Tuesday, November 24, 2020 · 7:00 PM
Agenda
Not posted
What was on the agenda.
One-line summary
The Planning & Zoning Commission continued the Leistico subdivision hearing, recommended conditional approval of the Swanson/Sonsteby Burns Auto IUP and variance, recommended several RRT/code amendment changes, canceled the December 22 meeting, and adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
10 items as recorded in the packet and minutes, each with a plain-English summary of what was at issue.
A1Call to order
Meeting called to order.
The minutes record the meeting being called to order at 7:17 p.m.
A2Pledge of Allegiance
Pledge of Allegiance.
The agenda listed the pledge, but the minutes do not separately record whether it occurred.
A3Roll call
Roll call.
The minutes record roll call and list Rob Schiller and Harold Jorgensen as absent.
A4Approve/amend agenda
Approve or amend the November 24, 2020 meeting agenda.
The agenda was amended to add cancellation of the December 22, 2020 P&Z meeting.
A5Approve prior meeting minutes
Approve the October 27, 2020 Planning & Zoning meeting minutes and November 5, 2020 special meeting minutes.
The minutes record a motion to approve both sets of minutes.
A6Leistico Estate subdivision public hearing
Continued public hearing on the Leistico Estate subdivision at 21413 Nowthen Blvd.
The Commission did not take up the substance of the Leistico Estate subdivision. It continued the public hearing on the request to subdivide three existing lots at 21413 Nowthen Blvd into four parcels until the January 26, 2021 Planning & Zoning meeting.
The public hearing was continued to the January 26, 2021 Planning & Zoning meeting.
A7Swanson/Sonsteby IUP and variance for Burns Auto site
Continued public hearing on the Swanson/Sonsteby Interim Use Permit and Variance for reuse of the Burns Auto site at 5340 199th Avenue NW for used auto sales.
The Commission heard the continued public hearing on Rick Sonsteby’s proposed reuse of the Burns Auto site for used auto sales and the related 10.2-foot bufferyard variance. Staff reported on MnDOT’s planned apron, failed but non-imminent septic compliance inspections, lighting standards, Anoka County Environmental Services’ site inspection, and the stormwater pond. Neighbors continued to raise concerns about road wear, traffic, lighting, runoff, and neighborhood impacts. The Commission recommended approval with the 33 staff conditions, added a requirement that the applicant be responsible for the cost of paving to the west side of the first main driveway, added landscape-buffer language, and asked for yearly Sheriff-report review.
The Commission recommended approval of the IUP and variance with 33 conditions, discussed changes, a paving-cost condition, a landscape buffer addition, and an annual Sheriff-report review.
A8City Code amendments for RRT, buildability, driveways, and single-family standards
Continued public hearing on amendments to the City Code, including Rural Residential Transition district standards, lot buildability, parking and driveway setbacks, and single-family development standards.
The Commission continued work on City Code amendments for the Rural Residential Transition district and related standards. It recommended lot-buildability language requiring 15,000 square feet with two feet of separation for the house area, one contiguous acre with one foot of separation and no wetland for the yard area, and groundwater verification by piezometer or an equivalent method. It also recommended allowing gravel second driveways regardless of location and allowing only architectural-grade steel with hidden fasteners as metal siding in the RRT district.
The Commission approved recommendations on lot buildability, groundwater-verification language, second driveway surfacing, and metal siding language.
A9Cancel December 22, 2020 P&Z meeting
Added agenda item to cancel the December 22, 2020 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting.
After amending the agenda to add the item, the Commission voted to officially cancel the December 22, 2020 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting.
The December 22, 2020 P&Z meeting was canceled by motion.
A10Adjourn
Adjourn the meeting.
Before adjournment, Commission members thanked Barry Wagner for 13 years of service on the Planning & Zoning Commission. The meeting then adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
The meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
8 motions on the record. Split votes are highlighted.
M1Motion by Ames; 2nd by Pearo to Amend tonight's meeting agenda of November 24, 2020.
Motion by Ames; 2nd by Pearo to Amend tonight's meeting agenda of November 24, 2020.
moved by Ames, seconded by Pearo
M2Motion by Pearo; 2nd by Wagner to Approve the Planning & Zoning Meeting minutes of October 27, 2020 and Special Meeting minutes of November 5, 2020.
Motion by Pearo; 2nd by Wagner to Approve the Planning & Zoning Meeting minutes of October 27, 2020 and Special Meeting minutes of November 5, 2020.
moved by Pearo, seconded by Wagner
M3Motion by Ames; 2nd by Alders to continue the public hearing until January 26, 2021 Planning & Zoning Meeting.
Motion by Ames; 2nd by Alders to continue the public hearing until January 26, 2021 Planning & Zoning Meeting.
moved by Ames, seconded by Alders
M4Alders made the Motion to approve the IUP with the 33 conditions presented by Planner Stockman and the changes that were discussed above, and an added condition that the Applicant shall be responsible for the cost of paving up to the west side of the first main driveway. He also wanted to recommend a yearly review with the Sheriff to determine if this car lot is driving crime in the area or not.
Alders made the Motion to approve the IUP with the 33 conditions presented by Planner Stockman and the changes that were discussed above, and an added condition that the Applicant shall be responsible for the cost of paving up to the west side of the first main driveway. He also wanted to recommend a yearly review with the Sheriff to determine if this car lot is driving crime in the area or not.
moved by Alders, seconded by Pearo
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
M5Alders made the Motion to approve 15,000 sq ft of land with 2 ft separation for the house structure, and 1 acre contiguous land area with 1 ft separation with no wetland for the yard area; to leave the piezometer requirement, but to include the wording "or some other equivalent method to determine highest ground water elevation" to the verbiage.
Alders made the Motion to approve 15,000 sq ft of land with 2 ft separation for the house structure, and 1 acre contiguous land area with 1 ft separation with no wetland for the yard area; to leave the piezometer requirement, but to include the wording "or some other equivalent method to determine highest ground water elevation" to the verbiage.
moved by Alders, seconded by Ames
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
M6Pearo made the Motion to change the 11-3-6 K.2.c verbiage to allow gravel surfaces on second driveways, regardless of the location, and to change the wording in 11-4-13 E. regarding metal siding to say "architectural grade steel with hidden fasteners" as the only metal siding allowed in the RRT District.
Pearo made the Motion to change the 11-3-6 K.2.c verbiage to allow gravel surfaces on second driveways, regardless of the location, and to change the wording in 11-4-13 E. regarding metal siding to say "architectural grade steel with hidden fasteners" as the only metal siding allowed in the RRT District.
moved by Pearo, seconded by Alders
All in favor. Motion Carried.
M7Pearo made the Motion to officially cancel the December 22, 2020 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting; Alders 2nd.
Pearo made the Motion to officially cancel the December 22, 2020 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting; Alders 2nd.
moved by Pearo, seconded by Alders
All in favor; Motion Carried.
M8Motion to Adjourn by Wagner; 2nd by Ames.
moved by Wagner, seconded by Ames
Unanimous Approval.
When someone referred back to earlier business, we found the matching prior discussion and tied it in here.
When the project started, they looked back at the minutes and determined that the City Council did not require the road to be updated in 2016 when they expanded their operations.
— Liz Stockman
What this is about
Whether the City or the Burns Auto property owner had previously been required to pave 199th Avenue in connection with the 2016 expansion.
The records I searched do not contain a prior 2016 City Council decision matching this recollection. In the results provided, there is no meeting record showing that Burns Auto, or the property owner, was required to pave or update 199th Avenue as a condition of a 2016 expansion. The search results do include 2026 road-improvement assessment materials for other streets and a separate 2026 land-use discussion where residents raised concerns about traffic and road impacts, but those records do not reference Burns Auto, 199th Avenue, or a 2016 paving requirement.
When he was at the meeting at 2016 and most of the neighbors were there, the decision was made to have the property owners pave the roadway to the 2nd driveway. After that meeting, it was decided by either the Commission or the Council that they did NOT have to pave the roadway because it was took expensive.
— Ron Ostendorf
What this is about
Neighbor recollection that paving the road to the second driveway had been discussed or decided during the 2016 Burns Auto proceedings.
The records I searched do not contain a prior 2016 Burns Auto decision matching this recollection. The search results returned unrelated 2026 packet material, ordinance text, and other agenda items, but no meeting minutes or packet excerpt showing that the Planning Commission or City Council required paving to the second driveway and later removed that requirement because of cost. So, based on these search results, I cannot confirm that such a paving requirement was formally approved or later reversed in the city records provided here.
Johnson said that his understanding was that as part of the upgrade that was approved in 2016, the road was included in that recommendation to the City Council, and the Council removed it as a condition for approval. Planner Stockman verified that in 2016 the PZ did recommend paving of the road, but when it went to Council it was removed as a condition.
— Roy Johnson and Liz Stockman
What this is about
Prior 2016 P&Z recommendation to pave 199th Avenue and the City Council’s later removal of that condition.
The records I searched do not contain a prior 2016 Planning and Zoning recommendation or City Council decision matching this recollection about paving 199th Avenue, nor do they show a Council vote removing that paving requirement as a condition of approval. The search results do show related road-improvement material from 2026, including the 2026 Overlay Road Improvement Project discussed in the April 14, 2026 and May 12, 2026 packets, but those documents list other roads and do not include 199th Avenue. A March 10, 2026 packet also includes a general permit condition that site access be from a paved publicly accepted road unless gravel access is approved by the City Council and Fire Chief, but that is not the 2016 action described.
agreements related to those applications, including direct costs such as recording fees and third- party consultants (Attorney, Engineer, Planner, septic, or others). Escrow amounts for applica
be stored on the back slab on the south side of the property, which is screened by trees and not visible from roads or to neighbors. Mayor Shane Hybben asked Planner Nash to display the property
be stored on the back slab on the south side of the property, which is screened by trees and not visible from roads or to neighbors. Mayor Shane Hybben asked Planner Nash to display the property on sc
## CITY OF NOWTHEN ANOKA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA ## RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX ## AMENDED RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AND NOTICE
# CITY OF NOWTHEN ANOKA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA # RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX # RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AND NOTICE OF ASSESSME
Documents and recordings archived for this meeting, when available.
The structured brief on this page is auto-generated and may need correction. The PDFs and the meeting recording remain the official record. What do the trust labels mean?