HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-09-2013 CCMJoint City Council/Planning Commission Workshop
ZONING DISTRICTS, FORM-BASED CODES, & DESIGN STANDARDS Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 6:15 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Pearson, Council Members Bloyer, Nelson, Smith, and Park. Planning Chair Williams, Commissioners Morreale and Haggard, and Larson [6:27PM] Also Present: City Administrator, City Planner Johnson, City Clerk Bell, and Planning Director Klatt
[6:26PM] City Admin Zuleger gave summary introduction. Explained purpose of meeting and the growing demand for development. Described a development interest map. Smith asked to be kept informed about meetings regarding developers that are taking place. She wants to stay informed. Mayor explained that his largest concern is that staff. Cautioned about potential quorums when a number of members are involved. Park stated that her experience is that potential developers do not want to meet with the entire council because of desire to maintain level of privacy. Zuleger gave summary of the interested parties and targeted parcels. Explained that these developer meetings keep coming. Explained that everything will be Williams said that it is not worth worrying about the meetings occurring, just that they are occurring. When there is an actual preliminary plat is submitted, then worry about it. Zuleger recommended that city stay ahead on infrastructure. Smith wants to stay on top of the financial aspect of Nelson stated the map is helpful and if council wants Williams asked if staff is explaining to developers that the infrustucture is not in place and that it may/will be a while. It was confirmed that that warning/disclaimer is being given. Planning Director Klatt explained the purpose of the workshop. And gave summary of what updates will be provided Zoning ordinance update. Overview of the process and the work plan schedule. Also explained the priorities. Explained the proposed reorganization. Mayor asked about sign ord. dean second half of year. Lighting and fencing ord discussed Explained the Village Mixed Use (VMX) district zoning. Smith noted her concern about maintaining the character of the village. Discussion of Form-Based Code. Vs traditional zoning. Allows better way to regulate desired development. …
Question #1: should city pursue FBC? Question #2: Should city hire consultant to assist with drafting of FBC? Question #3: should code only apply to the VMX or extend to other portions of the Village Discussion of obtaining expertise. Nelson against FBC. Wants market to dictate designs. City role to guide, but not design what buildings should look like. Mayor concerned about forcing owners to maintain. Could be interested in hybrid option. Likes the idea, but has concerns. Discussion about what flexibility is available. Johnson explained that FBC and design stds are often conflated. When dealing with FBC, staff is more concerned with site development. Nelson does not want to be restrictive. Let private owners do what they want within reason. Bloyer said he …. Larson wants development to be organic but is in favor of FBC. Pointed out that there is already a mix of architecture. Timeframe to develop FBC 3mo if use consultant; 6mo if in-house. Smith in favor of using outside professional expertise. Nelson ok with pedestrian friendly and site design. Bloyer ok to a degree. Opposed to bullets. Due to MN winter, Park ok with Ped friend. Also in favor of outside help. Opposed to the specific regulations bulleted in presentation. Smith in favor of ped friend. In favor of many presentation bullets. Concerned that the interests of the residents are not as high a priority as developers. Nelson clarified that friendly to businesses means being easier to get along with. LE reputation has been difficult to work with. wants to guide developers, but not restrict them. Haggard asked if FBC scares developers. Zuleger noted that some communities are trying to achieve what LE already has. Finding the flexibility (hybrid) may be key. Larson suggested that the group not lose seeing the forest from the trees. Park explained her reasoning for favoring the consultant. Wants the consultant to consider FBC for the I-94 corridor. Klatt explained that the geographic area matters and can have large impact. Direction to staff= RFP to consultant to develop FBC for village Mixed-use area. Smith do RFP and see how much it will cost. See what flexibility they can identify.
Discussion of design standards. Review process: Mandatory vs voluntary; process for review; demolition review (historic and non-historic). Planning Comm has seen the proposed design stds manual. Discussion of residential vs commercial. Planning comm. has discussed and staff recommendation was that single family homes would not be covered. Multi-family homes would be covered. Johnson noted that not popularly used regulation for SFH. Smith asked how to keep a developer from building 100 identical homes. Zuleger stated that he has heard that because LE’s situation as the last option in east metro, city can state preferences for design standards. The … Park noted that price point controls. Builders have more options at higher priced custom homes. Opposed to restricting builder’s options. Lennar was discussed. Nelson expressed his preference for allowing the market to control. Klatt explained that there are additional items that city can control for neighborhoods. (street width, boulevards, trees, etc. Johnson gave history and overview of manual. Stakeholder workshop very helpful. Need to incorporate theming. Nelson asked for another stakeholder meeting to tweak stakeholder input so far, don’t set up architectural standards too restrictive. Send message to dev com that LE is seeking high quality growth. Directive: Stake holder meeting before public hearing. Johnson: define scope before going to RFP. Council and planning commission dynamics were discussed. Meeting adjourned at 8:53PM