Tuesday, February 25, 2025 · 6:00 PM
One-line summary
The Planning and Zoning Commission approved A&B Addition recommendations, continued the Leistico East accessory-structure variance, sent the Howard bakery IUP forward with a denial recommendation, and recommended approval of home occupation, policy, and Planning Commission ordinance updates.
11 items as recorded in the agenda, packet, and minutes, each with a short summary of what was at issue.
1Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Meeting was called to order and the pledge was recited.
2Roll Call
Roll Call
Roll call was taken; all seven commissioners were listed as present.
3Approve/Amend Agenda
Approve/Amend Agenda
The presented agenda was approved.
4Approve/Amend Minutes from January 28, 2025 Regular Meeting
Approve/Amend Minutes from January 28, 2025 Regular Meeting
The January 28, 2025 meeting minutes were approved.
5aPreliminary/Final Plat, Variance and CUP - A&B Addition
Preliminary/Final Plat, Variance and CUP - A&B Addition
The Commission held the A&B Addition public hearing, heard that the applicant did not object to the flag lot but did not want to build a trail that would not connect anywhere, and received confirmation that notices had been mailed and published. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of the trail-construction variance, the preliminary and final plat findings and recommendations, and the CUP for a flag lot, with final City Council action expected later.
The Commission approved the variance recommendation, preliminary and final plat findings and recommendations, and CUP recommendation for a flag lot.
5bVariance - Leistico East
Variance - Leistico East
The Commission discussed a variance request tied to the unrecorded Leistico East plat and existing farm buildings that would not meet the ordinance if the lots were platted as shown. Family members and neighbors emphasized the farm history and continued agricultural use. The Commission did not vote; instead, it directed Planner Nash to return with possible approval conditions, including options involving lot-line adjustments, encroachment agreements, removal or relocation of a building if needed, and future removal if a road is built to city standards.
No final recommendation was made; staff was directed to bring back approval options and conditions for further discussion on March 25, 2025.
5cInterim Use Permit - Tony Howard
Interim Use Permit - Tony Howard
The Commission reviewed an IUP request for a commercial manufacturing kitchen on the Howard property for Original Hockey Mom Brownies. Staff said the proposed business building would be an accessory building and could not be built before a residence, and that the home occupation rules require a resident homesteading the property. The applicants explained they were losing their bakery lease and wanted to build both foundations first, finish the bakery in 2025, and complete the home in 2026. The minutes contain conflicting wording on the motion result, but state the item will go to City Council with a recommendation to deny.
The minutes state the item will go to City Council with a recommendation to deny, but the recorded motion text also says 'MOTION DENIED' despite a 5-2 vote on a motion to deny.
5dOrdinance Amendment - Home Occupations
Ordinance Amendment - Home Occupations
The Commission continued review of the home occupation ordinance amendment, with Planner Nash noting changes made after prior discussion. No residents commented during the continued public hearing. After discussing removal of item number 3 from the ordinance, the Commission unanimously recommended approval of the draft home occupation ordinance.
The Commission recommended approval of the draft home occupation ordinance.
6aReview 2025 Draft Policy of Planning and Zoning Commission
Review 2025 Draft Policy of Planning and Zoning Commission
The Commission reviewed the 2025 draft Planning and Zoning Commission policy, which is reviewed annually. Planner Nash had incorporated changes discussed at the prior meeting. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of the policy with amendments discussed.
The Commission recommended approval of the policy with amendments as discussed.
7aReview Draft updates to Planning Commission Ordinance
Review Draft updates to Planning Commission Ordinance
The Commission reviewed a draft ordinance amendment related to the Planning Commission and discussed minor changes. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of the ordinance amendment with the changes discussed.
The Commission recommended approval of the Planning Commission ordinance amendment with changes discussed.
8Adjournment
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m.
9 motions on the record. Split votes are highlighted.
motion-001MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIES, SECOND BY HAAPALA TO APPROVE PRESENTED AGENDA.
moved by COMMISSIONER BIES, seconded by HAAPALA
motion-002MOTION BY AMES, SECOND BY PEARO TO APPROVE MEETING MINUTES FOR JANUARY 28, 2025.
moved by AMES, seconded by PEARO
motion-003MOTION BY BIES, SECOND BY JORGENSEN TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT TO CONSTRUCT TRAILS.
MOTION BY BIES, SECOND BY JORGENSEN TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT TO CONSTRUCT TRAILS.
moved by BIES, seconded by JORGENSEN
motion-004MOTION BY HAAPALA, SECOND BY PEARO TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT FOR A&B ADDITION.
MOTION BY HAAPALA, SECOND BY PEARO TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT FOR A&B ADDITION.
moved by HAAPALA, seconded by PEARO
motion-005MOTION BY HAAPALA, SECONDED BY BIES TO ACCEPT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FLAG LOT FOR A&B ADDITION.
MOTION BY HAAPALA, SECONDED BY BIES TO ACCEPT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FLAG LOT FOR A&B ADDITION.
moved by HAAPALA, seconded by BIES
motion-006MOTION BY CHAIR AMES, SECOND BY PEARO TO DENY THIS INTERIM USE PERMIT BASED ON THE PROPERTY NOT HAVING A RESIDENCE.
MOTION BY CHAIR AMES, SECOND BY PEARO TO DENY THIS INTERIM USE PERMIT BASED ON THE PROPERTY NOT HAVING A RESIDENCE.
moved by CHAIR AMES, seconded by PEARO
motion-007MOTION BY PEARO, SECOND BY HAAPALA TO RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT HOME OCCUPATION ORDINANCE.
MOTION BY PEARO, SECOND BY HAAPALA TO RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT HOME OCCUPATION ORDINANCE.
moved by PEARO, seconded by HAAPALA
motion-008MOTION BY PEARO, SECOND BY HAAPALA TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE POLICY OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ORDINANCE WITH AMENDMENTS AS DISCUSSED..
MOTION BY PEARO, SECOND BY HAAPALA TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE POLICY OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ORDINANCE WITH AMENDMENTS AS DISCUSSED ..
moved by PEARO, seconded by HAAPALA
motion-009MOTION BY PEARO, SECOND BY CARLSON TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE CHANGES DISCUSSED.
MOTION BY PEARO, SECOND BY CARLSON TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE CHANGES DISCUSSED.
moved by PEARO, seconded by CARLSON
When someone referred back to earlier business, we found the matching prior discussion and tied it in here.
Leistico Estates East was a previously approved final plat that was to be recorded but has not yet been. A key issue related to this recording is that the City Council required that a number of existing accessory structures would need to be removed as the property was now being platted into lots and those accessory structures would not be conforming under the ordinance.
— Planner Nash
What this is about
Prior approval and recording status of the Leistico Estates East final plat and the earlier accessory-structure removal requirement.
The records I searched do not contain a prior decision matching the recollection for Leistico Estates East. In these results, I do not see a Leistico Estates East final plat approval, a recording deadline/status, or a Council condition requiring removal of accessory structures for that plat. There is a partial match on the same issue in the Palomino Estates records: at the March 10, 2026 meeting, the packet included a condition stating that proposed Lot 1 had too many accessory structures and too much accessory-structure square footage, and that the developer would need to remove structures, adjust lot sizes, seek a variance, or use some combination of those steps before final plat submittal. At the April 14, 2026 meeting, the Council approved the Palomino Estates final plat subject to several conditions before release for recording, but the excerpted conditions do not show the same accessory-structure removal requirement.
ITEM 5d. Ordinance Amendment - Home Occupations Public Hearing Continued from last month.
What this is about
The prior month’s discussion and continued public hearing on the home occupation ordinance amendment.
The records searched show home-occupation-related items in this period, but they appear to be individual interim use permits rather than a general “Home Occupations” ordinance amendment. At the February 24, 2026 Planning Commission meeting, the commission held a public hearing for an Extended Home Occupation interim use permit for a tire service business and recommended approval with conditions. The March 10, 2026 Council packet also shows the Council approved a Jays Services LLC interim use permit for an Extended Home Occupation for a landscaping/concrete/snow removal business, following a February 24 public hearing. I did not find a record in these search results of a prior-month public hearing on a Home Occupations ordinance amendment being continued, nor a recorded vote continuing that specific ordinance-amendment hearing.
Commissioner Pearo stated when she built, they had to pull the home permit first, get to certain % of completion, then apply for the accessory building permit. This was 9 years ago and has set a precedence for the city.
— Commissioner Pearo
What this is about
A commissioner recalled a prior permit sequence requirement for building a home before an accessory building.
The records I searched do not contain a prior decision or discussion matching Commissioner Pearo’s recollection that a home permit had to be pulled first, the home built to a certain percentage of completion, and only then an accessory building permit could be issued. The search results mainly show unrelated Planning Commission items from 2025–2026, including ordinance amendment votes and a home-based dog boarding permit discussion. They do not document a prior city action, policy decision, or precedent from about nine years ago on the sequencing of home and accessory building permits.
A redline is provided comparing to the version that was reviewed at the January meeting to show how discussion from that meeting has been addressed in this draft.
— Cindy Nash
What this is about
Planner’s note that the home occupation ordinance draft reflected discussion from the January meeting.
The records searched only partially match this recollection. The February 24, 2026 and March 10, 2026 packets include home-occupation-related ordinance/application language and staff notes about items such as ancillary sales, screening, on-site parking, and limits on customer vehicles. Those packets appear connected to the same general topic. However, the results provided do not include a January meeting record showing the draft was reviewed, nor do they show the specific planner’s note about a redline comparing the January version to a later draft. The January 13, 2026 packet results that appeared in the search were for meeting dates and an unrelated furnace issue, not the home occupation ordinance.
As discussed at the January meeting, attached are proposed updates to the Planning Commission ordinance.
— Cindy Nash
What this is about
Planner’s note that draft Planning Commission ordinance updates followed discussion at the January meeting.
The records show a related March 10, 2026 Council packet item submitted by City Planner Cindy Nash for an ordinance amendment concerning the Planning Commission. That item proposed updating the ordinance so the City Council would “determine the interview process” rather than being required to conduct interviews itself, and it also suggested expanding eligibility for Planning Commission appointment to include certain property owners or trustees of property in the city. The excerpt does not show a final ordinance number or vote outcome. The search results also show a February 10, 2026 packet item about the annual Planning and Zoning Commission policy review, which says the Commission reviewed its policy at its January meeting and recommended changes. That appears related to Planning Commission procedures, but it is a policy item rather than the ordinance amendment itself. The records I searched do not include January meeting minutes or another formal January decision specifically matching the recollection that the ordinance updates were discussed then.
DECISION: Based on the foregoing information and applicable ordinances, the City Council approves the Final Plat for Palomino Estates subject to the following conditions: 1\. No trail shall be
### Development Applications in Review Palomino Estates -- Kyle Roessler - 20930 St. Francis Blvd. · An application for preliminary plat and a conditional use permit for a flag lot were submitted. The
24\. Park dedication shall be payment-in-lieu of land dedication. Park dedication fees shall be paid prior to release of the final plat for recording as per the City fee schedule in effect at t
Council may also appoint a council liaison who shall be a non-voting member who is not counted for quorum purposes. B. Terms. The members of the Commission shall be appointed for staggered terms of th
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the foregoing information and applicable ordinances, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Palomino Estates subject to the f
Documents and recordings archived for this meeting, when available.
Meeting Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes (2025-02-25)
Minutes · Tuesday, February 25, 2025
7 pages
Meeting Planning & Zoning Meeting — Agenda (2025-02-25)
Agenda · Tuesday, February 25, 2025
1 pages
Meeting Planning & Zoning Meeting — Agenda Packet (2025-02-25)
Packet · Tuesday, February 25, 2025
123 pages
The summary on this page is AI-extracted and may need correction. The PDFs and the meeting recording are the official record. What do the trust labels mean?