Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 24, 1978 o o 0 ~ ~ ANDOVER o C) PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting October 24, 1978 AGENDA Approval of Minutes 1. Comm. #9-78-6 2. Comm. #2-78-5 Discussion of proposed Rum River Ordinance Pond View Preliminary Plat Continued Public Hearing 3. Comm. #10-78-2 Andover Mission Church Special Use Permit Continued Public Hearing 4. Comm. 1t9-78-l0 Ron Smith - Continued Proposed Registered Land Survey 5. Comm. 1t9-78-l3 Lund's Evergreen Estates Preliminary Plat 0 Public Hearing 6. Comm. 1tlO-78-3 Rosella Sonsteby Variance Request 7. Comm. 1tl0-78-4 William Rademacher Rezoning Public Hearing 8. Comm. 1tlO-78-5 Good Value Homes Rezoning Public Hearing 9. Comm. 1tl-78-3 Junkyard Ordinance For publication on October 20, 1978 C) o o 0 ~ ~ ANDOVER o o REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING October 24, 1978 MINUTES The Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Larry Retzlaff on October 24, 1978 at the Andover Community Center, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota. Commissioners Present: d'Arcy Bose1l, Don Jacobson, Ralph Kishel, Jeannine Pyron (arrived at 8:06) Walter Dick Chuck Wetzler, Engineer from T.K.D.A., and others Commissioner Absent: Also Present: Minutes of 10-10-78 Correction:, page 5, 1st paragraph, 5th line from bottom, delete one "Commission" Motion by Kishel, seconded by Jacobson, to approve the October 10, 1978 meeting Minutes as corrected. Motion carried unanimously. Minutes of 10-16-78 F-~, '~ Correction: page 3, last line, change to read 'no action ~r recommendation was needed from this Commission." Motion by Jacobson, Meeting Minutes as present - Bosell. seconded by Kishel, to approve the October 16, 1978 Special amended. Vote on motion: yes - Jacobson, Kishel, Retzlaff; Motion carried. Rum River Ordinance (Comm. #9-78-6) The Commission reviewed pages 11 - 14 of a model Ordinance relative to development along the Rum River in accordance with the Wild and Scenic River Act. Pond View Preliminary Plat Continued Public Hearing (Comm. #2-78-5) No one present - this will be continued to the next regularly scheduled meeting. Andover Mission Church Special Use Permit Continued Public Hearing (Corom. #10-78-2) Chairman Retzlaff asked for public input - no one responded. Commissioner Kishel said the applicants weren't ready for this meeting. Motion by Kishel, seconded by Jacobson, to continue to the next regularly scheduled meeting on November 14, 1978. Motion carried unanimously. (~ Ron Smith - Continued Proposed Registered Land Survey' (Corom. 1,19-78-10) Mr. Smith was present and said that the road is being put in the property now. The road will be called "Tract Y" on the Registered Land Survey and will be conveyed to the City. (Commissioner Pyron arrived at 8:06.) ) ~) . \ ,~ u Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 1978 Page 2 j The Commission and Engineer Wetzler referred to the T.K.D.A. letter dated 10-4-78 on which there are a number of engineering details that Mr. Smith's drawing still does not show. It was suggested that Mr. Smith take care of the details that are requested on the letter of review, make the necessary corrections and be placed on the next Commission agenda. At that time a recommendation could be made to the Council. Lund's Evergreen Estates Preliminary Plat Public Hearing (Comm. #9-78-13) Chairman Retzlaff called the Public Hearing to order. Bruce Grivna, of Egan" Field & Nowak was present to represent Mr. Lund. Engineer Wetzler reviewed his 10-17-78 T.K.D.A. letter with the Commission and Mr. Grivna. The type of surfacing on streets should be indicated. They should check with Anoka County to see that there is enough capacity for drainage into their culverts. Also mentioned was that the Coon Creek Watershed Board's approval is necessary for this plat. They should provide storage for a 100-year storm ponding and also the easement required on Lots 3 and 4 of Block 1. The drawing does not show the minimum grade of .5% at the intersection of the County roads. , j Mr. Grivna explained that they have 76.4 acres with 23 lots. The property is heavily wooded and there are some paths through there. The roads will be put in on the path areas. The Coon Creek Watershed Board's Engineer has mentioned that the drainage on this property is to be contained on the property. and they will be making use of 3 ponding areas. They have revised the grades coming out on to the County road. The existing barn near County Road 18 will be removed. The plat does not state the proposed use. Should show residential - single family dwelling units. They have not met with the Park and Recreation Commission yet. There should be a temporary cul-de-sac shown at the East end of l48th. Lot 1, Block 1 is 262.98' wide at the front lot line. The lots should be shifted to correspond with the recent frontage amendment of 300'. The lot width at the setback line should be shown. On Block 4 it shows a road easement. Mr. Grivna said that it is an existing road easement for this property that goes back many years, It is a deeded easement - perhaps where the old County Road 16 ran. Some attempt should be made to find who the road easement belongs to. Kildeer shows 80' of right of way at the intersection with Andover Boulevard. That is the existing property width at that point. The actual roadway would still meet the City standards but the right-of-way would be 80' instead of 66'. The preliminary plat doesn't show a resubdivision plan. It doesn't show a 20' radius at the intersections of County Roads 16 and 18. The Engineer was asked to check on the correct street names according to the City street layout. Chairman Retzlaff called for public input - no one responded. Motion by Kishel, seconded by Jacobson, to continue the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. , / A directive was given to the Park and Recreation Commission for their review and comment on the plat. T.K.D.A. letter items should be addressed, the statement of usage should be shown, the investigation of the road easement, a resubdivision map, a temporary cul-de-sac at the East end of l48th, radius at the S. point of Lot 3 on County Roads 16 and 18, a realignment of lots to meet the 300' frontage width, the Coon Creek Watershed approval, and the Engineer's determination of the correct street names should be taken care of prior to the November 14 1978 meeting. ' \ , ) ) " u u '\ ) Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 1978 Page 3 Rosella Sonsteby Variance Request (Comm. #10-78-3) Rosella Sonsteby came forward and explained to the Commission that she would like to sell some of her land to combine it with parcel 1580 owned by Robert Haslip. She would like to take out 66' through the middle of the property, however, in case a road goes through there (If Vintage continues to the South). It would be one piece of land but it would exclude 66' for road. Each piece would be 115' x 150'. Mr. Haslip would have 1 lot twice as big as what he now owns and one (115' x 150') across the 66' proposed road but it would all be one legal description and parcel number. It (the 2-115 x 150' pieces) would be combined with Mr. Haslip's property so he wouldn't have anybody living too close to him. It was explained to her that the lot across the road easement is The lot on the West would not have any actual road frontage now. that she sell 5 acres so she wouldn't need a variance. not contiguous. It was suggested Motion by Jacobson that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the Andover City Council denial of the variance by Rosella Sonsteby for the following reason: the granting of the variance request would create an illegal lot which is contrary to the Ordinances of the City of Andover. For this reason the Commission finds that the granting of the variance request would not be in the interest of the City. No second - motion dies. '. ; Mrs. Sonsteby asked if she could change it (her request) so the Commission would approve it right now so she doesn't have to come back in 2 weeks. She was told "yes" if she has a new legal description for only the lot that would be adjacent to parcel 1580. Motion by Bosell, seconded by Pyron, that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Variance request for Rosella Sonsteby (on the property described as: the W. 150' of the E. 690' of the N. 115' of the SE~ of the SW~ of Section 29, Township 32, Range 24, Anoka County, MN) for the following reasons: 1) that it be contingent upon this parcel being combined with parcel 1580; 2) (Ordinance 10, Section 17.01) there was no adverse comment; 3) it doesn't violate the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Development Plan; 4) it would not have an adverse effect on the adjacent property owners. Commissioner Jacobson - The reason for the variance, on the application, is that they want no one close to their lot. But Ordinance 8 -,5.~ - sals that~~ hardship must have to do with the characteristics of the land/?a~d ~ot'1ti~pt'bperty ~€t:/J" c-cirel!)e-d He didn't feel that this is reason enough to grant this variance. Discussed J/-~4-78 Ordinance 10 - Section 14.01. Vote on motion: Motion carried. yes - Retzlaff, Pyron, Bosell; no - Jacobson; present - Kishel. This will be on the City Council agenda on November 21, 1978. / ) William Rademacher Rezoning Public Hearing (Comm. #10-78-4) Chairman Retzlaff called the public hearing to order. Realty, introduced the ~ers - William Rademacher of the portion under discussion, and Frank Voth, Vice Homes. Pd;.).;c;\e{'s Jerry Green, of Green and John Crest, the developers President of Good Value , ) () ( ~ ~ I~ \ ~ \ ) Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 1978 Page 4 Mr. Voth informed those present of what is happening regarding Good Value Homes recent purchase. He said Good Value Homes has recently signed the purchase agreement and closed on 3 pieces of property in Andover. This 80 acres, known as the Rybeck property, and 80 acres that belonged to Keith Caswell is part of their purchase. The 2 old houses there have been discussed with the Fire Chief of Andover and they have plans for fire training exercises on them. The metal building on the property will be secured for the future so it doesn't become a problem. Our development plans are not exactly nailed down. We are developing land in Coon Rapids, We just opened up about 116 lots there for sale and it is our plans that we would begin in Andover when we are completed developing the land in Coon Rapids. We would probably begin developing a portion of this property between 6 and 18 months from now - either late next spring or a year from next spring. When we develop, we will probably be doing it in 80-acre increments. The 3rd piece of property we purchased is approximately 200 acres. We are not exactly certain how that will develop. If the matter under consideration here is given your approval and passed by the City Council, we would ask for or petition for the extension of sanitary sewer to serve that property. We have also been talking at Good Value Homes that we would like to talk with the City of Andover about putting in a water system and give it to the City of Andover. I talked with at least one other property owner who owns some substantial acreage and who would probably \ join in this venture and it would make it highly feasible to do something of / this nature to provide water in that area of Andover. I believe that in the general development plans for the area that the suggestion of higher use for this corner is consistent with the development plans for the community and it is our feeling that higher use should come to that corner rather than single family residential. We want to do that which is best for your community as we move in as we will be here on a long-term basis. What we have done in other communities and the things we will do here, hopefully will give credence to that statement. When we speak of the acreage, we have in excess of 300 acres and it would probably be 700 to 800 or more homes in the community and that would certainly be a relief in the use of the utilities which are in the area. The Vice Chairman of the Church had asked about taverns and saunas, etc., going on this property. It would never be our intention to do anything in the nature of taverns or saunas and if it would be agreeable to the City Council and the Planning Commission, I am sure that we could work out the proper wording for a convenance to cover the property to see it doesn't happen in the future. Chairman Retzlaff stated that it is in keeping with the City's Comprehensive Development Plan that a shopping center be located in this vicinity. He asked for a comprehensive plan from Good Value Home~ or the developers contemplating the rezoning, showing the over all plan for multiple, commercial, residential, a buffer area, etc. , Mr. Voth said that Good Value Homes is primarily a residential builder and they have restricted themselves to residential. They would be getting FHA subdivision approval on all the lots and the FHA addresses themselves to such matters as appropriate buffering, etc. The purchase agreement between Mr. Rademacher and Good Value Homes for the 10-acre portion that he has, has a clause in it that there be appropriate berming as would be agreeable to both parties. Where the 2 shopping centers meet at County Road 9, it might be a good place for double or multiple units. That would be taken care of in the platting process. This way the people J '. , \.~ '_J u , .J J Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 1978 Page 5 who will be buying in the subdivision would know what is going there before the subdivision is built. In talking to the Anoka County Highway Department, there is going to be a considerable amount of work on the transportation system in this area that would lend to this kind of thing. We control a portion of the land and would definitely want to berm it. The other portion, that Mr. Rademacher is buying from us, we would require this to be done also. At those places where we would find residential properties that are abutting a major county road, we would want to do something of a higher use. We have about 5 subdivisions at the present time. It was suggested that we might want to file for general business on a P.U.D. We don't want to do anything that is competitive or redundant but we want to do something that is complimentary or needed by the larger community. William Rademacher - The 10,000 square foot area would be the initial supermarket probably with something for rental purposes alongside and something else that would be compatible. We would like to go with a Super Value but we want to find out whether we can build it here first. Then we can go to one of the companies. We think it would be 10,000 to 18,000 square feet. The rest of the building would be done as the need arises - drug store, maybe off-sale liquor, pizza type, take-out chow mein, beauty shops, decorator shop, florist, etc. We do have one of these started in Brooklyn Park at 63rd and Boone. It was started with a small store about 4 years ago and as the need is coming, then we have built additional space. This would be about the same type of thing. J Commissioner Jacobson said that Andover Ordinance requires a market feasibility study be done to indicate the need, size and future size. Also a plot plan showing size, screening, landscaping, parking, etc. He was also concerned about the sewer and water extension. Mr. Rademacher said the study would be a little hard to do. They can't say that Good Value Homes will have 800 homes because they are not there yet. The traffic counts indicate there are a lot of people driving by. Good Value Homes has mentioned getting a tree moving machine so we would be putting in some berms and some large trees and some redwood fencing. Commissioner Jacobson commented that it almost looks like these rezonings would be competing against one another. Mr. Voth said that Mr. Rademacher does not want to invest a large amount of money if this is not going to fly. The purchase agreement that we signed states that in the event that this is rezoned there would be no other grocery store except in the area Mr. Rademacher owns. The intent of the piece on Bunker Lake Boulevard was to be of an entirely different character and the reason why the "Commercial" was suggested was that we were going to apply for a P.U.D. for a general business nature and that we would be able to have you people concur with it. The contrast between the 2 is that our plan shows more service oriented versus the other being more the merchandise or retail sales type. Good Value Homes Rezoning Public Hearing (Comm. #10-78-5) Chairman Retzlaff opened the public hearing in order to have both rezonings discussed together. / '\ J , J ~- , \ \.J , '\ o / Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 1978 Page 6 Chairman Retzlaff called for public input. Marnell Wilber, 3510 - l36th Lane, "I have 83 signatures that oppose the rezoning. We do not want businesses in that area. It would be creating more traffic, excess noise, vandalism, etc, If we had wanted to live by shopping centers, we would have moved by one." She presented 2 petitions to the Commission. John Peterson, 16120 Vintage, Vice Chairman of the Church Council of Grace Lutheran Church, "As a congregation, we are not opposed to construction of a shopping center there but would certainly be opposed to businesses in the line of a tavern, dance hall, sauna or something that we do not feel would enhance or go along with the thinking of the Church. We would like to go on record as saying we would be opposed to that type of business in either development." Lyle McLaughlin, 3155 Bunker Lake Boulevard, '~e favor the rezoning on the basis of the area has already become inundated with traffic. The opposite corner that Mr. Chutich owns, is my grandparents farm and we feel that we have been infringed upon by urbanization and we would like to see a shopping area that we do not have to drive several miles to. I think we might see the tax base and the traffic now on Round Lake Boulevard and it becomes apparent that Andover is not country estate but a highly urbanized area. We do favor it." I Gerald Gerard, 3442 - 136th Lane, "I have lived in Andover for about 1~ years. I came here because Andover is a residential, almost rural area. The area around this neighborhood is all residential except for the junkyards and tire pile down the road. It is a quiet, residential City. I don't feel that increasing the tax base really is a valid reason for allowing something like this to come in. We already have the second lowest taxes in the 7-county metro area and we have these low taxes without big industrial development. When I bought, I checked the zoning around here and found it was residential and assumed it would stay that way. If I had known something like this was coming in, I would never have bought in the area. I will be looking across the Church parking lot at this. I feel this is going to reduce the value of my property. There would be noise, commotion, traffic, etc. Both Bunker and Round Lake are very busy roads. The access driveways of both of these proposals go out onto these already busy roads. I think this is generating a big safety, traffic problem. Good Value Homes has made some promises for water and sewer on land that is now an unplatted hayfield. I think approval of this rezoning should be based on what is there now and not what will be in the future. I think our fire department should be consulted on this matter, as to whether they have the equipment and training to safely handle the fire protection for this kind of business. All in all, I oppose it because it isn't what I moved out to Andover to live next to. I moved out here to be in a quiet, residential area and if I had wanted to live across from a shopping center, I would have bought across the road from a shopping center. The SW corner of the intersection is already zoned commercial." \ /' Sandra Oxborough, 3464 - l4lst Lane, "I am against it. I am right behind where they want to propose this. I didn't move out here for that. I don't want my kids going to a shopping center every day. I don't want the hazards the traffic is going to cause. I definitely don't want a redwood fence. I moved out here so I didn't have to have a fence." ,) / -\ '-,/ , , \.J u ) Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 24, 1978 Page 7 Stanley Dedin, 13836 Round Lake Boulevard, "One of the things that has to be considered is the proposed realignment of Round Lake Boulevard. One of the realignment proposals would bring Round Lake Boulevard right through one of the proposed structures. I don't want to live in beautiful downtown Andover. I want to live in suburban Andover where I am now." Lola Fortner, 13808 Round Lake Boulevard, "I feel very strongly opposed to this. We moved north to get away from this sort of thing. It is scarey to think that we would have to live across the street from this. It seems to be in complete conflict with residential living. Also, I don't think it is compatible or complimentary to add more businesses to all the things rezoned and proposed - the Dales, the SW corner, etc. I stand opposed." Dale Gelling, 3432 - 136th Lane, "I am opposed to it. One of the reasons they are looking at this for economic reasons is the traffic. My observation of the traffic is that most of these people are commuting to and from work with one or two people in the car. Their destination is home to work and back the quickest time they can. I have a difficult time getting on the County Road now. I see very few of these cars traveling at peak periods turning into Northtown or other shopping/business establishments. I would like to see a water study showing the ground water supply to see if it would affect the wells here. I think people who would be buying out here would be looking for homes in a residential type area." \ J Lyle McLaughlin, "I have lived in Andover for 20 or 30 years. We didn't really want sewer and we didn't want dog control but we have had the influx of people in the neighborhood now. We have all the elements of a "City" but if we want to shop we have to travel and go elsewhere. I don't think it is reasonable that because you don't want to look at another person's property that you can ask that it not be rezoned. We do live in the Urban area. Now it would be nice if we could have some of the comforts of an Urban area as long as all the rural attributes have been taken from us. We used to see pheasants in the very area that you people are living in. I think the plan that Good Value has presented is very good. I think it would be very attractive buildings for our community. We are not a township. We are a full-fledged community." Lola Fortner, ''We are opposed to having it in our front yard." Gerald Gerard mentioned that it doesn't sound like an Urban area because he has a septic tank, well and dirt road in front of his house. Mr. McLaughlin said that he has a nice alfalfa field with cattle grazing to look at now. He would like to be able to tell the property owner that he can't build a house or block the view, but he can't control the property that someone else owns. If the use is compatible, the owner can do as he wishes. Chairman Retzlaff suggested that we continue the public hearings to give the developers and the residents of Andover an opportunity to further explore the applications and give the developers time to develop a feasibility study and further finalize their site plan. " ) ., , ) , J ~ \ I " \ o , Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting ) Minutes - October 24, 1978 Page 8 Motion by Bosell, seconded by Pyron, to continue the public hearing to November 14, 1978. Motion carried unanimously. Junkyard Ordinance (Comm. #1-78-3) This will be on the next meeting's agenda. Adiournment Motion by Pyron, seconded by Jacobson, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:51 P.M. ~~~ Commission Clerk / )