2014-10-28 Planning Comm Minutes
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSON MINUTES
October 28, 2014
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October
28, 2014, 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, Mary Magnuson, and Ansis Viksnins. Those absent: Doug Hennes.
Others present were City Planner Nolan Wall and Public Works Director/City Engineer John
Mazzitello.
Approval of September 23, 2014 Minutes
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23, 2014, AS PRESENTED.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1
Approval of Agenda
Chair Litton Field requested that the agenda be amended as the applicant for Planning Case 2014-
31 have requested that it be laid over.
There being no one in attendance who wished to speak regarding this matter, COMMISSIONER
ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN TO LAY OVER
PLANNING CASE 2014-31 TO THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 25, 2014
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1
Hearings
PLANNING CASE #2014-30
GreenWood Design Build, LLC, 750 Hilltop Road
Front Yard Setback Variance
Planner Nolan Wall explained that the applicant was seeking a Variance from the front yard
setback requirements to construct a new single family residential dwelling. This parcel is 0.48
acres or approximately 20,862 square feet and is the existing lot of record that was subdivided
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 1
from 1925 Dodd Road in 2010 as part of Planning Case 2010-25. The lot is zoned R-1 and guided
for low density residential development on the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant purchased the
subject parcel and intends to construct a new 2,267 square foot dwelling.
The ‘string-line’ rule was previously in affect for determining the front yard setback line; however,
as discussed in the approval of the lot split in 2010 that provision impacted the location of the
future dwelling on the subject parcel due to the lot sizes and setbacks of those abutting properties.
This ‘string-line’ rule provision was amended in 2010 and includes a formula that determines the
minimum front yard setback for lots that are located in between two developed abutting properties.
If the existing code revision is applied in this case, the required front yard setback for the new
dwelling on the subject parcel would be 57.3 feet. Planner Wall shared images of the setbacks and
the proposed dwelling. The proposed setback survey was also included as part of this request. The
applicant is proposing to utilize the 30-foot front yard setback, which is based on the applicants
preferred location for the new dwelling, which is the minimum standard for a typical lot in the
R-1 Residential district.
Planner Wall shared the thresholds that would apply in this variance request.
Staff recommended approval of the front yard setback variance request for construction of a new
single-family dwelling on the subject parcel.
Commissioners asked questions regarding the old ‘string-line’ rule.
th
Mr. Scott Loehrer, President GreenWood Design Build, LLC located at 4820 W. 77, Edina came
forward to address the Commission and to answer questions.
Commissioners asked questions regarding the reasons for moving the dwelling forward as much
as requested and the topography of the lot.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Mr. Steve Lemay, 764 Hilltop Road, stated that in 2010 he and his wife did not care for the plan
to divide the lot. He recognizes that it is a buildable lot but sees no reason why they should change
it now. He shared images from his front window and claimed that the location of the proposed
building would detract from their yard as, essentially, the new dwelling would be in their front
yard. He also explained the water drainage issues they have currently and believes the location of
the new dwelling would cause further issues. When asked, he admitted that no matter where the
new residence was located, it would negatively impact their front yard.
Mr. Paul Plum, 1933 Dodd Road – and the owner of 1925 Dodd Road – is the one who applied for
the lot split in 2010. Everyone has been very accurate in their description of the situation so far.
As the homeowner of the two properties most directly involved, he stated that he was in favor of
pushing the home more towards the street with the variance so that it would be further away from
his own backyard.
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 2
Ms. Joan Cochrane, 1937 Dodd Road, noted that no matter where the new residence is located she
will be able to see it. They have a wraparound deck and when she sits out there, they will be able
to look at her and she will be able to look at them. She would be in favor of whatever makes the
most sense and works for the neighbors. She requested the contractor keep her deck and the other
home’s view in mind when design the new dwelling.
Ms. Susan Lucio, 1888 Valley Curve, mentioned that one of the reasons she moved into the
neighborhood was because of the large front yards; making it a very cozy and warm area. Her
children played in her large front yard because their back yard is small. She expressed her desire
to keep the trees in the neighborhood and not have the dwelling so close to the street.
Mr. Richard Kouri, 1888 Valley Curve, claimed that if the Commissioners visited the area during
the day they would see why this new residence should not be so close to the street. It would ruin
the appearance of the neighborhood and the rules should stay as they are.
Mr. John White, 1897 Wachtler Avenue, voiced his opposition to so many homes being built in
the area that are out of character with the neighborhood. He is now looking at a 2.5-story garage
out his bay window.
Mr. John Vanbogart, 1920 Wachtler Avenue, stated that his concern is less about the setback,
although he believes the home should be a little further back from the road, and more about the
esthetics. Moving this home too close to the street is going to be a problem and will change the
look and feel of the neighborhood. If they have to move the home forward, do not move it forward
too far.
Mr. Scott Loehrer returned to address the concerns expressed by the residents by stating that
GreenWood is not trying to make mad neighbors. He noted that moving the proposed dwelling
back further would make it sit higher due to the topography of the lot. He also stated that if the
variance request is not approved, then his company would build the home in the back corner where
it would meet all of the code requirements, would have a very small backyard, and would be
approximately 27 feet from the neighboring lot line. However, they would be willing to move the
home back 45 feet from the lot line instead of the proposed 30 feet \[the current required setback is
57.3 feet\].
Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON,
TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1
Commissioners asked questions regarding the status of the 60-day rule and the possibility of an
extension.
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 3
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO
TABLE PLANNING CASE 2014-30, FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO THE
NOVEMBER 25, 2014 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WITH A STRONG
ENCOURAGEMENT TO THE APPLICANT TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORS FOR
DISCUSSION.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1
PLANNING CASE #2014-22
City of Mendota Heights
Proposed Code Amendments
Planner Nolan Wall explained that this is a continuation of a discussion from the September 23,
2014 Planning Commission Meeting. The City is considering various amendments to the Zoning
and Subdivision Ordinances within the City Code. Over the past year, staff has identified a number
of potential amendments packaged into a single application for consideration. The goal would be
to clean up, clarify, and simplify certain sections in order to improve the interpretation and
implementation of those ordinances.
The reason for this case being tabled was in regards to the traffic study requirement portion of the
proposed amendments. Commissioners were provided a tracked changes copy of the proposed
amendment in their meeting packet.
Commissioners expressed their appreciation for the changes that were made. However, discussions
continued on whether or not the changes were substantial enough.
Commissioners asked questions regarding if the definition of development or redevelopment is in
the code.
As this public hearing was left open at the last meeting, Chair Field asked if anyone was present
who wished to speak in regards to this case.
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 4
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2014-22, DRAFT ORDINANCE 467
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1
Chair Field noted that this would be considered at the next City Council Meeting scheduled for
Wednesday, November 5, 2014.
Verbal Review
Planner Wall gave the following verbal review:
PLANNING CASE #2014-26
Wayne Cummings, 2054 Acacia Drive
After-the-fact Wetlands Permit Wetland Permit for Vegetation Removal
Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission
PLANNING CASE #2014-27
Sarah and Aaron Macke, 744 Woodridge Drive
Critical Area Permit
Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission
PLANNING CASE #2014-28
Sarah and Aaron Macke, 744 Woodridge Drive
Code Amendment Request for Exception to Swimming Pool Fencing Requirements
Split decision at the October 7, 2014 City Council Meeting; subsequently tabled
Denied by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission at their October
21, 2014 City Council Meeting
PLANNING CASE #2014-29
Visitation School, 2544 Visitation Drive
Conditional Use Permit for an Electronic Display Sign
Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission
PLANNING CASE #2014-20
Paul and Shannon Burke, 645 Sibley Memorial Highway
After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit for Clear Cutting in the Critical Area
Ultimately approved by the City Council
Planner Wall mentioned that the City Council and staff appreciated the work that the Commission
did with this difficult issue. With the conditions that were proposed that the Planning Commission
recommended, the City Council increased the life of the performance bond on the landscaping to
36 months. They also added an additional change to the recommendation that would allow for
additional geotechnical studies as needed in the future to be paid for by the applicant, if that is
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 5
determined to be necessary. There was also an additional condition included that the City has the
right to inspect the property over the span of that time period to monitor the regrowth and require
a restoration plan be implemented if necessary.
Commissioners asked if the City Council had discussed any civil penalties. Planner Wall replied
that Councilmembers discussed the citation and staff is to bring back additional information to
continue that discussion with them internally and with the prosecuting attorney.
Staff Announcements
Grading has started at the United Properties site on Northland Drive for their 97,000 square
foot industrial building. They anticipate submitting for a building permit in the near future;
staff anticipates construction to begin in the spring.
Grading may start as early as next week on the Lemay Shores project. They intend to
construct a model home on the site this year, weather permitting.
Based on the discussion for the After-the-Fact Wetlands Permit in the Augusta Shores
development, staff reached a compromise in authoring a wetlands permit agreement with
the entire townhome association to allow buckthorn removal in compliance with a number
of conditions and best management practices.
The next Planning Commission meeting is Tuesday, November 25, 2014.
Adjournment
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:54 P.M.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1
October 28, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 6