Loading...
2014-03-04 Council minutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, March 4, 2014 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Krebsbach called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: Councilmembers Duggan, Povolny, and Norton. Councilmember Petschel was absent. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Krebsbach presented the agenda for adoption. Councilmember Povolny moved adoption of the agenda. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Krebsbach presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilmember Duggan moved approval of the consent calendar as presented and authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Approval of February 18, 2014 City Council Minutes b. Approval of February 25, 2014 Planning Commission Minutes c. Approval of Massage Therapist License — Jonelle Prow d. Approval of Personnel Action Report e. Approval of February 2014 Building Activity Report f. Approval of Claims List g. Approval of Contractor List Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 March 4, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 1 PUBLIC COMMENTS A) PRESENTATION BY ST. THOMAS ACADEMY STUDENTS, ASSESSMENT OF ROGERS LAKE The St. Thomas Academy A.P. Environmental Science Program students monitor Rogers Lake and each year they present their findings to the City Council on the lake's health and condition. Mr. Tony Kinzley, A.P. Environmental Science Teacher, introduced the four students presenting the Rogers Lake Water Quality Assessment for 2013; Connor Duffy, Chris Iverson, Dan Plourde, and Mason McGrath. Overall, the lake is in good condition and it remains a healthy lake. However, there were two chemical test results that were almost outside of the acceptable range, the phosphates and total solids levels. The students presented suggestions for improving the borderline areas and for keeping Rogers Lake in a healthy condition, which included proper fertilizer use, planting native plants in your yard, composting yard waste, encouraging use of a buffer zone around the lake, and looking for alternatives for road salt. They answered questions from the Council. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A) PLANNING CASE 2014 -04, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF COVERED FRONT ENTRYWAY WITHIN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, 2266 FIELD STONE DRIVE, RESOLUTION 2014 -12 Planner Nolan Wall explained that the applicant requested a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to construct a covered front porch entryway within the front yard setback for their property located at 2266 Field Stone Drive. The parcel, owned by Rod and Sue Stombaugh, is located on a partial cul-de-sac, which causes a curvilinear front yard setback line. The existing dwelling is compliant with the setback requirement. The proposed structure would cover the existing front stoop in order to provide for protection and to improve architectural features. Mr. Wall reviewed the three conditions that would be necessary, per city code, to allow for this type of structure. Since the application met these conditions staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit. Councilmember Duggan asked why a variance would not be requested. Mr. Wall stated our Code allows for this by a conditional use permit if the three conditions are met. Councilmember Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2014 -12 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF COVERED FRONT ENTRYWAY WITHIN THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK based on the findings of fact as outlined in the resolution. Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 March 4, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 2 B) PLANNING CASE 2014 -05, LOT SPLIT AT 1010 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY, RESOLUTION 2014 -13 Planner Nolan Wall explained that the applicant requested a lot split at 1010 Sibley Memorial Highway. The parcel is owned by Alden and Joyce Landreville and contains an existing single-family dwelling on five acres. Mr. Wall explained that the applicant has entered into a contract to purchase the entire subject parcel. If approved and recorded, the applicant may construct a new single family home on the newly created parcel and utilize the existing driveway access onto Sibley Memorial Highway. The subdivision would create two lots, both of which would meet the 15,000 square foot standards for the R-1 zoning district. Parcel A would be the original parcel with the existing dwelling (3.41 acres) and Parcel B would be the newly created parcel (1.63 acres). Both lots would meet the 100 foot minimum lot width on Sibley Memorial Highway and would be compliant with the R-1 zoning requirements and consistent with the comprehensive plan. The parcel is located entirely within the Mississippi River critical corridor area and a critical area permit would be required for any future improvements on the newly created parcel. At the request of staff, the applicant has shown a 4,000 square foot building pad for a future single family dwelling. This building pad generally meets the slope and setback requirements. Mr. Wall emphasized that no approval for construction or potential construction was being considered as part of this application, just the lot split portion. As proposed, Parcel B would share 450 feet of access from Sibley Memorial Highway by way of an existing 10 -foot wide bituminous gated driveway. Mr. Wall emphasized that if the Council were to approve the lot split, it would in no way indicate an endorsement of the submitted driveway agreement. Additional discussions occurred regarding the shared driveway and its agreement and the possibility of variance requests in the critical area. It was pointed out that the driveway agreement was not under consideration for approval at this point. The details were provided for informational purposes only. Further questions were asked in regards to the bluff line on Parcel B, the potential alteration of grades, and sight lines of a future house in relation to the existing house. Mr. Daren Carlson, 992 Caren Court, asked for clarification on what conditions need to be met to determine if a lot split is approved or not. He provided an additional map to help identify the bluff locations. He also pointed out the DNR is currently discussing new regulations for buffer areas in the critical areas. Even though no new regulations have been put into place, he requested that staff and Council take this new information into consideration before deciding on the lot split. Mr. Tom Lehmann, City Attorney, explained that the item under consideration was whether or not the current lot would meet all of the conditions and requirements for a lot split. The issues being raised relative to a building may be important when and if the applicant would apply for a building permit on Parcel B. March 4, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 3 Mayor Krebsbach questioned the split lot needing to be a buildable lot. Mr. Lehmann replied that the new lot meets the requirements for the amount of space that is required for a lot split. However, in this case, since the applicant could build in the critical area, one of the other deteiminations is whether or not there is a buildable lot within the split. According to Planner Wall, the buildable area is there. If at some point the applicant comes forward with a building plan and there are issues with regards to the slope, then there could be issues regarding the granting of a building permit. But at this point, there is no reason to deny the lot split. Mayor Krebsbach asked if the Council has enough information to determine if it is a buildable lot. Mr. Lehmann replied that this information came from the applicant and if the Planner and the Planning Commission feels that they have sufficient information, and then the Council should feel comfortable with that. City Administrator Justin Miller stated that the proposed location of a hypothetical house pad was based on a 4,000 square foot house, but it is possiblethat it would come in smaller than that, and it might be able to fit within different areas of that footprint. In staff's analysis, it is a buildable lot and if that proves to be untrue when an application for a building permit is submitted, then Council would have the right to deny it at that time. Councilmember Duggan cited Section 12.3.6a of the City Code, 'no subdivision approval can be provided until a site plan is prepared' He also commented that this is not a simple lot split. Mr. Lehmann agreed that this is not a typical lot split because of the critical area. Discussion occurred on when the topographic survey had been completed and the accuracy of that survey — a signed minor subdivision map from a licensed surveyor who stands behind the information provided on the map. Based on this information, staff is willing to consider that it as a buildable area. Knowing where that house would be located, how high it would be, and what the setbacks would be, would be determined at a later date. Mr. Carlson continued by asking for clarification on the bluff slopes and raised an issue regarding wildlife and `natural communities' in the area. Councilmember Duggan suggested that he has no problem splitting the lot, however, the area in the code he cited earlier ties the Council's hands in regards to what is in front of them and what they could do. Mayor Krebsbach stated that she was inclined to support Mr. Duggan in terms of wanting further clarification and answers before malting a decision. Attorney Lehmann cited 12.3.5a which reads "Site Plan Required", and he assumed this is what was provided to Planner Wall and the Planning Commission. Mr. Wall replied that the intent of a subdivision, in this reference, is referring to a major subdivision with multiple lots. In terms of a lot split, staff considered section 12.3.14e that reads "New Subdivision: For new subdivisions approved after September 1, 2006, the subdivider shall be required to demonstrate that any newly created parcel will be able to support a buildable area consistent with the underlying zoning regulations, on grades less March 4, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 4 than eighteen percent (18%). (Ord. 387, 10-7-2003)." This is what the applicant was asked to provide, and what staff considered in their recommendation. Staff would be willing to review any new information but their recommendation was based on this section, the lot split application, and the information and supplemental information that were provided by the applicant. Mayor Krebsbach asked about the definition of the term 'site plan.' Planner Wall answered that ideally an applicant would come in with a critical area permit application as well as the lot split request. Being that the lot split is well ahead of that, the applicant is not obligated to provide plans for a house that may or may not be built. Attorney Lehmann stated that Planner Wall is correct and that once a building permit is requested they will have to meet all of the requirements that are set forth. But for the lot split, the applicant has met the requirements. Mr. Kurt Williamson stated that the survey was completed by Jason Rud, a certified surveyor, in January of 2014. They did an actual verification of the topography by sticking rods in the snow. Clarifying questions were asked about the conditions in the proposed resolution. Councilmember Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2014 -13 APPROVING A LOT SPLIT AT 1010 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY with the conditions outlined in the resolution. Councilmember Norton seconded the motion and expressed his appreciation to Mr. Carlson for corning in and providing the new information. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 C) PLANNING CASE 2014 -06, PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT, MENDOTA TECHNOLOGY CENTER 4TH ADDITION, RESOLUTION 2014 -14 Planner Nolan Wall explained that this application was a request for preliminary and final plat approval for the Mendota Technology Center 4t'' Addition and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to amend a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to construct an office warehouse building. The property is located on Northland Drive. The applicant has developed a majority of the business park over the years and this is one of the few remaining undeveloped sites. The property is zoned Industrial. The original Mendota Technology Center addition included an outlot (Outlot A), which is proposed to be incorporated into the new development. City code requires that any rearrangement of lots would be an amendment to the planned unit development, which can be approved by a conditional use permit. The proposed development contains two existing parcels located in two different plats; therefore the applicant needed to go through the process to combine those. The combined parcel would be 8.31 acres, which meets the one acre minimum standard lot size in the industrial district. Planner Wall reviewed the proposed building area, parking area, elevation and building materials, office and dock locations, Xcel Energy's easement, landscaping areas and features, screening of dock areas, lighting, storrnwater pond locations, and signage. March 4, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 5 Staff recommended approval of the application based on the findings of fact and subject to conditions. Mr. Brandon Champeau, Assistant Vice President for United Properties, addressed the questions and comments made by the Council, including screening of the roof -top units, usage of design elements from other buildings in the industrial park, location of trash receptacles, additional elements to soften the look of the large building, signage, dock locations, and trailer storage. Questions were asked by Councilmembers which included the potential noise disruptions to guests at the hotel located adjacent to this property, the feasibility of flipping the building on the lot so the office area would be adjacent to the hotel, and how much property is left to be developed in the park. Mayor Krebsbach noted that she would be voting against this application because of the truck and trailer parking adjacent to the hotel. City Administrator Miller commented that if it was not for the fact that this needed to be re -platted, this application would not require City Council approval. Technically, this proposal meets all aspects of the City Code. City Attorney Tom Lehmann stated that there is no basis not to approve this request because it does meet all of the conditions. Councilmember Duggan asked about the possibility of a buffer area to soften the noise from the trailer parking area to the hotel and if the City has any controls in relation to timing of trucks arriving and leaving. Planner Wall pointed to condition 10 of the proposed resolution that reads "A Development Agreement is signed between United Properties and the City of Mendota Heights" and noted that this issue would be discussed and included in a development agreement. Mayor Krebsbach commended Planner Wall on the excellent staff work in preparation of this application; however, she commented that the application has been packaged very tightly and she believes it should have been brought before the Council in separate resolutions. Mayor Krebsbach moved to deny RESOLUTION 2014 -14 APPROVING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PLANED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT on the basis that the Council should have been presented a stepped -in plan that would start with the lot combination and, after that, look at any building that might be on that property. The motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2014 -14 APPROVING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT based on the findings of fact and conditions as outlined in the resolution. Councilmember Norton seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 1 (Krebsbach) Absent: 1 March 4, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 6 Councilmember Duggan stated that United Properties has been an outstanding business partner for the City of Mendota Heights for well over 30 years, they do outstanding work, and the work they have put into the industrial district is appreciated. He feels confident that United Properties will work with staff and their neighbors to provide the appropriate buffering. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS Assistant to the City Administrator Tamara Schutta made the following announcements: • Sunday, March 9 Daylight Saving Time begins • Sunday, March 9 is the last day the warming houses will be open for the season • On-line and in-person registration for summer program activities begins on Monday, March 10 at 9:00 a.m. • Residents have an opportunity to see the new fire truck up close on Tuesday, March 11 at 6:30 p.m. at the Fire Department COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Duggan noted that the Fire Department would appreciate help in digging snow away from the fire hydrants. He also wished everyone a happy St. Patrick's Day. Mayor Krebsbach commented that Mr. Mike Coonan had his retirement party from the Fire Department last Saturday, which was well attended. He will certainly be recognized at the Fire Relief Association Dinner next year. She also noted that she attended the Henry Sibley High School Drum Line and Winter Guard competition held at Sibley last Saturday. It is a very interesting and athletic activity. Henry Sibley did an excellent job of hosting the event. She also made note of other school activities that occurred in the area over the weekend. She recognized the three residents of Mendota Heights who serve on the Minnesota State Horticulturalist Society's leadership team. ADJOURN Councilmember Duggan moved to adjourn. Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 March 4, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 7 Mayor Krebsbach adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Sandra Krebsbach ATTEST: ,� Mayor Lorri Smith City Clerk March 4, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 8