2011-09-07_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, September 7, 2011 Page 15 Lines 325 – 327 695 Ms. Steinwall addressed similar issues with a specific directive that a property owner 696 would remediate groundwater contamination pursuant to state and federal law. Ms. 697 Steinwall noted that there was no problem as long as the developer knew the rules going 698 in; and suggested that language provide that cleanup be in accordance with MPCA 699 guidelines. 700 Line 285 701 Member Boguszewski, referring to Line 285 with plans subject to City approval, noted 702 that “staff” had been added; and questioned if Ms. Steinwall’s concerns wee with City 703 staff or the City as represented by the City Council; and whether striking that entire 704 phrase was what was being suggested by Ms. Steinwall to strike anything after 705 “regulations.” 706 Ms. Steinwall responded that she would suggest striking the remainder of the sentence 707 after “regulations;” reiterating that it was troubling for staff and/or the City Council and/or 708 the Planning Commission to have approval or denial rights after MPCA regulations had 709 been met. 710 Member Boguszewski suggested changing references to “and” to “or;” or to “or as 711 appropriate” as applicable. 712 Member Boguszewski questioned if there were any other templates for any additional 713 revisions proposed by staff or the City Attorney beyond the revisions discussed tonight. 714 City Attorney Bartholdi responded negatively, to his knowledge. 715 Chair Boerigter closed the Public Hearing at 8:25 p.m. 716 Member Boguszewski noted that Chair Boerigter had indicated earlier in the meeting that 717 there was no need to finalize this document tonight; and that another meeting may be 718 needed to address additional revisions. 719 Chair Boerigter clarified that his intent was that the document could be moved forward for 720 recommendation to the City Council with proposed specific and minor language tweaks 721 provided there was nothing the Commission considered significant that may need further 722 consideration or review before making that recommendation. Chair Boerigter used the 723 network trip section as an example of a significant revision. 724 Member Boguszewski suggested that those tweaks be specifically enumerated as 725 discussed tonight. Those tweaks were identified as follows: 726  Line 288: Strike language “materials dumped” 727  Lines 344-346: soften language with “as appropriate” when dealing with the 2001 728 Master Plan 729  Definition Section: adding or clarifying “block” and “parcel” as synonymous 730  Lines 67-69: Reviewing and incorporating suggested language of Member Wozniak 731 in defining “Network Trips” 732 Lines 344 – 347 733 Related to the comments of Ms. Steinwall, Member Boguszewski questioned 734 Commissioners and staff on whether additional approval by the City was superfluous and 735 could be eliminated without weakening the ordinance. 736 Member Wozniak noted the example provided by City Engineer Bloom based on actual 737 experience where the City needed additional oversight. 738 City Planner Paschke advised that it required denial of the developer’s plan. 739 City Engineer Bloom advised that the City’s right-of-way ordinance provided protection; 740 however, she advised that staff was concerned in the area of easements and if 741 contamination was placed over an easement, the property may not be owned by the City, 742