HomeMy Public PortalAbout12-14-2010CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
1. Call to Order: Commissioner Victoria Reid called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
Present: Planning Commissioners Victoria Reid, Robin Reid (arrived at 7:06 p.m.),
John Anderson, Kent Williams, and Beth Nielsen.
Absent: Kathleen Martin, Charles Nolan
Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke
2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda
No public comments.
3. Update from City Council proceedings
Council member Weir presented a report of recent activities and decisions by the City
Council.
4. Planning Department Report
Finke provided an update of various Planning projects as well as potential
applications which may be reviewed at the January meeting.
5. Approval of November 9, 2010 Planning Commission meeting minutes
Motion by Anderson, seconded by V. Reid to approve the November 9, 2010
minutes with recommended changes. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: Martin,
Nolan)
6. Discussion: 2011 Planning Commission Goal Setting
Finke stated the purpose of the discussion was to review the planning and zoning
related ordinances which have been identified by the City for review and to make a
recommendation to the City Council on how to prioritize them. He stated that the
City had worked on approximately a dozen subjects over the past few years and there
were another 13-18 on this list. Finke estimated that it was realistic to believe the
City would be able to touch on 7 or 8 subjects during 2011.
Williams noted that the timeline suggested that a few of the subjects had been
discussed previously by the Planning Commission and City Council and inquired if
work had been completed on any of the subjects, or if they were all basically starting
1
from scratch. Finke stated that amendments to these ordinances which had been done
previously had been narrow in scope so that they are basically back to square one.
Anderson inquired if some of the subjects could be combined and reviewed together,
such as signage and lighting. Finke responded that staff has attempted to combine a
number of the subjects and would look for ways to do more.
V. Reid inquired about the Supreme Court case related to variances and how it
impacts the City's timing. Finke described the Krummenacher v. Minnetonka
decision and how it decreased the discretion a City has to approve a variance. Finke
said that the League of Minnesota Cities is planning to lobby for a change in the law,
which means the City might need to change the language to be consistent with the
new law, and that is why staff recommends a relative low priority. Williams stated
that the decision basically says that a variance can only be granted if there is no way
to reasonably use a property without the variance.
Weir stated that she thought the sign ordinance had just recently been amended.
Finke responded that it had been over four years, and staff has noticed some things
worth reviewing during the implementation. He stated that more importantly, the
ordinance was based on 2006 zoning districts, so staff was concerned that an
argument could be made about which regulations apply to the new zoning districts.
He stated that signage is always a controversial issue, and is likely to take a lot of
effort. Finke suggested that it may be possible to make the technical clean-up to add
the new zoning districts, and place a lower priority on the policy questions. The
general consensus of the Commission was to place a high priority on cleaning up the
zoning district names
R. Reid stated that she believed regulations on wind and solar energy should be a high
priority.
Anderson suggested that the Commission start with staff s six highest priorities, and
if the consensus is that the Commission agrees with these, to add the discussion about
lot frontage/flag lot regulations and accessory dwelling units.
Commissioners discussed whether the flag lot and lot frontage issue will be
complicated as it was during the Hunter Ridge Farm discussion. Finke stated that he
believed this subject would be less complicated when discussed in general terms
rather than within the context of a particular property.
The general consensus of the Commission was to recommend that the City place a
high priority on the first six subjects mentioned in the staff report and to place lot
frontage/flag lot regulations and accessory dwelling unit regulations as a high priority
as well.
2
7. City Council Meeting Schedule
December 21 — Williams
January 4 — R. Reid
8. Adiourn
Motion by V. Reid, seconded by Anderson to adjourn the meeting at 7:55 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: Martin, Nolan)
3