2014-04-22 Planning Comm Minutes
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSON MINUTES
April 22, 2014
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October
22, 2013, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M.
The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Jr., Commissioners Howard
Roston, Michael Noonan, Doug Hennes, Robin Hennessy, Mary Magnuson, and Ansis Viksnins.
Those absent: None. Others present were City Planner Nolan Wall and Public Works
Director/City Engineer John Mazzitello.
Approval of Agenda
Chair Field recommended moving Planning Case #2014-09 to the end of the agenda schedule
because of the amount of information and the detail. The commissioners approved the agenda with
that change.
Approval of March 25, 2014 Minutes
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 25, 2014 AS PRESENTED.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Hearings
PLANNING CASE #2014-10
Michael Sullivan and Deborah Cuneo, 993 Delaware Avenue
Variance request for detached garage
City Planner Nolan Wall explained that this application is for a variance from the side-yard setback
requirement to construct a new detached garage at 993 Delaware Avenue. The subject parcel is
11,973 square feet and contains an existing single family dwelling and detached garage, is zoned
R-1, and is guided for low density residential development on the comprehensive plan. The survey
submitted as part of the application shows two parcels that have since been remedied and combined
through Dakota County.
The applicants are proposing to demolish the existing 390 square foot detached garage and replace
it with a new 680 square foot structure. The existing garage is approximately 1.8 feet from the
south property line. The code requires accessory structures over 144 square feet to have ten foot
side and rear yard setbacks. The proposed new detached garage would have three foot setback
from the south property line.
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 1
Planner Wall then described the standards of review necessary for approval of a variance request
of this type.
Planner Wall then shared photographs of the existing garage, which is in poor and unredeemable
condition and is undersized for storage utilization. There is significant deterioration to the
foundation and the floor which causes the door to not close properly. The proposed detached
garage would meet the size requirements, would be compliant with the comprehensive plan, and
is a reasonable use of the property.
The subject parcel and the existing garage are legal non-conforming uses. The lot width is 50 feet,
which is one-half of the required lot width for single family lots in this zoning district. There is
practical difficulty in locating a new structure to be in compliance as the new garage would need
to be located farther in the back yard to comply with the setbacks and would require expansion of
the existing driveway.
Staff agreed that the applicant has established a practical difficulty due to the narrow lot width and
the placement of the existing structure. However, findings for denial of this application were
included as the existing garage could be maintained and approved not to increase the non-
conformity, and an existing structure up to 144 square feet would be constructed to provide for
additional storage.
The proposed structure would not alter the essential character of the locality as the surrounding
neighborhood has a mix of attached and detached garages. Most of the homes fronting Delaware
Avenue have detached garages and similar lot configurations causing multiple nonconformities
with the existing code requirements. The proposed 680-square foot detached garage is slightly
larger than most in the area, however, staff feels it is not out of character in the City and meets the
permitted size requirements for a structure of this type.
Staff recommended approval of this variance request with conditions.
Commissioners asked questions regarding the setbacks of the existing garages along Delaware
Avenue as they appeared to be within the zero to ten foot setback and the conditions proposed
being the standard conditions for the area.
Chair Field invited the applicant to come forward and make comments or add to the staff report.
Mr. Michael Sullivan, 993 Delaware Avenue, noted that they are new residents of Mendota
Heights. They loved the house they purchased but knew that they would want to do something
about the garage as soon as they could.
Commissioners asked the applicant if the siding and color of the new garage would match the
existing house. The applicant responded that the proposed structure and roof would match the
existing dwelling’s color, but would have vinyl siding – not stucco, like the dwelling.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 2
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public
hearing.
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2014-10 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1.The proposed detached garage is a reasonable use of the subject parcel.
2.The proposed detached garage meets the Code’s permitted size requirements for such a
structure perpetuates the use as a single-family residence in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
3.The existing detached garage is a legal nonconforming structure in poor and unredeemable
condition that is undersized for storage utilization.
4.The subject parcel’s narrow lot width and location of the existing detached garage create a
practical difficulty in constructing a new detached garage in compliance with the required
side yard setbacks for the R-1 District.
5.In order to meet the 10-foot side yard setback, the proposed detached garage would have
to be located further into the existing back yard and would require expanding portions of
the existing driveway.
6.The proposed detached garage will increase the existing side yard setback by one-foot and
will not increase the structure’s width, which creates a similar view from the street as the
existing structure.
7.The proposed detached garage will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1.The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and a dimensioned site plan with
associated easements, subject to review and approval by the City Engineering Department,
as part of any building permit application.
2.Any land disturbance activities must be in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance
Guidance document.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its May 6, 2014 meeting,
which begins at 8:00 p.m.
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 3
PLANNING CASE #2014-11
Steven Olsen, 2469 Westview Terrace
Wetlands Permit for accessory structure
City Planner Nolan Wall explained that the applicant was seeking a wetlands permit to construct
an accessory structure at 2469 Westview Terrace. The 1.27-acre parcel contained an existing single
family dwelling, zoned R-1, and guided for low density residential development. The applicant
intends to construct an eighty square foot accessory structure in the rear yard. The area of
disturbance would be within one-hundred feet of the wetland and water resource related area and
does not meet the conditions for administrative approval, thus requiring them to come before the
Planning Commission for recommendation and ultimate decision by the City Council.
A building permit is not required for accessory structures under 120 square feet but this gave staff
an opportunity to review the code requirements for accessory structures to make sure it would be
compliant, even though it was a wetlands permit. The proposed accessory structure did comply
with the code requirements with the setbacks being approximately ten feet in the side yard and
over 200 feet for the rear yard. The height at eight feet ten inches met the fifteen foot requirement.
No other accessory structures were currently located on the property – the code only allowing one
accessory structure on a lot of this size – and the size would be under the 144 square foot
requirement.
According to the applicant, the proposed structure would be setback approximately 42 feet from
the normal high water mark of the pond. Invasive species were removed from the proposed
structure location; however, existing vegetation would provide additional screening from the
properties to the south and from the pond itself. The proposed structure would be constructed on
support blocks and would be removable.
Planner Wall described the purpose of the wetland system chapter of the code and stated that the
proposed accessory structure’s distance from the pond and the limited land disturbance satisfies
the purpose and intent of the code.
Staff recommended approval of this application with conditions based on findings of fact.
Commissioners asked why the proposed structure was so far away from the current dwelling on
the property.
Chair Field invited the applicant to come forward and make comments or add to the staff report.
Mr. Steven Olsen, 2469 Westview Terrace clarified that he has not removed any vegetation from
the planned structure area as Planner Wall stated in his presentation. However, he has begun to
remove buckthorn from the woods.
In response to the Commissioner’s question regarding the distance from the existing dwelling he
explained that the way the property is, the house is constructed and has a walk-out basement and
a structure cannot be built anywhere else because of the topography.
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 4
Commissioners asked about the block to be used under the shed and the freedom of water to flow
underneath, if necessary.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public
hearing.
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNESSY, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE #2014-11 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1.The proposed accessory structure meets the Code requirements for such a structure.
2.The project meets the purpose and intent of the Wetlands Systems Chapter of the City
Code.
3.No existing vegetation within the required buffer area, except invasive species, will be
removed.
AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1.Area between the proposed construction and the normal water level of the pond is to remain
naturally vegetated.
2.Construction and restoration activity, to include re-vegetation of disturbed areas, shall be
in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its May 6, 2014 meeting,
which begins at 8:00 p.m.
PLANNING CASE #2014-12
Somerset Country Club, 1416 Dodd Road
Variance request for accessory structure
Chair Field mentioned that he would chair this public hearing but would abstain from voting since
he is a member of the Somerset Country Club.
City Planner Nolan Wall began his report by stating that the applicant requested a variance to
construct an accessory structure at 1416 Dodd Road. The parcel is 133 acres, contains a country
club and golf course, currently zoned R-1, and guided as a golf course on the comprehensive plan.
The applicant intended to construct a new 384 square foot accessory structure at the south end of
the driving range to be used for storage.
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 5
The request requires a variance from the number and size requirement for accessory structures in
the R-1 district. The use predated the code and the property contained numerous accessory
structures. Most recently a similar case was approved \[Planning Case 2004-41\] for construction
and expansion of accessory structures on the property. The proposed structure would be over 400
feet from the nearest property boundary line and would be approximately 1,140 feet from the
principal dwelling and so would meet the five foot requirement. Accessory buildings on a golf
course have a 50-foot setback requirement from property boundary lines so this structure would
be in compliance. The height being twelve feet six inches would meet the fifteen foot requirement.
The proposed structure would be white with black shingles, matching some of the existing
structures currently on the property. The parcel is over four acres and would be limited to three
accessory structures; however, this particular parcel contains ten existing accessory structures. In
addition, properties over four acres are limited to 425 square feet total for all accessory structures
on the property – the total square footage of the accessory structures currently on the property is
unknown but it could be assumed that it was well over the 425 square foot requirement.
The individual structure is limited, in the R-1 district, to 225 square feet for any single structure.
This also would require a variance as the proposed structure would be 384 square feet. Besides the
sizing requirements, the proposed structure would meet the applicable set back and height
requirements.
Staff recommended approval of this variance application with conditions and based on the findings
of fact.
Commissioners commented for the need of the variance request being the number of structures on
the property and the total square footage devoted to those accessory structures, which Planner Wall
confirmed. Commissioners then asked about the practical or unique difficulty being created by the
parcel itself, what was the stated practical difficulty or hardship noted in the applicant’s previous
variance request, the most recent amendment to the zoning code to deal with accessory structures
on institutional uses in the R-1 zoning district, and the possibility of recommending the code be
reviewed for possible revision for institutional uses in the R-1 zoning district.
Chair Field invited the applicant to come forward and make comments or add to the staff report.
Mr. Dave DuSchane, Golf Pro at Somerset Country Club, 1416 Dodd Road had nothing to add to
the staff report. However, he did explain that the structure itself would be very well hidden by trees
and would fit in with all of the other structures on the property.
Commissioners asked Mr. DuSchane to explain why this structure needs to be installed onto the
property. He replied that it would be located at the back of the driving range and at the present
time there is no storage in that location. When clinics are held (six or seven time per year) staff
needs to haul tables, chairs, etc. to that location from the clubhouse, which is 500 yards away.
Teaching equipment is also used in that area on a daily basis.
Mr. DuSchane shared the use and location of the ten accessory structures on the property, which
included the clubhouse itself, a home that had been occupied by the former club manager, the pro
shop, pool building, pool kiosk, tennis building, etc.
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 6
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public
hearing.
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON,
TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSTAIN: 1 (FIELD)
COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNESSY, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE #2014-12 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1.The property’s use as a golf course and country club is reasonable and multiple accessory
structures are required for storage of equipment and materials.
2.The Code’s accessory structure standards regarding number and size for residential districts
causes a practical difficulty for a golf course/country club use.
3.The proposed accessory structure meets the applicable Code standards for setbacks and
height.
4.The property contains numerous accessory structures and is heavily screened by perimeter
vegetation from surrounding roads and uses.
5.The proposed accessory structure will be screened by adjacent existing vegetation and will
be located at significant distances from any surrounding residential uses.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSTAIN: 1 (FIELD)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its May 6, 2014 meeting,
which begins at 8:00 p.m.
Discussion
Chair Field then addressed Commissioner Rostons’ suggestion of reviewing the zoning code by
explaining that part of the issue that the Commission is dealing with is that over time the City has
chosen to put institutional uses into residential zoning districts, which is what creates these
dilemmas. One possibility to resolve this would be to rezone all of those institutional uses to a new
zoning class or perhaps a separate alternative which might be to incorporate into the existing
residential certain zoning wording which would apply to institutional uses in residential zoning
districts.
Over the past eight or nine years the Commission has seen changes in variance standards which
put some valuable members of the community at risk when the Commission could conceivably
grant no variances. Therefore, it was his suggestion to Planner Wall that the Commission briefly
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 7
talks about this issue and makes a recommendation to the City Council that they consider
suggesting to the Commission that they come back and make some change to the zoning code so
these types of issues can be eliminated.
Commissioner Roston stated that this preference would be to have a new zoning code and new
zoning designation; not try to shoehorn it into residential and get into arguments on whether or not
something should fit the institutional standards in a residential district or not.
Planner Wall stated that a City Council Workshop has been scheduled in May 2014 and if a motion
were to come forward from this group at this time it could be a perfect time to discuss how the
City Council would want, and if they would want to approach this topic in the future.
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, THAT
THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AS AN ADVISORY BODY, RECOMMENDS THAT
STAFF SEEK DIRECTION FROM THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT CREATING AN
INSTITUTIONAL ZONING DISTRICT TO APPLY TO THE INSTITUTIONAL TYPE
PROPERTIES IN THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS.
Commissioner Noonan asked if it would make sense to give an alternative as well, in case the
Council does not want to go as far as doing an institutional zone, by suggesting the look at specific
zoning provisions for institutional-type uses in residential districts. It was decided to let the
Council decide on what direction they would like to take.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Hearings (continued)
PLANNING CASE #2014-09
Southview Design, Inc., 2385 Pilot Knob Road
Conditional Use Permit for outdoor storage and display, accessory structure, and fence over six
feet
City Planner Nolan Wall explained that the applicant, Southview Design, Inc., has requested a
conditional use permit approval for outdoor and display of equipment and materials, an accessory
structure, and a fence exceeding six feet.
The property is located east of Highway 13 on Pilot Knob Road. The 3.2 acre parcel is currently
vacant and is zoned and guided industrial on the comprehensive plan. The applicant owns the
parcel and is seeking to construct a new corporate headquarters facility on the parcel. In November
2013, the Council passed Ordinance 457 which created landscaping and building design and
construction as a permitted non-manufacturing use in the industrial district, which would be the
principal use of this property. In addition, Council created outdoor storage and display of materials
and equipment accessory to landscaping and building design and construction as a conditional use.
Therefore, the applicant is seeking conditional use permit for that portion of the proposed
development. In addition, they also need conditional use permit approval for the accessory
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 8
structure in an industrial district and the eight-foot high privacy fence that is proposed to enclose
the outdoor storage yard.
Planner Wall reviewed the site and structure requirements, as well as plans for off-street parking,
landscaping, screening, retaining walls, building design and construction, geotechnical analyses
restricting the location of the building, the size of the building and specific areas inside, exterior
design plans and elevations, rooftop mechanics and adequate screening of same, site lighting,
signage plan, outdoor storage and display area, accessory structures, and fencing; all of which
would meet or exceed code requirements.
Proposed access to the development would be through a private driveway constructed within the
Perron Road right-of-way at the south property boundary line. The right-of-way is unplatted and
exists as a remnant from when the surrounding properties were platted. After staff questioned
MnDOT, the county, and others who may have had jurisdiction, it was determined that the right-
of-way is within the City’s jurisdiction. The existing property to the south also utilizes this for
access to their parking lot but they also have an additional access farther south on Pilot Knob Road.
The applicant did pursue other access alternatives with Dakota County since Pilot Knob is a county
road; however, the county ultimately determined that it would not be an ideal access because it
would not line up appropriately with existing accesses across the street and would become unsafe
for traffic movements. They then encouraged the applicant to enter into discussions with the City
in order to use the Perron Road right-of-way. After discussions with the applicant and in light of
other potential developments needing to use the Perron Road right-of-way to access their sites,
staff did not recommend vacating the right-of-way at this time. However, the City and the applicant
did come to an agreement on a license agreement that would ultimately need to be approved by
the City County as a part of this development application. Staff concluded that this access would
be the safest and most efficient for vehicle circulation available to the applicant.
Staff recommended approval of the entire conditional use permit request with conditions and based
on the findings of fact.
Commissioners asked questions regarding the Perron Road right-of-way, the license agreement for
use of the Perron Road right-of-way, the development to the south, what would happen if the
geotechnical report comes back showing that the proposed location of the development would not
work, and which property the existing trees are located on.
Chair Field invited the applicant to come forward and make comments or add to the staff report.
Mr. Chris Clifton, President of Southview Design, Inc. expressed his appreciation to staff for their
assistance in putting this plan together. Commissioners asked about their timetable. Mr. Clifton
replied that they would like to break ground in June 2014 and be finished by October 2014.
Commissioners asked additional questions regarding what would be on the site and where they
would be on the site, which Mr. Ryan Slipka, Vice President/Partner of Southview Design, Inc.
addressed.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 9
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public
hearing.
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2014-09 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1.The proposed use is permitted in the Industrial District and is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
2.The proposed permitted nonmanufacturing use for “landscaping and building design and
construction” meets the off street parking, landscaping and screening, and site and structure
requirements of the Code.
3.The proposed outdoor storage and display area is compliant with the conditional use permit
requirements contained in Ordinance 457 and will be heavily screening by privacy fencing
and landscaping from surrounding uses and public roadways.
4.Utilization of the unimproved Perron Road right-of-way by license agreement with the City
allows for the safest access and most efficient vehicle circulation on the site.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1.A Right-of-Way License Agreement is signed between Southview Partners I, LLC and the
City of Mendota Heights.
2.A performance bond, with security satisfactory to the City, is supplied by the applicant for
the proposed screening and landscaping improvements.
3.The applicant shall provide additional information regarding any potential visibility of
rooftop mechanical units to ensure compliance with the Code prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
4.A final lighting plan shall be submitted and approved prior to installation.
5.Final building elevations for the accessory structure and storage bins shall be submitted
with the final plans as part of the building permit application and approved to ensure
compliance with the Code requirements.
6.A final sign package shall be submitted for review prior to issuance of a sign permit.
7.Circulation and water service on the property shall meet the requirements of the City’s Fire
Chief for access and fire protection.
8.The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot drainage and utility easements adjacent to all property
boundary lines and over stormwater treatment facilities to be recorded by document with
Dakota County.
9.Geotechnical report and final stormwater model calculations shall be submitted and
approved by the City prior to the issuance of Building Permit(s).
10.Final plans submitted for building permit shall include structural design details of the
retaining wall and fence.
11.All soil disturbance, development, and construction activities shall comply with the City’s
stormwater ordinances and Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 10
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its May 6, 2014 meeting,
which begins at 8:00 p.m.
Discussion of Public Hearing Process
Chair Field explained that this is a follow-up on the discussion item from the Planning
Commission’s previous meeting. The question was brought up again as to the reason or purpose
of creating a formal process when there has not been one before. Chair Field replied that the
Commission has not really had any cases that needed rules of this nature; however, the day could
arrive when an issue that needs more order then in the past and he felt that having the ability in the
process to enforce rules; it would be more for the situation where rules are needed without trying
to create them on the fly.
Additional discussions followed regarding the need and desire to impose such restrictions on the
public. City Attorney Tom Lehmann explained that this is a question that arises in many public
bodies or boards. They would definitely have to balance the community’s right to present their
position versus the right to maintain some sort of semblance of control over the meeting. The cities
he represents all limit conversation in public forums to five minutes. The problem really arises
when you have a group of people who are saying the same thing and it becomes repetitive. At that
point, the body would have the ability to say that they have heard the same point more than once
and ask for any new comments. It is probably a good idea to have some form of time limit just so
people are aware of it when they come up to speak. But again, there may be times when the body
would want to let people go on for longer than the time allows.
Chair Field mentioned that there have been situations where the public comment or testimony was
not related to the proposed plan or amendment and making a ‘that is not permissible’ statement
beforehand certainly allows the chair a lot more flexibility to curtail those comments.
Planner Wall was asked if he knew what the requirements were for testifying before the City
Council and if the process under discussion would be consistent. Planner Wall replied in the
negative. However, he did point out that the City Council does not necessarily hold public hearings
on planning cases but this commission does.
Commissioner Roston stated, as he did at the last meeting, that he feels this is unnecessary.
However, he would be all right with a rule that states that the Chair has the right to limit discussions
to be on topic and after people repeated points the Chair could ask for any new comments rather
than a repeat of what has already been said.
After all Commissioners had been heard from and all topics discussed, it was determined that
Planner Wall would return to the next Planning Commission with a revised list of guidelines for
review and additional discussion, if necessary.
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 11
Verbal Review
City Planner Nolan Wall gave the following verbal review:
PLANNING CASE #2014-07 Lee Violet & Joe Rueckert Conditional Use Permit
•Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission.
PLANNING CASE #2014-08 Roger and Grace Pass Lot Split Application
•Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission.
PLANNING CASE #2014-03 City of Mendota Heights Code Amendment
•Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Planner Wall also shared the appreciations and thanks expressed by the City Council for the work
done by the Commission and staff on the code amendment.
Planner Wall also shared the results of the Dakota County Community Development Agency /
Maxfield Research Housing Needs Study – the findings of the entire report specific to Mendota
Heights.
Other Announcements
Planner Wall, in honor of Earth Day, reminded the residents and the Commission that the City’s
Annual Spring Clean Up is scheduled for Saturday, May 3 at Mendakota Park, from 8:00 a.m. to
1:00 p.m. All residents of the City are encouraged to participate.
The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, May 27, 2014.
Adjourn
COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:40 P.M.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
April 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 12