Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/24/04C I T Y O F ND6 06� 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 August 24, 2004 Andover City Hall Council Chambers 7.00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes — August 10, 2004 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat for planned unit development review of Miller's Woods, an urban residential plat located at 15955, 15827, 15803, and 15773 Crosstown Boulevard NW. 4. Work Session: a. Open Space Ordinance Discussion 5. Other Business 6. Adjournment is • LNDOVb T Y 9 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 - August 10, 2004 DATE: August 24, 2004 Request The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to approve the minutes from the August 10, 2004 meeting. n k PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONMEETING — AUGUST 10, 2004 • The Regular Bi- Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Daninger on August 10, 2004, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Commissioners absent: Also present: APPROVAL OFMINUTES. July 27, 2004 Chairperson Daninger, Commissioners Tim Kirchoff, Tony Gamache, Dean Vatne, Jonathan Jasper and Michael Casey. Commissioner Rex Greenwald. City Planner, Courtney Bednarz Planning Intern, Chris Vrchota Others Motion by Gamache, seconded by Vatne, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- present ( Kirchoff), 1- absent (Greenwald) vote. RESOLUTIONMODIFYING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCWG PLAN FOR TIF DISTRICT NO. 1-4. Mr. Bednarz explained on May 11, 2004 the Planning Commission reviewed a similar resolution. Since then there are changes that have been proposed to the size of the Tax Increment Financial District. The Andover Economic Development Authority (EDA) and the City of Andover are considering a proposal to enlarge the area involved in the proposed Tax Increment District and it necessitates adoption of a modification to the development program for Development District Number 1, to establish Tax Increment Financing District Number 14 (TIF District No. 14) and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan"). Mr. Bednarz introduced Mr. Todd Hagen, Ehlers & Associates, who explained the Tax Increment Financing Plan for TIF District No 1-4. l_.J Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —August 10, 2004 Page 3 TIF District because that is not only the revenue generator, and it has turned into the spending district also. The District would be expanded as far as they could to surround all of the other public improvements to be made and that is the tax increment coming off of that. That is one reason to expand the TIF District. Another reason for expanding a TIF District is to help qualify more as a TIF District. Commissioner Gamache asked whose idea was it that the two residential properties would be included in the TIF District. Mr. Bednarz believed it came from a recommendation from the Bond Council in meeting some of those requirements for setting up the TIF District. Mr. Hagen concurred. Chairperson Daninger asked what happened to the value of the property in the TIF District. W. Hagen stated if the zoning stays the same, it does not affect the value at all. Commissioner Jasper asked how many other Tax Increment Districts they had in Andover. Mr. Hagen stated this was number four of District 1. The Commission discussed other TIF Districts in Andover. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if the overall intention of the District itself to turn it into one PUD. Mr. Bednarz stated it is difficult to say what the ultimate redevelopment of • this area could be. He thought there was interest by the present property owners of the industrial area to do some expansion and upgrading of their facilities. If there is additional land available, it may generate more businesses to come into the area. Commissioner Kirchoff asked what would happen to the residential property. W. Bednarz stated there are a number of procedural processes to be taken. He discussed the steps that would need to be taken. Commissioner Gamache stated he would be concerned if he was one of the property owners. He stated a lot of questions have to be answered for the residents involved before City Council takes any action and he did not agree with this at all. Commissioner Vatne stated for clarification, they previously saw two thirds of the industrial property being included in the TIF District and now they are seeing all of the industrial property being included plus some residential properties. He stated this has significantly changed from what they saw previously. He recapped what was previously discussed. Commissioner Jasper stated the way he understood the change was they previously did not meet the statutory definition so they could hit fifty percent of the properties. The buildings are substandard and that is why they had to add other properties and they are adding other properties that do not want to be added. He stated the TIF District, as he understands it, is a way for the City to take a blighted area and redevelop it by use of the tax increment because it would not be financially feasible to do it without and he did not Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —August 10, 2004 Page 5 • Mr. Vrchota discussed the information with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Gamache asked how far back from the property line are they proposing to put the sign. Mr. Vrchota stated they do not have an exact location but it would be in the same spot as the previous sign was. Mr. Bednarz thought it would be ten feet. The applicant stated it would go in the same spot as the previous sign. Chairperson Daninger asked if the sign was lighted. The applicant stated it was backlit. Motion by Gamache, seconded by Jasper, to open the public hearing at 7:50 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Greenwald) vote. Commissioner Casey asked if the placement of the sign on the corner of Nightingale and 161` or is it set further back on the property. Mr. Wayne Buse stated the sign is in the comer of the property along Nightingale and 161 Avenue. Commissioner Kirchoff asked how the sign would be angled. Mr. Buse thought it would be perpendicular to Nightingale. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Gamache, to close the public hearing at 7:53 p.m. • Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Greenwald) vote. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Gamache, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Vatne thought it was a nice looking sign and met all of the conditions. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Greenwald) vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the August 17, 2004 City Council meeting. VARIANCE (04 -06) TO VARY FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS OF CITY CODE 5 1 FOR SHELTERING HORSES ON PROPER TY L OCA TED A T 17536 QUAY STREET NW. Mr. Bednarz explained that the applicant did not provide information in time for this item to be included in the packet. This item will not be reviewed at the August 10, 2004 meeting. L� Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —August 10, 2004 Page 7 • Commissioner Kirchoff stated he liked the idea of low maintenance. Maybe a dry river bed, especially around the first eight feet. Commissioner Vatne stated he noticed a caveat based on the final conclusion of where this easement is on the transmission lines. It looks like the interpretation runs pretty close to lots seven and eight. If the easement ends up coming in further to the east, does this propose problems to the layout. Mr. Bednarz stated if the easement does encroach further into the property, it could potentially affect the building pads as shown. The size of the cul -de -sac and street may need to be adjusted if that is the case. He stated the island itself has a diameter of about one hundred feet so there is room for adjustment if necessary. Commissioner Jasper stated this plan shows the pond being expanded but part of the pond expansion is on property that is not part of this development. How does that work. Mr. Bednarz stated there is a drainage and utility easement that covers the area of the pond up to the property line. The applicant would be required to put together a storm water management plan that meets the Watershed District requirements, that does not put additional water onto that property. Mr. Osberg showed on the map the easements of the property and explained how the building pad on lot seven could be adjusted. He stated regarding the storm water pond adjustment, at this point, when the sketch was put together, it is a presumption that the • pond could be expanded. The alternative is there is additional land on the site that a pond could be created. Motion by Jasper, seconded by Vatne, to open the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Greenwald) vote. There was no public input. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Greenwald) vote. Commissioner Jasper stated he would rather see sod in the middle of the cul-de -sac and have it maintained. Commissioner Gamache stated he agreed because the rocks will end up all over the road and other areas. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he was ok with sod as well. Chairperson Daninger s ummari zed the Commissions comments to the applicants. He commended the developers on the size of the lots. He stated the cul -de -sac is something different and he thought it would add some buffering from the houses. He stated there is always an issue with safety concerns but he thought this was something different. He did not think a park would work in the middle of the cul -de -sac because they did not want kids playing there. Another concern is the homeowners association and how the island • will be landscaped. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —August 10, 2004 Page 9 ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Vatne, seconded by Gamache, to adjourn the meeting at 8:20 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Greenwald) vote. Respectfully Submitted, Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary Timesaver Of, f'Site Secretarial, Inc. • 0 O JFM 1 � ' two i TO: 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.AN DOVER. MN. US FROM: SUBJECT: Crosstown Boulevard. i • DATE: Planning and Zoning Commissioners Andy Cross, Associate Planner PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development Review for "Miller's Woods" on property located at 15955, 15827, and 15773 August 24, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to review the preliminary plat for Miller's Woods, a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) on 43 -acres located along Crosstown Boulevard between 157 Avenue and 161 Avenue. In January 2004, the applicant hosted a neighborhood meeting at City Hall to get input on his development plans from Andover residents who live in the vicinity of the Miller's Woods properties. The residents who came also attended public hearings and City Council meetings to express ideas they had about the development. From this input the City Council asked that the Miller's Woods development incorporate two key features: an effort towards preservation of the existing woodlands on the site and a buffer or transition area between the urban density of this development and the rural character of the existing properties around the development. The preliminary plat submission and Planned Unit Development proposal represent an effort on the part of the developer to comply with the wishes of the City Council and the residents who live in the vicinity of the development. DISCUSSION Conformance with Local Plans and Ordinances 1. The property is located in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). A previous Comprehensive Plan Amendment changed the sewer staging time to 2000 -2005. Municipal utilities can be extended to serve the entire development. 2. The proposed site is designated Urban Residential Low Density in the Comprehensive Plan which carries a maximum density of four units per acre. The proposed housing development would have a density of roughly 3 units per acre. 3. The property is currently zoned Single Family Urban Residential (R -4). The proposed project would require Planned Unit Development Review to establish standards unique to this development. The Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed P.U.D. based on new City Code 13 —3, "Planned Unit Development. " a Easements Properties within this development will have the stan dard drainage and utility easements associated with R -4 lots. Additional easements will cover the stormwater ponds and wetlands. A 16.5 -foot buffer within which nothing may be developed has been placed around each wetland and drainage pond on the site. Tree Preservation Since the Miller's Woods site has a significant amount of existing woodland, tree preservation has been an important element in the Planned Unit Development. Page C4 of the attached plan set, Tree Preservation / Wetland Plan, shows tree preservation areas shaded in grey. The area along the southern and eastern borders of the development is intended to protect a large stand of pines on the property and provide a buffer between the new development and nearby rural properties. Park Land & Open Space There are four outlots in the development totaling 6.23 acres that provide areas for tree preservation and a private park. Outlot A includes a private neighborhood park with a swimming pool. Outlot B contains a forested area! that is shared in the read yards of several properties in Block 2. Outlot C contains much of the woodland that provides a buffer on the south and east borders of the development. Outlot D is a 240 square -foot tract of land adjacent to Fire Station #3. These outlots will be preserved and maintained by a homeowners association. The City • Attorney and staff will review the association documents to ensure the appropriate language is included. The applicant is requesting credit against park dedication fees pursuant to City Code chapter 9 -7- 8, "Credit for Private Open Space." The City Council, with recommendation from the Park and Recreation Commission, will determine whether or what ratio of the private open space can be applied toward the City's park dedication requirements to process his request and seek approval. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review - The Miller's Woods P. U.D. Applicable Ordinances City Code 13 -3 -9 regulates the findings that are required for a PUD to be approved: 1. The proposed development is`not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan of the City. 2. The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. 3. The proposed development demonstrates how each modified or waived requirement contributes to achieving the purpose of PUD. 4. The PUD is of composition and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation are feasible as a complete unit without dependence on any subsequent unit. This project contains single-fain fly homes on lots that meet or exceed the City's R -4 lot area • requirements. Since rural lots border the development, efforts have been made to provide buffering between Miller's Woods and the surrounding rural area. To accommodate this buffering and preservation of woodlands on the site, this development will vary from the chance to preserve tree groupings on lots. The flexibility provided in front and side yard • setback requirements will also provide for variety in the location of homes streetscape. H. The houses built on the lots in Miller's Woods are anticipated to have values ranging from $400,000 to $600,000. Laurent Builders, Inc. and Bergeron Homes will be constructing the homes in the development. Samples of the housing proposed for the development are attached. I. An owner's association will be established for the long term maintenance of the private park and open space areas. The covenants for the development will also ensure lasting quality. Homes The homes in the Miller's Woods neighborhood will be traditional single - family houses. The front setback for houses is 20 feet, but garages will be setback 25 feet throughout Miller's Woods. This will discourage a garage- dominant house design and soften the streetscape by bringing front porches and landscaping closer to the street. The average lot size in Miller's Woods is over 14,000 square feet. This larger lot size will allow for plenty of variety between the units. No floor plans will be submitted for approval, but several samples of housing styles have been submitted and are included with this report. Landscaping Plan City Code 4 -3 -13 requires two trees to be planted in the front yards of all new homes. The intent of this requirement is to reforest developments that have been denuded of trees and ensure that residential subdivisions have trees on their lots. The applicant has indicated on the plan that the number of trees will meet or exceed this requirement. However, the location of trees will be clustered to infill areas where custom grading is unable to preserve existing trees. Area Identification Sign Please see attached renderings of the monument signage for Miller's Woods. Association Documents The association will provide for the maintenance of common areas, the pool, recreation area, and outlots within the development. The City will maintain the streets. The City Attorney and staff will review the association documents to ensure all items are appropriately addressed. Attachments Resolution Location Map Miller's Woods Preliminary Plat (in packet) Alternate Plat Design (in packet) Applicant's Letter - P.U.D. Narrative Description Anoka County Highway Department Comments Entrance Sign, Landscaping, and Private Park Renderings • Sample House Designs Sketch Plan Minutes 61 CITY OF ANDOVER • COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO R -04 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW OF "MILLER'S WOODS" FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 32, RANGE 24, ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED ON EXHIBIT A; WHEREAS, Gary Laurent of Laurent Builders, Inc. has requested approval of a preliminary plat with Planned Unit Development Review of Miller's Woods, and 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 Planning Commission has reviewed the request and has determined that said request meets the criteria of City Code 13 Planned Unit Development with the following findings: 1. Miller's Woods incorporates buffering on its southern and eastern borders. Stands of existing trees will be preserved to help screen the urban density of this development from the existing rural properties around the site. 2. A sidewalk is included in the design that will provide off - street pedestrian access to the entire development, including the park, play area, and swimming pool. An 8 -foot trail also leads out of the neighborhood and will connect with the future City trail along Crosstown Boulevard'. 3. Miller's Woods incorporates buffering on its southern and eastern borders. Stands of existing trees will be preserved to help screen the urban density of this development from the existing rural properties around the site. 4. Tree preservation has been a goal throughout the planning of the Miller's Woods development. Page C4 of the attached plans illustrates areas where existing stands of trees will be preserved. 5. The proposed landscaping plan, with some adjustments, will provide focus areas at the entrance to the development, an attractive entrance monument and thematic planting areas thoughout the interior of the development. Existing trees will be saved in rear yard areas and others will be transplanted throughout the development to create a naturally forested character and will include screening along Crosstown Boulevard. 6. The design of the subdivision has maintained over 6 acres of open space. This • includes community outlots, as well as a private park and swimming pool area. 7. Tree clustering will be an important element in the streetscape and landscape design of this development. 'Many lots will be custom graded, which will give the builders a • 3. The developer shall contribute toward improvements made to the intersection of 159' Avenue and Crosstown Boulevard NW on a per unit basis. The required financial contribution shall be based on the total project cost as determined by the City Engineer minus payments from the Constance Corners development and Fire Station #3. Payment amounts will be provided as conditions of final plat approval based on the number of units shown on the final plat. 4. 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. 5. Park dedication and trail fees shall be based upon the decision of the City Council and incorporated into a condition at the time of final plat approval. 6. Parking shall be prohibited on one side of the public streets within the development as determined by the City Engineer. Appropriate signage and striping shall be installed at the developer's expense. 7. The development shall conform to City Code Titles 11, 12, and 13, as well as Exhibit B "Miller's Woods Design Specifications ". Exhibit B shall regulate when in conflict with the City Code. 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. 10. The developer must comply with the conditions included on the Landscaping Plan in regard to the quantity and location of trees planted in the development. 11. A property owners association shall be created with the following documents provided to the City Attorney for review and approval prior to being recorded with the final plat in accordance with City Code 11 -2 -3: a. Articles of Incorporation b. By -laws of the association c. Declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions regulating the properties, exterior maintenance of the homes and maintenance of the common areas. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this day of , 2004. CITY OF ANDOVER • ATTEST: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Section 13, Township 32, Range • 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the West line thereof distant 400 feet North of the Southwest corner of said Section 13, thence North along the West line of Southwest Quarter a distance of 160 feet, thence East at right angles to the West line a distance of 495 feet, thence South at right angles a distance of 160 feet, thence West at right angles a distance of 495 feet to the point of beginning. 0 u 11 co r 0 ID • - tv © • n ■ to son O 0 _ .. �. ..� F' At o a .._ e �eAe de �e►a � e :.. �i.�. �e�ee�111� �•� WIN 1111111 • Page Two It is our understanding the City requires that two trees be planted on each lot. Given the large number of trees being preserved, the effort that is going into doing so, and our desire to create a natural looking neighborhood, we ask that this development be exempt from this requirement. It certainly doesn't make sense to plant trees on lots that already have them. Note that it is our intention to move existing on -site stock into sparse areas and also to create visual barriers between existing neighboring residences and proposed building sites. This will be done by utilizing a variety of sizes, uneven spacings and non- linear clumpings to create a natural look. Finally, pursuant to City ordinance section 9.07.8 "Credit for Private Open Space," we respectfully request a credit against park dedication fees, based on open space, park, recreational amenities, trails and sidewalks provided within Miller's Woods. Nearly 4 acres (approximately 9 0 /a of the total development area), including the neighborhood park and pool, are being placed into private open space to be perpetually maintained by a Home Owner Association, established with professional management. We believe the requirements of the ordinance are met, thus allowing for the credit. The amenities cited provide benefits not only to the residents of Miller's Woods, but also to the City at large. The value of preserving natural features adds beauty, habitat for • wildlife and areas for groundwater recharge that extend beyond the borders of the development. It is expected that residents of Miller's Woods will make heavy use of the Neighborhood Park with its pool, playcourt and tot lot. This will take the burden off of other City parks and amenities, forgoing the subsequent wear and tear, and delaying the need for further park expansion and improvement. The cost for providing these amenities in Miller's Woods is about double what all park dedication fees would be. We look forward to proceeding through the approval process and bringing forth an outstanding residential neighborhood to the City of Andover. Sincerely, LAURENT LAND DEVELOPMENT, INC. Gary L. Laure t President • Courtney Bednarz City of Andover Re: Preliminary Plat — Miller's Woods Page 2 • completed in conjunction with the Miller's Woods development. For your information and use, I have enclosed a concept plan depicting the NB and SB CR18 left turn lane and right turn lane configurations at 159"' Avenue NW. Detailed engineering plans will be required to be prepared and submitted to this department for our review and approval. The engineering plan review fee is anticipated to be $650.00. The costs for design and construction of these roadway improvements shall be the responsibility of the Developer /City. Please contact Andrew Witter, Construction Engineer, to coordinate the engineering plan review process. It should be noted that residential land use adjacent to highways usually results in complaints regarding traffic noise. Traffic noise at this location could exceed noise standards established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Anoka County policy regarding new developments adjacent to existing county highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures. The City and/or the Developer should assess the noise situation and take any action deemed necessary to minimize associated impacts at this site from any traffic noise. Drainage calculations must be submitted along with a grading and erosion control plan that delineates the drainage areas for this site. The post - developed rate of runoff must not exceed the pre - developed rate runoff for the 10 -year, critical design storm. Contact Andrew Witter, Construction Services Engineer, for further information regarding the drainage review for this site. Please submit the drainage calculations, grading and erosion control plans, the ACHD Design Requirements Checklist for County Highway Modifications (copy attached) and the applicable engineering plan review fee to Mr. Witter for his review and approval. A permit for work within County right of way is required and must be obtained prior to the commencement of any construction (permit to work within R/W= $110.00). Contact Roger Butler, Traffic Engineering Coordinator, or Terri Klein, Permit Technician, for further information regarding the permit process. Installation and maintenance of any necessary permanent traffic control devices within the county right of way will be coordinated by Anoka County in conjunction with the permit process. (Please note that the Developer will be required to make the necessary pavement marking removals for the implementation of the turn lane plan as part of the permit process). Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Si ely, �) Jane Rose Traffic Engineering Manager xc: CR 181PLATS /2004 Mike Kelly, Chief Right -of -Way Agent Larry Hoium, County Surveyor Roger Butler, Traffic Engineering Coordinator Terri Klein, Permit Technician • Tom Hornsby, Traffic Services Supervisor — Signs Josie Scott, Traffic Engineering Technician Andrew Witter, Construction Engineer • r• i t ti 5, c ti m. K ?? ~f lu- vti a � f -1 a ej i t p 0 m 0 mg Rolm I� Su a sol . 16 '� IIIIIIIU111111U r� It °■ ��Il nflH I HI 0 • Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — April 27, 2004 Page 2 Mr. Cross explained an effort has been made in this neighborhood design to create a softer transition between its urban housing density and the existing rural properties to the east of the development. A stand of pines on the south border has been preserved, which will provide an effective natural buffer, and increased rear yards have helped produce a buffer along the eastern border of the development. Mr. Cross discussed the staff report with the Commission. Mr. Gary Laurent, Laurent Builders, gave a presentation to the Planning Commission of the proposed development. Motion by Jasper, seconded by Kirchoff, to open the public hearing at 7:36 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Gamache) vote. Mr. Mark Lipski stated there were a couple of things he was concerned about regarding the sketch. He stated the communication between himself and the developer was really good and there was talk about purchasing some property. He stated when he planted the trees when they moved there; it was not intended for a buffer zone. He did not think the trees he planted should be a buffer zone. He questioned the outlots in the development. He was concerned with how much say as a property owner they will have in this buffer area and how much say he will have because no one owns the outlot. Mr. Lipski wondered if he could purchase some of the property by his trees to protect them from grading and this would provide a buffer between the properties or if there could be a variance made for this property to protect the trees and both properties. Commissioner Greenwald asked what Mr. Lipski wanted to have authorization over. Mr. Lipski stated he wanted to have a say over what happened with the outlot along his property. Chairperson Daninger stated the Association owning the outlots is to make sure the trees are not cut or the area destroyed. He stated he cannot help Mr. Lipski with ownership of the outlots. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Motion carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Gamache) vote. Chairperson Daninger thought the developer was looking for guidance on the road going through as well as any other thoughts. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if the tree ordinance that they developed recently apply in the P.U.D., requiring it to have two trees of the same size on one lot and will it follow through on the P.U.D. Mr. Cross stated it could be used as a form of negotiations. 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —April 27, 2004 Page 4 Mr. Cross stated when there is talk about changing lane width on a road, they discuss it with the Fire Chief because he has the knowledge and say when it comes to providing emergency services and he spoke unequivocally that if it is 28 feet wide and parking is prohibited on one side, it will provide at all times emergency vehicle access. He stated twenty-eight foot streets are State Aid standards and for that reason, it had engineering support. Mr. Bednarz stated regarding the intersection at 159 as part of Constance Comers, the City did collect some dollars to contribute towards the intersection improvement. The fire department also has some money in their budget for that use and Laurent Development will also be asked as a part of this project to contribute to that improvement. He stated they have not arrived at the final design and the County will be involved in determining what that design will be. Once that is determined, they will be able to assign costs with the preliminary plat. Commissioner Jasper stated it seemed like staff and the Fire Chief thought the twenty- eight foot streets were a good idea and calming and if that is the case, then Andover should look at making this their standard. If the standard is thirty -three feet, it does not seem like there is a reason to this differently in this development as opposed to other developments. Commissioner Greenwald stated they would have to put in a sidewalk. Discussion ensued in regards to the width of streets in the Andover Station P.U.D. Commissioner Vatne asked in coming out of the review with the City Council, there were two points outlined. One was to preserve as much of the existing woodland as possible and he thought Mr. Laurent accomplished this and the other was to provide a buffering of trees and larger lots to be placed between the development and the acreage residential lots and then they opened the door with the P.U.D. Did they entertain or take a look at the possibility to surround the development with larger size lots to provide some of the buffering and also to save some of the trees. Mr. Laurent stated they did look into it and ended coming back to that primarily because if they take larger lots around the edge and they go all the way to the property line, then the buffer ends up being owned by a lot of different people and when that happens, what happens to it is much more in question than by a homeowners association with restrictions added on to it. Commissioner Vatne thought the economics also played a factor in this also. Mr. Laurent was not sure but he did not think it was too big of a factor. Commissioner Greenwald thought they were meeting the goals that the Council set forth for them. Chairperson Daninger asked if any of the Commission was opposed to the way 159` was planned. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he liked this design very much because he looked at the connection to Crosstown on 159 going to the east and it will be more of a detriment to the proposed development than it will be to the residents that already live to the east. S hr-7Ctt I'IA Regular Andover City Council Meeting 114xNU'rES Minutes —May 4, 2004 Page 6 r� STY e�+u.�+GZL Motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER RESIDENTLAL SKETCH PLAN/WHISPERING ACRES /140 LANE Comm ty Development Director Neumeister stated The City Council is asked to review the sketc plan for spering Acres (formerly known as the Blomberg property). The applicant has pro ed to subdivide a vacant 1.2 -acre rural residential lot into three urban residential lots. The petty will need to be zoned from R -1, Single Family in Residential to R-4, Single F y Urban Residential, at the 'me the Preliminary Plat is approved. Mayor Gamache state is his understanding that the Coon Creek Watersh istrict has not yet given their approval. Mr. \it. stated the Watershed has reviewed o the point where they do not see any reason to d The Council discussed thg through the wetland a potential for flooding. Ms. Pam Capp, 798 141 st Avenue NW, ted one o e things they found the researching this is that the pipe should have been longer to be ' She stated there also needs to be some work done on the intake pipe because one of the a ers told her that if this were done today, it would have to be done differently. She state ediment s been occurring in one area and corrective action needs to be taken and maint ' ed by the City, ch has not happened yet. Going forward this would have to be done to a sure none of the prope flood. What this proposal has done is shown some of the thin at should have been done ye o and is giving them a fairly inexpensive way of ailing some very expensive problems down a line. Councihn er Knight asked if the mitigation has been approved by the D2 t. Mr. Berkowitz state this point, a formal approval will occur at the Preliminary Plat stage but it look at this hetf found that the replacement is basically one -to -one and does meet the requirements. CONSIDER RESIDENTIAL SKETCH PLAN/MILLER'S WOODS Community Development Director Neumeister explained the City Council is asked to review a residential sketch plan for Miller's Woods, a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) on 43 -acres located along Crosstown Boulevard between 157 Avenue and 161 Avenue. Councilmember Trude stated she would prefer that if there were a few lots that required the seven - foot variance, they stay with the ten. The one thing she would be afraid of if they did the P.U.D. instead of the single - family requirements would be sodding of the yard, two trees per yard, should look at some kind of a tree planting so it looks like the new neighborhoods with their tree planting requirements. She was concerned that if they have their own park, would there still be some payment of park dedication because of the impacts on the existing park and is that neighborhood going to be for association residents only. Mr. Neumeister thought the developer was willing to Regular Andover City Council Meeting Minutes — May 4, 2004 Page 8 Councilmember Knight asked Mr. Laurent how long it will be before he expands east. Mr. Laurent stated it would be two years. They will be building this development in phases. Councilmember Orttel stated there is some benefit to having continuity but there is a trade off with safety. Mayor Gamache thought the developer had a really good loop in the development to allow access into and out of the development. Ms. Jackie Lipski, 629 157' Avenue N.W., wanted to thank Mr. Laurent for listening to the residents in the area and taking their suggestions into consideration. She wanted to thank the Council for working together with the residents and the developer to look at this as a learning experience on how to help other developments. APPROVE COMMUNITY CENTER YMCA SUBLEASE AGREEMENT Finance Director Dickinson explained YMCA representatives and City staffhave met to discus e series of comments raised at the April 20, 2004 Council meeting. Changes to the s ease . agree ent have been communicated to City Attorney Hawkins. Mayor G ache asked what the question of subordination was in regard to Dickinson explained wh this item was about. Councilmember Jac son wondered what the right of first refusal top ase was in regard to. Mr. Tom LaSalle stated if t City defaulted on payment of the build' the YMCA would have the right to purchase the buildi Councilmember Knight asked if the competition agree nt precludes the City from ever having a City recreation program. Mr. LaSalle st d they wo have the right to have recreation programs. Councilmember Knight asked if they farm on concession, if reviewed after two years do they have to agree to keep the vendor or to get . of the Mr. LaSalle stated the City owns fifty -one percent of this and the intent of the con t is the two sh d work together to have a common goal. The City Council recessed atX.49 p.m. The City Council recorXened at 9:54 p.m. Councilmemb Jacobson asked for clarification regarding the base rent. Mr. Dickinson explained the base re item in the contract. Motion by Knight, Seconded by Trude, to accept the Sub -Lease Agreement and Subordination • mr= N i� � -f- ,-- 2-)v*A-r tew I jr R -P "I tro q Mimi of J£ d F S I r < S�1 3 4 Rai s [ 1 r n 9 if r 3 � ha U ✓� c if f `. ¢ sue (,. -i �2 3'�+ �k„ ion �A 4 1 S J1 "I. Y } J£ d F S I r < S�1 3 4 Rai s [ 1 r n 9 if r 3 � ha U ✓� c if f `. ¢ sue (,. -i �2 3'�+ �k„ ion r C��TTI bT ffY �� O F i \ OV 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: WORK SESSION: Open Space Ordinance Discussion DATE: August 24, 2004 INTRODUCTION Please find attached an article from the Planning Commissioners Journal titled "Open Space Zoning: What It Is & Why It Works ". DISCUSSION This article is intended to be an introduction to a topic that will be discussed at the meeting. The ideas contained in the article present an alternative approach to preserving rural areas. ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is asked to have an informal discussion of the ideas presented in the attached article and their potential application in Andover. 1 9 - NW1110 � "' i q PCJ Article: "Open Space" Zoning, by Randall Arendt because every square foot of each development parcel is converted to front yards, back yards, streets, sidewalks, or driveways. Period. Nothing is left over to become open space, in this land - consumptive process. Above photo is of conventional large lot zoning in Middletown, Rhode Island. Above photo is of open space development in Lower Makefield Township, Pennsylvania, where over half of this 431 acre tract has been preserved as farmland (137 acres donated to a local farmland trust) or as woods and wetlands (100 acres). Houselots are about 1/2 acre in size. Buyer response has been very favorable, with sales outpacing similarly priced developments. The developer advertises the project as "a community that will be forever surrounded by acres of preserved farmland, open fields and woodlands." [Editor's Note: The Center for Rural Massachusett's Web site contains excellent drawings comparing development under conventional zoning principles and development using open space /cluster principles A Better Solution Local officials who are interested in ensuring that their communities will not ultimately become a seamless web of subdivisions, shopping centers and office or industrial parks now have a practical and effective alternative: compulsory Page 2 of 9 http: / /www.plannersweb .com/articles /are015.htmi 8/13/2004 PCJ Article: "Open Space" Zoning, by Randall Arendt The conventional approach to development results in the entire parcel being • covered with houselots and subdivision streets. Communities which have had a lot of experience with this type of development ultimately realize that, as one parcel after another is eventually developed, their formerly open landscape evolves into a network of "wall -to- wall" subdivisions. [See Sidebar, "Large Lot Zoning" at the end of this article]. The beauty of open space zoning is that it is easy to administer, does not penalize the rural landowner, does not take development potential away from the developer, and is extremely effective in permanently protecting a substantial proportion of every development tract. It does not require large public expenditures (to purchase development rights), and allows farmers and others to extract their rightful equity without seeing their entire land holding bulldozed for complete coverage by houselots. This pattern of down -sized houselots and preserved open space offers distinct economic advantages to all parties. Developers can reduce the costs of building roads and, if applicable, water and sewer lines. Local governments save on snowplowing and on periodic road re- surfacing. And home buyers often pay less because of these cost savings. Landowners who view their property as their "pension" no longer have to destroy their woods and fields in order to retire with a guaranteed income, as • their equity is not diminished. Local governments do not have to raise property taxes to finance expensive open space acquisitions, and are not faced with the administrative complexities posed by TDR (transfer of development rights) systems. Developers are not placed under unreasonable constraints, and realtors gain a special marketing tool, in that views from the new houses will be guaranteed by conservation easements protecting the open space from future development. Why Require Cluster Design? Perhaps the most controversial issue surrounding the cluster concept is the suggestion that this open space approach be made mandatory. The rationale is that there are certain types of irreplaceable natural resources which are extremely important to protect. Among these may be listed aquifers, riverfront land, fields and pastures. In addition, clustering allows flexibility in layout so that a developer can avoid impacting important wildlife habitat areas, such as deeryards, or scenic features of the rural landscape, such as large rock formations, hill crests, and mature tree- stands. It is a local decision whether to require the cluster approach when development is proposed on any or all of these resource lands. There are several possible options to mandating open space. One is to require . the cluster approach in only certain zoning districts, or when certain resources are present. Another alternative is to authorize the planning commission to require it only when the developer's conventional plan would destroy or remove Page 4 of 9 http: / /www.plannersweb .com/articles /are0l5.html 8/13/2004 PCJ Article: "Open Space" Zoning, by Randall Arendt should also be placed on conventional subdivisions when they abut working fields, but this is rarely done. Street Standards in Cluster Developments. When cluster developments are designed with privately maintained road systems, planning boards are often asked to reduce their normal street construction standards. This has sometimes created substandard conditions, and is a practice which communities would be well- advised to resist. If subdivision street construction standards are excessive -- as they often are -- they should be revised for all types of new development, so that street width bears a reasonable relationship to the expected volume of traffic. [Editor's Note: On this point, see Joseph Molinaro' s article, "Rethinking Residential Streets," in Issue 1 of the PCJ]. Sewerage and Septic Systems. Because of the shorter road system needed to serve lots in a cluster development, substantial savings are possible with respect to the construction of roads, sewers, and water lines. Where sewer service is unavailable, however, people have expressed concerns about siting septic systems on the smaller cluster lots. Recognizing this factor, officials are requiring such houselots to be located on that part of the parcel where soils are most favorable for leaching fields. The flexibility of cluster design allows this to happen. On the other hand, in a conventional subdivision, septic systems are located wherever the soils manage to pass minimum health requirements, even on marginal soils whose long -term suitability is questionable. In addition, it should be noted that septic systems can be located beyond one's lot lines, on an easement within the protected open space. Summing Up: Whether continuous coverage by large -lot subdivisions is more desirable than a mixture of village -sized cluster lots surrounded by permanently protected fields and woodland is a decision for residents and officials in each town. As long as everyone is clear about the ultimate consequences of the various development types which are available to them, these decisions can be made on an informed basis. Page 6 of 9 Sidebars: Large Lot Zoning One of the "solutions" that many conventional zoning ordinances use for presumably maintaining open space and rural character is large lot zoning -- that is establishing large, five to ten acre, minimum lot sizes in rural zoning districts. Although large lot zoning does reduce the number of homes that can be built, it also spreads out the homes in such a way that none of the remaining land is useable for http: / /www.plannersweb .com/articles /are0I5.html 8/13/2004 PCJ Article: "Open Space" Zoning, by Randall Arendt loss of the existing farmland and open space. The township also mapped out the open space it hoped to preserve to show landowners and developers exactly what • was envisioned: interconnected open spaces crossing parcel lines. Under the township's open space zoning provision, a developer first prepares a sketch plan showing the number of units that could be built under a conventional development pattern. This determines the allowable density that can be used when the project is designed in a clustered manner. According to Jan Dell, Assistant Township Administrator, allowing the same density was important to allay the concerns of affected landowners. At the same time, preserving views of open space would make developments more attractive to home buyers. One other note, West Manchester's open space zoning requirement only applies to developments involving more than fifteen acres. Page 8 of 9 Editor's Note: Manchester Twp. also made use of the design manual and video cited in the Resources sidebar. Return to text of article "Build -Out" Maps One of the most understandable, inexpensive and effective tools for showing local residents and officials the long -term result of implementing existing zoning and •. subdivision regulations is the "build -out" map. This map shows the probable location of new roads and houses which could legally be constructed on the vacant and buildable land remaining within the municipality (or a portion of the municipality). Because so many people assume their town is adequately protected by existing zoning, a build -out map, by graphically showing what might occur, can be a real "eye opener" for members of the community. To ensure accuracy, build -out maps must not project development into areas where natural or regulatory constraints would prevent it. The Center for Rural Massachusetts has available "A Manual of Build -Out Analysis," a step -by -step guide to the preparation of build -out maps. Enhancing Property Values A recent study, "An Examination of Market Appreciation for Clustered Housing with Permanent Open Space," by Jeff Lacy at the Center for Rural Massachusetts comparing conventional and open space developments in two Massachusetts towns over long periods of time found that the value of homes in open space developments appreciated at a greater rate. An interesting article by Philip Larsen, "Open Space That Sells," in Land Development, the publication of the National Association of Homebuilders, explores how well - planned open space can enhance a development's market value. As Larsen notes: "The key is to view the various open space requirements as opportunities http:// www.plamersweb.com/articles /areO 15.html 8/13/2004