Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/25/04C I T Y O F ND6AVE 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 May 25, 2004 Andover City Hall Council Chambers 7.00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes — May 11, 2004 3. PUBLIC HEARING: 'Preliminary Plat of Hanson Meadows, an urban residential development of four lots located at 13309 Jay Street NW. 4. 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 1155 Crosstown Boulevard NW. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Amended Preliminary Plat of Sophie's Manor located at 1021 and 1155 Crosstown Boulevard NW. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (04 -01) to further define collector streets and to revise language concerning grade separated railroad crossings. 7. Other Business 8. Adjournment , II i 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW. CLAN DOVER. MN. US TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Courtney Bednarz, City Planner SUBJECT: Item 2. Approval of Minutes - May 11, 2004 DATE: May 25, 2004 Request The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to approve the minutes from the May 11, 2004 meeting. • i E , W, LIV IM14 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONMEETING —May 11, 2004 The Regular Bi- Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Acting Chairperson Kirchoff on May 11, 2004, 7:02 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Chairperson Daninger (arrived at 7:20 p.m.), Commissioners Tim Kirchoff, Tony Gamache, Rex Greenwald, Dean Vatne (arrived at 7:05 p.m.), and Jonathan Jasper. Commissioners absent: Commissioner Casey. Also present: City Planner, Courtney Bednarz Others 0 APPROVAL OFMINUTES. April 27, 2004 Motion by Jasper, seconded by Greenwald, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried on a 4 -ayes, 0 -nays, 0- present, 3- absent (Casey, Daninger, and Vatne) vote. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (04 -02) TO AMEND CITY CODE 13 -3 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS. Mr. Bednarz explained the City Planning staff have reviewed the Planned Unit Development ordinance and found that it is inadequate for use in reviewing new requests for a Planned Unit Development approval. Mr. Bednarz stated that after looking at various other cities and how theirs was structured, staff concluded that a new PUD ordinance should be patterned after one that is simple and straight - forward. Commissioner Vatne arrived at 7:05 p.m. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — May 11, 2004 Page 2 Acting Chairperson Kirchoff asked if this was th e way they have been doing things prior. • Mr. Bednarz stated the land use district governs the density that is allowed for a project. Motion by Jasper, seconded by Greenwald, to open the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Casey and Daninger)vote. There was no public input. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Vatne, to close the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Casey and Daninger) vote. Acting Chairperson Kirchoff stated he read through this and what impressed him was it seemed a lot shorter in volume than the previous ordinance. Mr. Bednarz stated this covered everything needed in the ordinance. Commissioner Greenwald asked where they addressed density. Mr. Bednarz explained where in the information this was listed. He stated this ties it to the underlying land use district, which is how they presently set the land use for density. Acting Chairperson Kirchoff asked if this fell under contract development. Mr. Bednarz stated in situations where there is a rezoning of property there is a contract between the City and the developer to ensure that when the rezoning is done the product that is going to be constructed fits into what the City's perception is. Acting Chairperson Kirchoff stated it was not specifically tied to a P.U.D. Mr. Bednarz stated this was correct. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to recommend to the City Council approval of Ordinance Amendment (04 -02) to amend City Code 13 -3 Planned Unit Developments. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Casey and Daninger)vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the June 1, 2004 City Council meeting. RESOLUTION MODIFYING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TIF DISTRICT NO. 1-4 Mr. Bednarz explained the Andover Economic Development Authority (EDA) and the City of Andover are considering a proposal to adopt a modification to the development program for Development District Number 1, to establish Tax Increment Financing District Number 1-4 (TIF District No. 1-4) and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan'). 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — May 11, 2004 . Page 3 Mr. Bednarz stated TIF District No. 1-4 will be a redevelopment tax increment financing district which has a maximum life of 26 years of tax increment (or a shorter period as determined by the City Council). Tax increments collected from TIF District No. 1 -4 will enable the City of Andover to facilitate the demolition of several substandard buildings. New buildings will be constructed that will serve primarily as office and warehouse facilities for service businesses, within the City of Andover. The TIF Plan contains the estimated fiscal and economic implications of the proposed TIF District. The City Council will hold a public hearing on the plan on June 1, 2004. Acting Chairperson Kirchoff summarized the reason for the modification. Ms. Shelly Eldridge, Ehlers Associates, was at the meeting to answer questions regarding the Tax Increment Financing Plan. Commissioner Vatne asked for clarification on the service related industry. Mr. Bednarz stated the informal proposal is to build a building with one of the spaces as a manufacturing use. He stated there will be other potential tenant finish space in the building and the uses for those areas have not been identified at this point. Acting Chairperson Kirchoff asked if the City had to go to the State to get the enabling legislation for each TIF District. Ms. Eldridge stated the City Council has the authority to establish a Tax Increment District if it qualifies. This particular type of district is a redevelopment district. Ms. Eldridge discussed the redevelopment district with the Commission and how the TIF District affects this. Acting Chairperson Kirchoff asked if this was one parcel or multiple parcels. Ms. Eldridge stated she thought this was six parcels that they are considering. Mr. Bednarz stated there are two, possibly three owners. Commissioner Jasper stated looking at the proposal, the TIF District shows $831,000 and only $100,000 of which is for site improvements and $400,000 is for interest. Ms. Eldridge stated the line items in a TIF plan can be reallocated; they cannot spend over that amount. Commissioner Jasper asked if they do not know what the costs are that will be involved, how is the number $831,000 picked and calculated. Ms. Eldridge stated it is calculated from the tax increment that would be produced over the 26 years. She stated they have five years to do these projects. Chairperson Daninger arrived at 7:20 p.m. Ms. Eldridge explained to the Commission the process of tax increment obligations for the TIF District. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — May 11, 2004 Page'4 Commissioner Jasper asked if their purpose is to determine whether the TID plan conformed to the development and redevelopment and the Comprehensive Plan, how do they make th determination whether this conforms or not. Mr. Bednarz stated the land use district is industrial, the zoning is light industrial and together those classifications allow manufacturing, warehousing and similar types of light industrial uses and based on the proposal they have which would be for a multi -tenant building with one use proposed to be manufacturing, those other uses would be reviewed for their eligibility at the time that someone wants to move in based on their land use and zoning regulations. Commissioner Vatne asked for further clarification on light industrial. Mr. Bednarz explained that general manufacturing uses are allowed in that district. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if this conformed to their Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Bednarz stated it did. Commissioner Vatne stated until substandard is identified, this may or may not become a reality. He assumed from the definition, it talks about redevelopment and he thought this item would be structurally substandard. Ms. Eldridge stated this was true. • Commissioner Kirchoff asked if the properties were all in favor of doing this. Mr. Bednarz stated the initial owner on the comer of Round Lake Boulevard and 162 Lane is very much in favor of this and the other property owners have been contacted and he did not believe they were at the level of analysis that the initial site is at. Commissioner Jasper stated he did not get the TIF and did not understand the timing of it. None of the findings have been made that the land needs or could use it so it seems premature to do this but what they have to comment on today, it seems clear. Chairperson Daninger agreed. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Kirchoff, to adopt the attached resolution that indicates the Planning Commission has determined the Program Modification and TIF plan conform to th general plans for development and redevelopment of the City as described in the Comprehensive Plan. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Casey)vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the June 1, 2004 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (04-03) TO ESTABLISH REGULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY STRUCTURES. Mr. Bednarz explained that on February 24, 2004, the City Council reviewed general information provided to them regarding "temporary structures ". Council directed that the Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — May 11, 2004 • Page 5 staff and Planning Commission review regulations for temporary structures. "reviewing what could be done to establish some type of performance criteria, staff thought that the standards for temporary buildings should include; duration of how long they may stay on a given property; materials that they may be made of; lighting and landscaping and location where they may be placed on a site. In discussing this topic at the Planning Commission workshop on April 27, 2004, there was a great deal of discussion regarding allowing temporary structures subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Bednarz discussed the information with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Kirchoff stated it was his understanding this would be broken into two different areas, one would be the temporary structures that includes greenhouses and then there are the temporary structures for school houses. He wondered what the difference was. Mr. Bednarz stated there is a difference between a classroom and a greenhouse. A greenhouse is only functional a few months out of the year. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if school structures were the only ones that can be permanent. Mr. Bednarz stated as proposed in the Ordinance language, through the Conditional Use Permit process the Commission and Council will have the ability to interact with the School District or a Church with classrooms on the length of time those classrooms would be in use. Commissioner Greenwald asked where in the Ordinance is the long term plan for replacement that Councilmember Jacobson suggested organizations do. Mr. Bednarz stated he did not know if there is a specific line item dealing with that. It is something they could add if the Commission is interested. Commissioner Gamache stated as of right now the Ordinance stated this needed to be reviewed every year or two. Mr. Bednarz stated Churches have a Conditional Use Permit to operate general and then to build a temporary classroom or addition would be an amendment to that permit. Usually there is a specific date as to when the structure will be removed. Mr. Bednarz stated they could set a specific date for it to be reviewed. Commissioner Greenwald thought this would be a good idea. Commissioner Kirchoff asked what would happen to the temporary structure if a property were to sell. Mr. Bednarz stated under the proposed amendment, they could put a condition of approval stating there would need to be a review or removal of the temporary structure upon sale of the property. Commissioner Greenwald thought trailers could be allowed as temporary sales offices but there should be a time limit. Commissioner Gamache did not think allowing trailers • would be a problem because they are usually kept in good shape. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — May 11, 2004 Page 6 Commissioner Jasper thought they could add temporary sales office into item "K" and strike item "J". Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Gamache, to open the public hearing at 8:04 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Casey) vote. There w as no public input. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Greenwald, to close the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Casey) vote. Chairperson Daninger reviewed the language the Commission changed. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Kirchoff, to approve Ordinance Amendment (04 -03), to establish regulations for temporary structures with the changes listed below: F. Add "Remove or Review ". K. The Construction Trailers, Greenhouses and Temporary Sales Offices shall be allowed only through the Commercial Site Plan process ". M. Add Long term plan in writing. N. Add "Upon sale or transfer of ownershi p Permit has to b brought up for renewal Strike Item J from the Ordinance. of the property, the Conditional Use or remove the temporary structure " Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Casey) vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the June 1, 2004 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (04 -0I) AMENDING CITY CODE 12 -14 -10 D.& REGULATING LIGHTING IN OFF STREET PARSING AREAS. Mr. Bednarz explained City Code 12 -14 -10 D.B. requires parking lots to b illuminated a minimum of one footcandle as measured at ground level. With the intent of limiting light pollution, Staff is proposing to modify the existing city code in accordance with recommendations from the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA). Mr. Bednarz discussed the information with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Greenwald stated one of the items he brought up was the pole height. Mr. Bednarz stated they removed prohibition on pole height or setting an arbitrary pole height. 0 U Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — May 11, 2004 • Page 7 Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Kirchoff, to open the public hearing at 8:16 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Casey) vote. There was no public input. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Greenwald, to close the public hearing at 8:16 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Casey) vote. Commissioner Greenwald wondered if the Sheriff s Department should sign off on this because this Ordinance is more for safety than anything else. Commissioner Jasper concurred. Discussion ensued in regards to the Ordinance. Commissioner Jasper stated this proposal serves no purpose. He thought the Ordinance in Andover already covered this and the reason they were reviewing this for change was because of a couple of complaints of light pollution. He stated this ordinance change does not address that issue. It does not set maximums, it sets minimums. He stated they have talked at some length about shielding an d he would encourage the Commission to leave the Ordinance regarding foot candles and add a shielding provision. He thought • there should be new minimums which differentiate between different uses. Discussion continued in regards to shielding versus the minimum foot candles. Motion by Greenwald, to table this item to allow staff to re- wordsmith this. Motion failed for lack of second. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he liked the way this is prepared. Commissioner Gamache disagreed because he is comfortable with the way Commissioner Jasper wanted to amend the existing ordinance. Chairperson Daninger stated he was comfortable with the way it wa s written. Commissioner Greenwald stated he was not comfortable with either way, but would be against this as written. Commissioner Vatne: stated he was comfortable with the way it is written. Commissioner Jasper stated he did not like it as written. Motion by Jasper, seconded by Gamache, to not adopt staffs proposed resolution, instead adopt a resolution that would add to the existing ordinance the language that any lighting in off street parking areas shall be fully shielded with a total cut off angle equal to or less than 90 degrees and that illumination from light fixtures shall be measured at one foot above ground level on a forty-five degree angle plain ( motion moved forward on a 3 -ayes, 3 -nays (Kirchoff, Vatne, and Daninger), I -absent Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Vatne, to recommend to the City Council a favorable • recommendation to approve Ordinance Amendment (04 -01), amending City Code 12 -14- Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — May 11, 2004 Page 8 10 D.B. regulating lighting in off street parking areas. Motion carried on a 3 -ayes, 3 -nays • (Jasper, Gamache, and Greenwald), 1- absent (Casey) vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the June 1, 2004 City Council meeting. WORKSESSlON: a. Comprehensive Plan Update. Mr. Bednarz explained prohibiting driveways on all collector streets per Chapter 11 -3 -2 of the City Code is not practical given th wide range of subdivision designs and topography in Andover. While it makes sense to prohibit them on busy, high - capacity streets, lots should be allowed to put driveways on streets that are considered collector streets because of their function in the City's road system and not because of their high traffic count. Changing the Transportation Plan's definition to include two different classes of Collector Streets will solve this problem. Mr. Bednarz discussed the information with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Jasper wondered if the thinking of the original definition of one thousand • daily trips was in error because nothing has changed regarding th safety of having driveways on a street that carries one thousand trips. Mr. Bednarz stated based on the Engineering Department in Andover and in other cities, one thousand trips per day are not a collector street. Discussion ensued in regards to what would be considered a collector street and anticipated traffic volumes. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he liked the idea that it does free up the ability of the low volume roads to be able to have driveways on it. He stated this gives the City and developers more options. He asked if there was any ordinance requiring a turn- around for road access. Mr. Bednarz stated there was not. Commissioner Jasper asked if the numbers would be based on existing traffic volumes or those proposed for 2020. What would be the benchmark. Mr. Bednarz stated the language would have to be tied to the plan and to a specific number if there are a variety of numbers on the plan in the Ordinance. They would propose the Commission take scenario three for discussion purposes. Commissioner Vatne wondered how this Ordinance address some of the more recent developments they have seen which have some issues where it is a proposed collector street downstream and they know the traffic is going to be minimal today but sometime • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — May 11, 2004 Page 9 • in the future the level could increase. This gives them the split so they can differentiate between major and minor. Commissioner Vatne stated he liked the split because it makes sense and will be useful in the future. He stated he had a problem with the language because it is fairly subjective. Commissioner Jasper stated Class A and Class B, Major and Minor, do not address the thousand minimum that the report address. He thought this would be incorporated into the definitions. Consensus of the Commission was to go with Scenario three. B. Terr and Map Amendments to Comprehensive Plan —Railroad Grade Crossings Mr. Bednarz stated the Transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan recommends grade separated crossings at 4 public street railroad crossings within the City. Based on a recent City Council decision, this list should be reviewed and consider reducing the number of crossings on it. Mr. Bednarz discussed the information with the Planning Commission. is Commissioner Kirchoff stated he did remember that when they first started planning this, they looked at throwing everything out there to make the crossings but the reality is it will take a while to get even the Bunker Lake Boulevard crossing. Commissioner Greenwald agreed with that everything but Bunker Lake Boulevard be removed from the plan. Commissioner Kirchoff wondered about 161 Avenue. The Commissioner discussed the different intersections. Commissioner Jasper disagreed with what has been discussed by staff and the Council because the crossings are going to keep getting busier and if they develop they will get even busier. He thought this was a serious issue and is inclined to put in more separated crossings. Commissioner Gamache concurred but if they are not going to do grade separated on some of the railroad crossings, he would like to see them explore something like what has been done on Egret and Hanson. He stated they need to do something to the railroad crossings to make them safer. Chairperson Daninger asked why they would not want all of these have grade separation. Mr. Bednarz stated the issue is they would like to be more specific regarding railroad crossings in the City so that at the time development is proposed in the area, they are clear on what should be proposed on the plat. • The Commission continued to discuss the railroad crossings in the City. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — May 11, 2004 Page 10 Commissioner Gamache stated if they do not designate right -of -way when developing developments, they cannot do this in the future and this is the only shot at doing this. If they do not do it, they could never do it. Commissioner Jasper stated he would take the four that have been designated and put grade separated crossings there. Commissioner Vatne agreed to the maximum. He thought in this case, there are critical safety issues downstream. Commissioner Greenwald stated there are other ways to do safety on major roadways. He thought the primary reasons for doing this is safety and traffic flow and he thought they should only do Bunker Lake Boulevard. Commissioner Gamache thought this was a one time shot and if there is ever a possibility they want to do this in the future, they should do it now. • Commissioner Kirchoff stated he liked the idea of sticking with Bunker Lake Boulevard because in looking at the volumes of the other roads, in order to get a grade separated crossing built, it involves the Federal Railroad Association and they have to have justification to spend any time on it and he thought it would be hard to get them to agree • to this on the other roads because it does not meet the warrants. Chairperson Daninger thought they should keep these as grade separated crossings. OTHER BUSINESS. Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on related items. ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Jasper, to adjourn the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Casey) vote. Respectfully Submitted, Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Site Secretarial, Inc. 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: Preliminary Plat of Hanson Meadows an urban residential development of four lots located at 13309 Jay Street NW. DATE: May 25, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission is asked to review a preliminary plat with four urban residential lots located at the northeast comer of 133` Avenue NW and Jay Street NW. The Planning Commission and Council previously reviewed this proposal as a sketch plan. The minutes of these meetings as are attached. DISCUSSION Conformance with Local Plans The proposal conforms to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan which designated the site as Urban Residential Low Density (URL). The proposal conforms to the City's Zoning Map which designates the property Single Family Urban Residential (R -4). Access Access to the proposed lots would be provided from both Jay Street NW and 133` Avenue NW. The driveway along Jay Street meets the minimum spacing requirement of 60 feet from the intersection. Two driveways are proposed along 133` Avenue NW. One of the driveways is proposed to be shared between Lots 3 and 4. A variance to City Code 12- 14- 10D.3.D.f. to allow a driveway to be constructed to the shared property line of Lots 3 and 4. A shared access agreement would also be required to be recorded with the plat for these two lots. It is important to note that Outlot A shown on the Existing Conditions Plan is owned by the City of Coon Rapids. Coon Rapids has provided the attached letter indicating their consent to allow the outlot to be platted and the terms under which the and will be conveyed. Lots The proposed lots will meet the minimum lot size requirements of the R -4 Zoning District. The proposed plat would require a variance to City Code 11 -3 -2C. to allow lots to front • on a collector street. The applicant has provide the following findings to substantiate the variance request: 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. The proposed subdivision will change the front yard of the existing house from Jay Street NW to 133` Avenue NW. As a result, the building setback from the south property line will be increased to 35 feet. The new setback line touches the corner of the garage. Staff would not advocate granting a variance for this encroachment. If the structure is damaged beyond 50% of its assessed value, it would be required to be reoriented and positioned to conform with all applicable setbacks. Storm Water Drainage The applicant is proposing to reconfigure the drainage area that exists on the subject property. The drainage area would be extended along the north side of the subject property to allow a building pad to be created for Lot 4. The proposed adjustments need to be approved by the Coon Creek Watershed Management Organization. Easements The typical five foot wide side yard and ten foot wide front and rear yard drainage and utility easements will be provided on each lot. Additional easements will be provided to cover storm water ponds and drainage areas. is A portion of the existing drainage and utility easement would need to be vacated and a new easement would need to be taken as a part of the plat to cover the proposed drainage area adjustments to achieve Lot 4. Utilities Municipal utilities are available to serve the proposed development. One pair of water and sewer stubs exist along the west property line as shown on the plan set. Proposed Lot 1 would utilize these services. New services will need to be constructed for the other three lots. The City of Andover and Coon Rapids will need to work together to determine the assessments if the plat is approved. Buildability Requirements Each of the lots will meet or exceed the minimum of 116.5 feet of buildable area between the front property line and the 100 year flood elevation of storm water ponds. There are no wetlands within the proposed development. Park Dedication The Park and Recreation Commission recommended that park dedication and trail fees be paid on a per lot basis. These fees would be applied to the three new lots and not the lot created for the existing home. • Tree Protection Plan • The tree protection plan illustrates the trees that are proposed to be saved and those that are proposed to be removed. The City does not have regulations that limit the amount of trees that can be cleared on private property. However, the applicant has revised the grading plan to save trees on the north side of Lot 4 as well as along the south property line of Lots 2 and 3. Coordination with other Agencies The developer and/or owner is responsible to obtain all necessary permits (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Coon Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, LGU, and any other agency that may have an interest in the site). Initial contact shall be made with the City Engineering Department regarding this item. The developer is also required to meet all other applicable ordinances, including: • 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 ACTION REQUESTED Due to the fact that the proposal is requesting variances, the Planning Commission is asked to review the applicant's findings and make a recommendation of approval or denial to the City Council. The attached resolution has been prepared with recommended conditions if the plat moves forward with a recommendation of approval. If the Planning Commission recommends denial, findings need to be made and the resolution will be adjusted accordingly. Attachments Resolution Location Map Preliminary Plat plan set Letter from Coon Rapids Planning Commission Minutes Council Minutes Res ctfu y submitted, Be Cc: Ernest Rousseau, 13309 Jay St NW, Andover, MN 55304 • CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA • RES. NO R -04 A RESOLUTION APPROVING/DENYING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HANSON MEADOWS FOR ERNEST ROUSSEAU ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 32 RANGE 24 LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: The West Five Hundred Feet, Except The North One Hundred Seventy -Five Feet, Lot Nine, Watt's Garden Acres, Anoka County, Minnesota Lying West Of The East One Hundred Thirty Feet. Subject To A Road Right -Of -Way, Utility And Drainage Easements Per Document No. 198052 "M Outlot A, Maxwell Estates 2nd Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota 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 variances to City Code 11 -3 -2C. to allow lots to front on a collector street and a variance to City Code 12- 14- 1013.3.131 to allow a driveway to be constructed to the shared property line of Lots 3 and 4, and; WHEREAS, the findings for the proposed variances are as follows: 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. WHEREAS, as a result of such public hearing, the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council the approval/denial of the plat, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover has received the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approves /denies the preliminary plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of the preliminary plat is contingent upon Council approval of a vacation of the portion of the existing drainage and utility easement necessary to establish Lot 4 as shown on the preliminary plat. . 2. The preliminary plat shall conform to the drawing stamped received by the City of Andover May 19, 2004 subject to approval of the grading plan by the Coon Creek Watershed management Organization. 3. Park dedication and trail fees shall be collected for three lots based on the rate in effect at the time of preliminary plat approval. 4. The developer shall be responsible for the cost of providing utilities to each of lots and all other improvements proposed as a part of the preliminary plat. 5. The applicant shall be required to record a cross access agreement with Anoka County to allow a shared driveway for Lots 3 and 4. 6. Contingent upon staff review and approval for compliance with City ordinances, policies and guidelines. 7. 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 all of the subdivision improvements will be completed. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this day of , 2004. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Victoria Volk, City Clerk Michael R. Gamache, Mayor 0 Hanson Meadows H EID 00 D o❑ ❑ CO bLVU z O U) z a City of Coon Rapids 0 0 H W- 6 C I T Y O F NDOVE Project Location Map Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —January 27, 2004 Page 7 • on by Gamache, seconded by Greenwald, to recommend to the City Council denial of the pf'rSir4jnary plat because of the unknown of the access or continuation of the feeder street. Motion c on a 7 -ayes, 0 -nays, 0- absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this itemwvai3ld be before the Council at the February 17, 2004 City Council meeting. Commissioner Greenwald left the meeting at 8:10 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: RESIDENTLAL SKETCHPLAN FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 13309 JA YSTREETNW. Mr. Cross explained the Planning Commission is asked to review a sketch plan for a 4 -lot residential subdivision. Mr. Cross discussed the information with the Commission. Commissioner Gamache asked where the driveway is. Mr. Cross stated it extends out onto Jay Street. He stated there would have to be a variance for every property that would have a driveway out onto 133` Commissioner Gamache asked why the one lot needed to be widened out to one hundred feet. Mr. Cross stated because the ninety foot width on corner lots applies only to corner lots that back into one another and this one would not do that to the north of it. Commissioner Jasper thought only two of the lots were fronting on 133` Mr. Cross stated the applicant indicated that this would be the minimum. Mr. Ernest Rousseau stated currently his driveway fronted onto Jay Street so they could leave the existing driveway in and cover the front two lots with the existing driveway. He stated this would allow only two driveways onto 133` Mr. Rousseau stated it would be a shared driveway. Mr. Bednarz stated staff would not advise that situation. Mr. Rousseau stated they would like to seek a variance to put four driveways onto 133` Commissioner Vatne stated on the revised engineering sketch plan, there was a proposal to get by the driveways out to the collector street and treat it with a driveway that runs along the northern section where the homes would have driveway access off of that. He thought it was compared to one of the recent developments off of County Road 9, City View Farms. Mr. Cross stated the Engineering Department offered that as a suggestion to help the project go through as a way to work around the problem of access to 133rd, it was done successfully in City View Farms so Engineering brought this forward as a suggestion. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if this would be a private street. Mr. Cross stated it would. • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — January 27, 2004 Page 8 Commissioner Jasper stated City View Farms was a development with an association that • takes care of the private road, was this the intention of this development. Mr. Cross stated it was intended to make four single family lots. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if there was a turn around on each lot. Commissioner Jasper stated it was proposed to make the driveways "J" shaped to allow residents to drive out onto 133 instead of backing out. Mr. Rousseau stated this was correct. Commissioner Gamache stated he read that the City of Coon Rapids would have to deed some land to the owner in order to put accesses onto 133` Mr. Rousseau stated the City of Coon Rapids indicated they would transfer the property to him but they would not do it if the driveways are not approved onto 133` Mr. Cross stated in speaking with the Coon Rapids City Engineer, he indicated the city would convey the land contingent on Andover giving this the thumbs up to this sub - division. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Kirchoff, to open the public hearing at 8:22 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Mr. Tim Miller, 1765 132 Lane, Coon Rapids, stated they back up to the Proposed changes. He stated to their east there is a home with a driveway onto 133` , the same with the house to the west. He would propose they drive by the lot because he does not see the room and he is opposed to the entire process. He stated there are mature pines on • the property that deserve to stay. Mr. Ben Healy, 13344 Ibis Street, stated he lives behind the proposed property development and he could see one lot but he did not understand how they could get four lots out of the property. He showed the area on the map. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 8:31 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent vote. Commissioner Gamache stated this is zoned R -4 already and the applicant has the right to do what he wants on this as long as it falls in the zoning. He stated he does not have a problem with this at all. Commissioner Kirchoff suggested they put in turn- around's if possible. Commissioner Vatne stated the lot size is straight forward; his biggest concern is the collector street. He thinks the spirit of the ordinance is to keep safety and not have a busy access onto busy streets. His last concern was there were comments they needed to have a grading plan to preserve as much of the trees as possible and he agreed. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if there were already four sewer stubs into the property. The applicant stated there was not. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —January 27, 2004 Page 9 • Commissioner Jasper stated he agreed with the residents of Coon Rapids about it makes more sense to do two lots because the house is angled at such a way that the front of the house will be at the back of the other lot. He understands why the street cannot be put to the north edge because you cannot get the setback to do that and leave the house which makes it financially unfeasible. He would encourage the applicant to consider doing this as a two or three lot split, leaving the applicants access onto Jay Street and doing the other lots to the east. It seems like it is too much for the space. Commissioner Casey stated they all meet the requirements but he would like to see all four accesses onto 133` Commissioners Kirchoff and Gamache concurred. Chairperson Daninger stated he is not comfortable with all the houses having driveways onto 133` and he thought there could be other ways. Commissioners Vatne and Jasper agreed. Chairperson Daninger stated there are some concerns that were brought up and the applicant should take those into consideration for the City Council meeting. Commissioner Jasper asked if would be possible for the applicant to sit down with staff about the possibility of doing the road on the north side with the idea of getting a variance so he would not have to destroy his house and this would eliminate the driveways onto 133` Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the February 17, 2004 City Council meeting. IC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (04-02) FOR DRIVE THR HAND VARIANCE TO PARKING SETBACKS AT PROPOSED CYS PHARMA ONVENIENCE STORE AT 3631 BUNKER LAKE BOULEVARD NW. Mr. Bednarz explained this has been postponed to allow the applicant more time to revise the site plan to possibly a 'nate the need for a variance to parking setbacks. Notification has been mailed to Burro ng residents within 350 -feet of the property. The proposed project will be located on the rthwest corner of Bunker Lake Boulevard and Round Lake Boulevard on the site currently upied by Super America. OTHER BUSINESS. Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on related items. • Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes — February 17, 2004 • Page 9 PRELIMINARYPLAT ISOPHIESAL NOR/1021 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD Community Developmeft e�ctor Neumeister asked that this item tabled because additional information has come in and needs eviewed. He suggested this item be tabled until the March 1, 2004 meeting. This item was tabled in the agenda approval. k CONSIDER RESIDENTL4L SKETCH PLAN /13309 JAY STREET Community Development Director Neumeister stated the City Council is asked to review a sketch plan for a 4 -lot residential subdivision. Councilmember Trude stated she had a question about 133` She wondered if the street would eventually be a route for the people in the development in Coon Rapids to go to the shopping area if a light were constructed. Mr. Erar stated he believed the negotiations between the County and Coon Rapids are on hold. He does not believe the signal light will be going forward. He thought the City of Coon Rapids and the County could not agree on things. Mr. Berkowitz stated the signal did fall through but in 2005/2006 the County will be looking at constructing the improvement to that section and at that time they will reconsider it. Mayor Gamache asked where the pond sits on the land. Mr. Berkowitz showed the pond on the map. Councilmember Knight asked how much of the lot the pond takes. Mr. Berkowitz stated the pond takes up one of the lots but there is a way to do some excavation at the back of the lots and fill in the front part and expand the pond in the back to replace the volume that would be filled. Discussion ensued in regard to travel on 133 and access points. Mr. Ernie Rousseau explained the reason that driveways are allowed on the Coon Rapids side of the street is that the definition of a collector street in Coon Rapids is 10,000 compared to 1,000 in Andover. He thought the only issue they have right now was the driveways onto 133 and his current driveway is very unsafe the way it is now. If the development occurs as planned, his driveway will move to the other side of the property. Mr. Gary VanKamp, 13318 Hummingbird Street NW, stated his property adjoins Mr. Rousseau's property. He showed on the map where his house is. He is worried about crowding too many houses in such a small area. He is willing to work with his neighbors to do whatever they like. He is also • worried about the openness and wildlife being lost. He is concerned about where all the water will go if this land is developed. • Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes —February 17, 2004 Page 10 Mayor Gamache asked regarding the slope, will it be sloped down to the street as well as a holding pond. Mr. Berkowitz stated there is an outlet on the pond that handles the excess water so when the pond fills up, it does outlet. He stated the front yards will be sloped towards the road and the backyards will be sloped towards the holding pond. Councilmember Knight did not understand how the end lot could be buildable if they are going to extend the hundred years. Mr. Rousseau stated he is proposing four lots but the end lot belongs to the City and will not be built on; it has the pond on it. Mayor Gamache suggested they address the main issues facing them. He stated both the cities' building and engineering departments stated they would not support a variance that would allow the project to place any driveways onto 133` Avenue. He assumed the resident is correct that Coon Rapids looks at collector streets differently based on the amount of traffic. Mr. Berkowitz stated ten thousand ADT is like Bunker Lake Boulevard, which is an A minor arterial so he would have to check to see what requirements Coon Rapids has to designate that as a collector. He thought they are more in the one thousand to two thousand ADT for a collector street. Councilmember Jacobson stated there are no sewer stubs for the lots and they would have to go to Coon Rapids to connect. He stated it is not cheap to dig out and reconfigure the pond. If driveways would be allowed to exit out onto 1'33` Avenue, there will be a good site distance looking to the east but not to the west because there is a curve there. The third issue is the pond and he thought it needed to be looked at further to determine how this will affect the lots. The fourth issue is the lot on Jay Street that would be created and would have to face Jay Street. They have to look at the distances involved there and how many variances would be required just to have it. He stated with the existing house, they would have to move the driveway out onto 133rd. His personal feeling is the applicant should think about this further because he thought there were a lot of problems with this. Mr. Rousseau does not see fairness with driveways not being allowed on 133` because there are other developments where it is allowed. Mr. Neumeister read a letter from the applicant for his reasons for a hardship. Mayor Gamache explained they were dealing with a difficult situation. The applicant has a strip of property that is difficult to access because the road they would need to access is 133` Avenue. He stated he would not want the properties to access 133` Avenue because it is very dangerous and busy. The other issue is the possibility of a road towards the back of the lots but he does not know how that would work out. He thought it might be more like an alley. Mr. Neumeister stated he would not recommend a road behind the properties for safety reasons. Councilmember Trude agreed because the road would be right behind homes with backyards where children play. Discussion continued in regard to consistency regarding collector streets and the options that could be put in place for this applicant. Mr. Gary VanKamp stated another reason not to put a road behind the homes is because a lot of trees would have to be removed in order to do that. Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes — February 17, 2004 Page 11 Ms. Paula Liptak, 13343 This Street, stated she talked to staff about the one hundred year flood rule and staff assured her the City Council would not waver from that rule. She stated the homes in their neighborhood are very nice and she does not understand why the applicant is trying to take a very young neighborhood were everyone is aware of all of the kids who do live in the neighborhood and she wondered why the applicant would want to have houses face 133` Councilmember Jacobson stated on the two proposed easterly lots, it seemed that those lots were lower than the road, in order to bring them up to standards, a lot of full will need to be brought in which again could be very costly. Mr. Ben Ealey stated they would need to bring in a lot of fill in order to build two more houses on the property. He stated if a pond were constructed in the back, their backyard would end up part of the pond. Because the lots are so small the homes built on them would need to be significantly less than the surrounding neighborhood and bring down the value of their homes. Trees would also need to be taken down to construct the homes. Mr. Gary VanKamp stated if the homes are built, the water has to go somewhere and he does not want the water to go into his yard and cause flooding. • Mayor Gamache stated his overall concern is the water issues that will need to be addressed and the issue of accessing 133` He thought they may need to look at a different type of design for the land. Councilmember Knight thought the house on the corner lot will be substandard because it will be so close to the existing house and the front of the rear house will be facing the rear of the new houses and will be a very odd situation. Councilmember Trude stated when she has seen sketch plans come in that are subdivisions it is typically a house facing the street and they want to subdivide and place another house facing the street and the two houses will be parallel to each other and look somewhat alike and look like they were developed at the same time. This sketch plan does not look like any she has ever seen before. She stated that the house that is sitting there is very attractive on a very attractive large lot and to put three other houses will make this house look like the ill fit. It is going to devalue the existing property which is not like any sketch plan she has ever seen. She stated to subdivide will make the area less attractive. The road will pick up in traffic in the future when the signal light goes in. Councilmember Orttel stated the issue is if it is going to create a safety issue by going out onto 133` Avenue. He wondered if there was a problem also with the wetlands. Mr. Tim Miller, 132 " Lane, stated his concern is saving the trees on this property. He stated the trees are blocking the homes from the roadway. 0 • i 4 y. I J I I• i I N neessnoy ::Y -ir-�� I •-t p •--n ... SNOIlION00 ONLLSIX3 I alw3 ;Jot NW •Jaeopuy ") as( �H c+ea n•u r°°I I aS.aYmit •' w •.%,.� w ,,; . 4iw 4.r SM00V3W HOSNvH h SN:1GN3tl d p €a pCg a 6 �x c•5 t @a '4F INS E y; ? i ;i p j i t F Fn9d € # b� I I p � d Hil " f IP a Ili( o : ?e Dd +e' lee:. a .. s g s #1i P It i t a 4, 6 Y� E N 1 I I Jil I s X. 1 I K; 1 , i �'.•- to I lea •-- I / :,_ 4 y. I J I I• i I •uwapg7 !f°p a uoLa.+�6 vw! ltlld AHVNNEll3lld NEE NOSNotl N SMOOtl NOSNVN II sxsrsv.w t $ ` af ti `si ta 3ali3f 3 ; }4 f $I w 3 8• � ��e � �� � :$ _ o� 1e1�1. {fig I (K la Ilai s tY Y e Y �� p e Y 4t F e E g Is C ® �Y$ 9ay� i e g3 €4 a�6 s3 e 3�e Yk v ER @gg i Y4! \ V ! I I I I ! I I I I ,1 sl 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 t all 1 I I ` I —1. • u I I I � I I I I I 1 I I I s�3 1 t i ! f it \ V ! I I I I ! I I I I ,1 sl 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 t all 1 I I ` I —1. • u I I I a L_J • YS811®g ii I I I I I L p t� Y 6 i�Pf e 3 5 s8... }iep }LP " k �� ea gzi xk e� 3�P P a S`g 5 !: 9 I I I \ I I 1 + I I 1 I j l I I I I — I I Ifsd }I � � I I � I i 1 + Fill ... u a " k �� ea gzi xk e� 3�P P a S`g 5 !: 9 I I I \ I I 1 + I I 1 I j l I I I I — I I Ifsd }I � � I I � I i 1 + Fill ... I `1 I 1 I I l I I I i " I Ir. NVId 10H1NOO NOIS0113 NOISOH3 4 30VNIVHO 'OHIOVH•J neessnoH elsi3 uof NW ',e•OPUV S NOSNVH C N gyg a k Y e 3 tl 8 }g •s} � i�� � � a a i 4$� q�� e �{ � g�'g1a p 3P gg e 4t P �gq3 Rik yyg9 }s gP E g Y g� y s 1 1 "A t1 Yoke I ll } Ye 11 at 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I e° �• I a I I I a I _ 1 • e I I I I I ' i r• is jy9 I .L397LLS I , � I I — Ai - - - -- I I �. I I m neaeswtl elw3 1 11�A..�� Imo I Jot s,a..ms P- I 1 NV N0110310tld 33tl1 3W NOSNVH a A°p -n.±+r w ; SMOOV3W NOSNtlH H ' K A N s1u I � F F e e I t i' �1F !! ! !l - -.�.. _ � _ _ cli NinY•T u 1 --- T - - - - - -�\ I I 1 I I ` r I I I I --- L----- -- T L - - -- -- -� - - -;1 I "N 1j]i / I �F�d � s ; X' tia � � it i P I .I I "N MR o il, 1 -- - - - - -- I I 1 1 1 pp 1 I _l_ 1 f I 1 • / s. I 0 T h LJ U 0 zI :A11= 10 AN 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 Planne4 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 1155 Crosstown Boulevard NW. DATE: May 25, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed rezoning of the subject property. The property is proposed to be incorporated into the Sophie's Manor development. 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 that properties to the west have developed at urban densities, the property to the north has been rezoned to R -4 and is proposed to develop urban density 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. Re ed, • B Cc: Gordon Hines Emmerich Development Corporation 1875 Station Parkway NW t 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 properties to that properties to the west have developed at urban densities, the property to the north has been rezoned to R -4 and is proposed to develop urban density and municipal utilities are now available to serve the subject property. WHEREAS, the City Council agrees with the Planning Commission recommendation, and; • 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 2.27 acres (P.I.D. 23- 32 -24 -12 -0002) legally described as: THE WEST 250.08 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23 TOWNSHIP 32 RANGE 24, ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA LYING NORTHWESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF CSAH NO. 18, EXCEPT ROAD, SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS OF RECORD 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 • Rezoning 1155 Crosstown Boulevard R -1 to R-4 N • W S Y 5 C Project Location Map J � C I T Y ! F �.•. • 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: Planning and Zoning Commissi rs FROM: Courtney Bednarz, City PlannW SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Amended Preliminary Plat of Sophie's Manor located at 1021 and 1155 Crosstown Boulevard NW. DATE: May 25, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission is asked to review an amended preliminary plat to allow the Gordon Hines property located at 1155 Crosstown Boulevard to be incorporated into the Sophie's Manor Preliminary Plat. DISCUSSION " The proposed adjustments will allow development of the subject property in conjunction with Sophie's Manor and will provide a permanent access to Crosstown Boulevard. The remainder of the plat will remain as approved by the City Council. Conformance with Local Plans The proposal conforms to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan which designates the site as Urban Residential Low Density (URL). The proposal is contingent upon rezoning the subject property to Single Family Urban Residential (R -4). Access The proposed lots will have access to proposed Xeon Street NW as indicated on the attached plan set. The proposed street has been oriented to allow sufficient space for it to approach Crosstown Boulevard at a ninety - degree angle. A sixty six foot wide right -of -way will be required to be provided from the intersection back to the first two lots along the west side of proposed Xeon Street NW to allow sufficient space for a turn lane to be constructed. Additional right -of -way for Crosstown Boulevard will be dedicated to match the right -of -way line dedicated as a part of the Sophie's Manor plat. The proposed plat will be responsible for a portion of the costs of improvements to Crosstown Boulevard that will be required by the Anoka County Highway Department. The approximate cost of the improvements and a schedule for allocating these costs among the undeveloped properties was established with the Sophie's Manor Preliminary Plat. C� Development # Lots Proportionate Cost Sophies Manor. 46 $81,537 Harstad Property 67 $118,760 Hines Property 4 $7,090 Sophie's Manor Outlot B 2 $3,545 Totals 119 $210,932.40 The amended plat will be required to pay the Hines Property and Sophie's Manor Outlot B line items from the table above for a total of $10,635. A condition of approval of the original Sophie's Manor plat required the developer to pay $81,537 for that portion of the development. • Lots The lots will conform to the lot size requirements of the R4 Zoning District. The gap between the proposed right -of -way and Lots 1 and 2 will be required to be eliminated by being incorporated into these lots. It is important to note that the building setback from property lines along Crosstown Boulevard is 40 feet. The preliminary plat will be required to show this setback on the plan. The amended plat area needs to be provided a block number as well. An opportunity exists to eliminate the lot depth variance previously approved for Lot. l Block 1 by slightly adjusting the angle of the north property line of proposed Lot 3. This has been included as a condition of approval in the attached resolution. Wetland mitigation will be done on proposed Lot 2 to allow it to meet the buildability requirements. This adjustment needs to be approved by the Coon Creek Watershed Management Organization. A variance to City Code 11 -3 -2C. is needed to allow lots to front on a collector street. The proposed adjustments to the definition of a collector street will likely not be in effect at the time that the proposed plat is reviewed by the City Council. Tree Protection Plan The tree protection area provided along Crosstown Boulevard for the original Sophie's Manor plat should be extended along Crosstown. Boulevard for the subject property. This has been included as a condition of approval in the attached resolution. Existing Structures The existing house, garage and well will be removed from the subject 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 amended plat subject to the conditions in the attached resolution. • ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is asked to recommend approval of the amended plat subject to the • conditions in the attached resolution. Attachments Resolution Location Map Preliminary Plat plan set Cc: Emmerich Development Corporation, 1875 Station Parkway NW, Andover, MN 55304 Gordon Hines, 3920 Lakeland Avenue No., Robbinsdale, MN 55422 Marty Harstad, Harstad Companies, 2195 Silver Lake Road, New Brighton, MN 55112 0 3 CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA • RES. NO A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "SOPHIE'S MANOR" FOR EMMERICH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1021 AND 1155 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW (P.I.D. 23- 32 -24 -12 -0001 AND 0002) 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. AND The West 250.08 Feet Of The Southwest Quarter Of The Northeast Quarter Of Section 23 Township 32 Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota Lying Northwesterly Of The Centerline Of Csah No. 18, Except Road, Subject To Easements Of Record. WHEREAS, the Andover Review Committee has reviewed the amended 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 -2C. to allow lots to front on a collector street, and; WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the special circumstances for the proposed variance are The City's transportation plan proposes a collector route through the subject property, and; WHEREAS, the existence of wetlands, surrounding development and a rail line which preclude any collector roadway design that conforms with City Code 11- 3 -2C., and; WHEREAS, Vale Street NW will not carry enough traffic to be designated a state aid route unlike most other collector streets in Andover, and; WHEREAS, as a result of such public hearing, the Planning and Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the amended plat, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover has received the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approves the preliminary plat with • the following conditions: 4 1. The preliminary plat shall be revised as follows: a. As required by the Coon Creek Watershed Management Organization prior to final plat approval. b. The plat shall be adjusted to allow Lot 1, Block 1 to meet the minimum lot depth requirement of 130 feet. c. A block number shall be provided for the area of the plat on property currently addressed as 1155 Crosstown Boulevard d. The tree protection plan shall extend the tree save area along Crosstown Boulevard adjacent to Lots 1 and 2 on property currently addressed 1155 Crosstown Boulevard. e. The plat shall provide 66 feet of right of way for Xeon Street NW at the intersection with Crosstown Boulevard. The 66 foot wide right -of -way shall be extended north of the intersection to the north property line of proposed Lot 5. f. The area between the proposed right -of -way for Xeon Street NW and proposed Lots 1 and 2 shall be incorporated into Lots I and 2 to allow direct access to Xeon Street NW for these lots. g. The required 40 foot setback from Crosstown Boulevard shall be shown on the preliminary plat. h. The existing structures and well on property currently addressed as 1155 Crosstown Boulevard shall be labeled `to be removed' on the preliminary plat. i. A drainage and utility easement shall be provided at the 100 year flood elevation of Pond 46. j. The preliminary plat shall otherwise conform to the plat drawing stamped received by the City of Andover May 20, 2004. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. A variance to City Code 11 -3 -2C. is granted to allow lots to front on a collector street. 5. The developer shall be required to pay $10,635 which has been determined to be a proportionate share of the improvements required by the Anoka County Highway Department for the permanent street intersection where Xeon Street NW meets Crosstown Boulevard. This amount is in addition to the payment taken as a part of the original Sophie's Manor Preliminary Plat. 8. Contingent upon staff review and approval for compliance with City ordinances, policies and guidelines. 9. Such plat approval is contingent upon a development agreement acceptable to the City Attorney. A financial guarantee will be required as a part of this agreement to assure typical subdivision improvements will be completed. 10. All conditions of Resolution R079 -04 shall remain in effect except that the lot depth variance for Lot I. Block 1 shall be eliminated as a part of the amended plat. 0 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this _` day of , 2004. ATTEST: CITY OF ANDOVER Victoria Volk, City Clerk Michael R. Gamache, Mayor F1 Sophies Manor Amended Preliminary Plat 1 • N W--�wE • 8 A ND T Y O F NDOVE Project Location Map * I SOPHIE .9 A PRELIM. I AJE COMI ;j 15 623 S; 3 10 49,059 5. 24 ILI' 11 II� .4 F r 8t 1295', 11,610 SFJ emu A R-4 . ...... .... MM14 �,4 WETLAND c 26 38 F 15 % 5. 4.3 82, sy .295 S� 7 . 20 18 7 4N, 31123 S F F= -2 1 ct, 16 31,035 SF. 14 it DNR WETLAND 704W '$F 14, 3 2 v 22.821 o F. 15.4 &F. 6 i,'4 002 Q . �m A6 WA �A A93 rjft�w 10 o J `j;i /_� HIC SCALE lCMi 0 1 IQ} t. GRAP d rtZi OiW ;, FN SOPHIE -q A'-' GRADING I ., DRAIN AGE & F1 AJE COME 7 v CIA O & Ak. I S m NE W, NOW A. %07ZvV1 fill 7 v CIA O & Ak. I S m NE W, NOW A. . PREliMINARY SOPHIE'4 TREE PRESERV: }!J AJE &; F:'EL [) .~;' II ~/ ~i1 ~~ III ,~-' , , , " " "- . . , , ,/ . , , , , , \e u - l - ~ - - - - ~ t , is ffi I ~ ~ : I 1 '! i i J _ GRAPHIC SCALE ~ _...i ~ - - e -,:. , I .. .... Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes —April 20, 2004 Page 9 CONSIDER PRELIMINARY PLAT /SOPHIE'SMANOR/1021 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. CONT. Community Development Director Neumeister explained on April 6, 2004, the City Council reviewed the preliminary plat and discussed the primary issue of access to Sophie's Manor from Crosstown Boulevard. The Council asked the developer for a two -week continuance to allow staff to investigate whether the access to Crosstown could be designed in a location that would enable it to be built with this plat and also would be acceptable to the Anoka County Highway Department. Mr. Neumeister stated they want this temporary access constructed at the time of development with a permanent access going in when Mr. Hines' property is developed. Councilmember Jacobson asked if the developer has any discussion with Mr. Hines since the last meeting. Mr. Quigley stated they have not had any further conversation with the Hines; they expressed a desire to develop themselves. • Councilmember Jacobson noted the resolution states a temporary access would be provided and he asked if this meant a gravel road. Staff indicated it would have to be blacktop but probably a minimal. He assumed staff looked into the cost of doing this and asked if the developer's willing to do this. Mr. Quigley stated he is not opposed to a connection onto Crosstown but he does have some concerns about the design for the improvements that will be required and could be excessive. It was his understanding that right now the plat meets the requirements of the Ordinance without the connection. If the only requirement for that connection would be to provide for the implementation of the transportation plan the benefit far exceeds just the adjacent properties for all the improvements. Councilmember Knight asked why the tract is different for the temporary than for the final. Mr. Neumeister stated with the temporary access they need to make sure the access stays on the property that Mr. Quigley's company owns and none on the Hines property. When the Hines property develops, the road will be moved over further onto both properties. Councilmember Trude stated that as she looked at this, it seems that one of the parties is asked to build a road twice and she has never seen this in the city. Mr. Quigley stated as drawn there will be three lots that will be unusable until the final access is done and the lots can then be usable and will cost $30,000 to do that. Discussion continued in regard to the temporary road and what would be required. Councilmember Knight stated the curvature on this creates a parcel that is useless and he wondered if there was any way around this. Mr. Neumeister thought this should all be right -of -way because at some point Outlot B needs to have access to the road. He stated they would take the entire area that is tear dropped shape along with all of Xeon Street as right -of -way. That way Outlot B would have Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes —April 20, 2004 . Page 10 access to the public road. He stated there would be no compensation paid. The two lots on the east would pay 2/6 and the lots on the west would pay 4/6 of the entire cost of this complete rebuild. Discussion ensued in regard to alignment of the proposed road and road improvements on Crosstown Boulevard. Motion by Jacobson, seconded by Knight, to approve the preliminary plat including the temporary access discussed and to post a sign on Yellow Pine and 155 after the temporary access is built not allowing truck traffic. Councilmember Trude asked Mr. Haas to review the right -of -way. Councilmember Orttel stated they are hearing more about traffic management and the impact of the construction period on the surrounding properties and he wondered if it would be reasonable to post 155' at the back of this property that there would be no truck traffic allowed during the construction after the temporary road is in. Mr. Haas stated the development contract may need to be amended. The Council discussed with staff minimizing truck traffic into the development. • Motion carried unanimously. (Res. R079 -04) Motion by Trude, seconded by Orttel, to amend the speed study on Crosstown Boulevard to also include the roads east of Hanson all the way to Prairie Road. Motion carried unanimously. MUSA BOUNDARY EXPANSION 11341 AND 1433161 AVENUE NW Communitibe,yelopment Director Neumeister stated in addition to the two properties listed, the three remaining pr rties in the Rural Reserve area north of 161"Avenue NW have submitted an application and paid a rated ;fee to request a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to extend the Municipal Urban Service Bo (MUSA) to include their properties. Some reimbursement to properties who applied earlier wi necessary. Mr. Neumeister explained all of the remaim roperties in the Rural Reserve area north of 161 Avenue are now a part of this request. The prop would also add the properties to the current stage of sewer expansion (2000 - 2005). This item is at d of the review period allowed by State Statute. The Council must either act on this item at the meetin obtain an extension from the three property owners included in this application. Councilmember Trude asked if everyone was included in this expansion. Mr. eitter stated they • are now all included. Councilmember Jacobson stated this sketch plan is for parcels that will not be developed ANLb 6 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. *ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 MAIN (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 a WWW.ANDOVERMN,GOV TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Andy Cross, Associate Planner AFL SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (04 -01) to further define collector streets and to revise language concerning grade separated railroad crossings. DATE: March 25, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission is asked to review the revised definition for "Collector Streets" and the revised language about grade separated railroad crossings to be included in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. DISCUSSION These two items came before the Planning Commission at the May 11` meeting. During the meeting, the proposed definition for Class A and Class B (Major / Minor) Collector Streets was found to be insufficient given the reference to 1,000 Average Daily Trips that exists in the current City Code. To remedy this, it was proposed to add the 1,000 ADT threshold to the definition for Class B — Minor Collector Streets. The new proposed definitions for the two types of collector streets are as follows: Class A — Major Collector: Roadways with projected average daily traffic (ADT) volume above 2,000. No driveway access shall be allowed on these streets. Class B — Minor Collector: Roadways with projected average daily traffic (ADT) volume between 1,000 and 2,000, The data used to determine the average daily trip count for Andover streets will come from year 2020 estimates from the Comprehensive Plan's Figure 13 — Existing and Year 2020 Daily Volumes — Scenario 3 (see attachment). A change will also be made to the language in the City Code regarding the placement of driveways on collector streets. Currently chapter 11 -3 -2 states that no lots may front on collector streets. Driveways can safely front onto streets with less than 2,000 ADT, so this chapter in the code should be changed to allow lots to front on minor collector streets. The second item presented at the workshop at the May I P h Planning Commission Meeting was the Railroad Grade Crossings Text and Map Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The I intent of the proposal at the workshop was to strike three of the four locations for potential separated -grade railroad/highway intersections. After some discussion, however, it was proposed that the Comprehensive Plan mandate the construction of grade separated crossings at all of the four intersections listed in the Plan. The Andover City Council has already determined that no separated grade crossing will be required at the Crosstown Boulevard railroad intersection, so that crossing will be removed from the list. The remaining crossings are: • Bunker Lake Boulevard • Andover Boulevard • 161 Avenue NW The Andover Review Committee (ARC) stands behind its original recommendation that all the crossings remain as at -grade intersections and not be grade separated. The grounds for the recommendation include the resources required to obtain the extra right of way needed for the construction of a grade separated railroad crossing and the fact that the cost for the improvements would be borne not by developers, but by the City of Andover and Anoka County. ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan. Attachments Resolution Respectfully submitted, Oe Andy aeoss is asked to recommend approval of these amendments to the n U 0 • CITY OF ANDOVER . COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. R -04 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CHAPTER 11 -3 -2 OF THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF ANDOVER TO INCLUDE DEFINITIONS FOR TWO TYPES OF COLLECTOR STREETS. WHEREAS, the existing definition of collector streets needs to be expanded to include two separate types of collector streets, and; WHEREAS, the current code prohibiting driveways to front on all collector streets is not practical given the wide range of subdivision designs and topography in Andover, and; WHEREAS, a revised definition of collector streets dividing them into two separate classes will allow for more flexibility in subdivision design and driveway placement, and; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held pursuant to state statutes, and; WHEREAS, 2,000 Average Daily Trips was deemed an appropriate threshold by Andover City Engineers at which to prohibit driveways fronting on collector streets, and; WHEREAS, public safety is not considered threatened if driveways front on collector streets that have a traffic volume of less than 2,000 Average Daily Trips, and; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the amendment as requested, and; WHEREAS, The Council finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the occupants of the surrounding land, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and adopts the following amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and City Code: 1) Page 24 of the Andover Transportation Plan (June 2003) shall include the following definition of Collector Streets: Class A — Major Collector: Roadways with projected average daily traffic (ADT) volume above 2,000. No driveway access shall be allowed on these streets. • Class B — Minor Collector: Roadways with projected average daily traffic (ADT) volume between 1,000 and 2,000. 2) Chapter 11 -3 -2 of the Andover City Code shall be changed to read as follows: "Frontage Restrictions: No preliminary plat shall be approved wherein lots front on the • right of way of state, county, or city arterial roads. Such lots may front on service roads with entrances to the above or at intervals of six hundred sixty feet (660') for arterials and three hundred thirty feet (330') for collectors." 3) Page 59 of the City of Andover Comprehensive Plan shall be changed to include the following language: "For purposes of the transportation plan, future grade separated crossings are being recommended for the following three public street crossings. Additional right of way should be dedicated to each crossing at the time property is developed adjacent to these intersections:" • Bunker Lake Boulevard • Andover Boulevard • 161" Avenue NW 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 C�