Minutes - Planning Commission - 01/27/2022

Home

Chairperson Bauer commented that he believes that a buffer should be created to prevent the City from dipping below the three units per acre threshold. He asked if an applicant could meet two criteria to apply. Senior Planner McGuire Brigl confirmed that an applicant could apply for a Comprehensive Plan amendment if two of the criteria are met. Commissioner Dunaway stated that he has a similar concern with the proposed language, noting that E and F are very similar in meeting a threshold. He asked why similar criteria were added. He stated that if only two criteria are required, if an applicant met E,it could most likely also meet F. Senior Planner McGuire Brigl provided clarification noting that the intent was related to existing rural residential development. She suggested merging E and F into one criteria. Commissioners VanScoy and Dunaway confirmed that they would prefer to merge those items. Commissioner Walker commented that the City Council.has stated that it does not want smaller lots in this area. He stated that only two options are provided, and he does not like either option. He stated that he was told that once there is an open development case, the Comprehensive Plan and/or zoning could not be changed, yet here is a request to change both. He asked if this would be a great time to try to come up with a compromise to have larger lots on the outside and smaller lots on the inside to create the desired density. Commissioner VanScoy commented that was the initial proposal. Commissioner Walker disagreed and believed that the original proposals included 55-, 65-, and 75-foot lots. He commented that there has never been a compromise for the existing residents and asked if this would be the perfect time to provide larger lots on the outside of the development. He stated that if the density could be increased, the Comprehensive Plan would not need to be changed and everyone would get what they want. He stated that he would not even say full acre lots on the border, although ideally that would be preferred, but stated perhaps 120 foot lots are placed on the border to protect the existing residents. He noted then perhaps 70 or 65 foot lots are placed in the middle of the development. �j II Senior Planner McGuire Brigl commented that they did review that option with the applicant and even with larger lots they cannot get over the density threshold. She stated that the Preliminary Plat has already been approved and therefore the discussion tonight is related to density and whether the Commission would support the Comprehensive Plan amendment. She noted that the alternative would be to amend the zoning to allow smaller lots to meet the three units per acre threshold of the Metropolitan Council and the City Council has already stated it will not support that option. She stated that if nothing is done, that would be considered a taking and therefore these are the only two options to consider at this time. She stated that staff supports the lower density as that is desired by the existing residents and City Council. Planning Commission/January 27,2022 Page 9 of 22