Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout01.18.2022 City Council Meeting MinutesMEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 18.2022 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on January 18, 2022, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Martin presided. Martin read a statement explaining that the meeting is being held virtually due to the ongoing pandemic and provided instructions for public participation. I. ROLL CALL Members present: Albers, Cavanaugh, DesLauriers, Martin, and Reid. Members absent: None. Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Attorney Ron Batty, Finance Director Erin Barnhart, City Engineer Jim Stremel, City Planning Director Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, Planning Intern Colette Baumgardner, and Chief of Police Jason Nelson. 11. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:03 p.m.) III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:03 p.m.) The agenda was approved as presented. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:04 p.m.) A. Approval of the January 4.2022. Regular Citv Council Meeting Minutes Moved by Martin, seconded by DesLauriers, to approve the January 4, 2022, regular City Council meeting minutes as presented. A roll call vote was performed: DesLauriers aye Albers aye Cavanaugh aye Reid aye Martin aye Motion passed unanimously. V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:05 p.m.) A. Approve Resolution Granting Extension of Time to Request Final Plat Approval for Adams Subdivision; Amending Resolution No. 2020-20 B. Approve Resolution Granting Extension of Time to Effectuate Adam's Pest Control Site Plan Review Approval; Amending Resolution 2020-21 C. Accept John Jacob's Resignation from the Park Commission D. Approve Tennis Court Rental Agreement with Carrie Aare E. Approve Hiring of Planning and Building Assistant Medina City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022 1 F. Approve Resolution for X -Golf Gambling License G. Resolution Approving Recycling Grant Agreement with Hennepin County Albers referenced Items A and B, noting that this is not the first extension. He asked if there is a limit on the length that time extensions can be granted. Finke stated that ultimately it would be the discretion of the Council as to whether to allow an extension. He stated that staff does complete a review to ensure that there have not been any changes to the regulations since the original approval. He stated that if nothing has changed it would make sense not to go back through the entire review process. Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by Reid, to approve the consent agenda. A roll call vote was performed: DesLauriers aye Albers aye Cavanaugh aye Redi aye Martin aye Motion passed unanimously. VI. COMMENTS (7:08 p.m.) A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda There were none. B. Park Commission Scherer reported that the Commission will meet the following night to consider park dedication for three proposed developments. He noted that the Commission will also appoint officers for 2022. C. Planning Commission Finke reported that the Planning Commission met the previous week to hold four public hearings. He stated that the Commission considered the Meander Park and Boardwalk development which is a PUD Concept Plan for commercial and residential development. The Commission was generally supportive of the use of the PUD tool and the presented concept with a few suggestions related to layout and traffic flow. The Commission also considered the Preliminary Plat and PUD General Plan of Development for Marsh Pointe, which is a 30 -lot residential subdivision. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request. He stated that the Commission also considered the Comprehensive Plan amendment request related to the Cates Industrial Park project. He stated that the Commission recommended approval with a vote of 4-3. He stated that the Commission also considered the ordinance related to rooftop elements and recommended adoption of the ordinance with a vote of 6-1. He stated that the one Commissioner in opposition would like to see additional flexibility for the ordinance. He stated that the Commission also held its elections with Nielsen reappointed as Chair and Rhem elected as Vice Chair. Albers asked if the first item considered was a concept plan review. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022 2 Finke confirmed that the Meander Park and Boardwalk development was a PUD concept plan. VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Rooftop Ordinance Discussion (7:16 p.m.) Johnson stated that the Council reviewed the draft ordinance at its December 21st meeting and the draft ordinance returned to the Planning Commission for additional review at its January 11th meeting. Baumgardner stated that the discussion tonight is in response to the moratorium that the Council enacted in November related to rooftop elements. She provided a summary of the background information reviewed in the last presentation to the Council in December noting that the rooftop elements have been divided into the categories of architectural features and mechanical equipment. She stated that following the December presentations to the Council and Planning Commission, staff completed additional research. She stated that the Planning Commission held a public hearing at its meeting the previous week and recommended adoption of the ordinance. She stated that the intention tonight is to present information to the Council and seek any additional questions from the Council, noting that the item would then return to the Council at a future meeting for consideration of adoption. Martin commented that a redline version of the draft ordinance was circulated to the Council earlier today. She stated that it appears that a conditional use permit option was added with additional allowance added to the proposed allowed height. She commented that it appears that staff and/or the Planning Commission thought differently about the concepts the Council suggested at its last meeting. Baumgardner stated that the concept of allowing a conditional use permit or having a religious use exemption were suggestions from the Planning Commission. She stated that staff does not recommend having a Conditional Use Permit option for architectural features. She stated that if the Council were to desire that direction, it could consider including additional allowance in the ordinance rather than adding an additional layer of review. She stated that staff also does not recommend allowing a religious use exemption as buildings often turn over in use. She stated that the Council requested additional information on limiting the area of architectural features to less than 25 percent. She noted that after further review by staff, it is not recommended to regulate in that manner as it would take significant time to review in return for minimal benefit. She provided examples of existing buildings and how the 25 percent coverage limitation would apply. She stated that the Council also discussed limiting the height of the feature above the roof in order to avoid a feature being significantly higher than the roof it sits upon. She noted that is also not recommended to be incorporated as that is significantly more restrictive than what is allowed in other communities. She stated that staff believes that it would make sense for a feature to be allowed to be as high and the allowable roof height in that area. She stated that it was also discussed by the Council that perhaps the regulations vary based upon the zoning district. She noted that is an option that could be considered. She stated that the Council also discussed allowing a height of 12 feet for mechanical equipment with additional height allowed through a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) which was supported by the Planning Commission. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022 3 Martin asked the Council for input on whether a conditional use permit element should be allowed related to architectural elements. DesLauriers stated that he would agree but noted that his position could change based upon the discussion to follow. Albers agreed with DesLauriers. Reid commented that it seems arbitrary to state that architectural elements can only be ten feet higher with no CUP while mechanical features could be 12 feet in height with the option of a CUP. Cavanaugh agrees with DesLauriers and Albers. Martin stated that she falls into that same mindset as well. She stated that she sees a difference between architectural features and mechanical features, noting that mechanical equipment has a requirement for screening and the intention to allow for a CUP for mechanical equipment was to allow for more energy efficient equipment or the needs of the equipment to support that building. She stated that she recalled the City Attorney stated that exemptions should not be given for one use over another. She agreed with staff that the use of a building often changes over time and therefore did not support a religious exemption. Cavanaugh agreed with the opinion of the City Attorney. Reid stated that she would not support the ordinance as it does not allow exceptions for places of worship. She believed there should be different rules for religious buildings. Albers stated that he would also not support a religious use exemption. DesLauriers also agreed that he would not support a religious use exemption. Martin welcomed input on whether to limit the area on which architectural features could be situated. DesLauriers stated that initially the limitation seemed to make sense in order to avoid a situation in which a roof is cluttered with architectural features. He noted that upon further research by staff, there could be inconsistencies with commercial buildings and therefore did not support limiting the area for architectural features. Albers stated that he also agrees with the recommendation of staff. Reid stated that she would hate to see great design limited by an arbitrary rule and therefore agreed that the rooftop area for rooftop features should not be limited. Cavanaugh and Martin also agreed to not limit the area of architectural features. Martin welcomed input on limiting the feature height above a roof. Baumgardner stated that the draft ordinance limits the overall height of an architectural feature based off the ground rather than measuring that height from the roof it sits upon. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022 4 She noted that the first clause of the ordinance would include a limit of ten feet from the highest point of the roof. Martin commented that it would seem that an architectural feature could be the greater of either regulation as drafted. Baumgardner confirmed that to be true. Finke stated that the previous discussion of the Council included a third parameter that would limit the height of an architectural feature by no more than 10 or 15 feet from the roof upon which it sits. He asked if the Council were interested in having a restriction that would be more restrictive than the height a building could be within the district. Martin asked if the Council wanted to add the additional restriction. Finke provided additional clarification on how building height is determined and the different building height regulations in different zoning districts. He provided different examples to provide more clarity. Cavanaugh commented that he believed the last discussion included a limiting factor of 15 feet above the building height. Finke did not recall a context in which the 15 -foot height was discussed. DesLauriers asked why five feet higher than the maximum building height would be allowed. He stated that his belief would be that the maximum height should be the maximum height whether that is the roof or rooftop equipment. Baumgardner stated that the five feet would allow for some additional height for an architectural feature to go above the maximum building height. She commented that there are many features in Medina already that go slightly above the maximum building height and provided some examples. Finke stated that building height is defined as the roof and grade and does not account for architectural features, which are common above a roof. He stated that in the review of other communities, those that regulated features allowed an additional height above the building height. DesLauriers stated that he would prefer to be more restrictive in order to protect the rural character of Medina. Albers stated that he would also support being more restrictive. Reid stated that she would like to see an exemption for religious buildings. She stated that she would caution against being too restrictive as there could be unintended consequences. Cavanaugh stated that he reviewed the previous minutes in which the Council discussed a limitation of 15 feet. He believed that related to the first bullet which states five feet in the draft. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022 5 Martin commented that she believes that adding the additional language would be more restrictive than the City needs to be. She stated that the first bullet would accommodate different types of roof structures. She believed that the additional clause would be overly restrictive. She noted that the position of the Council seems to be split. Cavanaugh stated that he would agree that the additional regulation is not needed. Martin referenced the comment of Cavanaugh that the first bullet should include a height of 15 feet above rather than ten feet above and asked for input. DesLauriers commented that he could support the height of ten feet. Albers also supported ten feet. Reid commented that she believed the discussion focused on 12 or 15 feet and therefore was surprised to see a height of ten feet. She commented that she would support 12 or 15 feet. Martin asked if there would be support for 15 feet for bullet one. DesLauriers commented that he would like to keep that item at ten feet. Finke replied that that draft ordinance would allow an element either 10 feet above the highest point of the roof or 5 feet above the maximum height allowed in the district. If the Council changed the 10 feet in the first clause to 15 feet, the most likely application would be to allow a taller element on a peaked roof. The top of the peaked roof may already be higher than the maximum height, because height is measured to the mid- point of the roof. Finke noted that he believed the Council's discussion was more related to the 5 -feet above the maximum height allowed in the district. Finke stated that 10 feet above the peak of the roof was suggested because it would permit an element similar to a cupola. Cavanaugh stated that after that clarification he would agree with the recommendation of staff. Martin confirmed the consensus of the Council to not support changing the height of bullet one to 15 feet. She confirmed consensus of the Council in support of the recommendation as drafted by staff. She asked whether this regulation should apply equally to each zoning district. She noted that each district may have its own maximum building height, therefore even though the standard is applied equally, architectural elements could have different maximum heights based on the maximum building height in the zoning district. She confirmed the consensus of the Council to apply the standard equally across all zoning districts. She referenced the last discussion point related to mechanical equipment, allowing a maximum height of 12 feet but the allowance for additional height through a CUP. She asked if all mechanical rooftop equipment would be required to be screened. Baumgardner confirmed that to be true. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022 6 Finke commented that there are some things such as chimneys which would not require screening. He noted that single-family residential districts do not have the same screening requirements, but the others do hold that requirement for screening. Reid stated that she has worked with two companies that make huge industrial HVAC and other rooftop equipment and she did not recall a height above 12 feet. She stated that she is not opposed to the draft language but did not foresee a situation where the equipment would be above 12 feet. Martin confirmed the agreement of the Council with the language as drafted. Reid commented that she believes there should be exemptions for religious buildings. Martin invited members of the public to speak. Damn Rosha stated that he had an opportunity to speak with Batty earlier today and that he did a great job providing background information to him and answering questions. He noted that he represents BAPS Minneapolis, who submitted an application to construct a religious facility in Medina. He stated that the limiting feature language appears to address the concern his client has. He stated that he is a member of a parish that has a grandfathered approval of an architectural feature. He stated that it is his understanding that the original BAPS application was recommended for approval and should have been approved but understood that the City has the authority to regulate architectural features. He stated that this process would prohibit BAPS from building a religious institution similar to others allowed within the community. He stated that if the limiting feature language would accommodate the proposal that will come from BAPS, he supported that timing. He noted that there has been additional cost and stress to his client to go through this process and extended timeline. He asked that the moratorium be lifted allowing his client to proceed. He stated that if the draft ordinance would support the proposal from BAPS, he would support that but noted that if it would not, there could be additional actions. Martin commented that BAPS has Site Plan approval and could proceed with construction at any time. She stated that the factor seems to be related to architectural features. She stated that they welcome BAPS into the community and therefore did not see that any discussion tonight would limit the ability for BAPS to proceed with construction as this discussion is only related to what is allowed on top of the building. She stated that she has not gone back to review whether this language would allow the original request for spires from BAPS. She stated that the Council is reviewing the ordinance as it would apply to the entire city and not an issue of spot zoning. Rosha stated that he cannot speak to the significance of the spiritual need of the spires. He stated that in the same manner an ordinance regulating crosses would have an impact on Christian institutions. He stated that there is angst in proceeding with construction without the knowledge of whether the spires will be allowed, because of the religious importance of those spires. He stated that his client appreciates that the City has approved the main building, but from a religious perspective he cannot speak about whether the client would proceed without the spires. Reid stated that she did not see any way that the draft ordinance would allow the spires as originally proposed. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022 7 Rosha commented on his understanding of the interpretation of the ordinance. He stated that the maximum height of 50 feet for the spire would place that spire at five feet above the maximum building height and therefore would be allowed under the draft ordinance. Reid asked staff for input. Finke replied that the difference of opinion would be that the business park limitation is 35 feet in height. Rosha stated that his information would then be wrong as the spires would exceed that by 15 feet and therefore there would be a challenge. Batty commented that as the discussion demonstrated, this is a complicated issue. He noted that there have been a number of discussions at the Council and Planning Commission on this topic. He stated that there was consensus by the Council on a number of items in tonight's discussion that will come back in a revised draft ordinance. He stated that he can also provide suggestions to the Council on the next steps. He suggested that this matter be tabled for two meetings in order to allow that additional review. Moved by Martin, seconded by Cavanaugh, to table discussion of this ordinance until the second meeting in February, directing staff to revisit the ordinance for any necessary revisions based on the discussion tonight. A roll call vote was performed: DesLauriers aye Albers aye Cavanaugh aye Reid aye Martin aye Motion passed unanimously. VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (8:25 p.m.) Johnson stated that the next meeting will be held on Wednesday February 2nd because of the precinct caucuses that will be held on February 1st. He advised of an upcoming Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting on April 6th at 6:30 p.m. and asked if the Council wanted to hold that meeting virtually. He noted that he believes quite a few residents would want to participate in the meeting. Martin believed that the meeting went well when held virtually the previous year and supported to continue with that format. DesLauriers, Albers and Cavanaugh supported either format. Reid commented that she believed holding the meeting virtually inhibits residents from speaking but would support that format if that is the consensus. She believed an in - person meeting would provide more benefit. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022 8 Martin commented that she would be hesitant to hold that meeting in person if the variant continues to rage in the manner, it currently is. She stated that if things have settled down, she would be fine meeting in person, but would caution against holding a meeting with many people in a small room. Johnson stated that Hennepin County needs to put the information together now. He stated that staff would prefer to move forward with the virtual format due to the unknowns with the pandemic and hopefully this will be the last year it would need to be held virtually. DesLauriers stated that because the decision needs to be made tonight, he would support meeting virtually. Cavanaugh agreed with a virtual format. Albers stated that he would also support the virtual format. Reid stated that she also agrees with the virtual format. IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (8:31 p.m.) Reid commented that the Uptown Hamel group is proceeding with the design for the banners and will present to the Council at the appropriate time. X. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (8:31 p.m.) Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by Reid, to approve the bills, EFT 006218E -006237E for $1,068,384.86, order check numbers 052486-052546 for $622,818.92, and payroll EFT 0511552-0511584 for $55,185.17. A roll call vote was performed: DesLauriers aye Albers aye Cavanaugh aye Reid aye Martin aye Motion passed unanimously. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022 9 XI. ADJOURN Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by DesLauriers, to adjourn the meeting at 8:33 p.m. A roll call vote was performed: DesLauriers aye Albers aye Cavanaugh aye Reid aye Martin aye Motion passed unanimously. Kathy Martin, Mayor Attest: Scott Johnson, City Administrator Medina City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022 10