Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-03-2009 Council Minutes SPECIAL WORK SESSION June 3, 2009 APPROVED 1 2 CITY OF LINO LAKES 3 MINUTES 4 SPECIAL WORK SESSION—COMP PLAN UPDATE 5 6 DATE : June 3, 2009 7 TIME STARTED : 5:30 p.m. 8 TIME ENDED : 9:25 p.m. 9 MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Members Reinert, Stoltz, 10 Gallup, O'Donnell and Mayor Bergeson 11 MEMBERS ABSENT : none 12 13 Staff present: Acting City Administrator Dan Tesch; Director of Community 14 Development Michael Grochala; City Planner, Jeff Smyser; City Clerk Julie Bartell 15 16 Mayor Bergeson called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Police Workroom at Lino 17 Lakes City Hall. 18 19 Bonestroo consultant, Ciara Schlicting, reviewed the written staff report relative to the 20 council's discussion of the proposed 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update (the Plan). The 21 council had tabled discussion of the Plan at the May 11, 2009 city council meeting with a 22 plan to discuss the following modifications: modification of forecasts, a land use change 23 request relative to 797 Main Street and the Waldoch Farm Garden Center, and possible 24 ordinances to restrict or control growth of affordable housing. Ms. Schlicting first ..' 25 mentioned the inclusion of a natural resource protection plan within the Plan,noting that 26 it is a valuable element unique to this Plan. There have been several comments by 27 council members about the impact growth could have on natural resources and she 28 wanted to point out that important protection that is included in the Plan. She reviewed 29 the citizen involvement history that has brought the city to the current Plan proposal, 30 including a survey, visioning, and the citizen advisory panel (that included citizens from 31 the visioning process as well as representatives of the city's advisory boards). The goals 32 and strategies from the vision plan were incorporated, through review of the advisory 33 panel, directly into the Plan. When the advisory panel looked at forecasts, they 34 considered both the Metropolitan Council forecast and a market approach. Consultant 35 Bonestroo also reviewed the resource management plan with the council noting that it 36 integrates many elements of resources together and will help guide development while 37 protecting the area's natural resources. The land use plan was developed as a full-build 38 by the advisory group so that long-range infrastructure planning could be included. Then 39 that plan was trimmed back in terms of MUSA to accommodate the 2030 market based 40 forecast. She reviewed the staging included in the Plan. She pointed out that there is 41 actually less land staged in the proposed 2030 Plan that in the current 2020 Plan. She 42 reviewed a map that indicated all the elements coming together(land use, resources 43 management and staging). Staff is now recommending, based on the comments they've 44 heard, that the forecast be amended to reflect those contained within the Metropolitan 45 Council system statement as amended by the city council through the Hardwood Creek 1 SPECIAL WORK SESSION June 3, 2009 APPROVED 46 Comprehensive Plan Amendment that occurred in 2006. That would result in the 47 reduction of the cumulative 2030 household forecast by a total of 2,000 units and would �,,,, 48 also reduce the city's affordable housing goal to 560 units. That change would require 49 some text modifications and remodeling of the city's sanitary sewer system and traffic 50 system projections. 51 52 A council member asked how the 2,000 reduction is reflected as far as the two plan stages 53 and staff explained that it would basically be based on staging but staging doesn't 54 guarantee development within a certain time period. 55 56 Chris Lyden, 6275 Holly Drive W, asked if there is any criteria that would deal with a 57 situation where stage one is completed prior to plans. Would the city be able to question 58 stage two opening up prematurely? Also, regarding roadways, they will be greatly 59 impacted by fast growth and he is concerned that could create quality of life issues. 60 61 Community Development Director Grochala responded that a movement to stage two 62 before its established time would require a comp plan amendment by the council. 63 Movement within the stages (la to lb)would require a council resolution. 64 65 A council member requested a discussion on pace. Consultant Schlicting explained that 66 the council will have control over pace because they review and approve development 67 proposals based on the established goals and policies in the Plan. In one way the 68 infrastructure must precede the development and the Plan guides infrastructure 69 development and is a legal foundation on which to manage pace. Staff pointed out that a ~" 70 goal of the Plan is to accommodate quality growth; that includes the resource 71 management plan element that protects what the city has identified as planned resources 72 and the same follows with transportation and sewer where the plan includes goals. 73 74 If the council directs the change in the forecast, staff would require some additional 75 consultant assistance in making modifications to the Plan elements. There will be more 76 land than forecasted but that will be explained as part of the modification. 77 78 Paul Tralle, Planning and Zoning Board chair, addressed the council. He has been 79 involved in this process from the beginning. A great deal of time has been spent by many 80 volunteers from the community(17 meetings). There were public open houses, open 81 discussions in Zoning &Planning Board meetings, they crunched the numbers and he is 82 standing by the Plan they have recommended. He suggests that it is inappropriate for a 83 council member to discount all the work that went into the Plan and push to make 84 changes based on the input of four people at the last council meeting—there were many 85 more people involved in bringing it forward. 86 87 A council member replied that he has had a level of concern from the onset of the process 88 with some of the numbers and, further, some residents have voiced concerns directly to 89 council members. It was noted that the changes being considered now won't change the 2 SPECIAL WORK SESSION June 3, 2009 APPROVED 90 vision that was brought forward but will allow more flexibility as the things evolve. He 91 believes this is a more realistic view. 92 93 Laura Carlson,participant in the visioning process and member of the Comprehensive 94 Plan Update Advisory Panel (the Panel) explained that she believes the direction of the 95 group was based on the analysis (numbers) information provided with consideration of 96 not being arbitrary. It is important to realize that growth isn't just about people who own 97 lots but also people who own land. The advisory group felt it was important to follow 98 market forecasts but if those numbers are truly changing, she doesn't feel the group 99 would have a strong problem with an adjustment. 100 101 Barbara Bor, Environmental Board and Panel member, stated that she sees that residents 102 in established neighborhoods are concerned about changes that could occur to their area 103 as a result of growth; they recognize that growth is inevitable and tax base is good but she 104 thinks those people want to see that the council is doing what is possible to keep things 105 positive and minimize the negative aspects of the growth. She believes it was a good 106 process that brings the Plan forward although it was not helpful that some of those who 107 volunteered to participate in the citizen process did not show up to meetings but yet did 108 not resign their positions so that another volunteer could step up. 109 110 Michael Hyden,Planning and Zoning Board and Panel member, added that he supports 1 i 1 Mr. Tralle's comments in that public input was highly welcomed during the Plan 112 development. He feels the market will be foremost and the Plan proposed is good 113 because it prepares the city for the growth that will come. It is not wrong to go slow but �' 114 you may miss out on good opportunities. He supports the Plan as it was presented. 115 There is control in the Plan through the use of phasing that gives the city the flexibility to 116 move. 117 118 A council member suggested that pace isn't the only consideration but the restrictions that 119 have been in place from the last update have served well to allow the city to move 120 forward carefully. Good opportunities can be moved on as thoughtful decisions but you 121 also have the ability to turn down development you don't want. 122 123 Terry O'Connell, owner of a property on Main Street, first remarked that there were more 124 than four residents at the last council meeting. She's heard from a few neighbors that the 125 process hasn't been geared toward open discussion as much as promoting agreement with 126 what is proposed. 127 128 Council Members weighed in as follows on the Plan as proposed by the Panel and the 129 alternative that modifies the Plan forecast: 130 131 - The Plan brought forward by the advisory panel is very good and has been 132 identified as one of the most thorough and well researched plans of any city 133 involved in this process. A change in the forecast may be an appropriate 3 SPECIAL WORK SESSION June 3, 2009 APPROVED 134 consideration especially if that is necessary to gain the support needed for 135 passage. �.. 136 - The Plan that came forward is a good one but there is room for discussion on 137 the numbers. 138 - The council as a whole is committed to optionality and quality and the process 139 that brought this Plan forward has required those values all along. It includes 140 options for input from the city as growth is proposed. A great process brings a 141 great result and the advisory work has been a key element in the process and 142 that shows in the product. 143 - Although the Metropolitan Council forecast is a bit lower than the changes 144 proposed at this time, compromise is important also. The affordable housing 145 component is at least more realistic. 146 147 The question being if the council is ready to bring the Plan forward for a vote,more 148 discussion was requested. A council member suggested it's important to bring forward a 149 maximum of two options to the council meeting; more options would make reaching 150 agreement more difficult and moving forward less likely. Another council member 151 suggested that the consensus of this meeting should determine what will go to the council 152 floor. 153 154 The council discussed the request of Teresa Weinkauf(797 Main Street) and of Jeff Joyer 155 (Waldoch Farm Garden). Ms. Weinkauf is requesting a proposed land use change from 156 Low Density Residential to Commercial. Mr. Joyer is requesting that a portion of his 157 farm site be retained as commercial land use designation. 158 159 Planner Smyser first explained the city's responsibility under statute to conform its 160 zoning regulations to its Plan. The city's zoning follows the land use designation, 161 although there are differing zoning districts within land use categories. He showed maps 162 indicating the current land use plan and the proposed. The Weinkauf request relates to 163 how the property is guided. The existing zoning(general business) conflicts with the land 164 use designation(low density residential) and that conflict has existed for years and years. 165 The city would be correcting the situation by making the change proposed in the Plan. 166 Because of that conflict,the current use of the Weinkauf property is considered non- 167 conforming and the best thing to do with that type of a situation (in order to comply with 168 state law) is to make a change so that it conforms. The Planning and Zoning Board has 169 recommended concurrence with the Plan. Part of the consideration is that there is interest 170 on the part of the Weinkaufs to have a home business. When the city's home occupation 171 restrictions were reviewed, staff saw that the restrictions are quite strict and so they are 172 open to looking at some change when the zoning ordinance is reviewed. If the current 173 non conforming situation is allowed to continue, there is concern that there would be no 174 buffer for the residential area if businesses were to develop. 175 176 A council member noted that making all four properties commercial would not solve the 177 problem since only one of the properties would be true commercial. 178 4 SPECIAL WORK SESSION June 3, 2009 APPROVED 179 The council discussed the home based business issue. They recognize that there are home 180 based businesses legitimately operating in residential areas in the city. Staff is confident 181 that the problem can be solved for the Weinkauf type of business through zoning 182 regulation changes. The Planning and Zoning Board supports that course of action. 183 184 It was pointed out that when the Weinkauf property was purchased and the city was 185 approached about appropriate uses,the city gave assurances that a business situation 186 could be worked out. 187 188 Staff noted that the driving goal is to bring the zoning and planning for the property into 189 concurrence. A council member pointed out that there are two options for the council- 190 zoning change or change the proposed Plan. Staff is recommending a zoning regulation 191 amendment as the zoning code is updated according to the Plan. Another option would 192 be to designate the area mixed use. 193 194 Ms. Weinkauf expressed concern about being limited under new home occupation 195 regulations. Also she believes that some of the other owners do not want to lose the 196 commercial designation. Four of the five parcels owners (one owner is out of town) are 197 requesting commercial zoning. There is after all a bar and a junk yard already operating 198 in the vicinity. 199 200 Planner Smyser explained that the Planning and Zoning Board recommendation is to 201 leave the properties as low density residential (as designated in the Plan), rezone the 202 properties to match and in turn revamp the home occupation zoning regulations. To 203 designate the property commercial would mean that it could be developed as such with 204 little or no buffer from adjacent residential areas. 205 206 The question for the council being what will be included in the Plan relative to the 207 Weinkauf property, staff was directed to not change the proposed Plan. 208 209 The council discussed the Jeff Joyer property(Waldoch Farm Garden Center). It is 210 currently guided medium density residential after 2030; existing zoning is both rural and 211 general business. There is agriculture and business going on there. The request of Mr. 212 Joyer is that a portion of the property be guided commercial (so they can expand in the 213 future). Staff's concern is that there is no infrastructure in place or planned that could 214 support that and other issues as well. Staff's recommendation is no change to the Plan 215 and that as part of zoning code revisions, they will reexamine and reapproach the use as a 216 commercial greenhouse. If something were to change (infrastructure), there could be a 217 comp plan amendment. 218 219 The council concurred in their support of the staff recommendation. 220 221 Staff affirmed their commitment to working with both Mr. Joyer and the Weinkauf s as 222 zoning changes are considered. 223 5 SPECIAL WORK SESSION June 3, 2009 APPROVED 224 The council discussed the third agenda item - ordinances to restrict or control growth of 225 affordable housing. Staff is requesting further clarification on the council's direction in �, 226 this area. Community Development Director Grochala explained that he has discussed 227 with the city attorney the council's past direction that staff should prepare such 228 regulations. The city attorney noted some concern in that if the intent is to restrict 229 affordable housing, it may be in conflict with the state law that requires the city to 230 provide affordable housing land opportunity through the Plan. Also the Plan includes a 231 goal that calls for affordable housing in all housing districts. Staff discussed ordinance 232 possibilities with the council recently and recommended that the best approach would be 233 through the existing planned unit development (PUD)process, and perhaps incentives 234 through that process. That approach will allow ample council review and consideration 235 of projects. Staff is looking for more clarity on the council's direction. 236 237 A council member suggested that the council's discussion about ordinance amendments 238 has been directed at pace, quality and density. Perhaps affordability falls into that some 239 way but to say that ordinance changes have been requested to restrict affordable housing 240 is not accurate. The council member still wants to see what ordinances will look like that 241 deal with pace, quality and density. 242 243 Community Development Director Grochala announced that in the area of quality, staff 244 wants to look from a design perspective on how to transition different types of 245 development and that's something you can build into your code. 246 247 A council member suggested that some communities have ended up with bad 248 development when they've gotten into subsidized housing situations. He's interested in 249 some limitations in that area so the city can have some control. 250 251 A council member remarked that education in the area of affordable housing development 252 would be helpful for the council. It would be interesting to see what other cities (Edina, 253 Wayzata for example) are doing. The council can then decide how to be proactive instead 254 of waiting to see what comes through the door. 255 256 Staff added that the development process will be an important element. The council will 257 have discretion through the PUD process and will also have the opportunity to talk about 258 controls (and incentives) through the development process. Perhaps the best control now 259 is to make no change. 260 261 A council member suggested that the council is making a commitment to educate itself 262 further about affordable housing. 263 264 The council concurred that the Plan will be on the agenda for the next regular council 265 meeting and will include the modifications directed at this meeting. 266 6 SPECIAL WORK SESSION June 3,2009 APPROVED 267 A council members expressed concern that the council is being asked to vote on 268 something that isn't finalized (the final product won't be available at the council 269 meeting). 270 271 Community Development Director Grochala assured the council that the changes directed 272 will be incorporated. The changes that will be occurring will be highlighted for the 273 council at a work session before the meeting and for the audience at the meeting. There 274 will also be more information gathered for review before the council's final 275 consideration. 276 277 The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. 278 279 280 281 These minutes were considered and approved at the regular Council meeting held on July 27, 282 2009. 283 284 285 ele'tedv° 286 287 Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Jo Bergeson, Mayor 7