Loading...
1986-11-12 Joint Council-Planning Comm minutes Land UsePage No. November 12, 1986 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Special Council Meeting Held Wednesday, November 12, 1986 Acting Mayor Witt called the meeting to order at 7:12 P.M. for the purpose of a Joint Land Use Workshop with the Planning Commission. The following members were present: Mayor Lockwood, Councilmembers Blesener, Cummins, Hartmann and Witt, Mayor-elect Mertensotto and the following Planning Com- mission members were present: Morson, McMonigal, Henning, Duggan and Krebsbach. INTRODUCTION City Administrator Frazell gave a brief introduc- tion to the workshop. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS City Attorney Hart was present to discuss the legal standards in making land use regulation decisions. First he described legislative vs. quasi judicial decisions. He specifically made a point that a conditional use permit for a planned unit develop- ment, being a quasi-judicial decision, is techni- cally a right, not a privilege, although there is a strong element of subjectivity which an applicant must meet. He also stressed that when ever possi- ble the Council should make findings on decisions for land use matters. He went on to review the Local authority to enact Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances. He stated that Zoning Ordinances do control over the Comprehensive Plan however that a City is required to rezone to bring the Zoning Ordinance in line with the Comprehensive Plan unless there is a ra- tional basis not to do so. He stated that it was unreasonable to deny a re- quest on the basis of maintaining the "character" of a neighborhood. Council should do regulation at zoning ordinance level. Tom stated that Council can not deny a subdivision if it meets the standards of the Zoning Ordinance. Landowners have the fundamental right to develop their land. Tom went on to talk about the concept of "taking" in land use. He stated that it was difficult for landowners to prove taking, because if there is any reasonable use of the land remaining it is not a taking. It is easier to prove damages if the City spot zones. PLANNING IMPLICATIONS PROGRAM CHANGES Finally Tom spoke about acceptable basis for denying variances. He said that after a variance has been granted, following similar variances will then need to have compelling reasons for denial. City Planner Dahlgren was present to discuss Comprehensive Planning in the City. He gave a brief history of planning within the City, speaking on the original Comprehensive Plan as it was first prepared in 1959 and then modified twenty years later in 1979. Mr. Dahlgren spoke of preparing check lists for planning applicants. This was well received and should be implemented. Following the presentations by the City Attorney and Planner, workshop participants developed the following list of areas of interest for the staff and Council to address during the zoning and amendment process: VARIANCES Routine variances will be primarily dealt with by the Planning Commission, then placed on the Council consent calendar. Written consent from all property owners within 100 feet will be required, or else a formal public hearing will be held with mailed notice. ZONING CODE Lot area requirements (particularly side yard) should be related to house size. Floor-area ratio might be one approach. Review appropriateness for lot size requirements in all Business districts. Consider requirement for attached garage, except by specific variance. Look at non-conforming use language in Section 4.3(7). Look at standards for commercial/industrial building permit review in Section 4.17. Consider need for elevation requirements for garage/floor grades. Consider regulation of alignment of homes on cul- de-sacs. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE Review appropriateness for required submission materials now in ordinance. Reduce cul-de-sac size requirement. Consider expression of policy preference for residential street design that discourages thru traffic. Delete code requirement that final plats go back to the Planning Commission. Improve or bolster review of parks/green space. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Revise definition of net buildable area to exclude open water, and perhaps other area that would be otherwise unbuildable. Require 4/5's vote of the Council where the PUD will change the type of land use from that stipulated in the underlying zoning. Consider an option for the developer to have a pre- application conference with the Council, as well as the Planning Commission. Hold public hearing earlier in the process (perhaps sketch plan stage), and consider earlier Council input. Amend language, as necessary, to insure that PUDs are regarded as a privilege, not a legal right. Clarify the process for amendments to Conditional Use Permits, which includes PUDs. CRITICAL AREA REVIEW Waive fee and allow staff approval for minor variances (i.e. previously constructed single- family home totally inconformance to CAO ordinance standards). ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARING ISSUES Require published notice of public hearing for Conditional Use Permits, as stipulated by State statute. This includes PUDs. ADJOURN Clarify that staff is responsible for setting the date and time of public hearing, and sending out proper notice as required. Hold required public hearings at the Planning Commission only, and do not duplicate at the Council. This refers to formal public hearings. Citizens would still have the opportunity to speak at the Council meeting as recognized by the Mayor. FENCE REQUIREMENTS Adopt 3'- 4' as allowed fence height in the front yard, which should reduce the number of variance applications. Review line of site requirements in Section 4.7. MISCELLANEOUS Staff to develop checklist of required submission materials to be given applicants. Also "toughen Up,,. Develop public information brochure that updates where the City is in accomplishment of its long- range plan. Clarify and toughen penalties and other remedies for non-compliance with land use regulations. There being no further discussion at the workshop, Councilmember Hartmann moved, seconded by Witt to ad- journ the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 10:44 P.M. ATTEST: p,,t_th,t oestko-o-T-A. Robert G. libcawood, Mayor - ames E. Danielson, P.W. Director