2017-05-23 Planning Comm MinutesMay 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 1
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
May 23, 2017
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 23, 2017 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, and Brian Petschel. Those absent: Mary Magnuson and Christine Costello
Approval of Agenda
Chair Field proposed that the hearings take place in the following order: A) Case 2017-05, B) 2017-06, C)
2017-07, E) 2017-09, F) 2017-10, and D) 2017-08.
Revised Approved with 5 AYE votes.
Approval of April 25, 2017 Minutes
COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON TO APPROVE
THE MINUTES OF APRIL 25, 2017, WITH THE CORRECTION THAT COMMISSIONER COSTELLO
WAS ABSENT
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
Hearings
A) PLANNING CASE #2017-05
MR. SEAN HOFFMANN, MANAGER BP/MENDOTA HEIGHTS AUTO SERVICE STATION,
2030 DODD ROAD
PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT – ALLOW MOTOR FUEL SERVICE STATIONS
AS A PLACE OF SALE/RESALE OF NEW OR USED MOTOR VEHICLES
Planner Tim Benetti explained that Mr. Sean Hoffmann, the local manager of the BP/Mendota Heights
Auto Service Station on the corner of Dodd Road and Highway 110, approached staff and informed them
that he was in the process of obtaining a motor vehicle dealer license. His desire is to provide for that service
or operation at the local business. Unfortunately, City Code Title 12-1D-13-3, standard F4 currently states
that ‘service station premises shall not be used as a place of sale or resale, or as a place for display for sale
or resale, of new or used motor vehicles, trailers or campers.’ Mr. Hoffmann is requesting an amendment
to the code.
The standards listed under this portion of the City Code are applicable to other service stations. The City
has one full service station and two convenient store type gas stations. Planner Benetti also noted that under
Title 12-1F- 4, limited auto sales are permitted only in the B-3 District as follows: “Automobile and other
vehicles of transportation sales when conducted entirely within a building.” This is why there are not large
scale auto dealerships, such as the ones seen on Highway 110 in Inver Grove Heights or in West St. Paul.
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 2
Mr. Hoffmann explained in his request that he wants to be very limited; he does not want to turn this into a
used car lot. Planner Benetti this would open up the door to a lot of vehicles on the site. Staff suggested,
for the report process, Mr. Hoffmann should modify the request with conditions; such as, no vehicles shall
be marked or have any visible signs indicating “For Sale’ or similar; vehicles for sale under this provision
will be limited to more than _____ [staff indicated a number determined by the Planning Commission]
vehicles on the site; vehicles for sale shall not be placed in any front yard setback (including a corner front
yard) of the subject property, and vehicles must be stored in an inconspicuous area of the property as
approved by the Zoning Administrator.
Upon researching, Planner Benetti was unable to find other communities in the metro area that would allow
gasoline service stations and/or convenience stores to display or sell vehicles on these properties.
Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend denial of this application. However, the
Planning Commission could give some direction or guidance or input as to whether or not, as alternative,
would they allow the applicant to ask for a variance to the Conditional Use Permit that was approved for
the site.
Commissioner Petschel, noting a paragraph of page 3 of the staff report stating that “it does not appear
other cities generally permit or allow gasoline service stations and/or convenience stores to display or sell
vehicles,” asked if any other information has been discovered since the issuance of the report. Planner
Benetti replied that during his search he was unable to see that any allowances were made for auto sale uses
and nothing new has been revealed since the preparation of this report.
Mr. Sean Hoffmann came forward and addressed the Commission. He stated that he is trying to obtain his
dealers license to gain access to the wholesale auto auctions. Usually once or twice a month he has a
customer asking for a) where can I get a used car, b) can you help me find a vehicles for my son, daughter,
wife, or myself. It is his desire to cater to these customers. To obtain a dealers license the property needs
to be zoned properly, which is why he is making this request. He believes there is a need for this in Mendota
Heights.
Commissioner Noonan, referencing the comment about needing this approval to obtain his dealers license,
asked if he had to have an actual location or could he just hold a dealers license. Mr. Hoffmann replied that,
per Minnesota law, he has to have a brick & mortar store where it is permissible to sell vehicles. He has no
plans of keeping vehicles on the lot with flags and neon signs, or anything like that.
Commissioner Noonan asked, if the Commission were to recommend the conditions stated above and
inserted ‘zero’ in the blank spot, if that would work for him. Mr. Hoffmann replied in the affirmative. If
someone comes to him he wants to be able to purchase the vehicle from the wholesaler, inspect the vehicles
at his location, and be able to pass that onto the customer at significant savings to that customer. He
anticipated that the longest a vehicle would be on his site would be overnight – but it would not be sitting
out on his lot with a “For Sale” sign on it.
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 NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 3
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO
RECOMMEND DENIAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-05, THE REQUEST TO AMEND CITY CODE
TITLE 12- 1D-13-3 TO ALLOW SERVICE STATIONS TO BE USED AS A PLACE OF DISPLAY,
SALE AND/OR RESALE OF NEW OR USED MOTOR VEHICLES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. Amending the zoning code is not in the best long-term interest of the City of Mendota Heights
2. It is not consistent with the land use and zoning in the area
Commissioner Petschel stated that he has no problem with someone wanting to be a broker on their own
property. The question is whether or not the language can be changed in the ordinance so the City does not
end up with someone purchasing Mr. Hoffmann’s business and putting 10 cars on their lot and selling them;
aside from limiting the number of vehicles.
Commissioner Hennes agreed and commented that this could become a popular thing; it could become
known as a place where a resident could sell their car.
Commissioner Noonan stated that the lot is currently a busy lot; and it is not just this lot, this would apply
to the other gas station lots as well. Changing the ordinance would change the nature of those operations.
If the ordinance speaks for itself in terms of how the City wants to see car dealerships or car operations
handled, then there is no reason to change it.
Commissioner Roston stated that, as stated in the staff report, it is true that the other two stations are both
Super America, and it is unlikely that Super America is going to ever get into this type of business, but they
could also sell out. He also believed that it would be somewhat disingenuous to amend an ordinance to
allow the sale or resale of cars and then to say you cannot have any cars on the lot.
Chair Field noted that one alternative staff recommended was to take more time and look at the possibility
of a variance. The question was asked how the variance would make the situation any different; and would
it meet the variance rules. Commissioner Noonan stated that if it does not stand the test with satisfying the
Commission with respect to use, giving it more time is not going to change things.
Planner Benetti noted that there is a fine line for allowing a variance for a use, because “use variances” are
not permitted by state law. If the Commission wanted to explore an alternative, he would want to get the
City Attorney involved.
Commissioner Petschel stated that it appears that no one wants a used car lot; however, is there a desire to
see someone with the ability to act as a broker for used cars as part of their business.
Commissioner Roston stated that personally he likes the station, he goes to the station and believes that Mr.
Hoffmann is a good operator and he does not have any problem with him having a broker’s license. The
Commission should do whatever it can to encourage whatever business he can; however, he does not believe
this fits here. If there was a way to accommodate his broker license without having the change the ordinance,
he would be in favor of that. He just did not know how to get there with the existing state law.
Commissioner Noonan noted that even if the Commission adopted the motion to denial, there is nothing
that preclude the pursuit of the sustainable brokerage license. Even if it came back and they want a brick &
stick home, he was unsure that there was support by the Commission for it.
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 4
Planner Benetti stated that on the application for the motor vehicles dealers’ license, there is a zoning
approval area where he would have to indicate that it meets the zoning or it does not. Typically, the other
brokerages licenses that he has signed off on, they were typically run out of an office building or an office
suite. The understanding was that, because they were only brokering from party A to party B, he could
write ‘absolutely no parking or display of vehicles would be allowed at this site’ because that was not
allowed. As an office brokerage use, the state will accept that if the City limited it; however, it had to be
provided for in the underlying zoning ordinance that the activity or use would be permitted in that district.
Commissioner Roston also pointed out that the ordinance has to be land use based, not user based.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its June 6, 2017 meeting.
B) PLANNING CASE #2017-06
MR. JASON SANDERS OF THE THOMAS IRVINE DODGE NATURE CENTER
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR DODGE NATURE CENTER PARCEL, GENERALLY
LOCATED AT 656 HIGHWAY 110
Planner Timothy Benetti explained that this request is a simple lot line adjustment. The applicant is Mr.
Jason Sanders of the Thomas Irvine Dodge Nature Center. The request is to simply cleave off a parcel on
the north end. A lot line adjustment is typically used to create an adjustment to lot lines, as the name entails.
However, it is also used in cases where two parties are creating a piece of land or parcel between the two
that would not be used for any type of development purposes, where a lot split would entail a development
right to it.
The 6.53 acre parcel is being taken by Dakota County to assist in the extension of the Lebanon Trail System
and also to provide for a little bit extra space for the underground tunnel or underpass that would be going
under Highway 110 as part of that reconstruction project. The section of land to be separated and created
under this lot line adjustment will not affect or hinder the overall use and purpose of the remaining 45.5
acre parcel. The separated parcel would be sold to Dakota County subject to this action.
Staff recommended approval of this application.
Commissioner Noonan asked if this newly created parcel could only be sold to Dakota County. Planner
Benetti replied that currently the agreement is strictly between the Dodge Nature Center and Dakota
County. Commissioner Noonan asked for further clarification that if the agreement between the Dodge
Nature Center and Dakota County were to not succeed for some reason, could the shopping center located
adjacent to the newly created parcel purchase it. Planner Benetti replied that he did not believe that could
happen because the entire Dodge Nature Center is covered under a conservation easement, and this parcel
is being created to accommodate a specific need.
Chair Field noted that he is a former president of the Dodge Nature Center and still serves on the board. He
does not feel that he has any conflict of interest and certainly does not have any economic interest; however,
for the record he acknowledge that and asked if anyone felt that he should stand down from voting.
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 5
Mr. Jason Sanders, Executive Director of Dodge Nature Center clarified that the section under discussion
is not currently under the Dakota County Easement; however, it does have a Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT) easement on it.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Mr. Keith Kraft, 1314 Furlong Avenue, stated that when Mr. Benetti put up the map and talked about part
of a trail way system, he did not see how the trail could go below – where the trail met up. He asked if the
trail would connect with something to the south. Chair Field replied that it connects through the Mendota
Heights Plaza project. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek further clarified that the trail would connect with
the cul-de-sac at South Plaza Drive, go through the former MnDOT right-of-way, and the underpass project.
Mr. Al Singer, Dakota County Land Conservation Manager, 49 O’Day Street, Maplewood clarified that the
County Board has already approved the resolution to purchase the property, they have a signed purchase
agreement. This will soothe a lot of public interest on both the City and County’s part.
Mr. Joseph Weiss, 643 Highway 110, asked if this lot line adjustment would impact any of the properties
on the north side as far as taxes or anything else. Chair Field replied that taxes are not the Commission’s
preview and all they could comment on is the land use and the proposed lot line adjustment per the
agreement between Dakota County and Dodge Nature Center. City Administrator Mark McNeill was
unable to find a connection between property taxes and the neighborhood properties and did not believe
there would be any impacts on the neighbors.
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-06 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BASED ON
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The proposed lot line adjustment request meets the purpose and intent of the City Code and can be
considered consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The purpose of this request is to create a separate parcel to be sold by Dodge Nature Center to
Dakota County for the Mendota-Lebanon Hills Regional Greenway, which would help facilitate
the completion of a new trail link and tunnel underneath Highway 110.
3. Approval of the requests will have no visible impact on either property and will not negatively
impact the character of the neighborhood.
4. Approval of this lot line adjustment and creation of this new tract of land will have little, if any
impact upon the neighboring properties, the residual parcel, or the overall use, enjoyment and
purpose of the entire Dodge Nature Center area.
5. The proposed adjustment will not cause any non-conformities on either parcel, based on the
applicable zoning district standards.
AND WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTS ARE RECORDED WITH
DAKOTA COUNTY
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 6
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its June 6, 2017 meeting.
C) PLANNING CASE #2017-07
JASON (JAY) AND ALICIA JACOBS, 1023 DELAWARE AVENUE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW LARGER GARAGE WITH
REDUCED SETBACKS
Planner Timothy Benetti explained this request was both a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the
replacement of a detached garage with a larger garage then is allowed by ordinance and a Variance to a
side-yard setback from ten feet down to three feet. The applicant submitted three letters of support, which
were made a part of the staff report.
The site currently contains a single-family home and a detached one-car garage. The residence is a 1.5 story
building with a 2,352 square foot finished floor area. The existing detached garage is approximately 18 feet
by 22 feet (396 square feet) and is in very poor shape. The setback is 12.5 feet from the rear lot line and
approximately 9.4 to 9.7 feet from the northerly (side) property line. There is a 7 foot by 12 foot hard surface
pad that exists between the garage and the north lot line. That pad itself is approximately three feet from
the existing property line.
There is an Xcel Energy overhead line that runs along the back lot line. There is no easement for that line;
however, staff spoke with an Xcel Energy executive who stated that they typically like to keep at least a ten
foot spacing between any structures and the power line. So they are hoping that holding back to a 10-foot
setback would be adequate enough.
Planner Benetti shared an image of the property and indicated the location of streets, the home, the garage,
and a sandbox area on the property.
The new garage would be a two-car garage with an attachment for extra storage. They would maintain the
rear yard 10-foot setback and reduce the side yard setback to three feet. The existing driveway is
approximately three feet from the side yard lot line and the location of the new garage would line up with
that driveway. It would also provide for a little bit more ability to maneuver their large vehicles into the
garage.
Planner Benetti then shared the requirements and standards to be met a Conditional Use Permit and
Variance and how this application met those standards. This information was also included in the staff
report.
Commissioner Hennes asked to see the location of the trees that would have to be removed if the garage
were to maintain the 10-foot setback and asked for an explanation of why they would have to be removed.
Planner Benetti showed on the map where the trees were located and explained that the driveway would
need to be adjusted to allow for the maneuvering of a large vehicle into the garage, thus the needed removal
of the trees.
Commissioner Roston asked to see the location of the driveway in relation to Delaware Avenue and asked
for confirmation that the driveway would not be relocated if this application were approved. Planner Benetti
pointed out the driveway on the map and confirmed that it would not be relocated.
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 7
Mr. Jason Jacobs came forward but had not additional comments to make to the report. Commissioner
Petschel asked what the distance was between the house and the proposed garage. Mr. Jacobs replied that
it was 30 feet before and would remain 30 feet afterwards.
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: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-07, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND
VARIANCE FOR NEW DETACHED GARAGE AT 1023 DELAWARE AVENUE BASED ON THE
FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The existing use of the subject parcel as a single-family residential dwelling is consistent with the
City Code and Comprehensive Plan.
2. The planned development and use of the 812 sq. ft. detached garage is considered a reasonable
request, and is consistent with the City Code and Comprehensive Plan.
3. The proposed garage use 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.
4. The proposed garage and structure will be compliant with the conditions included in the City Code
that allow it by conditional use permit.
5. The variance requested under this application and layout plan meets the tests in the code for
practical difficulties and appears to be a reasonable request per City Coe and State Statute that
prescribe the authority of municipalities to grant such variances.
6. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
7. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the
landowner.
8. The new garage represents reinvestment in a residential neighborhood that is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan’s goals for residential land uses.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. No part of the upper storage section of the garage shall be used for livable or habitable space.
2. The applicant shall obtain a building permit prior to any demolition, excavation or construction of
the new garage addition.
3. All grading and construction activities as part of the proposed development shall 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.
4. The proposed detached garage shall be constructed in compliance with the applicable City Code
performance standards noted in Section 12-1I.
Councilmember Hennes asked for confirmation that the neighbor to the north signed a letter of support.
Planner Benetti confirmed.
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 8
AYES: 4
NAYS: 1 (Field)
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its June 7, 2017 meeting.
E) PLANNING CASE #2017-09
BEN & ERIKA CHRISTOPHERSON, 1897 WACHTLER AVENUE
VARIANCE TO ALLOW REDUCED SETBACKS FROM FRONT (CORNER) YARD SETBACKS
Planner Timothy Benetti explained that the applicants were asking to reduce the corner yard setback from
30 feet down to 16.9 feet. The subject site currently contains an over 1,500 square foot single-family home
and a 440 square foot two-car attached garage. The property was originally built in 1957 with the primary
frontage on Wachtler Avenue and a very small frontage on Hilltop Road to the north. There is a double
wide driveway entrance from Wachtler and a two vehicle parking pad about half way up the driveway. The
1.04 acre lot is very rectangular in shape, 150 wide by 300+ feet long.
The dwelling setback is 30.5 feet from the north, over 66 feet from the front lot line, and 30.2 from the
southerly lot line. Planner Benetti shared an image of the lot and explained that it is considered a corner lot
because with Wachtler and Hilltop coming in, there is actually a small segment of right-of-way that is
considered frontage on Hilltop. There is also a teardrop-shaped parcel labeled as a park, created as part of
the platting process, but no one knows why it has been labeled as a park. It serves more as a big chunk of
right-of-way.
The applicants had asked staff if they acquired the teardrop-parcel if it would help them. Staff agreed that
it would; however, it could not be done at this time because of the tight timeline of construction. Therefore
they required a variance. However, staff would like for the land transfer to take place, which would make
the setbacks for the home and garage expansion of 22.2 feet and 30.9 feet, rather than the requested 16.9
feet.
Planner Benetti then shared the requirements and standards to be met for a Variance and how this
application met those standards. This information was also included in the staff report.
Mr. Ben Christopherson, 1897 Wachtler Avenue, had nothing to add to the staff report.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Ms. Diane Smith, 812 Hilltop Road, lives adjacent to Mr. Christopherson. She noted that she and her
husband have no major objections to this variance; however, they would like to maintain the wooded area
around their home and for assurances that it would not change as a result of this construction. Planner
Benetti was able to provide those assurances.
Mr. Pat Mcquillan, 1909 Wachtler Avenue, noted that he is in full support of this application.
Mr. Christopherson returned and confirmed that, at this point, they have no intention to change any of the
foliage or vegetation on the side of the property abutting Ms. Smith’s property.
Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 9
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-09, VARIANCE REQUEST BASED ON THE
FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. Construction of the proposed dwelling and garage additions onto the existing single-family
dwelling is a reasonable use of the property and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The existing conditions were not created by the applicant and demonstrate a practical difficulty in
meeting the required setback in order to reconstruct the existing addition in compliance with
applicable codes.
3. The addition onto the existing single-family dwelling can be considered a reasonable request and
use of the property.
4. The encroachment along this wider segment Hilltop Road ROW, due in part to the presence of the
nearby “park” parcel, lends additional support to allowing the encroachment as this should lessen
proximity and visual impacts from this roadway.
5. Due to the subject parcel’s existing condition and location to the abutting Hilltop Road right-of-
way and road surface, a practical difficulty may be evident and was demonstrated in order to
construct said addition to the home.
6. The addition will tie-in and match the existing dwellings architecture and designs, which will not
alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
7. Granting of the variance sought is in accordance with the standards laid out in the City Code.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. The proposed encroachment for the addition shall not extend further than shown on the survey
included in the application submittal.
2. The new addition will match the overall architecture and design of the existing dwelling.
3. Within one year of approval by the City Council, the applicant shall obtain a building permit for
construction of the proposed addition.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its June 6, 2017 meeting.
F) PLANNING CASE #2017-10
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW PYLON OR MONUMENT TYPE SIGNS IN THE B-1
LIMITED BUSINESS AND B-1A BUSINESS PARK DISTRICTS
Planner Timothy Benetti explained that at the last Planning Commission meeting staff asked for direction
on whether or not to pursue a code amendment to allow pylon or monument type signs in the B-1 Limited
Business and B-1A Business Park Districts. The Commission gave direction to pursue with the
understanding that staff should ask the Council. The Council was very supportive of this and gave
directions.
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 10
Staff officially requested consideration of this item and prepared a draft ordinance No. 510 with new
language that now includes an added amendment to Title 12-1B-2 Definitions for “Pylon Sign” and
“Monument Sign.” The public hearing was duly noticed and no comments have been received from
residents, either in favor or in opposition.
The new definitions are as follows:
SIGN, MONUMENT: any freestanding sign independent from any building or other structure that is
mounted on the ground or mounted on a foundation base structure at least as wide as the sign. A monument
sign is typically solid from grade to the top of the structure.
SIGN, PYLON: any freestanding sign independent from any building or other structure that has its
supportive structure(s) anchored in the ground and a sign face elevated above ground by a pole(s), post(s)
or beam(s) with an open area below the face of the sign.
The ordinance also amends Title 12-1D-15 with new text or language changes, as outlined in the staff
report. Commissioner Petschel asked if the original limitation in height was to prohibit vertical obstructions.
Planner Benetti replied that he would agree with that assumption.
Councilmember Noonan asked, referencing the last meeting where it was mentioned that a number of pylon
or monument signs existed in the B-1 and B-1A district, if the existing signs meet the new provisions in the
draft ordinance or are they creating non-conforming uses. Planner Benetti replied that, based on his
observations, most of the monument signs do. However, the office building just to the south of City Hall
[Mendota Office Center] is over 200 square feet and would not meet the new provisions. But that sign plan
was approved under that development agreement.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Mr. Jon Faraci, owner of 1200 Centre Pointe Curve, noted that he would like to install a monument sign
and that is what started this initiative. He respectfully requested that the Commission approve the draft
ordinance. Commissioner Noonan asked if he was comfortable with the recommended size, heights, and
square footage. Mr. Faraci replied that he would like to have 100 square feet, but if it is limited to 80 then
he would work within the limitations. There are twelve tenants in the building so the signage would be
pretty small but he could work with the recommendations.
Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-10, DRAFT ORDINANCE 510, AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE B. RULES AND DEFINITIONS
CONCERNING NEW SIGN DEFINITIONS AND TITLE 12, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE D. GENERAL
ZONING PROVISIONS CONCERNING CERTAIN TYPES OF SIGNS IN THE BUSINESS DISTRICTS
AS PRESENTED
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 11
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its June 6, 2017 meeting.
D) PLANNING CASE #2017-08
MICHAEL SWENSON, MICHAEL DEVELOPMENT, LLC
2180 AND 2160-2164 HIGHWAY 13 (SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY)
AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO RE-GUIDE FUTURE LAND USE FROM
EXISTING “B–BUSINESS” TO PROPOSED “HR–HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL” OR “HR–
PUD HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL–PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT”
Planner Timothy Benetti explained that this request is to change the current land use from B-Business to
HR-High Density Residential or HR-PUD High Density Residential-Planned Unit Development. The
applicant, Mr. Michael Swenson from Michael Development, LLC and the two properties are 2180 and
2160-2164 Highway 13 (Sibley Memorial Highway), known commonly as the Larson Garden Center and
the Mendota Motel. Michael Development is proposing to a development on these two sites which will
have complications further down the road for rezoning, conditional use permit, and plating. Currently, they
are initially proposing a development of two 69-unit market rate apartments. The project would involve the
removal of the structures on both sites, clean up, and clearing to make room for the proposed multi-family
development.
Tonight’s action is simply to consider a land use amendment. No one is asking for the rezoning, or
comment, or any approvals of the development plan. The development plan is simply being presented as a
backdrop to why they are asking for the underlying land use. This is the first step in preparation to get the
land use amended, followed by the rezoning. The rezoning must comply with the underlying land use. Right
now, a multi-family rezoning would not comply with the B-Business; so therefore the request is to change
the land use. As part of that land use change, before it comes to the Commission and as a recommendation
to the Council, it also has to be presented officially to the Metropolitan Council (Met Council) for their
official review and recommendation. If they decide this is inappropriate they would let staff know,
hopefully within the next few weeks.
The Larson Greenhouse is a composite of approximately eight different parcels that have been combined
together by the former owner, Robert Larson, to create the Larson Garden Center. This center ran for a
number of years and closed down just a few years ago. The Mendota Motel is situated just south of Victoria
and is currently in operations. The development plan [not under consideration] shows a single access off of
Highway 13. The initial Phase 1 would start with a 69-unit building encompassing the Mendota Motel site.
Approximately 10 months later, Mr. Swenson would start the process of clearing of the Larson Property to
enable the construction of Phase 2, another 69-unit building.
Planner Benetti shared concept images that were provided at a public information meeting a few weeks ago
by Mr. Swenson, noting the nice design and layout of the proposed buildings. The buildings would also
have underground parking.
In November 2015, a presentation was made for a very similar land use change on the Larson site. Mr.
Swenson was the same developer back then and had asked for a change of that land use from B-Business
to HR-High Density Residential. At that point he was proposing a 70-unit building; however, that
application was later withdrawn at the request of the land owner.
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 12
In November 2017, city staff was informed by Mr. Swenson that he had just secured the rights to the
Mendota Motel. Shortly thereafter he informed staff that Mr. Larson had approached him to purchase the
Larson property. Mr. Swenson then had two purchase agreements; one for the Mendota Motel and one for
the Larson site.
Planner Benetti also pointed out that staff, even though they were only required to notify property owners
within 350 feet of the proposed development area, they went a little bit further – approximately a quarter
mile out. They wanted to make sure they informed everyone in the Augusta Shores neighborhood, all of
the residents along the south side down to Furlong and Victoria, and even further out on the west side.
Along with the 5.5 acres of the Larson site and the 2.5 acres of the Mendota Motel site, there is also an
access piece of right-of-way that runs right between the two parcels, which is owned by the City. The City
would allow that to be replatted into the site as part of the property rights.
Chair Field asked for clarification of whether the City would be abandoning their ownership of that right-
of-way as a part of this change in land use or would the change in land use take place but the City would
maintain its ownership. Planner Benetti replied that the intent is to vacate and convey; it has not been used
in years and is from the original platting in the 1890’s.
Again, the current land use is B-Business and the request is to change that land use to HR-High Density
Residential or to HR-PUD High Density Residential-Planned Unit Development. The Augusta Shores
development, located east of this site, is guided low density and is zoned R-1 with 23 duplexes or 46 units.
To the south is the Furlong Addition, also guided low density and zoned R-1. Other land uses along Lemay
Lake are single-family, west of Highway 55 is pretty much a nature preserve/cemetery/industrial park. The
proposal is to construct 69 market rate apartments; 2.3 acres would be developed and the remaining 3.2
acres would be left as green space. The applicant proposes that the apartments would employ approximately
three or four full-time staff members to manage and maintain the sites.
Hopefully by the start of this fall, Phase 1 would be underway and within nine to twelve months, Phase 2
would begin. Each complex would be approximately 25,500 square feet. An assessment was done on both
properties and both sites were considered ‘deficient’ or ‘sub-standard’ by building code standards. Any
potential for redevelopment on both sites as a business is questionable given the poor access.
The statement of proposed financing, the applicant states that the project would be privately appraised and
financed through a local bank. As part of the City’s efforts to help redevelopment they are considering a
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district; this would be a TIF #2 District. This would allow for some
assistance back to the developer as part of a tax increment improvement as made on the site to recapture
some of the tax value that they can use for various items.
Planner Benetti stated that there is no industrial acreage and there is no commercial development being
proposed. The current Larson site is generating just under $2,000 worth of taxes back to the City; the
Mendota Motel is generating approximately $1,500. Working with the Ehlers Financial Group and the TIF
consultants, staff estimates with the new development that the value could go up to as high as $100,000.
Staff also did a comparison of other communities around the metropolitan area as to guided density and
found that the trend is towards higher density in appropriate locations; which would include good access
and compatibility with surrounding land uses. Staff believes this proposed development site would meet
those criteria. Staff believes the current commercial use is struggling and probably will never come back
on this site simply because of high level of access and visibility that a commercial enterprise would need
and is not available on this site. However, a multi-family residential use would not need the same level of
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 13
access and visibility. Multi-family uses typically need to be buffered from lower density residential uses
and this site makes that relatively easy; it is very well heavily wooded and separated by the lake.
Planner Benetti concluded his presentation by explaining that designating the site for at least the requested
25 units/acre is appropriate, the only question would be how this should be accomplished:
1. Amend the High Density Residential land use category in the 2030 Land Use Plan from a maximum
density of 8.5 units per acre to 25 units per acre, then amend the 2030 Land Use Plan to re-guide
the subject site as “High Density Residential”
or
2. Amend the 2030 Land Use Plan for this site to “HR-PUD High Density Residential – Planned Unit
Development”, whereby allowing a higher density to be determined by the City
or
3. Amend the 2030 Land Use Plan to add a new land use category with a maximum allowable density
of 25 units per acre. This could be called “Urban Residential”, then amend the 2030 Land Use Plan
to re-guide the subject site “Urban Residential”
Staff recommended the Planning Commission re-guide the Larson Garden Center/Mendota Motel main
sites to allow multiple-family residential uses up to 25 units/acre, following one of the three options listed
above.
Commissioner Hennes asked if the current maximum density of 8.5 units/acre is city-wide. Planner Benetti
replied that this is the maximum under the high-density land use. Commissioner Hennes stated that there
appears to be a lot of inconsistencies in the number of units per acre in the high-density land use areas. To
him, 8.5 units/acre sounds pretty small. Planner Benetti agreed. Commissioner Hennes then asked if there
has been any discussion of a more consistent level or maybe a higher level of density. Planner Benetti
replied that this application could quite possibly lay the groundwork to explore those options down the
road.
Commissioner Hennes then asked if the Met Council has a recommended standard or do they leave it to
each city depending on circumstances. Planner Benetti replied that the Met Council leaves it up to the
discretion of the local government agency.
Commissioner Roston commented that this is something that Mendota Heights should expect going forward
as a City. Any first ring suburb, like Mendota Heights, is going to have pressure to have more high density
development.
Mr. Michael Swenson or Michael Development, LLC reiterated the request and noted that without this land
use change the development is just not possible.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Mr. Dave Jankowski, 2070 Acacia Drive, is located immediately north of this proposed site. He asked what
the average density currently is in Mendota Heights. Planner Benetti replied that the 8.5 units/acre is a
current density standard in the high density areas. Mr. Jankowski questioned the need to raise that standard
to 25 units/acre. He understands Mendota Heights being a first ring suburb has to anticipate growth;
however, he did not want to see it rush along too rapidly. He asked that consideration be taken carefully on
what 25 units/acre means for the City and the residents who like living there, in terms of the increase in
traffic on Highway 13 and in terms of other residents in the area.
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 14
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek shared an image of the zoning districts in Mendota Heights and pointed
out the two high density residential zoned areas; the Eagle Ridge Development and the Lexington
Apartments. There are a few PUD locations as far as along the Kensington area, the apartment complex
that went in where the Ecolab site was on Riverside Lane – so there are really very few areas that are zoned
high density residential. The request before the Commission was to re-guide this small area as a high density
planned unit development – similar to the Kensington Development – or just to have it zoned a high density
residential as the other two areas in the City.
Commissioner Hennes clarified that Mendota Heights has a mix of high density sites that have densities
much higher than 8.5 units/acre; and a lot of the reason why is because they were advanced under a Planned
Unit Development, which allows for the negotiation between the City and the landowner to come forward
with an appropriate development at an appropriate density given the site and its properties. To suggest that
the City has a standard 8.5 units/acre is not correct; however, we have a mix up to as high as 60 units/acre
in some high density developments. To ask for an average per acre density figure is not comparing apples
to apples – there are R-1 single-family districts – Commissioner Hennes lives in an R-1 district and has one
unit on a quarter acre lot. Others in the City live on much larger lots so to suggest that that a standard density
across all of Mendota Heights is a telling characteristic is not accurate. It is necessary to look at it from the
various land use categories in determining the appropriateness of the density based upon land use
considerations.
Chair Field noted that he did not believe the Commission could answer Mr. Jankowski’s question in terms
of the density for the entire City; however, they can give at 60 units what they have at Dodd and Highway
110. It is not a maximum, it is just what has been approved within the City.
Referencing the statement made earlier, staff estimates that with the new development the projected annual
gross TIF value could go as high as $100,000, Mr. Jankowski asked how soon those taxes could available
to the City. City Administrator Mark McNeill replied that under what is being proposed, there would be a
tax increment district and for the first nine years, any taxes above what are currently being received by the
City, the County, and the School District would to reimburse the developer for his costs involved with the
development. In year 10, those would start to get spread and being received by the individual jurisdictions.
Mr. Steve Kraft, 1314 Furlong Avenue, asked if there was any kind of buffer zone between the high density
PUD’s and the R-1 Residential districts. Planner Benetti, pointing to the zoning map, indicated that all of
the neighborhoods to the south of this area are R-1 Residential. Without delving too much into the proposed
development plan – as it is not final and not under consideration this evening – the plan would be to have
some kind of greenway or buffer between the site and the single-family residential areas.
Mr. Kraft then asked if anyone had any idea what affect this development would have on land property
values in the Furlong Addition and to Augusta Shores. The reply was that there really are no ideas and
anything that would be said would be speculative at best.
Ms. Katherine Haight, 2090 Acacia Drive in Augusta Shores, stated that she is happy to see this come back
to the Planning Commission. She challenged anyone to find two greater eye sores within the City. She
would love to see something better and lovelier in this area. She cited many incidents that have occurred
within the area and placed the cause on the disreputable clientele at the Mendota Motel.
Ms. Haight did voice her concern about the location of the multi-family unit proposed to be on the Larson
property appears to be very close to Highway 13. Currently, when coming from Acacia Drive onto Highway
13, when looking to the left the sight line is very difficult to see. The cars come very quickly around the
curve and she is concerned about that building being so close to Highway 13. Chair Field noted, assuming
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 15
this proceeds, staff will come back with some site reviews and these types of comments would be more
appropriate at that time.
Mr. Tom Hanschen, 2158 Lemay Lake Drive in the Augusta Shores Development, stated that it is his
understanding that on the north side of the Larson property is an old city road that Larson’s acquired. He
questioned what would be happening with that. Planner Benetti replied that there is a segment of right-of-
way along the north side that was brought up at the public information meeting. There has been some
inquiry from Augusta Shores to obtain that or get possession of that as part of this process. Whenever there
is an access of right-of-way, typically it is a half and half; one half goes the other side and one half goes to
the adjacent neighbors. If the other neighbor decides he does not need that, they can give up that half right.
The current tentative TIF area does not include that area. This would be a separate issue.
Mr. Hanschen then noted that it appears to be inevitable that there is going to be high density here and asked
if the Commission were leaders leading the rest of the community or were they following what is going on
in the rest of the surrounding communities. He stated that Mendota Heights does not necessarily need high
density.
Ms. Linnea Hanschen, 2158 Lemay Lake Drive, stated her concerns about the traffic – two buildings, each
with 70 units, equaling 140 units with possibly 180 to 350 people living in the two buildings adding up to
350 new cars every day on Highway 13; the traffic along Highway 13 has already been increasing steadily
the last few years. To go from no traffic from the Larson property and only 19 rooms at the motel to a
possible increase of 350 new cars – that is a huge increase.
[Note: an email from Tim and Mary Furlong, 2230 Furlong Avenue was received by the city on May 22,
2017, to which a copy was presented to the Planning Commission for consideration. Pursuant to Planning
Chair Field’s request, a copy of said email and response from City Administrator Mark McNeill is being
added to the record - attached hereto as “Attachment –A”]
Mr. Swenson had no additional comments or replies to the concerns raised.
Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-08 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT 2160 – 2180 HIGHWAY 13 (SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY), BY AMENDING THE
2030 LAND USE PLAN FOR THIS SITE TO “HR-PUD HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL – PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT,” BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. Commercial development in this area, in compliance with the goals and policies of the City’s 2030
Comprehensive Plan, may not be viable due to access and visibility constraints.
2. Residential land use would be in character with other surrounding properties and the existing
vegetation and adjacent commercial use can provide a physical and visual buffer between the
proposed high-density housing and nearby low-density residential housing.
3. The proposed increased density is consistent with surrounding suburban communities and would
allow for adequate open space as part of the proposed development.
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 16
4. The increased density provides for construction of a housing type that is lacking in the City and
would help to reach the forecasted population projections.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment is approved by the Metropolitan Council.
2. The applicant submits the necessary complete applications in consideration of the proposed concept
development plan within twelve (12) months of receiving approval from the Metropolitan Council.
3. If the deadline is not met, the current future land use designation for the subject parcels may remain
in place.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its June 6, 2017 meeting.
General Planning Items
A) RESOLUTION SUPPORTING A RECOMMENDATION TO MODIFY MUNICIPAL
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2 (FOR THE PROPERTIES GENERALLY
LOCATED AT 2180 AND 2160-64 HIGHWAY 13)
Planner Timothy Benetti explained that this is a prepared resolution that is required as part of the
Commission’s official recommendation back to the City Council and to any authorities, that the
Commission is recommending either for or against, approval or denial, of the creation of the Tax Increment
Financing (TIF) District No. 2. The creation of this new TIF District would provide limited financial
assistance to a developer, and help facilitate the successful redevelopment of the Mendota Motel and former
Larson Garden Center properties.
For clarification, Planner Benetti stated that the purpose is to modify the Municipal Development District
No. 1 – basically everything within the City boundaries as that is the municipal development district – and
the proposed establishment of TIF 2 is just exactly where the City is going with it.
Planner Benetti then provided a very quick overview of what a TIF does and why it is used:
• The ability to capture and use most of the increased local property tax revenues from new
development within a defined geographic area
• It encourages certain types of development or redevelopment that would not normally occur
without assistance – commonly known as the “but for” test. It helps redevelop blighted areas;
remediate polluted sites; construct affordable housing; create or retain jobs
TIF District approval can be established by City, County, HRA, or EDA. It must have approval by City
Council following a public hearing. The public hearing on this request is scheduled for June 20, 2017.
County and school district approval is not required; however, it is something that the City does request.
The City’s TIF area number 1 was established in 1981 and was certified in 2007.
The eligible uses for TIF include:
• Land acquisition and relocation
• Demolition and clearance
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 17
• Site improvements and parking
• Public utilities
• Construction of affordable housing
• City administrative costs
Ineligible uses include:
• Recreation (parks, trails, ice arenas, etc.)
• City buildings
Chair Field clarified that the applicant for this item is not the developer, Michael Development, LLC, but
it is the City of Mendota Heights.
Even though this was not publicized as a public hearing, Chair Field opened the floor for comments and
questions from the residents.
Seeing no one coming forward, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO ADOPT
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2017-01, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT A MODIFICATION TO THE
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND A TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2
CONFORMS TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF
THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS; IS HEREBY SUPPORTED BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION; AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
Commissioner Noonan stated that he was very comfortable with this given the fact that TIF is one of the
few remaining redevelopment tools available to cities to help facilitate redevelopment. Everyone has
experienced, for the last several years, the declining nature of Larson’s and concerns about the motel. This
tool allows the City to allow new development to come forward and to clean or address a situation that is
needing cleaning up or needed to be addressed.
Commissioner Roston agreed with Commissioner Noonan.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
Staff Update on Approved or Pending Developments
PLANNING CASE #2017-04
Randy and Becky Pentel, 815 Deer Trail Court
Conditional Use Permit
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 18
• Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission
City of Mendota Heights
Direction of a Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Allow Pylon/Freestanding Signs in the B-1 and
B-1A Commercial Districts
Planner Timothy Benetti stated that staff is entertaining a hotel group looking at the Northland Drive and
the Pilot Knob site. Their application will most likely come in for review in the next month or two.
Staff and Commission Announcements
Commissioner Roston announced that he closed on his house today and he will be moving from Mendota
Heights in June 2017. He has been in the City for 18 or 19 years and has loved everything about the City.
He appreciates the opportunity to serve on the Planning Commission, it is a great staff, and a very well run
City. He has had nothing but good experiences and he appreciates everyone.
Chair Field wished everyone a happy and safe Memorial Day Weekend.
Adjournment
COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:18 P.M.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT: 2 (Magnuson, Costello)
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 19
May 23, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting - DRAFT Page 20