Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/14/07Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda August 14, 2007 Andover City Hall Council Chambers 7.00 a.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes — July 24, 2007. 3. PUBLIC HEARING Variance (07 -02) vary from side yard setback requirements for property located at 771 141" Avenue NW. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit Amendment (07 -10) to allow expansion on the Metropolitan Mosquito Control site located at 1280 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit Amendment (07 -09) amending approval of a church on residential property located at 475 Andover Boulevard NW. 6. Work Session: a. Consider Interim Performance Standards for Hugh�s/Westview Industrial Parks. b. Receive copy of Land Use and Sewer Chapter of Comprehensive Plan for future discussion. 7. Other Business 8. Adjournment 9 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US • 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 - July 24, 2007 DATE: August 14, 2007 Request The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to approve the minutes from the July 24, 2007 meeting. 0 0 f C I T Y O E ND OVE • PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING — JULY 24, 2007 The Regular Bi- Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Daninger on July 24, 2007, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Chairperson Daninger, Commissioners Michael Casey, Devon Walton, Douglas Falk and Dennis Cleveland. Commissioners absent: Commissioner Tim Kirchoff and Valerie Holthus. Also present: City Planner, Courtney Bednarz Associate Planner, Andy Cross Associate Planner, Chris Vrchota Others 11 APPROVAL OFIKINUTES. June 26, 2007 Commissioner Cleveland indicated in the minutes on page 6, the name shown as Ms. Chris Warra should be Mrs. Kris Hora Page 12, third paragraph should be 3 `/z and not 3 115. Motion by Casey, seconded by Walton, to approve the minutes as amended. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Kircho$ Holthus) vote. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT (06-09) TO EXTEND 11HNING PERMIT FOR PROPERTYLOCATED AT 16689 HANSON BOULEVARD NW. Mr. Bednarz noted the applicant is requesting an extension of the mining permit that was initially issued in 1989. The permit was previously extended in 1991, 1996 and 2001. At this time the applicant is requesting that the permit be extended for two additional years. This item was tabled at the last meeting to allow the applicant to be present to answer • questions. A new grading plan has been provided since the last meeting. it Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —July 24, 2007 Page 2 • Commissioner Falls asked if the Watershed District has gotten back to staff on their findings. Mr. Bednarz indicated the applicant has not completed their application to the Watershed District Previously there were some wetland violations that were followed up on by the Anoka Conservation District, those have been corrected but they do not have a permit from the Watershed District at this point Commissioner Falk wondered if they will have a watershed permit by the City Council meeting. W. Bednarz said that that would be most unlikely. Motion by Casey, seconded by Walton, to open the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Kirchoff, Holthus) vote. Mr. Jim Kuiken and Mr. Dennis Kuiken, 16563 Hanson Boulevard, were at the meeting to answer questions. Chairperson Daninger indicated at the last meeting there were a couple of open questions and he wondered if the applicants could address them. Mr. Dennis Kuiken stated they have one dump truck and they use the black dirt only for their sod farm. The City indicated to them they could take the Trucks Hauling sign down because they did not have a lot of truck traffic, only their own truck. He actually thought . the City took the signs down Commissioner Walton wondered what the perceived time for mining was at this site. Mr. Dennis Kuiken stated they cannot get the black dirt out from the backside of the pond anymore and they would like to square it up an d possibly apply for another pond somewhere else on the property. He stated they use the dirt for their sod farm. Commissioner Falk asked who told them the pond was oversized two years ago. Mr. Tim Kuiken stated Mr. Bednarz told him this. Commissioner Falk wondered if they knew they went over the amount allowed. Mr. Dennis Ku&en indicated he has not seen the original Conditional Use Permit and was the one working there and did not know they had gone over. Mr. Jim Kuiken indicated originally their father applied for the permit and they inherited it to continue the business. Chairperson Daninger wondered if they were aware of the meeting two weeks ago. Mr. Jim Kmken indicated they were and were unable to come to the meeting. Chairperson Daninger asked if they were involved in the permit extension request. Mr. Jim Kuiken indicated they were. Chairperson Daninger wondered why they did not request more time in 2001. Mr. Dennis Kuiken stated they did not know the limits and • they were just trying to round out the pond. They also found more black dirt than they thought was there. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — July 24, 2007 • Page 3 Chairperson Daninger indicated he did not have a problem with them taking black dirt out but it continues to grow based upon need. He stated his concern is that they will continue to take more dirt than is allowed per the CUP. He stated his goal is move this forward and not have anymore misunderstandings. Mr. Jim Kuiken showed a revised grading plan and stated they have not done anything to this area in the past year because they were told they could not remove anything, even soil. The Commission discussed with the applicants the grading plan. Commissioner Walton noted that if they approve the CUP extension, the Commission wants to be sure that the applicants know where their boundaries are and that they will comply with the boundaries approved. Mr. Jim Kuiken stated they can have this staked so they know the boundaries of the pond and the area where they can dig. Chairperson Daninger stated his concern is to make sure the City knows exactly where this is going. He wondered if the applicants have started any of the other processes for permits they need to get. Mr. Tim Kuiken indicated he has. • Chairperson Daninger asked if any are approved yet. Mr. Tim Kuiken stated they were not He stated Mr. Craig Schlicter with Plow Engineering is completing all of the documents for them which should not take long. Chairperson Daninger wondered if this would be the last time they would be applying for an extension if approved. Mr. Jim Kuiken stated for this pond this extension would be the last one. Motion by Walton, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 7:24 p.m. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Kirchoff, Holthus) vote. Commissioner Cleveland wondered if there would be any reason why the Lower Rum River Watershed District would deny this. Mr. Bednarz indicated it was possible but he thought it was more likely that the pond could be created as proposed under additional conditions that they would need to comply with. Commissioner Walton wondered if there was any issue with them approving a CUP without the other permits being obtained. Mr. Bednarz stated the choice of whether or not to approve the CUP to allow the additional time for them to mine the site is up to the City, as structured here, that approval would be conditioned on them getting the permit and if for some reason that permit is denied the City would have to follow up and vacate • or remove that CUP. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —July 24, 2007 Page 4 • Commissioner Walton wondered if there was a permanent sign posted at one time and possibly got knocked over and was never replaced or was it always temporary signage there. Mr. Bednarz stated he has never seen a sign out there. Commissioner Walton asked if the condition for signs could require signs to face both directions on Hanson Blvd. Commissioner Walton asked if they could add to the Resolution that they stake the mining area so there is no confusion. Mr. Bednarz stated this should be included in the motion. Chairperson Daninger asked what the violations were that needed to be corrected. Mr. Bednarz stated there was an issue outside of the ponds where there was activity. The Anoka Conservation District followed up with the applicant and they did promptly correct the issue the Conservation District identified. That is no longer an issue on the site. Mr. Kuiken indicated that was a motor cross track and was corrected by the applicant. Chairperson Daninger wondered when the applicant was aware they went outside the CUP permit from 2001. Mr. Bednarz indicated they were notified sometime last year. • This application was actually Sled sometime late last year and it was around that time staff was in contact with the Conservation District and they also identified the issue. Chairperson Daninger asked what the best course of corrective action was. Mr. Bednarz stated staff is. recommending approval so the City and the Watershed District can work with the applicant to complete this pond, make sure the slopes are safe, reseed along the edges and have this pond completed within the regulations. Motion by Walton, seconded by Casey, to approval of the Conditional Use Permit Amendment to extend mining permit for property located at 16689 Hanson Boulevard NW with changes to the Resolution involving a staking by the applicant with City approval of the proposed pond size area and a modification to bullet point seven about signs being placed by the driveway of Hanson Boulevard but servicing both directions of Hanson Boulevard alerting the traffic on Hanson that there are trucks hauling. Motion carried on a 4 -ayes, I -nays (Daninger), 2- absent (KiwhA Holthus) vote. Mr Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the August 8, 2007 City Council meeting. WORK sEssm. ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE r Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —July 24, 2007 • Page 5 Mr. Vrchota explained based on input from a resident, the City Council has directed the Planning Commission to consider whether or not changes are needed to the City's Animal Control Code. W. Vrchota discussed the staff report with the Commission. • Nuisance Dogs/Barking W. Vrchota stated this is covered in the City Code under Section 5 -1 -A1. One thing that is not in there is a definition of what constitutes habitual barking. Looking at the City of Plainview's Code, they do have a definition of habitual barking as "Repeated intervals of at least five minutes with less than one minute of interruption". If they were looking to add something a little more objective to this, this definition is a little more concrete and not so loose. He stated this is something they may want to consider adding to their code to make it a little more specific. Chairperson Daninger stated one of the things they need to change is they need to come to a decision about what is habitual. He stated he liked the five minute rule but he did not know if five minutes would be too little. He thought if it were a nuisance, the dog would continually bark and not stop after five minutes. Commissioner Casey stated he agreed with the five minute interval. He thought this would give the Deputies some control because it would define the nuisance and give them some direction He indicated he was under the interpretation until he read the report that it followed the noise ordinance of 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Chairperson Daninger indicated a Deputy has discretion in their authority to verbally warn or issue a citation so there are many avenues of flexibility but if it is not in their ordinance then it is just a judgment call. Chairperson Daninger wondered if any of the Commissioners thought the time limit should be longer. Commissioner Falk felt five minutes was the right amount. If they go ten minutes or longer, there is a point where enough is enough. Commissioner Cleveland thought having the five minutes allowed the Sheriffs Deputy to not have to exercise judgment and know that it is a violation and issue a citation. Commission concurrence was to add the five minute definition to the City Code. A resident asked what would happen if a dog would bark on and off throughout the day and night but not within five minute intervals. Mr. Vrchota stated that would be a difficult situation without a deputy witnessing this. He thought this type of nuisance would b difficult to enforce. Chairperson Daninger concurred and indicated they are looking at just one area of the code but he wondered if they currently have anything in their ordinance for this. Commissioner Cleveland thought they did if someone was N Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —July 24, 2007 Page 6 . willing to define what it was to be annoyed. He stated Plainview has defined habitually but they did not define annoyed. He thought if someone was annoyed, it would be something where a person could make a call to the Sheriff s Department to have them come out A resident thought certain breeds of dogs barked more than others and were annoying more than others. Commissioner Cleveland stated in the Plainview regulation, it indicates the barking has to be heard off the owner's property in the same paragraph where it defines habitual. He wondered if that was something they would also incorporate. Chairperson Daninger thought it only had to affect anyone who could hear it, which could be one neighbor. He thought if it affected a neighbor or neighbors that would be an issue. Commissioner Falk wondered how they would define a neighbor that always calls on a certain dog barking which does not affect other neighbors, is that habitual or annoying. Commissioner Cleveland stated when he looked at Paragraph D in the report; to him it is sort of like the dog in a fenced yard that charges or barks specifically at the neighbor. This would fit annoy but it does not suggest the barking is annoying. Chairperson Daninger thought they could add to Paragraph D, barking over time. He thought the problem may be coming with the enforcement side of it Commissioner Walton wondered if it could do with the number of complaints Sled with the Sheriffs over a certain amount of time. Chairperson Daninger thought if they included this a neighbor will call just to rack up the number of calls. He thought if a dog barked all night it would annoy the person. Mr. Vrchota thought the word "annoy" will be hard to define in the City Code because it is such a subjective term. He thought what they may want to look at is defining frequently and setting some kind of standard for that Chairperson Daninger thought it may be a good start to put in the five minutes and then somehow define fivquency. Commissioner Walton thought the missing piece is the corroboration part He thought they needed to have more than one person indicating it is happening such as another neighbor, police officer or multiple complaints. Chairperson Daninger thought they were all in concurrence with adding the five minutes to the ordinance. He wondered how they could define the intermittent dog barking throughout the day or night and how they could enforce that Commissioner Walton wondered what the policy was for a nuisance dog. Mr. Vrchota referred to pages 16 and 17 which laid out the process. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — July 24, 2007 • Page 7 Commissioner Walton indicated in the Plainview Ordinance if a dog is viewed as a nuisance, their police officers can go in and take the dog to stop the nuisance and he wondered how their Deputies could enforce it Mr. Vrchota stated there is a process laid out in the Code on how nuisance conditions are handled and it does go to the City Council before any action can be taken. The Commission discussed with staff the current regulations regarding how the City handles nuisance dogs. Commissioner Walton thought they should look at a quicker resolution to a nuisance problem. • Potentially Dangerous Dogs Mr. Vrchota stated the City currently defines a dangerous dog in section 5 -1 -A1 of the code. There is one word that is not defined which is `unprovoked". He stated the City of Plainview does define it which may be further clarification they can look at for their code. Chairperson Daninger indicated he did not have a problem adding this because it is a • potential word that needs to be added. Commissioner Falk agreed with the addition of the wording. A resident asked if the threats are directed towards humans or other pets. Chairperson Daninger thought in Item C, it included everything except wild animals. Commissioner Walton indicated dogs are hunters and will go after wild animals so he did not think they wanted to go that far. Commissioner Walton stated in Section 5.1.a -11, page 11, paragraph A talks about resolution which will take two to three weeks. He thought there was something missing because they should be able to make a resolution faster about a potentially dangerous dog. Mr. Vrchota indicated the Sheriffs Department has other policies they do use and if they feel an animal is a threat they can take the animal Chairperson Daninger indicated if a dog were to attack a child it would be immediately contained. • Restraint Mr. Vrchota indicated this section deals with "invisible fencing". He stated their City Code has a definition for restraint. He stated both staff and the Sheriffs Department had interpreted that definition to mean that invisible fencing is a permitted type of restraint for a dog. The interpretation has been challenged. He stated the City of Lakeville Code Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — July 24, 2007 Page 8 • has a more in -depth definition for "restraint ". He asked the Commission whether or not invisible fencing would be permitted as the only restraint for fencing in the front yard. Chairperson Daninger stated restraint is to keep the dog in and is not to keep people out He thought initially invisible fencing counted as a restraint because it has to work. It is not a restraint if it does not work. It is considered a restraint but if the dog is not trained, it is not a form of restraint He stated this not stop a child from going into the yard. There are a lot of different issues that can be brought up. Commissioner Falk wondered how a person would be able to tell if a yard had invisible fencing or not What if someone was walking along and a dog came running up to the edge of the yard, how would a person know if the dog would stop or continue on. Commissioner Walton stated they do not control invisible fence installation but do they need to define the installation to keep them six feet away from a sidewalk or driveway and do they need to tell people where they can install them to avoid those types of situations. Commissioner Cleveland wondered if signage should be required as an indication that an invisible fence is there. Chairperson Daninger asked if the Commission thought invisible fencing was considered a restraint Commissioner Walton did not think it was. Chairperson Daninger thought this would be a debate both ways because residents who have invisible fencing would consider it a restraint He wondered if invisible fencing should only be used as a restraint in the back yard or both front and back yards. Commissioner Casey felt invisible fencing was a restraint for dogs. Commissioner Walton did not think it was a solid restraint and people do not see it so how would they know a fence would hold a dog in. Chairperson Daninger wondered why a dog would need to be restrained in the front yard. Commissioner Cleveland did not think invisible fencing was much of a restraint Commissioner Falk did not think it was a restraint The majority of the Commission did not feel that invisible fencing was a restraint Mr. vrchota stated the definition of restraint in the Code says "The dog or cat shall be deemed under restraint if it is on the premises of its owner." This does not specify that it needs to be fenced or tethered only on the premises and under control. He stated for clarification that if the invisible fencing stops a dog from leaving the yard is that considered a restraint Chairperson Daninger thought it was because if it works, it is doing its job and controlling the dog. He did not think they could stop someone from installing an invisible fence in their yard to restraint their dog. Commissioner Cleveland stated there is a limit to the predictability of the animals behavior and the ordinance does say that it is deemed to be under restraint if it is on the premises so there is an assumption to be made that if the dog is where it is supposed to Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —July 24, 2007 • Page 9 be, it is restrained, whether it is actually restrained or not is what happens next but the ordinance does not speak to what happens when someone walks by that dog. Commissioner Walton stated if someone walks by the property and the dog walks off the property and annoys or is dangerous, then it is deemed to have not been under restraint. If it is on the property and someone goes onto the property it is still deemed to be restrained because it stayed on the property where it was supposed to whether it was by invisible fence or training. It is only when the dog ventures off private property, then it is not restrained. Chairperson Daninger did not think the Commission could come out and say invisible fencing is not a restraint but they will also not say that invisible fencing is a restraint. He stated they did not want it in their ordinance to say invisible fencing counts. Chairperson Daninger thought any type of restraint could not leave the property. • Basic Care Mr. Vrchota stated in the Council workshop the section on Basic Care in the Plainview Code was indicated to be adopted. He indicated their Code section has the same • information as the Plainview Code but he thought this section needed to be labeled a little more clearly. The Commission felt comfortable with what they have in their ordinance but thought the title could be changed to make it more descriptive. WORKSESS1ON• SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE Mr. Cross stated for the last six months, City staff has been revising the Subdivision Ordinance, the section of City Code that determines the requirements and review criteria for new subdivisions. Like the Zoning Code, much of the language dates back to the original 1974 ordinance. Staff has attempted to simplify the Subdivision Ordinance, remove outdated material, and update it to conform to policies and regulations that are currently being used. The Council has reviewed and commented on the changes at two workshops. Mr. Cross reviewed the proposed changes to the Ordinance with the Commission and indicated this will come back to a worksession on August 28, 2007. He asked the Commission to review the changes for further discussion at another meeting. • OTRER BUSINESS Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on related items. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — July 24, 2007 Page 10 Commissioner Walton wondered if they have site line issues at intersections because of tree/bush growth and if they do, how that process gets handled. Mr. Cross indicated anyone can call City Hall to alert them to the growth and someone will go out and take a look and remove the overgrowth to make sure the vision triangle remains clear. Chairperson Daninger asked for summer road work project updates in the City. Mr. Bednarz stated starting July 25" Hanson Boulevard will be closed while they do further work on it Chairperson Da wondered if there was going to be any improvements to the road in front of the High School. Mr. Bednarz stated Crosstown Boulevard is a County Road and they do not have any improvements along there planned. If anyone has concerns, please call the County with concerns. ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Walton, seconded by Falk, to adjourn the meeting at 8:47 p.m Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 0 -nays, 2- absent (Kirchoff, Holthus) vote. Respectfully Submitted, Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. • • 3 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 TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Chris Vrchota, Associate Planner# SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Variance (07 -02) vary from side yard setback requirements for property located at 771 141 Avenue NW. DATE: August 14, 2007 INTRODUCTION The applicant is requesting a variance to the side yard setback to allow for the construction of a deck. DISCUSSION The property has a 25 -foot side -yard setback because it is a back -to -back comer lot. The house sits 26 feet from the property line, leaving 1 foot of usable space. The house was a model and a sliding deck door was included in the original construction. They are asking for a 9 -foot variance to the side yard setback to allow for the construction of a 10x13 deck. Including the • boulevard area, the deck would be approximately 29.5 from the paved portion of Palm Street. The applicant included a petition signed by many of the neighboring property owners stating that they had no objections to the deck. State Statute provides review criteria that are used to determine the merit of variance cases. In all cases the applicant must demonstrate undue hardship. The considerations for undue hardship include: 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 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 or combining a substandard lot due to size, shape or lot line dimensions, with an adjacent vacant lot. Economic considerations may not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use of the property exists with application of the minimum standards of this chapter. Findings for this Report • • The house was a model home and the deck door was included in the construction of the home, making it appear that it was possible to add a deck in this location. • The side yard setback limits the amount of usable space. • There is a larger than average drainage and utility easement in the rear yard of the property. The lot was created under the requirements at the time, which required the first 100 feet of the lot to be buildable. Since that time the city increased the buildable area for new lots to 110 feet. Additionally, the city now requires surveys for new homes to show the area where a deck can be constructed where a doorway is planned and the area is less than 20 •. feet. Variance Findings Needed Variances are intended to provide relief from hardship with the least possible variation from the applicable zoning requirements. The Planning Commission is asked to recommend approval of the proposed variance if it determines that the strict interpretation of the code creates an undue hardship and that the findings can be made to grant the variance. Attachments Resolution Location Map Site Plan Site Photographs Petition ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is asked to recommend approval or denial of the proposed variance. Respectfully Submitted, Chris Vrchota Cc: Timothy Ehlers, 771 141" Avenue NW, Andover, MN 55304 • �J CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. R A RESOLUTION APPROVING/DENYING A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET TO 16 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 771141s' AVENUE NW LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: Lot 18, Block 6, Crown Pointe East, Anoka County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request to vary from City Code 12 -3 -5 to reduce the side yard setback for the subject property from 25 feet to 16 feet, and; WHEREAS, the applicant has provided the following findings for the Planning Commission to consider: 1. The house was a model home and the deck door was included in the construction of the home, making it appear that it was possible to add a deck in this location. 2. The side yard setback limits the amount of usable space. 3. There is a larger than average drainage and utility easement in the rear yard of the property. 4. The lot was created under the requirements at the time, which required the first 100 feet of the lot to be buildable. Since that time the city increased the buildable area for new • lots to 110 feet. Additionally, the city now requires surveys for new homes to show the area where a deck can be constructed where a doorway is planned and the area is less than 20 feet. WHEREAS, after review the Planning Commission finds recommended approval/denial of the request, and; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover approves/denies the proposed variance request to reduce the side yard setback for the subject property from 25 feet to 16 feet. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this _ day of , 2007. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Michael R. Gamache, Mayor Victoria Volk, City Clerk • Q � 655 S V n OLS 10 V ZLZ tag A� C OL \ d \ L95 r \ d Bp9 009 ° m "\ 60'► ZL9 EL9 OL9 a N N \ 6 w A 1C Gr 1`Oi e Me sz9 9z9 �� ) a°� !� �� i S rdi ST 9£9 LE9 BE9 N\\ J L09 809 609 099 '` ^► y OQ a 899\ 699 099 L9g Z99 \, w�� wti Q w� lob ` N 089 US U9 US OL9 9L9 919 000�� B E69 089 Z 989 LB9 899 Z69 A w'y VOL gag 969 869 669 OOL m v �\ �! \* LO SOL 601 OLL LLL AL o J �t 9LL a v W OZL LZL ZZL EZL vu = OLL SzL 8L004 LEL ZEL EEL 0£L 5EL 9EL c:) ZZL LM ST at/ � soovL w 69L EOL 001 50L 90L LOL BOL zEL � Z L91 Q LLL1 99L 15L 89L 85L 091. 8£L bSl S8L gLQ1 __ ,j 9 / 89L 69L OLL ZLL ur01 M P, �0 1 W "L \fit 56L 6LL 88L m v a L61 W L ZSL U \ Q 88L EL8 808 N a l Q \� \\ 8LOL A 4L8 ZL8 L0004 rzs Faze a rzS EZ8 r 9Z8 l Is W1d, Leg gee Leg 608 ° v L08 �� ww ro / 898 898 t� \' e f3cb 089 to Z68 o� cL Q • rn oU U y = W •� U U n c Lo M AO N W Q Z O UO Z W In is -+ Z o J W ' G �d W O C uY € 3 a a � � O NQ Q � 655 S V n OLS 10 V ZLZ tag A� C OL \ d \ L95 r \ d Bp9 009 ° m "\ 60'► ZL9 EL9 OL9 a N N \ 6 w A 1C Gr 1`Oi e Me sz9 9z9 �� ) a°� !� �� i S rdi ST 9£9 LE9 BE9 N\\ J L09 809 609 099 '` ^► y OQ a 899\ 699 099 L9g Z99 \, w�� wti Q w� lob ` N 089 US U9 US OL9 9L9 919 000�� B E69 089 Z 989 LB9 899 Z69 A w'y VOL gag 969 869 669 OOL m v �\ �! \* LO SOL 601 OLL LLL AL o J �t 9LL a v W OZL LZL ZZL EZL vu = OLL SzL 8L004 LEL ZEL EEL 0£L 5EL 9EL c:) ZZL LM ST at/ � soovL w 69L EOL 001 50L 90L LOL BOL zEL � Z L91 Q LLL1 99L 15L 89L 85L 091. 8£L bSl S8L gLQ1 __ ,j 9 / 89L 69L OLL ZLL ur01 M P, �0 1 W "L \fit 56L 6LL 88L m v a L61 W L ZSL U \ Q 88L EL8 808 N a l Q \� \\ 8LOL A 4L8 ZL8 L0004 rzs Faze a rzS EZ8 r 9Z8 l Is W1d, Leg gee Leg 608 ° v L08 �� ww ro / 898 898 t� \' e f3cb 089 to Z68 J Established in 198E INVOICE NO 48039 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. F3.NO 776 - 34 LAND SURVEYORS SCALE. 1" = 30' REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF SCATS OF IONNESOTA o Denotes ran Mmmm" 700E 73rd Avmame North e18 -660 -0007 a Depot" wood H4 sat Fa: No. 660 -0638 for eamvaum ady Nlmmpo" Nlaaeeola 36480 xtMo Ow"m Existing Elevation Ourvrgarz (6rrtifiratr ( ED mot• °rapeied °watlo0 i• Daates Srface O ok" 11IIN RIVERS CONSTRUCTION NDT@ e4o,oeed vadee " mbTeat f tmta m r wAa r� o aw wermum meal be dram With app r- Property located in Section � w 2S. Tomship 32. Range 24. � P � Anoka County. Minnesota a owntruotlon -- _. •'"� "natri fi"On'HALL CE 7117:FSUU Is v�l ±� • 2. , a.� STR EET DRRDE WITH M" .: [G;;Py "e r�:::.7. ABO Uld SLOPE 10 PERCENT. .Y 1 O • • �atnm' &017 N 'I ldiA� �- 1 -- -- - -- - ------ lam I ar --ro., t 141St AVeHUt NW Lot 18. Block 6. CREAM POINTE EAST The on Ny on shown ar e shoe tram plats of record or idamnatlon We hereby oatiy t this Is a tom and correct representation of a covey of the bordaio of the above demilmd land are the location of d bvedigs vd visor rioraaelvnenle If dry loom or on solo tad ����....rr�t Srveyed by w WP_ del' of October 79 2 St* -V pr,pp„d Tap of Bloc, ✓ EB r wo.w Gump Floor . RepaeM Lovest Floor Type of dd*q E, Ca m &1561 ti 04vx yr .7'1 9.3 Tag. 8 F Na'1� - -J — f o e c reyy k 88 i5 AF 3,Prd 0a I Oat-, Orab F. Ardwm% 16et Re0 No21733 w � 1, x; I am applying for a variance to allow construction of a deck on the West side of my • house. It will extend out from the house 10' and will be 13' wide and made out of cedar. City laws current will not allow this without a variance. By signing this document, you will be stating that you do not have an issue with what I propose. Tim Ehlers 771 141" Ave NW Andover MN, 55304 141 Ave NW 759 141 Ave NW r e- 42tC&tOf C� ACACA 759 141 Ave NW t - ` it 759 141 Ave NW ��11 760W "Ave NW 772 141" Ave NW U - / D�q f��k 784 14FAve NW 797 141' Ave NW 14130 St ( j 14144 B St. NW 0 770 141 � r Nom' " 1 • 9 Cl 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: PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit Amendment (07 -10) to allow expansion on the Metropolitan Mosquito Control site located at 1280 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW. DATE: August 14, 2007 INTRODUCTION The applicant is requesting an amendment to their conditional use permit to allow additional office space, a new storage building and additional parking area. DISCUSSION The applicant leases the site from Anoka County. The city has received a letter from Anoka County authorizing the applicant to pursue this application. Letters from the applicant's Engineer and Architect are attached to summarize the proposed project. Site Design The attached plan set illustrates the proposed improvements to the site. The site plan shows the location of the proposed office addition to the front of the existing office and the proposed new building near the southwest corner of the site. All of the site improvements lie within the lease area. The lease area lies within a 40 acre parcel, which provides more space than required for building and parking setbacks from property lines. Building Architecture Building elevations for the office addition and new storage building are attached. The Office addition will be primarily constructed with brick and will have a standing seam metal roof. Architectural corrugated metal panels are proposed for the main entry. The new storage building will be constructed with a burnished block base, insulated architectural metal panels and a standing seam metal roof Manufacturer's information is attached to provide more detail on the architectural metal panels for the new storage building and the applicant will make a presentation of the building materials at the meeting. City Code 12 -13 -19 prohibits aluminum, steel and metal, except as follows: "2. Such materials, however, may be used as an accent material to complement the architectural design and appeal of the building as determined by the Andover Review Committee. The applicant shall have the opportunity for the City Council to review architectural plans and make a final determination of the materials and design. " The Andover Review Committee, in its review of the building architecture, determined that the materials for both buildings are complementary to the overall architectural theme and proposed • building expansion on the site. Parking Area The -shaded areas on the attached grading plan best illustrate the new areas of the site that will be paved. The parking area in front of the building will be constructed with curb and gutter and will contain 47 new parking stalls. These stalls will meet the minimum number required for the 11,690 square feet of office space that will exist when the project is completed. Additional overflow parking will be provided behind the office building. It should also be noted that the storage buildings provide parking area for company vehicles and equipment. No outdoor storage is proposed as a part of this application. Landscaping The applicant has provided a conceptual landscape plan with this application. It should also be noted that a significant amount of native landscaping already exists on the site. The landscaping plan will be reviewed for conformance to the City Code as a part of the commercial site plan application. Irrigation The City Code requires all areas that contain required landscaping to be irrigated. The applicant is requesting a variance from this requirement. The attached letter from the Project Architect provides the reasoning for this request. The Andover Review Committee (ARC) discussed the requested variance and recommends that irrigation be provided in the landscaped areas adjacent to the office building where landscaping presently has the most difficulty surviving. The remainder of the site already consists of well established native landscaping. Lighting Lighting will be added to the parking area and drive lanes to meet the City's requirements. The light will be directed downward and will not affect residential properties across Bunker Lake Boulevard. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit amendment with the proposed architecture illustrated in the attachments and a variance for partial irrigation of the property. Attachments Resolution Location Map Letter from Applicant's Engineer Letter from Applicant's Architect Existing Conditions Plan Proposed Site Plan Proposed Grading Plan Conceptual Landscaping Plan Building Elevations Manufacturers Information - Architectural Steel Panel 9 ACTION REQUESTED • The Planning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing, discuss the proposed conditional use permit amendment, and make a recommendation to the City Council. The recommendation should address the following items: 1. Approval of the amendment 2. Building architecture 3. Variance to irrigation requirement 4Rect d e , ar Cc: R. Richard Gauger Gauger Wayne Hilbert CNH Architects • Engineering, Inc. 35 W. Water StreetSt. Paul, MN 55107 7300 West 147' Street, Suite 504 Apple Valley, MN 55124 9 CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR EXPANSION OF THE METROPOLITAN MOSQUITO CONTROL FACILITY LOCATED AT 1280 BUNKER LAKE BOULEVARD AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED ON EXHIBIT A WHEREAS, Metropolitan Mosquito Control has requested a conditional use permit amendment to allow an office expansion, parking area expansion and a new storage building on the subject property; and WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting a variance to City Code 12 -13 -6. to waive the irrigation system requirement based on their intent to provide native landscaping that complements the native landscaping in the remainder of Bunker Hills Park; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a pubic hearing and has reviewed the request; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission recommends approval/denial of the proposed variance based on the following findings: 1. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds the conditional use permit request would not have a • detrimental effect upon the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the City of Andover and recommends to the City Council approval of the conditional use permit amendment; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approves the conditional use permit amendment on said property with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall complete the commercial site plan review process with the city. 2. The improvements to the site and exterior building elevations shall substantially conform to the plan set stamped received by the City of Andover August 1, 2007. 3. This approval is subject to a sunset clause as defined in City Code 12- 14 -61). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this day of , 2007. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Michael R. Gamache, Mayor Victoria Volk, City Clerk 11 Exhibit A 0 PARCEL C2 That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the most easterly corner of Parcel 45, ANOKA COUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT -OF -WAY PLAT NO. 68, Anoka County, Minnesota; thence South 82 degrees 51 minutes 48 seconds West, bearing assumed, along the southeasterly line of said Parcel 45, a distance of 112.34 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continue South 82 degrees 51 minutes 48 seconds West; along said southeasterly line, 66.12 feet; thence South 10 degrees 34 minutes 54 seconds East 75.99 feet; thence North 88 degrees 54 minutes 41 seconds West 92.03 feet; thence South 01 degrees 05 minutes 19 seconds West 626.00 feet; thence South 88 degrees 54 minutes 41 seconds East 380.00 feet; thence North 01 degrees 05 minutes 19 seconds East 626.00 feet; thence North 88 degrees 54 minutes 41 seconds West 220.58 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 10 degrees 34 minutes 54 seconds East from the point of beginning; thence North 10 degrees 34 minutes 54 seconds West 85.65 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 5.58 acres, more or less. Part of P.I.N. 35- 32 -24 -31 -0001 I* 11 C I T Y O F NDOVE Incorporated 1974 Conditional Use Permit Amendment 1280 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW i Location M ap _ SUBJECT PROPERTY N GAUGER ENGINEERING, INC. 35 W. Water Street, St. Paul, MN 55107 6511227 -1748 July 16, 2007 City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Blvd. N.W. Andover, MN 55304 Re: Conditional Use Permit Request Metropolitan Mosquito Control District 1280 Bunker Lake Blvd. Andover, Minnesota Att'N: Planning and Zoning Commission On behalf of the Metropolitan Mosquito Control Commission and as their Owner's Project Representative, attached please find the Conditional Use Permit request and'documentation. In 1984, Anoka County and the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District entered in- to a Lease Agreement for the construction of a District Facility. The Lease was ammended in late 1984 and again 1989. In 1990, the District submitted the..-:.. request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for an expansion of the facilities. This request was granted to allow for the expansion. At this time, the District (MMCD) is proposing an addition consisting of office space and a third storage building. -The District has been working close with the Anoka County Parks as well as Andover Staff.to meet current requirements. It is the desire of the MMCD to start construction in October of this year. Thank you for your consideration of this Request. Sincerely, A -_ R. Richard Gauger, PE Licensed in the State of Minnesota 7900 WEST 147TH STREET SUITE 504 APPLE VALLEY, MN 55121- 7580 CM 431-4433 E N rFc, METROPOLITAN MOSOUITO CONTROL DISTRICT — CONDMONAL USE PERMI NARRATIVE: July 17, 2007 General: The Metropolitan Mosquito Control District (MMCD) building addition is planned as an expansion to meet the rising demands ofthe district. MMCD provides services for seven counties ofthe metropolitan area and this facility serves Anoka County. The main focus ofthe project is to provide the facility with adequate space for employees and storage, while exploring sustainable strategies through building and site design Site: The site is located off of Bunker Lake Boulevard NW just east of Hanson Boulevard NW within the Bunker Ms Regional Park. MMCD is currently leasing their land from Anoka County and the lease lines are within the overall park property. Because MMCD's lease lines do not coincide with the park property, there are no required setbacks. A new cold storage building will be added in the southwest corner ofthe property and a new office addition will be added to the north ofthe existing office building. • A new 47 stall parking lot with curb and gutters will be added along the north side of the property adjacent to the office building to meet the city requirements for parking provided. There will also be significant landscaping along the lease lines where the additional building and parking lot are located to buffer the park from the site. In keeping with sustainable design strategies, the intent is to have no irrigation on the site as well as native plantings and efficient landscaping. The parking lot will have sufficient landscaping within the parking islands to help reduce the heat island effect. The site drainage from the buildings and new parking lot will be directed west of the office building to a retaining area on the low part of the site. Building: The proposed project is intended to expand the current office and storage facilities to meet the increasing needs of MMCD. The design provides a 6,070 square foot office addition that will replace an office addition from 1991. The office will mainly house a small number of employees on a regular basis, with a large training room designed to seat all employees when the field workers need to come in for training or meetings. The new office addition will be comprised of two main forms for the differ ent private office and training room functions, with an accent entrance element that connects the two together. A new 14,863 square foot cold storage building will be added with the potential for an additional 3,640 square foot that is currently an alternate. The cold storage building will house mainly company vehicles with some material storage. C- ADONME-- IUUCHARITLOCALS- 11T@IVRBIPORAAY DMBC10RY I FOR PROIBCITURRA7ry li2U PROIFCIMARRATIV6AOL • Exterior Materials: The exterior materials for the office addition will consist of mainly brick with architectural corrugated metal panels at the entrance tower to accent the main entry. The sloping roofs consist of standing seam metal and the canopy roof is designed with landscaped roof pavers to fulfill sustainability strategies. The cold storage building will consist of a burnished block wainscot with insulated architectural metal panels above that look similar to precast panels and blend with the existing buildings. A standing seam metal roof is designed for the storage building as well. 0 • CVOCUW- IWCHARDLLOCAL.4 -INT MP1TDOOMY DMWMY i PM MOMCINARRKMVEIWWROJBCrN"2ATnT -DOC I Ii - Existing Conditions Plan c , ;1)' h Ilhitillihll ~l - ; .. i. h !I' ! JlihUihit illhml c . -- II J .~ i I i -- . I~' .....o~gDD.a091 I Ii! -- If p" · -" -..alii II -- - I! fi!. . -- -- -- 111 -- --- 11, i 161 -- --- - -- .tl l ~ ~iigi 1'1 . II' t l~ ~ ! hI I IF I fll · i _.n -- - .1 '11 -4. __~ rt~itn Ui ~ ' -- ' .~_ n__-' 14t1.1 In -- ~t It 1)1 , , ~ ) !ti,l 1m , , -,- , , 11Ft'. , ..''''~ , I~rft \ , -'-. - tl' tlfl ill II .Il! JJI t Ilftl If~ ,-- . M.I , .fl " ,~- . 1 1 tl i! i >i .. '..., ~ ~ - , 11 j I. I, ' J I / ,------ . , , 1 1 i I 1 Proposed Site Plan W s E • s V F- w a w J Q z O H F3 z O U a m c U l, 1 I , , I , , ; i W 8°d r I I ' i I , ` � J f C - -- r--- I Ll Eli r , , F- w a w J Q z O H F3 z O U a m c U lie _ CONY ROAD SAKE BLVD) U Proposed Grading Plan �— a 0 m L {{FF j�ss l j7� �d eB u 0 • . I N i till Iq 35 Ii III F '_._._._:_. iJ i �I I r k U Proposed Grading Plan �— a 0 m L {{FF j�ss l j7� �d eB u 0 • . I N i till Iq 35 Ii III Conceptual Landscaping Plan a µVD iW ��i!!I a "ly � '.�.,. ski Lw:{ ��$1 x1�e� • .:.+..r- �...C'� ~ � P 1 r r 3 .� e :�. �.... o f gel 1 ' v. e Mm C o - r a n e y}4 ti of ? S Y YK ` s s � r ° `i to C D r n Z v 0 z D r C 0) m m X Building Elevations G8 Ga _ f _ — ' 1 r� �r • • • RAN I I A6 11 1 oonrrrioi.o� s.. CI VII TUFF - WALL INSULATED WALL PANH_ lulf V all" ,m t xcr ill nn,Jh a t t I I ( t c stuc,eo -like uuilated all panel - h,v. ,chihii, ihr nniiiral 1,,.:utc Ill it nun, du rI and ( % %: nit dc,'rc 1 :1, ull tt r ,Urlacc i, hi lIIi Itutl b% chu Tutl (.t�tt'° iher IClnfoItcc] poIv Ill rr co:.tinr Unlike snnilnr Litton appLcd Z111( !field applied titucen utaon!1, that arc Iclt to air drq the I1i11 -( rite Illllih i, heat cured tinder 11)ttwv controlled conditions maximum hoed to the metal tiutlacc Bill - ACall prn�idt, the ma,onr% �o(I ut , tucen �h the thermal ciliaenc\' (It an imulated mrtal panel . lial- CV,Ilst'dutahlc knish i, Iti�,hlr rr,is_ ant to nnp,lct and abra,ion and n��.intain, it, attratli',r colut I 1c'd tt,tcd anti prorun Iu1iCnt, h ;cc n,Ir,ou% t„n:c, with _ 'l IT Its m m ou:rIt, .. 07 40 00 /MET BuyLine 7344 `^ dccct,i�ci:nt 1 :I1' nt- ntl',' lull -A1 al'l , i pan he cl�cl: i t t'irtutaI an 1 t1uI L IC it( n nee die Tull - C n lnl,h is unrJlected by damp or utld Breather unlike held- appl,td ,utec n mattrial, Medium Beige Light Stone Light Gray Stucco White Module Width: 5o I2 Panel Thickness: 2 ' Lengths: N o to -1U -0 Exterior Face: Non- pnailutl. stucco cntbotitiUd hahanized andol alhnninuni- _ tnc coated steel: 26 C a. ,,.L ( Ia. and ?? Gi with factorY applied Tuil -Cote linitih ,rstcm Exterior Texture: Tutl -Cote timi, i �trrn - a hard Ic lih , at�d cr rcinlo�ccr: poly -rncr ctxuing Interior Face: ,Ales:, p , ttuco cmho„cd 1 ­ahnm::Pd and or aluminUM coated Steel: eft (.a 2 -{ Ga and �? (:a and Type 301 stamlcss,tccl in 2(, Ca. unpainted Panel Joint: (M,et douhle ton.-tic and _r I c «°ith rxtundcd metal ,hilt for po,itit'r taco fa,tenittp, — r./ l 1 F- ,\1 LII�,E'� & BENEFIT 1 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 MAIN (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Andy Cross, Associate Planner CC: Courtney Bednarz, City Plann SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit Amendment (07 -09) amending approval of a church on residential property located at 475 Andover Boulevard NW. DATE: August 14, 2007 INTRODUCTION Last December, Sambulsa of Minnesota, Inc. received approval for a Conditional Use Permit to add a temple to an existing house located at 475 Andover Boulevard. The applicants would like to change those plans and build a separate prayer room on the site, leaving the existing house untouched. DISCUSSION The Conditional Use Permit required that Sambulsa's temple be constructed "to the specifications on the documents dated November 7, 2006." After discussions with the Fire Chief, engineers, and their contractor, the applicants would like to change their plans for the new temple. Adding onto the existing house would require major renovation and improvements to the structure, including installing a sprinkler system throughout the entire house. As an alternative, the applicants would like to construct a separate free - standing prayer room (see attachments). The proposed new building is 2,600 square feet, slightly larger than the 2,500 square -foot addition proposed previously. The prayer room is the same size as before, but the free - standing structure will require its own restroom and mechanical areas (see attached). The site appears able to accommodate the change, and all plans will be subject to a full Commercial Site Plan review. The original Conditional Use Permit will need to be amended because of the condition connected with an outdated plan set. With the changes to the church's plans, this condition can no longer be met. The date in the condition will be changed to July 17, 2007, the date when the applicants submitted a new plan showing a separate prayer room. As with the previous plan, the Planning Commission will need to review the attached plans and judge whether there would be a significant negative impact from the size of the church on the surrounding areas as detailed above. Keep in mind that the proposed church must meet all local building and zoning codes and complete a commercial site plan review process. 5 Church Services The attached letter from the applicant references the size of the church's congregation. One weekly service is held on Sunday from 11:00 AM to noon. While the church remains open at other times for Zen meditation J practice, the only formal service is on Sunday. The applicants will be available at the meeting to answer questions about the church. • Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the change. The impact of the church on the site is not changing and all requirements of a Commercial Site Plan will still be met. ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. Respectfully �submitted, 74 , -_ - Andy Cross Cc: Sambulsa of Minnesota, Inc., 8301 West River Road, Brooklyn Park, MN 55444 Attachments Resolution Original Resolution (R153 -06) Location Map Letter from Applicant . Site Plan Building Details • 0 -2- CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SAMBULSA OF MINNESOTA, INC. TO ALLOW A REVISED SITE PLAN FOR A CHURCH IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AT 475 ANDOVER BOULEVARD NW. WHEREAS, Sambulsa of Minnesota, Inc. has applied to locate a church in a residential district; and WHEREAS, Chapter 12 -12 of the Andover City Code "Permitted, Conditional, and Prohibited Uses" lists Church as a Conditional Use in residential zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds the request would not have a detrimental effect upon the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the City of Andover; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the Conditional Use Permit as requested. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approves the amendment to the • Conditional Use Permit allowing a church on said property, subject to the following conditions: 1) Site improvements at 475 Andover Boulevard must be constructed to the specifications on the documents dated July 17.2007. 2) All changes, modifications, and improvements at 475 Andover Boulevard proposed to be made as part of this application shall be subject to review and approval through the Commercial Site Plan process. 3) No church services may take place at 475 Andover Boulevard before all site and building improvements identified in the Commercial Site Plan review process have been completed. 4) The proposed church must conform to all local and state building and zoning codes. 5) If the City Engineer requires a Traffic Impact Study, all study recommendations will become conditions of this Conditional Use Permit. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this day of , 2007. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Michael R. Gamache, Mayor Victoria Volk, City Clerk —3— CITY OF ANDOVER COUNTY OF ANOKA • STATE OF MINNESOTA RES. NO. R153 -06 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST OF SAMBULSA OF MINNESOTA, INC. TO PERMIT A CHURCH IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AT 475 ANDOVER BOULEVARD NW. WHEREAS, Sambulsa of Minnesota, Inc. has applied to locate a church in a residential district; and WHEREAS, Chapter 12 -12 of the Andover City Code "Permitted, Conditional, and Prohibited Uses" lists Church as a Conditional Use in residential zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds the request would not have a detrimental effect upon the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the City of Andover; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the Conditional Use Permit as requested. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover hereby agrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approves the Conditional Use Permit to permit a church on said property, subject to the following conditions: 0 1) The addition to the exiting house at 475 Andover Boulevard must be constructed to the 4�--- specifications on the documents dated November 7, 2006, or as modified by the Building Department. 2) All changes, modifications, and improvements at 475 Andover Boulevard proposed to be made as part of this application shall be subject to review and approval through the Commercial Site Plan process. 3) No church services may take place at 475 Andover Boulevard before all site and building improvements identified in the Commercial Site Plan review process have been completed. 4) The proposed church must conform to all local and state building and zoning codes. 5) If the City Engineer requires a Traffic Impact Study, all study recommendations will become conditions of this Conditional Use Permit. 6) The off - street parking that is provided is the minimum necessary based on what the representatives of the Sambulsa Buddhist Temple have represented as needed at this time. Should there be an expansion of the members that regularly attend, the City shall require the parking area to be expanded to meet the peak parking needs. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this 19 day of December, 2006. CITY OF ANDOVER ATTEST: Michael R. Gamache, Mayor 9 Victoria Volk, City Clerk _ cl! .- -H ~ H, \j;1 -i:i5 00 >"- -> 00 - . ! o oS! !R (/) z '" 0 (/)(/) w " "-" J 0." < ." 0- ~ ~"'" " " . ~ "~ ~ ~ H ~ H ~ ~. ,"'"0 c~" ~, G) s lB ~8 ~ 2l 2l ~~ ~ , ... ,0 , II I ~'. ~ to to oZ II L . . :::;; 0 (/)<( 0 . I I . . I L.I . " i I II i '-. ...).... '1'1j-1 _ " j , ,I_ _ _ .1'. ! , Ii' I . i-----{. '''~ ~" ~l . ~ II 8 , ~,,' c: '. I _ . .., "m. l!! ., . , i Iii . . 1 , I ... 1'1 ' .2! < i 111"' ',-" i iii. &! , /I - I" ."~ .c ~! ~ I ,.. ... I. .. . "'" .. ' _.' mi" - .. ~% ~~~., ~..".'''''- .. .! 0/1 ' .. ....." <'l ~t I 1.'.1 ,..' ..~ ~. ... L, L:J0 ,'-":. ., "".' ~ '" . ! ".\-"" /.~ _ .., \ \ ! _ ......, 'v... ~ i · - 1 -,,' ". " . ~ .. I " r-o<,!l!' ,\ L ~ .",,- III ~~ .. M .,.~'m j ! -" =\~ ~ _ ,.. _ I ~\~ ~'i-~ , ~D. _ R-.'\.'\."""'\.~ mi. l' ~ .. ~ J L ~~ i I '0. - '" 1-------:: _ ~..~ ,---"I J I - 'E!I; .\\~ :..----'_I!:~Gi) - i ~ ~ "" .... . ~ iill"i,'r!' ... Ii /. h : ~:.-::~ . . I .... r;;u - ' .. ~ ..'~ / c- " J--- - Z<~'" ' ~,,'~ ~ . _ ,-", .. T ~"p""" 8~,~"" _ 11:1:",' "'111:1: .~ m:: ~ ~.I':~ ,!<i? -' =-& '-~. ~4Jt' .. I ,-::'/~ .. .. f.' . ...... '~ I-- /' .. .." -. .. .. " ,,"'.. ~. '''.. ~ - '" . - - ~ " " '. ., = . ~ _"!....:IN::::~~i.. I J nm 't. \ ._ I .. ~:;ILI.l. llir.t .. II. ~ -=.. '" 1----1 .. I c" .. . IJU" .. -:: ~'. .. ~oiii 'I? I T!l1I ~ ~'U.' ~: IGr fi.i~ ~. ..IT" ._ ,,~ !i" ~ ",.. w I.. ..... i-!!'ti -~~ Ii !---,i--- ii," ! I a s.~" ~~ ~ ,.,111 :II' :: . ~~ . r-- ~~~,m."'''''.' 0- .. .. I f;ii a a i' Ii-- ~ I. .. ~. a ' ~N ~D:"/II~II n ,~~ ~ . . . Ii---. .!Ji,i . 'Hi~ -"'- ! .. :1 I f--!---.,,:Ii ~~'~". ';;;7!t1"!!!' ! i II .- II ftl ~ ~ I'~ ~ .. " I J ~ S 'I, " 'I. ,." .. ! f--- ~.. ~;.' -. I I . . ;:.l; '" I." 1// I I I \ I ! i ~,) s "'", ~ I~..i ., ~:oc-, . "V~1jOijj ".~ : ~ ~ ... c-' I(:-.I!' ' ,., ... ' "II"""'"" ,.. - "" . =, M' .... _. iii' 1'-,1/;/11'1 . ~ IouN*<1I/ili!i il~' _ I r-r= ~:,:e,:, "" ":1 ~ . /'~' r:1 .:.. . . - .~ ... ' l~:~. = 'r! Q ~_, .. , ., ",,,',m-." . ....~. - ....' ... .... ,,,,,,,;;;,,,,,',,,,,,," r,IW'~"II' II .'.' ": ,.,. ~":"":''fj~ ~ 1\......... .. ~ ! I' '""I. ,.n.:JJJm .,...' *,., (i! ....1.1 " _ . . II .. _..' *'.'.'.' "I} " . " .,.... .., .., "" "., n. 11 J ,.;-1 -jilili:ililiTl. 'm. !J ~,i!'~ ~): !/J:;ff;fJ.:: . _ .... 1~ ~l::J w/~iiY'" E -5'- Il City of Andover • 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W. Andover, MN 55304 November 7, 2006 Dear Planning and Zoning Commission; Our request for a conditional use permit is based on the need of SamBulSa of Minnesota, Inc. to acquire a larger property for its Buddhist Temple. First, about SamBulSa; It is the only Korean Buddim Church in Minnesota Formed in 1989, it purchased a small home the next year to serve as its church. As the congregation grew, we realized that our quarters, especially the prayer room were too small. Therefore, for several years we have searched for anew property to house our church. The Andover property (475 Andover Boulevard NW) would be an ideal location provided we could expand the existing building to include a prayer room and lunch room. The existing building would be used as a parsonage by our priestess. We have a very small congregation. Only 15 to 20 families attend services on an average Sunday. Therefore, we will not cause a traffic or noise problem for our neighbors. Buddhism is an old established formal religion going back over 3,000 years. It is not a cult The religion is very peaceful, teaching tolerance, and extremely high standard of moral values. Part of our activities includes Zen Practice (or Meditation), which gives a chance to think about what the real life means and how to improve our life without suffering. This successful program is open to public and free of charge. We are welcoming to every one to use our facility for Zen. We are sure that this practice will provide healthy life and community. We feel that our Buddhist Temple, once established in Andover, will be a credit to your community for many years to come. You can expect from us full cooperation in all respects with your city. Thank you. Sincerely, Keum Ja Kim Authorized Representative, Sambulsa of Minnesota, Inc. 8301 West River Road Brooklyn Park, MN 55444 • — �V- • • E I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I oo 3 ' OW I ------------- - ------- - - - --� W _ � M G" 7 C c m O Y C W O co f � A / W M � W L O Q E i 0 0 L IN O Ln • 0 N N • L 0 0 W z 3 • _I- a-+ L 3 N N /a M �O • 0 9 00 J � 3 a� 0 N ,T N i N ►� L fu Q) ce O IJ') • O N • 122' 1 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: Chris Vrchota, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Work Session: Consider Interim Performance Standards for Hughs/Westview Industrial Parks. DATE: August 14, 2007 INTRODUCTION About two months ago, City Code Enforcement staff received a complaint about a roll -off . dumpster business being operated from a property in the Hughs Industrial Park. After an inspection was done and the owner of the property was contacted, it was determined that the roll -off business had been operating from the property for nearly 2 years. Staff determined that a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) was needed to operate the roll -off service on the property. The City Code requires that when a commercial site is expanded or the use is changed so that a CUP is required, the entire site be brought up to the City's zoning standards, including: parking lot pavement, curb and gutter, landscaping, lighting, etc. Based on the types of businesses located in the area, the age of the properties, and current land values, the property owners have indicated that it would not be financially feasible to make all of the required site improvements. In response to this issue, staff brought up two options for the Council to consider, as this may also affect other property owners at Hughs/Westview Industrial Park. Option 1 was to create a new zoning district, for instance an "I -2" zone, to establish a different set of standards for the rural industrial park. Option 2 was to establish a set of interim performance standards that would be in place until city sewer and water become available. After receiving input from the City Attorney, the Council decided that the second option was preferable. DISCUSSION If the City were to create a set of interim performance standards in the City Code for use in the rural industrial park, it would create some flexibility over how strictly the City's zoning standards are applied to these businesses. This would allow the City to require essential improvements to the properties while also allowing the businesses to expand or be otherwise improved in a financially feasible way. The types of requirements the City could offer flexibility on may include: • Landscaping- the quantity and size of required plantings required could be lowered. • Parking Lot Improvements- areas used for parking or storage in the rear of the building ce— • could be allowed to be surfaced with class 5 or other material, not necessarily concrete or asphalt. The amount of curbing could be reduced and asphalt curbs could be allowed. This would apply to areas screened from view from the road, customer parking area, or street, not areas in the front of the building. ti • Lighting- Lighting requirements for new parking lot areas could be reduced or eliminated. • In return for the reduced zoning standards, the City would look for improvements in the following areas: • Screening- storage areas should be screened from neighboring residential properties, public roads, and any customer parking areas. • Dust Control- measures will be required to control dust in areas where class 5 is permitted in lieu of paving. • Building Maintenance - The City may require some aesthetic improvements to the buildings, such as painting of faded or peeling surfaces. • Parking Lot Improvements- Improvements to parking lots visible from the street and used by customers could be required. • Limits on Exterior Storage - The amount, type, and location of exterior storage could be further controlled. The interim performance standards would be crafted so that they only apply to the rural industrial park for a limited period of time. The intent is that the interim performance standards would remain in place until city sewer and water service are available to the industrial park. After these services are made available through the Rural Reserve, all properties in the Hughs/Westview Industrial Park would need to be brought into compliance with the performance standards that are in place at that time if any further expansion, site improvements, or change of use is made. The City cannot waive, modify, or vary from the Building Code, Fire Code, or National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Any structural changes or expansion to the buildings or changes of use inside the buildings would trigger Fire and Building Code requirements, possibly including the installation of fire suppression systems. Expansion of impervious surface area (additional building space, paved areas, etc... ) would trigger storm water ponding/treatment requirements under the NPDES. While meeting these requirements could require a significant investment, they are not negotiable. Laws and statutes adopted at levels higher than the City mandate that they be met. Attachments Council Minutes- July 24, 2007 ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is asked to provide feedback and input on the creation of interim performance standards for the rural industrial park. How flexible should the City be with various zoning standards, and what level of improvements should be pursued in exchange for the interim standards? Respe y s ed, Chris rchota of • Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes —July 24, 2007 Page 6 Council decided unless a problem at 31 feet shows up, they would leave things as they are and address any issues on a case -by -case situation. Mayor Gamache suggested they notify the public about the parking safety concerns with streets less than 31 feet wide. TIFDISTRICT 1- 4INDUSTRI4L OPPORTUNITIES DISCUSSION Community Development Director Neumeister stated about a month ago, City Code Enforcement staff requested Rick Lindquist provide information relating to the current status of the site where Northern Cylinder Heads and LePage Rolloff Service are operating. The staff determined they need a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to operate the rlloff service on the property. Mr. Lindquist and LePage have provided the information needed to process a CUP. Their CUP application is considered complete and the 60 -day review period (can be extended an additional 60 days if needed) is underway. Before staff begins processing the CUP, Council is requested to provide direction. Last month staff brought up two options for the Council to consider in dealing with the various property owners at Hughs Industrial Park. Option 1 is to create a new zoning district, say an I -2 zone to establish a different set of standards for the rural industrial park. Option 2 is to establish an interim use permit until sewer and water became available. The second option seems to be the best to pursue, because it is allowed by State Statute and will be easier to implement, and be more flexible. The current City Code requires the entire site be brought up to the City's zoning standards including: parking lot pavement, curb and gutter, landscaping, lighting, etc. The issue that staffneeds direction on is how stringent the Council wants to be implementing the standard zoning requirements. The City cannot waive or modify Building/Fire Code and NPDES requirements. The City may have discretion over how much of the city zoning standards apply to these businesses if the City were to create an "Interim Use Permit" in the city code. The City Attorney advised staff that Minnesota Statue Statute 462.3597 allows the City to adopt "interim uses" into the City Code and set up the parameters under which an "interim use" may be granted. He asked if the Council wants to work with Rick Lindquist and LePage Rolloff Service to become a legitimate outdoor storage use on the property with a Conditional Use Permit (but have only limited zoning standards apply)? Does the Council want staff to prepare a Zoning Code Amendment to enable "Interim use Permits" to be granted in areas like the Hughs Industrial Park with interim zoning standards that require very basic interim improvements (limited cosmetic or screening improvements) but not all city standards? What level of zoning code requirements will be required of Mr. Lindquist? Councilmember Jacobson did not think they could change anything without changing the zoning. Community Development Director Neumeister responded that is correct. • Councilmember Orttel stated he would like to see everything go through the Conditional Use Permit process. Councilmember Trude wants to see screening from residential and anything with retail customers. k J Special Andover City Council Workshop Meeting • Minutes — July 24, 2007 Page 7 Councilmember Jacobson stated he wants the screening to be kept up and maintained. City Engineer Berkowitz stated if they don't increase the impervious surface and it is functioning and operating as it is now, they should let it go, but if they do increase the impervious surface then they have to follow the rules that were set. Community Development Director Neumeister stated staff would prepare an interim use type ordinance with the City Attorney to allow this to happen and bring this through the Planning Commission. Councilmember Trude asked if there is a way to do a communal fire suppression system. Community Development Director Neumeister responded they had spoken to them about this. Fire Chief Winkel believes a fire system would be a lot more difficult to deal with than the water system. They need to look at the entire area and determine what type of fire system they need to protect all of the buildings. 2008 -2012 CIP REPORT City Administrator Dickinson updated the Council on the 2008 -2012 CIP. He reviewed the major • items. At this point they would need to move out a significant amount based on the budget forecast. He indicated what those items would be. They did not have a recommendation at this time. 2008 BUDGET PROGRESS REPORT City Administrator Dickinson updated the Council on the 2008 budget progress. He did not believe they would reach the commitment to maintain or reduce the City Tax Capacity Rate, utilizing recent market value growth this year. He recommended they do not levy for the entire $200,000 amount for the open space referendum the first year. They would do what they could to maintain the 3 5 percent of planned 2008 General Fund expenditures for fund balance. He indicated 4, 5, 6 and 7 in his report would all be met. After Department Head requests, the requested budget was $718,403 over available. funding sources. Councilmember Jacobson requested statistics on the requested increase in the City Attorney's contract. City Administrator Dickinson asked if Council wants to accept the 2008 Sheriffs contract. He noted if additional services are requested, it is likely that other City department service levels will need to be reduced or eliminated. He noted personally he is supportive of it, but fiscally it is difficult to provide for the cost. • Councilmember Jacobson requested staff determine what it would cost for a half -year implementation. 0 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: Receive copy of Land Use and Sewer Chapter of Comprehensive Plan for future discussion. DATE: August 14, 2007 INTRODUCTION Preparation of the decennial comprehensive plan update has reached a point where substantive review can be made by the Planning Commission and City Council. DISCUSSION Please find attached the text and associated maps for the following chapters of the draft comprehensive plan: • Land Use Plan • Wastewater and Comprehensive Sewer Plan • The Planning Commission is asked to review and retain these items for discussion at the September 11, 2007 meeting. Please note that the Planning Commission will be asked to review and hold public forums for the comprehensive plan update as indicated on the attached schedule. Attachments Draft Land Use Plan Draft Wastewater and Comprehensive Sewer Plan Comprehensive Plan Update Schedule ACTION REQUESTED Please review and be prepared to discuss the attached information at the September l l meeting. j �. IN r C l T V O P 0� 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 814107 DRAFT 0 Chapter One: Foundation of The Comprehensive Plan Identity Andover is primarily a residential community with established urban and rural neighborhoods. Greater than ninety percent of the city's housing stock is owner occupied. Families with school age children comprise the largest portions of Andover's population. Residents value the rural character of the community, the local schools, the park system and their safe neighborhoods.. These values have influenced the policies of the city. Areas planned for urban development are balanced with rural areas to allow the rural character of the community to be preserved. This growth pattern is reflected in the Metropolitan Council's 2030 Regional Development Framework which provides Andover with both Developing Community and Rural Residential planning area designations. More information on these designations is provided in Chapter Two: Land Use Plan. As the city's population has grown, so has the demand for commercial development. The result has been consistently strong occupancy of previously existing commercial centers like the Downtown Center, successful redevelopment of former industrial properties into Andover Station and Andover Station North as well as expansion of the commercial tax base to include neighborhood centers like Andover Clocktower Commons and Hanson Commons. Growth Forecast The 2030 Regional Development Framework prepared by the Metropolitan Council provides a population, household and employment forecast for each community in the seven county metropolitan area. The purpose of this information is to determine how investments in regional systems will need to be made to accommodate the growth forecasted for the region from 2000 to 2030. Similarly, the city must plan and budget to ensure that local services, systems and facilities can be provided to accommodate growth. The tables below show city and Metropolitan Council growth forecasts. The city forecast is considered to be more accurate because it is based on verified building permit activity and parcel level analysis. Figure 1.1 Citywide Growth Forecast E Andover Growth Forecast Source: City of Andover 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Population 15,216 27,013 37,392 42,024 44,578 Households 4,430 8,659 11,400 14,008 15,921 Em to ment 1,125 2,979 4,494 5,039 5,530 Metropolitan Council Growth Forecast Source: Metropolitan council System Statement Sept 2005 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Population 15,216 26,588 33,000 39,000 40,500 Households 4,430 8,107 12,100 14,600 15,500 ffmpl2oent 1,200 3,062 4,200 4,800 5,200 3 2030 Framework Planning Areas G e o g r a p h i c P l a n n i n g A r e a s Ad d i t i o n a I I n f o r m a t i o n Urban Planning Areas Rural Planning Areas WMA Reuional Natural - Resource Areas De%etopirgArea Rural Center mch,j:-, Lm"t"LlImI1111 tN elIlItIll %.1;1�1 - - - - - - Reeimial Trail De\ eloped Area .. Aulicultund I Sot R( I %I Iro DNR I o,o,dq3.j,,w ,,III the \101",1411rull ( t'Ilikil Trarsit 2025 Corridor Diversified Rural ReLioral Park Principal Arterial Rural Residential Open Water Proposed R egional Park A.A.A Metropolitan Council 11 11 NOTE: Please refer to t he Comprehensi Plans Composite map or I lie Regional S maps for the Ino."t recent mformatior. - ni"c maps are znw I able at the Met I-opt) I i I au Council Data Center 1651) 602 — 1140. Figure 2.3 • It Metropolitan Council Local Planning Handbook Section 3. Land Use EXISTING AND PLANNED LAND USE CATEGORIES RESIDENTIAL LAND USES • Single Family Residential (SRES) - Residential purposes, including mostly one - family homes and manufactured homes. May include some two- family homes, and open space within or adjacent to related to a residential development. • Multi - Family Residential (MIRES) - Residential purposes, Including duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, apartment buildings and condominiums. May include open space within or adjacent to related to a residential development. • Mixed Use (MU) - Two or more of the following: residential, industrial, commercial and /or office, and institutional uses, where the primary use is residential. COMMERCIALIINDUSTRIAL LAND USES • Commercial (COM) - Provision of goods or services. • Industrial (IND) - Primarily manufacturing and /or processing of products; could Include light or heavy industrial land use, or large warehouse facilities. • Office (OFC) - Predominantly administrative, professional, or clerical services; includes medical clinics. • Mixed Use (MU) - Two or more of the following: residential, Industrial, commercial and /or office uses, where the primary use is Commercial /Industrial (COM /IND). Think single building with mixed use. • Extractive (EXT) - Extraction of nonmetallic metals, quarrying sand and gravel. PUBLICISEMI PUBLIC LAND USES • Institutional (IN) - Primarily religious, governmental, educational, social or healthcare facilities (excluding clinics). • Park & Recreation (PR) - Primarily for public active recreation activities improved with playfields /grounds or exercise equipment, golf courses, zoos or other similar areas. • Open Space (OS) - 1) - Resource protection or buffer; 2) support unorganized public recreational activities, may contain trails, picnic areas, public fishing; etc or 3) preservation of unaltered land in Its natural state for environmental or aesthetic purposes. • Roadway Rights -of -Way (ROW) - Public or private vehicular, transit and /or pedestrian rights -of- way. • Utility (UTL) - Public or private land occupied by a power plant or substation, electric transmission line, oil or gas pipeline, water tower, municipal well, reservoir, pumping station, water treatment facility, communications tower, or similar use. • Railway (RL) - Public or private freight or passenger rail activities. • Airport (AP) - Public or private airports and related activities. RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL LAND USES • Rural Residential (R) - Residential purposes, including mostly one - family homes and manufactured homes. May Include some two - family homes, and land used for agricultural purposes. Housing development across the land use designation should not exceed 1 housing unit per 1 acre and no less than 1 housing unit per 40 acres. • Agricultural (AG) - Agricultural purposes, including farming, dairying, pasturage, horticulture, floriculture, viticulture, and animal and poultry husbandry and accessory uses, including farmstead or rural residence. UNDEVELOPED Open Water (W) - Permanently flooded open water, rivers and streams, not Including wetlands or periodically flooded areas. • Wetlands (WET) - Wetlands included in the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). September 2005 C I T Y O F L O� 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT Goals, Objectives and Policies The following pages describe the goals of the community and the strategies that are employed to achieve them. The goals, objectives and policies are structured according to the topic that they address. However, it is important to remember that these statements are interrelated. As a result, the cause and effect for each topic must be considered when decisions concerning the Comprehensive Plan are made. For the purposes of this plan these terms are defined as follows: Goal: A statement that expresses a desired outcome or state of affairs. Objective: A statement that provides direction on how the goal will be achieved. Policy: A speck action that will be taken or a general rule that will be applied to a specific situation. Overarching Goals, Objectives and Policies Goal 1: Maintain and enhance the quality of life in Andover Objective: Efficiently provide services to improve all aspects of the city that contribute to quality of life including land use, public safety, transportation, recreation, health, education, and resource preservation Policy: Prepare, implement, periodically evaluate and update local controls such as: • Comprehensive Plan • City Code • Capital Improvement Plan • Water Resource Management Plan Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program • Paris Improvement Plan Objective: Preserve the rural character of the community Policies: Preserve the Rural Residential Planning Area Designation Identified by the Metropolitan Council 2030 Regional Development Framework • Control the expansion of municipal sewer and water through implementation of the Land Use Plan • 0 • El C i T T D F NDO 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT • • Preserve natural areas through implementation of the Parks and Open Space Plan Goal 2: Maintain a high degree of community planning and involvement Objective: Ensure an open and accessible local government that is responsive to the needs of residents Policies: • Provide access to information in a variety of forms including the newsletter, official newspaper, web site and televised meetings • Maintain healthy relationships with residents, businesses, community groups, school districts, and government agencies to ensure all points of view are represented • Promote participation in citizen advisory committees • Consider all available information and the potential impacts on all aspects of the community when making land use decisions Maintain a mix of land uses, including schools, professional and medical office, retail, community and park facilities to provide a vital node of activity in the vicinity of City Hall • Encourage resident involvement through the public hearing process and utilize a variety of public hearing notification methods including direct mailing, publication in the official newspaper and signs placed on subject properties Goal 3: Maintain the Comprehensive Plan as a relevant official document Objective: Consider Comprehensive Plan amendments that better achieve the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan Policies: • Adhere to the goals, objectives and policies of this Comprehensive Plan to prevent incremental decision making that adversely affects the intent of the plan • Review Comprehensive Plan text amendments with the following criteria: • o A public need for the proposed amendment can be identified or C I T Y O P NDO� 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT • The proposed amendment is the best way to satisfy that need • • The amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan o The amendment is in the best interest of the City of Andover as determined by the City Council • Review Comprehensive Plan amendments concerning a proposed land use change with the following criteria: o Conditions have changed since the present land use designation was established such to warrant the proposed amendment or the present land use designation is in error o The proposed land use is compatible with surrounding land uses and with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan o There is capacity of public systems, facilities and services to serve the proposed land use and capacity of these systems to serve other planned land uses is not adversely affected o Agreement can be reached for the applicant of the proposed land use to pay for any increased capacity of public systems, facilities and services required to serve the proposed land use o Potential impacts by the proposed land use on natural resources including vegetation, wetlands, floodplain and other natural features can be avoided or sufficiently mitigated as determined by the City Council Land Use Goals, Objectives and Policies Goal 4: Allow residential growth while maintaining the quality of natural resources and amenities Objective: Clearly define areas for urban and rural residential development Objective: Promote orderty growth to ensure efficient utilization and delivery of community services Objective: Prevent extension of infrastructure that is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan Objective: Work cooperatively with resource protection agencies and organizations to minimize the impact of development on natural resources and • amenities ri NDOVE 1008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT • Objective: Create opportunities for the city to preserve open space and natural amenities through review of development proposals and implementation of the Parks and Open Space Plan Policies: • Maintain a Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA) Boundary to define the boundary between the Developing Community and Rural Residential planning area designations of the 2030 Regional Development Framework • Stage urban development within the MUSA Boundary to ensure orderly growth and expansion of infrastructure • Review and update the staging plan periodically to address changes in times and conditions • Prohibit platting of property without municipal sewer and water within the MUSA Boundary • Restrict lot splits without municipal sewer and water within the MUSA Boundary • Encourage infill development within the MUSA Boundary with appropriate transitions to existing neighborhoods • Allow rural development outside of the MUSA Boundary consistent with the Rural Residential Land Use Designation • Require existing conditions information to be provided during the development review process to allow evaluation of opportunities to preserve and protect natural features and open space • Engage local watershed management organizations and other appropriate agencies and organizations in the review of development proposals Goal 5: Encourage appropriate economic growth and redevelopment Objective: Develop a diversified tax base through balanced development of commercial, light industrial, and residential properties Objective: Create a downtown area by aggregating commercial land uses along Bunker Lake Boulevard between Hanson Boulevard and Crosstown Boulevard • Objective: Select strategic locations for neighborhood commercial sites and establish design performance standards for such uses that promote quality site 7 C I T Y O F OVE 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT design and compatible land use arrangements • Objective: Prevent the intensification of neighborhood commercial areas that may negatively affect surrounding residential properties Policies: • Maintain the existing commercial nodes along Hanson Boulevard, Bunker Lake Boulevard and Round Lake Boulevard as cohesive, interrelated nodes of commercial activity • Prevent fragmented, uncoordinated and linear commercial development away from these locations • Provide limited opportunities for commercial development in other areas of the city only when demand is demonstrated with a professionally prepared market study • Ensure new development and redevelopment has a positive impact on the community by providing appropriate transitions and demonstrating compliance with the City Code • Promote redevelopment of existing industrial zones to accommodate industrial development • • Allow limited industrial development within Andover Station North when the use, site design, and building architecture are compatible with the existing and planned uses within this commercial center Goal: Protect and develop access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems Objective: Preserve reasonable access to direct sunlight for all parcels so that alternative forms of energy can be used to supplement or replace conventional forms of energy Policies: • Encourage and support educational programs and research that focuses on altemative or renewable energy systems such as offered by Metro Cities, University of Minnesota Extension Services, Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance, Anoka County and other organizations • Encourage the use of solar energy in future housing developments through such programs as the "Energy House° • 8 C I T Y O P NDOVEA 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT • • Encourage future site and building plans to design for efficient use of solar energy including such elements as the location of windows, shade trees, windows, and driveways Goal: Reduce maintenance and energy costs for public facilities and infrastructure Objective: Where feasible, use solar energy design elements for future public facilities and infrastructure development Policy: • Explore alternative energy sources when replacing systems in public facilities Housing Goals, Objectives and Policies Goal: Provide a variety of housing types to accommodate the life cycle needs of all residents Goal: Remain responsive to housing market demands through implementation of the Land Use Plan Objective: Utilize the existing housing stock to provide a portion of the is affordable housing demand projected by the Metropolitan Council Objective: Utilize local controls to provide opportunities for a variety of housing types, including affordable housing Objective: Continue to work with agencies that provide affordable housing and housing for residents with special needs Policies: • Work with property owners to identify sources of funding for home improvements to prevent deterioration of the city's older homes • Continue the housing rehabilitation revolving loan program to provide maintenance assistance for housing occupied by low to moderate income families and individuals • Support Anoka County's efforts to implement the Five Year Consolidated Plan • Utilize the planned unit development review process for medium and high density residential projects to encourage more efficient allocation of density and intensity of land use • Support public service agency applications for the Community Development Block Grant Program 0 C I T V O F DOS 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT Chapter Two: Land Use Plan • This chapter defines the different land uses that presently exist in Andover and describes the growth management strategies that guide future development. Speck goals, policies and objectives are provided in Chapter One: Foundation of the Comprehensive Plan. Metropolitan Council Planning Area Designations The Metropolitan Council provides generalized geographic planning designations in the 2030 Regional Development Framework. As shown in Figure 2.1, Andover contains two such designations: Developing Community and Rural Residential. The Metropolitan Council defines these designations as follows: Developing Communities — Developing area is that portion of the region that is in the path of urban growth. It includes communities beyond the fully developed areas up to the metropolitan urban service area boundary, or contains areas designated urban reserved or diversified rural. The Regional Development Framework sets an overall minimum density standard of 3 to 5 units per acre in developed and developing areas where urban service is located or planned. It is important to note that density is calculated after land that cannot be developed is deducted from the total acreage. These deductions include wetlands, • water bodies, public parks, open spaces, arterial road right -of way and other areas that are restricted from development by applicable land use regulations. Rural Residential — The land area identified in 4 communities (Ham Lake, Andover, Inver Grove Heights and Credit River Township) that are currently developed at one unit per 2 to 2% acres or less, with no plans to provide urban infrastructure such as centralized wastewater treatment. Existing Land Use Map Figure 2.2 illustrates how properties are presently used based on land use categories provided by the Metropolitan Council. This map is intended to illustrate present land use conditions and does not regulate land use or assign land use designations to properties. Definitions for the categories of existing land use are provided in Figure 2.3 Land Use Map The Land Use Map provides a land use designation for each property in the city. These designations guide-how each property can be developed as defined in the City of Andover Land Use Districts. Changes in land use designations require a public hearing and approval by the City Council and Metropolitan Council. The criteria for reviewing land use changes are provided in the land use goals, objectives and policies of Chapter One: Foundation of the Comprehensive Plan. Figure 2.4 represents the city's official Land Use Map 17 C I T Y a F 0 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8/14/07 DRAFT • City of Andover Land Use Districts Land use districts are established to ensure compatible development and to protect natural resources and amenities. The district definitions provided below are intended to state their purpose, provide location criteria and describe the relationship of each district with other land uses. Residential Land Use Districts • CI Rural Residential (RR) district provides an area for low intensity residential development in areas outside of the Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA) that will not be served by municipal sewer and water. The minimum lot size is 2.5 acres to provide sufficient space for on site sewer and water facilities and to prevent dense development that would create an adverse impact on municipal and regional infrastructure. However, smaller acreage lots exist in areas subdivided prior to 1978 and in the two previously approved rural planned unit developments: Nightingale Preserve and Timber River Estates. This district must be protected from higher intensity land uses, including the Urban Residential Low Density Land Use District, with appropriate transitions. This district also accommodates agricultural land uses. Minimum Lot Size 2.50 acres City Utilities None Corresponding Zoning Districts R -1 - Single Family Rural Residential R -2 - Single Family Estate R -3 - Single Family Suburban Type of Development Single Family Detached Housing, A riculture Urban Residential Low Density (URL) district is established to create cohesive neighborhoods of single - family detached housing within the MUSA and with access to municipal sewer and water. Residential lots within this district are sized to allow efficient utilization of municipal infrastructure as well as to provide an area large enough to accommodate housing market demands. These neighborhoods must be protected from higher intensity uses with appropriate transitions. These transitions include natural features such as trees, wetlands, streams or major changes in topography. Man -made elements such as streets, parks or earth berms in combination with landscaping are also appropriate. When adjacent to arterial roadways additional setback distance, landscaping and berming are required. Facilities that generate noise, traffic, and/or glare also require major separation from these neighborhoods. Minimum Lot Size 11,400 square feet Density Up 3.6 units Der acre PUD Density Up to 4 units per acre City Utilities Required Corresponding Zoning Districts R-4 Single Family Urban Residential Type of Development Single Family Detached Housing, 18 C I T Y D P OVEA 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT Urban Residential- Medium Density (URM) district provides areas suitable for a variety • of attached and detached dwelling units. The URM district helps to address the need for life cycle housing with increased density and smaller lot sizes. This district, with appropriate transitions, can serve as a buffer between lower density residential and commercial districts and may also be appropriate along higher volume transportation corridors, such as collector and arterial streets. These neighborhoods are created as part of a planned unit development that ensures efficient distribution of density and to achieve appropriate transitions between uses of different intensity and transportation corridors. These transitions are achieved with a combination of landscaping, berming, physical separation and preservation of natural features. Minimum Lot Size Variable Density Up to 5 units per acre PUD Density Up to 6 units per acre City Utilities Required Corresponding Zoning Districts R-4 Single Family Urban Residential M -1 Multi le Dwelling Medium Densi Type of Development Single Family Detached, Two Family Residences Town homes and Condominiums with private entrances Urban Residential - High Density (URH) district provides additional affordable housing choices for all stages of the life cycle. Owner occupied as well as rental housing is • permitted. Planned unit development review is used to establish standards that are specifically designed for each development. Potential sites for this district must be evaluated to ensure sufficient capacity of municipal infrastructure can be provided. Location near higher volume transportation corridors, such as collector and arterial streets is necessary to accommodate the increased level of traffic generated by this land use. Location near shopping, service, transit and park facilities is also desirable. Appropriate transitions between this district and other districts or transportation corridors are necessary. These transitions are achieved with a combination of landscaping, berming, physical separation and preservation of natural features. Minimum Lot Size Variable. Density Up to 12 units per acre PUD Density Up to 14.4 units per acre City Utilities Required Corresponding Zoning Districts M- 2 Multiple Dwelling High Densi Type of Development Single Family Dwelling Two Family Dwelling Multiple Dwellings Location Criteria Must abut collector or arterial street Best located near shopping, service, transit and arks 0 19 c r V a r 0 VE 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8/14707 DRAFT • Commercial Land Use Districts • • Limited Commercial (LC) land use district is designated for locations in the community that should be limited to primarily office uses due to their location in proximity to residential neighborhoods. This district can be used to transition from residential neighborhoods to more intense commercial uses or transportation corridors. Site design and building architecture are required to complement adjacent residential neighborhoods when so located. A combination of landscaping, berming, physical separation and preservation of natural features is necessary to provide an appropriate transition to residential neighborhoods. Area Requirements 1 -5 acres City Utilities Required within MUSA Corresponding Zoning Districts LB - Limited Business Type of Development Professional office and similar uses; not including retail sales Location Criteria Adjacent to collector or arterial street or within a larger commercial development Development Criteria Design to complement surrounding land uses. Special care for transitions to residential. Neighborhood Commercial (NC) land use district is designated for businesses that provide services and retail goods to meet local neighborhood needs. The trade area and size of these businesses are smaller than those found in General Commercial areas. Site design and architecture is carefully reviewed to create a cohesive center that complements adjacent land uses. Linear design with storefronts and blank walls is prohibited. Special care is taken to provide appropriate transitions to residential neighborhoods with landscaping, berming, physical separation and preservation of natural features. This district requires location along a collector or arterial street and convenient pedestrian access. Neighborhood commercial locations are separated from more intense commercial land uses to avoid pressure to expand intensity beyond a neighborhood scale. Area Requirements 1 -5 acres City Utilities Required within MUSA Corresponding Zoning Districts NB Neighborhood Business Type of Development Retail trade and services serving immediate area Location Criteria Must abut intersection of collector or arterial streets Development Criteria Design to complement surrounding land uses. Limit to development nodes. Strip development prohibited. Special care for transitions to residential. Convenient pedestrian access. pill C I T Y U Y NDOVE 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT General Commercial (GC) is intended to be the focal point of commercial activity in the • city on a larger scale than the Neighborhood Commercial District and may serve. a trade area that extends beyond the City limits. This district provides a complementary mix of uses, including retail, service, office, entertainment and civic facilities. Site design must provide convenient access for both pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The architecture of structures must complement an overall architectural theme for that district. General Commercial districts that are located adjacent to residential properties must provide extensive berming, landscaping and physical separation to ensure an appropriate transition is created. Area Requirements More than 5 acres City Utilities Required Corresponding Zoning Districts SC Shopping Center Type of Development GB General Business Type of Development Variety of commercial uses with large market area Location Criteria Must abut intersection of collector or arterial streets Must be located within the MUSA Design to complement surrounding land uses. Development Criteria Limit to development nodes. Strip development prohibited. Special care for transitions to residential. Convenient pedestrian access. Industrial Land Use District Light Industrial (LI) District is intended to provide a location for a variety of work processes such as manufacturing, warehousing, wholesaling and distributing. These uses typically involve intensive use of properties and necessitate separation from residential zoning districts. Where existing Light Industrial Districts are located adjacent to residential neighborhoods, extensive berming, landscaping and screening are necessary to mitigate potential adverse impacts. This district requires convenient access to collector and arterial streets. Area Requirements More than 5 acres City Utilities Requi red within MUSA Corresponding Zoning Districts I Industrial Type of Development Manufacturing, warehousing, wholesaling, Distributin Location Criteria Must abut collector or arterial streets Must be located within the MUSA' Development Criteria Separation from residential land uses necessary. ' Except the HughslWestview Industrial Park that presently exists outside the MUSA n n U 21 C I T Y O P NDQVE^ 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT • Transitional Land Use Districts Transitional land use districts encompass areas where future land use may differ from that of the designated zoning district. Transitional districts recognize the possibility for land use to change in the future with the arrival of municipal sewer and water. Transitional Commercial (TC) District contains properties within the MUSA that are currently zoned for residential development, but may potentially become commercial because of their proximity to existing commercial development or location at the intersection of major transportation corridors. When municipal sewer and water are available, properties in this district may develop as either residential or commercial under the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. A Rezoning requires a contract as specked in the City Code. Transitional Residential (TR) District contains properties within the MUSA that are currently zoned for rural residential uses (R-1, R -2, and R -3). These properties are guided for urban development in 5 year stages as shown in Figure 2.5. Property designated Transitional Residential may only be platted under urban residential guidelines and served by municipal utilities. Lot splits may only occur without municipal services under the requirements of the City Code. Any subdivision of property that results in lots less than 2.5 acres in size must be served with municipal sewer and water. 0 Other Land Use Districts Limited Commercial/Medium Density (LCIMD) District contains properties within the MUSA that have site characteristics conducive to either low intensity commercial or medium density residential development. This designation is used to provide a carefully planned transition from a major transportation corridor to residential neighborhoods. Site design and building architecture are required to complement adjacent residential neighborhoods. A combination of landscaping, berming, physical separation and preservation of natural features is necessary to provide an appropriate transition. Public (P) District identifies areas for present and future civic, govemment, school or other publicly owned and operated facilities. Open Space (OS) District identifies areas that are protected from development through public ownership or agreement with private property owners. This designation is used for public parks and other areas designated for preservation of natural areas, water and air quality and wildlife habitat. Rural Reserve — (RR) district was designated as an area of approximately one thousand acres in size to accommodate future urban growth beyond the previously • planned Municipal Urban Service Area. This area is restricted from development until a master plan has been approved and municipal sewer and water can be constructed to 22 O OC r;CCC 'I m V 3 g m m �I Q j m O 7 7 7 • r tb n (D m a a m m 3 ° m 0 .0...�..O. "* m L C a°a� c a, mw rn CL a s c n m N N s m O O O O O � O a m 3 N i 7 �OONOtO w 9 Q A V i W 4f 0041 ON 9 i m a 0 0 0 0 0 a cn V1 A ;4 N St Ch C 0 0 a � 000000 m o W 3 N W 4kA�k N p % p i W AO�IOW Z CL eo m W 0 r • 7 7 m =i 7 G S 1 0 7 W CL O J • -1 m C N V 2 a' -� m 7 � O c C I T P O F 0� 1008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT . serve the area. In this case, a new trunk sewer line will need to be connected to the Coon Rapids Interceptor, a regional trunk sewer line located near the intersection of Crooked and Bunker Lake Boulevards. The city has reached agreement with the Metropolitan Council that areas designated for residential development in the Rural Reserve will be developed at three units per net acre (subtracting parks, wetlands, floodplain, water bodies, arterial roads, and other areas restricted from development). STAGING PLAN Undeveloped land within the Municipal Urban Service Area is divided into five year growth stages based primarily on the proximity of municipal sewer and water. The growth stages are intended to provide a reasonable estimate of urban growth to the year 2030. Property owners may choose not to develop even if their property is shown within the current growth stage. Property owners seeking to develop sooner than shown on the Staging Plan may petition the city to change the growth stage designation. These changes are at the discretion of the City Council. The Staging Plan Map is represented on Figure 2.5. Figure 2.6 summarizes the map by providing the amount of acreage within each land use district in each of the five year stages. The Metropolitan Council also requests information that summarizes density in each residential land use district. This information is provided in Figure 2.7. The following tables describe historical and projected growth within both sewered and unsewered areas of the city. The city forecasts were generated using transportation analysis zones and the Sewer Staging Plan. The Metropolitan Council forecast was • submitted to the City as part of the System Statement in September 2005. The city's forecast is considered to be a more accurate representation of future growth because it is based on verged building permit activity and parcel level analysis. Figure 2.8 Urban and Rural Growth Forecast • 23 Sources: 1990 Census, 2000 employment from DEED estimates, City of Andover �NDOVE 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 814107 DRAFT • Agricultural Preserve A portion of the agricultural land in the city is enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program. Minnesota Statute 473H, known as the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Act, establishes a program to encourage preservation of land for the production of agricultural products by valuing agricultural property in the metropolitan area in a manner similar to out -state Minnesota. To qualify, the property must be zoned long- term agricultural by the city, with a maximum residential density of one house per forty acres. The parcel must (normally) be forty acres in size. However, smaller tracts may qualify in certain instances. To enroll in the program, the owner obtains city approval and records a covenant with the County Recorder to leave the property in agricultural use. To remove property from the program the owner files an "Expiration Notice" with the County Recorder. Eight years after the Expiration Notice is filed, the property is released from Agricultural Preserve. A waiver of the eight -year requirement may be granted only by action of the Governor due to some emergency. Figure 2.9 shows the land enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program. Floodplain and Wetlands Land within the city is encumbered by wetlands and Floodplain is shown on Figure 2.10. These features have affected the city's development pattern and provide a corridor of natural areas throughout most of the city. Wetlands and floodplain areas provide one of the basic building blocks for the city's open space preservation efforts more fully described in Chapter 5: Parks and Open Space Plan. Housing Plan The housing goals, objectives and policies described in Chapter One provide an overview of the Housing Plan. This section evaluates the City's housing stock, housing trends, programs, strategies for providing affordable housing and the implementation plan. HOUSING ACTIVITY Andover was a rural, agricultural community for most of its early existence. Suburban development began in the 1960's; primarily in the western sections of the City. Lot 24 Sours: Metropolitan Council, 2000 US Census, DEED estimates. • C I T Y D F O� 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8/14/07 DRAFT sizes varied from less than an acre on up, and were served by private well and septic systems. Municipal sewer service arrived in 1976, contributing to tremendous growth in the southern quarter of the City. Sewer line extension spurred new home development throughout the 1990's. From 2000 to 2006 the city and development community shifted to accommodate demand for different types of housing. During that period more than 40% of approved housing units were townhouses, smaller lot single family or condominium units. Some of these approved units remain in the city's lot supply as demand has shifted back to the more traditional single family home and suburban lot size. A part of this trend can be contributed to the increased size of newer homes. As the growth forecasts in this plan indicate, the city will to continue to grow at a moderate pace with more than ninety percent of residential growth within the urban service area. Housing Stock Summary A variety of housing types are available for individuals and families within all stages of the life cycle. Andover has one of the highest average household sizes in the Twin Cities area, at 3.28 persons per household according to the 2000 census. Household sizes will decline slightly in the future to an estimated 2.8 persons per household by 2030. The large average household size is influenced by a relatively youthful • population and an abundance of single family housing. The graphics below summarize Andover's housing stock. Figure 2.11 Age of Housing • 25 CITY O F O� 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Figure 2.12 Housing Type Summary 8114107 DRAFT 8000 6000 4000 2000 617 213 5 0 oo Of Sources: Census 2000, City of Andover Figure 2.13 Home Ownership Rental Housing 3% Owner Occupied Housing 97% Source: Andover Rental Licenses Anoka County Properly Records • • I* Wr CIT OF 6 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8114107 DRAFT • Figure 2.14 Building Permits Affordable Housing The City of Andover acknowledges that it shares responsibility to provide affordable housing with the rest of the region. The Metropolitan Council defines affordable housing as having a purchase price that a family of four with an income at or below 80 percent of the area median income can afford at prevailing interest rates. Affordable rental units, are defined by the Metropolitan Council uses the maximum rents permitted in the metropolitan area for the federal low- income housing tax credits (LITC) serving households at 50 percent of area median income (AMI). The housing goals, objectives and policies in Section One: Foundation and the implementation program defined below summarize the city's commitment to providing affordable housing. Further documentation of the need for affordable housing can be found in the Metropolitan Council publication titled 'Summary Report Determining Affordable Housing Need in the Twin Cities 2011— 2020 . Implementation The implementation plan has two components. The first component is comprised of the various activities undertaken by the city. The second component consists of programs conducted by others that are supported by the city. E 0% C 17 V O P O 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8/14407 DRAFT Local Programs and Strategies • Housing Rehabilitation Revolving Loan Program This program provides loan assistance for maintenance and rehabilitation of residential dwellings. The loan criteria require the funding be used to improve homes occupied by low to moderate income individuals and families. The was initiated in 2003 with funding from the Community Development Block Grant Program. High Density Zoning The city continually maintains one or more undeveloped sites zoned for high density Residential development to provide opportunities for increased density and affordable housing. As these sites are developed, the city evaluates new sites that are appropriate based on a number of factors, including the efficient extension of municipal utilities and the capacity of the transportation system to support increased densities. Planned Unit Development Review This process is used for medium and high density residential projects to allow project specific zoning standards to be created. In this manner, virtually any requirement of the city can be modified based on the particular needs of the project. The City Council must authorize the use of planned unit development review for each proposal based on the criteria established in the City Code. Other Programs • Metropolitan Council Section 8 Rental Assistance Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) • Minnesota Mortgage Program • Homeownership Assistance Fund • Purchase Plus Program • Minnesota Urban and Rural Homesteading Program • Partnership for Affordable Housing • Rental Assistance for Family Stabilization (RAFS) • Energy Cost Homeownership Program (ECHO) Anoka County • Fair Housing Implementation • First Time Homebuyer Program • HOME Investment Partnerships program • Housing Referral Assistance • Community Development Block Grant Program • Continuum of Care • Shelter Plus Care (S +C) • 28 C[ T Y O P NDO� 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 8/14107 DRAFT . Anoka County Community Action Program ACCAP provides a variety of programs for low to moderate income individuals and families, including pre - purchase education, confidential financial counseling, down payment assistance, post purchase follow up, reverse mortgage counseling, foreclosure prevention, housing maintenance assistance, various service areas. Historic Preservation The city has one structure listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The 20 room Porter Kelsey home was built in 1887 with brick made from their own brickyard, the Kelsey Brick Company. Many years ago, brick from this brickyard was brought to Minneapolis by train and used for the inside walls of the courthouse. In Anoka, the former courthouse, the former Catholic Church, and many store fronts were of the same yellow brick made on the Kelsey Farm. E 9 29 Revised 8/1/07 • * * ** *NOT ALL APPENDICES ARE INCLUDED IN THIS DRAFT * * * ** WASTEWATER AND COMPREHENSIVE SEWER PLAN The Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary in general bisects Andover intc a northern and southern portion. The southern portion of the City is served by municipal sewer. The northern portion of the City has individual sewage treatment systems (ISTS). Sewer flow from the City of Andover is treated by the Metropolitan Council through the Metropolitan Disposal System (MDS), specifically by the Metropolitan Waste Water Treatment Plant in St. Paul. A. CURRENT AND PROJECTED POPULATION / SEWERED RESIDENCES The City data as of May 1, 2007 shows that the current population of Andover is 32,597. Approximately 21,576 persons (66.2 %) are currently served by municipal sewer. The remaining 11,021 persons (33.8 1 /6) reside in the rural areas of the City or reside within the MUSA and are still served by septic systems. It is anticipated that residences within the MUSA served by private systems will connect to the municipal sewer system as utilities are extended. The projected population of Andover in 2030 is 44,578. It is expected that 34,442 persons (77.3 %) will be served by municipal sewer at that time. The remaining 10,136 persons (22.7 %) will reside outside of the MUSA boundary, or may still be living within the MUSA and will not yet be connected to municipal sewer. Figure 4.1 below presents the population, household, and employment forecasts for the City for 2007 (current), 2010, 2020, and 2030. Figure 4.1 Population, Household and Employment Forecasts • 2007 2010 2020 2030 Total Population 32,597 37,392 42,024 44,578 Sewered 21,576 26,306 31,524 34,442 Unsewered 11,021 11,086 10,500 10,136 Total Households 9,938 11,400 14,008 15,921 Sewered 6,578 8,020 10,508 12,301 Unsewered 3,360 3,380 3,500 3,620 Total Employment 4,040 4,494 5,039 5,530 Sewered 3,574 3,989 4,471 4,910 Unsewered 466 505 568 620 • Revised 8/1/07 B. CAPACITY AND DESIGN OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM • All properties serviced by municipal sewer in Andover flow into the Council Interceptor MSB 7035 (Coon Rapids Interceptor), a 36" trunk line that is part of the regional system maintained by the Metropolitan Council. All served properties in Andover except for approximately 110 connections in the southeast corner of the City discharge into the Coon Rapids Interceptor at Crooked Lake Boulevard. These 110 additional connections flow south into lateral systems in Coon Rapids, ultimately flowing into the Coon Rapids Interceptor. These 110 connections are depicted in Figure 4.2 in the Appendix. The existing sewer system in Andover is operating within the design capacity of the lines (no surcharging) and lift stations. Currently there are nine lift stations in the City. A detailed analysis of the existing system was completed in 2007. The City has divided the existing sanitary sewer system into eight major trunk systems. Each trunk system was analyzed based upon current and ultimate anticipated connections, and existing slope and size. A map of the existing sewer system with tributary areas is included in the Appendix as Figure 4.2. Figure 4.3 provides a summary of each trunk line and lift station along with existing sewer flows and capacities. Figure 4.3 Existing Trunk Line Sewer Flows and Capacities (May 2007) Trunk Line Size Slope Peak Capacity GD Exist. Peak Flow GD % of Peak Capacity Bluebird Trunk -North 12" PVC 0.14% 1.40 0.83 59.2% Bluebird Trunk -South 18" RCP 0.12% 2.52 1.30 51.5% Pinewood Trunk 18" PVC 0.12% 3.06 0.94 30.7% Coon Creek Trunk 24" PVC 0.06% 4.66 3.08 66.1% Crosstown Blvd Trunk 24" RCP 0.08% 4.48 3.65 81.5% Bunker Lake Trunk -West 24" RCP 0.08% 4.48 1.32 29.5% Bunker Lake Trunk -East 30" RCP 0.20% 12.85 4.09 31.8% Crooked Lake Blvd Trunk 36" RCP 0.05% 10.45 5.11 48.9% Lift Station #1 387 GPM 4" DIP 0.56 0.14 24.4% Lift Station #2 180 GPM 6" DIP 0.26 0.06 21.5% Lift Station #3 470 GPM 6" DIP 0.68 0.40 59.4% Lift Station #4 486 GPM 4" DIP 0.70 0.50 71.5% Lift Station #5 181 GPM 6" DIP 0.26 0.04 15.2% Lift Station #6 106 GPM 4" PVC 0.15 0.06 41.5% Lift Station #7 90 GPM 4" DIP 0.13 0.01 7.6% Lift Station #8 105 GPM 4" DIP 0.15 0.08 54.2% Lift Station #9 100 GPM 4" DIP 0.14 0.02 16.9% • Revised 8/1/07 . C. CAPACITY AND PLANS FOR FUTURE SYSTEM The average projected sewer flow for the City in 2030 is 3.01 million gallons per day (MGD), with . a peak of 7.83 MGD. The ultimate average projected sewer flow for the City is 3.33 MGD, with a peak of 8.66 MGD. This ultimate flow would include 100% build out within the MUSA boundary, including connection of all parcels within the current MUSA and build out of the area designated as the Rural Reserve. This would also include an area between Round Lake Boulevard and Verdin Street, north of 161 Avenue that is currently outside of the MUSA boundary but could be served by extension of the planned trunk line that will serve the Rural Reserve area. The City currently does not have plans to extend municipal sewer to the area designated in the MCES System Statement as "Potential Service" that is north of 161 Avenue and east of Verdin Street. Figure 4.4 provides a summary of the anticipated average and peak sewer flow rates generated by the City of Andover in 5 -year increments up to the year 2030. These flow rates are consistent with population, household, and employment projections from the Traffic Analysis Zone's (TAZ). Projected flow rates were calculated by multiplying the projected households by 225 gallons per unit per day. Based upon actual sewer flow rates from the Metropolitan Council at meter M218 for June 2006 — June 2007, and the actual number of sewer connections during that timeframe, the average flow per connection for Andover was 207 gallons per unit per day. Staff discussions with MCES personnel indicated that the average flow per unit for the metro area is approximately 218 gallons per unit per day. City staff chose to use a value of 225 gallons per unit per day for these calculations to be somewhat conservative and to allow for variation in flow. For commercial / industrial / institutional flows, the number of employees in the sewered portion of the City was multiplied by an assumed flow rate of 50 gallons per employee per day. This rate would include flow from restaurants, schools, businesses, car washes, etc. This flow rate would include flow from employees as well as students, patrons, and customers of these establishments. Currently the MCES has allocated 4.0 MGD of sewer flow in the Coon Rapids Interceptor for the City of Andover. By 2030, the City of Andover expects to contribute 3.01 MGD to the Metro WWTP, which would assume total build out of the MUSA boundary and the Rural Reserve Area Once ultimate build out (beyond 2030) of the City is achieved, the anticipated sewer flow is 3.33 MGD. This ultimate total assumes the MUSA boundary will be extended north of 161 Avenue between Round Lake Boulevard and Verdin Street. It also assumes that additional expansion of the MUSA boundary does not take place east of Verdin Street and north of 161 s1 Avenue. Should the City Council reverse the right of expansion of the MUSA in this area, or the economics change such that it would be feasible for this expansion, the ultimate sewer flow would be higher. The City of Andover would like to reserve a total of 3.6 MGD of sewer flow for anticipated needs and potential future expansion of the MUSA boundary (an additional 0.27 MGD over the ultimate anticipated needs of 3.33 MGD). This additional requested amount would equate to approximately 1,200 homes, or an additional 400 acres of developable residential area, assuming a density of 3.0 units / acre. • Revised 8/1/07 E • 0 P h 0 H DO d Y a V b FN iw � a bD O �y �I "C u �O w 00 Pao o ti fn 0 W N o C 0 aQ O CU ;z o r bO N N 0 N O N v1 kn O kn oo a O+ � M O� M O� 7 v1 W N �O un FL M N O et en v1 7 a A M ON a O bC a Q m N N W G N O N 7 O o0 O 00 O O O ON M ,-• t� 00 tO 0 tn p N O O M v1 7 m � 00 �aA k kn au a A c N o N Q� /-• G N O N y 00 O kn - CS M Cl- ON C- C- N C- N kn Fly M N o O� C M V aA tn a w to o Rn O OD aA 0 N O N Q /-• O N N �O �D O O O a' O� kn O N CN co �aQ Do co ca lz y ' F.- CA CO 0 r N CO 00 h O O v V Co CO CO G lA 0 O O m U) P7 m O CA v Qy CN r N r O> CD C � Ch C'o N N W t 0 0 0 0 F F F F Revised 8/1/07 To accommodate the projected sewer flows in the City, there are improvements that will • need to be made to the existing system. Three major improvements have been identified that will be necessary to handle the anticipated growth in the City. Each improvement is discussed in further detail in the following sections. No additional connections directly to the Metropolitan Disposal System are planned in the City. Yellow Pine Lift Station Improvements to the Yellow Pine Lift Station would include construction of a bypass lift station for the Bluebird North Trunk Line located at Yellow Pine Street NW and Crosstown Boulevard. This improvement would divert all of the existing flow in the Bluebird Trunk north of Crosstown Boulevard west to the Pinewood Trunk Line. This improvement will allow increased capacity for development in the Bluebird South Trunk Line, specifically for the areas east of Yellow Pine Street, south of Crosstown Boulevard, north of Andover Boulevard, and extending to the eastern City limits. The manhole and wet well for the Yellow Pine lift station were constructed in 2005. The pumps, controls, and force main necessary to complete the improvements will be constructed in sequence with development east of the Bluebird South Trunk Line. Funding for this improvement would come from the City's Trunk Sewer Fund. Coon Creek Trunk Sewer Line Diversion The second major improvement project would include diverting a portion of the flow in the Coon Creek Trunk Line into the Bunker Lake East Trunk Line. A flow diverter would be constructed along the Coon Creek Trunk Line at Hanson Boulevard, diverting a portion of the flow south along Hanson Boulevard to Jay Street (Andover Station North) and ultimately into the Bunker Lake East Trunk Line. This improvement would eliminate potential surcharging of the Crosstown Boulevard Trunk Line as development progresses. This improvement will be completed once upstream development increases flows to near capacity in the Crosstown Trunk Line. Funding for this improvement would come from the City's Trunk Sewer Fund. Rural Reserve Trunk Sewer Line Development of the area referred to as the Rural Reserve will require extension of a new sewer trunk line. This trunk line would connect to the existing Crooked Lake Boulevard Trunk system at Bunker Lake Boulevard and Crooked Lake Boulevard. The trunk line will generally extend north from Bunker Lake Boulevard, following Coon Creek up to South Coon Creek Drive, then extend north though the center of the Rural Reserve up to 161` Avenue. There is sufficient grade for this system to be a gravity system, however, a lift station may be constructed to minimize impacts of construction through existing neighborhoods between South Coon Creek Drive and Bunker Lake Boulevard. This trunk extension would allow for development of the Rural Reserve, and could also provide service for areas east of the Rural Reserve and south of 161' Avenue that currently are served by ISTS's but are outside of the current MUSA boundary. This trunk line could also serve an area north of 161' Avenue between Round Lake Boulevard and Verdin Street. The trunk line will be designed and constructed once development of the Rural Reserve is imminent. Funding for this trunk line improvement would be paid for through area and connection fees for all parcels within the Rural Reserve. 0 Revised 8/1/07 • A map of the proposed sewer system with the aforementioned trunk improvements and tributary areas is included in the Appendix as Figure 4.5. D. PRIVATELY OWNED TREATMENT FACITILITIES The northern portion of the City of Andover is located outside of the MUSA boundary. In 2007, there were 3,360 residences in the City that had Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS). By 2030 it is expected that approximately 2,420 homes will be served by ISTS's. While growth outside of the MUSA is expected to add residences with new ISTS's, it is also anticipated that existing areas within the MUSA currently without municipal sewer service will be added to the system, thereby decreasing the total amount of residences on ISTS's. Title 10, Chapter 4 of the Andover City Code regulates Individual Sewage Treatment Systems and adopts Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080. The City Code also has adopted the Anoka County Sewage Treatment Ordinance, with modifications that are more restrictive. A copy of this City Code and the Anoka County Sewage Treatment Ordinance are included in the Appendix. The City Code requires the following items be completed by owners of ISTS's: • Inspect system and submit a maintenance report to the City every two years. • • Pump systems as often as needed, but no less than every three years. • Owners must upgrade, replace, or discontinue use of system within six months if the system is found to be non - compliant. • Systems deemed to be a public nuisance (effluent leaking, noxious odors, etc). must be abated within 30 days. • Those persons within the City designing, evaluating, installing, maintaining, or pumping individual sewage treatment systems must be certified by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) as an Individual Sewage Treatment (ISTS) Professional. The City's Building Official is responsible for ensuring that all systems are in compliance with City Code. The City of Andover Building Department maintains construction, installation, inspection and pumping records for all individual sewage treatment systems in the City. Per City Code, if owner's fail to make necessary repairs or complete pumping and inspections as required, the City has the right to contract out such work and assess the costs to the property. The City does not currently allow use of communal, or shared treatment system, or experimental or alternate systems. However, the City may consider and allow them on a case -by -case basis in the future. • A copy of the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and State Disposal System (SDS) permit are included in the appendix. Revised 8/1/07 E. INFLOW AND INFILTRATION The City of Andover recognizes that inflow and infiltration (1/1) is a problem on a metro - wide scale that could limit the sewer capacity available for growth. Excessive amounts of UI also increase fees billed to the Cities by the MCES for treatment of wastewater. It is in the best interest of the City to minimi the I/I entering our sanitary sewer system to reduce costs and maintain capacity in the system for future growth. In general, the City of Andover does not have a significant I/I problem. In conversations with MCES personnel and in correlating the average flow and peak flow metering data from Meter 218 with large rainfall events, it is evident that the I/I in Andover is minor. This can be attributed to a relatively new sanitary sewer system, the presence of sand deposits throughout the City, and the implementation of standard construction and inspection practices for the system. The following Objectives, Polices and Strategies shall be followed by the City of Andover to ensure that we maintain the integrity of our sewer system and limit potential sources of I/I. Objective. Maintain the integrity of the Andover sanitary sewer system and minimiz potential sources of I/1. Policies. The City of Andover has implemented the following policies to minimiz 1/I in new and existing sewer systems: • City inspection of all publicly installed sewer systems to verify compliance with City Standards. • Adoption of Construction Engineer Association of America (CEAM) Standard Utility Specifications for pressure testing of lines between manholes. • Video inspection of all newly constructed sewer lines before project acceptance. • Jet clean and vacuum 20% of existing sewer lines annually. • Video inspection of existing sewer lines on an annual basis to the extents practicable. • Require solid manholes covers with concealed pick holes. • Periodic visual inspection of manholes. Make repairs as necessary. • Do not allow discharge of residential drainage systems (sump pumps, drain tiles, roof drains, etc.) into the sanitary sewer system. • Require disconnection of any potential existing residential drainage systems that are connected to the sanitary sewer system. Strategies: The following strategies are used by the City of Andover to achieve the aforementioned objective and policies: 0 Revised 8/1/07 • Ensure inspectors for utility projects have adequate knowledge and training to enforce City Standards for construction. • Require developer's of newly constructed sewer lines to submit video inspection tapes for review by City staff prior to project acceptance. • Provide funding to Public Works to annually televise and inspect existing sanitary sewer lines and make necessary repairs. • Enforce the International Residential Code (IRC), which prohibits discharge of drainage systems (sumps, roof drains, etc.) directly into the sanitary sewer system. A copy of the IRC is included in the Appendix. • Enforce Chapter 10 -24F of the City Code stating "No person shall make connection of roof downspouts, foundation drains, areaway drains, or other sources of surface runoff or ground water to a building sewer or building drain which in turn is connected directly or indirectly to a public sanitary sewer unless such connection is approved by the City Engineer for purposes of disposal of polluted surface drainage." Implementation Plan: As previously discussed, the City of Andover does not have a problem with VT. To ensure that problems do not occur in the future the following measures will be taken: • The City will maintain our current plan, policies and objectives to maintain the integrity of our sewer system. • Periodic and routine maintenance of the system will identify areas needing repair to limit potential I/I. Financing will come from the Trunk Sewer Fund. • The City will enforce the City Code requiring disconnection of illegal sewer connections on a complaint basis, or as identified by other means. • The City Building Inspectors will inspect newly constructed sewer service connections to verify that they comply with the IRC. •