Commission members present: Keilani Ludlow, Megan Brown, Valarie Theurer, Melissa Porter, Dana Myers
Commission members excused: Kelly Barrett, Millie Smith P&Z Secretary
City Council members present:
Also present from Mendon City: Mayor Ed Buist, Stephanie Miller, City Clerk, Councilmember Amy Garbe joined by phone
Public members present: Diane Buist
Presiding: Keilani Ludlow, Chair
Minutes prepared by Stephanie Miller
Shape
7:00 PM: Keilani calls meeting to order
Pledge of Allegiance - Valarie Theurer
Invocation - Keilani Ludlow
Acceptance of Minutes: May 21, 2026
Motion to accept minutes: Melissa Porter
Second: Valarie Theurer
All in favor.
Agenda:
Topic 7 - Change in Code Discussion/Vote (7:04 PM)
It was discussed to change the wording in the code from Board of Adjustments to Land Use Appeal Authority. It was decided to research more before any decisions are made and to have an attorney with knowledge of code look at it further. No changes or votes were made.
Topic 7: Residential / Commercial Definition (7:36)
Main Topics Discussed
1. Agricultural Zoning Gaps (A1, A2, A3)
The city code identifies three agricultural zoning categories: A1, A2, and A3.
Only A1 appears to have clear regulations.
There is uncertainty about what is permitted on A2 and A3 properties, especially regarding residential construction.
A recent inquiry from a prospective land buyer highlighted this gap.
2. Whether Agricultural Land Can Have a House
Participants generally agreed that agricultural parcels should be allowed one residence.
Existing code appears to allow a house on smaller agricultural parcels (under 5acres), but it is unclear for larger parcels.
Discussion centered on formally clarifying that A1, A2, and A3 each permit one residence.
3. Rules for Larger Agricultural Parcels
The group discussed creating standards for:
5-10 acre parcels
10+ acre parcels
Potential approach:
One residence per parcel.
Agricultural uses tied to parcel size.
Limits on certain commercial-style agricultural activities.
4. Agricultural Commercial Uses
Discussion about allowing agricultural-related businesses such as:
Farm stands
Seasonal produce sales
Similar low-impact agricultural enterprises
Desire to create a list of permitted agricultural-commercial activities.
Activities not explicitly listed would need to be evaluated based on similarity to approved uses.
5. Subdivision Concerns
Questions arose about:
How agricultural land can be subdivided.
Whether subdivision could disrupt neighboring agricultural operations.
Frontage requirements and minimum parcel sizes.
Existing subdivision procedures already exist, but participants discussed whether they are appropriate.
6. Road Frontage Requirements
Concern was raised that agricultural lots require 330 feet of road frontage.
Several members questioned whether this standard makes sense and suggested comparing it to other municipalities.
7. Setback Requirements
Current agricultural regulations require buildings to be 40 feet from the right-of-way.
Members questioned why barns and agricultural structures must be set back so far, since farmers often prefer them closer to roads for operational efficiency.
Additional research into other communities' standards was requested.
8. Future Commercial Development
Discussion focused on how agricultural land might transition to commercial use in the future.
Concerns included:
Large commercial developments near residential neighborhoods.
Need for buffering between commercial and residential areas.
Long-term planning along highway corridors.
9. Airbnb / ADU Discussion
Brief discussion about:
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).
Whether ADUs could become short-term rentals.
Existing limits and permitting requirements for Airbnb-type uses.
10. Making the Code More Defensible
Participants reviewed zoning code language that may be legally difficult to defend.
Examples included provisions based on subjective standards such as:
Approval depending on whether a majority of residents object.
The goal is to replace subjective language with objective, measurable standards.
11. Administrative Cleanup
The board approved a motion allowing references in city code to 'Planning and Zoning' to be updated to 'ALUA' where those duties have already been reassigned.
This was intended as a housekeeping change rather than a policy change.
No major zoning changes were adopted during this portion of the meeting. The discussion was largely exploratory, with members identifying gaps in agricultural zoning regulations and assigning themselves follow-up work to:
Clarify residential rights on agricultural parcels
Review frontage and setback requirements.
Define agriculture-commercial uses.
Improve the legal defensibility of zoning code language.
Plan for future agricultural-to-commercial transitions.
Motion to change wording of references to duties from P&Z to ALUA: Valarie Theurer
Second: Melissa Porter
All in Favor
Topic 8 - Citizen participation: (8:02 PM) - No public comment was given
Topic 9 - Other Business: (8:03)
Planning & Zoning Membership Discussion
Discussion about replacing a departing Planning & Zoning member.
A potential new member, Logan Brown, has been identified and is interested in serving.
The mayor has also been considering another candidate.
General Plan Review
The group discussed the timeline for reviewing and adopting the city's General Plan.
A joint public work meeting between Planning & Zoning and City Council is needed before adoption.
The purpose of the meeting will be to:
Review major changes and highlights in the General Plan.
Allow City Council members to provide feedback before final revisions.
Avoid duplicate review work and unnecessary costs.
Proposed Work Meeting
Tentatively scheduled for August 6, 6:30 PM
The meeting must be public because a quorum of City Council members is expected to attend.
Public attendance will be allowed, though public comment is not anticipated as part of the work session.
Preparation for the Work Meeting
Council members should review the draft plan before attending.
Discussion should focus on significant changes and issues rather than reviewing the document line-by-line.
Updated sections from Aaron need to be reviewed by commission members before the meeting.
Adoption Timeline
The General Plan must be completed and adopted by November.
There will be no City Council meeting in December, making November the deadline.
Legal Considerations
Discussion about ensuring the General Plan is written in a legally defensible manner.
Members noted that General Plans can be referenced in litigation involving municipal decisions.
The consensus was to use clear, defensible language while recognizing that legal challenges are always possible.
Motion to adjourn: Megan Brown
Second: Dana Myers
All in favor.
Adjourned (8:10 PM)
Notice of Special Accommodations (ADA)
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special accommodations (including auxiliary communicative aids and services) during this meeting should notify the Mendon City clerk at 435-753-3449.