Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 26, 2005 CITY OF NDOVE C-tl-t-~ Cv) /' ~\..V\ S-/()/O'J , / PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING -APRIL 26, 2005 The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Daninger on April 26, 2005, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Chairperson Daninger, Commissioners Tim Kirchoff, Rex Greenwald, Dean Vatne, Jonathan Jasper, Michael Casey and Valerie Holthus. Commissioners absent: There were none. Also present: City Planner, Courtney Bednarz Associate Planner, Andy Cross Associate Planner, Chris Vrchota Others J APPROVAL OF MINUTES. April 12, 2005 Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Greenwald, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried on a 7 -ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. VARIANCE (05-02) TO VARY FROM THE MAXIMUM LIGHT ALLOWED TO ENCROACH ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES FOR ATHLETIC FIELDS AT PRAIRIE KNOLL PARK LOCATED AT 595 146TH LANE NW. Mr. Bednarz noted this item continues the discussion oflighting the athletic fields in Prairie Knoll Park. The suggestion from the Planning Commission was researched over the past two weeks. A summary of the results is attached and will now be presented. City Engineer Berkowitz discussed the design issues with the Commission. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if the homeowners to the west were present. There was no response. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 2 Commissioner Holthus wonder if a pole could really be moved into the easement as stated in the letter from Mr. Jim O'Brian under section four, option three. Mr. Berkowitz stated Mr. O'Brian did check with the gas company and that is an option but the concern they have with that is if they do move that pole into that location, they take responsibility for relocation or replacement costs for that if they need to replace the pipe line. They prefer to keep that outside of the easement. Commissioner Holthus asked if they encroached into the easements would they be able to have the twenty-five foot standards. Mr. Jim O'Brian stated they would come close to the twenty-five foot candles. The max minimum ratio would be still higher than what they prefer to see in lighting a ball field. He stated they could probably get into the low twenty foot candle range with that placement. The big issue is if they come back to add another pipe line and ask to move the pole and it has to be moved back outside the easement, they will be right back where they started as far as spill light and unevenness, the maximum ratios on the field. / Commissioner Holthus asked if twenty foot candle range appropriate amount oflight for a football game. Mr. O'Brien stated there is an organization, Illuminating Engineering Society, which put recommendation together as to what lighting levels should be applied to all different sorts of applications from office areas, to manufacturing to outdoor sports. For this type of facility, they say twenty foot candles to thirty foot candles are appropriate. Chairperson Daninger asked how long were they looking to light the field through out the year. Mr. Bednarz stated it would be three months in the fall. Chairperson Daninger asked if the residents that would be affected notified of the meeting. Mr. Bednarz stated they were. Commissioner Vatne stated three options were entertained, none of which was recommended because they all have drawbacks so they are back to the original proposal with consideration of hardship. Mr. Bednarz stated this was correct and a variance would still be needed. Chairperson Daninger stated he thought this is creating a hardship because if they do not approve this variance to light the field, children cannot see what is going on and it could be dangerous. Commissioner Holthus asked if they were installing lighting on another field at Prairie Knoll. Mr. Berkowitz stated they are installing lighting on the east field and the southwest field. They looked at through the design and through an alternative an alternate to the bid is preparing this for possible lighting to the north side because there is a cost saving involved. \ / Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 3 Commissioner Holthus stated a hardship cannot be proved the west field, they are lighting the east field any way and would be gaining one football field at least. Mr. Berkowitz stated that was correct. Commissioner Holthus thought they may just want to light one field. Mr. Berkowitz stated staffwas directed to light both fields. Commissioner Kirchoff stated the homeowners have been talked to and the residents support this according to the letter they received. He stated he would support this because of the safety issue involved. If the homeowners weigh in and say they support this to the City Council that would be an important piece. To move this forward, he would see the safety issue. Commissioner Jasper thought they needed more lighted fields but they have very specific standards for variance and this meets none ofthem. He stated this was purely an economic consideration. There are other alternatives that would be appropriate. Mr. Berkowitz stated on the option were the poles would be moved into the easement, would reduce the spillage but would still need a variance because it would still spill over. Commissioner Vatne asked if there would be an option to move the southeast pole back into the easement, that correct the north side spillage, but what about the south side spillage. Mr. O'Brian stated they do not want to move the pole any further back than it is because of aiming angles. He thought the pole should be ten feet closer than where they want to put it now. He thought the only option they could look at that would limit the foot candles down to City ordinance levels at the property line, cuts the lighting down on the field an average of about seventeen foot candles. They are looking at a 12 to 1 maximumlminimwn ratio. Commissioner Vatne stated he was leaning toward it but he would like to hear from the , property owner to the north. Commissioner Holthus did not think she would vote for this. Commissioner Casey stated he would vote for this. Motion by Kirchoff, seconded by Casey, to recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution No. , to grant the variance to vary from the maximwn light allowed to encroach on residential properties for atWetic fields at Prairie Knoll Park Located at 595 l46th Lane NW. Commissioner Greenwald stated they tabled this before and already had the public hearing, he wondered if there will be another public hearing at the City Council. Chairperson Daninger did not think there would be another public hearing. , Commissioner Kirchoff stated if the homeowner were at the City Council meeting, he thought the City Council would listen to what that person would have to say in regards to this. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 4 Motion carried on a 4-ayes, 3-nays (Jasper, Greenwald, Holthus), O-absent vote. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the May 3, 2005 City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: RESIDENTIAL SKETCH PLAN OF A SINGLE FAMILY URBAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS COON CREEK ACRES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 14437 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. Mr. Vrchota explained the Planning Commission is asked to review a sketch plan containing five urban residential lots on 7.95 acres. The property is located at the southeast comer of the intersection of Crosstown Boulevard and Andover Boulevard. Mr. Vrchota discussed the staff report with the Commission. Commissioner Jasper stated the report indicates the accesses are not being recommended by the City Engineer, he wondered if there were any other options on how to access and develop the property. Mr. Vrchota did not think he found any. / Commissioner Greenwald did not agree with the traffic count. He thought the 3,700 was low already. He stated he had a concern with the driveways going out onto Andover Boulevard. His biggest concern was the width of the road and how much more it could be increased in the future. Commissioner Greenwald asked when the traffic count was done. Mr. Vrchota indicated it was done in 2003. Commissioner Vatne stated it does not indicate any ponding or wetland that has opened up but it looks like there is an area that will be proposed ponding, mitigation area He wondered if this would qualify for the offset for the fill. Mr. Vrchota stated the Coon Creek Watershed District will dictate on what wetland had to be mitigated and how it was to be done. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if anyone looked at possible turnarounds in the driveways. Mr. Vrchota thought the developer could look into this. Mr. Touchette indicated this is high quality residential and he thought it would be easy to incorporate a turn around in the driveway and this could be required. Chairperson Daninger asked why the address was listed on Crosstown Boulevard ahd not Andover Boulevard. Mr. Vrchota indicated he did not know. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 5 Chairperson Daninger asked ifthere was any other sketch plan done on this property. Mr. Vrchota stated the developer has done sketches in the past and there has been other plans done by other people but nothing has been approved. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Kirchoff, to open the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried on a 7 -ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. There was no public input. Motion by Casey, seconded by Kirchoff, to close the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Commissioner Vatne stated they discussed earlier about the potential for a cul-de-sac. He wondered if there was a potential to utilize a cul-de-sac and be able to work lots off of that and come up with potentially the same number oflots. Mr. Ron Touchette, Rock Solid Realty, stated they have considered many plans and have had a lot of sketches made up to try to maximize the potential for this property. Due to the amount of wetland and floodplain, this is the only option. The intent is to work with the natural landscape to provide a different kind of high quality lots. / Commissioner Kirchoff asked if they ever had any attempt for a higher residential density with one access, possibly a zoning change. Mr. Touchette stated they did look at the possibilities and discussed it with City staff and it was decided it was so much outside of what the City wanted and would not be as desirable in a single family residential setting. He stated from then on, they did not consider the higher density. Commissioner Holthus stated on building site five, the building pad is closer to the street than the others. Mr. Touchette stated the reason for this is because there is wetland there but lot five is a larger lot. He indicated they would move the house back and turn it so the front does not face so close to the road. Commissioner Holthus asked under the wetland section, it says all wetland mitigation will need to be approved by the Coon Creek Watershed District but in another section it notes coordination with other agencies and it mentions the Lower Rum River Watershed District. She wondered if there were two different watershed organizations that need to have approvals. Mr. Vrchota stated it was his mistake and only needed to be approved by the Coon Creek Organization. , .' Commissioner Vatne stated for clarification, the other variance beside the driveway, is relating to the setback in the rear because of the location of the floodway boundary. Mr. Touchette stated there were actually three variances. Two were with the driveway (side yard setback and direct access to collector street) and one was because they did not have front yard setback (buildable lot depth due to front yard wetlands). Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 6 Commissioner Vatne asked which lots did not have the front setback (buildable lot depth). Mr. Touchette noted all the lots are affected. Chairperson Daninger asked on the build-able pads, would they all need to be built up. Mr. Touchette stated all would need to be built up with walkout style homes. Chairperson Daninger asked if they will be up higher that the ones across the street. Mr. Touchette stated the houses across the street are also elevated and would probably close to the first house elevation on the east. Chairperson Daninger stated it looked like there will be quite a bit of clearing to get to the build-able lots. Mr. Touchette stated there will not need to be much clearing of trees, most of the clearing will be scrub trees and not desired trees. Commissioner Greenwald stated when he first read this packet; he wondered if it was possible they had a piece of land that was not conducive to development. He stated his second thought was the entrance to this site was about four hundred feet from the intersection on lots four and five, which was pretty close. His biggest concern is Andover Boulevard has almost become a main thoroughfare because of the High School and in a few years down the road, Andover Boulevard may be continued on with even more traffic. He wondered if they could have a frontage road with one entrance onto Andover Boulevard. Commissioner Jasper stated the only problem with a frontage road is they will have end up filling in a ton of wetland. Commissioner Vatne stated the other variance would be the positioning of the lots and the setbacks. He thought there was a lot of acreage but would need to be set up with a cul-de-sac and three lots. Commissioner Greenwald stated his concern with the driveways was the safety concern of them going out onto Andover Boulevard. Chairperson Daninger asked if anyone liked the sketch plan. Commissioner Kirchoff stated he liked the sketch plan with the wetland but he did not like the driveways going out onto Andover Boulevard. Commissioner Jasper agreed with Commissioner Vatne regarding if they could do this as a cul-de-sac. He stated the variance for shared driveways causes him some concern because he saw some potential conflict between neighbors. Mr. Touchette stated the driveways would not be shared but contiguous driveways next to / each other. He stated they looked at looped cul-de-sac driveways but this would impact Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 7 / the front wetlands so much in order to get to the back build-able property. He stated they met a great amount of conflict to touch the wetlands so they decided to work around it. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if there would be any possibility in the future to have a median put in the middle of Andover Boulevard because this would help the driveways with only having a right-inlright-out. Mr. Bednarz stated Andover Boulevard is a City road and he did not think the City had any plans to put a median in. Chairperson Daninger summarized the Commission comments to the developer. Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the May 3, 2005 City Council meeting. WORK SESSION: ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE 1. 12-14-5 Screening Mr. Bednarz indicated the City already had two sections on screening and they would like to pull this together under one section. , / Commissioner Kirchoff asked if there will be cross referencing in the Code where needed. Mr. Bednarz stated there will be a number of areas in the code which will send the person to this section. Commissioner Vatne stated there was a couple of references to landscape screening of a minimum height of six feet at plant maturity, does this mean they will need to wait for the plants to grow to the minimum height. Mr. Bednarz stated this was correct. Chairperson Daninger stated when they screen using a certain material, what happens when that material deteriorates. Mr. Bednarz stated they have addressed this in the section regarding fences but in regards to shrubs and trees, if it does not already state it in the code, they should probably say that plant material to satisfy screening requirements must be kept in good condition and replaced if needed. Commissioner Jasper stated if a shrub dies, it no longer is screening so it would be in violation of the code and would need to be replaced. He wondered if a ticket would be issued from the City Inspector. Mr. Cross stated they would receive a notice that they are in violation of the code and the City would proceed to work with them on correcting the problem. , / Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 8 / ll. 12-14-6 Landscaping in All Districts Mr. Bednarz stated right now they do not have any specific requirements; they have one paragraph in the code stating there needed to be areas landscaped. He stated they have evaluated other cities requirements and came up with a number of different approaches on what type of landscaping needed to be done. Mr. Bednarz stated what they selected is the number dealing with parameter; ratio to the parameter of the site because they are required to have landscaping done in the parameter on the site and this gives them a number that is coordinated with that. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if at one time they required all new homes to have a set amount of trees. Mr. Bednarz stated they do require a minimum of two trees in the front yard for urban lots. These requirements would deal with commercial, industrial and institutional uses. Commissioner Holthus asked in Section J, irrigation required, she wondered why they required all landscaped areas be irrigated. Mr. Bednarz stated they require this to make sure landscaped areas are watered routinely. Commissioner Holthus thought this should be left up to the commercial property owner and she thought this would be a lot of control the City is taking on. Commissioner Kirchoff thought they may want to consider plants that would not need to be irrigated. Commissioner Jasper thought this may be appropriate in certain areas. Chairperson Daninger thought the irrigation wording should be reviewed. Mr. Bednarz wondered if the Commission would want this taken out of the code. Commissioner Vatne thought if irrigation was left as is, there is always a discussion around a landscape plan with the proposed business where they could take exception in cases. Mr. Bednarz stated the irrigation plan is a flexible tool because they have lawn areas, planting beds that require different levels of water. Commissioner Vatne thought this may be a little controlling but he leaned towards liking it. J Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 9 Chairperson Daninger did not think they wanted to take it out but lighten this up a little bit. Commissioner Jasper thought any turf areas needed to be irrigated. Commissioner Vatne commended the staff on the comparison between the different cities. Commissioner Jasper stated in Subsection C, it lists tree, shrubs and shrubs for different measurements and he thought this needed to be clarified that all three are required. He stated ground cover in Section I, talks about mulch and rock could be substituted around the parameter of the building, he thought there were several places where they have allowed rock and mulch along planting beds or along sidewalks or street edges and he did not know if it should be limited to just along the parameter of the building. Commissioner Holthus thought this was too controlling and a waste of water. She stated this is contradictory too with the water restrictions put in place. Commissioner Greenwald indicated this would be for churches also. Commissioner Kirchoff asked if under Section I, where it says "Native plant communities may be reestablished in appropriate portions of the site", would those areas need to be irrigated, was that the intent. Mr. Bednarz stated this was not the intent although they may need to add words to clarify that. Commissioner Kirchoff agreed with Commissioner Holthus that this would need to be lightened up. Commissioner Greenwald asked if they required irrigation now on commercial property. Mr. Bednarz stated they do. Mr. Bednarz stated maybe they should have an irrigation put together as suggested and it is flexible in terms of what is irrigated and what is not depending on the need. I Commissioner Jasper thought a rule should be established and the rule should be lighter than that which is in there. If there is some reason where someone would want to deviate from that, they could come in for the opportunity to deviate from that. To make it something that is completely ambiguous, makes it something that is not enforceable and becomes way to haphazard. Lightening it up makes sense but they also need to have some standards in the code as opposed to having something very ambiguous makes more sense. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 10 111. 12-14-16 Guesthouses Mr. Cross explained this revision corrects a vestige in the code that needed to be addressed. He stated at one time this might have addressed a need but as times have changed, this provision opens up the City to a difficult situation down the line when one property owner decides to build a guest house, which is defined as a structure that provides shelter, but cannot be lived in full time. What the City has found is that as the property changes hands, this guest house becomes a viable opportunity for a rental and the person for whom it was intended has long since left. He stated they would like to strike out the provision for guesthouses. Commissioner Jasper stated he did not know how long this has been a problem but he wondered why they don't just prohibit renting out guesthouses. Commissioner Vatne stated he was surprised to see the recommendation of the removal of guesthouses and he wondered what brought this up. Mr. Cross stated the zoning code does prohibit the rental of guesthouses. The wording is there but the problem is in the enforcement. / Mr. Cross stated they are currently dealing with reactive enforcement and they would like to stop this altogether. Commissioner Jasper stated there is also a problem then with renting out a basement. The problem is renting out a dwelling so there are two families living there and whether it is a guest house or not, it is still a violation of code and the guesthouse is not the problem, it is the illegal rental and that is already prohibited. Commissioner Vatne stated the legitimate purpose would be taken away if they prohibited this. Commission consensus was to leave this item in the code. IV. 12-10-21 Animal Shelters Mr. Bednarz stated this was discussed briefly at the last meeting about this item. There were some concerns brought up. What they are trying to do is to move this section out of other nuisance characteristics and into setback requirements. Commissioner Jasper did not know what the difference was between a building and a roofed enclosure because they have different setbacks. Mr. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 11 Bednarz stated the second one would be a property line. Commissioner Jasper stated this does not make sense to him. Commissioner Greenwald stated a lot of people have a closed barn with one side that is open and that may be the difference in the distances. Mr. Bednarz stated it does say any open or roofed enclosure so that is the shelter that has to be fifty feet from the property line and the animals themselves need to be kept one hundred feet from any residence. Commissioner Jasper asked what the source of the distances was. Mr. Bednarz stated the numbers relate directly to the equine ordinance. Commissioner Jasper stated it seemed to him there should be a reason for a particular distance from a particular monument and he did not see what the rationale was for picking these distances. Commissioner Jasper thought this needed to be clarified. v. 12-8-7B.3 Bulk Fuel (continued) / Mr. Bednarz stated there is no clear concise definition of what constitutes bulk liquid storage as regulated by City Code. The Fire Department currently requires a permit before installation, repair, removal or alteration. It should be made clear in this section what is specifically regulated, and that it should be properly permitted by the Fire Department. Our Fire Department needs to have knowledge of special hazards that exist within the community and this Code section will enable that to happen. In discussing the issue of why the 1000 gallon cut off, they indicated the 1000 gallons is used because most household heating tanks are 1000 gallons or less. Also, the Minnesota State Fire Code Chapter 34 talks about the tanks above and below ground and they use the 1000 gallon as the cut off for exemptions. The proposed change is a new definition is needed, since one does not currently exist. Under Part A, it is recommended that the threshold for what constitutes a liquid storage tank (that is to be regulated) shall be established. / This should also be shown as a Conditional Use were appropriate in the uses table. The districts that this will be listed as a Conditional Use are R- 1 (Single Family - Rural Agricultural Uses Only), NB (Neighborhood Business), SC(Shopping Center), GB (General Business), I (Industrial). There should also be a provision added that enables public agencies (school district, city, county, state) regardless of the zoning district they are located in to request a Conditional Use Permit. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 12 The Fire Department has reviewed the wording ofthis section and is acceptable to them. The code should also have a provision that a permit is required from the Fire Department to install, alter, repair or remove a tank covered under this provision of City Code. Lastly, the section that established a sunset date (B.3) should be removed from the City Code, since that five year grace period has long since expired (in 1975). Commissioner Vatne asked why the governing body may require the development to dike around tanks. He wondered why this mayor may not be required. He thought it should either be required or not. Commissioner Vatne stated he was concerned about farm liquid storage tanks of one thousand gallons or less capacity used for storing motor fuel for agricultural purposes. He wondered if they would have some people who would be looking to store less than one thousand gallons of gas or something flammable or dangerous call it for agricultural purposes and not being used for agricultural purposes. He thought maybe in some areas from acreage and zoning point, that it legitimately they could keep the tank there for agricultural purposes, it would make sense to say so. He wondered if this might be abused with the language as is. Commissioner Jasper stated the ordinance only addresses tanks of more than one thousand gallons. He did not know if there needed to be an exception that it does not apply to these one that are less than one thousand gallons because as he read the original part, it only applies to tanks that are over one thousand gallons. He did not know if the exceptions do anything. Commissioner Jasper thought item 3 should be clarified to say "existing at the time of adoption of this ordinance" to make that clear. Commissioner Jasper thought every tank would be required to have a permit with the exceptions listed. Mr. Bednarz stated they did not want to have a public hearing for every tank installed. Commissioner Vatne wondered if there was a policy elsewhere in the code that addressed the tanks that are less than bulk on what can be stored and if there is, does it contain language that is consistent with C-l. Mr. Bednarz stated that makes sense and points out a huge deficiency in this. I Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 13 I VI. 12-14-22 Visual Standards Mr. Bednarz explained these standards are intended to prohibit certain building materials. A list of materials is provided, yet it seems to apply only to unfinished materials and the next paragraph allows the same with "proper arrangement or combination with other materials". The proposed change is the update the language, clearly prohibit the items from the existing list unless they are used as accent materials as evaluated by the Andover Review Committee. Commissioner Jasper asked if this just applied to commercial buildings. Mr. Bednarz stated this does not apply itself to any subsets, it only says "prohibited exteriors". Commissioner Jasper asked if someone would use any type of concrete block, is it supposed to be approved by the Andover Review Committee. Mr. Bednarz stated through the building permit process the building is approved. Commissioner Vatne stated the way he read this; a pole barn cannot be constructed. Mr. Bednarz stated there is a section under accessory structure requirements that allows a person to do that if they have more than three acres. This would indicate a pole barn could not be constructed to operate a business out of. Mr. Bednarz thought it would make sense to adjust the language under B and apply it more specifically of how it is most commonly used, which is non-residential buildings. Chairperson Daninger stated how he saw this, they were trying to make this more user friendly. Commissioner Vatne asked what was meant by accent material. Mr. Bednarz stated it was any material used on the building not including the structural material used to build and support the building. Mr. Bednarz stated they could clarify what the materials would be. VB. 12-14-23 Building Height / Mr. Bednarz noted this section allows all structures to exceed the maximum height allowed by City Code 12-3-4 with a conditional use permit under certain circumstances. A line item needs to be added to the Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 14 J proposed uses matrix of City Code 12-13 to show that principle structures are eligible for a CUP to increase the maximum height. The height of accessory structures is regulated by City Code 12-6. Building height regulations need to be applied to the principle structure. Height regulations are dimensional standards that need to be located in City Code 12-3-4 Minimum District Requirements. Exemptions from height limitations are currently provided in 12-4-5 F. This section needs to be edited. Staff is also proposing to remove monuments, smokestacks from this list. The section needs to be moved with the section concerning height to City Code 12-3-4. Commissioner Vatne stated he liked the tables but had a question on the table. He wondered what the "c" meant. Mr. Bednarz stated it meant Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Greenwald asked if the primary reason for this was safety. Mr. Bednarz stated these standards are pretty old and like many cities out of the model code, thirty five feet was kind of a benchmark that was used in terms of a maximum height. Commissioner Vatne thought this was more for aesthetics than for safety. Commissioner Jasper concurred. Chairperson Daninger stated on 2F, he wanted to make sure this should be antenna and he wondered if there was somewhere else in the code for height structures. Mr. Bednarz stated there is an entire chapter in the code for towers. Vlll. 12-15-7 Variances Mr. Cross explained currently the City Code does not require a public hearing for variances. Minnesota State Statutes do not require it either, but residents have indicated that they would like the opportunity to comment on variance requests from nearby property owners. This code revision is essentially a yes/no policy decision: Would the City of Andover like to require a public hearing for variance requests. This revision also adds some definition to the term "Hardship" from the language in the State Statute. Chairperson Daninger stated he was for this because if a resident was going to say something, they would say it no matter what. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 15 , / Commissioner Greenwald wondered if there is not a public hearing, would all property owners within a certain distance would have been notified. Mr. Bednarz stated they would still get notification even though there was not a public hearing. Commission consensus was to allow variances to have a public hearing. IX. 12-15 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Mr. Bednarz stated the City Code should make reference to the Comprehensive Plan as the document that establishes the proper land use (and ultimately zoning) is for a given property in Andover. Currently there is no reference to it at all. The proposed change is to change the wording. Commissioner Greenwald thought this made sense. The Commission liked this. , , OTHER BUSINESS. / Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on related items. Chairperson Daninger thought everyone has done a great job on the work session. Commissioner Vatne stated the City Council had requested to have a summary of the fmdings and or results of the Planning Commission available at the time they are going through the agenda. He wondered if this was something that has been added. He stated it came down to the timing and when the minutes are published. Mr. Bednarz stated right now they have all of the proposed changes up on the website and they are working on an updated table that would be easy for people to reference. Commissioner Vatne stated he thought the City Council meant they were not receiving the information and decisions from the Planning Commission. Mr. Bednarz stated they update the staff report and put the Planning Commission recommendation right in it and however detailed it needs to be to reflect that and then in the report, they attach the minutes from the minutes. \ Commissioner Vatne asked if that information was just recently compiled and provided because in reading the minutes, it clearly said they were not getting the feedback in some cases from the Planning Commission. Mr. Bednarz stated the staff report gets updated on each item on each staff report. Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 26, 2005 Page 16 \ / Commissioner Jasper stated it was in the City minutes that a couple of the Councilmen were commenting that they were dealing with things that had been through the Planning Commission without having the Planning Commission minutes so they did not know what their discussion and debate and public input was. The concern is if they are going through all this work, they want to make sure the Council has that input before they make their decision. Mr. Bednarz stated there may be a specific circumstance they are referring to but the secretary works very hard for them to get those minutes for the expedited items and they do update the staff reports. Mr. Cross stated regarding the zoning revision project on the website, the content on the website is only the hard projects and not the smaller, more minor code changes. ADJOURNMENT. Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Vatne, to adjourn the meeting at 9: 15 p.m. Motion carried on a 7-ayes, O-nays, O-absent vote. Respectfully Submitted, , -' Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary TimeSaver OjJSite Secretarial, Inc.