Loading...
2017-09-26 Planning Comm MinutesSeptember 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 1 of 13 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 26, 2017 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, September 26, 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 John Mazzitello, Michael Noonan, Mary Magnuson, Michael Toth, and Brian Petschel. Those absent: Doug Hennes (excused). Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of August 22, 2017 (Regular Meeting) Minutes Commissioner Magnuson, referencing page 8 of the minutes, asked if the brackets around words in Findings of Fact #3 and #4 were to indicate that those words were added and, if not, why were they there. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that the brackets could be removed. Chair Field asked if it would be appropriate to capitalize the words rather than having them in brackets. Commissioner Magnuson said she just wanted to know what the brackets meant. She then suggested that Mr. Benetti check the recording and see if the words should even be in the document. Commissioner Magnuson then referenced Condition #1 on the same page, that reads “. . . construction of any new dwelling on each lot”, and asked if the word each should be there as there was only one lot. Mr. Benetti replied that the word each can be replaced with the. COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 22, 2017, WITH THE CORRECTIONS AS NOTED. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 (HENNES) Approval of August 23, 2017 (Special Meeting) Minutes COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017, AS PRESENTED. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 (HENNES) September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 2 of 13 Hearings A) PLANNING CASE #2017-22 WOODSPRING SUITES HOTELS, SE CORNER OF NORTHLAND DRIVE AND PILOT KNOB ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that this request was for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) from WoodSpring Suites Hotels for a new 122 room, 4-story hotel located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Northland Drive and Pilot Knob Road. Per Title 12-1L- 6, any use allowed by a CUP in the Industrial Zone has to go through a full site plan and review process through both the Planning Commission and the City Council. This item was presented under a Public Hearing Review, notices were published in the local paper, and notices were mailed out to all property owners within 350 feet. No comments or objections were received on this application. Mr. Benetti shared an image of the property location as it relates to the surrounding streets and properties. The property is zoned and guided Industrial and no changes are pursuant to this application. The size of the property is just over 3 3/4 acres. The building to land ratio is 7.5%; well under the 50% threshold. He also shared an aerial view of the property. Elevation plans show a mixture of stone materials, stone veneers, brick veneers, lap board siding, and metal fascia boards; a good combination. The color scheme is indicative of a preferred marketable element of the WoodSpring Suite Hotels. The information packet provided to the Commission prior to the meeting included the following elements, of which Mr. Benetti shared a brief overview: Project Description Building Plan/Elevations Site Plan Parking Plan Grading & Drainage Plan Landscape Plan Lighting Plan Utility Plan Sign Plan Traffic Analysis Aircraft Noise Attenuation Mr. Benetti concluded his report by sharing the standards that must be met before a CUP can be issued and explained how this project met those standards. September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 3 of 13 Commissioner Magnuson noted that she is not familiar with this brand of hotel and asked if it would include an independent restaurant, bar, or anything like that. Mr. Benetti replied in the negative. This would most generally be used as an executive-type extended stay location with the possibility of a fitness room but no pool, restaurant, bar, or even breakfast service. Commissioner Mazzitello noted that he asked his questions to staff earlier so they are prepared to answer. He then stated that it was his understanding that a stormwater model has not been completed. Mr. Benetti confirmed and replied that it would be forthcoming. Commissioner Mazzitello asked that a condition be added to the recommendation, which staff agreed to do. Commissioner Mazzitello then stated that other development requests that have come through, and even the others on the agenda this evening, included a provision for the landscape plan to meet the City’s pollinator-friendly policy. He asked that this condition also be added to this request. Staff agreed to do so. Commissioner Toth, referencing the stormwater pond to be installed on the side of the property, asked if any consideration had been made for a water retention system under the parking lot instead of the stormwater pond and, instead, have that area designated as green space. Mr. Benetti replied that this type of consideration is usually up to the developer. If they have the space to put in stormwater ponds, then they usually do so as they are cheaper than the underground systems. Staff did speak with the developer and he is open to the idea of installing a fountain feature in the stormwater pond. Mr. Andy Berg, Project Manager with Kimley Horn made himself available to add comments to the staff report or answer questions. He also extended apologies from Mr. Scott Bixler of WoodSpring Hotels for being unable to attend. Mr. Berg confirmed Mr. Benetti’s reasons for the stormwater pond and also explained that the pond also provides a more cost effective and easier access should any problems arise. Commissioner Mazzitello asked if Mr. Berg was familiar with the pollinator-friendly policy of the City and coordinating their landscaping plan through the master gardeners that volunteer with the City. Mr. Berg replied that he was not aware of the program; however, it is something he would be willing to work with. 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 MAZZITELLO, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 (HENNES) September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 4 of 13 COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-22 CONDITIONAL USE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The proposed hotel use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor depreciate surrounding property values. 2. The proposed hotel use conforms to the general purpose and intent of this code and comprehensive plan, including all applicable performance standards, provided all conditions are met and upheld by the property owners during the term of construction. 3. The property on which the use will be located is currently in compliance with all applicable city code standards. AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. All new buildings shall be constructed in conformance to building and site plans certified by a registered architect and/or licensed engineer. 2. Trash enclosure must be made to match the exterior finishes of the principal building. 3. Rooftop mechanical units shall be of a low profile variety. All ground-level and rooftop mechanical utilities, other than low profile rooftop units, shall be completely screened with one or more of the materials used in the construction of the principal structure, to be reviewed by the Planning Department and verified as part of the building permit review process. 4. Plant material near the entry points shall not exceed 36-inches in height, and shall not obstruct fire department connections or hydrants 5. A performance bond or letter of credit shall be supplied by the applicant in an amount equal to at least one and one-half (1 ½) times the value of such screening, landscaping, or other improvements, to be submitted at time of building permit approval. 6. The Developer shall be jointly and severally responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping in a condition presenting a healthy, neat and orderly appearance and free from refuse and debris. Plants and ground cover which are required by an approved site or landscape plan and which have died shall be replaced as soon as seasonal or weather conditions allow. All landscape areas must be irrigated. 7. Any connections to the city’s water system shall be designed and constructed to Saint Paul Regional Water Service (SPRWS) standards. 8. Building and grading permits shall be obtained from the City prior to construction commencement. 9. 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. 10. All applicable fire and building codes, as adopted/amended by the City, shall apply and the buildings shall be fully-protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system. 11. All new buildings must comply with the Aircraft Noise Attenuation standards as found under Title 12-4-1 of City Code. 12. Any new signs proposed under this plan submittal must either be approved as part of an accepted comprehensive sign plan; or any sign that does not meet the standards of City Code Title 12-1D-15 must be adjusted to comply with City Code, or the Developer must request separate variances to allow excess sign sizes. September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 5 of 13 AND WITH THE ADDITION OF THE TWO FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 13. A stormwater model is produced and submitted to the City for approval by the City Engineer prior to final approvals. 14. The landscape plan is submitted for review for compliance with the City’s pollinator- friendly policy. Commissioner Magnuson asked if it should be stated anywhere in the recommendation that includes approval of the Comprehensive Sign Plan to avoid having any discussion of variances. Mr. Benetti confirmed that this should be included. Commissioner Mazzitello agreed to add this as part of the motion. Since Commissioner Magnuson was the second but also made the recommendation, no second was necessary. Mr. Benetti asked if modifying Condition #12 to include ‘all new signs proposed as part of this plan are approved as part of the accepted copies of the site plan’. The Commission agreed that this would be sufficient. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 (HENNES) Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its October 3, 2017 meeting. B) PLANNING CASE #2017-24 TIM DYRHAUG, 1773 SUTTON LANE WETLANDS PERMIT Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Mr. Tim Dyrhaug was seeking approval of a Wetlands Permit to help facilitate the removal and replacement of some retaining walls in the rear yard, along with select removal of dead or diseased trees and invasive/noxious vegetation in and around the area of work. The work would also include the repair of a concrete footing pier. The Wetland Permit is required due to the work being done within 100 feet of a wetland or water resource-related area. This item was being presented as a public hearing item, notices were published in the local paper, and notices were sent to all of the homeowners within 350 feet of the subject site. No comments or objections had been received. The subject property is approximately 17,447 square feet in size, just under 0.40 acres, has an existing 1 3/4 story single-family dwelling; is zoned R-1 and guided LR-Low Density Residential development on the Comprehensive Plan. This parcel is located immediately next to three parcels owned by the City of Mendota Heights and abuts a parcel containing an unnamed pond or water features, which is also owned and maintained by the City. September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 6 of 13 Mr. Benetti shared images of the retaining walls that need repair despite being green pre-treated timbers that also have trees and vegetation growing up next to them and are causing some problems. The project involves replacement of three retaining wall systems, which would be of natural stone or boulders rather than the pre-treated wood. Since all of the work would be completed up near the home, no actual wetland property would be impacted. Also, staff would ensure that all silt-fencing and bio-rolls are installed to prevent any type of washouts or erosion control to the pond. Mr. Tim Dyrhaug, 1773 Sutton Lane, had nothing to add to the staff report but made himself available to answer any questions. Commissioner Toth noted that, according to the plans, the retaining walls are less than four feet in height. He then asked what type of stone wall he would be replacing. Mr. Dyrhaug replied that they would be of natural fieldstone boulders. Commissioner Toth also noted that the report indicates that no structural engineering design is necessary at this point. He then asked if the plan was to use some kind of fabric behind the boulder walls to keep any other soil amendments that may wash and seep through the soil in later years from causing problems down the road. Mr. Dyrhaug replied in the affirmative. 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 PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 (HENNES) COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-24 WETLANDS PERMIT APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The proposed construction activities to be allowed under this Wetlands Permit meet the purpose and intent of the City Code and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed construction work should have very little, if any impacts to the adjacent water feature. 3. The Owner will provide for the protection and preservation of the adjacent water resource- related area by installing silt fence and stormwater run-off protection measures. 4. The Owner will make every attempt to minimize disturbance of the area in order to protect and preserve the natural surroundings, avoid excess loss of vegetation, and avoid any impacts to wildlife and aquatic organisms. September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 7 of 13 5. Vegetation will be replanted, in accordance with City guidance and instructions in the disturbed areas after construction is completed. AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Any land disturbance activities shall be in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance document. 2. An updated plan must be submitted for review by the Planning Department showing vegetation to be re-planted within the disturbed areas of the project. This plan will include pollinator friendly and/or native plantings/grasses that will grow and thrive in the over- shaded area of the rear yard. 3. For the agreed upon temporary right-of-access to the city-owned land to the south, including all work to install, remove and restore said temporary access/construction road, the Owner/Applicant shall provide evidence or proof of insurance that the City of Mendota Heights is waived from any and all liability, and named as an added insurer to the homeowner’s insurance policy or contactor’s policy. 4. A cash bond, letter of credit or agreed upon surety in the amount of $1,000 shall be submitted and held by the city for a period of at least one (1) year from completion of all work, to ensure all new landscaping has survived, and the access roadway has been properly restored. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 (HENNES) Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its October 3, 2017 meeting. C) PLANNING CASE #2017-25 JIM CARLSON, 1562 WACHTLER AVENUE AFTER-THE-FACT WETLANDS PERMIT Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Mr. Jim Carlson, the owner of 1562 Wachler Avenue, requested a Wetlands Permit for work being done within 100-feet of a wetland or water resource-related area. Since most of the work has already been completed; approximately 90%, this was considered an after-the-fact permit. This item was being presented as a public hearing item, notices were published in the local paper, and notices were sent to all of the homeowners within 350 feet of the subject site. No comments or objections had been received. The subject property is 1.77 acres in size and contains a 5,345 square foot single-family home. It is zoned R-1 and guided LR-Low Density Residential on the Comprehensive Plan. On August 3, 2017 staff was notified by a concerned resident that extensive grading and landscaping was being done on the site. Upon investigation by the City Engineer and Mr. Benetti a Cease and Desist Order was issued and an appointment was made with the applicant, who was out of town at the time, to discuss the issue. At that meeting Mr. Carlson was very embarrassed September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 8 of 13 that he did not know or understand the process. He is new to the community and did realize that a permit was necessary. He agreed to stop all work, to install bio-filtration rolls, and he has agreed to not do any further work until approvals are received. Mr. Benetti shared images of the subject property and the work that had already been done. This work included removal of some buckthorn and other invasive weeds and plants along the edge of his rear yard and along the creek edge. When he discovered that he also owned a small area of land on the other side of the creek, he began the process of grading a new access trail down to the creek edge and installed a small wooden foot bridge to allow access to that area without crossing his neighbor’s property. Mr. Carlson would like to finish the work by installing some Class-5 or similar angular rock roadway leading to and from the foot-bridge for traction. Commissioner Magnuson asked if a structure of this type – the bridge – be required to meet any building code or standards. Mr. Benetti replied that there is no building code requirement for this type of structure. Commissioner Mazzitello asked how the foot-bridge was imbedded into the creek bed. Mr. Benetti replied that when he and the City Engineer walked across the bridge they were impressed with its stability. There was no sway or rocking at all. However, Mr. Carlson could probably address how it was built. Commissioner Mazzitello asked, because the creek is a water body and the work has been done very close to the creek, if there was any necessity to get either the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers or the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) involved in a review of what has been done. Mr. Benetti replied that, from a staff level, they felt that the DNR was not needed because it was not an affected or identifiable wetland feature on the wetlands map. Also, the Army Corp of Engineers usually only provides oversight on navigable waters, which this is not. Mr. Jim Carlson, 1562 Wachtler Avenue, came forward and, in response to Commissioner Mazzitello’s query, noted that the bridge is secured very well and would hold 9,000 pounds easily. He has also installed some sidewalk blocks underneath so it would not sink and he put boulders along side the bridge. He also spoke to his neighbor who indicated that in the 20+ years he has lived there the water has never come up that high. He moved in last fall and when he walked down to the creek this spring he noticed that the previous owner had used the area as a brush and wood dump. He started some of the grading to enable the removal of this debris – which included some large tree trunks – and make it look nice again. 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 PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 9 of 13 AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 (HENNES) Commissioner Mazzitello noted that he had been working with the neighbor to the south, Mr. Sweeney, on a project that has nothing to do with this one and he is not under any contract with Mr. Sweeney; however, he wanted to inform the Commission and the public for transparency. COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-25 AFTER-THE-FACT WETLANDS PERMIT APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The proposed construction activities to be allowed under this Wetlands Permit meet the purpose and intent of the City Code and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The project includes erosion and sediment control measures in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 3. The Owner will make a concerted effort to eliminate or reduce any impacts to the adjacent water feature by establishing a protective buffer area along the creek within the subject property. 4. The Owner will provide for the protection and preservation of the adjacent water resource- related area by installing silt fence and stormwater run-off protection measures. 5. The Owner will make every attempt to minimize disturbance of the area in order to protect and preserve the natural surroundings, avoid excess loss of vegetation, and avoid any impacts to wildlife and aquatic organisms. 6. Vegetation will be replanted, in accordance with City guidance and instructions in the disturbed areas after construction is completed. AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Any land disturbance activities shall be in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance document. 2. Owner/Applicant must establish and maintain a wild growth buffer area at least 25 feet in width from the established creek edge 3. The 25-ft buffer area shall comprise of new vegetation cover consisting of wild-native mix seeding and pollinator friendly plantings within the buffer area, with plantings to be done by this fall. 4. Owner/Applicant shall install and maintain silt fence or approved erosion control measures along all disturbed areas and the edges of the creek until the vegetation is properly established, as determined by the City. 5. A cash bond, letter of credit or agreed upon surety in the amount of $1,000 shall be submitted and held by the city for a period of at least one (1) year from completion of all work, to ensure all new landscaping has survived, and the access roadway to the new footbridge has been properly restored. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 (HENNES) September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 10 of 13 Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its October 3, 2017 meeting. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update A) DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED VISION & GOALS Mr. Phil Carlson, AICP, Consulting Planner from Stantec noted that the process of updating the Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan was started late last year; however, with the shuffle of planners and such there was some delay. Mr. Carlson stated that every community in the Twin Cities seven county area needs to have a Comprehensive Plan done by the end of 2018 that will fit with the Metropolitan Council’s (MetCouncil) format and template, and answer the questions and provide the information that they are looking for. Stantec is planning a series of three meetings in the next month with the Planning Commission to go into the next phase – Goals and Policy. Afterwards, they will develop alternatives – the draft of the draft – of the plan; develop some implementation steps; and then go through and prepare the full draft plan next spring and summer. A series of community meetings has also been tentatively planned to obtain citizen input on what might be in the plan. Mr. Carlson explained that what they would like to go over is the Preliminary pieces of this section of the plan – Vision and Goals. This starts with a broad picture of what are the issues in Mendota Heights today – what do you think is good and bad. Mr. Carlson wants to start a process to look at Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (S.W.O.T.) – what are the issues and how does the Commission see Mendota Heights today. The next piece is the Vision Statement – a concise statement that says this is what we intend for the future. He would like the Planning Commission to look at the current Vision Statement to ascertain if it still reflects what they feel about the community; would they like to change, modify, update, add, delete – or do they even see the need for a Vision Statement. Mr. Carlson had included in the information packet, provided to the Planning Commissioners prior to the meeting, several pages of goals that were divided into the various elements of the plan. He had no plans to review those in detail at this point; however, he would like for the Commissioner to become familiar with them and be prepared to talk about them at the October 11, 2017 special meeting. At this meeting they would also revisit all of the issues raised this evening, the Vision Statement, and then the goals in detail. Hopefully, at the regular meeting on October 24, 2017, they can pull everything together and finalize the goals. Chair Field suggested that this part of the meeting be more informal than a typical Planning Commission meeting to allow more give and take. Mr. Benetti and he had discussed possibly adjourning this to a more of a roundtable; however, they felt in the interest of time and presenting September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 11 of 13 this to the public by means of the broadcast – this would be the best environment to share some of the work that does need to be done for important work in the next several months. Subsequent meetings would be – with the exception of the formal Planning Commission meeting – would be more informal and conversational. As the chair he would welcome the publics coming and participating in the process. Commissioner Noonan asked if the intention was to take the commission through a S.W.O.T. analysis tonight. Mr. Carlson replied that the intent is to take the commission through the first part of it. Commissioner Noonan stated that he felt particularly unprepared to engage in that discussion; there was no indication to them to put their thinking caps on before the meeting and come prepared. If they had the opportunity just to think about it, the quality of what they would offer would be much more deliberative, thoughtful, and comprehensive than trying to have them throw out ideas off the cuff. Commissioner Magnuson noted that the Commission had talked from time-to-time about changing various zoning requirements – such as creating some special category for institutions in residential zones – would that appropriate to think about as part of this plan or is that something that gets done independently after the development of the plan is completed. Mr. Carlson replied that this could be one of the issues and one of the things that is brought up in this plan. It does get a bit detailed but it could be a part of the implementation steps. It would be appropriate. To address Commissioner Noonan’s concern, Mr. Carlson stated that they could go through and have the meeting next time if they are more informal and feel more prepared. He believed they could do that and still keep on schedule. Commissioner Toth stated that being newly appointed to the Commission he has questions for staff and the Council. He is unprepared to answer or give ideas of where he may see the pro- activeness of the City moving forward. He agreed with Commissioner Noonan’s comments also. Commissioner Mazzitello asked if it would be an appropriate step now to talk about what the ‘heart of the plan’ is, what a Vision Statement is, what a Mission Statement is, what goals are for, how the policies back up the goals, etc. to help get the Commission into the mindset for the next meeting. Chair Field stated that he believed that would be perfect. While the idea of going through on a broad brush what they are accomplishing, they also should feel free, if something comes up that they think is important to be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan, to mention it so it is not overlooked at a later meeting. Commissioner Noonan stated that attached to the report is a series of goals. He then asked if these goals prescribed by the MetCouncil as part of their planning handbook or are these goals that have a legacy with the City and the Commission is looking to continue to work and upgrade them. Mr. Carlson replied that the goals that were attached were a sample for the Commission to start with; however, they did not come from the MetCouncil. There is a specific list of information that the MetCouncil wants to be given by the time the City is done with the plan. Part of them came from the current Comprehensive Plan that was done in 2008; but that plan did not have goals in very many parts of the plan. He then pulled some from other communities that are typical goals for those elements. September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 12 of 13 Chair Field asked for the 2008 iteration of the Comprehensive Plan be sent to the Commissioners so they have that baseline. It was agreed that this would be made available. Mr. Carlson then provided a very high level purpose of the Comprehensive Plan and how it is put together for the newer Commissioners. Additional general discussion occurred as to what would be appropriate to discuss, add, or change during the Comprehensive Plan process, what materials should be made available during the process to facilitate educated discussions, and appropriateness of various topics. Staff Announcements / Update on Developments Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted the following: Planning Case #2017-17 Alltech Engineering Conditional Use Permit to allow an over-height fence in the industrial district was approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission Planning Case #2017-18 Landscape Architecture Inc. and Peter & Jen Eisenhuth Critical Area Permit and Conditional Use Permit to allow certain construction activities in the critical area overlay district was approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission Planning Case #2017-19 Mike Swenson – Michael Development of MN, LLC Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit, and Wetlands permit for the proposed Mendota Heights Apartment Development was approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. Mr. Benetti noted for the Commission that this item passed on a 3-2 vote to approve. The city is conducting a public hearing at the October 3, 2017 City Council meeting to consider the vacation of a segment of Hilltop Avenue right-of-way situated between the Larson Greenhouse site and the old Mendota Motel site. The developer intends to bring the final plat of his Mendota Heights Apartments development to the October 17, 2017 City Council meeting or future meeting. Chair Field asked what the genesis was on the 3-2 vote on the Michael Development application. Mr. Benetti replied there were some objections and concerns about what was presented and addressed under the overall PUD application process, specifically the allowances given for increased density, reduced setbacks, impervious surface percentage, reduced distance between buildings, sight lines and other development standards granted under the PUD approval. Chair Field asked if there were any surprises. Mr. Benetti replied in the negative. Planning Case #2017-20 City of Mendota Heights & Ideal Energies Conditional Use Permit, Variance, and Wetlands Permit for the city’s new ground-mounted solar array field was approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. September 26, 2017 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 13 of 13 Planning Case #2017-21 Minnehaha Academy Interim Use Permit was approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. Adjournment COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:42 P.M. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 (HENNES)