HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/26/080
A C I T Y • "'
NLD6 06
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US --
Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Agenda
August 26, 2008
Andover City Hall
Council Chambers
7.00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes — August 12, 2008
3. PUBLIC HEARING Variance (08 -03) to vary from the side yard setback
requirements for an addition at 921 158 Avenue NW.
4. Other Business
5. Adjournment
0
0
• C I T Y O F
DOVE'
.
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Courtney Bednarz, City Planner
SUBJECT: Item 2. Approval of Minutes - August 12, 2008
DATE: August 26, 2008
Request
The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to approve the minutes from the
August 12, 2008 meeting.
U
0
C I -T Y TO�F
i
PLANNINGAND ZONING COMWSSIONMEETING — AUGUST 12, 2008
The Regular Bi- Montbly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
called to order by Chairperson Daninger on August 12, 2008, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover
City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
Commissioners present: Chairperson Daninger, Commissioners Tim Kirchof�
Michael Casey, Valerie Holthus, Devon Walton (arrived at
7:10 p.m.), Douglas Falk and Dennis Cleveland.
Commissioners absent: There were none.
Also present: City Planner, Courtney Bednarz
Associate Planner, Chris Vrchota
Others
i
APPROVAL OFMINUTES.
June 24, 2008
Motion by Kirchof� seconded by Casey, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion
carried on a 6 -ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Walton) vote.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (08 -08) AMENDING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (03 -15) TO EXTEND THE APPROVAL OF
TEMPORARY S TR UCTURE FOR ANDOVER CHRISTIAN CHURCH AT 16045
NIGHTINGALE STREET NW.
Mr. Vrchota explained the applicant is requesting an amendment to the conditional use
permit to extend the timeframe for the removal of the temporary classrooms on their
property by five years.
Mr. Vrchota reviewed the staff report with the Commission.
Commissioner Holthus asked if the buildings were recently inspected by the City. Mr.
Vrchota stated the Zoning Department has not done any and he did not know if the
Building Department has done any. He noted he would look into it.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —August 12, 2008
Page 2
Commissioner Kirchoff asked why these cannot be permanent structures and wondered
what the difference was. Mr. Vrchota stated the biggest difference is the buildings
themselves do not meet the City's requirements for a commercial building. He noted the
building life safety requirements are met through the State Building Code.
Motion by Falk, seconded by Casey, to open the public hearing. Motion carried on a 6-
ayes, 0 -nays, 1- absent (Walton) vote.
Mr. Jim Jensen, Chairman of the Trustees, 3423 165' Lane NW was at the meeting to
answer questions.
Commissioner Falk asked what the ultimate goal of the building was in the future. Mr.
Jensen stated at this point in time they are using the facilities for their Junior and Senior
High and it also serves for Vacation Bible School and other functions throughout the
year. He stated when they moved in 2004 their goal was to expand the church and he
thought there was plans in the future to take the building down and put in a larger more
multipurpose type structure there. They did not have a timeline set but he heard things
such as three years as a possible timeline.
0
Commissioner Holthus wondered when the structures were manufactured. Mr. Jensen
stated he could only guess based on what he was told and that was they were put in the .
spot in 1998. Commissioner Holthus indicated she remembered something about them
being from Minneapolis Schools and she wondered what condition they were in. Mr.
Jensen stated they recently did some siding work and as a result of the recent hail storm
the roof needs to be replaced but they have been putting this off until they know the
building will be able to remain on site. He noted they do maintenance on the building
themselves.
Commissioner Walton arrived at 7:10 p.m.
Mr. Jensen stated recently the Fire Marshall went through and inspected the whole
building including the portable building.
Mr. Jensen thought they would be building a permanent structure in three years but that is
dependent on their goals for growth of the church.
Chairperson Da stated they were requesting five years and he wondered where the
number came from. Mr. Jensen thought it was approval in increments of five years.
Chairperson Da noted he had a concern with multiple extensions of the portable
buildings.
Commissioner Walton asked for a point of reference if they approved this for another five •
years would they be able to plan for what they might be able to do after that Mr. Jensen
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —August 12, 2008
. Page 3
indicated the understanding from the people who asked him to get the permit renewed
was that it was an automatic extension and there was no discussion about what they
would do if it was not renewed. That is something new to him and if it is not renewed
they would have to decide what to do.
Commissioner Walton asked what kind of planning time does it take to think about
adding on a structure if they go less than four or five years for a renewal. Mr. Jensen
stated part of the planning would be if there was financing available. He was not sure
what steps would need to be taken.
Commissioner Walton wondered if they had a four or five year running numbers to
indicated to them that their growth is continuing or declining which would help in their
planning process. Mr. Jensen stated they have figures that show they have had
continuous growth and have been steadily growing and the idea is that they will continue
to grow but he did not know how they could predict that.
Motion by Casey, seconded by Cleveland, to close the public hearing. Motion carried on
a 7 -ayes, 0 -nays, 0- absent vote.
Commissioner Walton asked if they had any numbers indicating how many portable
structures they have in Andover. Mr. Vrchota indicated he knew of two for sure.
Commissioner Walton asked if they had any track record of length of time the City
allows these or does it vary based on the applicant. Mr. Vrchota explained it is generally
based on the applicant.
Commissioner Cleveland asked if there was any history on the inspections of the
buildings. Mr. Vrchota stated he did not believe the Building Department normally
inspects buildings on a regular basis, generally it is done when there is an issue or an
expansion but he will check to see if any inspections have been done.
Commissioner Holthus stated she did not know if she wanted to vote to approve this or
not because she thought it might be a good idea to have them inspected by the Building
Department.
Commissioner Walton thought this was an excellent point and he also knew they
inherited the temporary structure and the Conditional Use Permit and he did not know
when they looked at the permit to see that it was "temporary" and not intended to be a
permanent structure because it is not normally built to any kind of code to sustain some
kind of a permanency and upon inspection maybe it could be checked to see if it could be
made permanent and annexed to their grounds but his thought was if it is truly a
temporary structure than it should be treated as one maybe the City grants them a shorter
extension that allows them to do some quick planning and either annex it and build
• additional footage. He stated he would look at shortening it up because it is a temporary
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —August 12, 2008
Page 4
structure and they are not built to any safety codes to allow them to stay for any length of •
time.
Commissioner Kirchoff stated he has been getting the impression that the only difference
between them and a permanent structure is the exterior, it does not conform to the
commercial codes along with the roof structure may or may not be in conformance for
what they have for commercial property. Other than that they could be considered
permanent structures.
Commissioner Walton asked if they could inspect this to see what it would take to bring
the structure up to code and retrofit it and make it permanent and conform to codes.
Chairperson Daninger stated in the resolution it is the effect upon health, safety and
general welfare of the City of Andover and that includes the safety of kids so part of the
resolution is to make sure it is a safe structure.
Commissioner Walton recommended shortening this to a two the three year time period
instead of five years to try to spur on change.
Mr. Bednarz stated the difference between the temporary nature of these structures and
the church are just the exterior materials. They are required to conform to all the building
and fire codes like the rest of the building, they are not masonry, which is what the City
requires. From a life safety standpoint, the temporary structure is as safe as the church
itself.
Chairperson Daninger indicated he did not have an issue with the safety of these
buildings. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he would not have a problem with allowing
these for five more years. Most of the Commission was ok with granting a five -year
extension.
Motion by Casey, seconded by Falk, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
Amended Conditional Use Permit for a five -year time period as presented in the
resolution. Motion carried on a 5 -ayes, 2 -nays ( Daninger & Walton), 0- absent vote.
Mr. Vrchota stated that this item would be before the Council at the August 19, 2008 City
Council meeting.
PUBLICHEARING. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (08 -09) TOALLOWA HOUSE
TO BE MOVED TO 14355 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW.
Mr. Bednarz explained the applicant is seeking to move a house and detached garage
from 14905 Crosstown Boulevard approximately % of a mile to the subject property.
Mr. Bednarz discussed the staff report with the Commission and showed photos of the •
existing structure and surrounding homes.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Page 5
Motion by Casey, seconded by Kirchoff, to open the public hearing. Motion carried on a
7 -ayes, 0 -nays, 0- absent vote.
Commissioner Holthus stated she was looking at the two houses and the site lines and
wondered why the newer house was placed on the lot the way it was and not lined up
with the rear lot line because then the site fines out of both houses would have a greater
expanse.
Mr. Ken Orttel, 2772 Bunker Lake Boulevard, stated he did a proposal that was
somewhat in that light and it did not work for a couple of reasons. He talked to staff and
typically homes are supposed to be parallel to the road. If the house was aligned with the
back property line there is a fairly large deck that then would protrude back further than
what is allowed so what he did instead was push it as far over to the right as he could on
the lot line so in general the site line of the existing house goes past the new house. To
settle it against the back property line will also take out more trees. This is a fairly
heavily wooded lot and they are trying to save as many trees as possible. He thought that
staff recommended the one that is closer to the front property line. Mr. Bednarz
concurred.
Commissioner Cleveland asked where they will be placing the accessory structure. Mr.
• Orttel stated it will not be moved because of the expense but will be removed from the
property and discarded.
Commissioner Kirchoff asked if he has a driveway permit for a driveway access onto
Crosstown. Mr. Orttel indicated he has one that has already been used and has placed
curb cuts in the property a couple of years ago. He indicated he was at Anoka County
last week to review this and the existing old driveway goes directly into the garage door
so Anoka County is debating this. He stated even though he has a permit and two curb
cuts he was told that he would probably have to get another one when it is finalized to
make it official. He noted one of the two curb cuts will be used.
Commissioner Walton stated it was nice to see the home recycled because the house is in
great shape.
Chair Daninger asked if he was comfortable with the resolution. Mr. Orttel stated he did
not have a problem with anything in the resolution.
Motion by Walton, seconded by Falk, to close the public hearing. Motion carried on a 7-
ayes, 0 -nays, 0- absent vote.
Motion by Walton, seconded by Casey, to recommend approval of the proposed
conditional use permit. Motion carried on a 7 -ayes, 0 -nays, 0- absent vote.
0
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes —August 12, 2008
Page 6
Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the August 19, 2008 •
City Council meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS.
Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on related items.
ADJOURNMENT.
Motion by Walton, seconded by Falk, to adjourn the meeting at 7:34 p.m. Motion carried
on a 7 -ayes, 0 -nays, 0- absent vote.
Respectfiilly Submitted,
Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary
DmeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
•
�J
•
E
•
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 Plann*
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING Variance (08 -03) to vary from the side yard setback
requirements for an addition at 921 158 Avenue NW.
DATE: August 26, 2008
INTRODUCTION
The proposed addition to the existing house is shown on the attached survey.
DISCUSSION
The city approved a variance to reduce the front and side yard setback requirements from 40 feet
to 35 feet for a previous owner of the subject property in 2004. The northwest corner of the
proposed addition will encroach slightly into the 35 foot setback.
The existing house sits at an angle to the property lines. An addition that extends the west wall
flush with the existing structure causes the corner of the addition to encroach less than one foot
into the setback area. Staff discussed this situation with the applicant. The applicant has elected
to pursue this variance request.
The applicant has provided the attached letter as justification for the variance. The letter
references a variance that was recently approved in Woodland Estates 4 Addition. The
Planning Commission will recall that variance reduced a corner lot side yard setback from 35
feet to 25 feet to allow a new home to be constructed on the lot.
It should be noted that the subject property contains areas of both wetland and floodplain. These
areas will not interfere with construction of the addition.
Staff Recommendation
An additional finding that can be made in this case. According to the survey prepared by the
applicant's surveyor, 66 feet of right -of -way exists along the west side of the property. The city
typically requires only 60 feet for a local street. The additional width is a contributing factor to
the need for the variance.
Attachments
Resolution
Location Map
Survey
Applicant's Letter
Petition
Aerial Photograph
Approximate Wetland Boundary
Site Photographs
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning Commission is asked to recommend approval or denial of the variance.
Cc: Eric Kohnke 921 158 Avenue NW
•
•
•
CITY OF ANDOVER
• COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING/DENYING THE VARIANCE REQUEST OF ERIC
KOHNKE TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO 34 FEET FOR A PROPOSED
ADDITION ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 921 158 AVENUE NW 173 LANE NW
LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS:
THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 32, RANGE
24 DESCRIBED AS FOL LOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
SAID QUARTER THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID QUARTER
A DISTANCE OF 561.0 FEET THENCE WEST & PARALELL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF
SAID QUARTER A DISTANCE OF 660.0 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEG OF THE TRACT
HEREIN TO BE DESCRIBED THENCE WEST ALONG A LINE PARALELL WITH THE
SOUTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER A DISTANCE OF 260.99 FEET THENCE NORTH A
DISTANCE OF 300.0 FEET THENCE EAST & PARALELL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF
SAID QUARTER A DISTANCE OF 260.99 FEE THENCE SOUTH 300 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
WHEREAS, Eric Kohnke has requested a variance to reduce the side yard setback for the subject
property to 34 feet; and
• WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a pubic hearing and recommends approval/denial
of the proposed variance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendation of the Planning Commission,
and;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the 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 as requested.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the following conditions constitute an undue hardship
for the subject property:
1. : and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Andover
approves the proposed variance request to reduce the front yard setback for the subject
property from 35 feet to 34 feet.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover on this day of ) 2008.
CITY OF ANDOVER
• ATTEST:
Michael R. Gamache, Mayor
Victoria Volk, City Clerk
•
•
•
N '
j 59
16930
,
i
O
O
° a
m
A
WVD.IS
7�
\
16726
861
0 m
849
841
y m
O
Y
\'
N
p
N
f0 $ A
m S
16614
CROSST
D
� o
�
p �
y
A
m
746
73
0 0
0 C
m m m
ry' V 9
® �`
y ❑
U
C] D
O
y m
m
r 9 L7
w
Zo
m J
� n3 is
Z
p
ZA
m fn
O +
o
0 0
S
M
D
�o
m <
� m
•
•
•
1
F--- — — — — — — —1— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1
`
]
4327'E
gag
# : {;'
SYCAMORE STREET h N' +c I j p
II G a
n 7
9 cc
n � r � L
'W gZ a "UN log
•e! W
p C
I cm
mm
I tZA 1 e
g I -
� a 4 {
ry
I j a
1 ,
I i s Jnl I I s'"
p C ;
a 1
aw
vYCAHOEF _ F 1 '_' Lj' n
O
� �l T •1 r tt l v T T T l
l G
y t
-
� 4
_ _ G
ICs��r ^S
Kohnke, Eric and Toni •
921 158` Ave NW
Andover, MN 553043
4- August -2008
City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Blvd NW
Andover, MN 55304
RE: Variance Request
Andover City Official,
My wife and I would like to request a variance to the 40 foot side yard setback as stated in the
chart on page 489 Section 12 -3 -5 of the Andover city code. Our hardship is the addition will be
added to an existing structure which is already located within the 40 foot back. This requirement
is a line of sight requirement and there are no home's currently located in the line of sight.
The following items were taken from the City Council Meeting minutes dated May 6
1) Councilmember Trude stated they may want to change their ordinance for corner lots
where no other homes can be located immediately around the corner.
2) Councihnember Knight stated another thing is that the setback is a line of sight item and
in this case the line of sight is moot because the adjoining piece has nothing to do with
sight.
Item #1 will apply to our situation because the property owner's home behind us is nowhere
close to the line of sight with our home. Please see the attached aerial photograph.
Item #2 will apply because there is currently no home located in the line of sight and if a home
would be built there it would be because of a development and if that happens we will sell.
We have also included a petition signed by four of our neighbors supporting our addition. Three
out of the four are located directly west of us and would be impacted the most.
Sincerely,
Eric and Toni Kohnke
•
Jam D �TtTtoN
0 Petition for Variance
Adiacent Property Owners
We, the undersigned, support Mr. and Mrs. Kohnke's request for a variance. We
understand they are requesting a variance to allow their addition to be
approximately 34.2 feet away from the property line instead of the required 40
feet.
al 4AP---,4-
Names)
I S - s / 5j' d> V-e >a . w -
Address
P-Nloe- rA L') ,— 3
t
. city State Zip
Signature
Names
1 5 - 650 S �C w�O 2 - e-
Address
99
/9
Names)
910 l 5- f'Ate Al
Address
A li2oj Ga /i'1 /V 9 J z'6/
city State Zip
Signature
JcSlct - �iklC 2
Names)
X572 sC
Address
city State Zip
� A
Signature
•
jai
ILWIk
d
• f .g f M r Rte,
.vi W
x ;
Prope -
a
n
+hi
f
�LL1i Ste.
`Y
7 7 7 m "
+
.'
h
qq
'ham'
n
+hi
f
�LL1i Ste.
7 7 7 m "
.'
1�y •• �
qq
'ham'
r
^ 1
>>
y
T
i •.
.:sti
�t j4
1 �
l �
x �T�
t J
t
�w
"�f J