HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 14, 2005
,
C I T Y 0 F
NDOVE
~c)::- QQ..i
l0~ b-~~-oS
/
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - JUNE 14,2005
The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission was
called to order by Acting Chairperson Kirchoff on June 14, 200S, 7:01 p.m., at the
Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
Commissioners present:
Commissioners Jonathan Jasper, Tim Kirchoff, Rex
Greenwald, Dean Vatne, Michael Casey and Valerie
Holthus.
Commissioners absent:
Chairperson Dean Daninger.
Also present:
City Planner, Courtney Bednarz
Associate Planner, Andy Cross
Associate Planner, Chris Vrchota
Others
/
APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
May 10, 2005
Mr. Bednarz stated he handed out a memo of a portion of the May 10th minutes for the
Silver Meadows project, outlining the changes to the motion and vote as requested by the
Commission. He stated in addition to that Mr. Holasek has pointed out two other items
for the Sophie South minutes. One of the comments was the timing of submittal of his
alternate sketch plan was stated by staff at the meeting that they had not previously seen
it when in fact Mr. Holasek had submitted it previously during the sketch plan process.
Mr. Holasek separately distributed this plan to the Council and it was not included as an
attachment in the preliminary plat report. He believed the Council received their own
copy of the letter and the sketch but he did not believe it followed as an attachment to the
staff report. He stated the item that was important was staff did receive Mr. Holasek's
alternate sketch plan before the meeting.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Casey, to approve the minutes as amended. Motion
carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 2
May 24, 2005
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Casey, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion
carried on a 5-ayes, O-nays, I-present (Vatne), I-absent (Daninger) vote.
V ARlANCE: (05-03) TO VARY FROM THE SIDE YARD SETBACK
REQUIREMENTS FOR LOT 17, BLOCK 1, WOODLAND ESTATES 6TH
ADDITION.
Mr. Bednarz explained the applicant seeks a variance to allow construction of a home
they designed for themselves.
The applicant purchased the property with the understanding that there would be a 25
foot setback on the side that faces Verdin Street NW. Due to the fact that the property to
the north fronts on Verdin Street NW, this setback is actually 35 feet. As a result, the
proposed home will not fit within applicable setbacks as shown in the attachments. An
attached letter further describes the situation. As with all variances, hardship must be
demonstrated to vary from the City Code.
The items that the applicant has brought to staffs attention include the following:
/
1. A misunderstanding about the lot and the building pad being ten feet narrower
than they believed.
2. The home was designed to meet the minimum house size required by Woodland
Development.
3. The home is no larger than a typical home that is being constructed within
Woodland Estates 6th Addition.
4. The curve of the west property line which will prevent the side of the proposed
house from aligning with the front of a house on the property to the north (as is
the intent of the 35 foot setback).
Acting Chairperson Kirchoff asked typically when a house is designed, don't they get an
actual survey plat that shows all of the boundaries. Mr. Bednarz stated with submittal of
a building pennit application, the City does require a survey that shows the setbacks,
location of the home and all of the details. He stated the setbacks for individuaIlots and
development work their way through that plat review process so that at the time the final
plat is recorded all of the details are worked out. He stated he was not sure when the
information was given to the applicant but it has obviously changed from the time they
received it and the time it was approved.
Commissioner Vatne assumed a lot could not be purchased until a fmal plat had been
determined and he would think: that by that time there would be a drawing that indicated
that it was in fact thirty-five feet. Mr. Bednarz stated this was correct. He stated by the
time the fmal plat is approved, the final setbacks are shown. There are a couple of
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 3
different places, even on the preliminary plat drawing that a person can look. There is the
lot specifically and then there is the detail of a typical lot and also the notes on the
preliminary plat page that will show what the setbacks will be in the given circumstance.
Commissioner Vatne asked if lots were purchased typically before the fmal plat is in
place or are offers made. Mr. Bednarz stated lots cannot be closed on until the fmal plat
is recorded and the lot is actually created but he was aware that there are certain
situations where builders and developers take holds on lot before that time.
Commissioner Vatne stated he was trying to determine if hardship exists. There are
circumstances to the property that are not created by the landowner is and believed this to
be true in his determination. He thought this was a hardship.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Vatne, to recommend to the City Council to approve
the proposed Variance. Motion carried on a 6-ayes, a-nays, a-absent vote.
Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the June 21, 2005 City
Council meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING: LOT SPLIT (05-09) TO CREATE A NEW RURAL
RESIDENTIAL PARCEL FROM PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF 17350 WARD
LAKE DRIVE.
Mr. Bednarz summarized the staff report.
Commissioner Holthus indicated the lot to the right, the land just above will have the
same owners as parcel B if the sale goes through. Mr. Bednarz stated his understanding
is the properties will be combined for rural development.
Commissioner Greenwald stated the staff report indicates it will remain in the green acres
program. He wondered what this meant. Mr. Bednarz explained to the Commission
what Green Acres meant.
Commissioner Vatne stated it sounded like the lot split and the variance needed to be
linked together. He stated you cannot split the lot without having the variance because of
the front setback. Mr. Bednarz stated this was correct.
Commissioner Vatne stated the concern he had was if the lot split goes through and the
parcel B is not combined with the surrounding land, it could be developed and that is
what he is afraid of. He did not think there was anything that would stop them. Mr.
Bednarz stated that possibility does exist but he thought it was rather unlikely given the
value of the land and the potential to achieve more than a single rural lot.
\
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 4
Commissioner Vatne stated he understood the Green Acres were a contractual period of
time. He wondered if staff knew how long it would be locked up in Green Acres at this
point. Mr. Bednarz stated the land can remain in Green Acres and receive the reduced
tax rate for as long as it is fanned and there is a homestead connected or nearby.
Commissioner Greenwald asked if Ward Lake Drive was paved or gravel. Mr. Bednarz
stated most of it is paved but rougWy a half mile is gravel.
Commissioner Vatne stated he saw in the recommendation that there is language
pertaining to parcel B that the property will remain in the Green Acres program and
continue to be fanned or will be platted in conformance with City requirements. He
thought this would cover the concerns he had.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Vatne, to open the public hearing at 7:27 p.m.
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
No one wished to address the Commission.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 7:28 p.m.
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nayes, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
Commissioner Jasper asked if this condition that it remain in the Green Acres and fanned
if not platted something the applicant is aware of and agrees to. Mr. Bednarz stated it
was his understanding that it would be fanned until the time it is sold.
The Commission discussed how the properties were combined because they only touched
at the point.
Commissioner Jasper indicated the resolution itself does not contain the variance. Mr.
Bednarz stated it is stated the second WHEREAS on the second page of the resolution
describing the variance should technically carried down into a numbered point at the
bottom of the page.
Motion by Jasper, seconded by Vatne, to recommend to the City Council approve the lot
split for Planning Case OS-09 with the addition that there be a variance for parcel B to
have a 140 foot lot width at Ward Lake Drive as opposed to the required 300 foot lot
width building setback line.
Commissioner Greenwald wondered where the lot width was measured. Mr. Bednarz
indicated it was measured at the setback line.
, /
Commissioner Holthus asked if the eventual owner of Parcel B and the land north of it,
will that individual work with the owner of parcel A to form one larger development.
She wondered if that was what the intent was. Mr. Bednarz stated it was difficult for him
to answer that question for the applicant.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 5
)
,
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the June 21, 2005 City
Council meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING (05-07) TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM
SINGLE FAMILY RURAL RESIDENTIAL (R-1) TO SINGLE FAMILY URBAN
RESIDENTIAL (R-4) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1140 CROSSTOWN
BOULEVARD NW.
Mr. Vrchota explained the Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed
rezoning to allow the lot split on this property to move forward.
As with all rezoning, the City must meet one of the two following [mdings that are
provided by state statute:
1. The original zoning was in error.
2. The character of the area or times and conditions have changed to such an
extent to warrant the Rezoning.
The property is located within the 2020 Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). The
approximately 40 acres directly adjacent to the property has been given preliminary plat
approval for an urban development. City sewer and water will be available to the
property when the utilities are installed for this development. Times and conditions have
changed with the availability of municipal utilities and it is appropriate to rezone the
property at this time to allow for urban residential development.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Casey, to open the public hearing at 7:39 p.m.
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
The applicant indicated he was at the meeting to answer any questions.
Motion by Vatne, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. Motion
carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
Commissioner Vatne thought to the extent of the development around the property, times
and conditions certainly have changed.
Motion by Vatne, seconded by Greenwald, to recommend to the City Council approval of
Resolution No. _, approving the rezoning request based on the fact that times and
conditions have changed. Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
Mr. Vrchota stated that this item would be before the Council at the June 21, 2005 City
Council meeting.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes-June 14,2005
Page 6
1
,
PUBLIC HEARING: LOT SPLIT (05-08) TO CREATE A NEW URBAN
RESIDENTIAL LOT FROM PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1140 CROSSTOWN
BOULEVARDNW.
Mr. Vrchota explained the applicant is proposing to split an existing rural residential lot
into two urban residential lots. The property contains an existing house and a detached
garage. The property owner is working with the developer of "Sophie's South" to
incorporate this property into the proposed development.
The lot split would require the property to be rezoned from R-1 Single Family-Rural
Residential to R-4 Single Family-Urban Residential. The attached survey illustrates the
proposed lot split. After rezoning, both lots will meet the dimensional requirements of
City Code 12-3-4.
The existing garage is to be demolished. The house will be evaluated to determine if it
can be renovated and updated to be compatible in style and quality with the houses that
will be built as a part of the "Sophie's South" development. It may be possible to "turn"
the orientation of the house without physically moving the structure, allowing it to face
154th Avenue. The house would meet all minimum district setback requirements. If it is
determined that the house could not be made compatible with the houses in "Sophie's
South", or that doing so would carry too great of a cost, the house would be razed and a
new house built. The existing driveway onto Crosstown Boulevard will be abandoned.
Both new properties will gain access from 154th Ave NW.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Casey, to open the public hearing at 7:40 p.m.
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
There was no public input.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Vatne, to close the public hearing at 7:40 p.m.
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
Commissioner Jasper asked if the applicant was aware of an agreement with the
requirements that the access onto Crosstown be abandoned and the garage be raised. Mr.
Bednarz stated they were.
Acting Chairperson Kirchoff stated it was mentioned without moving the house they
were going to try to make some cosmetic changes to orient itselfto the rest of the
development. Mr. Bednarz stated this was not a requirement of approval.
)
Mr. Martin Harstad, 2195 Silver Lake Road, stated he is the co-developer in the Sophie's
South Development and once the project was approved, the previous property owners and
them were able to come to an appropriate agreement regarding this parcel. He stated
what is unique about this house is the home will meet all of the setbacks and one of the
builders that will be building homes in the project has looked at the house and thought it
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 7
would be fairly easy to fix the house up and make it blend in with everything else. He
explained what they would do to improve the home. He indicated they would like to
reserve the right to do this for a later date. Mr. Bednarz thought it would be the intent of
the developer to try to reorient the front of the house to either the west or south. Mr.
Harstad stated that was correct.
Commissioner Greenwald asked with the rezoning, were they required to hook up to City
water and sewer. Mr. Bednarz stated there is a specific condition that Mr. Vrchota put in
the resolution that will require both lots to hook up.
Commissioner Greenwald asked when lots are turned over to City water and sewer is
there a requirement to remove the holding tanks for the septic system. Mr. Bednarz
stated the State has requirements on how those need to be abandoned and those would
need to be followed through the building permit process.
Commissioner Vatne stated they have talked about situations like this where there was an
existing home and that there isn't any teeth in any of their ordinances to require the
orientation of the house and he would encourage the developer to try to fit that in and
have the orientation of the house be consistent with the surrounding homes.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Casey, to recommend to the City Council approval
of Resolution No. _, approving the lot split subject to the conditions of the attached
resolution. Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
Mr. Vrchota stated that this item would be before the Council at the June 21, 200S City
Council meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT OF A SINGLE FAMILY RURAL
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS BROOK CROSSING
LOCATED TO THE SOUTHWEST OF HANSON BOULEVARD AND 177TH
AVENUE NW.
Mr. Cross summarized the staff report.
Commissioner Greenwald stated the Council talked a lot of the transportation plan in
regards to connections. In regards to the Transportation Plan, what kind of
considerations are being made. Mr. Bednarz stated the plan follows the sketch plan
review they had. The transportation plan does currently show what is represented as
lS7th Lane on this plat continuing onto the west but there was a decision made through
this process that a cul-de-sac would be allowed and the connection to the west on the
transportation plan would be changed or removed at the time the plan is updated.b
/
Commissioner Vatne wondered if the cul-de-sac on Grouse Street less than SOO feet.
Mr. Bednarz indicated it was beyond SOO feet.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 8
)
Commissioner Vatne stated it was indicated this looked similar to the sketch plan that
was presented when at the time he believed lot one was attempting access onto Hanson
Boulevard and that has changed, he wondered if any attempt has been made to move the
Gross Street cul-de-sac over to enable two and a half acres in lot one. Mr. Cross stated
the wetland prohibits much movement of Gross Street further west to allow lot one to
reach the two and a half acre minimmn.
Commissioner Jasper thought the southerly one hundred fifty feet of it could be moved
which would reconfigure that and make the lot a conforming lot without impeding the
wetlands at all. Mr. Cross showed on the map the area being discussed has a drainage
pond on it and would need to be reconfigured if the lot were reconfigured.
Commissioner Jasper asked if there was a possibility ofreconfiguring the drainage pond.
Mr. Mike Quigley, representing A.J.E. Development, stated the pond cannot be made
smaller.
"
,
Commissioner Jasper stated he was not suggesting making the pond smaller, he was
suggesting the configuration be changed in order to move the road. Mr. Quigley stated
there are wetlands that need to be considered also and they have worked a long time with
staff to make this work and the ponds cannot be reconfigured. What the Commission is
seeing is a combination of wetlands and the storm water requirements. If the cul-de-sac
were to be moved and displace the current location of the storm water pond, they would
end up with a less than desirable situation for one or both of the lots at the south end. Mr.
Bednarz stated they did spend a considerable amount oftime figuring this out with the
Developer. He indicated they could not fmd another way out of the situation.
/
The Commission discussed different configurations that could be done on the parcel with
the Applicant and the potential for meeting the lot size requirements if one of the lots
were removed.
Commissioner Vatne asked about the tree preservation plan and while looking at the
graphic of the trees to be saved he noticed the area went over the building pads as well as
the septic fields and he wondered if this was true. Mr. Quigley stated the tree
preservation plan on the map is actually existing conditions and some of the trees will
need to be removed.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Vatne, to open the public hearing at 8:03 p.m.
Motion carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
There was no public input.
Motion by Vatne, seconded by Casey, to close the public hearing at 8:03 p.m. Motion
carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 9
Commissioner Casey asked if the property owner where the stub is on Hummingbird
expressed anything as far as development on their property. Mr. Bednarz stated the
property is in Ag. Preserve until at least 2011.
Acting Chairperson Kirchoff stated this was similar to what they were'looking at on the
sketch plan. Mr. Cross stated there are similarities and the biggest change is there is no
accesses onto Hanson Boulevard, so the internal road structure had been added to
accommodate the entire internal road structure.
Commissioner Vatne indicated he was not comfortable with this plan the way it is with
the variances given the length of the cul-de-sacs and then less than two and a half acres
on lot one. He did not see any conditions for hardship to allow two variances. He
thought this solely economic and was not in favor of the plat.
Commissioner Jasper agreed and thought the lot could become conforming either by
reconfiguring the street or by eliminating one of the lots and combining them so the only
reason to do the variance on the lot is to keep on additional lot. He stated he was also
concerned about the way the preliminary plat was presented. There are access problems
and the drainfields do not seem to be properly placed. He stated the proposal does not
address the tree preservation plan at all.
Acting Chairperson Kirchoff thought the trees would be removed from the building pad
areas but not around them. Commissioner Jasper stated a drainfield cannot be put in
without taking out trees so they have not given any plans for preserving trees because
eighty percent of what they show for tree preservation is actually going to need to be
removed.
Acting Chairperson Kirchoff concurred that a drainfield could not be put in without
removing trees; if this were not allowed it almost stifles the development to the point
where the property could not be developed. Commissioner Jasper stated he was not
saying they had to preserve the trees where they were placing the drainfields, what he
was saying was their ordinance requires indication in the plan where trees will be
preserved and this plan does not do that.
Commissioner Jasper stated the more serious issues are the variances for the cul-de-sac
and a lot that neither of which appears to be necessitated by the topography or
requirements to develop the land; it is an economic process of trying to get in another lot.
Commissioner Greenwald asked 17Sth Lane a cul-de-sac all the way from Hanson or is it
just from Hummingbird Street. Commissioner Jasper stated the SOO foot Grouse cul-de-
sac was what concerned him.
Commissioner Greenwald asked when the Fire Chief reviews these plats and gives
comments. Mr. Cross stated he did review this already and he did not receive any written
comments regarding this project.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 10
Acting Chairperson Kirchoff stated he could support the variance on Grouse Street
because it they do shorten it, they will have a bunch of almost vacant land which does not
increase the value to the City. He thought it added quality to the whole development to
allow the lots to be where they are with the wetland areas and he thought this made better
lots. He did not think the length of the cul-de-sac on Grouse Street was a big issue
because there will only be two houses there and does not front a lot of homes. He stated
he was comfortable with the variances.
Mr. Greenwald noted there were actually three variances for this plat instead of two
because there are two cul-de-sac variances.
Motion by Vatne, seconded by Casey, to recommend to the City Council denial of the
Preliminary Plat of Brook Crossing due to the number of variances discussed. Motion
carried on a 5-ayes, I-nays (Kirchoff), I-absent (Daninger) vote.
Mr. Bednarz stated that this item would be before the Council at the June 21, 200S City
Council meeting. .
WORK SESSION: ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE
1. City Code 12-1S-4 Code Text Amendments
This section of the code describes who may initiate an amendment to the text of the City
Code. It presents an opportunity, however, for unreasonable or impractical amendment
proposals to be brought before the Planning Commission. Staffhas no recourse to
decline proposals. In addition, applicants have no recourse to appeal if Staff should
administratively decline their proposal before it is heard by the Planning Commission.
The City Code should also make reference to the Comprehensive Plan as the document
that establishes the proper land use (and ultimately zoning) for a given property in
Andover. Currently there is no reference at all.
The proposed change is language will be inserted into the existing code that will allow
Staff to perform an administrative review of proposed text amendments to the City Code
before they go before the Planning Commission for action. The "Amendments" section
is also the ideal location to reference the Comp Plan as the guiding document for land use
changes.
Commissioner Greenwald asked what the logic was behind instead of "any person", now
you have to be a property owner to initiate the rezoning. Mr. Cross stated they did
include "as designee" in there for builders and developers.
Commissioner Jasper asked if there has been a situation where someone other than an
'\ owner or their particular designee has tried to initiate a rezoning. Mr. Cross stated he was
not aware of any.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 11
/
Il. City Code 12-15-10 Public Hearing Process
Chapter 12-15 contains the process for a Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit Application,
and Variances. Each of these sections contains its own language regarding a public
notice and hearing process. This is needless and redundant because the public hearing
and Planning Commission/City Council review is the same for each of these actions.
The proposed change is Chapter 12-15 will contain one subsection that will clearly
explain the City's public hearing process including Planning Commission review and
City Council approval. The language in the Rezoning, CUP, and Variance sections
referring to the Public Hearing process will be deleted. References to the new section
describing the City's Public Hearing process will be added to each of these sections, as
well as the sections of the Code regarding Sketch Plans and Preliminary Plats, which also
require public hearings. This new section regarding Public Hearings will be 12-15-8.
The former sections 8, 9, and 10 will be renumbered to reflect this.
Commissioner Greenwald asked where an item borders another City, do they send
notices to all property owners or only property owners within the City. Mr. Bednarz
stated they do send within 350 feet regardless of the municipal boundary and also to their
City Hall to make them aware.
/
Ill.
IV.
V.
VI.
City Code 12-13 1 B Animals (Continued)
City Code 9-9-11 Housing Maintenance
City Code 9-4-4 Swimming Pools, Spas and Hot Tub
City Code 12-8-7B.3 Bulk Fuel (Continued)
The Commission indicated they did not have their information packets so these items
were postponed to a future meeting.
VB. City Code General Discussion Item - Front Porches
Several residents with homes that sit at the front setback line have inquired about adding
a front porch to their older homes. Some cities encourage investment in older homes by
allowing front porches to encroach into the front yard setback area.
Commissioner Vatne asked what are some of the drawbacks they get into if they go down
this road. Mr. Bednarz stated one drawback is there will be variable setbacks and some
people may want to do these and some may not.
Commissioner Greenwald thought he would be in favor of them.
Commissioner Vatne stated he would be in favor of a porch concept but not an expansion
\ of the home.
, /
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 12
Commissioner Jasper stated this will be a very narrowly defined open air designed porch.
Commissioner Greenwald thought the information from Woodbury was good and staff
could expand on this to include more sp~cific items.
Consensus of the Commission was to have staff look into this further using the
Woodbury language.
VIlt. City Code General Discussion Item - Dirt Bikes
A request has been received from a resident to develop an ordinance restricting the
operation of recreational motorized vehicles on residential property.
Commissioner Jasper asked if this differentiated between dirt bikes and all terrain
vehicles. Mr. Cross stated this is a decision the Commission can make. The proposed
language by the resident does make very clear distinction.
/
Commissioner Greenwald stated by State Code, they need to word it OHM (Off Highway
Motorcycles), is the legal term. He stated he did not like the wording at all and drives
him crazy when someone wants to regulate what someone else does on their own land
except he does have the tolerance for the land owner in regards to noise. He thought the
wording that was good was in regards to setting a time enforcement. He did not think
anyone should be out on an OHM, ATV or a snowmobile after 8:00 p.m. making noise.
As far as the ramps, how can they regulate someone on their own property. He stated
they have an ordinance for noise and they could put in something regarding a time frame
for the noise.
Commissioner Vatne stated as long as the noise is not bothersome and they control the
noise, it is sufficient.
Commissioner Greenwald stated they cannot tell a resident they cannot build a ramp or
berm. He noted there is not a way to control dust carrying over to a neighbor's property.
Commissioner Casey asked if there were any regulations on dirt bikes in relations to lot
size. Commissioner Greenwald stated they do not but what they try to do on that is write
in the wording "distances".
Commissioner Greenwald stated where there really are problems is where people have
tracks set up and people are using them later in the evening. He wondered though where
to draw the line.
,
Commissioner Holthus wondered what the County has regarding noise and when
someone has to deal with loud noises. She wondered if there was some kind of
disturbing the peace. Mr. Cross stated he was not familiar with County regulations but
the Council in 2002 added a noise ordinance which mimics the State Statutes in regards
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 13
to noise nuisance and they do have a decibel measurement tool and a stop watch and they
are capable of measuring the volume of potential nuisance noises.
Commissioner Jasper stated he would not disagree with putting hour prohibitions on the
operations of dirt bikes or A TV's and he wouldn't differentiate between the two in a
residential neighborhood just like they do with snowmobiles because that makes sense.
He stated the wording suggests doing something to control dust and he did not think that
was reasonable or enforceable. There is also a proposal that the property owner is
responsible for proving that the noise ordinance is not violated. He stated this is
unconstitutional. He also did not think it was reasonable to not allow ramps to be used.
Commissioner Greenwald discussed information about ATV's and OHM's with the
Commission and staff.
Commissioner Greenwald asked if they would be willing to make some changes based on
one complaint.
Commissioner Holthus thought they needed to make some determination on what is
appropriate and not for the dirt bikes.
/
Commissioner Greenwald thought they needed to do something regarding the times but
he did not think they could regulate what they can do on their land.
Commissioner Casey also thought they needed to include something in the ordinance
regarding times to use the bikes.
Staff discussed how they test for noise violations with the Commission.
Commissioner Consensus was to look at adding a time to the ordinance along with a
definition of "dirt bike".
OTHER BUSINESS.
Mr. Bednarz updated the Planning Commission on related items.
ADJOURNMENT.
Motion by Greenwald, seconded by Vatne, to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Motion
carried on a 6-ayes, O-nays, I-absent (Daninger) vote.
Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes - June 14, 2005
Page 14
Respectfully Submitted,
Sue Osbeck, Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
"