Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />January 22, 2003 <br />Page 2 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />V.ACTION ITEMS <br />A.PUBLIC HEARING, Draft Zoning Ordinance Review <br />Chair Schaps opened the public hearing at 6:44 p.m. <br />Staff stated they had been working on th e Zoning Ordinance since May or June. He <br />stated there was a Citizen Task Force formed to work with the staff and consultant to <br />work on this Ordinance. He stated the S ubdivision Ordinance would be going to the City <br />Council this Monday for first reading. He noted tonight was the start of the public <br />hearing for the Zoning Ordinance and it would be continued to the regular February P&Z <br />meeting. <br />Staff reviewed the following in the proposed Zoning Ordinance: <br />Page 1-3, paragraph E, the current Ordinance says if a use is not specifically listed, then it <br />is prohibited. This was changed to say if there was a proposed use either specifically <br />allowed or denied, the City Council will determine if the pr oposed use was comparable to <br />something that was listed and if there were , they would go by that comparable use. If <br />not, they would prepare a study to research the use. <br />Page 2-5, changes were made to the conditional use permit standards. He stated the <br />standards they have are very general and ambiguous. He stated what they had done in <br />this draft was to replace them with clear standards. <br />Page 2-8, paragraph 14, he stated they cl eared up the language on that paragraph by <br />stating anything listed as a conditional use in the zoning district, if it was there already, it <br />would be considered to have a CUP. At the bottom of the page, as item C, a revocation <br />clause was added to the conditional use permits. <br />Page 2-9, interim use permits was made the same as conditional use permits. <br />Page 2-12, under variances, submittal requirements are clearer. <br />Page 2-15, an appeal procedure was added. <br />Page 2-16, paragraph F, this will be revised to add the extension to the 60 days under <br />Minnesota Statutes 15.99. <br />Page 2-19, paragraph 5, the extension i ssue must be added to the 60 days. <br />Page 2-22, paragraph A, site and building plan review would now be reviewed and <br />approved or denied administratively by th e community development department. It <br />would not go through P&Z and City Council. If there were a disagreement, it would go <br />into the public process. Very specific subm ittal requirements for the plans were added to <br />pages 2-23 through 2-28.