Loading...
2022-11-17 Planning Commission Work Session MinutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP NOTES NOVEMBER 17, 2022 A special workshop relating to the Zoning Code Update was held on Thursday, November 17, 2022 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 5:30 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Vice Chair Sally Lorberbaum, Commissioners Cindy Johnson, Brian Petshel, and Michael Toth Also present: Community Development Director Tim Benetti; Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp; City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson. Vice Chair Lorberbaum started the workshop at 5:40 p.m. Planner Haskamp reiterated that no action is taken at these workshops, and the Commission and Council will provide feedback on the full draft of the Code. Administration and Process Discussion Planner Haskamp introduced the administration section. Planner Haskamp described the key objectives of editing and drafting the administration section. Planner Haskamp described the different application types that administration section has to address and the corresponding state statutes. Planner Haskamp described the types of permits/reports that are not subject to the state statutes. Planner Haskamp presented topics for discussion to change/add in the administration section. Director Benetti described what a site plan review process would do for the City and Planning Commission, such as seeing proposed development plans, even if the proposed use was allowed. Planner Haskamp described that the site plan review would give the Planning Commission a chance to review a development for design and site standards, and the Planning Commission can give recommendations based on the Code. The Site Plan Review process would not apply to a single-family/duplex residential property. A Site Plan Review could potentially be used in cases where a variance would be hard to justify. Planner Haskamp will draft language for a Site Plan Review process for the Commission to review. Planner Haskamp presented the idea of a Concept Plan Review process. The Concept Review process would be adding the ability for applicants and the Planning Commission to have a conversation with a potential developer. The Commission discussed the potential drawbacks of a Concept Review Plan, such as the Planning Commission saying an idea would be okay but then circumstances change with the actual application. The Concept Plan review can potentially go to Council for feedback, or it can only be the Planning Commission. Planner Haskamp described that the Concept Plan Review is non-binding and no action is taken. Planner Haskamp will draft a section for Concept Plan Reviews and it can be taken out of the code if the Commission wants later. Planner Haskamp discussed the potential addition of a Certificate of Compliance/Administrative Permit. Planner Haskamp described that it’s essentially a way to do code compliance checks. For example, a home-occupation like an attorney who works from a home office and needs a certain amount of parking to make sure there are no any adverse effects. Then, if the user is not following the Certificate of Compliance/Administrative Permit, the City has recourse. Planner Hakamp will draft language for the COC/AP process for the Commission to review. The Commission discussed if this would be the way to address treehouses. Planner Haskamp suggested adding language about size, utility hookups, height, insultation, and making the distinction between a “primitive” and “advanced” treehouse structure. A more “advanced” treehouse structure could be considered an accessory structure. Planner Haskamp also suggested adding some basic standards for play structures, such as setbacks, height requirements, screening requirements, etc. The Commission also discussed potential issues with antennas, such as ham radio towers. Planner Haskamp asked the Commission for other general hot topics for the Code. The Commission discussed front yard gardens, such as vegetable gardens. There could be issues such as equipment being left out, irrigation systems, mismatched materials, tall posts, fencing, etc. Planner Haskamp discussed that aesthetics are difficult to regulate. Planner Haskamp gave the example of another city that does not allow front yard gardens at all. Planner Haskamp will research if there are any comparable regulations about front yard gardens. Planner Haskamp will draft language for the Commission to review. The Commission also asked about excessive Christmas lights. Additionally, the Commission discussed the definition of structure and standards, in terms of structures in the front yard. Planner Haskamp described other cities have addressed it by requiring a Certificate of Compliance for any structure in the front yard. The Commission also brought up the issue of covered work trailers being parked on driveways. Currently, the Code does not allow trailers in the front yard, only in the side yard and rear yard. The existing language will remain in the Code. Director Bennetti brought up the topic of small/personal WECS (wind energy conversion systems). Planner Haskamp described that if the small WECS are defined as an accessory structure, they would be limited to the accessory structure standards. Standards specifically for WECS would be height, diameter and power level. Planner Haskamp gave an example of a standard that the WECS setback must be equal to the height. The Commission would like to see the full draft before the Council sees it. The work session adjured at 7:36 p.m.