing in the through traffic. She stated they would like to keep their area the way it is even though there is growth all around them. Mr. Pat Sprague, 525 159' Avenue, asked if an impact study has been done on how much traffic will be going through the neighborhood if they open this up. He stated they have already paid to upgrade the road and he wondered who would pay for the maintenance and upgrade of the road in the future. Chairperson Da asked Mr. Bednarz if he knew how much traffic would be going through the neighborhood and in which direction. Mr. Bednarz stated this is an item they talked about at the neighborhood meeting and the most direct route for traffic would be to go to Crosstown. Ultimately when the County improves Crosstown, there will be an intersection with a signal light at Crosstown and 159 Commissioner Kirchoff stated it looked like the existing homes will also use Crosstown as the main access as more of a way to travel Ms. Barb Nielson, 546 159 Avenue, asked what street would be right inhight out. Mr. Bednarz showed on the map the street and explained this is not immin but if 159 was to be extended out to Crosstown, the County may take out the medians and they will try to limit access points at other locations. Ms. Nielson stated she is opposed to the rezoning because she would like to keep the area the way it is with wildlife and nature. She stated she does not understand the need to build all of those houses and the integrity of their neighborhood would be compromised. A buffer zone should be constructed all the way around the development and she thought it was a shame that there were other areas in Andover that they did not need to take all the trees down. She thought they should build on those areas and leave this area alone. Mr. Mark Lipski, 629157' Avenue, stated development is inevitable and going to happen. As far as the sketch plan and the way things are laid out, certain trees that were Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 3 brought up for a buffer zone, he saw that they cannot have a buffer zone with some of the trees. He explained that on the new sketch plan, they planned a drainage ditch or pond on the back of his property and this is a concern to him. He wondered if the developer is going to have this drainage, what it will do for stagnant, standing water and mosquitoes. Mr. Lipski stated he has been living there for twenty -five years and they have a stand of pine trees. He talked to a forestry person from the City of Andover and they do not believe they have to clear cut all of those trees. His concern is the standing water. He stated there are enough setbacks where they would not have to take down all the trees and a few of the lots could be put into a rustic setting. His concern is if the lots are '/< acre lots, even on the east side, is it not possible where they can request 2' /Z lots instead of 'A lots or get the lots a little larger such as 1 acre or larger to accommodate the existing houses which will not affect the property owners that have been in Andover twenty years or more. Mr. Shawn Lindberg, 545 Constance Boulevard, stated one of the points that were made was the feasibility and impact of the traffic. He understands every other aspect of the development but he thinks a stop light at Crosstown and 159' does not make sense. He stated the pretty soon they will have stoplights every 125 feet to make this feasible. He thought they should look at the impact of these roads. He wondered how long it will be until they have to expand the roadways to accommodate the additional traffic. Chairperson Daninger stated in regards to traffic, the County has been requesting that improvements be made to some of the roads. He stated that they do look at the traffic in the sketch plans. Commissioner Jasper stated it would be his preference as a matter of procedure to have the builder answer their questions during the public hearing so the public could ask additional questions if need be. Chairperson Daninger stated that would be fine. Mr. Mark Smith, Weston Woods Townhomes, 4601 Weston Woods Way, White Bear Township, explained he owns three of the parcels in the development. He stated the sketch plan is rough at this point and in answering the questions regarding the trees, they are a sales point and they do not want to take any more trees than what is necessary. Mr. Smith showed on the site map where the trees are located and the reason why they needed to be cut down. Mr. Smith stated the ponds will not go stagnant; they will have water moving through them every time it rains. Ms. Nielson asked if the pond along the development property will remain triangular or will it be added to surrounding properties. Mr. Smith stated they cannot put water onto other properties. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —January 13, 2004 Page 4 Mr. Smith stated the buyers of the property will dictate how they want to try to save the • trees on their lots. Commissioner Vatne asked if there was a possibility of developing some of the property into larger parcels. Mr. Smith stated the problem is the sewer and water costs would be too high to develop the land. Mr. Lipski stated a few things came to mind, last Monday he asked the developer about the pine tree buffer and he was told that the trees were thirty -three feet away and they would be clear cutting all of the trees. As far as the cost of getting City sewer and water, he understood that people were willing to pay more for a larger lot. Ms. Nielson asked if they have to have City sewer and water on the property. Mr. Bednarz explained the staging plan and MUSA boundary. Commissioner Jasper stated this is also the area of the new fire station and the City wants City sewer and water for the fire station - Mr. Bednarz stated they would put City sewer and water no matter what. Mr. Pete Nielson, 158` Avenue, asked how they are going to save all the trees and provide drainage for all of the homes that will be in there. Mr. Bednarz stated they did not design the project. Mr. Jim Cyberlick, 157 Avenue, stated his concern is about the trees. As far as the buffer zone goes, he understands the economics of the sewer but they are going to put in ninety-four houses in, if they only made the lots around the parameter larger, they would recoup his investment and still satisfy the existing neighbors. He thought this was a good way to save the trees. Mr. Doug Kronhouse, 577 158 Avenue NW, stated he is on the end of the cul -de -sac where the development will link with theirs. He stated the whole way it is set up in this development will put the houses close together and putting larger lots on the ends makes more sense. Mr. Lindberg stated he agrees with the points of the buffer area and having larger lots around the outside. He was curious about what type of impact is the City imposing upon the actual linear footage of the City sewer and water to the developer and where are they coming up with the $300,000 lot at one acre type of a figure. He stated in evaluating that, increasing the size of those lots, what is the feasibility of increasing the size of the lots in the development. Mr. Sprague asked if the extra revenue in the City will lower their property taxes. Mr. Bednarz stated this will not lower their taxes. He stated that the more people who are contributing will also increase the number of people using the services. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 5 • Mr. Smith showed on the map where the trees are and explained why some of the trees need to go. Mr. Smith stated they have professional delineators that check the soils to create elevations for ponding and buffers for wildlife. Ms. Hammett stated her main concern is the road getting punched through. Some of the developments around their area are larger developments and they only have one way in and one way out and she wondered why it was such a concern to put the road through. Chairperson Daninger stated the Commission is concerned about cul -de -sacs and they search for the best thing for the development and the surrounding areas. Ms. Hammett stated her concern is they have been this way for a long time and she wondered why they needed to punch the road through at this point when other developments in the area have the same type of cul -de -sac and have only one way in. Motion by Jasper, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Commissioner Gamache stated with the standard layout, he does not like this with the standard butt lot and it looked like they were creating some kind of outlot in the development with the acreage lot that is staying. Commissioner Jasper stated the circle with one access is inappropriate under the standards they have been using because they end up with a two thousand or more foot long cul -de -sac and it seems to be fixable by bringing the road through. Discussion ensued in regards to how they can fix the access points. Chairperson Daninger stated whatever it takes; they will want to save as many trees as they can. Commissioner Kirchoff stated the pond will affect the trees also and he wondered if the pond needed to be there. Commissioner Gamache stated they needed to have a pond somewhere in the development and he also wants to save as many trees as possible but the houses will back up to the setbacks and you will still see the houses, and most of the trees will be in the front yard and the houses will not be covered by the trees. Commissioner Jasper agreed and he stated the problem is the setbacks that put the houses in the middle of that particular stand of trees. He stated he would rather see developments have some type of transition from rural to urban. He noted that is the problem they have in Andover where rural residential lots back up to urban residential lots without any transition. He did not know if they can have the lots larger and still be developable. 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 6 Commissioner Kirchoff stated he did not think the entire parameter needed to be one acre • lots, they are looking at this one corner area and the pond becomes a kind of buffer area. Commissioner Gamache stated in Andover, lot prices are already prohibitively expensive for a %< acre lot Commissioner Vatne stated in taking a look at the layout of the development, it m aximize s profitability by putting as many units as they can on the property that is proposed. He stated there needs to be some consideration back to the discussions around the buffer zones. They need to have the developers give consideration to the neighborhoods that the developments are being dropped into. He believes a majority of the stand of trees should remain because it will enhance the development and will be a great asset to the City Commissioner Jasper stated it seems like they see developers are maximizing lots to maximize the profits and they should have to justify it and bear some burden to prove it Chairperson Daninger agreed. Commissioner Kirchoff stated looking at the lots, some of these are not the legitimate width, there are some that are smaller than the eighty feet required. If the lot is eighty feet and it meets their standards, it is a matter of how it is laid out and he has a concern with the circle. Chairperson Daninger stated this is a minim standard but can be made larger. Chairperson Daninger s ummarized what the Commission liked and did not like. He stated they did not like the outlot He suggested the developer re-look at the buffer zone. The Commission did not like the circle road and do they have some kind of a tree plan. Chairperson Daninger asked how they can protect trees through the tree plan. Mr. Bednarz stated the City's present tree ordinance allows the developer to choose tree save areas but the Planning Commission, staff and City Council can suggest tree saving areas but it does not give the City the ability to require the developer to saver trees in any given location, it is only a recommendation. Chairperson Daninger stated their recommendation and guidance would be where they will try to save some trees. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the February 3, 2004 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (04 -01) TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM SINGLE FAMILYRURAL RESIDENTIAL (R -1) TO SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RESIDENTL4L (R-4) FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 15955 15803,15773 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD. I* Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —January 13, 2004 Page 7 • Associate Planner Cross explained the 43 -acre spread of land around the site of the new fire station is composed of four separate parcels that would all like to be considered for rezoning from R -1 to R-4. The owner of one parcel has already applied for a rezoning. The application represents the rezoning request of the other three properties. With the passage of this resolution, the entire 43 -acres will have the potential to be rezoned at once instead of the individual parcels being rezoned at different times. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Vatne, to open the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Jasper, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Commissioner Vatne stated this is within the MUSA district and makes possible the zoning change with the addition of sewer and water. He stated in his mind, the availability of sewer and water is not enough to change the zoning. Commissioner Jasper asked Mr. Cross on page two, item four, regarding Weston Woods Townhomes, he wondered if this meant townhomes were going to be considered. Mr. • Cross stated this is the development company name and townhomes will not go in. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Kirchoff, to recommend to the City Council approval of the rezoning request based on the fact that times and conditions have changed. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the February 3, 2004 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (04 -02) TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM SINGLE FAMILYRURAL RESIDENTLAL (R -1) TO SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RESIDENTIAL (R-4) FOR PROPERTYLOCATED AT 15929 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD FOR FIRE STATION #3. Associate Planner Cross explained according to the City Code, parcels in the (R -1), Rural Residential zoning district cannot receive city sewer and water. Since it is imperative that the new fire station has access to municipal utilities, an effort is being made to change the station's zoning to an Urban Residential zoning classification. Mr. Cross discussed the information with the Commission. �J Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 8 Commissioner Gamache wondered why they were rezoning this property separately , because he thought it was part of the previous item, which was recommended for rezoning. Mr. Cross stated the fire station on the map was for site location purposes only. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he read that they have been upgraded for fire insurance rating already and he wondered if they would get even better ratings with the new fire station. Mr. Bednarz stated the availability of another fire station shortens the response time and that is one of the factors they used to determine what the insurance rates should be. He stated he will make sure he gets the information for the City Council. Motion by Casey, seconded by Gamache, to open the public hearing at 8:41 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 8:42 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Casey, to recommend to the City Council approval of the rezoning request based on the fact that times and conditions have changed. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the February 3, 2004 • City Council meeting. VARIANCE (04-01) TO VARY FROM THE FRONT AND SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR EXISTING HO USE AT 921158'AVENUE NW. Mr. Bednarz explained the subject property contains an older home that was constructed before the current setback requirements were adopted. The home does not meet the current front and side yard setback requirements as illustrated in the drawing. Mr. Bednarz discussed the staff report with the Commission. Commissioner Kirchoff asked for clarification how the Ordinance has changed. Mr. Bednarz stated the house is an older structure that was built before the, current setbacks were adopted. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if this became a non - conforming use because of the Ordinance change. Mr. Bednarz stated that was correct. Commissioner Jasper stated they needed a variance beyond the actual house; they would also need a variance for the deck. Mr. Bednarz stated this was correct. Commissioner Vatne asked if the neighbors signed the petition and if they did, they do not have it in the packet. The applicant stated they did not have the signatures on time to • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 9 • give to Mr. Bednarz. Commissioner Gamache stated a petition was not necessary for this variance. Chairperson Daninger stated that was correct. Commissioner Jasper asked if they had the signatures from the neighbors. The applicant stated he did not Commissioner Jasper asked if anyone was able to drive by the home and did it fit into character of the other homes. Commissioner Gamache stated if they put in an asphalt road instead of the gravel, it would vary a little in layout. Commissioner Gamache asked if they were being specific in the thirty feet for the variance or are they making this house legal non - conforming. Mr. Bednarz stated the way the variance is written the setback would be thirty -five feet on those two sides of the property. Chairperson Daninger stated it was his understanding that anything above and beyond this would require another variance. Mr. Bednarz stated that was correct. Commissioner Vatne asked for clarification if in fact this was built on this location before they had the setback requirements in place, he thought this would have been grandfathered in as is. Mr. Bednarz stated this was not the case because when the ordinances change, if you have a structure that does not meet the requirements, that • becomes a non - conforming structure. They are allowed to use and do maintenance on it but it cannot be expanded and if it were to bum down, they would not be able to reconstruct it on the same location. Commissioner Jasper recapped the steps taken by the applicant when they found about the need for a variance. He asked if the neighbors were all given notice of this request for a variance. Mr. Bednarz stated they sent a notice out to neighbors within 350 feet of the property and a sign was put out on the property. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Casey, to recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed variance to the front and rear yard setbacks. Commissioner Vatne stated it was a little troubling that the letter stated the applicant had a petition with neighbors' signatures only to find out this was never done. He felt a little uneasy approving this. Mr. Jim Toay, 15743 Redwood Street, stated he encouraged the City to approve this simply for the fact that they are older homes. He stated the house looks one hundred percent better then what was there before the applicant moved in. He stated all the neighbors received notices and saw the sign. • Commissioner Gamache asked if this home were to be damaged, does the variance stay on the property or would they have to rebuild within the current setbacks. Mr. Bednarz Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 10 stated they would be able to rebuild at the thirty -five foot setback as opposed to the forty . foot setback, Mrs. Genz, applicant, stated that if the neighbors had concerns, they would be at the meeting. She apologized for not having the signatures. They are a young couple with a small child and their goal is to improve the home and without the variance they will not be able to do this. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the February 3, 2004 City Council meeting. The Commission recessed at 9:00 p.m. for a five minute break. The Commission reconvened the meeting at 9:05 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (04 -03) TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM SINGLE FAMILY URB41V RESIDENTL4L (R-4) TO MULTIPLE DWELLING LOW DENSITY (M-1) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD AND 141 LANE NW Mr. Bednarz explained the Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed • rezoning to allow the Crosstown Meadows project containing attached townhouses to move forward. Mr. Bednarz stated the Neighborhood Business Study contemplated either low or medium density residential development for the subject property. After a public hearing process the Council determined that low density residential was most appropriate for the site. Mr. Bednarz stated the property located in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Municipal utilities can be extended to serve the development. A rezoning to Multiple Dwelling Low Density (M -1) is necessary to allow the proposed twinhouse style buildings. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Casey, to recommend to the City Council approval of the rezoning request based on the fact that times and conditions have changed. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the January 20, 2004 City Council meeting. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 11 • PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (04 -01) FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW OF CROSSTOWNMEADOWS, A TWINHOUSE PROJECT CONTAINING 16 UNITS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD AND MI LANE NW Mr. Bednarz explained this application continues the review process started with the Crosstown Meadows Sketch Plan. The development consists of 16 attached townhouse units on approximately four acres. Approval of the Conditional Use Permit will allow the development to be constructed according to alternative standards that are designed to m aximize the quality of the development. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Casey, to open the public hearing at 9:13 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Ms. Becky Joyner, 14194 Quinn Street, stated she has been talking with the builder quite a bit and some of her issues were resolved. She stated she is fine with the entire plan but she is concerned with the tight squeeze at the comer near her house. She wondered if the house could be turned a little so the comer is not so close to the property line. Mr. Bednarz stated it would affect both comers of the structure but they can take a look at this. • Ms. Joyner also wondered what would happen with the pond behind the houses. She wanted to know if the neighborhood kids would have access to this and if this would be a safety hazard. Mr. Bednarz stated the watershed and City have design requirements that prevent steep slopes in pond areas. Motion by Vatne, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 9:18 p.m. Motion carved on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Commissioner Kirchoff thought they have come along way since this was first looked at for a site for a gas station. Chairperson Daninger asked if there will be more room for trees and can they do something with the pond to dress it up and make it more presentable. He wondered why the structures will all be the same. Mn Bruce Carlson, Kodiak Homes, stated the structures are all the same as far as size and shape but they will have different siding, stone, brick and roofing. These will all be earth tones. They will all have the address stones and trees and shrubs in the front. As far as the berm in the back, they are doing everything required for this. He stated the pine trees are at the required separation to allow them to grow and not kill each other. The trees will be five to six feet tall to begin with. He stated the association will be required to • maintain the pond to whatever standard is set in the association documents. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 12 Commissioner Jasper stated they could include the maintenance of the pond in the • Homeowners Association. Mr. Carlson stated they want to keep the cost of the association low. He stated they are trying to keep the monthly fee under $100.00. Commissioner Vatne stated the landscaping on the far side of the pond is well done and will add a backdrop. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if there will be a berm along Crosstown. Mr. Bednarz showed the grading plan and outlined a three to four foot berm above street level along Crosstown Boulevard. Mr. Carlson stated they will coordinate the landscaping with the elevation and make it so the homes are screened from Crosstown Boulevard. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Casey, to open the public hearing at 9:13 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. The public hearings were combined for Items 7 -9. Motion by Vatne, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 9:18 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Casey, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution R 04, approving the proposed Conditional Use Permit subject to the conditions in the attached Resolution. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the January 20, 2004 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARYPLAT OF CROSSTOWNMEADOWS, A TWINHOUSE PROJECT CONTAINING 16 UNITS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD AND 141 LANE NW Mr. Bednarz explained that the Planning Commission is asked to review a preliminary plat for the subject property. Mr. Bednarz explained the proposed plat contains 16 townhouse units on approximately four acres. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as the property is designated Urban Residential Low Density (URL) which allows up to four units per acre with planning unit development review. Commissioner Jasper asked if there were sidewalks existing beyond the segments recommended for the developer to build. Mr. Bednarz stated there were not. Commissioner Jasper asked what the purpose of recommending the developer build sidewalks was. Mr. Bednarz stated because it is close to a busy road, it gives pedestrians a safe place to walk. • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 13 • Commissioner Vatne asked if the City would recommend sidewalks to be developed further into the developments if they are not already there. Mr. Bednarz stated that if the area were not already developed, it would be nice to extend the sidewalk a block further back to allow pedestrians to get off the road at an intersection with a local street. Commissioner Jasper stated when they did the sketch plan on this, one property owner was concerned with lights from the road going into his window, and he wondered if this was fixed. Mr. Bednarz stated this the road was shifted to allow the lights to shine on the garage and not the house. Commissioner Vatne stated there were three or four points brought up before and it looked like everything has been met. Mr. Bednarz stated this was correct. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Casey, to open the public hearing at 9:13 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Motion by Vatne, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 9:18 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Vatne, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the proposed preliminary plat subject to the conditions of • the attached resolution. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, I- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the January 20, 2004 City Council meeting. OTHER BUSINESS. Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on related items. It was noted the reappointment of Commissioners Jasper and Greenwald to the Planning Commission. The Commission discussed the 2003 year update and Planning Commission report card. ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Kirchoff, to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. u Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 13, 2004 Page 14 Respectfully Submitted, Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. • • u TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Courtney Bednarz, City Plann SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning (03 -09) to change the zoning from Single Family Rural Residential (R -1) to Single Family Urban Residential (R-4) for property located at 1021 Crosstown Boulevard NW. DATE: January 27, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed rezoning to allow the Sophie's Manor project to move forward. DISCUSSION As with all rezonings, in order to change the zoning the City must establish one of the two following findings are present: 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 proposed plat is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as the property is designated Transitional Residential (TR). This designation indicates that the property will transition from rural to urban with the extension of utilities to the property. The property is located in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and lies within the current growth stage (2000 - 2005) in the City's Sewer Expansion Plan. Staff Recommendation The times and conditions have changed due to the fact that properties to the north and west have developed at urban densities and municipal utilities are now available to serve the subject property. Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezoning. Attachments City Code Amendment Location Map ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is asked to recommend approval of the rezoning request based on the fact that times and conditions have changed. �' rr Cc: Emmerich Development Corporation 1875 Station Parkway NW 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE 12 -3 -5 ZONING DISTRICT MAP TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM SINGLE FAMILY RURAL RESIDENTIAL (R -1) TO SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RESIDENTIAL (R -4) WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined that said request meets the criteria of the City Code, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposed rezoning to the City Council based on the fact that times and conditions have changed due to the fact that properties to the north and west have developed at urban densities and municipal utilities are now available to serve the subject property. WHEREAS, the City Council agrees with the Planning Commission recommendation, and; I* NOW THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: City Code 12 -3 -5, the Zoning District Map of the City of Andover is hereby amended as follows: 1) Rezone land from R -1, Single Family Rural Residential to R -4, Single Family Urban Residential on approximately 34 acres (P.I.D. 23- 32 -24 -12 -0001) legally described as: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 23, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, except the Burlington Northern Railroad, lying north of Crosstown Boulevard NW. AND That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 23, Township 32 Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota lying North of Crosstown Boulevard NW except the West 250.00 feet of Said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter. 2) All other sections of the City Code 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 2004. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Michael R. Gamache, Mayor Victoria Volk, City Clerk Sophie's Manor N W-O Project Location Map AndoverEPlanning C I T Y O F ND OVE . 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 PlannA/ SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat of Sophie's Manor, a Single Family Urban Residential development located at 1021 Crosstown Boulevard NW. DATE: January 27, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission is asked to review a preliminary plat of 46 urban lots on approximately 34 acres. DISCUSSION Access through the Development Access through the property is limited due to the existing streets stubbed at the property Iine, location of wetlands and the rail line along the east property line. A single north -south street can be located between wetland areas and will connect to existing 155' Avenue at the southwest edge of the project. As indicated in Figure 11 of the Transportation Plan, a collector street is planned to • extend through the property and all the way south to Andover Boulevard. This raises two issues. First, a connection to Crosstown Boulevard is needed. Second, lots are not allowed to front on collector streets under City Code 11 -3 -2. Access to Collector Streets Driveways are typically not permitted on collector streets due to increased traffic and increased speeds on these roadways. Introducing additional turning movements slows traffic and can be detrimental to traffic safety. Additionally, increased speeds and traffic levels on collector streets conflict with safe enjoyment of front yards and creating desirable neighborhoods. Due to the development constraints described above, the property can only develop with driveways on the north - south/collector street. It should be noted that that Vale Street NW was designated a collector street because it will carry slightly higher volumes of traffic than a typical local street when it is fully constructed as shown in Figure 11. Vale Street NW will not carry enough traffic to be designated a state aid route unlike most other collector streets in Andover. A variance to City Code 11 -3 -2 has been included in the attached resolution based on these findings. Access to Crosstown Boulevard The applicant has designed the plat to provide access to Crosstown Boulevard through the property to the southwest that is not a part of the current proposal. The property is for sale, and this plat has been delayed in an attempt to coordinate the development of both properties. No agreement has been reached at this time. The developer will continue to negotiate with the property owner to allow the street to be constructed as apart of the proposed project. The location of this access is based on the following factors: • Providing local street access to the property to the southwest. • Maximizing the distance of the access from the rail line. • Aligning access with the sketch plan of property on the south side of Crosstown Boulevard to achieve a full intersection in the future. As with all new connections to County roads, turn lanes and bypass lanes will be required by the County through their permitting process. A condition of approval requires the cost of these improvements to be shared between the two properties based on the number of lots in each development. Temporary Access In the event that the access shown on the plan is not constructed, Staff is recommending that a temporary access be constructed for the proposed development to mitigate the increased traffic that would otherwise result at Avocet Street NW to the southwest. Avocet Street NW is currently the only connection to Crosstown Boulevard for the surrounding neighborhood (see location map). Location factors for the temporary access are as follows: • Maximizing distance from the rail line • Avoiding a location directly across from the existing house on the south side of Crosstown Boulevard • Locating the access to work with the sketch plan on the south side of Crosstown Boulevard in case the property to the southwest does not develop or develops differently than shown on the ghost plat. Staff recommends the location be through proposed Lot 5, Block 3. A 60 foot wide temporary • street easement will be necessary. Conditions of approval will require the developer to obtain a permit from Anoka County, to construct the street to City standards and would allow the temporary easement to be vacated once a permanent connection has been established. Additional Right -of -Way Thirty feet of additional right -of -way is proposed to be dedicated to Anoka County as a part of the proposed plat. ACHD Comments Despite meetings, phone calls and letters from City staff, no comments have been received from the Anoka County Highway Department (ACHD). A sketch plan from a previous developer was submitted for comment on September 26, 2002. A sketch from the current developer was submitted for review on October 7, 2003. The plat was submitted for review on November 14, 2003. No comments have been received. State Statute requires the County Engineer to provide comments within 30 days. Given that the City is essentially out of review time on this project, all that can be done at this point is to include conditions requiring the applicant to conform with any future recommendations of the ACHD. Lots The lots will conform to the R -4 Zoning District and buildability requirements of the City Code with a few exceptions as follows: The wetland edge will need to be adjusted on Lots 16, 17,18,19, Block 2 to achieve 116.5 feet of is buildable area between the front property line and wetland edge. These areas are indicated on the 2 attached grading plan and will need to be approved by the Coon Creek Watershed Management Organization before approval can be granted by the City. • Lot 1, Block 1 does not meet the minimum lot depth requirement of 130 feet. The lot may also be considered a butt lot due to its location between two corner lots. This situation is caused by the location of existing 155'' Avenue NW and the south property line of the subject property. A variance would be needed to City Code 12 -3 -4 and City Code 11 -3 -6 to allow the lot to be created. Alternatively, the two lots could be combined into one lot facing east, with additional width available for the property to the south when it develops. This would allow the property to the south to achieve four lots. Without additional property only three lots could be achieved on the property to the south because additional right -of -way would be taken from the property just as with the proposed plat. A condition addressing this situation will need to be added to the resolution to address this situation. Double frontage lots are shown along Crosstown Boulevard and provide the additional ten feet of required lot depth, but no screen planting as required by City Code 11 -3 -6. This requirement has been applied to plats such as Constance Corners and Foxburgh Crossing that abut county roads ( and where wetlands didn't prohibit rear yard screening). There is an existing row of mature evergreen trees that can be saved to meet this requirement (see attached aerial photograph) and alleviate the need for new trees to be planted. The majority of these trees will be located inside the additional right -of -way taken as a part of this plat. The grading plan can also be adjusted to save these trees and allow the rear yard drainage shown on the grading plan. The preliminary plat indicates two proposed outlots, Outlot A along the east side of the rail line, • and Outlot B at the southwest comer of the plat. The outlot to the southwest may be subdivided in the future at the time Wintergreen Street NW is extended to the south. The outlot to the east is unbuildable and will be required to be combined with adjacent property. 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 Management Organization, 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. Other The developer is also required to meet the following City Ordinances and all applicable ordinances: City Code Title 11, Subdivision Regulations City Code Title 12, Zoning Regulations City Code Title 13, Planning and Development City Code Title 14, Flood Control Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat subject to the conditions of the attached resolution. . ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is asked to recommend approval of the proposed plat subject to the conditions of the attached resolution. 3 Attachments Resolution Location Map Development Plan (11x17 in packet) Figure 11 Transportation Plan Sketch of Property to South Aerial Photograph (existing trees) Respectfully sub 'tted, o ey n • Cc: Emmerich Development Corporation 1875 Station Parkway NW CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO R A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "SOPHIE' S MANOR" FOR EMMERICH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1021 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW (P.I.D. 23- 32 -24 -12 -0001) LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 23, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, except the Burlington Northern Railroad, lying north of Crosstown Boulevard NW. ME That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 23, Township 32 Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota lying North of Crosstown Boulevard NW except the West 250.00 feet of Said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter. WHEREAS, the Andover Review Committee has reviewed the preliminary plat; and WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed notice thereof, the Planning Commission has conducted a public hearing on said plat; and • WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a variance to City Code 11 -3 -2 to allow lots to fr ont on a collector street, and; WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the special circumstances for the proposed variance are The existence of wetlands, surrounding development and a rail line which preclude any other roadway design that conforms with City Code 11 -3 -2 and that Vale Street NW will not carry enough traffic to be designated a state aid route unlike most other collector streets in Andover. WHEREAS, as a result of such public hearing, the Planning and Commission recommends to the City Council the approval of the plat. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby agrees with the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approves the preliminary plat with the following conditions: 1. The preliminary plat shall be revised as follows: a. To.include a 60 foot wide temporary street easement on Lot 5, Block 3. b. Outlot A shall be eliminated by being combined with the adjacent residential property. c. To eliminate Lots 16, 17,18 and 19 of Block 2 if the Coon Creek Watershed Management Organization does not approve the proposed wetland fill areas. d. The tree protection plan and grading plan shall be revised to save existing trees along the • north side of Crosstown Boulevard. 2. The preliminary plat shall otherwise conform to the plat drawing revised January 22, 2004 and stamped received by the City of Andover January 23, 2004. 3. The developer obtains all necessary permits from the Coon Creek Watershed District, DNR, Corps of Engineers, LGU, MPCA, Anoka County Highway Department and any other agency that may be interested in the site. 4. Contingent upon the approval of the Rezoning of the property to R -4 Single Family Urban Residential. If this request fails to be approved, the preliminary plat shall be considered null and void. 5. Park dedication and trail fees shall be paid on a per lot basis at the rate in effect at the time of preliminary plat approval. 6. A variance to City Code 11 -3 -2 is granted to allow lots to front on a collector street. 7. The applicant shall be required to construct a temporary access to Crosstown Boulevard in the temporary street easement on Lot 5 Block 3 in the event that a permanent access cannot be constructed through the property to the southwest as a part of this development. The temporary street connection shall conform to City standards. The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Anoka County Highway Department for said temporary access and follow their recommendations. 8. The applicant shall be required to pay a portion of the cost of future county road improvements for the permanent access through the property to the southwest. If the road is constructed as a public improvement, the full cost of these improvements shall be allocated based on the number of lots in each development. 9. The temporary street easement on Lot 5, Block 3 can be vacated once the permanent access has been constructed and the temporary street connection with Crosstown Boulevard has been eliminated. 10. Contingent upon staff review and approval for compliance with City ordinances, policies and guidelines. 11. Such plat approval is contingent upon a development agreement acceptable to the City Attorney. A financial guarantee will be required as a part of this agreement to assure typical subdivision improvements will be completed. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this _`" day of , 2004. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: 11 Victoria Volk, City Clerk Michael R. Gamache, Mayor Sophie's Manor 0 0 Project Location Map N W- b Andover Planning � t C 1 � f 1 l \ a � � w o ti n w � ry r v� e y 1 ':�- ri_Y _i .x14' • /L��,'� Al g r � .6 n7� x 1� x p � p � 4 rr l � 4 F { Et iT1e g le x M z W a i ll a $ a, ig g a z ; a see]; 9R512• 'a t n a { [ Zia S t4 a � � w o ti n w � ry r v� e y 1 ':�- ri_Y _i .x14' • /L��,'� Al g r � .6 n7� x 1� x p � p � 4 rr l � 4 F { Et iT1e g le x TA iet 1:1 O ••• {{{ �I •➢f N u �{ 4 S d u i 5 11 gy d I � C a � ! �l T� jr-. t o tti ♦ � A 6 a v ees IF f t a 1 1 g T pp �p� I+ _. tr _ _ __ __ ...•Wl�°.`Li�` .:: 'i= .Y.;�i:T?:Y`Yf�y, '`.Q ___ T _, i � M z W a i ll a $ a, ig g a z ; a see]; 9R512• 'a TA iet 1:1 O ••• {{{ �I •➢f N u �{ 4 S d u i 5 11 gy d I � C a � ! �l T� jr-. t o tti ♦ � A 6 a v ees IF f t a 1 1 g T pp �p� I+ _. tr _ _ __ __ ...•Wl�°.`Li�` .:: 'i= .Y.;�i:T?:Y`Yf�y, '`.Q ___ T _, i � 1 'xN�11fYH' d11IA � M � Mll 1 'xN�11fYH' d11IA � U ili HIS y g ! e r g l o ; p ±p - IKI � E " z z 2 f! 1 e@ Him If 'd .! Y:k xE n � E E X M B 35aala vxln onax ,__ � R 99 ggE T o i. .� •. .i li t li� f5l �iS �l� 'f C 14 ysys [ µ£ ! R �c z 2 f! 1 e@ Him If 'd .! Y:k xE n � E E X M B 35aala vxln onax ,__ � � | || |9+$ | � / � \ . 2 ® § q k� ] | § | ] | Rl/ � �n/ � •!�, ' q � 2( ■ !# $s0 ' |.� n . � § ! | � � ■ ■ | | | | via |� � / ,4 § F § � . � | || |9+$ | � / � \ . 2 ® § q k� ] | § | ] | Rl/ � �n/ � •!�, ' q � 2( ■ !# $s0 ' |.� n . � § ! | � � ■ ■ | | | | u t i YLq Yr�- o� e ?e rp ill A ' o Fi 1 G pjF x�`fi�fi 2 I AF p Y` "�n e4 i Q. O � � ti ti p W •`7y+1 Va X:. L E k 6 51 oDii ®O i61 s I I I i } O ^Y � � V i i e ?e rp ill A ' o Fi 1 G pjF x�`fi�fi 2 I AF p Y` "�n e4 ^,, "� s - "s� 14 , N � . �g ¢ r b F-------------------- - - ----------- -- - - - - -- - - -- r a U � e � Po a p F W IL i p •`7y+1 Va X:. L E k 6 51 oDii ®O i61 s I I I i } i i ^,, "� s - "s� 14 , N � . �g ¢ r b F-------------------- - - ----------- -- - - - - -- - - -- r a U � e � Po a p F W IL Po a p F W IL f r O o ti w �g C4 W D4 w r m nn < i yy z 1 kg c, C� � €q� �e1 W � � �qq .. F e F � g g r. F S'69¢iQ�g pp �yy�II ggQ q �I • a g F' 31 Tr <�i�6 O o ti w �g C4 W D4 w !jI� k @@ tr ,gy a I � � Y'I s4 9 yd s 1 kg c, C� � €q� �e1 W � � �qq .. yy qqxp g g r. F S'69¢iQ�g pp �yy�II ggQ q �I • a g F' 31 Tr <�i�6 396 E�,E C.FG� !jI� k @@ tr ,gy a I � � Nigh ! Y 9 yd q 8e x _ 44 V ® ° a mg a Y'I s4 9 yd s 1 kg c, E�sil 5` Nigh ! Y 9 yd q 8e x _ 44 V ® ° a mg a o, 'd 0 O O � C �i O U O ,O O C U N O N off 17 It III 4 14 21 \ ! ---- - 1w ti IS �}SM W �, ` y w . y x ° • aY Tj, is `- �• �� ,may' '�` A x �H`o' Y' +. ,s e i ek 'is^.'9[d' , � ti�`r..s �x . .uy � ,.. " y ' "" ✓ ,:' w'� £ ,,SS br 'a s }, .- .. r Q Y e�`. .fi^ q. V :1• � 5 �'-:' 4A 4 .p.w te a. 't r e, ' TP x :. +w `� " ;ys '� i'. Tr x� r* . v. 'f' � x V E nR ., � �•' 4 {�t "`ham ��.� X t. � ;.� 9 g � �� , p ,{ I P y � t .e in N K Y r"1 , r r• x i x 5 C I T Y O F �&N DOVE9 - e • TO • 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US FROM: SUBJECT: DATE Planning and Zoning Commissioners Andy Cross, Associate Planner PUBLIC HEARING: Residential Sketch Plan for a single family residential development located at 13309 Jay Street NW. January 27, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission is asked to review a sketch plan for a 4 -lot residential subdivision. DISCUSSION Conformance with Local and Regional Plans and Ordinances 1. The proposed site is designated Urban Residential Low Density in the Comprehensive Plan which carries density of roughly four units per acre. The proposed subdivision would have a density 3.3 units per acre, which complies with the Comprehensive Plan. 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. Two of the lots meet these requirements, but the corner lot does not. The property is located inside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Municipal sewer and water are available to serve the property. Access to City Streets The current sketch plan shows lots fronting on 133 Avenue. 133 Ave is considered a collector street, which means it carries at least 1,000 daily automobile trips. The City Code prohibits the development of residential lots that front onto collector streets. This sketch plan will therefore require a variance from the City Code if it is to move forward. The ordinance that prohibits residential lots from fronting on collector streets is in place to address public safety concerns relating to cars slowing or backing out into heavily - traveled rights -of -way. Slowing down for a turn can disrupt traffic, just as backing out into moving traffic can present a hazard. Additionally, increased speeds and traffic levels on collector streets conflict with safe enjoyment of front yards and creating desirable neighborhoods. For these reasons the Code does not permit the placement of driveways onto collector streets, and this proposal would require a variance if the applicant wishes to front his new lots on 133 Avenue. The applicant has offered several reasons why he should be granted a variance: 1. The applicant's existing driveway is situated at an awkward angle and moving it to face 133 Ave would be an improvement over the current situation. 2. The City of Coon Rapids has permitted driveways to front onto the south side of 133 Avenue across from the applicant's property. 3. There is a broad shoulder along 133` Avenue that would accommodate traffic that may be slowing to turn into the proposed driveways without impeding the flow of traffic. 4. The applicant has indicated a willingness to include turnarounds in the driveway plans • for the new lots so that cars would not have to back out onto 133` Ave from these lots. Site Design The current sketch plan does not illustrate where the houses will be placed on the lots or where their driveways will enter 133` Avenue. The aplicant has indicated that only the two eastern properties would need driveway access to 133` . The corner lot on the east end of the subdivision is not wide enough. Corner lots that are not back -to -back with another corner lot are required to have a width of at least 100 feet. There is currently an 80 -foot wide easement on the applicant's property. He has applied for a Vacation of Easement and the item is scheduled to go before the City Council on February 3` 2004. 133 Avenue bubbles slightly to the south directly below the applicant's property. The sliver of land that is created between the applicant's property and UP Avenue belongs to the City of Coon Rapids. The applicant will be required to show written proof that the City of Coon Rapids . will convey this land to the him. The City Engineer of Coon Rapids has indicated to the applicant that Coon Rapids will not sell the piece. of land until they are sure that Andover will allow the subdivision to proceed and permit access to 133 Avenue. The applicant will have to indicate how he plans to get services to the new lots. The sewer and water lines along 133 Avenue are owned by the City of Coon Rapids, so the applicant will be required to get written proof from Coon Rapids that he is able to connect to those sewer stubs. Please reference Engineering Comments 14 & 15 for more information. Natural Resources There are some valuable mature northern pin oak, bur oak, silver maple, and other trees on the property. The applicant is encouraged to preserve as many of these trees as possible. A Tree Protection Plan will eventually be needed. It can be submitted independently or included on the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. ACTION REQUESTED 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. Respectfully submitted, ( Attachments Location Map eiyross Sketch Plan Engineering Comments Cc: Ernest Rousseau, 13309 Jay St NW, Andover, MN 55304 w m s ' a T Z w ° o '0 , a� +_' o azi R m E € f' ' w ( sz z v lS Z w o a� V ` Q Z N C L W F Z ~ G I � N C 0 LU Z _j } cm O w¢ w N m a ~ W w¢ W U F- q Q 10 () y m o C> y o N Cn d 0 ` `2 O N •—O• .. N � V w C '00 U � wn v -o i 0 ` O L i U w _ > > m O d � C ` m d i L C O 0 C C O N j is aaie�r�iwvunw N o w CL c E o m �- nd to .. m r d .. vv d N ''---. S N. � v V w C L_ w N L O w w m m 1 L w E� m 2 j O. m w A w d � r d w a '-'— ---.._---- ---- ._..._ -- -- -- - -._._ __ _� Q N v c o m E`o c . L H Gi O Z W6. 138036 LEDAL :SEE SCHEDULE h PROPERTY SKETCH ACCESS WO RtdnYW SYSTEMS (This is not o surrey) LL Z . f V C11 N hwry was 13309 JAY ST. NW ANDOVER THIS 16 Is f ref residential nortgege mrermotloaoSIAVET T,iiO F U __ M , In rflOtleaN TS. IQ the pre aq parlr dlntlastee! 1. 66604) Yupp the 1` 6 41 61` 418 0 p�or naps is the emrnrq rdcerO,.TM tapr6reneat I lien old dlrleafl0as fltoaa are 6pp1`011lhalo 0114 based YOOa a.rlfwe 1 18608611011, 0 r Q� t t/t a 140 FRAME Y v 4 CAR a 0 133RD AVE NW C IT Y O F NDD� 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA:5530 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US . MEMOMMOI/M TO: Andy CFoss, Associate Planner COPIES TO: FROM: David Berkowitz, City Engineer & Tod Haas, Asst. City Engineer ,✓ DATE: January 21, 2004 REFERENCE: Sketch Plan @ 13309 Jay Street NW/Review #1 1. Per City Code Title 11- 2 -1(E) it is a suggestion that the subdivider show existing adjacent properties. 2. Need to identify the boundary of the approved delineated wetland boundary on sketch plan. If no wetland exists, it would be necessary to indicate this in the legend. Wetland locations may have an impact on how lots are to be configured within the development. 3. Need to indicate the exiting right -of -way width for all streets and all existing drainage and utility • easements. 4. The developer is responsible to obtain the necessary permits from the Coon Creek Watershed District, DNR, US Army Corps of Engineers or any other agency that is interested in the site. 5. Need to meet the requirements of the City of Andover Water Resource Management Plan. 6. Need to submit a Tree Protection Plan with the submittal of the preliminary plat. 7. The developer will need to petition for improvements (sanitary sewer, watermain, streets & storm sewer). Note: The developer may have the option to install these improvements privately, which does not require a petition. It would be good to meet with the City of Andover and the City of Coon Rapids to determine if this is an option. 8. Need to meet requirements of all City Codes that apply. 9. Sidewalks may be required along 133 Avenue NW. If so, the developer is responsible for the cost of the improvement. 10. Are there any existing easements (private or public) that need to be vacated? If there are, they should be clearly indicated on the sketch plan so that it can be determined if the easement needs to be vacated. Note: The City understands that an easement does exist at the east end of the property that is being considered to be subdivided. ing street names and all other information as required in City Code 11- 11. The developer shall identify exist 2 -1 A -E in regard to sketch plans. 12. City Code 11-2-1D5 requires the developer to provide an aerial photo (most current) with the sketch plan overlay. 13. It will be necessary that the City of Coon Rapids put in writing that they are willing to deed over the property to the adjacent landowner at 13309 Jay Street NW.. Otherwise, without this parcel the lots do not access to 133 Avenue NW. Show this property on the sketch plan: • 14. The Engineering Department is recommending that no preliminary plat shall be approved wherein lots front on the right -of -way of 133` Avenue NW, per City Code 11 -3 -2C, as 133 NW is considered a collector street in the recently adopted Transportation Plan and also is designated as a State Aid road. MnDOT studies have shown that an increase in accesses, whether public or private, results in a reduction H:tEngineering\PlatsU 3309 Jay Street NWWemos)Andy.doc in the traffic carrying capacity of the roadway and increases the vehicular crash rate. Note: No direct access from driveways on the Andover portion (north side) of 133` Avenue NW currently_ exist. 15. It will be necessary to obtain in writing from the City of Coon Rapids that access to the sanitary sewer and watermain will be allowed since they are the agency that currently owns the sewer and water lines along 13P Avenue NW. 16. It appears that the City may want to encourage a private drive be considered along the north side of the • parcel and have access to Jay Street NW similar to what was done at City View Farm. See revised sketch plan. Note: Some adjustments may be necessary to accommodate this type of layout or it is recommended to raise the house and rebuild a new one. 17. A scaled drawing is required to be submitted as required. Currently the sketch plan does not indicate a scale. 18. Additional comments pending further review. • HAEngineering\P1ats \13309 Jay Street NWWlemos%Andy.doc 7 7, L *. 138036 LEGAL : SEE SCHEDULE A �cv�scJ1 Sk on ..v. II II .. I 1 In a' STORY FRAMIE N a 4 CAR a a WLO 40-a_e r z W j ° o. M �" IA Q 0 O 6 sur A Axial 370.00' P f f I 1 I b r l i i 370.00t 133RD- -AVE- NW- s N h " JAY 57. NN ANDOVER 7""SdrR1� i A S- "Y NM S1i71LD "S BE USED AS A SIAV TO LWAIE FWVE IMPRDMNWS. Im the prapirlrr� dlMafl 0 l foal Is O Ihtr arQs l dp101 Of SO S nOpf Rfi IaYrOVerNal lOpollpa pad dlneasl0af ehpea a�4 epprOlInOle 040 based was 0 vliepl IsopeollOa. ��lor 80 �� 4 �a • �l C I T Y O F ND OVE 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 CC: Courtney Bednarz, City Planne* FROM: Jon Sevald, Planning Intern SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit (04 -02) for drive - through and variance to parking setbacks at proposed CVS Pharmacy /Convenience store at 3631 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW. DATE January 27, 2004 INTRODUCTION This item has been postponed to allow the applicant more time to revise the site plan to possibly eliminate the need for a variance to parking setbacks. Notification has been mailed to surrounding residents within 350 -feet of the property. The proposed project will be located on the northwest corner of Bunker Lake Blvd. and Round Lake Blvd. on • the site currently occupied by Super America. ACTION REQUESTED No action is necessary. spectfiAly submitted, Ov1 0 XA4k Sevald CC: Chet Harrison, Loucks McLangan 20 East Thompson Ave. Suite 205, West St. Paul, MN 55118 Cl