HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 12, 1977
o
o 0
CITY of ANDOVER
o
o
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting - April 12, 1977
AGENDA
Time Capsule
Approval of Minutes
1. Comm. #12-76-5
Lot Split Ordinance Public Hearing
2. Comm. #3-77-4
Obscenity Ordinance discussion
3. Comm. #4-77-1
Buildability Ordinance discussion
4. Progress Report from Subcommittee for Ordinance Revision
5. Ordinance Violations Report
Committee to appoint individual to represent Andover to Met Council
o
Publish on April 8, 1977
r--,
U
o
o
o
o
o 0
CITY of ANDOVER
o
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
April 12, 1977
MINUTES
The Regular Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Don Jacobson on April 12, 1977
at the Andover Community Center, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka,
Minnesota.
Commissioners Present: d'Arcy Bosell, Walter Bruns, James Elling,
John Johanson, Ralph Kishel
Commissioner Absent: Larry Retzlaff
Also Present: Councilman Ted Lachinski, Richard Schneider, and others
Minutes
Motion by Commissioner Bosell, seconded by Commissioner Johanson, that
we accept the Minutes of March 22, 1977 as written. Motion carried
unanimously.
Time Capsule
Richard Schneider, who is a member of the Andover Bicentennial Committee,
informed the Commission of the intentions of the Bicentennial Committee
to seal a time capsule (to be opened on July 4, 2076) and to make a
cassette tape recording to put in it. They are requesting each of the
elected and appointed officials of the City of Andover or past Township
of Grow to speak for 1 minute on the tape. This will be done during
a break later in the meeting.
Committee to appoint individual to represent Andover to Met Council
Councilman Ted Lachinski spoke to the Commission regarding a motion made
by the City Council last Tuesday night (April 5, 1977). He asked how
much power the Met Council has relative to Andover planning? Particular
items were the airport and definition of critical development. Councilman
Lachinski stated that he felt the Met Council was being very evasive.
Andover doesn't appear to have anything to say about these issues. The
motion that was made by the City Council was for the Mayor to appoint
a select committee of two Council and two Planning and Zoning Commission
members to recommend an appropriate individual who could represent
Andover in matters of Metropolitan significance. First - Mayor Windschitl
appointed Don Jacobson, Larry Retzlaff, Mary VanderLaan and Ted Lachinski;
however, the appointments were never approved by the City Council. Thus
no committee. Any other method or idea to get an individual to represent
Andover should be'mentioned to the City Clerk.
o
o
o
o
f\
\J
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - April 12, 1977
Page 2
Lot Split Ordinance Public Hearing (Comm. #12-76-5)
Chairman Jacobson called the public hearing to order and explained
briefly the intent of the Planning and Zoning Commission, when drafting
the Lot Split Ordinance, was to help people when sewer and water came
through with the large expenses for assessments, etc.
Commissioner Bruns wrote the initial ordinance and he was asked to explain
the Ordinance and go over some of the specific points. He said that
the intent was to provide the residents of Andover with the procedure to
split a lot without having to go through the process and expense of
platting. This applies particularly in the Urban area when they are
faced with large sewer assessments, then a lot may be divided into 2
parcels. They would still have to go before the Planning and Zoning
Commission and City Council and meet the current zoning and ordinance
requirements. It is not meant to circumvent the platting ordinance.
He read and went through each section and explained to those people
that were in the audience.
C)
Chairman Jacobson readvised the Commission of Ordinance 10 - Section
14.02 and that the City Council and Attorney said this portion could
be used to grant a variance at this time.
Tom Cherney, l40th Lane & Raven Street, "I have a large lot and about
$24,000 worth of assessments with the sewer and streets. In order to
keep the land, I have to split the land into 3. The lots would be 120'
of frontage (in R4 Zoning). The land has not gone up $24,000 in value.
I think there should be room in the Ordinance to give people the chance
to divide into what would meet the Zoning. These lots will exceed the
size of the other lots in Red Oaks."
Discussed where to draw the line on how many times to split a lot.
Talked about having Mr. Cherney apply for a Variance under Ordinance
10 - Section 14.02.
Richard Schneider, 1343 Andover Boulevard NW, "I would like to commend
the Planning and Zoning Commission for going ahead with this as its
been long overdue and we need a lot split Ordinance." He had a question
on the $50 fee. He said that the fee is supposed to cover just the
cost of handling and that the City shouldn't earn money on it.
Discussed costs, fees and the present fees for variances, special use
permits and rezoning applications, how the $50 fee was originated, engineer
costs that might be incurred and how to arrive at a fair and accurate
fee for a lot split.
()
Bob Snyder, 167th Lane, "It seems to me that a developer could use this
ordinance to develop his property. With 40 acres, in 9 years he could
have 16 parcels for $200. It would be very advantageous for a developer
rather than platting to use this ordinance. Also, there isn't any way
to protect yourself from someone owning a parcel then splitting it,
selling it to someone else and they could again split it."
o
o
o
o
o
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - April 12, 1977
Page 3
Ted Lachinski, "If there are engineering fees, who will pay them?"
It was suggested that the fee should state "plus Engineering fees".
Discussed metes and bounds lots and, also, if park land was already given
in an addition then no park fee shall be assessed. But if there is
no park, perhaps it could be at the discretion of the Park and Recreation
Commission.
Bob Rylander, 167th Lane NW, "Why are you making a new ordinance? It
seems to me that a variance covers it. What is the advantage of this
Ordinance?"
The Commissioners attempted to explain to Mr. Rylander and Mr. Snyder
why they feel the ordinance is necessary. It is to be a guideline and
a proper and better procedure and method instead of using a variance.
Discussed splitting lots, size of lots, buildable lots, concern about
too many divisions to one original parcel and how to revise the wording,
fee, engineering costs, and park fee. The Metropolitan Council's new
rules and regulations might require a much larger lot size.
o
Motion by Commissioner Bruns, seconded by Commissioner Kishel,
the public hearing until the next regularly scheduled meeting.
carried unanimously.
to continue
Motion
A letter has not been received from the Attorney of his opinion on this
Ordinance. It was suggested that a reminder be given so his opinion
might be written prior to the next meeting.
Obscenity Ordinance (Comm. #3-77-4)
Chairman Jacobson told the Commission of his talk with the Attorney
last week. No written statement has been received regarding the Attorney's
opinion. ec--1ed
J..-oc' ij_.J./v.17
Some of the comments and suggesyions were: could the City demand that
things objectionable be plac€J6nder the counter, partial covering on the
cover, or not in the City at all; the problem that "who" is to say what's
objectionable - the Supreme Court has a very difficult time deciding; we
should have something on the books; a lot of legal fees shouldn't be
incurred to get an ordinance when we don't have a problem; if the ordinance
were adopted, how would it be enforced; getting an okay to go ahead from
the City Council, and if they don't think the ordinance is necessary
at this time to just drop it for now; discussed the stores in the City.
o
Chairman Jacobson will ask the Attorney for his written comments and
get copies of the State Statutes regarding obscenity and have the Obscenity
Ordinance on the next meeting's agenda.
o
o
o
o
o
o
(;
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - April 12, 1977
Page 4
Progress Report from Subcommittee for Ordinance Revision
Commissioner Elling reported that he and Commissioner Bruns had met
the 1st and 5th of April and are working on the definitions and, also,
are close to having a rough draft on Ordinance 8.
Planning Sessions
The City has again received information from the Center for the Study
of Local Government regarding workshops to be held. Consensus after
being asked for opinions of the last workshops: wasn't worth it, the
materials were disappointing, the teachers weren't qualified, and they
got more information from talking to other people in the class than
from the instructors.
Buildability Ordinance (Comm. #4-77-1)
Commissioner Bruns had indited a Buildability Ordinance that was sent
to the Commission for their review. Some of the items discussed were:
1) existing lots of record and how the building inspector would get
a certificate of buildability; 2) the Planning and Zoning Commission
brought up a buildability ordinance last year but nothing was done;
3) referred to letter from Attorney Hawkins of December 1976; 4) the
seller of the land is the one that has to comply with the ordinance;
5) discussed "substantially completed" and decided to delete the last
sentence in Section I. - This section shall not apply to lots or parcels
upon which construction has been substantially completed as of the
effective date of this Ordinance; 6) modifications needed and the
recommendations to render the lot buildable - would there be a completion
date or would another certificate be needed?; 7) water table and soil
type - who would make the percolation tests and soil borings? This
would create a lot of work for the building inspector. If the City
inspector makes a mistake on the buildability of a lo~would the City
be liable? 8) the necessity of having an Ordinance of this type and
the rigid restrictions that may be needed for the Met Council and
until City sewer is available; 9) discussed having a time limit on
the buildability for the statement on the certificate; 10) discussed
fees that should be charged.
The Commission agreed that the Ordinance needs some more work and
each Commissioner will be prepared at the next meeting with workable
ideas to make the buildability ordinance effective and enforceable.
o
A;gh
~e.d
e.Co'
rf
v~/).bf17
o
<:0< <e~\e!
<4 - ;).(.,-17
o
o
()
'--',
U
o
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - April 12, 1977
Page 5
Ordinance Violations Report
Commissioner Bosell told of a call she had regarding a new home being
constructed on Ward Lake Drive. The caller was concerned about the
~ water table in the area where the home was being built. She had
directed the person calling to contact the City Building Official.
Chairman Jacobson mentioned that at the SW corner of the Andover Boulevard
and the railroad track intersection there are old structures falling
down. They appear to be very dangerous and should be looked into and
dismantled. Ordinance violation would be against Sections 4.03 F and
8.19 of Ordinance 8.
Commissioner Bruns said that an obvious ordinance violation is the
junk cars in various subdivisions.
It was mentioned that it would be a good idea to have the Ordinance
number and the specific section of the ordinance that is being violated
in the future to aid the zoning administrator.
Ad;ournment
Motion by Commissioner Johanson, seconded by Commissioner Kishel,
to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
1Y\e..e..i;,,~ QdjOLCO,e-d a...f /o~ 30 ",?,fYI.,
&,Qttr.'iiJ ~
Commission Clerk