pm_100709 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, October 07, 2009 Page 2 City of Roseville Policy on Council Members’ Electronic Communications Mr. Anderson reviewed the purpose and awareness of communications related to the recently- adopted Policy on Council Members’ Electronic Communications, attached hereto and made a part thereof; applicable to the City Council, and all of its Advisory Commission members and staff liaisons as applicable. Mr. Anderson noted that these applications were related to and in accordance with Minnesota’s Open Meeting Law and Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. It was the consensus of Planning Commissioners that e-mails directed to individual commissioners be forwarded to the Chair and then forwarded to staff for dissemination to the entire Commission. Further consensus of Commissioners was to request absent Commissioners from tonight’s meeting to listen to the tape of tonight’s meeting and advise Chair Doherty and staff of their participation in absentia for the record. City Attorney Anderson recommended that commissioners contact him directly with questions. Chair Doherty requested that staff e-mail the policy to absent commissioners and link the City Attorney’s e-mail and phone contact information to the video stream information. City Attorney Anderson advised that by following the process of e-mailing directly to staff would obligate staff to retain the e-mail records, rather than individual commissioners with their personal computers. Making Solid Land Use Decisions – Roseville Planning Commission Training, October 7, 2009, by Scott T. Anderson Mr. Anderson then provided, as a resource, an outline of land use law in Minnesota, attached hereto and made a part thereof. City Attorney Anderson noted that variances were considered final action of the Variance Board, unless appealed; and their other decisions considered advisory and for recommendation to the City Council, and compiling a land use record for the City Council with a basis for their actions. Mr. Anderson reviewed the nature of cases heard by the Planning Commission: those of legislative (ordinance) nature, and those of a quasi-judicial nature, applying standards property to specific cases on a reasonable and consistent basis. Mr. Anderson summarized the considerations reviewed by a court in determining if the City, in making land use decisions, had acted in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of its constituents and the applicant in their decision-making. Mr. Anderson reviewed the court’s standard in considering findings, the “why” and facts, the “because” of a body’s action. 6. Public Hearings a. Planning File 09-025 Request by Boater’s Outlet (with property owner RECO Real Estate, LLC) for approval of outdoor storage as a CONDITIONAL USE at 1705 County Road C Chair Doherty reviewed the purpose and process for public hearings before the Planning Commission; and opened the Public Hearing for Planning File 09-025 at 7:20 p.m. Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd reviewed staff’s analysis of the request by Boater’s Outlet, with the property owner RECO Real Estate, LLC, for approval of outdoor storage as a CONDITIONAL USE at 1705 County Road C. Mr. Lloyd provided relevance via background of this use, with storage initiated in 2004, a subsequent moratorium on outdoor storage preventing more permanent approval at that time; a temporary Interim Use Permit granted, and expiring three (3) years later in 2007, and continued non- conforming use by the applicant. Mr. Lloyd advised that staff was aware of the non-compliance, and had worked with the applicant in resolving the non-compliance; and potential external or internal impacts. Mr. Lloyd further advised that the Fire Department had no concern with the current outdoor storage arrangement, ant that this arrangement was preferred by the applicant; and staff concurred with the configuration, beyond the conditions outlined in Section 6 of the staff