Loading...
01-17-2023 Planning Comm Agenda Packet CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY JANUARY 17, 2023 7:00 P.M. A G E N D A CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL / (LIAISON) SCHEDULE EGGENBERGER (JAN) _ _ HOLKER () ______ VICE-CHAIR RIEDEL () ______ HUSKINS () ______ COUNCIL LIAISON MADDY (JAN-JUNE) COUNCIL LIAISON CALLIES (JULY-DEC) 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES  December 6, 2022 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (This portion of the meeting allows members of the public the opportunity to bring up items that are not on the agenda. Each speaker has a maximum of three minutes to present their topic. Multiple speakers may not bring up the same points. No decisions would be made on the topic at the meeting except that the item may be referred to staff for more information or the City Council.) 4. OTHER BUSINESS A) Variance to Rear Yard Setback (Shed) Applicant: Gene German and Sara Lassila Location: 5925 Eureka Road B) Variance to Rear Yard Setback Applicant: Clayton Tessness Location: 22430 Murray St C) Capital Improvements Program Review Applicant: City of Shorewood Location: City-wide D) Volunteer for Liaison for February 27, 2023 City Council meeting 5. REPORTS A) Council Meeting Report B) Draft Next Meeting Agenda 6. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 2022 7:00 P.M. DRAFT MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Maddy called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Maddy; Commissioners Eggenberger, Riedel, Huskins and Holker; Planning Director Darling; and, Council Liaison Gorham Absent: None 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Riedel moved, Huskins seconded, approving the agenda for December 6, 2022, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES  November 15, 2022 Commissioner Eggenberger noted a change needed on the top of page 2 to remove an apostrophe. Eggenberger moved, Riedel seconded, approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of November 15, 2022, as amended. Motion passed 3/0/2 (Commissioners Huskins and Holker abstained). Planning Director Darling clarified that abstaining from a vote to approve the minutes for a meeting that they did not attend was not required by Robert’s Rules of Order. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chair Maddy explained the Planning Commission is comprised of residents of the City of Shorewood who are serving as volunteers on the Commission. The Commissioners are appointed by the City Council. The Commission’s role is to help the City Council in determining zoning and planning issues. One of the Commission’s responsibilities is to hold public hearings and to help develop the factual record for an application and to make a non-binding recommendation to the City Council. The recommendation is advisory only. A. PUBLIC HEARING – ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH MS4 REQUIREMENTS Applicant: City of Shorewood Location: City-wide CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 6, 2022 Page 2 of 7 Planning Director Darling explained that this application is a City initiated request to amend the zoning regulations, as necessary, to comply with the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) requirements. She reviewed the proposed ordinance amendments including: adding regulatory authority to all agencies with jurisdiction over stormwater pollution prevention; complies with the updated MS4 permit requirements; and works in concert with proposed amendments to Ordinance 907. Staff recommends approval of the amendments. Commissioner Riedel asked about the wording on the watershed district rules and suggested that a language change be made so it doesn’t imply that approval from both area watersheds are necessary. Planning Director Darling stated that she can take a closer look at that language and gave examples of when rules kick in for different sized developments. She stated she will check with City Engineer Budde and City Attorney Shepherd about the possibility of making adjustments. Commissioner Huskins asked if there would be any value in helping citizens find these things and explained that if he were reading this his first question would be where he needed to go to find this information. Planning Director Darling explained that the City sends the homeowners to those agencies if they need permits. She noted that there are more requirements, but explained that what is front of the Commission tonight were requirements with the MS4. Chair Maddy opened the Public Hearing at 7:14 P.M. noting the procedures used in a Public Hearing. There being no comments, he closed the Public Hearing at 7:14 P.M Riedel moved, Huskins seconded, recommending approval of the Ordinance Amendments for Compliance with MS4 requirements, as proposed by staff, with the direction for staff to check with the City Attorney regarding a possible language change related to the two watershed districts and their rules. Motion passed 5/0. 5. OTHER BUSINESS – A. Variance to Rear Yard Setback (Shed) Applicants: Gene German and Sara Lassila Location: 5925 Eureka Road Planning Director Darling explained that this request is for a variance to allow the construction of a 16 x 20 foot accessory building in the southeast corner of the lot. She noted that there are other locations on the property that would meet the required setback, but this proposed location is the applicant’s preferred location. She explained that staff is recommending denial because the applicants have not met all the standards required for granting a variance. She stated that the City had received one e-mail from a neighbor who supports the variance request. Commissioner Holker stated that Planning Director Darling had mentioned a 10 foot setback from the two property lines and asked if that would also require a variance. Planning Director Darling confirmed that it would from the rear/south property line, but not from the east property line. Commissioner Holker asked if staff was in possession of any drawings that had that depicted. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 6, 2022 Page 3 of 7 Planning Director Darling stated that one of the drawings shows where the 10 feet from the side lot line is located. Commissioner Holker stated that she was just wondering about the adjacency to the concrete that is already there. Planning Director Darling stated that she did not have a drawing that shows that information. Commissioner Riedel stated that it appears as though they are planning to go with a pre-built style of shed and stated that staff’s recommendation to proceed with a different roof line would entail a different pre-built shed. Commissioner Huskins asked about the letter in support of the variance and noted that they had cited a shed on their property that is in the same location. He asked if staff knew anything about the setback of that shed. Planning Director Darling stated that she did not see one in the general area unless the property owners to the east have one and it was underneath the tree cover. Commissioner Huskins stated that he was wondering if that shed was placed similarly and was close to the property line or if it was in compliance with the setback. Planning Director Darling offered to look through the photos and see if there is one that shows that shed location, but after looked stated that she did not see any in the photos nor does she recall seeing one when she was out at the site. She noted that she had not looked over the fence. Commissioner Huskins stated that he was wondering if the City had approved a variance for the existing shed because of its proximity to the property line. Commissioner Eggenberger stated that was a good question. Planning Director Darling suggested that the Commission asked the property owners these questions. Gene German, 5926 Eureka Road, thanked City staff for all their assistance in expediting this matter because they were hoping to do this in February. He referenced the letter that they had submitted to the City on October 25, 2022 and noted that he wanted to add a few more comments to the Commission. He stated that the shed and the house will be painted the same color. He noted that in driving around the City he has noticed quite a few sheds on properties that have different roof lines. He noted that he has spoken with their builder and there is a different roof line available, if the City feels that issue is a ‘deal breaker’. He stated that the shed will arrive completely constructed and explained that it makes the dog yard within the chain link impractical because they would have the rip the fencing out in order to physically move it onto the site. He stated that it will be situated on a cement pad. He stated that the location they are proposing appears to be flat and he also did not believe that this location will cause drainage issues. He stated that what concerns them about the other two possible sites is that they are either wholly or partially situated over a sewer line and with the concrete pad for the shed, any future repairs that may be necessary will be very difficult and expensive. He explained that they feel the southeast corner is the most secluded and secure area. He stated that the significant thing about the dog fencing is that they have a Norwegian Elk Hound, two Border Collies, and a Poodle and they need that area. He stated that the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department has been out and inspected their yard since 2010 when they first got their license for multiple dogs and they have CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 6, 2022 Page 4 of 7 never had any issues. He stated that if the shed is put into the dog yard, it would essentially consume half of the yard. He stated that he has spoken with Ryan Paulson who lives in the manor house to the south and he gave verbal approval of this location and told him that he would not object if the shed sat 3 feet from their property line. He stated that he believes their proposed location provides access for their use without disrupting the neighborhood. Commissioner Riedel asked for an explanation of the location of the dog yard. Mr. German showed the Commission the dog yard area and what would be left remaining if the shed would put in this location. He noted that there is also a walnut tree in this area and he is concerned that if they start digging around for the shed that the tree root system will be damaged. He noted that because they are a corner lot, they have 50 foot setbacks on three sides of their property which does not give them much real estate to park the shed. Commissioner Riedel asked what Mr. German’s objection would be to the staff proposal which is 10 feet from the southeast corner. Mr. German stated that the land to the east and the south would then become useless. He referenced the location of a 1960s Department of Defense fallout shelter on the property and explained that it would create a chokepoint in getting around the area because he does not believe he could get a garden tractor through that space. Commissioner Riedel stated that he thinks the drawings look like they would have enough room with this location. Mr. German reiterated that this location would move everything too close to the fallout shelter. Commissioner Holker asked how far up the fallout shelter sits. Mr. German stated that it about 3.5-4 feet above ground. Commissioner Riedel reiterated that he felt that there would be space in this location. Mr. German explained that he had moved stakes around his yard and feels it would be too close. Commissioner Riedel asked if his point was that it was too close because a lawnmower would have to go around the other side of the house. He stated that he understands that Mr. German wants the shed to be right against the property line but he remained skeptical of the claim that there would not be room in this location. Mr. German stated that it would be tight in this location and clarified that he had measured it as a possibility. Commissioner Huskins asked Mr. German if there was an acceptable compromise. Mr. German stated that he did not have a number off the top of his head, but he feels there could be something between 3 feet and 10 feet that would be acceptable. He stated that before he gave a number he would really need to mark it and see how it would turn out. He explained that he wanted to ensure that there was enough room to pass between the concrete structure and the shed and reiterated that the more the shed is moved into their yard and away from the property lines, the more wasted yard they end up with. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 6, 2022 Page 5 of 7 Chair Maddy stated that crossing the 10 feet threshold with regard to setbacks is something that is fairly rare within the City. Mr. German stated that this situation is what it is and may be a situation where they are trying to pound a square peg into a round hole. Commissioner Riedel asked about the possibility of bringing the shed to the 10 feet setback point and then rotating it by 90 degrees because that should create a larger gap. Mr. German stated that he cannot say no to the idea, but reiterated that he would need time to go mark it out and make sure it would work. He stated that rotating it may put it too close to their chain link fence, so it may not work. Commissioner Eggenberger asked about making the building part of the chain link fence border. Mr. German stated that it is not impossible to do that but reiterated that he would have to take a look at how that would actually work. He stated that the closer to the fence the building gets, the closer to the walnut tree they will get which concerns him. Commissioner Huskins asked if Mr. German had eliminated the possibility of placing the shed on the southwest portion of his property because of its proximity to the road. Mr. German stated that there is a 50 foot setback off of Eureka which would bring it within 8 feet of the house which would put it in their front yard. He stated that there is also a large maple tree in that location so he was not sure there would be room to do that either. Chair Maddy stated that having a lot platted before modern zoning and being on a corner lot means that issues like this will arise. He stated that it appears as though they are just discussing the minimum necessary to alleviate. He asked if the Commission had any problems if the shed was moved 10 feet off of both property lines. Commissioner Eggenberger stated that he would not have an issue with that. Commissioner Holker stated that she would also not have an issue with that placement. Commissioner Riedel stated that agreed. Chair Maddy stated that he feels the applicant made a pretty good point on where the shed should be placed within the lot. Commissioner Holker stated that it feels like this should be officially plotted and measured to determine the distance between the concrete and the placement of the shed. Commissioner Riedel stated that he feels that there are reasonable options for placement of the shed with a 10 foot setback from both property lines. He noted that he feels the setback requirements are in place for a reason. Commissioner Holker explained that this was the point she was trying to get to because it is not her place to determine. She stated that her only issue is whether moving it to the 10 foot setback from both properties actually creates an issue and, if so, there may need to be a compromise option. She clarified that she is not in favor of a 3 foot setback. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 6, 2022 Page 6 of 7 Commissioner Eggenberger noted that he thinks the fencing is in the applicant’s favor, but noted that he believed that there can be some changes made to the dog run to make it fit with a 10 foot setback. Chair Maddy asked the Commission to discuss the point brought up by Mr. German about the usefulness of yard between the fence and shed which he found to be an interesting point. Commissioner Holker stated that she would assume that is a common situation because of the setbacks so she would not think it would be unique to this situation. Commissioner Riedel stated that 10 foot setbacks seem reasonable to him. Commissioner Huskins stated that his feeling was to keep the 10 foot setbacks from both the south and the east until, or unless, the Commission is shown that it is impossible or creates undue harm. He stated that he is not prepared to make a recommendation to the Council on this issue until the Commission receives more information from the applicant about the possibilities would be with the 10 foot setback. Commissioner Riedel noted that it appears as though the Commission is leaning towards denial of the request as it has been presented and asked Mr. German if he would prefer the Commission move forward with a 10 foot setback requirement or to wait until he can bring back more information to the Commission. Planning Director Darling stated that she would suggest the Commission give the applicant time to make changes other than ask him to make another application, because that will cost an additional $400. Mr. German stated that he can provide another drawing on the survey for the Commission. Planning Director Darling suggested that the Commission continue this item to the next meeting and then she will work it so this comes before the Council at the first meeting in January. Mr. German noted that he can also provide Planning Director Darling with a different shed roof option, but noted that it does not provide as much storage. Eggenberger moved, Riedel seconded, to table discussion of the variance request to Rear Yard Setback (Shed) for Gene German and Sara Lassila, located at 5925 Eureka Road until the first meeting in January of 2023. Motion passed 5/0. B. Liaison for February 27, 2022 City Council meeting Commissioner Holker volunteered to be the liaison for the February 27, 2022 City Council meeting. Chair Maddy noted that if he ends up being off of the Planning Commission following the recount, then there will not be a quorum for the January Planning Commission meeting. 6. REPORTS • City Council Meeting Report CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 6, 2022 Page 7 of 7 Council Liaison Gorham reported on matters considered and actions taken during the Council’s recent meetings. Chair Maddy thanked Council Liaison Gorham for stepping up and filling the vacant Council seat over the last few years and noted that he felt he had done a good job. Council Liaison Gorham stated that he may be open to serving on the Planning Commission once again, depending on the vote recount. • Draft Next Meeting Agenda Planning Director Darling stated that at the next meeting there will be the shed that was discussed earlier, discussion about the CIP, and an antennae CUP. She stated that staff wanted to officially acknowledge Chair Maddy’s years of service on the Planning Commission and explained that they had purchased a cake in his honor. Commissioner Riedel asked how many years Chair Maddy had served on the Planning Commission. Chair Maddy noted that he had been on the Planning Commission for 10 years. 7. ADJOURNMENT Riedel moved, Holker seconded, adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of December 6, 2022, at 8:00 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. CITY OF 4A SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD, SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · 952.960.7900 www.ci.shorewood.mn.us · cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Marie Darling, Planning Director MEETING DATE: January 17, 2023 continued from December 6, 2022 REQUEST: Variance to allow an accessory building to be constructed at three feet from the rear and side property lines where 50 and 10 feet are required APPLICANT: Gene German and Sara Lassila LOCATION: 5925 Eureka Road REVIEW DEADLINE: February 22, 2023 LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: Minimum Density Residential ZONING: R-1A FILE NUMBER: 22.13 REQUEST: The applicant requests a variance to construct a new accessory building in the southeast corner of the lot. The building would be 16-feet by 20-feet. Notice of the original meeting for the variance application was mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the property. BACKGROUND At their last meeting, the Planning Commission requested additional information and exhibits showing the distance of the new shed to the existing emergency shelter. Two exhibits are attached. Staff prepared two exhibits showing the shed a minimum of 10 feet to the side and rear property lines with showing two different building orientations. In either case, the applicant indicates that he can work with Page 2 the separation shown. He has also submitted revised graphics showing the detached accessory building with a gable roof instead of a gambrel roof consistent with the proposed recommendations. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission review the application according to the new graphics and the variance criteria (listed in the original staff memo) The variance criteria are open to interpretation. Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request for a rear yard setback, but denial of a side-yard setback, staff recommends that the applicants be required to acquire all necessary permits prior to construction, use horizontal lap siding instead of vertical and locate the shed a minimum of 10 feet from the side and rear property line. ATTACHMENTS Revised site plans Revised shed plans Planning Commission memo from December 6, 2022 and attachments Correspondence Received S:\\Planning\\Planning Files\\Applications\\2022 Cases\\5925 Eureka Road shed Var\\PC memo 01 17 2023.docx 12-21-2022 To whom it may concern: We are requesting a variance for the property at 22430 Murray Street. The variance would be for the rear yard setback from 40 feet to 37.6 feet. We are adding an addition above the garage and not changing any of the pre-existing conditions pertinent to a setback. The variance, and its resulting construction and use is consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan and in harmony with the general purposes and the intent of the zoning regulations. The pre-existing conditions where the house was built on the lot caused the practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. The property owners propose to use the property in a reasonable manner which are in line with the comprehensive plan. The plight of the homeowner is not due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner being that the home was built before this ordinance was in effect. The variance, if approved, would not alter the essential character of the locality. Being that it will continue being a residential single family dwelling. The variance would not be based exclusively on economic considerations. The variance shall not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. CITY OF 4C SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD, SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · 952.960.7900 www.ci.shorewood.mn.us · cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Marie Darling, Planning Director REVIEWED BY: Joe Rigdon, Finance Director MEETING DATE: January 17, 2023 REQUEST: Capital Improvements Program Review APPLICANT: City of Shorewood LOCATION: City-Wide REQUEST: The Capital Improvements Program is a 10-year budgeting tool that the City uses to prioritize large capital projects. It functions as an implementation tool as part of the Comprehensive Plan. Chapter 201.07 (Powers and Duties) of City Code directs (pursuant to Minnesota statute) the Planning Commission to review and make findings as to the compliance of the CIP with the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission’s responsibility is not to analyze each project, but to generally review the projects for the overall implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. ANALYSIS All of the projects within the plan are categorized by type and funding mechanism. A sampling of the applicable goals, objectives and/or policies included in the Comprehensive Plan are included for each category. Fund 201 (Community & Event Center). This section includes building and grounds improvements as well as equipment for the Center. Goal: Maintain a sound financial planning program for capital improvements, relating such improvements to actual need, proper location and timing. Policies: All public facilities shall be developed, improved and maintained according to the highest adopted standards of design and performance to serve as examples for private development. The City shall strive to make efficient use of its various municipal buildings by evaluating, on a periodic basis, the space needs of various City functions. Page 2 Fund 402 (Park Capital Improvement Fund). The Parks Commission met on October 25, 2022 and prioritized the capital improvements based on their annual in-person assessment of the conditions in each park and the need for the programmed items. Trails are generally not included in Fund 402 as they are constructed with street reconstructions and have their own fund. The Freeman Park trail project is different as the trail is within Freeman Park and are considered a park facility. Goal: Maintain a sound financial planning program for capital improvements, relating such improvements to actual need, proper location and timing. Policies: Funding for park maintenance and necessary improvements shall be considered a community priority. Recreational open space improvement shall be programmed in accordance with a capital improvement program, updated on an annual basis. Fund 403 (Equipment Replacement Fund). The majority of the CIP for equipment replacement pertains to public works and reflects the equipment necessary to carry out their basic duties including capital equipment, vehicles, etc. Other projects generally placed in this category include improvements for City Hall and other public buildings, technology upgrades, etc. In this CIP, a vehicle is also included for the Building Official. Goal: Maintain a sound financial planning program for capital improvements, relating such improvements to actual need, proper location and timing. Objective: New community facilities and services are to be developed to meet the needs and interests of the Shorewood community. Fund 404 (Street Reconstruction Fund), Fund 405 (Municipal State Aid Street Construction Fund), and Fund 406 (Trails): Based on their conditions, staff are proposing the following street improvements for 2023. For each of the applicable proposed street and utility improvement projects, there are also associated costs in the Water, Sewer, and Stormwater funds for the associated utility costs. When considering trails, the City has placeholding location for both Mill Street and Galpin Lake Road trails and will continue to submit for funding from other levels of government. Hennepin County, for example, will pay for ½ the costs of the land acquisition and costs of the Mill Street trail and consequently this project is closer to receiving funding. Staff will be applying for grants to contribute toward the local share of this project. Goals: The City shall provide for and maintain a safe and efficient system of transportation, sensitive to the needs of residents and the environment of the community. The City should establish a plan for an interconnected system of trails, enhancing the safe movement of pedestrians, bicyclists and other modes of non-motorized travel. Objectives: Implement trail segments on an implemental basis consistent with an overall plan. (Staff notes the trail plan is incorporated as part of the comprehensive plan.) Policies: Maintain a system of evaluating street conditions and prioritizing street maintenance/improvement efforts. Timeframes for street improvement/replacement efforts shall be identified within the City’s capital improvement program (CIP). Priorities for the funding of the construction of trails shall be established based on safety concerns, funding conditions and neighborhood acceptance. Page 3 Fund 601(Water), Fund 611 (Sanitary Sewer), and Fund 631 (Stormwater Management Fund): Projects included with these funds include new utility extensions, rehabilitation of mains, lift stations, ponds, etc. and other equipment directly related to provision of the utility services. For 2023, notice that several projects are consistent with the street projects as much of the work is done at the same time. Goals: The City shall provide those basic facilities and services that ensure the health, safety and general welfare of the public, the cost of which facilities and services are most efficiently shared by the general public. Maintain a sound financial planning program for capital improvements, relating such improvements to actual need, proper location and timing. Objectives: New community facilities and services are to be developed to meet the needs and interests of the Shorewood community. Public facilities and services are to be planned and provided in a comprehensive coordinated and economic fashion. Policies: City public utilities will be reviewed at the same time that the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is reviewed each year. Demand for urban services shall be anticipated, with emphasis to conserving existing facilities, in order to facilitate orderly, fiscally responsible extension of service systems. The stormwater drainage facilities shall be considered integral elements of the City’s street improvement projects. FINDINGS/RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends a positive finding that the Capital Improvement Program is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and has provided an authorization consistent with this recommendation. Proposed motion: Move to recommend approval of the 2023-2032 CIP based on the finding that it is generally consistent with, implements, and/or the projects are contemplated by the City’s Comprehensive Plan and further that the Vice-Chair of the Commission may execute and forward this finding to the City Council. ATTACHMENTS 2023-2032 CIP Draft Written Recommendation Comprehensive Plan (available on the website under government/city departments/planning and protective inspections/Comprehensive Plan or with this link: Welcome to Shorewood, MN CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD, SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 952.960.7900 · www.ci.shorewood.mn.us · cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us To: Shorewood Mayor and City Council From: Shorewood Planning Commission Date: January 17, 2023 Subject: 2023-2032 Capital Improvements Program (CIP) ________________________________________________________________ At the January 17, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed 2023-2043 Capital Improvements Program (CIP)pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 462.356 Subd. 2 and City Code § 201.07 Subd. 10. Findings and Conclusions: NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 462.356 subd. 2 and City Code § 201.07 Subd. 10, the Planning Commission finds that the capital projects within the CIP are consistent with, implement, and/or are contemplated by the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Marc Riedel, Vice-Chair ATTEST: Sandie Thone, City Clerk 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE PLANNING COMMISSION MTG REPORT AT CITY COUNCIL MTG TUESDAY, JANUARY 17 MONDAY, JANUARY 23 TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7 MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27 TUESDAY, MARCH 7 MONDAY, MARCH 27 TUESDAY, APRIL 4 MONDAY, APRIL 24 TUESDAY, MAY 2 MONDAY, MAY 22 TUESDAY, JUNE 6 MONDAY, JUNE 26 TUESDAY, JULY 18 MONDAY, JULY 24 TUESDAY, AUGUST 1 MONDAY, AUGUST 28 (PRIMARY ELECTION ON AUG. 8) TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5 MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25 TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3 MONDAY, OCTOBER 23 (CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON OCT. 10 DUE TO HOLIDAY ON OCT. 9) TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21 MONDAY, NOVEMBER 27 (ELECTIONS TAKE PLACE ON NOV. 7) TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5 MONDAY, JANUARY 22, 2024