Loading...
C Planning Commission JOINT MEETING CITY COUNCIL & PLANN1NG COMMISSION MARCH 5TM, 2001 Roles and Responsibilities. Attachment: Maintaining the Edge, Information, Resources and Tips for Working with Appointed and Elected Officials. 2.) Ethics Policy / Code of Conduct. 3.) Adoption of Community Values. Attachment: Community Values Resolution 4.) s.) City Council Liaisons. Attachment: Mr. Botcher's February 21, 2001Memorandum - To save staff and applicant time and expense. Less "hassle" and delay. - To represent the collective philosophy of the city council. - To provide guidance on policy level issues. - Possibility of future empowerment of the planning commission to have final say on issues like variances, site plan review, etc. Visions / Guiding Documents. - Bluff Creek Corridor Natural Resources Management Plan - Hwy. 5 Corridor Study. 6.) Miscellaneous. Planning Commission Update Comprehensive Plan Rezoning and Land Use Changes This is the final step of the comprehensive plan implementation Glitch Ordinance This is a series of amendments clearing up ambiguity in the subdivision and zoning ordinance. (Staff will take one at a · time on available agendas). Flag Lot Amendment During a work session this item will be further discussed. Arboretum Village Putte Homes rezoning of 120 acres 379 units. Nuisance Ordinance Staff has met with the city attorney regarding noise complaints. There are an increasing number of complaints that we are unable to resolve. While planning department does not enforce this chapter, noise is discussed in Chapter 20. The city attorney has drafted an ordinance. If the amendments are just to chapter 13 the amendment may go straight to the city council. (attached) Design Standards Staff has been working with the city council in trying to modi~ design standards. Several discussions have been held and there seems to be a consensus to a 50-75 percent brick or better requirement. It was left with the staff to take pictures of other community. When an ordinance is presented it will go the city council via the planning commission. Lakeshore Landscaping Consider an ordinance that would require landscaping on lakeshore lots. Existing Neighborhood Standards Consider an ordinance that would require an average lot size, and building height based on existing neighborhoods. Presbyterian Homes They are looking at possible 160 assisted and independent living rental units at villages on the ponds. The site is just west of the church. Fertilizer Ordinance Create an ordinance that limits or prohibits the use of phosphorous. (Issue paper attached.) Ongoing Issues Doug Hanson has prepared a draft design for a 30-36 unit apartment Sept - Winter 2001 Work session Feb 2001 Winter 2001 Winter 2001 Winter 2001 Ongoing Winter 2001 Spring 2001 Winter 2001 ? Winter 2001 complex on Santa Vera next to his existing building and the city park Ashling Meado~vs Lundgren Subdivision at the intersection of Galpin and Lake Lucy. Traditional RSF subdivision with 50 + lots. Code Enforcement Home occupations violations R & B Landscaping JB Landscaping Conditional use standards Proj eot Management Lake Susan Apartments March Glen Subdivision Paisley Park- studio addition Feb 20,2001 Both have been resolved Mattson Property Industrial guided and property that is located south of Stone Creel and just west of the Bluff Creek and north of Lyman. The site is apProx 80 acres. Part of the site is in the Bluff Creek Overlay District. Site Plans Chanhassen Lakes Business Park #7, Lot 8 Block 1 28,821 sq. fi. Office/Warehouse Chanhassen Lakes Business Park #7, Lot 7 Block 1 26,040 sq. ft. Office/Warehouse Conditional Use and Site Plan Westwood church 184,940 sq ft Winter or Spring 2001 Feb 2001 Feb 2001 Spring 2001 g:\plan\ka\pc update.doc Appoft te. arid Ele d Ofti lals.-- Carolyn Braun- Planning Director, City of Anoka THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TI{E GOVERNING BODY: MISUNDERSTANDING OF ROLES The misunderstanding of roles is one of the most common barriers to a positive relationship between governing bodies and planning commissions. The governing body has the responsibility of appointing the members of the planning commission. It is the govern/rig body' s job to create a capable planning commission with a balance of expertise and experience. After that, the governing body needs to let the planning commission do its job. The planning cormnission and governing body have two distinctly different jobs. Members of the governing body are elected policy makers who are responsive to the public whom they represent. Planning Commission members, on the other hand, are not policy makers. They are appointed to work within the ordinances adopted by the governing body. They work with already established policy and do not change the policy or make a decision on a specific request based on policy. It is the planning commission's role to apply the ordinance. If the planning commission is concerned about the impact of applying a given ordinance, it is their role to recommend changes to the governing body. It is not their role to base a decision on what they would like the ordinance to say. Even in rewriting an ordinance or developing a new ordinance, the planning commission functions as a technical consultant and the governing body is still the policy maker. UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFE~NCE IN DECISION-MAKING Technical vs. Political Decision Making Planning Commissions and Governing Boards may reach different decisions on the same request. Why does this happen? Both bodies have the same goal of acting in the public interest. Then why the difference? Planning Commissions base their recommendations on interpretation of the code as it relates to a specific request. This approach is essentially regulatory compliance blended with policy interpretation. At the Governing Board meeting, however, broader socio-economic and cultural issues are blended with policy. So, when a governing board reverses a planning commission recommendation, it is often due to the expanded scope of"compatibility," "quality of life," and other overriding considerations of similar nature. Planning Commissions often measure and make planning decisions based on whether the decision will create the best outcome in relation to the ordinance standards. For example, the Planning Commission will work to reduce, a variance to the least amount possible. The Governing Body, however, may look at who receives the most benefit and whether the variance'-- regardless of the actual mount -- impacts others. As a result, decisions from the Governing Body may be more responsive to existing voters. Planning Commissions also evaluate requests based on a comprehensive approach, using the comprehensive plan as a guide. Governing bodies, however, prefer a more incremental approach that analyzes only the request at hand. The incremental approach has less political risk. Finally, Planning Commissions are more likely to be receptive to technical presentations. Governing bodies are often more effected by presentations with an emphasis on public sentiment, such as a strong emotional presentation opposing a project. 2000 L~PPER ~IDWE$'r REGIGI~A.L PL~.Hf~IHG ¢OHFEI~ERCE EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION Given the difference in roles and methods of decision making, it is important to have effective and appropriate communication. The governing body needs a way to provide collective guidance to the planning commission and there needs to be a way for the planning commission to share the background and process that leads to a recommendation to the governing body. STEPS THAT CAN ENHANCE COMMUNICATION 1. Hold a yearly workshop to review and agree on roles, to discuss common connnunity goals, and to establish the general work agenda for the year. TIP: Allow enou~ wor 'kshop time before major issues so that recommendations can be fully understood and questions answered before the political debate. TIP: Agree on ground rules for joint meetings, public statements and informal workshops which -include mutual respect. TIP: Facilitated joint workshops may be helpful on issues that have created or have the potential to create difficulties bem, een the tTvo groups. TIP: Ordinance and plan development processes should include community input early in the process to reduce the likelihood of conflict in the approval process. 2. Produce a regular update to the governing body that reports on issues of mutual interest. BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS Building bridges through effective advocacy. h~ any community, there are steps that can be taken to make sure planning commission aims and policies are clear to the elected body, with the long- range goal of mutual understanding and support. Attend your governing body's meeting when an appeal of one of your decisions is being considered. While it 'may not be pleasant to hear the discussion of those who disagree with you, you will be able to experience the feeling of the elected officials and the public on speci, fic issues. If the planning commission decision is overturned, the planning conmfission may want to informally revisit the issue to determine why and if a different approach is warranted. Be acquainted with the political platforms of the members of the governing body. If planning is not important to an elected official, you may want to arrange a visit to explain your position and the positive results planning has on your con~nunity - and also listen to the elected official's contrary ideas. Do not rely entirely on staff to convey 3'our message. In most cases, reliance on your professional staff is a satisfactory way to carry out the planning commission' s objectives. However, there may be times when the planning commissions feelings are best expressed by a planning conm~ission member (often the chairperson). Suggest a retreat or informal workshop among planning commission members and elected officials to try to come to consensus on a common vision, goals and objectives. Even if the best you can do is agree to disagree, you will have heard each other and learned something. The relationship between the elected official and appointed boards should always be cordial, even in the heat of battle. You can do a great deal to make it so. Excerpted in great part fi~om "Working Effectively with Elected Officials," by Elaine Cogan, PCJ, Fall 1995. Source: Planning and Zoning Administration in Utah Second Edition, 1989 Center for Public Affairs and Administration University of Utah As a member of the Planning Commission who is vitally interested in building and maintaining a viable community in which to live, work, and play, I hereby resolve to: · Support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America and the Constitution of the State of Utah. · Uphold the laws of the United States of America and those of the State of Utah. · Concern myself with the advancement of the pubic interest in all matters that come before me. · Place the competence and effectiveness of service to the public above all iAterests of persons, factions or parties. · Endeavor, through diligent attendance, to represent the best interest of the community as a whole as I have been appoLnted to do. · Seek to assimilate all pertinent information on matters before ti~e Planning Commission prior to committing myself to an irrevocable judgement or decision. · Prepare mvself for all items scheduled for presentation to the Planning Commission. · Strive to provide fiscally sound policies, matching expenditures to funds budgeted. · Not make available to an,,' one citizen any services, tangible or intangible, that are not equally available under the law to any other citizen. · Abstain from participation in a decision of the Plar'aning CommLission and/or the governing body in which I have a conflict of interest. · Avoid unilateral action that does not comply with existing policy of the Planning Commission. · Work with professional staff of the Planning Commission and other persons to achieve the most desirable results with regard to the planning or zoning process and established community development policies. · Refuse personal gifts in every instance where I have reason to believe the gift would not have been extended to me except for my official position, where I have reason to believe the giver's interests are likely to be affected by my official actions, or where the gift is or may reasonably be considered to be designed to influence my official actions. · Conduct myself in my contacts with other persons and groups in a manner keeping the trust and dignity in my position as a servant of the people and of my community. I shall further take care to guard not only the factua[ principle~ but also the appearance of justice and' ~ ~ ' · ETHICS & THE PLANNING COMMISSION , ndependent and nformed %'3j~agine that ),our commission tl"~ a member who regularly attends meetings unprepared. (For some of you, this may not be much of a stretch to imagine.) As a result, the member displays little depth of thought on matters before the planning commis- sion. He may appear to always "rubber stamp" the position of staff, or repeatedly ask questions that have no bearing on the application or were addressed in the information provided. Obviousl); this is not an independent and informed commissioner. But is there an obligation for plan- ning commissioners to exercise indepen- dent and informed judgment in review- ing matters? The answer is 3'es. A central function of a planning com- mission is to provide an objective, and independent, voice on matters relating to a COlmnunity's long-term development. This is especially important since local governing bodies are (quite naturall)') more sensitive to public opinion and the demands of various special interests. Planning historian Larry Gerckcns has noted that "it is worth recalling that citizen planning commissioners were put in that position not to execute adminis- trative chores for city council, but to pro- vide insights into the problems and potential of the communit); and to pro- vide leadership in the solution of prob- lems before they arise" (from "Community Leadership & the Cincin- nati Planning Commission," PCJ #18, Spring 1995). Moreover, the American Planning Association's "Statement of Ethical Principles in Planning" includes the following: "Planning process partici- pants should exercise fair, honest and independent j:~dgment in their roles as decision makers and advisors" (emphasis added). What are so,ne of the basics to ensur- ing tt~at you, as a commissioner, are b.y C. GregoU' Dale, AICP well-informed, and capable of exercising independent judgment? First, be sure to open your meeting packet before the meeting! OK, maybe that is too basic, but many commission- . ers have cringed to hear the sound of a fellow board memi~e, tearing the enve- lope open at the meeting. .'/i:.- BOTH 'COMMISSION'-AND ' -~ .:' STAFF-SHOULD. RECOGNIZE '~;.~ :THE.' OBLIGATION OF .THE-" ,~..~z .,. .- .... - . . . - , - _ ' : · ;,; :- COMMISSION .TO_ ACT~ IN -'-~- ~::"'-.' AN INDEPENDENT'- . ~-~ '"" !.",:,': .: .-'MANNER. '" ': If you haw a professional staff you should obviously review the staff report carefully.. If not, then you should review the application itself. Also, there is no substitute for viewing the subject site and the surrounding area. Reviewing previous staff reports or minutes may help provide you with some historic per- spective on the application at hand. It is also helpful to review the zoning code and comprehensive plan provisions that are relevant to a particular request. Do not confuse independent judg- ment with personal bias. The compre- hensive plan and the regulations that implement that plan represent the poli- cies and laws that you are bound to uphold, regardless of your oxvn personal biases. Can one do too much to prepare? Always remember that ),our decision must ultimately be based upon evidence in the public record. Man), commission- ers, in their well-placed enthusiasm to be as prepared as possible, engage in inde- pendent investigation that involves dis- cussing pending cases before the commission with interested parties to that application. Such ex parte contacts are improper and should be avoided (see my column, "Ex-Parte Contacts" in PCJ #2, Jan/Feb. 1992). Another aspect of this issue has to do with the relationship between the com- mission and staff. Professional planning staff have the training and .ability to provide the commission with valuable information and insights. Many commis- sions actually request that staff provide a recommendation for action. Planning commissions should take full advantage of staff expertise in mak- ing decisions. However, both commis- sion and staff should recognize the obligation of the commission to act in an independent manner. Remember also that staff's analysis usually occurs prior to the public having the opportunity to testif>: The commission may very ,,veil hear testimony that leads to a conclusion or interpretation different from that which staff tias articulated. It can take time and effort for com- missioners to be well-informed about matters before them, and be capable of exercising independent judgment. But it is an investment that must be made. · C. Gregory Dale is a Principal with thc plan- ning and zoning firm of McBride Dale Clarion in Cincinnati, Ohio. Dale manages planning projects and conducts training for planning officials through- out the cotmtD: A collection of all of Greg Dale's "Ethics & the Planning Commission" columns is now available. Contact the PCJ office or order from the PlannersWeb at: x~qv~:plannersweb.com PLA N N I N G C<) M M I S S I O N E RS _J O U RN AL / NUMBER 36 / FALL 1999 RECIPE FOR FAIRNESS In saying "yes" to appointments to serve as planning commissioners, we accept positions of public trust and the responsibility of helping to guide our communities and counties into the future. To be effective we must conduct ourselves in a manner that develops and maintains the public's respect for and understanding Qf the job we do and the public process we serve. The key to respect is acting with fundamental fairness to all involved in the process and to all who may be affected by any decisions that arise from the process: citizens (now and future), applicants and their representatives, professional staff, other commission members, and the elected body. Looking back over my 16 years as a planning commissioner, I recognize that each of the above groups has its own expectations of "what's fair". What seems fair and reasonable to some seems entirely "unfair" to others. Therefore, the preparation and adoption of specific policies and procedures that incorporate a "Recipe for Fairness" is essential to the well-being of a planning commission and to its dispatch of duties. "Recipe for Fairness" Into the ELEMENTS OF PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS Fold-in the AICP/APA ETHICAL PRINCIPALS IN PLANNING Mix well with Understanding, tolerance, and vision, And serve with Competence, integrity, and consistency. An understanding of the key ingredients is critical to fairness. Elements of "procedural due process": The "due process clause" found in the 5th and 14th amendments to the U. S. Constitution mandates requirements of procedure for bodies making land use decisions to effectuate reason and fairness in the public process and to ensure that applicable decisions and laws are not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. At a minimum we must provide: · adequate notice and full disclosure of information, · unbiased decision-makers, absence of ex parte contact in any quasi-judicial issue, · opportunity to be heard and to present evidence, · record of the proceedings, · written decision based on the record and supported by findings of fact. Elements of the AICP/APA Ethical Principles in Planning: These principles bind professional planners to ethical standards of practice. It is additionally important that planni · · ng commissioners subscribe to the same ethical standards. Serve the public interest; Recognize the rights of citizens to participate in the process; Give full, clear, and accurate information; Expand choice and opportunity; Make information available to the public; Protect the integrity of the natural environment an~l heritage of the built environment; Pay atte..ntion to the inter-relatedness of decisions; Achieve high standards of proficiency and integrity; Disclose personal interest and define it broadly; Abstain from participation when you have a personal interest; Seek no gifts or favors; Not participate as an advisor, decision-maker, or advocate when when you have previously been an advocate; Serve as an advocate when the client's objectives are consistent with the public interest; Not use or disclose confidential information; Not misrepreSent facts; Not participate unless prepared; Respect the rights of all persons. The elements of due process and the ethical principles of planning blend together smoothly to provide elemental fairness when diligently and 'consistently' followed. Mixing those elements with understanding, tolerance and vision leads me to the following thoughts with regard to specific "audiences". To the public: We represent not only those who have come to participate in a meeting but also those who did not come, and those who will be our citizens in the future. The Supreme Court of Washington (in the 1972 decision in Buell v. City of Bremerton) adds that members of commissions must be "capable of hearing the weak voices as well as the strong". In decision-making, we must respect and preserve the legacy of the past and be responsive to the needs of the present as we prepare for the future to assure opportunities for success and fulfillment for all. In our hearings and meetings, we should be respectful and attentive to all who wish to participate. For many, it is a first experience with our public process. If we put ourselves in the shoes of those on the other side of the hearing room, would we feel welcomed? Would the meeting space be large enough with good sound and lighting? Would all case materials be set out for public review and would meeting procedures be clearly explained? Would visual aids (overheads, etc) be used and would all testimony be handled fairly with time and attention to all? Would issues be clearly defined and questions be carefully addressed? Would action taken be explained as well as the next step in the process? Would we feel our input was .- appreciated and considered and would we look forward to participating in the process in the future? To the applicants: · Come to each meeting prepared, having studied the applications, staff reports, · '- other documentation, applicable ordinances, plans and policies, and the sites. · - Keep an open mind avoiding determination until all documentation has been reviewed and all testimony and discussion has been beard in public session. · Do not use continuance as a delaying tactic when a decision may be difficult or unpopular. To tti'e professional staff: · Review all reports in the "meeting packet" as quickly as possible after receipt. If you have questions or need more information, let staff know immediately. Do not "bushwhack" your staff by waiting until the meeting to ask for information that may not be available "on the spot". · Treat the professional staff (including consultant planners) with decorum, respecting the professional code of ethics by which they are bound. To other commission members: · Be respectful to each other and to differing opinions. · Seek training and-education opportunities to ensure a 'better grasp of the responsibilities. · Attempt to clarify all issues -- not everyone on the commission has the same level of experience. Never think a question is "too dumb" to ask. To the elected body: · Send clear recommendations substantiated by "findings of fact" in a timely manner. · Periodically meet with the elected body to discuss community planning priorities, goals, and policies and to embrace a shared planning attitude for the community. · Recognize that they serve a voting constituency, as well as the general public, and are likely to respond to "public pressure" in a politically expedient manner. In closing, remember that each individual involved in the planning process brings a different perspective to the issues and that in FAIRNESS all perspectives deserve consideration as we work to prepare for the future. Carol Lynne Swayne Planning Commission Chair, City of Bellevue, Nebraska APA Board of Director-at-Large Note: Written for and reprinted from "The Westem Planner"; Vol 21, No 3; April/May 2000 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: February. 8, 1999 RESOLUTION NO: 99-07 ~VIOTION BY: Mancino SECONDED BY: Entel PROCLAMATION DECLARING VALUES ~VEEK, FEBRUARY 14-20, 1999 WHEREAS, "it takes a whole village to educate a child," (African proverb) The whole comlnunity has the responsibility to work in concert with the home to provide consistent messages about how we are to treat each other. WHEREAS, the entire conmmnity participated in a process to identify a common ground of basic goodness. The District 112 conmaunities process involved tlm'ee community forums and a committee that reviewed and summarized the input from the community. The values were then adopted by the city councils, school board, and county commissioners. WHEREAS, the entire conm~unity must be involved. This includes school, business, clergy, law enforcement, social se~x4ces, city govenm~ent, and sen,ice organizations. This involvement begins witli identi~4ng the values and continues by community melnbers modeling and promoting the values. WHEREAS, the City of ChaN~assen has adopted and. promotes the eight Community Values of CITIZENSHIP, ENVIROMENTALISM, GENEROSITY, HUMAN WORTH & DIGNITY, INTEGRITY, LEARNING, RESPECT FOR OTHERS AND RESPONSIBILITY. WHEREAS, The Values Con~nittee has organized the Tenth Annual Conm~unity Values Award Program for 1999. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Chanhassen hereby proclaims the week of February 14-20, 1999, to be COMMUNITY VALUES WEEK in the City of Chanhassen. As we continue to face the challenges and oppm~unities of our society, I call on all citizens of CHANHASSEN to promote and model these eight values. CHANHASSEN'S commitment and dedication to building a bright future for all members, but especially the youth of this community, remain top priorities. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8t}' da3; of February in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine. Todd Gerhard, Acting City Manager Nancy .K. Mancino, Mayor YES NO ABSENT Mancino Engel Jansen Labatt Senn None None Distiiict ._ __ .J l 2 Strategic_ Direction- __ ._ ~ -Mis~ibn:- .... -- - _ - ._ ._ __ ._ District 112 will prepare learners to achieve their personal best. - ~ .-Vision - __ District 112 is. dedicated to the preparation of life-long learners so each may achieve personal success and contribute to family and conm~unity. Community Values Citizenshil}: A quality in individuals whereby each adheres to an has an understanding and appreciation of the rights, responsibilities and privileges afforded our society under the Constitution of the United States of America; and, where every individual has a willingness and ability to participate in the democratic process in a lawful manner in a society where actions of the individual, group or government are free from bias, favoritism or prejudice. Enviromnentalism: A quality of care and concern for our surroundings and being willing to help improve and preserve the environment. . Generosity: A quality in an individual whereby each is willing to share Unselfishly in words as well as action and is willing to serve others without pay; indiscriminate altruism, gratitude and appreciation. Itumai~ Worth and Dignity: One's assessment-of the extent to which on~ is lova'ble and-capable; the personal sense of being valued. Inte~ritv2 The quality 9f strict personal honesty, truthfulness and sincerity in the conduct of human interactions. I,earnin~: A quality in individuals whereby each strives to learn more and increase personal levels of fulfillment and competence throughout life;' a condition ih which one uses problem solving and reasoned argument to identify, fi'amc and propose new and improved solutions to existing and emerging problems to the betterment of self and society ...... Respect for Others: A quality whereby each and every individual has an unselfish regard and devotion, free from pride or prejudice, to the welfare of others, as well as one's self, by respecting others; by displaying courtesy and compassion; by appreciating and accepting individual differences and cultural diversities; and by showing regard for and knowing the unique qualities of each person as a valued individual. Responsibility: A quality in individuals whereby each knows, understands and accepts the impact and consequences of personal actions and decisions and whereby each tries to fulfill the obligations of self-sufficiency and active commitment to the common good of society. These values have been adopted by thc CiO, Councils of Carver, Chat~hassen, Chaska, and Victoria, the Carver County Board, the School Board of District I 12, and the Chaska Chamber of Commerce. CITYOF CHANH EN dgO CiO' Ce,ret D;'iz,e PO Box 147 Cl,.m/,,~s:e;:. ..'~'[i,,e~ota Pholle 952.93 :-.)900 Ge,er,T/Fax Q52. gzzsf3Q £,gi, eeri,g Depm'tmem 952.93L9152 £,ildi,g Departme,t Fax 952.934.2524 It'Fb Site MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor City Council FROM: Scott A. Botcher. City Man%er d)~ ,~ DATE: February 2 l. 2001 SUB J: . 1 · Commission Liaison Recommenoatlons There have been times in the. past, most recently accentuated by the inter- commission commul~ication process used involx'ing the Pulte development, where it appears as if commu~ication of the municipal position by the Council to its advisory commissions was at times lacking. Having been here long enough to notice, it appears that this issue, similar to other dilemmas we have faced, can be traced to one of organizational structure within the lmmicipal corporation. While some of what I am about to say may seem dreadfully obvious to some, it appears some oF the Following statements have not been implemented even if you assume that these things are patently obvious to the governing bodies of the City in the past. I1'~ its simplest form. our con2missions exist primarily £or one purpo:;e--<hey exist to assist the Council in performing its duties as the gove~'ning body of'ti~e City. They exist to act on behalf of, and at the direction of, the governing body that established these comn~issions, and as their creator, the Council establishes the policy parameters within which they desire each one of these committees to work. \Vithout the clear establishment of this relationship, and v¢ithout the understanding of these sal!~.e said parameters, one of two things can happen: 1 ) the advisory commissions can do their work with a lack of direction, making their job rnore difficult; and 2) the work product the Council ultimately receives from these advisory commissions will not have served the purpose or met the need of the governing body, which is (was) the purpose of the commission's existence in the first place. The question then is how to create a structure whereby there is an understanding on the part of both the governing body and the advisory commissions as to their roles, and secondly, as to the acceptable policy parameters within which the advisory comlnissions should consider specific issues as determined by the governing body of the City. Although I do not claim to have the perfect answer, the Mayor has asked me to share with you my thoughts on how we can address this structural issue. 3Iayor & Ci0, Council February 21, 2001 Page 2 In Delafield (which is, for the new Council members, where I worked for five years prior to coming here), we had a system in place whereby each Council member was assigned a position on each one of the commissions in a liaison- type relationship. These Council members sat as full members of each one of the advisory commissions and did vote. This served multiple purposes, two of xvhich I have mentioned before. First, it created an bxplicit conduit through which direction and communication could flow fi'om the Council to the commission and back again. In this manner, the commissions heard directly from a Council member any communication necessary or desirable by the commission as part of their deliberation. Secondly, it established for these advisory bodies the policy parameters within which the Council desired each one of these commissions to work. As an example, the Council may decide that certain things are acceptable as a matter of policy within park and recreation or land use areas within the City of Chanhassen. The establislm~ent of that policy then could be fully and clearly communicated first hand by this liaison to the advisory commission so that when they were considering issues, they 'knew clearly the parameters under which the governing body of this city wished them to review issues prior to reporting to the City Council. As I said, it does the Council no good to have commissions do work outSide the policy parameters in a fashion that is unacceptable to the governing body. Additionally, it is fi'ustrating to the commission members to put in the time and effort without some sort of direction from the Council. You, as a Council inember, owe that to them and certainly the creation of this type of relationship facilitates that. Additionally, given the special role of the Planning Colnmission within growth communities (and Delafield was a grov~h community too), the Mayor, by ordinance, served as Chair of the Planning Commission. It is thought that this role as Chair helped to further communicate to the Planning Commission public policy as established by the Council to the Planning Commission. It goes without saying that it is incumbent upon each of the Council members who serve as the liaison to represent the interests of Council. It is not their job to represent their interests. It is their j ob to represent the interests of the governing body. In cases where there is not a firm position on the part of the Council, it is their job to represent the varied perspectives that may exist on the Council. I personally have seen people do an outstanding job of representing diverse policy perspectives to advisory commissions. Additionally, one of the issues that Council may wish to consider is whether or not they wish to continue to deal with some of the land use issues they currently do. My rationale is as follows: at the current time, there appears to be, outside of the appointment process, a pretty distinct line between the actions of the Planning Commission and the City Council. This is not meant to be an adversarial statement; I am simply saying that we have two distinct bodies 3J(lyor & City Coltncil FebrltaO, 21, 2001 Page 3 considering and deliberating issues that come before them. Suffice it to say, the Council workload appears to be growing every single week. Additionally, I have been nudging (okay, perhaps pushing) the Council to try to get up to that 30,000 ft. policy level, thereby making policy to guide and lead this community instead of getting so bogged down with detail that we burn up valuable time and energy dealing with issues like 8 fl. deck variances hs opposed to issues of housing and transportation et.al, within Chanhassen. Part of the "trade" is that the City Council would not deal with n'mlly of the rudimentary land use approvals. The Council would not deal with variances, instead focusing on large conceptual issues, such as approving PUDs, development agreements, general developlnent plans in putting together a PUD, etc. We would not, for example, approve individual site plans for buildings v,,ithin the PUD, the rationale being that the PUD is in existence, the development agreement is in existence, and the Planning Commission, especially given the communication through the liaison to the Planning Comlnission, could just as well decide whether or not a specific submittal met the standards implied within a development agreement and within a PUD as the Council. Frankly, it is my experience that Plmming Commissions do an outstanding job in applying the template created to review the individual submittal. Chanhassen has a history.,, however,, of the City Council being involved (I might sa>.' bogged down) in detail work. i don't know if you all are ready to let go of some of this. but I throw it out there because I've seen it work and I want to continue to encourage you, again, to lead at the broadest and highest possible level. You are here to lead this COlnmunity, and again, these commissions exist to do much of the detail, research, and public hearing work for you, gMng a broader audience to your constituents so that when an issue Colnes before you, you can deal with these issues fi'om a broader policy based perspective instead of counting trees or setback footage. I apologize for the length of this memo and I am more than happy to discuss it xvith you on Monday evening. It is my understanding from my conx, ersations with the Mayor that this issue on Monday night is simply one for discussion. The Council can communicate to her their initial thoughts, feelings, and concerns at that time. If you have any questions about this, please contact me directly and I will be more than happy to talk. Thank you. g:\user\scottb\commission liaison.doc