2018-01-23 Planning Comm Agenda Packet
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
JANUARY 23, 2018
7:00 PM - Mendota Heights City Hall
1. Call to Order
2. Introduction of newly appointed Commissioner Patrick Corbett
3. Roll Call
4. Adopt Agenda
5. Approval of November 28, 2017 Planning Commission (Regular Meeting)
Minutes
6. Public Hearings:
a. Case No. 2018-01: Lot Line Adjustment request for properties located at 572
and 566 Hiawatha Avenue (Ed Meisinger – Applicant)
b. Case No. 2018-02: Lot Split (Subdivision) request for property located at 684
North Freeway Road (Mark Gergen – Applicant)
7. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
a. Draft Goals and Policies presented to the City Council 01.02.18 meeting.
(No action to be taken- for review purposes only)
8. Staff Announcements / Update on Developments
a. Annual Update of the previous 2017 Planning Applications List
9. Adjourn
Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 120 hours in advance. If a notice of less
than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every attempt to provide the aids, however, this may
not be possible on short notice. Please contact City Hall at 651.452.1850 with requests.
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 1 of 12
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
November 28, 2017
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday,
November 28, 2017 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M.
The following Commissioners were present: Vice-Chair Doug Hennes, Commissioners John
Mazzitello, Michael Noonan, Mary Magnuson, Michael Toth, and Brian Petschel. Those absent:
Chair Litton Field, Jr. (excused).
City staff present: Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek; Community Development Director Tim
Benetti.
Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as submitted.
Approval of October 24, 2017 Minutes
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 24, 2017, AS PRESENTED.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (FIELD)
Hearings
A) PLANNING CASE #2017-28
KEITH SCHWEIGER, 697 WESLEY LANE
LOT SPLIT – SUBDIVISION REQUEST
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Mr. Keith Schweiger has submitted
an application for a lot split of the property located at 697 Wesley Lane. This item was presented
under a public hearing and notices were published in the local paper and also notices were sent out
to all property owners within 350 feet of the subject site.
The property is located at the corner of Wesley Lane and Wesley Court, Dodd Road is off to the
far west. It is currently zoned and will stayed zoned R-1 and is guided as LR – Low Density
Residential on the land use plan. The lot consists of 0.813 acres in size and a 2,100 square foot
single-family, one-story residence on the property. There is a single access point on Wesley Lane.
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 2 of 12
Mr. Benetti shared images of the existing residence and the lot’s location relative to surrounding
streets and properties. This lot was originally created in the Rolling Woods 1st Addition in 1987.
The surrounding lots range in size from 100 feet frontage to 110 feet frontage; this lot is 202.76
feet by 132 feet in size.
In January 2017 a similar application was filed by Mr. Mark Gergen to do virtually the same lot
split as now. The Planning Commission did recommend approval of that application; however,
before it got to Council Mr. Gergen was working out some potential impacts with the neighbors
and solve some drainage issues and concerns that were raised at that previous public hearing. Mr.
Gergen later requested that the application be withdrawn from final consideration in June 2017.
The property went back onto the market and went through a number of potential buyers. Now Mr.
Schweiger is here asking for this lot split. The only difference is that the Gergen plat had a
proposed layout of two different style homes on each lot and the current request is simply showing
a representation of a 60-foot by 60-foot building pad. This is not the actual size of the building, it
is just a general location for setback allowances.
The proposed parcel A, the west area, measures 100.02 feet by 175 feet for a total of 17,762 square
feet; therefore, it meets the 100-foot width minimum and the 15,000 square foot area minimum.
The access to the parcel would be from Wesley Lane with the current driveway location being
adjusted or moved five feet further to the east to allow for ease of snow plowing and leaf removal.
This had been a major concern for the neighbor as the driveway was virtually right on the property
line.
The proposed parcel B, the east area, measures 102 feet by 107 feet for a total of 17,688 square
feet. The access to this parcel would off of Wesley Court only and meets the city code requirement
that all driveways must be a minimum of 30 feet from any property corner.
The plan calls for a number of trees to be removed – approximately 10 trees from parcel A and
approximately 12 trees from parcel B. Some of these are over story and consists of a variety of
elms, evergreens, etc. The original request was for a total of 12 trees to be removed and the request
from staff was to preserve as many trees as possible, especially along the Wesley Lane frontage.
Unless the current trees proposed to be removed are diseased or in poor shape or dying, staff
requests that the applicant explain why the extra trees are being removed.
Staff encouraged the applicant to maintain the existing berm and vegetation along Wesley Lane
and recommended a one-to-one tree replacement. These are recommendations, not requirements.
Mr. Benetti then explained the zoning requirements that must be met and shared how this lot split
meets those requirements.
Under the Gergen application a lot of concerns were raised in regards to drainage; nothing
officially has been submitted with this application. However, staff will make sure than any new
development that goes into the sites will be reviewed thoroughly by the Engineering Department
with the new grading and drainage plan.
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 3 of 12
Commissioner Noonan asked for an explanation of Condition 3, which reads “The lots shall
include infiltration of 1 inch over all new increased impervious surface and there shall be no
increase in run off from the existing conditions.” Mr. Benetti deferred this question to the City
Engineer. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that the City adopted a local surface water
management plan – the last update was in 2006. In combination with that the City adopted a land
disturbance guidance document that requires that any disturbances over 5,000 square feet must
meet the City’s stormwater requirements. The current requirements are to infiltrate the 1 inch over
all new impervious surface.
Commissioner Noonan stated that in the past the Condition would simply say that a lot split had
to meet the City’s policy; however, now it is specifically being called out. He then asked if this
statement was true. Mr. Ruzek replied in the affirmative.
Commissioner Petschel asked what was meant by ‘infiltration’. Mr. Ruzek replied that basically
the owner will need to construct a rain garden or similar sort of system on-site to hold back and
push some of the stormwater back into the ground where it would not be getting if there is an
impervious surface covering the ground.
Commissioner Magnuson noted that Condition 6 says “. . . they shall plat one 6’-8’ evergreen tree
for each evergreen tree removed, . . .” and asked that it be corrected to read “. . . they shall plant .
. .”
Commissioner Noonan asked if Condition 6 was City Policy or if this was something different.
Mr. Benetti replied that this is staff recommendation; anytime these over story trees are removed
on a nice lot like this, staff would like to see – as it benefits the community and the neighborhood
– tree replacement. Staff wants to encourage more activities like this by asking for something more
under an application process. There is no true nexus in the ordinance.
Commissioner Mazzitello stated that Condition 6 is a special condition specific to this application
because of the existing condition of the lot. Mr. Benetti concurred.
Commissioner Toth asked if any of the potential drainage issues of the past been addressed. Mr.
Benetti replied that he was not fully involved in the previous application; however, he believes
that some of the concerns raised were referencing the low spot on the east side. This ‘swale’ carries
some of the water from the adjacent residential neighbors. There was concern raised during the
last application process; however, the building footprint on this new application is not the same as
on the previous. He reiterated that the grading and landscaping plans will be analyzed, reviewed,
and approved by city staff before any building permits are approved on each lot.
The applicant, Mr. Keith Schweiger, who currently resides at 2291 Ocala Court, has been a resident
of Mendota Heights for 30 years. It is his and his wife’s goal to move out of their two story home
and move into a single story home. This lot became available and they purchased them. His brother
is actually considering purchasing one of the lots. He had nothing to add to Mr. Benetti’s report
other than to state that he has no desire to cause any disruptions in the area and his plans meet all
of the city requirements without variances.
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 4 of 12
Commissioner Magnuson asked if Mr. Schweiger was in agreement with the tree replacement
recommendation. Mr. Schweiger noted that some of the trees are diseased and scraggly looking;
however, there are a lot of beautiful trees there that he wants to keep as they beautify the lot. He
is going to try to save as many as possible. He gave his verbal agreement to follow the
recommendations in Condition 6.
Vice-Chair Hennes opened the public hearing.
Mr. Patrick Smith, 695 Wesley Court, spelled out the reasons he and his family moved to Mendota
Heights and into this neighborhood specifically. He listed the covenants he and his neighbors have
committed to, knowing that covenants are private agreements and are not under the prevue of the
Commission or the Council. He noted the surrounding resident’s strong opposition to amending
the covenants to allow for this lot split to occur and encouraged the Commission and Council to
remember the ‘character of the neighborhoods’ when making decisions such as this one.
Commissioner Noonan asked for the location of the 18 neighborhood residents who are opposed
to this lot split – or at least were opposed six months ago when the original application came
through. Those residents are located on the north side of Wesley Lane, all of Wesley Court, and
Mager Court. The residents to the west of the proposed lot split did not vote; however, they are
on 100-foot size lots. He then stated that it appears that it was OK for them to be on 100-foot lots
but this lot needs to stay at 200 feet. It sounded to him that the residents are saying ‘do as I say,
not as I do’.
Commissioner Magnuson asked if Mr. Smith owned the property to the northeast, the one with the
water issues. When he confirmed, she asked him about the water problems – what problem has it
caused. He replied that if anyone were to stand in his yard and look to the south – just east of the
existing home – there is a swale. That swale comes off of Wesley Court and from the home, and
it channels through his lot and his backyard to the natural egress, which is to the house to the
northwest. The existing drainage pattern is causing the problem – there is standing water on the
west side of his home and there has been standing water in the back.
When Commissioner Noonan stated that Mr. Smith should take comfort from the fact that one of
the conditions is that the Engineer Department must approve the grading and drainage plans to
address this issue. Mr. Smith replied that he would rather cover the cost of his own lot if it would
prevent this lot from being split.
The Commission had further discussion with Mr. Smith to try to ascertain why he so strongly
objected to this lot split – splitting a 200-foot lot into two 100-foot lots – when most of the lots in
the surrounding area are 100-foot lots. Mr. Smith replied that addressing the drainage issues is the
responsible thing to do; however, his community would like to pre-empt that and let the
Commission and the Council know that – as they look at the macrocosm of the character of
neighborhoods, this is their neighborhood – they live here. Everybody bought into that
neighborhood knowing that there were restrictions that were in place because it is part of the
purchase process. Part of that was to protect them and part of that was to also ensure quality of
life; and quality of life comes with diverse lot sizes.
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 5 of 12
Commissioner Noonan did not agree with the comment about diverse lot sizes because the lots he
was seeing in that area were of regularly shaped 100-foot lots, yet the lot that is the subject of this
application as one that appears to be out-of-character with the nature of the neighborhood. When
Mr. Smith tried to bring up the covenants that the residents agreed to, Commissioner Noonan
replied that doesn’t matter as the Commission makes the decision, not the neighborhood. He
reiterated that the covenants speak for themselves, they are private mechanisms that can be
enforced as neighbors. However, the Commission is looking at what the planning circumstances
are – consistency with the comprehensive plan, consistency with what the character of the
neighborhood is in terms of the other lots, and with what the zoning says.
Mr. Smith agreed that the splitting of the lot would meet the standards as set by the City. His desire
was to present to the Commission and the Council the thoughts and feelings of the residents in the
area.
Ms. Diane Caruso, 675 Wesley Court, owns her lot and the one next door – which is vacant.
Preserving the character of the neighborhood is her main concern with the lot split. She expressed
her desire to go on record that she opposes it as well.
Ms. Sarah Ruff, 686 Wesley Court, noted that her driveway goes onto Wesley Court. As it is
currently proposed, there will be another driveway directly across from hers – her grandchildren
play in her driveway. This is not an ideal situation and creates a hazard for children playing. She
also shared the sentiments that had been expressed by Mr. Smith and Ms. Caruso. When asked she
replied that her lot is 100 feet wide and the driveway next door to this split is not directly across
the street.
Commissioner Toth asked to see the plot map again and confirmed that if one were to take and
draw a line directly down the center of the lot under consideration that it would be the same size
and shape as the surrounding lots.
Ms. Mimi Krueckeberg, 680 Wesley Court, noted that her family was the second to move into the
area back in 1988. At that time they made a big deal about them signing this covenant and talking
about it. She asked which one has the final say, the Planning Commission that says the request
meets the City’s requirements or the Covenant. The Covenant says that until all of the lots are built
there is only one house per lot. Ms. Caruso still holds an empty lot; therefore, the residents believe
the covenant still stands because not all of the lots have been built on. Mr. Benetti replied that
cities do not enforce nor do they regulate association rules or covenants – they are strictly a civil
matter between residents or neighborhoods. This application is a subdivision request that is,
pursuant to the City ordinances, allowable subject to a recommendation and a favorable approval
through the City Council.
Commissioner Magnuson recommended that before this matter comes before the Council for
deliberation and determination the residents may want to consult with a private lawyer to
determine what their rights and obligations are under the covenant so they have a better
understanding of that prior to the time the City Council is asked to make a decision.
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 6 of 12
Mr. Kenneth Larson, 703 Wesley Court, stated that he was the one who, in the original application,
raised the concern about the driveway with the snow plowing, etc. He also said that in purchasing
his lot the covenants were a plus to him, not a problem. There was no feeling of jealously or envy
of someone who had a bigger lot nor did he feel that their lot should be split. There are many
occasions when a large public building, like a school, is closed and under the threat of being torn
down. However, someone comes in and turns it into a condominium with covenants, which is a
plus to the condominium owners. They get a refurbished building and the City does not have to
worry about the large lot being split apart. The idea of splitting lots has come up many times at
Council meetings and a lot of unhappy neighbors have moved. He is not concerned about the lot
being the size that it is and if it had been marketed properly there would have been many people
who would have loved to live in that big house on the larger lot.
Commissioner Noonan asked Mr. Larson how far his driveway was from the property line. Mr.
Larson replied that his driveway is approximately one foot from the property line. Mr. Noonan
then noted that the proposal is to move the driveway on the subject parcel, which currently abuts
the property line, five feet away from that property line – thus creating a better situation. Mr.
Larson agreed that it would be better; however, he would still have the issue with the snow
plowing. He also noted that he has had to replace his sprinkler heads yet again this year.
Mr. Schweiger returned to address some of the concerns made by saying that he has no desire to
disrupt the neighborhood; if he did not believe that this fit and was not doable he would not do it.
He has been a resident of Mendota Heights for 30 years. He believes that even with the lot being
split that the new lots will be bigger than the existing lots on Wesley Lane. Conformity wise it will
be bigger than the majority of the existing lots on Wesley Lane. It is their intention to build nice
homes there to enjoy in whatever years they have left.
COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (FIELD)
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO,
TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-28 LOT SPLIT – SUBDIVISION
REQUEST BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The proposed lot split and construction activities meet the purpose and intent of the City
Code and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. No change to the Comprehensive Plan or zoning designation and no variance is requested.
3. The proposed subdivision and additional new housing will not create any negative impacts
to the surrounding uses or neighborhood; and the increased front yard setbacks will ensure
the new homes are in alignment with other residential uses along Wesley Lane.
4. The two lots resulting from the lot split meet City Code minimum standards and are
comparable in size and frontage to other lots on Wesley Lane.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 7 of 12
1. The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and dimensioned site plans with
associated easements, subject to review and approval of the Engineering Department as
part of any building permit application.
2. All grading work and land disturbance activities must comply with the City’s Land
Disturbance Guidance document.
3. The lots shall include infiltration of 1 inch over all new increased impervious surface and
there shall be no increase in run off from the existing conditions.
4. All erosion control measures shall be installed prior to any construction, and maintained
throughout the duration of any construction activities on both sites and until each have been
properly restored.
5. Front-yard setbacks from Wesley Lane for future structures on both Parcel A and Parcel B
shall be a minimum of 35.5 feet; and the setback along Wesley Court shall be 30-feet.
6. The Applicant agrees to preserve and protect as many mature/over-story trees on the
subject site; shall submit a detailed landscape plan for each new lot as part of any new
building permit application review; and shall plant one 6’-8’ evergreen tree for each
evergreen tree removed, plus one 2” to 3” caliper sized deciduous tree for each deciduous
tree removed.
7. The applicant shall dedicate drainage and utility easements on both parcels to be denoted
on the Certificate of Survey submitted to Dakota County: 10 feet wide along the front
property lines and 5 feet wide along the side and rear property lines.
8. On Parcel A, the existing asphalt driveway will be removed, and graded so as not to
aggravate drainage problems, and the ground restored with suitable ground cover, as
approved by the City Engineer before a certificate of occupancy is issued.
9. On Parcel A, the new driveway shall meet a minimum 5-ft. setback from the westerly lot
line, and this setback will apply to any retaining wall or similar shoring system if needed.
10. Park dedication fee of $4,000 (in lieu of land - per current City policy) will be paid before
the subdivision is recorded with Dakota County.
11. The existing home must be demolished before the subdivision is recorded with Dakota
County.
12. Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a
building permit.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (FIELD)
Vice-chair Hennes advised the City Council would consider this application at its December 5,
2017 meeting.
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 8 of 12
B) PLANNING CASE #2017-29
GONYEA HOMES ON BEHALF OF JASON & THOMASINE EGGERS, 2260
WAGON WHEEL COURT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND WETLANDS PERMIT
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that this request was from Gonyea
Homes on behalf of Jason and Thomasine Eggers seeking a Conditional Use Permit to build a
1,427 square foot garage and also to build a new 4,440 square foot residential dwelling. The garage
requires a Conditional Use Permit on its own and the overall footprint of the new dwelling and
garage requires a Wetlands Permit due to the proximity of the wetlands nearby.
Mr. Benetti shared an image of the site in relation to its location to surround lots, streets, and
Rogers Lake. He also noted that in December 2016 the City adopted Resolution 2015-93, which
approved a preliminary final plat of Caroline’s Lake Second Addition. This was a two lot
subdivision by the Ratchye/Light family of their original 3.02 acre lot along Rogers Lake, which
created two lots of 0.71 acres and 2.31 acres. The 0.71 acre lot was kept by the Ratchye/Light
family and the Eggers recently purchased the 2.31 acre lot.
He also shared an image of the proposed home’s footprint, noting that all setbacks are easily met.
This lot would have only one access point, that being from Wagon Wheel Court. The proposed
home would be a single story dwelling with dormer windows on the dwelling and on the garage.
The garage would also have two 16-foot wide overhead doors on the front.
Mr. Benetti shared the standards that need to be met in order to issue a conditional use permit and
how this application would meet those standards. Staff believes that the expanded garage facility,
with the overall footprint of the 4,440 square foot home, would fit in very nicely – especially
considering the size of the lot. It also meets the general purpose and spirit of the current city code
and comprehensive plan.
Mr. Benetti then shared the reason for the wetlands permit and the standards to be met in issuing
such permit. The house would sit approximately 80 feet off of the edge of the wetland and
approximately 155 feet from the edge of Rogers Lake; therefore, there would be no impact to any
of the water bodies under this plan. Also, staff will ensure that the applicant adheres to the
stormwater pollution prevention requirements.
The applicant does plan to remove a number of trees; however, quite a few of them are elm and
cottonwood. This is a heavily wooded lot and they are removing what they need to site the home;
however, staff would like to ensure that they provide some type of replacement as part of a
restoration plan.
Commissioner Magnuson asked for clarification on the utility connections, specifically Condition
2. Mr. Benetti replied that this was a fee that was provided for under the 2015 subdivision process.
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that there is an existing set of utilities that serves the
Ratchye/Light home, which is a little bit further south than this one. They installed new utilities
into Wagon Wheel Court. The new home that is being constructed is proposed to connect to the
older utilities that the lot used to be connected to. They are going to be looking at a street
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 9 of 12
connection by using the existing utilities that are already run up to this building pad. They could
connect new utilities up to Wagon Wheel Trail without paying that fee. Wagon Wheel Court was
a recent development and the properties that were platted with the Wagon Wheel Court property
pays this fee. It is the City’s policy that any new connections also pay the same fee as the existing
homes.
Commissioner Mazzitello noted that Condition 5 is the standard grading and construction activity
rule that conforms to the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document. However, in the previous
case the infiltration of a 1 inch over impervious surface was specifically spelled out. He asked for
an explanation of why that condition was not included in this application. Mr. Ruzek replied that
it was specifically called out on the last application due to that being a repeat application where
drainage was expressed as a major concern. That concern was not specifically raised in this
application; however, according to the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document it is also
subject to that same requirement.
Commissioner Toth asked if this lot could be split again down the road. Mr. Benetti replied that it
could be possible. Commissioner Mazzitello noted that dimensionally this lot could be split again;
however, if one were to look at where the wetland lines are and where the utility lines are being
run – it would be a real challenge to develop a lot if it were split off.
Mr. Rick Packer of Gonyea Homes, 1000 Boone Avenue North, Suite 400 in Minneapolis, was
available for questions from the Commission. He expressed his appreciation to staff for their
favorable recommendation going through the conditional use permit and wetlands permit. He
stated that the utility connection fee was a surprise to them and they did their due diligence on this
and the connection fees. Usually when a resolution is passed by the City Council it is recorded
against the property; however, they could find no evidence of that. But if they were adopted by the
City Council and made part of a resolution he understood that the Commission could not do
anything about that.
Mr. Ruzek clarified that if the driveway goes onto Wagon Wheel Court they would need to pay
the $21,390.86 Public Utility/Improved Public Right-of-Way Fee. If the driveway were to go to
Wagon Wheel Trail, the assessments on Wagon Wheel Trail were $8,500.
In regards to tree preservation, they will talk with the property owner about an appropriate
replacement plan.
The property owners, Jason and Thomasine Eggers of 2260 Wagon Wheel Court, expressed their
excitement about becoming part of the community here. Part of the appeal of this lot and the
neighborhood is the fact that there are mature trees there and he sees no difficulties in adding a
tree restoration plan.
Vice-Chair Hennes opened the public hearing.
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 10 of 12
Mr. Ira Kipp welcomed the Eggers to the neighborhood and encouraged them to protect the
wetlands as much as they can. He would like to see a recommendation to the new owners to keep
working on the removal of buckthorn from the property that was started by the previous owner.
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (FIELD)
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO,
TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-29 CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR OVER-SIZE GARAGE AND WETLANDS PERMIT BASED ON THE
FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The use of the subject parcel as a new single-family residential dwelling is consistent with
the City Code and Comprehensive Plan.
2. The planned development of the new dwelling with an oversized garage of 1,427 sq. ft. is
considered a reasonable request, and is consistent with the City Code and Comprehensive
Plan.
3. The proposed residential home and large garage easily meet the required setbacks and other
standards established under the R-1 One Family District.
4. The proposed garage and residential structure will be compliant with the conditions
included in the City Code that allow it by conditional use permit.
5. The proposed over-sized garage will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general
welfare of the community; should not cause any serious traffic congestion nor hazards; will
not seriously depreciate surrounding property value; and said use appears to be in harmony
with the general purpose and intent of the City Code and the comprehensive plan.
6. The proposed new residential home project and any related construction activities will not
cause or create any negative impacts to the ecologically sensitive area of the wetlands or
Rogers Lake area, due to the proximity and separation of the structure from said water
features.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Since access is being proposed off Wagon Wheel Court, a Public Utility/Improved Public
Right-of-Way Fee of $21,390.86 is paid to the City prior to issuance of a building permit.
2. If any ut ility connection is made on to Wagon Wheel Court, a utility connection fee of
$17,609.33 must be paid to the City prior to issuance of a building permit
3. No grading or construction activity on the subject site will occur on slopes over 25%.
4. The Applicant/Owners shall submit a final grading plan, utility plan 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.
5. All grading and construction activity will be in compliance with applicable federal, state,
and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance
Guidance Document.
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 11 of 12
6. No disturbance, grading work or any type of construction activities shall occur within 25
feet of the established wetlands edge.
7. A detailed Landscape Plan must be submitted for review to the Planning Department
showing tree replacement and all new vegetation to be re-planted within all disturbed areas
of the subject site.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (FIELD)
Vice-chair Hennes advised the City Council would consider this application at its December 5,
2017 meeting.
Staff Announcements / Update on Developments
Community Development Director Tim Benetti gave the following verbal review:
• Planning Case 2017-26, Sean Hoffman, Critical Area Permit was approved by the City
Council as recommended by the Planning Commission
• Public Engagement/Open House Meetings: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Review Meetings
o Averaged 15 – 20 people at each meeting (3 nights)
o Received good feedback
o Heard a lot of issues and concerns about what is happening at Dodd Road and
Highway 110
• Michael Development Final Plat was approved by the City Council
o The motel has been completely demolished and site cleared.
o Developer now working on getting the footing foundation work done as soon as
possible
• 2040 Comprehensive Plan process is ongoing
o Consulting Planner Phil Carlson is compiling all of the comments and general
information
o Participation by the Commission on the goals and policies discussions was
appreciated
o Mr. Carlson plans to bring the compiled information to the Council at a later
meeting and get their input/feedback
o To be brought back to the Commission and start working on the main elements and
maps of the Plan
o A lot of work to be done in the next six months and Commission participation is
critical
• Staff is looking to move next month’s Planning Commission meeting to Thursday,
December 14 due to the Christmas Holiday. As there are currently no items on the agenda
there is the possibility that the meeting could be cancelled for December.
• This is Vice-chair Hennes last official meeting if the December meeting is cancelled.
Commissioner Noonan, being uncomfortable with making policy changes or decisions as they go
along – such was done in the first case heard this evening in regards to the one-on-one replacement
November 28, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 12 of 12
of trees, suggested that some thought be given to establishing a standard policy that could be
applied across the board.
He also noted the calling out of the infiltration on the first case heard this evening; yet only
referencing the Land Disturbance Guidance in the next case. For the sake consistency, if they are
going to call it out in one place they should call it out every place; or simply let the Land
Disturbance Guidance stand for itself.
Adjournment
COMMISSIONER TOTH MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO, TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:15 P.M.
AYES: 6
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 1 (FIELD)
Planning Staff Report
DATE: January 23, 2018
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Case No. 2018-01
Lot Line Adjustment
APPLICANT: Ed Meisinger
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 572 & 566 Hiawatha Avenue
ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One-Family Residential/SF Residential
ACTION DEADLINE: February 12, 2018 (60 days)
INTRODUCTION
Mr. Ed Meisinger (along with his wife Victoria Meisinger and daughter Michelle Neish) is requesting
consideration of a simple lot line adjustment between the two properties they jointly own, located at 572 &
566 Hiawatha Avenue.
This item is being presented under a duly noticed public hearing process. A notice of hearing on this item
was published in the Pioneer Press newspaper; and notice letters of this hearing were mailed to all owners
within 350-feet of the affected parcels.
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
Mr. & Mrs. Meisinger are seeking to adjust the shared lot line between the two properties. The lot width
of the smaller house (566 Hiawatha Ave.) is 124.7-ft.; while the larger residence (572 Hiawatha Ave.) is
only 100-ft. The Owners/Applicant wish to swap the lot line widths by making 566 Hiawatha with a 100-
ft. wide lot and 572 Hiawatha with 124.7-ft. lot width. The Meisingers will continue to own/occupy the
main residence at 572 Hiawatha, while their daughter Ms. Neish will occupy the 566 Hiawatha residence.
566 Hiawatha contains a 1-1/4 story, 837 sq. ft. single-family dwelling; while 572 Hiawatha contains a one-
story, 1,690 sq. ft. single family dwelling. There are no physical changes planned to each dwelling.
566 Hiawatha 572 Hiawatha
Planning Report: Case #2018-01 Page 2
ANALYSIS
The 566 Hiawatha lot is 125-ft. wide by approx. 195-200 ft. in depth, with 24,628 sq. ft. in lot area. The
572 Hiawatha lot is 100-ft. wide by 200-ft. in depth, with 20,341 sq. ft. in lot area. The new lot line will
essentially be relocated 24.7 feet northerly between both properties, resulting in the new (preferred) lot
dimensions presented and illustrated on the attached survey drawings.
The survey maps indicate the new adjusted lot line will go through the existing playground structure.
According to the Owners, this playground has been removed and relocated to the back area of the 572
Hiawatha parcel.
Title 11-1-5.C of the City Code (Subdivision Ordinance) allows lot line adjustments to take place, provided
the following standards are met:
Lot line adjustment request to divide a lot which is a part of a recorded plat where the division is to
permit the adding of a parcel of land to an abutting lot and the newly created property line will not
cause the other remaining portion of the lot to be in violation with this title or the zoning ordinance.
The resulting lot line adjustment keeps or maintains the minimum lot width of 100-ft. and minimum lot size
of 15,000 sq. ft. (R-1 District standards) for both lots intact, and there is no variance needed for any
standards. For all intents and purposes, this lot line adjustment will have little, if any impact upon the
neighboring properties, the residual parcel, or the overall use, enjoyment and purpose of the entire Cherokee
Heights neighborhood.
With the new lot line adjustment, there will be no impacts or need to vacate any dedicated drainage and
utility easements, since no easements were ever dedicated under the original Cherokee Park Heights plat
of 1924. Typically under new subdivision requests (including lots splits and lot line adjustments) the city
will request the Applicant to provide (dedicate) new drainage and utility easements whenever needed. In
this case the city is requesting the Applicant to provide a 10-foot easement along the front lot lines; and 5-
foot wide easements along the new (adjusted) line and all other side and rear lot lines.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Recommend approval of the lot line adjustment, based on the attached findings of fact, with
conditions.
OR
Planning Report: Case #2018-01 Page 3
2. Recommend denial of the lot line adjustment, based on the findings of fact that the proposed
adjustment is not consistent with the City Code or Comprehensive Plan and will have a negative
impact on surrounding properties.
OR
3. Table the requests.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the lot line adjustment based on the attached findings of fact (Alternative 1),
with conditions noted as follows:
1) Appropriate documents indicating the new lot line adjustment shall be recorded with Dakota
County
2) The applicant shall dedicate drainage and utility easements on both parcels to be denoted on the
Certificate of Survey submitted to Dakota County: 10-ft. wide along the front property lines and 5
feet wide along the side and rear property lines.
Planning Report: Case #2018-01 Page 4
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL
Lot Line Adjustment
566 & 572 Hiawatha Avenue
The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed requests:
1. The proposed lot line adjustment request meets the purpose and intent of the City Code and is
considered consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Approval of the lot line adjustment will have no visible impact on the subject properties and will
not negatively impact the character of the neighborhood.
3. The proposed adjustment will not cause any non-conformities on either parcel, based on the
applicable zoning district standards.
CHIPPEWA AVEMIRIAM ST
WINSTON CTSIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYHIAWATHA AV E
SIMARD ST
FREMONT AVE
JUNCTION LN
ANNAPOLIS ST W
DOWNING ST
LONDON RD DIEGO LNKIRCHNER AVE
GARDEN LN
SUTCLIFF CIR
WINSTON CIRDakota County GIS
572 & 566 HIAWATHA AVE.Planning Case No. 2018-01 City ofMendotaHeights0310
SCALE IN FEET
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
1/19/2018
66666666666666
³
"
"
"
"
"
*
³
"6666666666666666666
6
6 6 666666 !!2!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
50200
193
172
143
14090133
91130
123
79
1
4
67166
756056
5570
484140
3836992521199
155
1610535040
130
140501305050123
60566
572
564
555
567
574
557569565
573
563
551
559
562 558
583
586
549
HIAWATHA AVESIMARD ST253.4'200.85'Dakota County GIS
572 & 566 HIAWATHA AVE.Planning Case No. 2018-01 City ofMendotaHeights060
SCALE IN FEET
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
1/19/2018
Planning Staff Report
DATE: January 23, 2018
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Case 2018-02
Lot Split – Subdivision Request
APPLICANT: Mark Gergen
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 684 North Freeway Road
ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential
ACTION DEADLINE: February 19, 2018
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
Mr. Mark Gergen is requesting approval to subdivide a parcel located in the R-1 One Family Residential
zoning district, to replace one single-family lot (with an existing home) with two conforming single-family
lots for future residential development. The request requires City Council approval before any plat or
survey can be accepted and recorded by Dakota County.
This item is being presented under a duly noticed public hearing process. A notice of hearing on this item
was published in the Pioneer Press newspaper; and notice letters of this hearing were mailed to all owners
within 350-feet of the affected parcels.
BACKGROUND
The original site contains an existing one-story, single family (basement walk-out) dwelling of 2,138 sq.
ft., built in 1971. The subject lot is 1.15 acres in size; and has 200-ft. of frontage (lot width) along North
Freeway Road and depth of approx. 250-ft. The home will be removed should this lot split be approved.
Planning Report: Case #2018-02 Page 2
The site is bordered to the north, south east and west by existing single family homes.
There are a number of mature trees scattered throughout the lower 1/3 of the lot, and some of these will
have to be removed to make space for the future single family dwellings. Many of these trees are located
in the lower area of the lot, located along the west-southwesterly-southerly area of the lot.
Project Description
The applicant proposes to remove the existing single family home and subdivide the lot into two single-
family lots, as illustrated on the survey drawing dated 12/15/2017 from Bohlen Surveying and Associates.
Parcel A: the western area of the existing parcel will be subdivided to create a new 100-ft. by 250-ft. sized
lot, consisting of 24,994 sq. ft., or 0.57 acres.
The survey map includes 1-ft. contour (grade) elevation lines along the westerly side and rear yard areas of
the existing lot, which illustrate a considerable grade elevation difference in this area, from 898-ft down to
878-ft. in the most southwest corner of new Parcel A. The existing dwelling has a retaining wall that
supports or shores-up the west side of the home and existing garage/driveway area. The survey provided
by Mr. Gergen illustrates a “Proposed 60’ x 60’ Bldg. Pad” – which is shown with a 30-ft front setback off
N. Freeway Rd. and approx. 20-ft along each side yard. The survey does not provide a location of the new
driveway.
Parcel B: the east side of the existing lot will be subdivided to create a new 100-ft. by 250-ft. sized lot,
consisting of 24,984 sq. ft., or 0.57 acres. This easterly portion of the lot is relatively flat with little to any
grade differences, except in the far southerly area of the new lot.
The survey also illustrates a similar “Proposed 60’ x 60’ Bldg. Pad” – which is shown with a 30-ft front
setback off N. Freeway Rd. and approx. 20-ft along each side yard. The survey does not provide a location
of the new driveway.
ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan
The subject parcel is guided LR-Low Density Residential in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The applicant’s
request to subdivide the subject parcel into two parcels, consisting of approximately 0.57 acres each, is
consistent with and well below the LR maximum density of 2.9 units per acre.
According to the Comprehensive Plan, “Infill sites” are meant to be any property in Mendota Heights
that has the opportunity to develop, or redevelop, beyond its current level. Because these properties
tend to be smaller and surrounded by established neighborhoods, development would have the potential
to dramatically change the environment of the areas in which they are located.
The City’s policies for consideration of development in these sensitive areas are noted as follows:
o Require that any new development or redevelopment meets all zoning and subdivision
regulations.
o Avoid access and traffic which unduly burdens just a few properties.
o Ensure that development of infill sites will not result in any negative impact on existing
environmental conditions, such as soils, wetlands, drainage, or similar factors.
o Require that all development of infill sites provide access to a public street, new or existing.
o Ensure that land uses are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, and do not reflect a
“spot-zoning” pattern.
o Avoid infill development that relies on private street or “flag-lot” design.
Planning Report: Case #2018-02 Page 3
Zoning Requirements
Title 11-3-2 of the City Code (Subdivision Ordinance) allows the subdivision of parcels, provided that the
resulting lots are compliant with the requirements of the applicable zoning district.
As shown in the table below based on the attached plan set, the proposed parcels are compliant with the
R-1 District’s lot area and width standards:
Standard Subject Parcel New Parcel A New Parcel B
Lot Area 15,000 SF 49,978 sq. ft.
(1.15 acres)
24,994 sq. ft.
(0.57 acres)
24,984 sq. ft.
(0.57 acres)
Lot Width 100 ft. 200-ft 100-ft. 100-ft.
Title 12-1D-4-D-2 of the Code requires the following:
Whenever buildings have been built on one side of the street between two (2) intersections, no building
shall hereafter be erected to extend closer toward the street than the average of the required district
setback and average setback of the adjoining principal structures.
The proposed 60’ x 60’ house pads are shown with a setback of 30-ft. The existing dwelling is also shown
(at furthest projection point – north corner of attached garage) at the 30-ft. setback line. According to old
city survey records, the home next door to the east (670 N. Freeway) has a 46-ft. front setback. The home
to the west (owned by the Applicant – Mr. Gergen) was recently built in 2014 and has a 30-ft setback from
N. Freeway Road.
Pursuant to City Code 12-1D-4.D (Front Yard Requirements), whenever a new home(s) is developed
between existing homes along a street, the average of the setbacks between adjoin structures is applied. IN
this case the 46-ft. + 30-ft. = 76-ft, or average equates to 38-feet. Because the new house pads are
considered a general design” in nature, city staff is recommending the final (new) building setbacks for
each lot must be a minimum of 38-feet for both lots.
REQUESTED ACTION
Following the public hearing and discussion, the Planning Commission may consider the following actions:
1. Recommend approval of the lot split based on the attached findings of fact and conditions of
approval as noted herein.
OR
2. Recommend denial of the lot split based on revised or determined findings of fact.
OR
3. Table the request, pending additional information from staff or the Applicant.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission is asked to determine the effect of the proposed lot split on the character and
development of the neighborhood in forming its recommendation to the City Council. Staff recommends
the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the lot split as submitted, with the
following conditions:
Planning Report: Case #2018-02 Page 4
1) The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and dimensioned site plans with associated
easements, subject to review and approval of the Engineering Department as part of any building
permit application.
2) All grading work and land disturbance activities must comply with the City’s Land Disturbance
Guidance document.
3) The lots shall include infiltration of 1 inch over all new increased impervious surface and there
shall be no increase in run off from the existing conditions.
4) All erosion control measures shall be installed prior to any construction, and maintained
throughout the duration of any construction activities on both sites and until each have been
properly restored.
5) Front-yard setbacks from North Freeway Road for future structures on both Parcel A and Parcel B
shall be a minimum of 38-feet.
6) The Applicant agrees to preserve and protect as many mature/over-story trees on the subject site;
shall submit a detailed landscape and tree replacement plan for each new lot as part of any new
building permit application review.
7) The applicant shall dedicate drainage and utility easements on both parcels to be denoted on the
Certificate of Survey submitted to Dakota County: 10-ft. wide along the front property lines and 5
feet wide along the side and rear property lines.
8) Park dedication fee of $4,000 (in lieu of land - per current City policy) will be paid before the
subdivision is recorded with Dakota County.
9) The existing home must be demolished before the subdivision is recorded with Dakota County.
10) Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a building
permit.
Planning Report: Case #2018-02 Page 5
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL
Lot Split – Subdivision Request
for
684 North Freeway Road
The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed requests:
1. The proposed lot split and construction activities meet the purpose and intent of the City Code and
are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed subdivision and additional new housing will not create any negative impacts to the
surrounding uses or neighborhood; and the increased front yard setbacks will ensure the new homes
are in alignment with other residential uses along North Freeway Road.
3. The two lots resulting from the lot split meet City Code minimum standards and are comparable in
size and frontage to other lots on North Freeway Road.
HWY 110 DODD RDSOUTH LNWESLEY LN
MENDOTA RDLINDEN STM A R K E T S T
HILLTOP RD
FREEWAY RD S
FREEWAY RD N
WILLOW LN
VALLEY CURVE RDRIDGE PL
MAPLE ST
MAIN STOAK STWESLEY CTHWY OAK STHWY 110
Dakota County GIS
684 N. FREEWAY ROADPlanning Case No. 2018-02 City ofMendotaHeights0420
SCALE IN FEET
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
1/19/2018
6666666666
66666666"
"
³
³"
*
"
"
"
"
"66666666666666666666666!!2!!2
!!2!!2 !!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
(]250200
185
169
50
150
119
125
100248 249249200150
200100
25050
200250200169
250200150
100
684
679
670
697 685693
699 689 679 667
664
667
FREEWAY RD N
OAK STHWY OAK ST313'270'303'
Dakota County GIS
684 N. FREEWAY ROADPlanning Case No. 2018-02 City ofMendotaHeights080
SCALE IN FEET
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
1/19/2018
684 N. Freeway Rd.04/04/2017
DATE: January 23, 2018
TO: Chair Litton Field and Planning Commissioners
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals and Policies / Vision Statement / Mission Statement
Introduction
Attached for the Commissioners’ review is a Draft copy of the most recent Goals and Policies for the 2040
Comprehensive Plan Update.
I have also included the proposed (revised) Mission Statement and Vision Statement to be made part of the
overall planning document.
These same draft goals & policies, along with the two statements were presented informally to the City
Council at the January 2, 2018 meeting. The Council appeared to receive these goals and policies very
favorably, and are looking forward to completing the final stages of the 2040 Comp Plan project.
Please note this information is also only for the Commissioners preliminary and informal review; no action
will be taken on these items at this time.
Planning Consultant Phil Carlson (Stantec) intends to come back to the Planning Commission next month
and the March 2018 meeting to provide further updates, new maps, and other related planning materials for
the Commission to consider. More information will be forthcoming.
Thank you.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 1 of 11
LAND USE
GOAL 1: THE LAND USE PLAN WILL SERVE AS THE FOUND ATION FOR LAND USE DECISIONS
IN MENDOTA HEIGHTS.
POLICIES
• Develop in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan for land use, housing, transportation, parks
and other community facilities.
• Review and amend the Comprehensive Plan as necessary to ensure consistent development
policy in current and future development decisions.
• Zoning and rezoning decisions shall conform to the Land Use Plan.
• The Land Use Plan will be updated to reflect changing priorities and conditions or as required by
the Metropolitan Land Planning Act.
• Balance land use designations to meet projected growth demand.
GOAL 2. PRESERVE, PROTECT AND ENRICH THE MATURE, FULLY DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL
ENVIRONMENT AND CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY.
POLICIES
• Subdivision and zoning standards will emphasize high quality site and architectural design.
• Emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and a high general aesthetic level in community
development and building.
• Parks, trails and open spaces will be planned within walking distance of all residential areas.
• Encourage development and planning of land that provides for reasonable access to surrounding
properties.
• Public buildings and properties will be designed, constructed and maintained to be a source of
civic pride and to set a standard for private property owners to follow.
• Historic preservation will be considered in land use decisions.
GOAL 3: SUPPORT INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN DESIGNATED AREAS.
POLICIES
• The City will use available resources to meet redevelopment needs. This will include cooperation
with the Dakota County and the Metropolitan Council to achieve redevelopment objectives.
• Encourage appropriate transitions and buffering between potentially incompatible land uses.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 2 of 11
GOAL 4. ENHANCE AND PROTECT THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.
POLICIES
• Provide for maintenance and further natural restoration of ecological systems including lakes,
ponding areas, aquifers, and drainage areas
• Encourage energy efficient design in all public and private construction.
• Take in to account impacts on air quality in land use and infrastructure decisions.
• Follow best practices in land use and infrastructure decisions that impact stormwater runoff.
GOAL 5. REDUCE THE IMPACT OF AIRCRAFT NOISE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.
POLICIES
• Increase public participation and representation through the Noise Oversight Committee (NOC)
and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC).
• Achieve noise reduction through advocating modified takeoff proc edures and corridor
compliance.
• Advocate an equitable distribution of aircraft traffic and a more equitable runway use system.
• Monitor the continued implementation of the Minneapolis/St. Paul (MSP) airport Comprehensive
Plan.
• Advocate for specific noise control measures through operational changes and advance
technology.
• Establish a physical capacity for the Mendota Heights/Eagan corridor and transfer general
aviation use to other reliever airports.
• Notify and work with MnDOT in the event that potential airspace obstructions are encountered.
• Consider aircraft noise and safety issues in all land use and zoning decisions.
GOAL 6: PROTECT REASONABLE ACCESS TO DIRECT SUNLIGHT FOR SOLAR ENERGY
SYSTEMS.
POLICIES
• Consider modification of existing ordinances to protect access of direct sunlight to rooftops of all
principal structures.
• Encourage developers to establish covenants that do not restrict the development and use of
active and/or passive solar energy systems.
• Encourage buildings and developers to offer solar energy system options, to the extent practical,
for space heating and cooling and hot water heating in new residential, commercial and industrial
developments.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 3 of 11
HOUSING
GOAL 1: PRESERVE AND IMPROVE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS AND HOUSING UNITS.
POLICIES
• Continue to enforce housing maintenance and zoning codes.
• Explore options for flexibility in Zoning Code standards to encourage and allow expansion and
reinvestment in existing houses.
• Partner with Dakota County, Metropolitan Council, the State of Minnesota and other agencies that
provide housing rehabilitation programs and services.
• Protect public safety by requiring owners to repair substandard housing or as a last resort, abate
and demolish dangerous housing.
• Develop a housing maintenance program that promotes and requires safe homes and attractive
neighborhoods.
GOAL 2: MEET FUTURE NEEDS WITH A VARIETY OF HOUSING PRODUCTS.
POLICIES
• Encourage life-cycle housing opportunities in Mendota Heights that allow residents to remain in
the community throughout their lives. This includes:
o Maintenance of existing entry level housing.
o Construction of move-up single family housing.
o Construction of various types of senior housing, including senior ownership units, senior
rental units, memory care and assisted living units.
o Providing a mix of affordable housing opportunities for all income levels, age groups , and
special housing needs.
• Encourage environmentally sustainable housing development and construction practices.
• Provide for housing development that maintains the attractiveness and distinct neighborhood
characteristics in the community.
• Support the maintenance and rehabilitation of the community’s existing housing stock.
• Periodically assess the housing needs in the community, including the elderly, disabled, active
retirees, and other groups with special housing needs to determine development priorities and to
formulate strategies to meet those needs and maintain an adequate and quality housing supply.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 4 of 11
PARKS & OPEN SPACE
GOAL 1: PROVIDE A PARK SYSTEM THAT IS SAFE, ACCESSIBLE, AND EQUITABLE IN ITS
OFFERINGS TO ALL MENDOTA HEIGHTS RESIDENTS AND VISITORS.
POLICIES
• Create and maintain a park system that provides the optimum amount of active and passive open
space for the enjoyment of all Mendota Heights residents.
• Provide facilities and programs that allow people of varying abilities to participate.
• Build, maintain and retrofit park facilities and equipment to be safe for all users.
• Plan and build safe connections for pedestrians and bicyclists within and between park facilities
and major destinations in the community.
• Strive to make all facilities and programs open and welcoming to people of all ages and diverse
backgrounds.
GOAL 2: PROVIDE A PARK SYSTEM THAT ASSURES HIGH QUALITY FACILITIES, BUILDINGS,
GROUNDS, TRAILS, AMENITIES, AND NATURAL SETTINGS.
POLICIES
• Keep the park system up-to-date in terms of facilities, activities and programs that are responsive
to the community’s needs and wishes.
• Staff the park system adequately for the facilities, activities and programs offered.
• Provide bicycle amenities in parks and along trails, including bike racks and repair stations.
• Provide a sustainable funding stream and operate the park system in a fiscally sound manner ,
including taking advantage of available grants.
GOAL 3: USE THE PARK SYSTEM AS A MEANS TO ENHANCE AND SUSTAIN THE ENVIRONMENT
OF EACH NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CITY AS A WHOLE.
POLICIES
• Provide facilities, programs and opportunities in the park system that bring people together and
create community.
• Protect and enhance the environment by promoting native species and pollinator friendly
plantings, preventing and removing invasive species, and reducing salt on roads and sidewalks.
• Protect and enhance native wildlife by c onsidering their needs and habits in our stewardship of
park property and facilities.
• Ensure that stormwater is managed in park facilities in a manner that protects and preserves
water quality and the ecology of the watershed.
• Strive to make all park facilities, equipment and construction projects and materials
environmentally friendly and sustainable.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 5 of 11
GOAL 4: COOPERATE WITH DAKOT A COUNTY AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES IN PARK
AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS
POLICIES
• Support the Dakota County 2030 Greenway Corridors Plan/Vision.
• Continue to cooperate with South St. Paul, West. St. Paul and other neighboring communities on
park and recreation programs and facilities.
• Encourage the preservation of open space by private property owners and the City.
• Explore new opportunities and continue to work cooperatively with School District #197, St.
Thomas, Visitation, Fort Snelling State Park, and other entities to provide maximum recreational
opportunities and avoid duplication.
• Improve and expand safe bicycle and pedestrian connections to City parks and other community
destinations.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 6 of 11
TRANSPORTATION
GOAL 1: PROVIDE A SAFE, HIGH-QUALITY, AND COST EFFECTIVE MULTI-MODAL
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
POLICIES
• Transportation improvements will be coordinated with the plans of MnDOT, Dakota County,
Metropolitan Council, and adjoining communities.
• The City will support regional improvements to major transportation facilities serving the city when
feasible.
• New construction techniques, technologies, and environmental sustainability will be considered in
planning new transportation facilities.
• A network of sidewalks and trails will be constructed in all new developments and
redevelopments, where practical and feasible.
• Developers will be required to provide the transportation facilities within and adjacent to new
subdivisions, including rights-of-way, roadways, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities necessary to
support their development.
• Existing transportation facilities will be maintained so as to preserve or improve service levels and
minimize life-cycle costs. This includes an ongoing pavement management program for city
streets.
• Where practical and feasible, planning for roadway improvements will include landscapi ng, street
lighting, and other aesthetic improvements.
GOAL 2: EXPAND TRANSIT OPTIONS SERVING MENDOTA HEIGHTS
POLICIES
• The City will continue to support and participate in efforts to implement improved transit service in
the City.
• The City will seek county, regional, state or federal funding to expand transit services in and
around the city.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 7 of 11
WATER SUPPLY
[City staff to provide]
SANITARY SEWER
GOAL 1: EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE CITY’S SANITARY SEWER
SYSTEM.
POLICIES
• Mendota Heights will construct its system to facilitate operation and maintenance and prevent
inflow and infiltration.
• Mendota Heights will maintain a detailed inventory of its sanitary sewer system including an up-
to-date electronic map including location and specifications of all pipes, structures, and lift
stations.
• Mendota Heights will clean a portion of its sanitary sewer system every year.
• Mendota Heights will regularly televise and clean its sanitary sewer system to determine whether
it is performing adequately.
• During major street reconstruction projects, Mendota Heights will assess the system within the
project area and makes improvements as needed.
• Mendota Heights is committed to training those responsible for managing its sanitary sewer
system and ensures that staff has the equipment necessary to properly m aintain the system.
• Mendota Heights will maintain an organizational chart of its sewer maintenance department and
ensure that each staff member has a job description.
• Mendota Heights will rehabilitate sewers before their deterioration negatively affects residents,
businesses, or the Metropolitan Disposal System.
• Mendota Heights will maintain a general emergency response plan that pertains to sanitary sewer
overflows.
• The City will coordinate sanitary sewer utility services and development with surrounding
communities, Washington County, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the Metropolitan
Council.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 8 of 11
GOAL 2: TO PROVIDE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE THAT IS ADEQUATE TO MEET CURRENT
AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS.
POLICIES
• The extension of sanitary sewers shall be programmed so as to achieve maximum benefit from
the existing utilities.
• The sanitary sewer system shall be constructed to accommodate the proposed land use densities
and uses identified in the future land use plan.
• Mendota Heights will provide a system reserve capacity in all trunk designs so that local
occurrences of higher sewage generating uses or higher densities can be accommodated.
• When in-fill development or redevelopment occurs, Mendota Heights will evaluate existing
sanitary sewer systems as to their capacity.
• Mendota Heights develops and regularly updates its sanitary sewer system Capital Improvement
Plan (CIP).
• The City will encourage development densities that maximize the use of the existing sa nitary
system. Where existing facilities do not have capacities to accommodate the maximum allowable
densities, the City reserves the right to restrict development to average density.
• For properties not connected the sanitary sewer system, subsurface sewage treatment systems
(SSTS) shall be allowed provided such systems conform to all local, county, state and federal
requirements.
• When feasible, maintain sanitary sewer depth to provide maximum flexibility related to future
development.
• When installing new sanitary sewer adjacent to properties on private well and septic, sanitary
sewer services will be installed to allow for cost effective connection it the future.
GOAL 3: MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROVIDES A COST EFFECTIVE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM THAT
IS EQUITABLY FINANCED.
POLICIES
• Mendota Heights finances new sanitary sewer trunks for new development through area and
connection charges.
• Mendota Heights finances its existing system operation and maintenance through utility billings.
• Mendota Heights prepares for replacement of its sanitary sewer system by incorporating
replacement costs into its utility billing rates.
• The extension of sanitary sewers shall be programmed so as to achieve maximum benefit from
the existing utilities. This staging program will result in the most efficient expenditure of public
funds while maintaining the City’s growth pattern.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 9 of 11
SURFACE WATER
GOAL 1: MANAGE SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER RESOURCES USING APPROACHES THAT
MEET OR EXCEED REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS BY FOLLOWING THE CITY’S LOCAL
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN, THE LOCAL WATERSHED PLANS, AND PERMITS
ADMINISTERED BY THE MPCA, BWSR, USACE, MNDNR, AND ANY OTHER GOVERNING
AGENCIES THAT ARE APPLICABLE AND HAVE JURISDICTION AUTHORITY WITHIN THE CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS.
POLICIES
• Provide adequate flood protection for residents and structures and protect the integrity of
conveyance channels and stormwater detention areas.
• Pursue the reduction of Total Phosphorus (TP) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) loading to
water bodies by compliance, municipal management activities, and public education.
• Classify and effectively manage water bodies in the community to achieve watershed
management organization, state, and federal regulatory agency standards.
• Classify, manage, and administer wetlands in the community.
• Regulate new development and redevelopment activities within the community including erosion
control at construction sites.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 10 of 11
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
GOAL 1: PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN MENDOTA HEIGHTS THROUGH A
COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO BUSINESS NEEDS.
POLICIES
• Manage growth and land resources to ensure an appropriate mix of development and an
adequate land supply to secure new business investments.
• Retain the present industrial and commercial base and assist companies with their expansion
needs where appropriate.
• Attract quality businesses consistent with the City’s target market to areas available for
development.
• Encourage an adequate supply of sites and buildings to meet the demand for commercial and
industrial development.
• Maintain an infrastructure system to meet the needs of current businesses and facilitate future
growth.
• Address unique development challenges including the reuse and redevelopment of vacant
buildings.
• Foster private investment and economic activity without compromising community objectives to
maintain and enhance Mendota Heights’s environment.
GOAL 2: PROMOTE BUSINESS ATTRACTION, RETENTION, AND EXPANSION IN MENDOTA
HEIGHTS.
POLICIES
• Identify target markets and prepare and implement a marketing plan to attract businesses that fit
this market.
• Work with local businesses and industry to ensure needs for expansion and development are
adequately met and maintain an open line of communication with the business sector through the
Business Retention and Expansion Program.
• Continue to actively market Mendota Heights to commercial brokers and retail businesses to
expand retail opportunities in the City.
• Work cooperatively with local business groups, the school district, and area colleges and
universities to provide training for workers with the skills needed for existing and future Mendota
Heights businesses.
Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Draft Goals & Policies
December 22, 2017 Page 11 of 11
GOAL 3: PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THROUGH PUBLIC FINANCING TOOLS.
POLICIES
• Periodically review economic development opportunities, such as incentive programs from the
county, regional and state.
• Review new and innovative economic development incentives for application in Mendota Heights.
• Pursue outside funding sources to develop or redevelop land for commercial and industrial uses,
such as Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base
Revitalization Account, Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA), Minnesota
Department of Employment and Economic Development, and other applicable grants.
GOAL 4: CONTINUE TO DEVELOP COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AREAS THAT SERVE THE
WHOLE COMMUNITY.
POLICIES
• Provide and support commercial areas to supply convenience goods and services for residents of
Mendota Heights.
• To mitigate conflicts between commercial and residential development, r equire appropriate land
use transitions at the edges of residential neighborhoods through the use of setbacks, screening,
buffering and fencing.
• Require sidewalk connections along major streets leading up to neighborhood commercial
centers and direct connections from the public sidewalk to the storefronts.
GOAL 5: CONTINUE TO DEVELOP BUSINESS PARK AREAS THAT PROVIDE JOBS AND SERVE
THE LOCAL AND REGIONAL ECONOMY.
POLICIES
• Provide opportunities for new industrial development and expanded employment opportunities to
create livable-wage positions in Mendota Heights and the redevelopment of existing industrial
uses to serve existing businesses in the community.
• Provide attractive, planned environments as means to induce employers to locate within the City.
• Continue to provide and enforce standards for industrial developments that improve the
appearance and character of industrial properties.
• Provide high quality public services and infrastructure in all commercial and industrial districts.
Vision Statement
Mendota Heights will be recognized as
a high quality, family-oriented
residential community, with a vibrant
business and industrial base, highly
regarded educational and religious
institutions, a spacious, natural feel, and
the amenities of a city.
Mission Statement
Our mission is to preserve and enhance
the quality of life in the Mendota
Heights by providing quality public
safety, infrastructure, and planning for
orderly and sustainable growth.
Implmt Plan Preparation
Inventory + Analysis
Goals +
Vision
Alternatives
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
2016 20182017
PC
Hearing
Draft Plan
SCHEDULE
COMMUNITY
MEETING
COMMUNITY
MEETINGS
Planning Commission Meetings
CC
Adoption
Interim
WE ARE HERE
Planning Commission
Meeting
Parks
Commission
DATE: January 23, 2018
TO: Chair Litton Field and Planning Commissioners
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: 2017 Planning Applications List
Introduction
Attached for the Commissioners’ annual year-end review is a listing of all the planning application cases
that were considered last year by the Planning Commission and City Council.
There is no action needed on this item. This list is simply being provided by city staff for review; and in
the event the Commission wishes to receive an update or status report of any projects listed.
Thank you.
2017 Planning Applications
CASE ADDRESS REQUEST APPLICANT DETAILS ACTION
2017-01 1919 Hunter Lane Lot Split and CAP DBG, LLC remove existing SF; split lot into two buildable lots Approved
2017-02 687 Wesley Lane Lot Split Mark Gergen remove existing SF; split lot into two buildable lots Withdrawn
2017-03 1960 Lexington Avenue CUP Holy Family Maronite Church church and hall expansion Approved
2017-04 815 Deer Trail Court CUP Randy & Becky Pentel Oversized Garage Approved
2017-05 N/A Code Amendment Sean Hoffmann Allow Auto Sales in the B-2 Zone Approved
2017-06 Dodge Nature Center Lot Line Adjustment Dodge Nature Center/Dak.Co.adjustment of lines DNC and Dak. Co. trail parcel Approved
2017-07 1023 Delaware Ave.CUP and VARIANCE Jay Jacobs oversized garage and reduced setback Approved
2017-08 2160-2180 HWY 13 (Larson-Motel sites)Comp Plan Amendment Mike Swenson, Michael Development Business to HR PUD Approved
2017-08.1 2160-2180 HWY 13 (Larson-Motel sites)Tax Increment Financing Dist. #2 Mike Swenson, Michael Development establishment/approval of new TIF #2 District Approved
2017-09 1897 Wachtler Avenue Variance Christopherson reduced setbacks for garage addition Approved
2017-10 N/A Sign Code Amendment City of Mendota Heights allow freestanding signs in the B-1 Zones Approved
2017-11 1680 Lexington Avenue Comp Plan Amendment Keith Ostroski change LR-Low Density to MR-Med. Density Res. DENIED
2017-12 MH Plaza CUP - PUD Amendment Gemini Medical (Arthrex)allow new medical office/distribution center Approved
2017-13 800 Sibley Mem. Hwy Interim Use Permit Xcel Energy allow temporary outdoor pipe storage yard (gas plant)Approved
2017-14 1140 Orchard Place Preliminary Plat Royal Oaks Realty / Olin Family Subdivision Plat of 19 lots (reduced to 18)DENIED
2017-15 751 Willow Lane Wetlands Permit Bob Reidell wetlands permit for pool and landscaping Approved
2017-16 796 Sibley Memorial Hwy.Critical Area Permit Precision Homes CAP for the removal of SF home; grade for two new homes Approved
2017-17 2515 Pilot Knob Road CUP All-Tech Engineering screening fence for outdoor storage yard Approved
2017-18 1275 Knollwood Lane CAP and CUP Peter & Jen Eisenhuth remove home, construct new home Approved
2017-19 2160 -2180 HWY 13 Rezone; CUP; Prelim Plat; Wetlands PermMike Swenson, Michael Development New PUD/Plat for Mendota Heights Apartments Approved
2017-20 1101 Victoria Curve (City Hall)CUP & Variance City of Mendota Heights New Ground Mounted Solar Field Approved
2017-21 1340-1345 Mendota Hts. Rd.Interim Use Permit Minnehaha Academy temp 9-12 grade high school Approved
2017-22 1380 Northland Drive CUP Woodspring Hotels new 122-room hotel Approved
2017-23 2473 Bridgeview Court Wetlands Permit Scott & Jennifer Thalhuber removal of vegetation Approved
2017-24 1773 Sutton Lane Wetlands Permit Tim Dyrhaug removal of vegetation; secure deck Approved
2017-25 1562 Wachtler Ave.Wetlands Permit Jim Carlson new footbridge; vegetation removals; grading Approved
2017-26 711 Woodridge Dr. CAP Sean Hoffmann vegetation removals Approved
2017-27 2455 Pond Circle West Wetlands Permit - Administrative Mitch & Meggan Oldham vegetation removals Approved
2017-28 697 Wesley Lane Lot Split Keith Schweiger remove existing SF; split lot into two buildable lots Approved
2017-29 2270 Wagon Wheel Ct.CUP-Wetlands Permit Jason & Thomasine Eggers construct new SF dwelling Approved
2017-30 755 Willow Lane Wetlands Permit SD Custom Homes (Sean Doyle)fence and shed permit in wetlands boundary areas Approved
2017-31 1275 Knollwood Lane CAP - Administrative Bob Moser (Eisenhuth)revised/updated landscape/grading plan Approved