Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/12/05r C I T Y O F NDOVE 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 April 12, 2005 Andover City Hall Council Chambers 7.00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes —March 22, 2005. 3. Variance (05 -01) to vary from the accessory structure exterior material requirements of City Code 12 -6 -5 for proposed horse shelter at 3028 181 Avenue NW. 4. Variance (05 -02) to vary from the maximum light allowed to encroach on residential properties for athletic fields at Prairie Knoll Park located at 595 146 Lane NW. 5. PUBLIC HEARING Residential Sketch Plan for a single family urban residential development to be known as Cardinal Ridge located at 15785, 15805, and 15875 Nightingale Street NW. 6. WORK SESSION: a. Zoning Ordinance Update i. City Code 12 -13 Uses ii. City Code 12 -13 113. Animals iii. 12 -14 Performance Standards iv. 12 -14 -5 Screening V. 12 -14 -6 Landscaping in All Districts vi. 12 -14 -16 Guesthouses vii. 12 -10 -21 Animal Shelters 7. Other Business 8. Adjournment 0 • .�_ 19k 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 - March 22, 2005 DATE: April 12, 2005 Request The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to approve the minutes from the March 22, 2005 meeting. 11 is i PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONMEETING — MARCH 22, 2005 The Regular Bi- Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Vice Chairperson Kirchoff on March 22, 2005, 7:03 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Commissioners Jonathan Jasper, Tim Kirchoff, Dean Vatne, and Michael Casey. 11 Commissioners absent: Commissioner Greenwald, Commissioner Holtus, and Chairperson Daninger Also present: City Planner, Courtney Bednarz Associate Planner, Andy Cross Associate Planner, Chris Vrchota Others APPROVAL OFMINUTES. March 8, 2005 Motion by Commissioner Vatne seconded by Commissioner Casey to approve the minutes as presented. Motion failed on a 3 -ayes, 0 -nays, l- present (Jasper), 3- absent ( Daninger, Greenwald, Holthus) vote. Approval of minutes was postponed to the next meeting due to lack of quorum. PUBLIC HEARDVG: RESIDENTIAL SKETCH PLAN OFA SINGLE FAMILY URBANRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ONPROPERTYLOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OFANDOVER BOULEVARD AND PRAIRIE ROAD NW. Mr. Bednarz explained that the applicant is for a single family urban residential develo illustrate how the entire area can be develop seeking approval of a residential sketch plan �ment. The sketch plan is intended to red. It is important to note that not all of the property owners in this area are interested in development at this time. 0 Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — March 22, 2005 Page 3 • Mr. Bednarz said there is no statute that requires notification during the sketch plan stage. Notification is required as plan is more solidified at the preliminary plat stage. Mr. Dave Yeager said when he moved in he was told that there would be a bridge and trail parallel the creek on the north side of his property and is curious to know why this has changed. Vice Chairperson Kirchoff answered the Park Board makes the decision in regard to the trail placement. Mr. Hapka asked if there were a possibility of Butternut ever becoming a City street. His concern is that the road will stay in the development but the access to Andover Boulevard will not remain. He would not like to see Butternut become a City street, as it would increase traffic among the town home development. Vice Chairperson Kirchoff answered that this depends on the permits issued by the County. Mr. Bruce Carlson, a developer, said road, trail and park placement are all still being negotiated. • Ms. Arlenia Witon expressed concerns about the growth in traffic in Andover, 168 more homes will be added to a street with no sidewalks or shoulders. And, 168 homes will bring more children and the speed limit is 55mph, which is already excessive for the residential area that already exists. She stated she has spent thousands of dollars to save trees from oak wilt. Tree removal in the Spring will damage entire area, and she would like to know who will oversee the protection of these trees, and/or safe removal. Mr. Bednarz said the City has a forester and policies are in place to address oak wilt. Mr. Chris Wallace who lives across from the proposed service road asked if the County would consider a controlled intersection, and is also curious to know about the location of the trail. Mr. Bednarz said the new intersection would require a right turn out, a left turn out, and bypass lanes, and improvements to Andover Blvd. are at the discretion of the Anoka County Highway Dept. Mr. Bednarz explained the location of the proposed trail. Mr. Brian Streger voiced his concern about the security and privacy of his property with the addition of foot bridges. There is already a problem with snowmobiles and four wheelers. More people will bring more temptation to use this open area of his property. He asked what could be done to show that this is privately held property. 0 Mr. Bednarz said he would be talking with park staff as to how to address this issue. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — March 22, 2005 Page 5 Ms. Karen Swanson asked if easements are opened up for utilities, what would be included. She asked if there would be a cost to the property owner in this case. Mr. Bednarz explained that how easements are done is up to the City Council. Ideally it is a road with water and sewer runnin underneath it. Going against owner preference is the last resort of the City Council, whose preference is to cooperate with owners. Mr. Dave Yeager asked who makes the decision on placement of trails. Mr. Bednarz answered the City Staff makes a recommendation to the City Council, who then make a final decision. Mr. Mark Smith asked if owners do not sell, would the utilities be able to be run in the right -of -way for Andover Blvd. Swanson asked at what point does the volume of houses require a road other than Butternut to go to Andover Boulevard. He also asked if other sketches can be submitted for alternate road placement. Motion by Vatne seconded by Casey to close the public hearing at 8:44 p.m. Motion carried on a 4 -ayes, 0 -nays, 3- absent (Daninger, Greenwald, Holthus) vote. i Vice Chairperson Kirchoff indicated he would rather not see the two long cut -de -sacs and is reluctant to consider granting any variance at the sketch plan stage. Commissioner Jasper said the sketch plan seems meaningless without knowing what land is involved. If this sketch goes through to preliminary plat, then a solid plan is made without any meaningful input. The long cul-de -sacs seem unnecessary and planning temporary cul -de -sacs seems to give more options even if in reality the option is never exercised. Commissioner Jasper suggested the several unowned outlots adjacent to the property should be owned by someone. He went on to say that there are several existing homes currently on this property and the sketch plan does not incorporate them. Commissioner Vatne said until there is a solid feel about which owners will participate and which will not, it is hard to make recommendation about the sketch plan. Several issues have come up that are not in the jurisdiction of this Commission. He said he is looking for more detail on tree preservation plans from the developer. He is not in favor of granting the cul -de -sac of more than 500 feet, and looks unfavorably on this plan at this time. Commissioner Casey said he is concerned about the floodplain and effect of water on the current homes and the impact on future residents. He is reluctant to hear the request for variance with only a sketch of cul -de -sac. r 1 LJ Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — March 22, 2005 Page 7 . retail, and he wanted general permits so that additional permits do not need to be sought as tenants change. He has interested parties for both on and off sale liquor at this time. The package store would still have to apply for and receive their liquor license. There is a sit down restaurant approved for on sale liquor on lot four. Vice Chairperson Kirchoff thinks it will be a benefit to the project to allow the permit for both on and off sale. Commissioner Casey stated he is more skeptical of the off sale permit and assumed the development would include only sit down restaurants. He is not in favor of a liquor store in the area, but does want to give the property manager as much flexibility as possible. Motion by Commissioner Jasper seconded by Commissioner Casey to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. ' approving the conditional use permit for the on -sale of liquor for lot 5 excluding the permit for off sale liquor, with the following two conditions: (1) There will be no signage for tenants serving or selling alcohol for on- sale or off -sale consumption allowed on the west elevation of the building. Excluded from this requirement would be one sign for the trade name allowed along side other tenants within the existing sign band. (2) On sale uses will be incidental to the primary service of food by the perspective of the tenant. (3) Establish a threshold of 10% by revenue as compared to the 50% ordinance requirement. Motion carried on a 3 -ayes, 1- • nay (Kirchoff), 3- absent (Daninger, Greenwald, Holthus) vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the April 5, 2005 City Council meeting. Mr. Darren Lazan asked for the specific findings to not allow the off sale permit. Commissioner Jasper answered the Commission was asked to make a recommendation based on the health and welfare of the community. The high volume of traffic from minors in the area due to schools, YMCA, and other tenants in development makes this location inappropriate for an off -sale liquor retailer. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (05 -03) TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATIONFROMR -1, SINGLE FAMILYRURAL RESIDENTIAL TO R-4 SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RESIDENTIAL FOR PR OPER TY L OCA TED AT 665 140' LANE NW. Mr. Bednarz asked that the Commission hear the Staff recommendations for items 5, 6, and 7 at one time. Mr. Vrchota summarized the staff reports for the rezoning, lot split, and conditional use permit. U Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — March 22, 2005 Page 9 Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the April 19, 2005 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (05 -04) TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM R -1, SINGLE FAMILYRURAL RESIDENTIAL TO R-4 SINGLE FAMILY URBANRESIDENTL4L FOR PROPER TYLOCATED AT 1341 161' AVENUE NW. Mr. Cross asked the Commission to hear items 8 and 9 together and gave a summary of the staff reports. The Commission recessed at 9:44 p.m. so the cable videotape could be changed. Commission reconvened at 9:50 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Jasper seconded by Commissioner Vatne to open the public hearing at 9:51 p.m. Motion carried on a 4 -ayes, 0 -nays, 3- absent (Daninger, Greenwald, Holthus) vote. There was no public input. • Motion by Commissioner Jasper seconded by Commissioner Vatne to close the public hearing at 9:52 p.m. Motion carved on a 4 -ayes, 0 -nays, 3- absent (Daninger, Greenwald, Holthus) vote. Commissioner Jasper asked if this plan is as presented in the ghost plat seen by the Commission in the past. Mr. Bednarz answered essentially yes. Motion by Commissioner Vatne seconded by Commissioner Casey to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , approving the rezoning to change the zoning designation from R -1, Single Family Rural Residential to R-4 Single Family Urban Residential for property located at 1341 161 Avenue NW. Motion carried on a 4- ayes, 0 -nays, 3- absent (Daninger, Greenwald, Holthus) vote. Mr. Cross stated that this item would be before the Council at the April 19, 2005 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARYPLAT OFA SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWNAS EMMERICH ESTATES LOCATED AT 1341161' AVENUE NW. Mr. Cross asked that the variance for the length of the cul -de -sac at Country Oaks West be added to this development. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — March 22, 2005 Page 11 • ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Commissioner Vatne seconded by Commissioner Casey to adjourn the meeting at 10:16 p.m. Motion carried on a 4 -ayes, 0 -nays, 3- absent (Daninger, Greenwald, Holthus) vote. Respectfully Submitted, Nicole Hasewinkle, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 0 L� 3 � c 1 DaVE N 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 MAIN (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CLANDOVER.MWUS TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Andy Cross, Associate Planner ,apt. SUBJECT: Variance (05 -01) to vary from City Code 12- 6- 5 -F -2: Exterior Finish for Accessory Structures for property located at 3028 181 Avenue NW. DATE: April 12, 2005 INTRODUCTION Ken and Theresa Meyer have applied for a variance from the requirement that the exterior finish on their proposed horse barn be compatible with their house at 3028 181 Avenue NW. DISCUSSION The Code to which a variance is being sought is as follows: F. Exemptions From Front Yard Setback Requirements: No detached garages or other accessory buildings shall be located nearer the front lot line than the principal structure except as follows: 1. On residential parcels with a lot area of one acre or more, a detached garage or accessory building may be constructed closer to the front lot line than the principal structure; however, the minimum distance it may be from the front lot line is sixty feet (60'). 2. All detached garages or accessory buildings constructed nearer the front lot line than the principal structure shall be similar in design and exterior finish material so as to be compatible with the principal structures. (Ord. 8NNNNNN, 7 -16 -2002) The applicants have proposed constructing a barn on their property that would be placed closer to 181 Avenue than their house. Placing the barn behind the house is not feasible given the layout of the lot. The southern side of the lot behind the house is a narrow strip of land that is heavily wooded with stands of oak and slopes into a wetland area that dominates most of the 10 -acre property. There is a well behind the house. State statute requires that barns housing animals must be at least 50 feet away from wells. This requirement would force the placement of a barn further into the wooded area behind the house and lead to the removal of a large number of oaks. Please see the attached aerial photo of the lot. i To the west of the house is a large open area that could easily accommodate the applicants' proposed 36' x 48' pole building and a horse corral area. The building would be closer to the front lot line than the applicants' house, but could still be placed 60 feet away from the front line, • CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. R A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE REQUEST TO EXTERIOR FINISH REQUIREMENTS IN CITY CODE 12- 6 -5 -F -2 ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3028 181st AVENUE NW, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: That part of the North Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 4, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the North line of said Northwest Quarter, said point being 425 feet East of the Northwest corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence East on said North line a distance of 1,088.3 feet; thence South on a line at right angles to said North line a distance of 592 feet; thence West on a line parallel to said North line a distance of 1088.3 feet; thence North on a line at right angles to said parallel line a distance of 592 feet to the point of beginning EXCEPT THAT PART described as follows: That part of the North Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 4, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the North line of said Northwest Quarter, said point being 1,123.3 feet East of the Northwest corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence East on said North line a distance of 390 • feet; thence South on a line at right angles to said North line a distance of 592 feet; thence West on a line parallel to said North line a distance of 390 feet; thence north on a line at right angles to said parallel line a distance of 592 feet to the point of beginning. WHEREAS, Ken and Theresa Meyer petitioned to vary from the Exterior Finish requirements of City Code 12- 6- 5 -F -2, and; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds the request would _, and; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council of the variance request, and; WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is not feasible to place a pole building in the rear yard, and; WHEREAS, space exists to the west of the principle structure on the lot and; WHEREAS, placement of a barn to the west of the principle structure would locate it in front of the principle structure on the lot, and; WHEREAS, conformance to the Exterior Finish requirements of City Code 12- 6 -5 -F -2 could • pose a health threat to horses and thus would not be appropriate for the intended use of the proposed building; March 15, 2005 Dear Commissioners and Council Members, We are asking for a variance on a barn that we would like to construct on our 9.6 acre property on 181` Ave. We have lived on the property since 1987. The house and a small garden shed are the only buildings on the property. When we bought the property my husband and I had dreams of owning horses and having them on the property. We are finally trying to realize this dream after boarding them for 8 years. The size of the barn would be 36 feet by 48 feet, with a 9 foot attached lean to the south of the barn, open to the wetland side of the barn. We have 3 horses right now, and would probably get a e sometime in the future. The barn would house the horses in bad weather, hold hay, grain, and tack. Our lot is a non - traditional lot by today's standards. About half the lot is wetland; most of the other half is wooded with some nice oaks. There are about 2 open acres in the middle on the north end of the lot. Our home sits in the northeast corner in the trees. The rear yard and the back yard are either wooded or wetland. In fact, wetland exists in the `front' yard on the very northwestern corner of the property about 400 feet from the house. • The house sits back about 150 feet from the property line. Our proposed barn would sit between 60 and 70 feet from the property line. If it goes further back from that the barn would be very near the wetland and/or we would have to take down trees. We've tried to preserve our trees the best we can, they are one of the best assets of our property. We've had it trenched twice to prevent oak wilt spread (with financial help from the city,) and it's worked. The reason we are asking for the variance on the look of the building is so that we can have a safe environment for our horses. Our home is a split level with brick up about 3 feet from the ground and then masonite siding. We are planning on fencing for the horses on three sides of the building, including the side that the city ordinance is requiring to be brick and siding. Brick is not a safe material for a horse barn. Brick is hard, and has no give. If a horse kicks the brick the horse could break bones in its legs. Broken legs are still a death sentence for a horse. The siding that the city is requesting, similar to that our house has other problems. It has too much give. If a horse kicks it, it will break or crack. This leaves a shabby appearance neither the city nor we would like, and it would be difficult to repair. Metal -sided pole barns are used today for livestock for the very reason that they are safe, durable, and maintenance free. As stated previously, our house is in the trees, and you cannot see the barn from the house, and can barely see the house from the proposed barn site. They are not in the same "picture" as you drive by on the road. The barn site seems more in the side yard of the house as opposed to being in front of the house. I • 0 X il 4 4 \ I I� +pia S � x � � � lv. ; :1f 'tl ON Vp - Vi f ill ev ff • W -.:;�' . ` �i 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 Planne SUBJECT: Variance (05 -02) to vary from a maximum light allowed to encroach on residential properties for athletic fields at Prairie Knoll Park located at 595 146 Lane NW. DATE: April 12, 2005 INTRODUCTION The Andover Football Association has asked to light the athletic fields in Prairie Knoll Park. DISCUSSION Lighting of the fields was not contemplated when the park was designed to maximize the number of fields. An engineering firm was retained to prepare the attached photometric plan. The plan illustrates lighting levels that exceed the 0.4 foot candle limit at residential property lines. As you can see from the plan, the lighting would be significantly higher than allowed by the City Code. As with all variances, hardship must be demonstrated to vary from the City Code. The standards used to evaluate hardship are as follows: 1. There are circumstances unique to the property that were not created by the landowner. Unique conditions may include the physical characteristics, including topography or 10 water conditions that may exist on the property. 2. The property, if the variance is granted, will not be out of character with other properties in the same neighborhood. 3. The applicant has exhausted all reasonable possibilities for using his/her property, 4. Economic considerations may not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use of the property exists with application of the minimum standards of this chapter. The attached letter addresses the need for lighting at Prairie Knoll Park. Staff Recommendation Community Development is not in favor of light installation that will result in the light levels shown on the attached luminare plan. Staff feels that other options need to be explored. ACTION REQUESTED Please make a recommendation to the City Council. Attachments Location Map Prairie Knoll Park Site Plan Photometric Plan Memo from Lighting Engineer Lighting Details Lett fkBoeo, l Association • c ffed, Cc: Tedover Football Association 14376 Quince Street NW C J • Variance Lighting at Residential Property Lines Prairie Knoll Park N W 8 S C I T Y O F NDOVE Project Location Map Layout Name: LOCATION MAP LAYOUT Project Location: N:\ GISDATA \PLANNING\PR03EMNEWCASES.APR Date Printed: 04IW2DD5 - 03:00:49 PM i � � 3 E» uvo m m .» ,mM a tl 6 a 9 g m s 14M 1R16 pq 1p00 � n+ ,pC, 41M 10 6 w T $ 6 » 8 c� 4P »o qo sn a B» w Nv g S a ANDOVER BLVD J .a N W 8 S C I T Y O F NDOVE Project Location Map Layout Name: LOCATION MAP LAYOUT Project Location: N:\ GISDATA \PLANNING\PR03EMNEWCASES.APR Date Printed: 04IW2DD5 - 03:00:49 PM � � 3 » c� a rr � c b, do y wb �s Pt a x i x' V n � 44 a All R__4 L_� s PRAIRIE KNOLL PARK BALL FIELD LIGHTING, 03 -1A Page 1 of 1 Todd Haas From: O'Brien, Jim jjim.obden@wmeng.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 20D5 2:30 PM To: Todd Haas Subject: PRAIRIE KNOLL PARK BALL FIELD LIGHTING, 03 -1A Todd, As discussed achieving the lighting levels required by city ordinance along the west property line would be difficult City ordinance requires a maximum of 0.4 foot-candles at a residential property line. Please refer to drawing E2 which indicates calculated "maximum" foot-candle levels from the field edge, then west approximately 100 feet This drawing shows that 0.4 foot - candles can not be achieved due to site specific conditions. To produce this drawing extensive modeling of the field lighting has been performed. This modeling reviewed pole locations, lamp wattage, pole height, internal and external lamp shielding. The site conditions are as follows; • The proximity of the field to the west property line. Typically to attain 0.4 foot- candles you will need a minimum of 55 feet behind the light pole. The field placement on the site allows us approximately 20 feet • On the east side of the field there are three obstructions to recommended pole placement. The first is a major irrigation line the second is a pathway both of which are running parallel to the field. The third and major obstruction is the pipeline easement Poles can not be placed within the easement, thus the north east pole was moved an additional 40 feet to the north to avoid the easement Both east side poles had to be moved farther east then recommended. The design parameters for this project call for an average lighting level of 25 foot- candies on the field. This lighting will be provided by four 70 foot tall poles, each pole with six 1500 watt light fixtures. Typically for this size of field the recommended pole placement is 30 feet off the edge of the field and 126 feet down from the field center line (50 yard line). A large portion of the spill light across the west property line is produced from the fixtures on the east side of the field. The conditions on the east side of the field combine to cause fixture aiming angles which in order to properly light the field cause light to spill farther then would typically be the case. Based on the site conditions it was determined that a lighting product manufacturer with a proven track record of being able to minimize glare and spill light at difficult sites would be needed. The proposed manufacturer has in the past provided glare and spill light control equal to or better then the other major brands. Attached is a line drawing of the proposed pole/fixture. The poles installed on the Sunshine park soccer fields will be similar to the proposed poles. Jim O'Brien Wundedich - Malec Engineering 5501 Felts Road Minnetonka, MN 55343 «06- std.pdf>> jim.obrien@wmeng.com Phone: 952 - 933 -3222, Ext. 182 is Fax: 952 - 933 -0608 3/30/2005 Andover Planning Commission Andover City Hall • 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW Andover, MN 55304 April 5, 2005 To whom it may concern: The Andover Football Association (AFA) strongly encourages you to pass the variance to the current city ordinance concerning lighting and its impact on adjacent properties in order to light the two community 100 yard football fields at Prairie Knoll. The Prairie Knoll football fields were completed last year and we have received excellent feedback on these fields from the referees, visiting coaches, visiting parents, and community members. However, the one improvement these fields need is lighting for playing games at night. We have talked to the homeowner whose property will be affected by the addition of lights on the fields, and she expressed her support of the lighting of the fields, and the AFA program. We invited her and her husband to attend the meeting to voice their support in person. We will be using the lit 100 yard fields for our grades 4 -8 football games. We expect our primary field usage to be in September and October on weekdays until l0pm. However, if games go into overtime, or the season gets extended do to inclement weather, we may need the fields lit accordingly. The AFA currently has over 500 kids on its K -8 grade teams, and we expect this number to rise as the Andover community grows. AFA along with surrounding communities involved with the football program are responsible for scheduling over • 600 games. Having the additional lit fields will help make this task more manageable. Currently, the AFA program has only one available 100 yard lit field for use within our community. We originally had two additional lit fields, but when the Andover community center and YMCA were built, we lost the two lit fields. We are not asking for more resources, we are simply asking for a replacement of what we had prior to the ground breaking of the community center. Since Andover has such active community sports programs, we are not just scheduling our football games, but also scheduling around soccer and lacrosse games and others community activities. Due to the lack of fields, last year two Andover 8' grade teams had to play each other in Maple Grove. This does not build a sense of community and pride in what we consider our home field. The lit fields will also help the AFA as an organization. Since the AFA is a non -profit organization, we must raise a lot of our money through fundraising. One of our main fundraisers is our recently built concession stand. The more games we have scheduled for Prairie Knoll, the more money we will be able to raise for our organization and in turn our community. This money will help reduce member fees, provide new equipment for the association, and upgrade park facilities such as field benches, scoreboards, and bleachers. Lighting these fields will not just benefit the AFA, but also make the Andover community more attractive. People who are looking to move into a community do not just look at the houses within the community; they also look at the schools, the parks, the facilities, and the services available. We believe that getting two lit fields will improve the community, and make Andover a more desirable place to live. The AFA is committed to improving not only its members, but also its community. Sincerely, • Andover Football Association Andover Football Association / P.O. Box 813 / Anoka, Minnesota 55303 Telephone Hotline: (763) 754 -1610 / www.andoverfootball.org 5 X C IT Y OF NDOVE 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Courtney Bednarz, City Planner SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING Residential Sketch Plan for a single family urban residential development to be known as Cardinal Ridge located at 15785, 15805, and 15875 Nightingale Street NW. DATE: April 12, 2005 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission is asked to review residential sketch plan for a single family development. DISCUSSION Conformance with Local and Regional Plans and Ordinances The property is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and within the current Sewer Stage (2000- 2005). The property is zoned Single Family Rural Residential (R -1). A rezoning to Single Family Urban Residential (R -4) is needed for the proposal to move forward. The rezoning will be processed with the preliminary plat. Phasing of Development The Sketch plan shows the proposed first phase in solid lines. Dashed lines are used to show how the property to the north and east could be developed in the fixture. The applicant has indicated that they have reached an agreement with the property owner to the north to develop that property in approximately 2 years. Access Two cul -de -sacs approximately 720 feet in length are shown connecting to 157" Avenue. The sketch plan shows how the cul -de -sacs can be connected when the property to the north develops. The plan also shows a potential street connection to Linnet Street NW. An easement for this street was taken as a condition of approval of a lot split from the property that borders the east side of the sketch plan. The developer proposes to dedicate the other half of the right -of -way needed to construct a street that straddles the shared property line. However, an additional easement from the Frederickson property to the north would be necessary to angle proposed Linnet Street to existing Linnet Street to the north. (see shaded area of attached sketch plan). The Andover Review Committee (ARC) recommends that the connection to Linnet Street be made with the first phase of this development. If this is done, ARC would favor of a variance to the cul -de -sac length of proposed Martin Street with the understanding that it will be connected to Linnet Street in the future as shown on the sketch plan. If a street connection to Linnet Street . Coordination with other Agencies The developer and/or owner are 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. Other The developer is also required to meet the following City Ordinances and all other 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 Park and Recreation Commission Comments The Park and Recreation Commission will review the sketch plan at an upcoming meeting. Staff Recommendation The report summarizes staff's positions on the various issues. ACTION REQUESTED • The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to discuss the relevant issues, including access, and proposed variances. Please advise the applicant on adjustments to the proposed project based on this discussion Attachments Location Map Sketch Plan (11 x17 in Packet) submitted, Cc: Ben Minks Minks Custom Homes 17024 Barium Street NW K Sketch Plan s.u.r ow • Saps Re] I I i I I I I I I i I L I 1 L0 I cC I u _ I I 158TH AVE NW 0 L•J AA I y 157TH m- " _ — — I. ai r Caraznal Ridge I ll I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 --- I - - - --T ?ftCpOSM I S:CA'p- L4'- I I I I No "a 1 4e3aam I I I I I I I I I I I I Sh aky el arn.o-a n I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I f 11 1 I Pro N 15322 «30000 1 I I I I I I I I I I I ShesT 6ben.a.s. Sr -.-1 O� 4 M is hb i R 4'l. ee — Plmh m. w n.1h4r m/ DRS rt I em a ably f Sahveyer u•.ev ' as c CRC Properly D..eripllrna Parcel A Those Parts of the Sh e.lension . Geserihed Beginning at the Southeast Ouarte fire. a distance , AND Beginning at a G Quarter. thence 7DO feet evet of Nast. along sma Lin. X is dnorA seconds Nest. ak degraas 42 minus rocAus of 70.00 1 54 seconds East. Southeast Quart. EXCEPT that part of Porem B That W of tM ..w m, a *d along the t EXCEPT the north 201 ALSO EXCEPT that D< 520 test east of the the intersection .1th .est Nne. to ..id nw AND ALSO EXCEPT th Parcel C The North 312 feel o mena]rad along the EXCEPT that port of LE I 0- SANITAR JX . HYDRAN 0- STOW • - CATCH O . ELECTRI - LIGHT S - SIGNAL -- DENOTE — o -- DENOTE —� DENOTE . DENOTE O . NT H La tNnt w DENOTE DENOTE — f -- DENOTE — T.-- DENOTE —vs-- DENOTE O DENOTE ® - DENOTE ® - DENOTE b - DENOTE p DENOTE n - DENOTE Hakanson Anderson Civil Engineem and Land JIM Thurston Ave.. Anoka, W- 763- 427 -5860 FAX 763 .rr..hokonsan— cndersa s Sketch Plan ]wlrrl MV M 4 w4 D Sou. ly L It R N• I I I I I I I I I cc I U 1 , ) I L3 E[ I I I I 158TH AVE NW I t I l SI I J id Q ij I z Uj I F Z 12 y 157TH LANE NW 1 — F a point an the north line of said Southwest Quarter of the Soulheasl Quarter distant art, of the Swthwst Ouarter. 208 feel: thence East. parallel with said north Ina. to of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence North, parallel with said - OUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAT NO. 2. Anoka County. W—aeatm I utheasl 0uarter of Section 15. Township 32. Ronne 24, Anoka County. Mkwleaola os Y RIGHT -OF -WAY PLAT NO. 2. Anoka Count), Yknnesoty. 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Mnnesato lying north of the south 659 feet as RIGHT-01`-WAY PLAT NO. 2. Anoka County. Minnesota. I has been made to obtain Or show data concemsp cation of any utiity exuttnq ea the tile, whether sigotion or independent search far easements of rarship title evidence, w any ether fools that an Ri-kaLDVED y - - - - -- - I I I i I I f I I I I PIC NO. 15322441 I 91 .1, Soo v I ' I a.nr �c CITY OF A 'DOVER eo g m Ira SCALE W FEEL 1 onrE REVISION Sketch Plan Cardinal Ridge for Minks Custom Homes 1 SHEETS s Custom Homes 4. Anoka County. Minnesota, lying north of the hereinafter described Lna % and its n an ossumed bearing of East. a" the north of said Southwest Ouorler of the of the Southeast Quarter a 41stance of 208 feet. thence West, paaallel with said north beginning. It 520 feet east of the Northwest Garner of said Southwest Ouorter of the Southeast rorler. 208 feet: thence East. parallel with acid north fine. to the intersection with a line the Southeast Ouartel thence NmUl, paro4el to said west Ine, to said north Me; thence utheast Ouarlar, thence an an as rn d bearnq of South 00 degree 38 minutes 38 e of MOO feet to the point of beginning of the me to be described; thence South 88 of 43.33 feet an o non- longentiol curve coneow to the southeast, said curve honing a of North 73 degrees 33 minutes 09 seconds East: thence South 88 degrees 42 minutes 700.00 feet. m measured along the awth line, of said Southwest Quarler of the _ r as meas.red along the north and west lines thereof. /, L N T Y O F ' 9 DOVE is 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 Planned SUBJECT: WORK SESSION: Zoning Ordinance Update DATE: April 12, 2005 INTRODUCTION Please bring the following code revisions from your last packet: • City Code 12 -13 Uses • City Code 12 -13 1 B Animals • City Code 12 -14 Performance Standards Please find attached the following code revisions: • 12 -14 -5 Screening • 12 -14 -6 Landscaping in All Districts • 12 -14 -16 Guesthouses • 12 -10 -21 Animal Shelters DISCUSSION Staff will present each item individually to the Planning Commission. ACTION REQUESTED Please discuss and make a recommendation for each item. Attachments 12 -14 -5 Screening 12 -14 -6 Landscaping in All Districts 12 -14 -16 Guesthouses 12 -10 -21 Animal Shelters 0 • City Code 12 -14 -5 Screening City Code 12 -14 -10 E. Required Screening Background Screening requirements are provided in two different places in the City Code and the requirements conflict with each other. The current requirements do not provide for screening of commonly required items in other cities such as; trash enclosures, loading docks, mechanical equipment and double frontage lots. Proposed Change Provide all screening requirements in the performance standards section of the City Code. Reference this section as appropriate in other areas of the code. The proposed language below is a composite of other city's regulations structured in a topical format. VTTWAMIAMN -TM G . R x 4 eF i of St AN a o 1 M a t er i a l s an equ b e i ng , . e f or- eenstme a ...t ELI IMMUM MIN G . R x 4 eF i of St AN a o 1 M a t er i a l s an equ b e i ng , . e f or- eenstme a ...t ` �' o s hall be oiac acvxx�ivpercj - rmcs c. � o a fifteen feet (I i LM ME. _ ' • M jIlIff . MINIS WMENW ITNAI ra rmftm m lira rim WiM, IMAM P2. 1 • b. Hedges: dff eughotA the year, (2) At -1 _ +• - h + 1 .FA be at lees \ + /1' i 1. a' 1_+ / Y w l 1 MINOR 12 -14 -5: Screeniniz: Exterior Storage: Screening from residential properties and public streets shall be provided with an architecturally compatible opaque fence with a minimum height of six feet as measured from the surface of the exterior storage area. Plant material shall be provided on the outside of the fence for aesthetic appeal Additional fence height and/ berming shall be required if a six foot fence would not block direct vision of the exterior storage. a. Landscaping products and merchandise displayed for sale in limited quantities may exempt from this screening requirement provided that a conditional use permit and commercial site plan approval have been achieved and the approved plan provides specified locations appearance and maintenance_ criteria and prevents conflicts with traffic circulation and emergency access. 2. Loading Docks: Screening of loading docks from public streets and residential properties shall be provided to the top of the loading door(s). Such screening shall be provided with a wing wall constructed from the same materials as the principle structure whenever • possible Other views into the loading dock from public streets and residential proper shall be screened with a combination of berming fencing and landscaping to a mimmum height of six feet except within sight triangles at intersections with public streets. 3. Mechanical Equipment: a. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from public streets and residential properties with a cornice parapet or other architectural feature to the fullest extent possible Any remaining protrusions of rooftop equipment above these features shall be painted to match the principle structure. b. Ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from public streets and residential ro erties with landsca in or a fence or enclosure that is architecturally compatible with the principle structure. 4. Multiple Frontage Residential Lots: Screening between the rear yard and the adjacent street shall be provided to achieve a minimum height of six feet at plant maturity as measured from the surface of the adiacent street Such screening must consist of: a. Existing vegetation b. A compact evergreen or deciduous hedge c. deciduous and coniferous trees • d. A landscaped berm e. A combination of the above Please note a cross reference is needed in City Code 11 -3 -6 H. 5. Non-residential Buildings: The sides and rear of non - residential buildings shall be screened from residential properties within 200 feet measured from property line to property line to a minimum height of six feet at plant maturity as measured from th grade of the residential property line Such screening shall be provided with the following: a. Existing vegetation b. A compact evergreen or deciduous hedge c. deciduous and coniferous trees d. A landscaped berm e. An architecturally compatible opaque fence f. A combination of the above 6. Parking Areas: Screening from residential properties shall be provided to a minimum height of six feet as measured from the surface of the parking area. Screening fro public rights of way shall be provided to a minimum height of three feet. Parking area screening must consist of a. An architecturally compatible opaque wall or opaque fence. b. A landscaped berm c. Two staggered rows of evergreen trees with trees in each row spaced a max imum • of 12 feet Such trees shall not be used to satisfy minimum tree requirements. d. A combination of above. 7. Trash Enclosures and Compactors: Trash collection shall be provided on the interior of the principle structure whenever possible When exterior trash enclosures are necessary such enclosure shall be constructed from a masopa product that is compatible with the Principle structure Such enclosure shall exceed the height of all waste receptacles stored inside and shall provide adequate space for recycling The trash enclosure shall have an opaque metal or wood gate Chain link fencing shall not be allowed. Trash enclosures shall be screened from public rights -of -way and residential properties with coniferous trees equal in height to the trash enclosure at the time they are planted. 0 • City Code 12 -14 -6 Background As shown below, the City's landscaping requirements are minimal. Without specific requirements it is difficult to require a consistent level of landscaping. Proposed Chance Create landscaping requirements for non - residential properties that achieve a reasonable level of landscaping. Approach Staff prepared a table to compare landscaping regulations of other communities. The table shows a variety of means of regulating landscaping. Staff has prepared the potential ordinance language below for discussion. 12 -14 -6: Landscaping of Nonresidential Properties A. Purpose and Intent. The City of Andover recognizes the health, safety, aesthetic, ecological and economic value of landscaping and screening. The provisions of this Section are intended to: 1. Add visual interest to open spaces and blank facades; 2. Soften dominant building mass; 3. Provide definition for public walkways and open space areas; 4. Ensure significant tree canopy shading to reduce glare and heat build -up; 5. Improve the visual quality and continuity within and between developments; 6. Provide screening and mitigation of potential conflicts between activity area and more passive areas; 7. Protect and improve property values; 8. Improve air quality and provide a buffer from air and noise pollution; 9. Enhance the overall aesthetic conditions within the City; 10. Limit sight line obstructions and drainage conflicts; 11. Reduce the potential for criminal and illegal activities; and 12. Prevent conflicts with utilities. • B. Landscape Plans: A landscape plan shall be submitted with any Commercial Site Plan Application as described in City Code 12- 15 -xx; n U C. Minimum Number of Trees and Shrubs. Except for single and two family uses, development must at a minimum provide the following numbers of trees and shrubs in addition to any trees and shrubs required for screening in Section 1. One tree per 50 lineal feet of site perimeter 2. One shrub per 20 feet of site perimeter 3. One shrub per 10 lineal feet of building perimeter D. Credit for Existing Trees. Existing healthy deciduous trees greater than four caliper inches or existing healthy evergreen trees greater than six feet in height and are not identified on the City's prohibited plant species list (see Section 18.03) may be credited toward the minimum required trees on a site. E. Minimum Tree Size. Required trees must meet the following minimum size standards: 1. Overstory trees must be at least one and one half caliper inches at planting; 2. Single stem ornamental trees must be at least one and one half caliper inches at planting; 3. Evergreen trees and multi -stem ornamental trees must be at least six feet in height at planting. F. Parking Island Landscaping. The following plant material shall be provided in parking islands without credit toward the minimum number of trees and shrubs described above: 1. One tree per 180 square feet of parking island area 2. One shrub per 20 square feet of parking island area G. Restrictions. The following restrictions on landscaping and screening apply to protect the public health, safety and welfare. 1. Public Easements. Landowners are advised that landscaping features placed in a public easement may be removed without compensation if it is necessary to install, replace or maintain a public utility, sidewalk or drainage way within the easement. 2. Trees, irrigation lines, berms, walls or fences must not be placed in a public easement where public improvements are located without the written approval of the Director of Public Works. 3. Clear View Triangle. Landscaping and screening must not interfere with the clear view triangle as specified in Sections 17.31 and 17.32. 4. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design ( CPTED). In support of CPTED principles designed to reduce the fear and incidence of crime • and to improve the quality of life, landscaping must support the objectives of natural surveillance, territorial reinforcement, access control, and maintenance. These CPTED objectives are further discussed in the Planning Manager's Landscaping and Screening Policies and Procedures document. 5. Fire Hydrant and Utility Clear Zone. The area three feet in radius around all fire hydrants, fire hose connections and utility boxes must be kept free of any trees, shrubs or other landscaping feature that could impede access to or use of the hydrant, fire hose connection or utility box. H. Authority of Planning Manager. The Planning Manager shall have the authority to adopt and implement Landscaping and Screening Policies and Procedures for the purpose of specifying landscape plan submittal requirements, establishing surety rates and procedures and offering landscaping and screening material and design recommendations. I. Ground cover. All site areas and areas that have been disturbed during construction must be covered with sod to property lines and/or adjacent rights -of -way. Rock and mulch may be substituted for sod in landscaping planting beds and along the perimeter of buildings. All landscaping planting beds shall provide durable edging system. Native plant communities may be re- established in appropriate portions of the site. J. Irrigation Required. All landscaped areas shall be irrigated. K. Material Maintenance. The property owner must maintain all landscaping and screening materials shown on the approved landscape plan in a manner consistent with the intent and purpose of the plan and City Code requirements. Approved landscaping • and screening materials that die, become diseased or are significantly damaged must be replaced at the next appropriate planting period with new materials in conformance with the approved landscape plan and applicable City Code standards. L. Ground Cover Maintenance. Ground cover must be maintained in accordance with Sections 10.37 —10.42 of this Code. M. Removal. Unless a modified landscape plan is approved, landscaping and screening materials and structures approved on a landscape plan must not be removed except when replaced in accordance with this Section. N. Surety. To ensure that landscaping and screening is installed as proposed and survives through at least one full growing season, a landscape performance surety must be submitted prior to issuance of building permits for new development where a landscape plan is required. The surety may consist of a bond, an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or other instrument which provides an equal performance guarantee to the City. 0 . 12 -14 -7 Backsround This section provides maintenance standards for building exteriors, landscaping, and fences. Building exterior maintenance can be covered by making some modifications to Section 9 -9 -11, General Maintenance Requirements. Fence maintenance will be addressed in the revised 12 -7 -2, "Fences and Walls ". Landscape maintenance will be included in 12 -14 -6, "Landscaping in all Districts ". These changes will make this section obsolete. Proposed Chance This section will be stricken from the code. • • A WIN • • 0 12 -14 -16 BackLyround Current code conflicts with limit of one principle structure per residential property in the long term as these guesthouses tend to be finished and rented as a dwelling unit. Current policy prevents construction of a separate sleeping quarters. Proposed Change Chapter 12 -14 -16 — Guesthouses will be deleted. bin IF M 1. Y_ • W rr�i���v W* ��v�i 0 `-J . City Code 12 -14 -21 E. Animal Shelters Background This section provides setback requirements for accessory buildings that house animals. It is presently buried under Other Nuisance Characteristics where it is difficult to find. Proposed Chance It is recommended that this section be moved to City Code 12 -6 Accessory Buildings and Structures and City Code 12 -5 Setback Requirements. A specific section number will be assigned based on other potential adjustments to City Code 12 -6. 12- 14 -21: Other Nuisance Characteristics: B. -6 - ?? Animals: Any building in which farm animals or pleasure /recreational animals are kept shall be a distance of one hundred feet (100') or more from any other occupied residence, and any open or roofed enclosure in which such animals are kept shall be a distance of fifty feet (50') or more from any occupied residential lot 130 The city council may order the owner of any such animals to apply for a conditional use permit if it is deemed to be in the interest of the public health, safety, or general welfare. (Amended Ord. 8, 10 -21 -1970; amd. 2003 Code) 0 12 -5 Setback Requirements: 5 Animals: Any building in which farm animals or pleasure /recreational animals are kept shall be a distance of one hundred feet (100') or more from any other occupied residence and any open or roofed enclosure in which such animals are kept shall be a distance of fifty feet (50') or more from any occupied residential lot ' 3u . The city council may order the owner of any such animals to apply for a conditional use permit if it is deemed to be in the interest of the public health safety, or general welfare. (Amended Ord. 8, 10 -21 -1970: amd. 2003 Code) It should also be noted that similar setback requirements exist in the equine ordinance (City Code 5 -111-7) However, this section deals specifically with equines and no other farm animals. Therefore it is appropriate to leave that section as is and make the changes discussed above. 0 Comparison of Landscaping Requirements Trees - Minimum Quantities Shrubs - Minimum Quantities Additional Street Trees comply w/ adopted streetscape plans b.vomington 1/2,500 s.f of developable area 1 /1,000 s.f. of developable area no credit toward required quantities Every 100 feet of arterial frontage Varies district ed with total site area Varies. Determined by total site area 1- 3.5" minim overstory tree; 48% required red to to be coniferous Light appro 4 Light commercial 1/833 sf 2- 6' minimum coniferous trees; Brooklyn Park commercial 1/2,415 sf Medium comm Medium commercial 1 /1,000 sf 2- 2 minirrum ornamental may be commercial 1 sf Dense Dense commercial 111,250 sf substituted for every 1 overstory up t 2 commercial 1//3 36 62 1 sf , Office Campus/Industrial 1/1,666 sf 50% of required trees. no credit Office Campus /Industrial 1/4,840 sf toward re uired auantities Each 100 feet of frontage on T.H.16! 1 /1,000 sf total building floor area or 1150 feet of 1- 3" minimum overstory tree; site perimeter, whichever is greater. 1/300 sf total building floor area or 2- 10' minimum coniferous trees; Champlin 30% required to be coniferous 1/30 feet of site perimeter, whichever 2- 2 minimum, ornamental may be 1 ornamentaU.06 overstory tree substitution allowed is greater. substituted for every 1 overstory. up to 50% of required trees no credit toward required quantities 1/40 feet of perirnter of landscaped area 50% overstory, 25% coniferous, 25% ornamental. Not more than 50 percent of the required number of River and overstory or ornamental trees shall be composed of ? �,_.ple Grove one species. In order to accomplish an adequate buffer, additional landscaping over and above the required amount may be requested by the city. Minimum Landscape Value based on Project Value, Including Building Construction, Site Preparation, and Site Improvements below $1,000,000 = 2% See previous column Minnetonka $1,000,001 - $2,000,000 = $20,000 + 1% of project Also note not more than 50% of Not mentioned value $1,000,001 - $2,000,000 = $20,000 + 1% of required trees may be of any one project value $2,000,001 - $3,000,000 = $30,000 + species .75% of project value $3,000,001 - $4,000,000 = $37,500 + 0.25% of project value over $4,000,000 = 1% one tree per 1,000 square feet of gross building floor A minimum five -foot strip from the area; or one tree per 800 square feet of landscaped building edge must be treated with Parkway trees shall be provided not area; or one tree per 40 lineal feet of site perimeter; decorative ground cover and/or more than 40 feet apart in the right -c St. Michael or one tree per multi- residential dwelling unit, foundation exce t for plantings, p way adjacent to the parcel and withu y j whichever is greater not less than 25% deciduous garage/loading and pedestrian access the median of the parkway. and not less than 25% coniferous. areas.