Agenda - Council - 11/12/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CASE #5 INFORMATION DISSEMINATION TO COMMISSIONS By: Ryan R. Schroeder, City Administrator Background: Recently it was mentioned that the Planning and Zoning Commission is requesting a Council policy on increased information dissemination to the Planning and Zoning Commission on public improvement projects. The rationale apparently is unless the Planning and Zoning Commission is fully informed, it is difficult to adequately review private improvements, plans and zoning. Given the above, I have reviewed, and would like to draw your attention to, three enclosures. The first is the chapter within the City Charter regarding Boards and Commissions. The second is the chapter within the City Code regarding the Planning and Zoning Commission. The third is the chapter within the State Statute which deals with the procedure for planning bodies. After review of these three enclosures, it appears that within the State Statute it has been contemplated that the designated planning agency (which may or may not be defined as thc Planning and Zoning Commission) should reasonably have review of not only comprehensive plans and plan amendments, zoning and subdivision ordinances, but capital improvements and other municipal planning as well. This would include specific planning documents such as the Transportation Plan passed in 1988 and the Park Improvement Comprehensive Plan amendment in 1991, which I am assuming did receive Planning and Zoning Commission review. I believe that it is a normal procedure within municipalities that once the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and recommended a document such as the Park Plan, that an inherent ratification of individual items within the Park Plan has already occurred. Further, that actions taken in response to and within that plan do not create additional need for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. However, upon that assumption, it would therefore be u'ue that in the amendment of those plans, activities conducted relating to the plans, or capital improvements contemplated within the plans should reasonably receive review of the Planning and Zoning Commission. As an example of the above, it would be my position that since the 153rd Avenue N.W. extension has been in the Comprehensive Plan for a significant period of time, further review is not mandated under the Statute. However, it could be read that significant alteration of the alignment would create the need for Planning and Zoning Commission review. As another example, staff recently proposed pursuing a possible acquisition of property northeast of the intersection of County Road #116 and Sunfish Lake Boulevard N.W. Given that this acquisition has not received a prior review by the Planning and Zoning Commission, it would be appropriate, should this go any further, to receive this review prior to entering into an acquisition agreement. However, I would also think that ff the Council would pass upon a plan which has received the Planning and Zoning Commission review within which this acquisition is discussed, that the stamtorily discussed review by this planning agency would have been met by the review of the planning document.