Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council introduces changes to interim‑use rules to allow more temporary uses
Summary
The Minnetonka City Council voted to introduce and refer amendments to the zoning ordinance that would broaden interim‑use standards and give the city planner authority to determine whether a proposed temporary use is similar to existing allowed uses.
The Minnetonka City Council on May 19 introduced and referred to the planning commission an amendment to the city’s zoning code intended to broaden the scope of permitted interim (temporary) uses and to delegate limited interpretive authority to the city planner.
City planner (presenting as Miss Thomas) told the council that the existing interim‑use rules are narrow and sometimes force staff to either deny reasonable temporary requests or treat temporary proposals as conditional uses that can become permanent. She said the proposal would make three main changes: allow the city planner to determine whether a proposed use is similar to an existing listed use (appealable to council), broaden general interim‑use standards and permit some uses currently classified only as conditional uses to be considered as interim uses when appropriate.
Council members discussed specific examples staff expects to appear under the revised standard, including temporary classroom buildings for schools, garden centers in parking lots, temporary fireworks sales and short‑term ramps that may expire on sale of a property. Council member Wilburn asked whether emergency temporary housing (for example, temporary modular housing) could be treated as an interim use; staff said that existing emergency provisions allow some temporary housing in certain cases and that the planning commission will be asked to specifically examine such situations. Councilor discussion also raised whether ordinance language should include default time limits (for example, three years) or leave the expiration term to the council’s resolution approving an interim use.
Council member Calvert moved to introduce the ordinance and refer it to the planning commission; Council member Wilburn seconded. The roll call vote was unanimous and the motion carried. Staff said there are no procedural changes proposed beyond the planner’s limited interpretive authority and that the planning commission will review the ordinance and return recommendations to council.
The amendment was introduced; no final ordinance adoption took place at the meeting.
