2021-05-25 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2021 - 7:00 PM
Mendota Heights City Hall – Council Chambers
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights MN 55118
1. Call to Order / Roll Call
2. Approve the April 27, 2021 Regular Meeting minutes
3. Public Hearings
a. CASE NO. 2021-06: Zoning Code Amendment – consider proposed Ordinance No.
565 –amending City Code Title 12-1D-3: Accessory Structures. (City of Mendota Heights
-Applicant)
b. CASE NO. 2021-02: Conditional Use Permit and Variances for property located at 806
Bachelor Avenue. (Mike Cashill – Applicant & Owner).TABLED and HEARING
CONTINUED from the April 27, 2021 meeting
c. CASE NO. 2021-05: Variance for the property located at 662 Ivy Falls Court. (Joe Opack
–Applicant & Owner)
d. CASE NO. 2021-08: Zoning Code Amendment – consider proposed Ordinance No.
566 – amending parts of City Code Title 5 – Police Regulations and Title 12 – Zoning
regarding the Temporary Keeping of Goats for Prescribed Grazing. (City of Mendota
Heights - Applicant)
4. New / Unfinished Business
a. CASE NO. 2021-07: Zoning Code Amendment – preliminary review and discussion of
proposed Ordinance No. 568 –amending Title 12 - Zoning - Chapter 3: Critical Area
Overlay District by creating a new Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA)
Overlay District Ordinance (no public hearing – preliminary review and discussion only)
5. Adjourn Meeting
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
April 27, 2021
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April
27, 2021 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M.
The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Commissioners Patrick Corbett,
Sally Lorberbaum, Cindy Johnson, Michael Toth, Brian Petschel, and Andrew Katz. Those absent:
None
Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as submitted.
Approval of February 23, 2021 Minutes
COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 23, 2021.
Commissioner Lorberbaum noted that she had a few readability type changes: page 4, third
paragraph, that phrasing should be changed to state, “two years ago”; page 8, 2 nd paragraph, should
be changed to, “if there is any appetite for”; page 8, staff announcements, should state “the City
completed”; page 8, 2nd to the last paragraph, should say, “Commissioner Lorberbaum asked if the
ordinance amendment would apply based on a building size or any specific type of
commercial/industrial development”.
COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 23, 2021, SUBJECT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE
CHANGES AS REVIEWED.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Approval of March 23, 2021 Minutes
COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 23, 2021.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
PC Page #1
Hearings
A) PLANNING CASE 2021-01
DALE KRYSTOSEK, 573 HIAWATHA AVENUE – VARIANCE
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Dale Krystosek, owner of 573
Hiawatha Avenue, was requesting a variance from the required side-yard and rear-yard setback
standards in order to replace an existing legal nonconforming garage with a new garage structure.
Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; a Neighbors
Consent (petition) was submitted. Neighbors on both sides of the property as well as behind Mr.
Krystosek have also provided support for this request. No other comments or objections have
been received.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a planning staff report and a presentation
on this planning item to the Commission (which is available for viewing through the City’s
website).
Staff recommended approval of the variance request based on the findings and with conditions.
Commissioner Corbett noted that Community Development Director Tim Benetti referenced
findings-of-fact on page 5 and he did not see that in his packet.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that the approvals are listed on pages 5,
6, and 7.
Commissioner Corbett thanked Community Development Director Tim Benetti for clarifying this
now and noted that he was used to seeing it broken out in a different format so missed it when he
was looking through the information.
Commissioner Katz stated that he does not want to get into too much information regarding alleys,
but confirmed that this is kind of a unique situation with having one that is in an unimproved type
of situation. He asked what would happen if the Commission were to walk forward with this and
this eventually is not an alley anymore. He asked if that meant this would eventually become
some of his property.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that this would be correct and explained
that usually, when the City vacates an alley, that was probably never improved, such as this one,
and was platted as part of the original Cherokee Heights Addition, if a petition is submitted to the
City, typically half is vacated to every property on either side, which means they would gain 10
feet of extra property.
Commissioner Katz noted that this would further reduce the impact of the garage, but understands
that would be at some point in the future and not being considered right now.
PC Page #2
Community Development Director Tim Benetti agreed that it would in the future and noted that if
the Planning Commission approves the 3-foot variance on the back side, with the extra 10 feet,
they would clearly make the 10-foot setback off the alley.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Dale Krystosek, 573 Hiawatha Avenue, stated that he would like to add a few things to Community
Development Director Tim Benetti’s presentation. He stated that to meet the setback guidelines,
it would create difficulty getting in and out of his driveway which is about 130-140 feet long. He
explained that the current situation is that there is just enough room to do a 3-point or 4-point turn
to get his vehicles out of the garage as opposed to backing out all the way to Hiawatha Avenue.
He explained that he has six neighbors who readily signed the consent. He stated that he has spent
a lifetime working in conservation and really likes the big trees in his backyard and would prefer
not to have to damage their roots. His request is a net reduction in project area and would
appreciate it if the Commission would grant the variance.
Commissioner Johnson stated that item #4 on the sixth page of the packet refers to grading and
construction activity and asked about grading in the side yard that butts up to 583 Hiawatha
Avenue. She stated that she would also like to know if the eaves will overhang onto the property
since it is so close to the property line and if there were plans for gutters for the new structure.
Mr. Krystosek replied that they plan on no disturbance to the neighbor to the south. He stated that
there is a privacy fence along the property line and his contractor has assured him that there will
be no damage to the fence and noted that he believes the contractor included gutters as part of their
project plans.
Commissioner Johnson noted that she did not see information relating to gutters in the packet.
Mr. Krystosek stated that he believes there are plans for gutters and even though there are no run-
off issues in the area, but will make sure that they are added to the project.
Commissioner Johnson stated that if gutters are added, she wondered where they would discharge
because the new structure will have a larger roofline even though the total project area will be less
because of the covered walkway. She noted that this means that there will be more watershed and
explained that she had done the calculations for it and found it will add quite a bit more gallons of
water towards that neighboring property than the current garage. She explained that she had asked
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek to take a look at the elevations of the property to see which
way they drained.
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that he spoke with Commissioner Johnson earlier
because she had questioned the drainage pattern on the property. He noted that it looks like the
area on the south side drains back to the alley and then to some other property. He noted that their
analysis did not get into volume of water.
Mr. Krystosek noted that the current carport does have a roof that sheds water so he believes
Community Development Director Tim Benetti was correct when he stated that the total roof and
PC Page #3
structure area will be smaller. He explained that he is managing his land so it absorbs water and
noted that he had planted about 150 trees on the borders for a hedge and tries to maintain the water
on the site. He stated that he knows that there is eventually some drainage off the property that
goes to the Mississippi River, but believes most of it will be absorbed on his property. He shared
his willingness to put in a rain garden as a way to address this potential issue.
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
LORBERBAUM, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2021-01, THE VARIANCE WITH
FINDINGS-OF-FACT ON PAGES 5, TO SUPPORT THE GRANTING OF A VARIANCE TO
DALE KRYSTOSEK OF 573 HIAWATHA AVENUE, WITH THE CONDITIONS NOTED
THEREIN ON PAGES 6 AND 7.
FURTHER DISCUSSION: COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM STATED THAT SHE WOULD
LIKE TO ADD THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION INCLUDE IN THE CONDITIONS
THAT GUTTERS BE ADDED TO THE GARAGE AND ASKED IF THE MAKER OF THE
MOTION WOULD ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT.
COMMISSIONER CORBETT STATED HE DID NOT THINK THAT WAS NECESSARY
BECAUSE THIS SITUATION HAS ALREADY BEEN WELL DISCUSSED. HE NOTED
THAT HE APPRECIATED THE COMMENTS MADE EARLIER ABOUT THE POTENTIAL
FOR A LARGER ROOF BUT DOES NOT THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE CONCERN ABOUT
THE NEIGHBORS PROPERTY OR THAT THIS CONDITION NEEDS TO PUT ON THE
APPLICANT.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its May 4, 2021 meeting.
B) PLANNING CASE 2021-02
MICHAEL CASHILL, 806 BACHELOR AVENUE – CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT AND VARIANCES
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Michael Cashill, 806 Bachelor
Avenue, was requesting a conditional use permit for an over-sized detached garage, with multiple
variances to the following detached accessory structure standards: (a) allow garage to exceed the
PC Page #4
maximum area of 1,800-sq. ft. up to 2,400-sq. ft.; and (b) allow garage to exceed the maximum
height of 15-ft. up to 17.5-ft. / 24-ft. in overall height.
Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; there were
two letters of support/no objection from the neighbors. He noted that he had neglected to get these
letters out to the Commissioners participating virtually and offered to read them into the record, if
necessary. He noted that the City had also received one call from a neighbor. No additional
comments or objections to this request were received.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a planning staff report and a presentation
on this planning item to the Commission (which is available for viewing through the City’s
website).
Staff is deferring the final recommendation on this case to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Corbett asked if this is an all or nothing type of approval of denial.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted that he had consulted with the city attorney
earlier today and that same question came up during the discussion. In the city attorney’s opinion,
and as indicated in the report, typically when applications are run together, they should either rise
together or fall together. However, in this case, if the Commission felt that Mr. Cashill did not
meet the granting or awarding of a variance in this case, the Commission could still ask Mr. Cashill
to reduce it and make the CUP work for him at the 1,800 square foot threshold or 1,500 square
feet where he would not even need a variance or a CUP, provided he can still meet all the other
standards. He stated that if Mr. Cashill would like this to be altogether as one application, the
Commission can do that and approve or deny together, but they could be separated out if they
chose.
Commissioner Katz asked about the proximity of the proposal to the golf course. He stated that
he understands that the neighbors do not feel that they will be impacted and are supportive of this
request, but has concerns about when people are on the golf course, especially at that particularly
hole and whether they will suddenly feel as though they are seeing an encroaching structure that
is only 20 feet away from the property line. He noted that he had not gotten the opportunity to get
over and see how dense those woods are or get a sense of the elevation differences in the area.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that in his opinion, after visiting the site,
the location that Mr. Cashill is proposing to place the garage is in a lower part on the east side of
the property, which is a good thing because it will help minimize the site impacts from the golf
course. He stated that in walking over on the golf course side and looking over, the golf course
has a higher elevation at that point on the western edge of the golf course, so people will basically
be looking over the structure. He reviewed photographs of the proposed areas and the tree cover
in the area.
Commissioner Katz asked if Community Development Director Tim Benetti felt that trees along
the along the back side would be helpful in order to cover the roof line.
PC Page #5
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated if the Commission feels that is warranted,
they could ask for additional buffers or screening as part of the CUP approval.
Commissioner Katz asked if they should be considering asking for a berm in this location.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that a berm can get a bit tricky because
it has the potential to mess up natural grading that may already exist. He stated that, in his opinion,
trees are a better option.
Commissioner Katz stated that perhaps Mr. Cashill could work with the City experts in terms of
landscaping on what might be the best types of trees to put in place.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that he assumed that Mr. Cashill would be
more than happy to do that.
Commissioner Petschel asked if he was reading the application correctly that the structure will be
24 feet at the peak and 17.5 feet mid-point. He asked if the City specifies a maximum or just an
average.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that he has been holding accessory sheds or
garages to 15 feet at their high point because they have had a number of sheds and garages that
look higher than they should. He stated that as a Zoning Administrator, most of the sheds or
garages that have been approved are usually under 15 feet from peak down. According to code,
the City measures building height for a typical gabled type roof such as this, at mid-point which is
why he provided the Commission with both the 17.5 feet at mid-point and 24-ft. at highest point.
He stated that if he gets the mid-point measurement to 15 feet, the argument could be made that it
met the building height requirement, however, when you look at the upper point, that did cause
him a bit of concern because he thinks that is a bit more than what an accessory structure should
be.
Commissioner Johnson asked what species of trees will be removed for the building as well as the
driveway to the garage. She stated that she looked at the site and noted that the hole for the golf
course has no trees in that location.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti admitted that he was not a tree expert, but believes
Mr. Cashill may be able to answer more specific questions regarding trees. He stated that during
his site inspection he did not think they looked like significant trees that were doing very well in
that area. He stated that he does not believe any of the newer trees will be removed, but will defer
the question to Mr. Cashill.
Commissioner Lorberbaum stated that the Zoning Ordinance says that the garage cannot exceed
15 feet and does not say mid-point, average, or anything similar.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that this is correct, but noted that under the
definition section, building height is defined on a gable type roof structure and the mid-point is
how structure height is measured. He stated that this is the reason that if you take the mid-point
PC Page #6
measure on an accessory structure, it could be higher than 15 feet, but noted that he has typically
asked people to hold it down to 15 feet total from the tip.
Mike Cashill, 806 Bachelor Avenue, explained that he lives on an 8-acre parcel of land and is
requesting a variance to build a 60 x 40 storage shed. He stated that his property is unique in that
it is one of the larger private parcels in the community and it takes a substantial amount of
equipment to properly care for it. Therefore, it is necessary to build a storage garage of this size
to store and maintain the equipment necessary to care for and maintain this parcel. He listed off
some of the equipment such as snow blowers, and noted that he has three of them. He explained
that he has four boys and puts an ice rink in his side yard every year. He stated that he has a long
driveway and uses a John Deer tractor to clear that with a 4-foot blower attachment. A carry-all,
similar to the golf course, to help with landscaping projects or tree removal or clean-up, as well as
back pack blowers, fertilizer spreaders, lawnmowers, wood chippers, trimmers, trailers, and
equipment for caring for apple trees. He stated that he likes to have a clean yard and likes to take
care of the equipment, does not like to store anything outside, but also wants to be respectful of
those in the neighborhood to keep his yard clean and free of clutter and debris. The structure is
designed to match his existing home with a similar roof, stucco/stone exterior and explained that
the height of the garage is designed to match the steepness of the garage. He stated that his
proposed location is in a valley and noted that it is about the lowest on the entire property and the
top of the roof will be lower than the foundation of his house. He stated that he feels his variance
request is reasonable because the structure and size is necessary to store all the equipment that is
necessary to properly maintain 8 acres. He stated that he has 4 drivers in his home, which means
4 cars, so 2 of the vehicles sit outside because all of the equipment is in the garage. He explained
that his property backs up to a valley and the Mendota Heights Par 3 golf course so he has very
few neighbors. The proposed structure will not be able to be viewed by the neighbors and will not
affect the health, safety and welfare of the community, nor will it pose any risk to the public safety
or effect the value of properties in the surrounding area. He stated that one of the Commissioners
had asked about tree removal and noted that there are no trees from his existing driveway up to the
front of this shed, so the only trees he is planning to remove are in the immediate footing area of
the structure. He stated that he loves beautiful trees and plans to place this so any really nice tree
will not be affected. He stated that there are a number of boxelders and scrub trees that have grown
in this area because it has not been maintained other than with buckthorn removal. He stated that
he plans on planting a number of white pines around the perimeter of the structure and areas where
they can get the proper sunlight to survive and noted that his goal will be to have it screened as
much as possible and reiterated that it is in a naturally low spot on the property and feels it will be
screened with the current environment and location.
Commissioner Petschel stated that he loves the way it looks especially since it is derived from the
other building, but asked if it would be possible to reduce the pitch of the roof to 4 over 12 for the
entire length of the roof.
Mr. Cashill stated that he is certainly possible, but given the look of the structure, he was hoping
that it would look similar and match the structure of his house as opposed to looking like a structure
that was there before his home was built.
PC Page #7
Commissioner Johnson stated that Mr. Cashill mentioned that he wanted to preserve and protect
some trees and asked what measures he would be taking during the construction process to ensure
that they are being protected.
Mr. Cashill stated that he will oversee that with his contractor. He stated that there are 4 beautiful
white pines that are 5 to 8 feet to the southeast of the structure that he wants to make sure the
structure is placed in a manner that does not affect those trees.
Commissioner Johnson asked about equipment when they are building the structure.
Mr. Cashill explained that in front of the garage is a sledding hill and noted that he has a 12-foot
enclosed trailer that he uses to move the equipment that will sit out there.
Commissioner Johnson explained that she was referring to the construction equipment when they
are building the structure and if he has plans to keep a certain distance from the canopy of the trees
or whether there would be enough room to do that. She stated that in order to preserve and protect
trees, many people do not understand that the weight of the equipment on the root systems even
when you are not near the tree, is what can cause problems.
Mr. Cashill stated that the entire area to the west and to the south of the garage is flat and wide
open, so that is where any equipment will be and it will not be necessary to be outside of about 5
feet of the foundation of the structure. He stated that there will not be a lot of commotion around
the sides and back of the building during the construction process.
Commissioner Johnson asked if there were any plans to replace trees for the 15-18 that will be
removed.
Mr. Cashill stated that he plans to plant a number of trees around the perimeter of the structure.
Commissioner Lorberbaum asked if there was an existing detached structure on Mr. Cashill’s
property.
Mr. Cashill answered that there was not a detached structure on his property.
Commissioner Lorberbaum stated that it seems to her that the variance request for roof height is
an aesthetic convenience and noted that she would be more in favor if the roof height was lowered.
Mr. Cashill agreed that the reason for the building design was purely due to the aesthetics of
matching his existing home.
Commissioner Lorberbaum stated that she loves his roof, but thinks that the two buildings are far
enough away that if the detached structure was just slightly lower it would not look odd. She
stated that she would be more in favor of granting the variance if he came back with a lower height.
She stated that staff had reported that Mr. Cashill could get two detached structures without a
variance and asked if it would make sense to put an accessory structure nearthe ice rink as a second
building.
PC Page #8
Mr. Cashill stated that the ice rink is on the west side of the home in a completely different location
and noted that the ice rink area is the only flat area on his property for baseball, football, soccer,
and hockey. He stated that he is not interested in building another structure and noted that he
didn’t understand what was shared earlier in the meeting by Community Development Director
Tim Benetti.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that right now this is a detached
accessory garage, and applicants with larger lots get a secondary or second detached garage as part
of an approval if they choose. He stated that when it comes to other accessory structures such as
utility sheds, bigger lots are also entitled to have additional secondary structures if they chose. He
stated that is not the case with this particular application.
Commissioner Lorberbaum asked for Mr. Cashill’s thoughts about housing some of the equipment
for the ice rink near the ice rink.
Mr. Cashill stated that he does not think there was a real good location for a structure in that area
because the area is very steep and it would be difficult to access it off of the driveway.
Commissioner Lorberbaum asked if she heard Mr. Cashill say that this was being built on the
lowest part of his property.
Mr. Cashill stated that he is not sure that it is actually his lowest point because the ravine plays out
to the valley, but it is the lower portion of his property.
Commissioner Lorberbaum read aloud a portion of the ordinance that talked about the floor of the
garage being at least 1.5 feet above the street grade unless a deviation is granted by the Public
Works Director. She asked Community Development Director Tim Benetti if this was in a lower
area and if that detail should be added to the findings.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that it could be, but isn’t sure if that
requirement would be for detached or an attached garage. He asked for a minute to look up that
information.
Commissioner Lorberbaum noted that the portion of the ordinance she was referring to was
12.1D.3C.1.
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that based on the size of this lot and the location, he
thinks that it would be challenging to relate the street elevation to the elevation along this property.
He stated that much of what Commissioner Lorberbaum was referring to was for a typical
subdivision. He stated that he would like to review the grading plan and noted that the one included
in the packet was very small and difficult to read. He stated that when the applicant submits for a
building permit for this structure, he would do a grading review and make sure that the grading
will not negatively affect this area.
PC Page #9
Commissioner Lorberbaum stated that would be perfect and makes this not an obstacle that cannot
be overcome and is just something to be aware of.
Commissioner Corbett stated that the applicant had stated that 2 of his cars are currently displaced
because of the equipment which makes him think that Mr. Cashill needs about 300 square feet of
space for his equipment. He asked if Mr. Cashill was planning to buy another 2,100 square feet
worth of equipment or if there was other equipment that is not currently in the garage that will be
filling this space.
Mr. Cashill stated that his trailer sits outside and he shuttles equipment to other locations that are
off property.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Richard Wicka, 1650 Wachtler Avenue, stated that he has had a chance to review the planning
report and noted that he is the closest house to the proposed building. He stated that during the
winter months, as they look out through the woods, they can see the roofline of the Cashill’s house
and it is just a beautiful vertical roof. Given the fact that the structure is being placed down low
and that the roofline is mimicking the existing house, they are actually kind of excited by this
proposal. He stated that there is really something kind of romantic about looking through the
woods and seeing the Cashill’s house. He stated that he feels this is a legacy property in the City
and it was really nice to see it being cared for the way the Cashill family takes care of it. He stated
that the Cashill’s are also really good about having kids over to their house and using the outdoor
space. He stated that they can hear that from their house and really enjoy it because the kids are
outside having fun playing. He stated that he and his wife are completely in support of this project
without any of the revisions that have been discussed tonight.
Seeing no one additional coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close
the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DENY THE VARIANCES TO ALLOW A PROPOSED
DETACHED OVERSIZED GARAGE UP TO 2,400-SQ. FT. IN AREA AND UP TO 17.5-FT.
(MID-POINT MEASURE) AND 24-FT. IN OVERALL HEIGHT, BASED ON THE
ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFIED ON PAGE 7.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that he would like to make sure that if the
Planning Commission as a collective body feels that this project does not warrant a variance, they
can recommend that the variance be denied, but if they feel that Mr. Cashill has a right to come
back with a CUP, he believes it would be prudent to bring that plan back to the Commission to
PC Page #10
ensure they are approving something that meetings the code and ordinance. If the Commission
feels the variance is not warranted tonight, staff would ask that the Commission request that Mr.
Cashill withdraw the variance and have the CUP tabled to the next meeting and have staff work
with him to bring back a different plan. The other opportunity is for a proposed text amendment.
He stated that if Mr. Cashill, or other property owners that have a larger lot, wished to provide a
larger scale garage of this nature, he could work with staff and present an amendment and there
could be, for example, another line added to the table that could be applied to parcels over 5 acres
for a permitted and CUP. He stated that the Commission cannot approve a CUP based on a plan
that they have not yet seen.
Commissioner Corbett stated that the reasoning behind his motion was that while he agrees that
the property is unique, he feels things are being misinterpreted. He gave the example of the
admission by the applicant that part of this is for an ice rink that has been added to the property,
which means that the property is not causing the issue, but the homeowner. He stated that he
thinks this request is based mainly on convenience, which is why he does not think the variances
hold, but the CUP would.
Commissioner Petschel stated that he would agree because it seems intuitively obvious to him that
for a property this size, the footprint of this proposed project would be like him putting an outhouse
on his property. He stated that he feels that there is an additional line that could and probably
should be added to the table. He stated that, in general, he supports the scale of this project but he
cannot find his wayto make this work, given their instructions on practical difficulty. He reiterated
that he would support a text amendment to add a line to the table.
Chair Field stated that unfortunately that is not what is in front of the Planning Commission this
evening. He stated that while he appreciates Commissioner Corbett’s reasoning, he feels the
variances kind of rises and falls with the entire case. He stated that he is a bit troubled and stated
that if the City goes through the variance with a CUP and it is denied, his recollection is that no
action can be taken for 6 months on the property because the CUP would have been denied.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that this was correct and explained that the
CUP application process is the only one that has a provision that says if the CUP is denied, you
must wait 6 months after the denial period to reapply.
John Hartman, 812 Deer Trail Point, stated that he thinks the Cashill’s did a spectacular job.
Chair Fields respectfully pointed out that the public hearing has been closed and asked him to
allow the Planning Commission to do their job.
Mr. Hartman stated that his backyard borders Ms. Cashill’s northern extremity.
Chair Field repeated his request that Mr. Hartman allow the Planning Commission to follow their
procedures and asked for a motion to reopen the public hearing to confer with the applicant.
COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO
REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
PC Page #11
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field asked Mr. Cashill to address the Commission following some of the discussion that
has happened tonight. He stated that it has been suggested that a code amendment may be a better
approach to this situation and, in his opinion, has more potential for gathering approval based on
the conversation this evening.
Mr. Cashill stated that he understands the dilemma of the Planning Commission and is open to
pursuing a text amendment and was amenable to tabling this issue.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that the action deadline for this application
is May 28, 2021, so the review period would also need to be extended. He stated that Mr. Cashill
would also need to waive the 60-day rule.
Chair Field asked if Mr. Cashill would be willing to table the matter and to extend the review
period beyond May 28, 2021.
Mr. Cashill stated that he would be willing to do both of those things.
Chair Field noted that he also owns property in excess of 5 acres and has this same issue, however
at the moment, has no desire to build on it. He stated that he believes there are probably about ten
parcels or so within the City that this could potentially affect and believes a code amendment is a
better way to approach this issue.
Mr. Cashill reiterated that he was definitely willing to work with staff on a possible text
amendment.
Commissioner Corbett asked if this item should be tabled or actually withdrawn by Mr. Cashill
and resubmitted as a different application.
Chair Field stated that there is an application and the Commission can see where it goes and for
now, the Commission is tabling this application, which would be the chair’s ruling.
Commissioner Lorberbaum stated that since the public hearing has been reopened, she would like
to hear from the person in the Council Chambers that had attempted to speak earlier.
John Hartman, 812 Deer Trail Point, noted that he was on the Mendota Heights City Council for
twelve years. He stated that his backyard runs up against Mr. Cashill’s northern boundary and he
has never had a problem. He stated that he doesn’t see anything that could be done that would
make his proposal any better than what Mr. Cashill has brought before the Commission. He stated
that it is an old farm which means you have to deal with some of the things that occurred on an old
farm. He stated that this is the way the property is configured and as long as it does not harm any
of the neighboring properties, he does not see any problem with what Mr. Cashill is planning and
reiterated that what is being proposed could not be done any better.
PC Page #12
Chair Field thanked Mr. Hartman for his past service to the City, for coming to tonight’s meeting
and suggested that he come back and visit the Planning Commission again.
THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, COMMISSIONER CORBETT SECONDED TO
TABLE DISCUSSION ON CASE 2021-02 MICHAEL CASHILL, 806 BACHELOR AVENUE
– CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING TO BE
KEPT OPEN, TO NO SOONER THAN THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON MAY
25, 2021.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field recommended that staff and Mr. Cashill begin working together as soon as possible
Commissioner Katz recommended that Mr. Cashill also come back with a detailed plan that
showed vegetation so they know exactly what will be added and taken away.
Board of Appeals
A) PLANNING CASE 2021-03
JULIE A. OLSON (APPLICANT) AND MIKE & JULIE GEREND (OWNERS),
2159 DELAWARE AVENUE – APPEAL OF ZONING DECISION REGARDING
PROPOSED MASSAGE THERAPY USE AS A HOME OCCUPATION IN THE R-
1 ZONE IN AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Julie A. Olson was requesting an
appeal of an official zoning decision made by the City’s Zoning Administrator regarding the
allowance or licensing of a massage therapy business in the R-1 One Family Residential zoning
district. The applicant is requesting said business be allowed as a permitted home occupation use,
and to operate from an accessory structure on the subject property.
The item was presented under a duly noticed public hearing process; copy of notice was published
in the Pioneer Press; and notice letters were mailed to all neighboring property owners within 350-
feet of the subject property. No comments or objections were received from the neighbors.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a planning staff report and a presentation
on this planning item to the Commission (which is available for viewing through the City’s
website).
Staff recommended denial of the appeal of the zoning administrator’s decision that a massage
therapy use or business can and should only be licensed in an established and recognized business
district. Staff is also recommending that the Board of Appeals denying the request to allow
massage therapy as a Home Occupation Use in a residential district.
PC Page #13
Commissioner Katz stated that he had a question related to other businesses that request to operate
out of the home. He stated that he understands that this is massage therapy in this case, but asked
how the City deals with people who want to, for example, cut hair out of their home.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that issue does come up periodically and
typically the standard has always been whether you would normally find a barber chair or a salon
chair inside of a normal residential home. He stated that equipment that would normally be found
inside of a home can be part of a Home Occupation. He stated that it is a gray area and the City
typically limits the Home Occupational uses that are, for all intents and purposes, very benign.
They do not want to see a lot of traffic or deliveries, no employees, no retail sales, and uses one
room of the home, and gave the example of an insurance agent or an accountant. He stated that
they tend to keep it to a low level and low activity for a home occupation.
Commissioner Katz asked if the City had granted any permits like that before.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that Home Occupations are an allowed
permitted accessory use as long as they meet the requirements of the City’s definition of a home
occupation. He stated that people have called and asked him about various services and noted that
the pandemic made home occupation requests much more popular. He gave examples of requests
to operate lawn mower repair services or auto services which are ones that are not wanted in
residential areas because they are just trouble from the day they begin.
Commissioner Katz stated that his understanding is that in the past the request has always come
from the homeowner itself, but in this case, it is coming from someone else who uses the property.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that was correct and this is a situation where
this individual has to be licensed by the State of Minnesota an d has to be site specific to the license
and the City is the only issuer of the license and the City cannot issue the license unless they
approve the location. He stated that if she is not approved for the location, the City will not issue
the license.
Chair Field clarified that the owner of the property is part of the application but the person who is
requesting to provide the massage therapy is not the owner of the home.
Julie Olson stated that she is a massage therapist currently working in Mendota Heights where she
has worked for 9 years. She stated that she has been a massage therapist for almost 19 years. Part
of the reason she wants to share a bit with the Commission about her education and background is
to support the idea of why the City should consider doing this in a residential area. She stated that
she realizes it is not a normal thing that happens and has had some bad connotations with it in the
past. She explained that she had graduated from Center Point School of Massage in Minneapolis
and also got some of her education in San Diego, California as a prenatal therapist. She noted that
she has also done some additional trainings since she has graduated from massage school to
maintain her continuing education credits. She stated that she is also licensed through each
individual city that she works at and has worked at several over the last 19 years such as
Bloomington, Eagan, Mendota Heights, Woodbury, and Shakopee. She stated that she has always
PC Page #14
maintained good standing with her licensure and passed all her background checks. This past year,
due to COVID, her business was closed for 3 months which was a very difficult situation both
professionally and personally, because she works in a therapeutic and healing field. She explained
that in times of change and stress, people often come to her to decompress and receive care as well
as maintain physical and emotional support. She was unable to offer that service for her clients
and spent time focusing on how she could continue in this field and offer a safe place to provide
massage therapy when they were able to reopen and move forward. She stated that she wants to
be able to provide massage as long as she is physically able. She stated that when they reopened
in June, she was presented with a business opportunity by clients Mike and Julie Gerend, who own
the property at 2159 Delaware Avenue. She explained that they have a beautiful space that they
have created in the converted barn on their property which is a fully modern, free-standing
structure, has its own parking, a private room for massage and a sitting area for clients to enjoy to
have a space to relax and regroup. The land surrounding the barn butts up to the Dodge Nature
Center and the driveway is a long, split driveway going in one direction to the main residence and
the other to the barn and parking. The parking can accommodate ample room for massage clients
and still maintain privacy for neighbors including the road leading to the property and the Gerend
family. She would plan to be open Monday through Friday and Saturday from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00
p.m. with a maximum of 5 clients per day. Some of the time would be for administrative duties
that she would complete and explained that she would have not employees. She stated that during
COVID and beyond, she will maintain strict sanitation protocols following the CDC guidelines for
massage therapists as well as local policies for business owners. Minors would be required to have
written consent and be accompanied by a parent or guardian. All clients would be spaced an hour
apart, no signs would be visible from the road, marketing would be done from her website,
scheduling would be done on-line and through referrals, which is most of her clientele. She stated
that she will not sell any retail product and all deliveries will go to her home address in Burnsville.
She explained that the reason for her appeal is so she can offer a space that is private, form a small
business, and help her continue to maintain a good work environment for herself and her clients
on a small scale. She stated that it is her intent to maintain privacy to the residential neighbors and
the Gerend family.
Commissioner Corbett asked if Ms. Olson could elaborate on the opportunity that was presented
to her. He asked if she would be paying to lease this space and asked what is advantageous about
this space versus a zoned, appropriate commercial business use space.
Ms. Olson stated that she is currently in a business space that is in the appropriate zoning and the
benefit of going to a private residential area would be to keep a smaller scale as far as foot traffic.
She stated that one of the things that was difficult during COVID was because she had to take into
consideration all the foot traffic that was coming in and out, and not just her own clients which
really limited what she could do. She stated that having a smaller scale available for both clients
and herself would help facilitate keeping it low profile.
Commissioner Katz asked how long Ms. Olson was hoping to be able to use this space for her
work.
Ms. Olson replied that she is hoping to have the space as long as she can. She stated that she is a
seasoned therapist and the reality is that her body will not be able to do this work forever. She
PC Page #15
stated that she is hoping to maintain this small business as she ages for as long as she can and as
long as the Gerend’s are willing to have her in that space. She stated that to answer Commissioner
Corbett’s earlier question, when this opportunity was offered to her, it was offered from the
Gerend’s just as she was getting started back working after being closed, as an alternative for her
business.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Mike Gerend, 2159 Delaware Avenue, stated that Ms. Olson has been a great massage therapist
for a number of people that he knows and this whole idea was hatched out of a desire to help.
When COVID hit, the people in the health and fitness industry who should have been supported
as much or more than anyone as an essential business, were hurt the absolute worst and treated the
most harshly. He stated that the individuals that were hurt the most were customers of Ms. Olson
and were the kind of people that need massage therapy for both physical and mental healing. He
stated that it was an unfortunate situation and he saw Ms. Olson potentially having to look for new
space in a very trying situation after a very difficult period of time which brought to mind the
possibility of using the barn space since it is not used very often. He explained that they put a lot
of tender loving care into the property when it was renovated. He noted that at one point in time
he was the President of Lifetime Fitness and has employed thousands of massage therapists across
the country and even built studios for them. He explained that he understands the healing benefits
that they provide and the conditions that they need and he felt the barn would be the perfect place
to provide the kind of healing environment in a time when people need it more than they ever have.
He stated that Ms. Olson needed a softer landing and felt like her clients also needed that. He
stated that the business terms and length of time are pretty loose because he honestly just said to
her that he didn’t really care and asked her to figure out what would be fair along with what would
make her business work. He stated that the terms are pretty informal and they are just trying to
make something work.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public
hearing.
COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Commissioner Katz stated that he was thinking of the scenario when the City has people who just
call independent contractors to their residence and the massage therapist comes and brings their
own chair or table and sets it up at their home, provides the service and leaves. He asked if those
people were not licensed in the City if they were in violation of City Ordinance.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that he believes that they would be in
violation because the City only allows licensed therapists at a specific fixed location. He stated
that if people are hiring someone to come into their home and provide this service, there is really
PC Page #16
no way to track it. He stated that he would hope that there are at least licensed massage therapists,
but believes under the City’s licensing program, they have to be at a fixed location.
Commissioner Katz stated that he questions how other cities handle those situations and whether
there are ordinances that allow for individuals to come and work in the home temporarily.
Chair Field stated that he believes this line of questioning is going down a line that is not germane
to the case at hand.
Commissioner Katz stated that he disagreed and wonders if in this case it is a situation where the
ordinance does not necessarily match what the application is. He stated that it may be better to go
and ask the City Council to take a look at the issue if there is something that may be more
appropriate rather than just saying that it isn’t allowed without looking at the overall issue.
Chair Field stated that he would object to Commissioner Katz disagreement on the basis that this
is not a home business because the applicant does not reside in the home.
Commissioner Katz noted that the homeowner is part of this application.
Chair Field stated that was true but they would not be performing the service and this is an
accessory structure. He stated that he doesn’t want the Commission to go down a rabbit hole that
they aren’t being asked to go down.
Commissioner Katz stated that he understands Chair Field’s point, but does not necessarily agree
with it because he thinks that is the reason that this is being appealed to the Commission.
Commissioner Petschel asked for an explanation of the statutory constraints and asked if the
Commission was allowed by Minnesota law to grant any kind of use variance.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that as the report indicates, this is
coming dangerously close to allowing for a use variance, but wh en Ms. Olson approached the City
Clerk requesting this license at the residential property that request was denied. He stated that Ms.
Olson asked if she could still operate it as a home occupation with different standards applied to
her because it is site specific and just for her which is the crux of her appeal. Use variances, as the
Commission learned at the last workshop, are not allowed, which State statute makes very clear.
He gave the example of a convenience store in a residential area that could not be granted a
variance. In this case, because the City does allow for certain levels of professional services under
a home occupation and Ms. Olson is clearly a professional that is providing a service, it would
meet part of some home occupation, if she lived there and if this was not run out of an accessory
structure. He stated that even if she did own this property and was not operating out of the
accessory structure, the debate would go on about whether the City would allow a massage therapy
license at this residence. The City Council has chosen the three districts as a permitted right for
massage therapist services, so this would be going against the home occupation and the massage
therapy ordinance. He stated that the Council could consider allowing massage therapy as a home
occupation but he believes the ordinance for massage therapy was just gone through a few years
ago, so he is not sure if there would be an inclination to change it at this point in time.
PC Page #17
Chair Field stated that the Council could do something, but as a Planning Commission, they have
some very clear charges. He stated that speaking editorially, he would love to find a way to make
this work, but he cannot.
COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LORBERBAUM, TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE APPEAL FROM JULIE A. OLSON
SEEKING TO OVERTURN THE CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S DECISION TO NOT
ALLOW A MASSAGE THERAPY BUSINESS AS A HOME OCCUPATION USE IN THE R-
1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, SPECIFICALLY AT 2159 DELAWARE
AVENUE, AND ADOPT RESOLUTION 2021-31, A DENIAL BASED ON CERTAIN
FINDINGS-OF-FACT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION AND
ADOPTION.
FURTHER DISCUSSION: CHAIR FIELD REITERATED THAT HE DOES NOT RELISH
MAKING THIS DECISION, BUT IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT, GIVEN THE
EXISTING CODE, THE REQUEST JUST DOESN’T FIT.
COMMISSIONER KATZ AGREED THAT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING HE WANTS TO DO
AND WOULD LIKE TO FIND A WAY TO WORK WITH MS. OLSON ON THIS, BUT THE
PLANNING COMMISSION HAS TO OPERATE WITHIN THE PARAMETERS THAT ARE
SET WITHIN THE ORDINANCES. HE STATED THAT HE THINKS THIS IS ONE OF
SEVERAL TYPE OF INSTANCES WHERE THE CITY SHOULD HAVE SOME DIFFERENT
ORDINANCES IN PLACE IN ORDER TO HAVE A BIT OF FLEXIBILITY TO WORK WITH
SOMEBODY LIKE MS. OLSON.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its May 4, 2021 meeting.
PC Page #18
Staff Announcements / Updates
Chair Field noted that at the start of Mr. Cashill’s case, Community Development Director Tim
Benetti made reference to a letter that didn’t go to the Commissioners and asked that the letter be
distributed to those individuals, since the public hearing is still open.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that at the last Council meeting staff
presented an administrative Critical Area Permit for a property on Woodridge Drive to fill in a
front step area with a covered porch and allow a 12 x 10 shed for Shawn Hoffman. The City has
enacted a moratorium, but this was one of the minor developments that met the exemption criteria
and was approved.
Adjournment
COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:07 P.M.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
PC Page #19
Planning Staff Report
MEETING DATE:May 25, 2021
TO:Planning Commission
FROM:Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:Planning Case 2021-06
Zoning Code Amendments – Accessory Structure Ordinance
APPLICANT:City of Mendota Heights
INTRODUCTION
The City of Mendota Heights is asked to consider an ordinance amendment to City Code Title 12 – Zoning,
specifically Section 12-1D-3: Accessory Structures, which would amend and revise certain design
standards and allowances for various accessory structures in the city.
This item is being presented under a public hearing process. A notice of hearing on this item was published
in the Pioneer Press newspaper and posted on the city’s website.
DISCUSSION
At the April 27, 2021 planning commission meeting, Mr. Mike Cashill presented for consideration a request
of a conditional use permit (CUP) with variances to build a new 2,400-sq. ft. detached garage on his
residential property. Based upon the discussions that evening, it appeared some commissioners supported
the applicant’s desire to have a larger garage with a CUP, but did not support the related variances to exceed
the maximum structure size (area) or height standards as prescribed by the current code. The commission
later directed staff to prepare an ordinance amendment, that may help resolve some of the issues related to
the variances.
The changes being offered under this new ordinance begin with Section B.2. Height: b. Residential
districts:, which include new language specifically on heights standards for accessory structures 144-sq. ft.
and less; with separate standards for those more than 144-sq. ft. but less than 2,000-sq. ft.; and even new
standards for those structures exceeding 2,000-sq. ft. in size. For heights standards, staff is asking the
commissioners to give careful consideration of the differing height standards and storage allowances under
each subpart.
The table found under Section C. Accessory Structures in all Residential Districts: 1. Private Garages
in all residential districts: b. Size: (3) Detached Private Garage has also been revised to include a line
for lots greater than 2.5 acres up to 5.0 acres; and a new table line for those parcels 5 acres or more.
PC Page #20
Section C.1.c. Standards for Private Garages… include changes to Subpart (4); and a new Subpart (6)
that includes new language addressing allowable upper stories or lofts.
Finally, due to the recent COVID pandemic and the resulting shelter-in-place/home schooling rules, there
have been a number of recent requests by homeowners seeking to install outdoor play houses and tree forts
for kids. As such, staff is proposing a new Subpart (4)to allow temporary playhouses and tree forts on
residential properties, with certain size and height limitations. Structures of this type would still need to be
reviewed and given zoning approval under an accessory structure permit.
ALTERNATIVES for ACTION
Since part of this ordinance amendment involves Title 12-Zoning, the Planning Commission is required to
provide a review under a public hearing process, and provide a recommendation to the City Council. The
Planning Commission may consider one of the three following actions:
1. Recommend approval of the draft Ordinance No. 565, which amends certain sections of Zoning
Code Title 12 – Zoning, as presented herein or with added/revised language and standards deemed
necessary by the commission; or
2. Recommend denial of the requested zoning code amendments and make no changes to Title 12 –
Zoning, with findings to support such a recommendation; or
3. Table the amendment request, and direct city staff to provide additional information for further
consideration by the Planning Commission, and present this information at the next scheduled
Planning Commission meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Open the public hearing; allow comments; discuss with city staff the requested zoning code amendments;
and make a motion to recommend approval of the draft Ordinance No. 565 as presented herein.
The Commissioners should bear in mind that any amendment(s) approved under this draft ordinance, may
directly affect the outcome of Planning Case No. 2021-02 (Mike Cashill – 806 Bachelor Ave.), which is
under separate review and hearing.
Attachments
1) Draft Ordinance No. 565
2) Section 12-1D-3: Accessory Structures (shown with new language/revisions)
3) Section 12-1D-3: Accessory Structures (un-altered)
PC Page #21
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 565
AMENDING PARTS OF
TITLE 12 – ZONING OF THE CITY CODE
REGARDING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, does hereby ordain:
Section 1.
City Code Title 12 – ZONING is hereby amended as follows:
Title 12-1D-3 of the City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting
the double-line struck-through language as follows:
12-1D-3: ACCESSORY STRUCTURES:
B. Accessory Structures in All Zoning Districts:
2. Height:
a. All districts: No accessory building shall exceed the height of the principal building.
b. Residential districts: No accessory building shall exceed fifteen feet (15') in height.
(1) Accessory structures one hundred forty four (144) square feet or less in area
shall be limited to a single-level only, and must not exceed fifteen feet (15') in
overall height from the ground elevation to the highest point of a flat roof, shed
roof, pitched roof or gabled roof.
(2) Accessory structures exceeding one hundred forty four (144) square feet, but
less than two thousand (2,000) square feet in area shall be limited to one and one-
half (1-1/2) stories, must not exceed fifteen feet (15') in height as determined by the
vertical distance from the average grade of the front building line to the top of the
cornice of a flat roof, to a point of the roof directly above the highest wall of a shed
roof, to the uppermost point on a round or other arch type roof, or to the average
distance of the highest gable on a pitched or hip roof.
(3) Accessory structures exceeding two thousand (2,000) square feet in area, as
allowed under 12-1D-3.C.(3) below, shall be limited to one and one-half (1-1/2)
stories, and must not exceed [eighteen feet (18’)] / [twenty feet (20')] in height as
determined by the vertical distance from the average grade of the front building line
to the top of the cornice of a flat roof, to a point of the roof directly above the
highest wall of a shed roof, to the uppermost point on a round or other arch type
roof, or to the average distance of the highest gable on a pitched or hip roof.
PC Page #22
C. Accessory Structures In All Residential Districts:
1. Private garages in all residential districts:
b. Size: Size, as measured by the building footprint:
(3) Detached Private Garage: One detached private garage may be allowed on
residential property as a second garage by permitted use, or by conditional use
permit, according to the following table:
Lot Size Permitted Conditional Use Permit
0.75 acre or less Not allowed Not allowed
>0.75 acre - 1.5 acres 750 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft.
>1.5 acres - 2.5 acres 1,000 sq. ft. 1,200 sq. ft.
>2.5 acres - 5.0 acres 1,500 sq. ft. 1,800 sq. ft.
>5.0 acres 2,000 sq. ft.2,600 sq. ft.
c. Standards For Private Garages In All Residential Districts:
(4) Use: No use of the garage shall be permitted other than private residential
storage of personal motorized and non-motorized vehicles, household goods and
equipment, and must be strictly for noncommercial use.
(6) Any detached garage with an allowed upper story or loft area shall only be used
for the storage of personal household goods and equipment. No part of the upper
story or loft area may be used as habitable space, an accessory dwelling unit or
residential living space. The area of the upper story or loft space shall be factored
in when determining the total amount of garage size (area) allowed in this section.
3. Accessory structures (other than detached, private garages) in all residential districts:
(4) Temporary playhouse or elevated treehouse exceeding twenty five (25) square feet
in size shall not exceed [eighty (80) square feet] / [one hundred (100) square feet];not
exceed six (6) feet in overall height from the ground level, or fifteen (15) feet at its
highest point if elevated off the ground. The area of the playhouse or treehouse in
combination with another permitted accessory structure less than 144 square feet must
not exceed two hundred (200) square feet. The owner shall maintain the playhouse or
treehouse in good repair. The owner shall ensure the playhouse or treehouse does not
present a health or safety threat.
PC Page #23
Section 2.
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according
to law.
Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this _____ day of June, 2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
ATTEST
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
PC Page #24
12-1D-3: ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: [CURRENT EDITION]
A. Definitions:
ACCESSORY USE OR STRUCTURE: A use or structure subordinate to and serving the principal
use or structure on the same lot and customarily incidental thereto.
GARAGE, PRIVATE: A detached accessory building or portion of the principal building, including a
carport, which is used primarily for storing passenger vehicles, trailers or one truck of a rated
capacity not in excess of one and one-half (11/2) tons.
GARAGE, PUBLIC: A building or portion of a building used for the storage of vehicles for
remuneration or gratis.
B. Accessory Structures In All Zoning Districts:
1. Setbacks:
a. Front Yard Setbacks:
(1) No detached garage, or other accessory building, shall be located nearer the front lot line
than the principal building on that lot.
(2) No accessory structure shall be located within any front yard.
b. Side And Rear Yard Setbacks:
(1) Accessory structure one hundred forty four (144) square feet or less: Five feet (5').
(2) Accessory structure exceeding one hundred forty four (144) square feet: Ten feet (10').
c. Setback From Principal Building: No accessory structure shall be erected, altered, or moved
within five feet (5') of the principal building. See figure 1D-3.1 of this section.
FIGURE 1D-3.1: ACCESSORY BUILDING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS
2. Height:
a. All districts: No accessory building shall exceed the height of the principal building.
PC Page #25
b. Residential districts: No accessory building shall exceed fifteen feet (15') in height.
3. Time For Construction: No accessory building or structure, including parking area, shall be
constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory.
4. Use Restrictions: No cellar, basement, tent, tent trailer or accessory building shall at any time be
used as an occupied dwelling primarily for human habitation.
5. Subdivision: In the event that any property upon which an accessory structure or structures have
been erected shall later be subdivided, then the number and size of accessory structures on the
subdivided property shall conform to the requirements of this chapter, and those which do not conform
shall be relocated, removed or reconstructed so that they do conform.
C. Accessory Structures In All Residential Districts:
1. Private garages in all residential districts:
a. Number: One detached private garage, as an accessory building, and one attached private
garage shall be allowed on residential property, subject to the size allowances identified in this section.
b. Size: Size, as measured by the building footprint:
(1) Attached Private Garage:
(A) Up to one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet is permitted.
(B) More than one thousand two hundred (1,200) up to one thousand five hundred (1,500)
square feet is allowed via a conditional use permit.
(2) Single-Family Residential Parcels: Single-family residential parcels that do not have an
attached garage may be allowed one detached garage up to seven hundred fifty (750) square feet as a
permitted structure, or up to one thousand (1,000) square feet upon approval of a conditional use permit.
(3) Detached Private Garage: One detached private garage may be allowed on residential
property as a second garage by permitted use, or by conditional use permit, according to the following
table:
Lot Size Permitted Conditional Use Permit
0.75 acre or less Not allowed Not allowed
>0.75 acre - 1.5 acres 750 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft.
>1.5 acres - 2.5 acres 1,000 sq. ft. 1,200 sq. ft.
>2.5 acres 1,500 sq. ft. 1,800 sq. ft.
(4) Garage Building Footprint Area: Notwithstanding the size allowances in subsection C1b(3)
of this section, no single- family parcel shall have total attached and detached garage building footprint
area that exceeds the finished square footage of the principal structure.
c. Standards For Private Garages In All Residential Districts:
(1) Floor Of A Garage: In all R districts, the floor of a garage shall be at least one and one-half
feet (11/2') above the street grade at the curb unless a deviation is granted by the public works director
upon determination that a lower elevation is appropriate.
(2) Garage Doors: No more than thirty six (36) linear feet of garage door per structure, measured
horizontally, may be installed to provide access to any private garage or other accessory building space
on a single- or two-family residential property. More than thirty six (36) linear feet of garage door may be
provided by conditional use permit when such additional garage door exposure is not visible from a public
street or from surrounding residential property.
(3) Height: No garage doors over nine feet (9') in height shall be permitted.
PC Page #26
(4) Use: No use of the garage shall be permitted other than private residential noncommercial
use.
(5) Detached Private Garages: Detached private garages must be architecturally compatible
with the principal structure, including exterior design, materials and colors.
2. Chicken coops and runs in all residential districts:
a. Number, Size And Building Requirements:
(1) One chicken coop and run may be constructed with the issuance of a permit as stipulated in
this title.
(2) The dimensions of such coop and run are limited to:
(A) The interior floor space of the chicken coop shall be a minimum size of two (2) square feet
for each chicken authorized under the permit. The floor area of the run must have a minimum of five (5)
square feet per chicken. The coop and run must not exceed a maximum area of one hundred forty four
(144) square feet.
(B) The coop and run are limited to a maximum height of ten feet (10') tall, whether the
accessory structure is for sole use as a chicken coop or if it is part of an accessory structure also used
for other purposes. The chicken coop portion of such a structure may be no more than ten feet (10') tall.
(C) The coop and run must be set back ten feet (10') from the side and rear lot lines of the
property. The coop and run must be located in the rear or side yard and are not permitted in the front
yard of the property.
(3) Construction requirements for the chicken coop and run include:
(A) The exterior finish materials of the chicken coop shall be: 1) weather resistant, protective
covering material, decay resistant wood, or if exterior finish wood is not decay resistant, then the wood
finish shall be protected from the elements and decay by paint or protective covering (e.g., siding, fascia
wrap); and 2) in accordance with the accessory structure regulations set forth in the zoning regulations
in this code.
(B) The construction of and materials used for the chicken coop and run must be adequate to
prevent access by rodents or other pests.
(C) The chicken run shall be attached to the chicken coop. The chicken coop and run shall
be deemed as a single structure and subject to the accessory structure regulations set forth in the zoning
regulations of this code.
(D) The chicken run shall be fully enclosed (sides and top) by fencing or other similar material.
b. Regulations: The keeping, harboring, maintaining, or possessing of any chicken shall be in
accordance with the following:
(1) Limit: No more than six (6) chickens shall be kept or harbored on the premises to which the
permit applies.
(2) Roosters: Roosters are prohibited.
(3) Slaughter: Slaughtering of chickens on any property zoned for residential use is prohibited.
(4) Eggs: No chicken eggs shall be sold or offered for sale; all chicken eggs shall be for personal
use or consumption.
(5) Fighting: Chickens shall not be raised or kept for fighting.
(6) Food: Food materials stored outside shall be within closed containers with lids.
(7) Sanitation: All containment areas and structures shall be maintained in a clean, sanitary, and
odor free environment and shall be free from the presence of rodents or other pests at all times.
PC Page #27
(8) Disposal Of Waste: Fecal waste or coop related litter shall be removed at such reasonable
times to prevent odors from emitting over property lines. Such waste or litter must be double bagged and
disposed of in city garbage. Waste or litter is allowed to be composted on the property, provided the
composting is done in a sturdy, weather resistant compost bin or dedicated enclosure. Should the
composting be done in an unhealthy or ineffective manner, whereby creating a public nuisance or
complaint from a neighboring resident, the permit holder shall immediately cease all waste composting
on the property and remove such waste composting bin(s) if so ordered by the zoning administrator or
animal warden.
(9) Nuisance: Chickens shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a public nuisance.
Any violation of the provisions of this subsection shall be deemed a public nuisance.
(10) Inspection: Any chicken coop and run authorized under this section may be inspected at
any reasonable time by the city zoning administrator, animal warden or their designee.
(11) Permit Required: An application for a permit hereunder shall be filed with the city clerk upon
an application form furnished by the city. The permit fee, which shall be paid and filed with the permit
application, shall be in an amount established by city council resolution. A permit issued hereunder shall
be for duration of one year from its date of issuance. An application for permit renewal shall be filed sixty
(60) days prior to the expiration of the current permit. The permit application shall include, but not be
limited to, the following:
(A) The full name and address of the following persons:
(i) The applicant signed thereto; and
(ii) The owner(s) of the premises on which chickens are sought to be kept and for which the
permit would apply;
(B) The street address of the premises on which chickens are sought to be kept;
(C) The number of chickens to be kept on the premises;
(D) A detailed sketch plan of the premises on which chickens are sought to be kept, including
the location, the dimensions and design of the coop and run, establishing compliance with the chicken
coop and run specifications provided in this section;
(E) A statement certifying whether the property's homeowners' association rules, if any,
prohibit the keeping of chickens on the property for which the application is sought;
(F) If the applicant is not the fee owner of the premises on which the chickens are sought to
be kept and for which the permit would apply, the application shall be signed by all fee owners of the
premises.
(G) Any other and further information as the city deems necessary.
(12) Revocation: A permit granted under this section of the code may be revoked by the zoning
administrator or animal warden with a finding in writing to the applicant that a violation of any of these
standards has occurred or that there is a threat to public health, safety or welfare. Such revocation may
be appealed to the city council, whose decision shall be final.
3. Accessory structures (other than detached, private garages) in all residential districts:
a. Number And Size:
(1) Accessory buildings (other than detached, private garages) shall not exceed one thousand
(1,000) square feet.
(2) Property is four (4) acres or less*: One accessory structure with the area not to exceed one
hundred forty four (144) square feet, or one accessory structure plus a chicken coop and run provided
the total area of both structures shall not exceed two hundred twenty-five (225) square feet.
PC Page #28
(3) Property is more than four (4) acres*: Total area cannot exceed four hundred twenty five
(425) square feet, provided:
(A) No single structure shall exceed two hundred twenty five (225) square feet; the exception
being a single structure with an attached chicken coop and run shall not exceed three hundred (300)
square feet in total area.
(B) No more than three (3) accessory structures may be erected.
*In computing the area of the property on which an accessory structure is to be located, any part
which is a lake or a wetland, as defined in any city ordinance or by state or federal law, any part which is
subject to an easement for a street, alley or private roadway, and any part which is in the critical area
and below the "bluff line", as defined in chapter 3, "Critical Area Overlay District", of this title shall be
excluded.
b. Through Lots: All accessory buildings greater than one hundred forty four (144) square feet on
through lots located in R districts shall require a conditional use permit.
D. Accessory Structures In Single-Family Residential Districts (R-1, R-1A, R-1B, And R-1C): One
private, single-level garage with a minimum floor area of four hundred forty (440) square feet and a
maximum area of one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet shall be required to be built concurrent
with the principal structure.
E. Temporary Family Healthcare Dwellings: Pursuant to authority granted by Minnesota statutes section
462.3593, subdivision 9, the city of Mendota Heights opts out of the requirements of Minnesota statutes
section 462.3593, which defines and regulates temporary family healthcare dwellings. By opting out, the
city expressly prohibits temporary family healthcare dwellings as defined in Minnesota statutes section
462.3593. (Ord. 429, 8-3-2010; amd. Ord. 454, 1-7-2014; Ord. 499, 8-2-2016; Ord. 508, 3-7-2017; Ord.
553, 2-4-2020)
PC Page #29
12-1D-3: ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: [Changes/Revisions Highlighted in RED underlined text]
A. Definitions:
ACCESSORY USE OR STRUCTURE: A use or structure subordinate to and serving the principal use or
structure on the same lot and customarily incidental thereto.
GARAGE, PRIVATE: A detached accessory building or portion of the principal building, including a
carport, which is used primarily for storing passenger vehicles, trailers or one truck of a rated capacity
not in excess of one and one-half (11/2) tons.
GARAGE, PUBLIC: A building or portion of a building used for the storage of vehicles for remuneration
or gratis.
B. Accessory Structures In All Zoning Districts:
1. Setbacks:
a. Front Yard Setbacks:
(1) No detached garage, or other accessory building, shall be located nearer the front lot line
than the principal building on that lot.
(2) No accessory structure shall be located within any front yard.
b. Side And Rear Yard Setbacks:
(1) Accessory structure one hundred forty four (144) square feet or less: Five feet (5').
(2) Accessory structure exceeding one hundred forty four (144) square feet: Ten feet (10').
c. Setback From Principal Building: No accessory structure shall be erected, altered, or moved
within five feet (5') of the principal building. See figure 1D-3.1 of this section.
FIGURE 1D-3.1: ACCESSORY BUILDING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS
PC Page #30
2. Height:
a. All districts: No accessory building shall exceed the height of the principal building.
b. Residential districts: No accessory building shall exceed fifteen feet (15') in height.
(1) Accessory structures one hundred forty four (144) square feet or less shall be limited to a
single-level only, and must not exceed fifteen feet (15') in overall height from the ground elevation
to the highest point of a flat roof, shed roof, pitched roof or gabled roof.
(2) Accessory structures exceeding one hundred forty four (144) square feet, but less than two
thousand (2,000) square feet shall be limited to one and one-half (1-1/2) stories, must not exceed
fifteen feet (15') in height as determined by the vertical distance from the average grade of the
front building line to the top of the cornice of a flat roof, to a point of the roof directly above the
highest wall of a shed roof, to the uppermost point on a round or other arch type roof, or to the
average distance of the highest gable on a pitched or hip roof.
(3) Accessory structures exceeding two thousand (2,000) square feet, as allowed under 12-1D-
3.C.(3) below, shall be limited to one and one-half (1-1/2) stories, and must not exceed [eighteen
feet (18’)] / [twenty feet (20')] in height as determined by the vertical distance from the average
grade of the front building line to the top of the cornice of a flat roof, to a point of the roof directly
above the highest wall of a shed roof, to the uppermost point on a round or other arch type roof,
or to the average distance of the highest gable on a pitched or hip roof.
3. Time For Construction: No accessory building or structure, including parking area, shall be
constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory.
4 Use Restrictions: No cellar, basement, tent, tent trailer or accessory building shall at any time be used
as an occupied dwelling primarily for human habitation.
5. Subdivision: In the event that any property upon which an accessory structure or structures have
been erected shall later be subdivided, then the number and size of accessory structures on the subdivided
property shall conform to the requirements of this chapter, and those which do not conform shall be relocated,
removed or reconstructed so that they do conform.
C. Accessory Structures In All Residential Districts:
1. Private garages in all residential districts:
a. Number: One detached private garage, as an accessory building, and one attached private
garage shall be allowed on residential property, subject to the size allowances identified in this section.
b. Size: Size, as measured by the building footprint:
(1) Attached Private Garage:
(A) Up to one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet is permitted.
(B) More than one thousand two hundred (1,200) up to one thousand five hundred (1,500)
square feet is allowed via a conditional use permit.
(2) Single-Family Residential Parcels: Single-family residential parcels that do not have an
attached garage may be allowed one detached garage up to seven hundred fifty (750) square
feet as a permitted structure, or up to one thousand (1,000) square feet upon approval of a
conditional use permit.
PC Page #31
(3) Detached Private Garage: One detached private garage may be allowed on residential
property as a second garage by permitted use, or by conditional use permit, according to the
following table:
Lot Size Permitted Conditional Use Permit
0.75 acre or less Not allowed Not allowed
>0.75 acre - 1.5 acres 750 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft.
>1.5 acres - 2.5 acres 1,000 sq. ft. 1,200 sq. ft.
>2.5 acres - 5.0 acres 1,500 sq. ft. 1,800 sq. ft.
>5.0 acres 2,000 sq. ft.2,600 sq. ft.
(4) Garage Building Footprint Area: Notwithstanding the size allowances in subsection
C1b(3) of this section, no single- family parcel shall have total attached and detached garage
building footprint area that exceeds the finished square footage of the principal structure.
c. Standards For Private Garages In All Residential Districts:
(1) Floor Of A Garage: In all R districts, the floor of a garage shall be at least one and one-half
feet (11/2') above the street grade at the curb unless a deviation is granted by the public works director
upon determination that a lower elevation is appropriate.
(2) Garage Doors: No more than thirty six (36) linear feet of garage door per structure, measured
horizontally, may be installed to provide access to any private garage or other accessory building space
on a single- or two-family residential property. More than thirty six (36) linear feet of garage door may be
provided by conditional use permit when such additional garage door exposure is not visible from a public
street or from surrounding residential property.
(3) Height: No garage doors over nine feet (9') in height shall be permitted.
(4) Use: No use of the garage shall be permitted other than private residential storage of personal
motorized and non-motorized vehicles, household goods and equipment, and strictly for noncommercial
use.
(5) Detached Private Garages: Detached private garages must be architecturally compatible with
the principal structure, including exterior design, materials and colors.
(6) Any detached garage with an allowed upper story or loft area shall be used only for the storage
of personal and household equipment. No part of the upper story or loft area can be used as habitable
space, an accessory dwelling unit or residential living space. The area of the upper story or loft space
shall be factored in when determining the total amount of garage size (area) allowed in this section.
2. Chicken coops and runs in all residential districts:
a. Number, Size And Building Requirements:
(1) One chicken coop and run may be constructed with the issuance of a permit as
stipulated in this title.
(2) The dimensions of such coop and run are limited to:
(A) The interior floor space of the chicken coop shall be a minimum size of two
(2) square feet for each chicken authorized under the permit. The floor area of the run
PC Page #32
must have a minimum of five (5) square feet per chicken. The coop and run must not
exceed a maximum area of one hundred forty four (144) square feet.
(B) The coop and run are limited to a maximum height of ten feet (10') tall, whether the
accessory structure is for sole use as a chicken coop or if it is part of an accessory structure also
used for other purposes. The chicken coop portion of such a structure may be no more than ten
feet (10') tall.
(C) The coop and run must be set back ten feet (10') from the side and rear lot lines of
the property. The coop and run must be located in the rear or side yard and are not permitted in
the front yard of the property.
(3) Construction requirements for the chicken coop and run include:
(A) The exterior finish materials of the chicken coop shall be: 1) weather resistant, protective
covering material, decay resistant wood, or if exterior finish wood is not decay resistant, then the wood
finish shall be protected from the elements and decay by paint or protective covering (e.g., siding, fascia
wrap); and 2) in accordance with the accessory structure regulations set forth in the zoning regulations
in this code.
(B) The construction of and materials used for the chicken coop and run must be adequate to
prevent access by rodents or other pests.
(C) The chicken run shall be attached to the chicken coop. The chicken coop and run shall be
deemed as a single structure and subject to the accessory structure regulations set forth in the zoning
regulations of this code.
(D) The chicken run shall be fully enclosed (sides and top) by fencing or other similar material.
b. Regulations: The keeping, harboring, maintaining, or possessing of any chicken shall be in
accordance with the following:
(1) Limit: No more than six (6) chickens shall be kept or harbored on the premises to which the permit
applies.
(2) Roosters: Roosters are prohibited.
(3) Slaughter: Slaughtering of chickens on any property zoned for residential use is prohibited.
(4) Eggs: No chicken eggs shall be sold or offered for sale; all chicken eggs shall be for personal use
or consumption.
(5) Fighting: Chickens shall not be raised or kept for fighting.
(6) Food: Food materials stored outside shall be within closed containers with lids.
(7) Sanitation: All containment areas and structures shall be maintained in a clean, sanitary, and odor
free environment and shall be free from the presence of rodents or other pests at all times.
(8) Disposal Of Waste: Fecal waste or coop related litter shall be removed at such reasonable times to
prevent odors from emitting over property lines. Such waste or litter must be double bagged and disposed of in
city garbage. Waste or litter is allowed to be composted on the property, provided the composting is done in a
sturdy, weather resistant compost bin or dedicated enclosure. Should the composting be done in an unhealthy
or ineffective manner, whereby creating a public nuisance or complaint from a neighboring resident, the permit
holder shall immediately cease all waste composting on the property and remove such waste composting bin(s)
if so ordered by the zoning administrator or animal warden.
PC Page #33
(9) Nuisance: Chickens shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a public nuisance. Any
violation of the provisions of this subsection shall be deemed a public nuisance.
(10) Inspection: Any chicken coop and run authorized under this section may be inspected at any
reasonable time by the city zoning administrator, animal warden or their designee.
(11) Permit Required: An application for a permit hereunder shall be filed with the city clerk upon an
application form furnished by the city. The permit fee, which shall be paid and filed with the permit application,
shall be in an amount established by city council resolution. A permit issued hereunder shall be for duration of
one year from its date of issuance. An application for permit renewal shall be filed sixty (60) days prior to the
expiration of the current permit. The permit application shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
(A) The full name and address of the following persons:
(i) The applicant signed thereto; and
(ii) The owner(s) of the premises on which chickens are sought to be kept and for which
the permit would apply;
(B) The street address of the premises on which chickens are sought to be kept;
(C) The number of chickens to be kept on the premises;
(D) A detailed sketch plan of the premises on which chickens are sought to be kept, including
the location, the dimensions and design of the coop and run, establishing compliance with the chicken
coop and run specifications provided in this section;
(E) A statement certifying whether the property's homeowners' association rules, if any, prohibit
the keeping of chickens on the property for which the application is sought;
(F) If the applicant is not the fee owner of the premises on which the chickens are sought to be
kept and for which the permit would apply, the application shall be signed by all fee owners of the
premises.
(G) Any other and further information as the city deems necessary.
(12) Revocation: A permit granted under this section of the code may be revoked by the zoning
administrator or animal warden with a finding in writing to the applicant that a violation of any of these
standards has occurred or that there is a threat to public health, safety or welfare. Such revocation may
be appealed to the city council, whose decision shall be final.
3. Accessory structures (other than detached, private garages) in all residential districts:
a. Number And Size:
(1) Accessory buildings (other than detached, private garages) shall not exceed one thousand
(1,000) square feet.
(2) Property is four (4) acres or less*: One accessory structure with the area not to exceed one
hundred forty four (144) square feet, or one accessory structure plus a chicken coop and run provided
the total area of both structures shall not exceed two hundred twenty-five (225) square feet.
(3) Property is more than four (4) acres*: Total area cannot exceed four hundred twenty five
(425) square feet, provided:
PC Page #34
(A) No single structure shall exceed two hundred twenty five (225) square feet; the exception
being a single structure with an attached chicken coop and run shall not exceed three hundred (300)
square feet in total area.
(B) No more than three (3) accessory structures may be erected.
*In computing the area of the property on which an accessory structure is to be located, any part
which is a lake or a wetland, as defined in any city ordinance or by state or federal law, any part which
is subject to an easement for a street, alley or private roadway, and any part which is in the critical area
and below the "bluff line", as defined in chapter 3, "Critical Area Overlay District", of this title shall be
excluded.
(4) Temporary playhouse or elevated tree house exceeding twenty five (25) square feet in
size shall not exceed [eighty (80) square feet] / [one hundred (100) square feet]; not exceed six (6) feet
in overall height from the ground level, or fifteen (15) feet at its highest point if elevated off the ground.
The area of the playhouse in combination with another permitted accessory structure less than 144
square feet must not exceed two hundred (200) square feet. Should the playhouse or treehouse be
determined by the city as no longer in use, in disrepair, or a threat to the health and safety of children or
residents, the owner shall remove the structure within thirty (30) days of written notice from the city zoning
administrator.
b. Through Lots: All accessory buildings greater than one hundred forty four (144) square feet
on through lots located in R districts shall require a conditional use permit.
D. Accessory Structures In Single-Family Residential Districts (R-1, R-1A, R-1B, And R-1C):
One private, single-level garage with a minimum floor area of four hundred forty (440) square feet and a
maximum area of one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet shall be required to be built concurrent
with the principal structure.
E. Temporary Family Healthcare Dwellings: Pursuant to authority granted by Minnesota statutes
section 462.3593, subdivision 9, the city of Mendota Heights opts out of the requirements of Minnesota
statutes section 462.3593, which defines and regulates temporary family healthcare dwellings. By opting
out, the city expressly prohibits temporary family healthcare dwellings as defined in Minnesota statutes
section 462.3593. (Ord. 429, 8-3-2010; amd. Ord. 454, 1-7-2014; Ord. 499, 8-2-2016; Ord. 508, 3-7-
2017; Ord. 553, 2-4-2020)
PC Page #35
Planning Staff Report
[Addendum ]
MEETING DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Case No. 2021-02
Conditional Use Permit and Variance for Oversized Detached Garage
APPLICANT: Mike Cashill
PROPERTY ADDRESS:806 Bachelor Avenue
ACTION DEADLINE:July 27, 2021 (60-Day Review Period Extended)
INTRODUCTION
At the April 27, 2021 regular Planning Commission meeting, the applicant (Mike Cashill) presented for
consideration a conditional use permit (CUP) to allow an over-sized detached garage, with added
variances to allow the garage to exceed the maximum area of 1,800-sq. ft. up to 2,400-sq. ft.; and allow the
garage to exceed the maximum height of 15-ft. up to 17.5-ft. (measured) or 24-ft. in overall height.
Pursuant to City Code Title 12-1D-3: Accessory Structures, larger single family sized parcels are allowed
to have an additional (or larger) detached private garage, either by permitted use or by conditional use
permit, according to the following table:
Lot Size Permitted Conditional Use Permit
0.75 acre or less Not allowed Not allowed
>0.75 acre - 1.5 acres 750 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft.
>1.5 acres - 2.5 acres 1,000 sq. ft. 1,200 sq. ft.
>2.5 acres 1,500 sq. ft. 1,800 sq. ft.
The subject property is 8-acres in size, so a 1,500-sf. detached would be permitted, while an 1,800-sf. garage
could be allowed by CUP. The proposed garage under this application was shown as 2,400-sf. , which is
600-sf over the maximum amount allowed under the CUP process. In order to allow (approve) this excess
garage space above 2,400 sq. ft., the Applicant was required to submit two variances to exceed the allowable
area and to exceed the maximum height of 15-ft. for accessory structures (see building elevations – below).
PC Page #36
This item was originally presented under a public hearing process; and after comments from the public; and
follow-up discussion with the applicant and staff, a motion was initially made to approve the CUP, but deny
the requests for variances. Based upon the discussions that evening, it appeared that some commissioners
felt the applicant should be afforded the right or ability to construct a larger garage, primarily due to his
larger than normal residential property; however, City Code specifically limits these accessory structure
sizes, and the requested variances were not supported (by the commissioners) under this application.
In order to avoid an unnecessary six month delay in Mr. Cashill’s project (note: per City Code, if a CUP is
denied, applicants must wait up to six months from a date of denial to reapply for another CUP request on
the property), Staff suggested this matter be tabled; and offered up one of two options for the commission
to consider:
1) allow Mr. Cashill to re-design and resubmit an amended site plan with architectural/building
elevation plans that show the detached garage will meet the max. 1,800-sq. ft. allowed under the
CUP process and one that meets the 15-ft. structure height standard, and bring a revised plan back
to the May 25th meeting; or
2) allow Staff to bring a proposed Zoning Code [text] amendment to change certain standards and
parameters under the Accessory Structure ordinance, which may eliminate the variances requested
under this application review; bring those changes to the commission at the May 25th meeting, and
if found to be acceptable, the new CUP could theoretically be approved based on new (allowable)
accessory structure standards.
PC Page #37
The Commission elected to TABLE this matter to the May 25th meeting, and kept the public hearing open.
The commission further directed staff to work on an Zoning Code amendment for further consideration at
the same May 25th meeting.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
The amendments that directly impact or affect the successful outcome of this CUP/over-sized garage
structure, includes a provision to allow accessory structures exceeding 2,000 sq. ft. may now be up to 18
feet or 20’ in mid-point measured height (staff seeking input form the commission on this height allowance
standard); and the table has been modified to include parcels 5-acres or more can have up to 2,000-sq. ft.
as a permitted right or up to 2,600-sq. ft. with a conditional use permit (see amended table – below):
Lot Size Permitted Conditional Use Permit
0.75 acre or less Not allowed Not allowed
>0.75 acre - 1.5 acres 750 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft.
>1.5 acres - 2.5 acres 1,000 sq. ft. 1,200 sq. ft.
>2.5 acres - 5.0 acres 1,500 sq. ft. 1,800 sq. ft.
>5.0 acres 2,000 sq. ft. 2,600 sq. ft.
AMENDED ANALYSIS
Conditional Use Permit
Should the city accept the proposed changes offered in the Accessory Structure ordinance, then the
Applicant’s need for a variance to exceed the CUP maximum area of 1,800-sf. and height variance of 17’-
6” would no longer be needed. However, a conditional use permit is still needed to approve the garage over
the 2,000-sf. (proposed) limits.
Title 12-1L-6-E-1 of the City Code contains standards for reviewing a conditional use permit request, with
the following standards to be taken into consideration:
The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community;
will not cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards;
will not seriously depreciate surrounding property value; and
the proposed use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City Code and the
comprehensive plan.
The new garage remains as a very nice design with exceptional exterior building finish materials. The
garage is designed to match with the appearance and architectural elements of the current home; and should
easily accommodate the needs of parking additional personal vehicles and equipment. The Applicant has
submitted a revised aerial Site Plan that illustrates the approximate location of the new garage with a
driveway layout.
The Applicant stated he intends to keep the garage at least 10-feet or more from the adjacent property line,
with the understanding that any increased setback will be used to minimize or reduce additional tree
removals in this area. City staff will work with the Applicant in determining the final location as part of
the building permit review process.
PC Page #38
The easterly property line meets the city’s Par-3 Golf property, and along this shared line is a row of planted
and volunteer type trees, that provide an effective screen and buffer between properties. The north sides of
the subject property are also heavily wooded and provide a nice buffer and screening for residences to the
north.
As was noted in the original May 25th Planning Report, the new garage is being placed near the east edge
of the site, in a slightly lower elevated section of the property. This area chosen by the Applicant does
contain some trees that are slated to be removed as part of this project. The city’s Natural Resources
Technician inspected the garage site and the impacted trees, and in her professional opinion “…the trees in
this garage layout space were not of high-quality; most appeared to be planted or volunteer red pine and
boxelder trees – most of which had storm damage or not very healthy. There were some mature cherry
trees as well, but nothing significant that could be replaced with new trees and vegetation.”
Mr. Cashill stated to city staff that he intends to plant three (3) white pines, three (3) birch trees; and two
(2) flowering crab trees as part of this garage project.
Staff has amended its recommendations on the conditions of approval to include a landscape/tree
replacement plan as part of this new garage project, which will include native or pollinator friendly
plantings, and must be reviewed for completeness and appropriateness by the city’s Natural Resources
Technician and other city staff as needed.
This larger parcel owned by the Applicant is somewhat of an anomaly in this community, and there are
very few residential parcels in this community that share or compare in size to this property. By calculating
and comparing a building to land ratio, and comparing the city code allowance versus the proposed, staff
notes the following:
x 1,800-sf. garage with a 2.5 ac. (min.) parcel: 1,800-sf. / 108,900-sf. = .0165% (bldg. to land area)
x 2,400-sf. garage on 8-acres (subject) parcel: 2,400-sf. / 348,480-sf. = .0069% (bldg. to land area)
As demonstrated above, the proposed oversized garage on this very large parcel should have minimal or
nominal impacts on lot coverage; nor should it create any significant impacts or concerns to added
impervious surface coverage.
Due to the over-sized nature and scale of the Applicant’s property at this location, staff believes the new,
larger garage will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the neighborhood or the
community; or cause any serious traffic congestion, hazards; or seriously depreciate surrounding property
values. This proposed garage appears to be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City
Code and the comprehensive plan; and the CUP to allow a larger, oversized garage can be reasonably
supported due to the size and scale of this larger residential parcel.
AMENDED ALTERNATIVE(S) for ACTION
These alternatives have been modified from the April 27, 2021 Planning Report to reflect only the
consideration of a conditional use permit (CUP) to allow an accessory structure up to 2,400-sq. ft. and
without any variances, but is based on the understanding the city needs to accept the proposed amendments
to City Code Title 12-1D-3: Accessory Structures ordinance. If the Planning Commission chooses to reject
the new accessory structure standards, or modifies said standards that may make this CUP application still
subject to additional variances, then the commissioners should refer back to the original alternatives of
PC Page #39
action as stated in the April 27th Planning Report (Case No. 2021-02), along with the original findings-of-
facts and conditions noted therein.
If the Planning Commission deems this CUP as acceptable (subject to the amended standards) then the city
may consider the following recommendation:
1.Pursuant to City Code Title 12-1L-6: Conditional Uses, the city council shall consider the advice and
recommendations of the planning commission and the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety,
and welfare of occupants or surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions including
parking facilities on adjacent streets, and the effect of the proposed use on the comprehensive plan. As
part of the review of this proposed project and plan as presented under Planning Case No. 2021-02, the
Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of the conditional use permit to allow a proposed
detached oversized garage up to 2,400-sq. ft. in area and up to 17.5-ft. in height, based on the following
findings-of-fact:
A.In accordance with City Code Title 12-1D-3: Accessory Structures [amended], residential
properties of 5 acres or greater are allowed to have one additional detached garage up to 2,600-sq.
ft. in size by means of a conditional use permit, and the Applicant has demonstrated a reasonable
need and justification for the garage, which is supported by the following findings-of-facts:
i. The proposed oversized detached garage on the subject residential property is found to be in
generally conformance with many other provisions and standards of the City Code, and meets
other related City Code standards such as setbacks, appearance and aesthetics.
ii. The large (8-acres) subject property is somewhat unique when compared with other typical
single family residential properties in the community; therefore, the proposed over-sized
detached garage under this application can be considered a reasonable request and may be
viewed as being consistent with the City Code and Comprehensive Plan.
iii. The proposed over-sized detached garage will not cause or create any negative impacts to the
surrounding properties or subject property.
iv. The proposed over-sized detached 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.
v. The proposed over-sized detached garage will be compliant with the conditions included in
the [amended] City Code that allow it by conditional use permit.
vi. The proposed over-sized detached garage represents a reasonable reinvestment in a
residential property and neighborhood that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s goals
for residential land uses.
B.Pursuant to City Code Section 12-1L-6: Conditional Uses, the city has the authority to place
reasonable conditions upon the property subject to any conditional use permit request, provided
these conditions are directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact created by the
conditional use permit. Conditions related to this application are as follows:
PC Page #40
1.The new detached garage must match the overall architecture and design of the existing
residential dwelling on the subject property.
2.The proposed garage addition and all other proposed improvements shall be constructed in
compliance with all applicable City Code and State of Minnesota Building Code standards.
3.The garage will be setback a minimum of ten feet (10’) or more from the side yard, and the
Applicant/Owner agrees to work with city staff in determining the final location in order
to reduce or eliminate additional removal of trees in this area.
4.The applicant shall obtain a building permit prior to any excavation or construction of the
new garage addition.
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. Full erosion and sedimentation measures will be put in place prior to
and during grading and construction work activities.
6.As part of the building permit review process, a landscape/tree replacement plan, which
will include native or pollinator friendly plantings, must be submitted for review,
completeness and appropriateness to the city’s Natural Resources Technician and other
city staff as needed.
7.Approval of this conditional use permit is contingent upon City Council approval of the
application and corresponding site plan. If the conditional use permit is approved by the
City Council, the Applicant shall obtain a building permit for construction of the proposed
garage structure within one-year from said approval date.
2.Pursuant to City Code Title 12-1L-6: Conditional Uses may be denied by resolution of the city council,
and such resolution shall include a finding and determination that the conditions required for approval
do not exist. The city hereby finds the following:
A. Under City Code Title 12-1L-6: Conditional Uses, the city council shall consider the advice and
recommendations of the planning commission and the effect of the proposed use upon the health,
safety, and welfare of occupants or surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions
including parking facilities on adjacent streets, and the effect of the proposed use on the
comprehensive plan. As part of the review of this proposed project and plan as presented under
Planning Case No. 2021-02, the city hereby finds:
i. The proposed oversized detached garage on the subject residential property is found not to be
in general conformance with the provisions and standards of City Code Title 12-1D-3:
Accessory Structures.
ii. Although the large 8-acre sized subject property is somewhat unique in the community, the
over-sized detached garage is determined not to be a reasonable request and is viewed as being
inconsistent with the City Code and Comprehensive Plan.
iii. The proposed over-sized detached garage may cause or create negative impacts to the
surrounding properties or the subject property.
PC Page #41
iv. The proposed over-sized detached garage is found to be a potential detriment to the health,
safety or general welfare of the community; may depreciate surrounding property values; and
said use appears to be not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City Code and
the Comprehensive Plan.
3.Table the request and direct staff to work with the Applicant to provide other options or an optional
plan to be brought back for continued consideration at the July 27, 2021 meeting. If this alternative is
selected, the Applicant must agree to waive or extend the statutory review period, in compliance with
MN STAT. 15.99. (Note: if the Applicant chooses not to waive or extend this review period, then one
of the Alternatives for Action in this May 25
th Planning Report or the previous April 27th Planning
Report must be acted on).
ATTACHMENTS
1. April 27, 2021 Planning Report for Case No. 2021-02 (with related plan attachments)
2. Revised Site Plan – Garage Location
PC Page #42
SITE IMAGES
LOOKING SOUTHWARD – TOWARDS ENTRANCE OFF BACHELOR AVENUE
LOOKING WESTERLY – TOWARDS DWELLING
PC Page #43
LOOKING NORTHERLY – TOWARDS LOCATION OF NEW GARAGE
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF NEW GARAGE (NOTE MARKING STAKES – RED CIRCLES)
PC Page #44
4*5&1-"/#"$)&-03"7&3523(57</,1(PC Page #45
PROPERTY LINE
PC Page #46
10'-0"10'-09'-0"10'-0
PC Page #47
3ODQQLQJ6WDII5HSRUW
0((7,1*'$7( $SULO
72 3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ
)520 7LP%HQHWWL&RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW'LUHFWRU
68%-(&7 3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R
&RQGLWLRQDO8VH3HUPLW DQG9DULDQFHIRU2YHUVL]HG'HWDFKHG*DUDJH
$33/,&$17 0LNH&DVKLOO
3523(57<$''5(66 %DFKHORU$YHQXH
$&7,21'($'/,1( 0D\
,1752'8&7,21
7KH DSSOLFDQWLVVHHNLQJ D FRQGLWLRQDO XVH SHUPLW IRU DQ RYHUVL]HG G HWDFKHGJDUDJHZLWKPXOWLSOH
YDULDQFHVWRWKHIROORZLQJGHWDFKHGDFFHVVRU\VWUXFWXUHVWDQGDUGV D DOORZJDUDJHWRH[FHHGWKHPD[LPXP
DUHDRIVTIWXSWRVTIW DQG E DOORZJDUDJHWRH[FHHGWKHPD[LPXPKHLJKWRIIWXSWR
IWIWLQRYHUDOOKHLJKW
7KLVLWHPLVEHLQJSUHVHQWHGXQGHUDGXO\QRWLFHGSXEOLFKHDULQJSURFHVV$QRWLFHRIKHDULQJZDVSXEOLVKHG
LQWKH3LRQHHU3UHVV DQGQRWLFHOHWWHUVZHUHPDLOHGWRDOOQHLJKERULQJSURSHUW\RZQHUVZLWKLQIHHWRI
WKHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\7KHFLW\UHFHLYHGQRREMHFWLRQVRUFRPPHQWVIURPWKHQHLJKERULQJSURSHUWLHV
'(6&5,37,212)7+(5(48(67
7KH VXEMHFW VLWH LV JHQHUDOO\ ORFDWHG
LPPHGLDWHO\ZHVWRIWKH3DU*ROI&RXUVH
see aerial image- right 7KH SURSHUW\
FRQVLVWV RI DSSUR[LPDWHO\ DFUHV DQG
FRQWDLQVDODUJHVLQJOHIDPLO\GZHOOLQJ
image – below QHDUWKHFHQWUDOSDUWRIWKH
SURSHUW\ 0RVW RI WKH DUHDV DURXQG WKH
SHULPHWHURIWKHSDUFHODUHZRRGHGDQGWKH
KRPH LV YHU\ ZHOO VFUHHQHG IURP WKH
QHLJKERULQJKRPHVWRWKHQRUWKRII'HHU7UDLO
3DWK DQG WKH KRPHV DORQJ VRXWK VLGH RI
%DFKHORU$YHQXH
PC Page #48
3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R 0 &DVKLOO 3DJH
7KHFXUUHQWKRPHKDVDILQLVKHGVTXDUHIRRWDJHVSDFHRI VIZLWKDQDWWDFKHGJDUDJHRIVTIW
)RUSURSHUWLHVODUJHHQRXJKWRKDYH ERWKDQ DWWDFKHGDQGGHWDFKHGJDUDJHWKHFRPELQHGJDUDJHEXLOGLQJ
IRRWSULQWDUHDPXVWQRWH[FHHG WKHILQLVKHGVTXDUHIRRWDJHRIWKHSULQFLSDOVWUXFWXUH
7KH2ZQHU$SSOLFDQWLVVHHNLQJWREXLOGDQHZ¶[¶ VTIW GHWDFKHGJDUDJHVWUXFWXUHZLWKD
PLGSRLQWPHDVXUHGKHLJKWRI¶´DQGDQRYHUDOO XSSHUPRVW KHLJKWRIIHHW
7KHJDUDJHLVSODQQHGWREHSODFHGQHDUWKHHDVWHGJHRIWKHSURSHUW\VHWEDFNDSSUR[LPDWHO\IW IURP
WKLVHDVWHUO\ SURSHUW\OLQH$VHSDUDWH QHZ DVSKDOWGULYHZD\LVSODQQHGWRVHUYHWKHQHZJDUDJHZKLFK
ZLOOFRPHRIIWKHPDLQGULYHZD\
PC Page #49
3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R 0 &DVKLOO 3DJH
$1$/<6,6
&RQGLWLRQDO8VH3HUPLW
3XUVXDQWWR&LW\&RGH7LWOH' $FFHVVRU\6WUXFWXUHVRZQHUVRIODUJHUVLQJOHIDPLO\VL]HGSDUFHOV
DUH DOORZHG WR KDYH DQ DGGLWLRQDO RU ODUJHU GHWDFKHG SULYDWHJDUDJH HLWKHU E\ SHUPLWWHG XVH RU E\
FRQGLWLRQDOXVHSHUPLWDFFRUGLQJWRWKHIROORZLQJWDEOH
>Žƚ^ŝnjĞ WĞƌŵŝƚƚĞĚ ŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůhƐĞWĞƌŵŝƚ
Ϭ͘ϳϱĂĐƌĞŽƌůĞƐƐ EŽƚĂůůŽǁĞĚ EŽƚĂůůŽǁĞĚ
хϬ͘ϳϱĂĐƌĞͲϭ͘ϱĂĐƌĞƐ ϳϱϬƐƋ͘Ĩƚ͘ ϭ͕ϬϬϬƐƋ͘Ĩƚ͘
хϭ͘ϱĂĐƌĞƐͲ Ϯ͘ϱĂĐƌĞƐ ϭ͕ϬϬϬƐƋ͘Ĩƚ͘ ϭ͕ϮϬϬƐƋ͘Ĩƚ͘
хϮ͘ϱĂĐƌĞƐ ϭ͕ϱϬϬƐƋ͘Ĩƚ͘ ϭ͕ϴϬϬƐƋ͘Ĩƚ͘
7KHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\LVDFUHVLQVL]HVRDVIGHWDFKHGZRXOGEHSHUPLWWHGZKLOHDQVIJDUDJH
PD\EHDOORZHGE\FRQGLWLRQDOXVHSHUPLW 7KHJDUDJHSURSRVHGXQGHUWKLVDSSOLFDWLRQLVVIZKLFK
LVVIRYHUWKHPD[LPXPDPRXQWDOORZHGXQGHUWKH&83SURFHVV
%HFDXVHWKLVLVDQRYHUVL]HGJDUDJHVWDIIUHTXLUHGWKHDSSOLFDQWWRVXEPLWERWKWKHFRQGLWLRQDO XVHSHUPLW
DQGYDULDQFHDSSOLFDWLRQ WRH[FHHGWKHVL]HDQGKHLJKWVWDQGDUGV DVQRWHGSUHYLRXVO\LQRUGHUWRUHFHLYHDQ\
DSSURYDOVRIWKLVVWUXFWXUH
7LWOH/(RIWKH&LW\&RGHFRQWDLQVVWDQGDUGVIRUUHYLHZLQJDFRQGLWLRQDOXVHSHUPLWUHTXHVWZLWK
WKHIROORZLQJVWDQGDUGVWREHWDNHQLQWRFRQVLGHUDWLRQ
The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community;
will not cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards;
will not seriously depreciate surrounding property value; and
the proposed use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City Code and the
comprehensive plan.
7KHQHZJDUDJHSURSRVHGE\WKH$SSOLFDQWDSSHDUVWREHDYHU\QLFHGHVLJQ LVLQWHQGHGWRPDWFKZLWKWKH
DSSHDUDQFHDQGDUFKLWHFWXUDOHOHPHQWVRIWKHFXUUHQWKRPH DQGVKRXOGHDVLO\DFFRPPRGDWHWKHQHHGVRI
SDUNLQJDGGLWLRQDOSHUVRQDOYHKLFOHV DQGHTXLSPHQW $OOVHWEDFNVZLOOEHPHWXQGHUWKLVSODQ
%DVHG RQWKHVLWHSLFWXUH image-right DQGVLWH
LQVSHFWLRQ0U&DVKLOOPDUNHGRXWWKHORFDWLRQ
RI WKH QHZ JDUDJH ZLWK JUHHQ VXUYH\ VWDNHV
FLUFOHGLQ5(' ,WDSSHDUVDSSUR[LPDWHO\ ±
WUHHVZLOOEHUHPRYHGWRPDNHURRPIRUWKLV
JDUDJH0RVWRIWKHWUHHVDSSHDUWREHVPDOOHU
VFUXEYROXQWHHU GHFLGXRXV WUHHV DQG D IHZ
HYHUJUHHQWUHVVDVZHOO7KHDUHDORFDWHGEHKLQG
WKH JDUDJH VSDFH ULVHV XS D ELW LQ HOHYDWLRQ
ZKLFK WLHV LQWR WKH H[LVWLQJ JUDGHVHOHYDWLRQV
FRPLQJRIIWKHZHVWHUO\HGJHRIWKH3DU
SURSHUW\7KH$SSOLFDQWLQWHQGVWRVDYHRU
SURWHFW WKHVH WUHHV DV SDUW RI D FRQWLQXRXV
VFUHHQLQJEXIIHULQJIURPWKHFRXUVH
PC Page #50
3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R 0 &DVKLOO 3DJH
7RWKHQRUWKRIWKHJDUDJHDODUJHDUHDRIWKLVSURSHUW\LVDOVRZRRGHGDQGEXIIHUHGIURPWKHUHVLGHQFHVWR
WKHQRUWK DQGWKHJDUDJHZLOOEHVSDFHGIDUHQRXJKDZD\WKDWLWLVXQOLNHO\QHLJKERULQJRZQHUVZLOOVHHWKH
JDUDJHIURPWKHLUORFDWLRQV
7KLVODUJHUSDUFHORZQHGE\WKH$SSOLFDQWLVVRPHZKDWRIDQDQRPDO\LQWKLVFRPPXQLW\DQGWKHUHDUH
YHU\IHZUHVLGHQWLDOSDUFHOVLQWKLV FRPPXQLW\WKDWVKDUHRUFRPSDUHLQVL]HWRWKLVSURSHUW\%\FDOFXODWLQJ
DQGFRPSDULQJDEXLOGLQJWRODQGUDWLRDQGFRPSDULQJWKHFLW\FRGHDOORZDQFHYHUVXVWKHSURSRVHGVWDII
QRWHVWKHIROORZLQJ
x VIJDUDJHZLWKDDF PLQ SDUFHO VI VI EOGJWRODQGDUHD
x VIJDUDJHRQDFUHV VXEMHFW SDUFHO VIVI EOGJWRODQGDUHD
$V GHPRQVWUDWHG DERYH WKH SURSRVHG RYHUVL]HG JDUDJH RQ WKLV YHU\ ODUJH SDUFHO ZRXOG KDYH
PLQLPDOQRPLQDOLPSDFWVRQORWFRYHUDJH QRUZRXOG LW FUHDWH DQ\VLJQLILFDQWLPSDFWVRUDGGLWLRQWR
LPSHUYLRXVVXUIDFHFRYHUDJH
'XHWRWKHRYHUVL]HGQDWXUHDQGVFDOHRIWKH$SSOLFDQW¶VSURSHUW\DWWKLVORFDWLRQVWDIIEHOLHYHVWKHQHZ
ODUJHUJDUDJHZLOOQRWEHGHWULPHQWDOWRWKHKHDOWKVDIHW\RUJHQHUDOZHOIDUHRIWKHQHLJKERUKRRGRUWKH
FRPPXQLW\ RUFDXVHDQ\VHULRXVWUDIILFFRQJHVWLRQKD]DUGV RUVHULRXVO\GHSUHFLDWHVXUURXQGLQJSURSHUW\
YDOXHV7KLVSURSRVHGJDUDJHDSSHDUVWREHLQKDUPRQ\ZLWKWKHJHQHUDOSXUSRVHDQGLQWHQWRIWKH&LW\
&RGHDQGWKHFRPSUHKHQVLYHSODQ DQGWKH&83WRDOORZDODUJHURYHUVL]HGJDUDJHFDQEHUHDVRQDEO\
VXSSRUWHG GXHWRWKHVL]HDQGVFDOHRIWKLVODUJHUUHVLGHQWLDOSDUFHO
9DULDQFHV
'XHWRWKHRYHUDOOVL]HRIWKHVXEMHFW SURSHUW\DQGWKHGHVLUHWRSURYLGHDGGLWLRQDOVWRUDJHVSDFHRQWKH
SURSHUW\WKHDSSOLFDQWLVDOVRVHHNLQJWKHWZRYDULDQFHVWRH[FHHGWKHDOORZDEOHDUHDRIDGHWDFKHGJDUDJH
IURPVIWRVI DQGDOORZWKHJDUDJHWRH[FHHGWKHPD[LPXPKHLJKWRIIHHWIRUDFFHVVRU\
VWUXFWXUHVXSWRIHHW PLGSRLQWPHDVXUHPHQW DQGDQRYHUDOOKHLJKWRIIHHW
&LW\&RGH6HFWLRQ/JRYHUQVYDULDQFHUHTXHVWV7KH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQPXVWFRQVLGHUDQXPEHU
RIYDULDEOHVZKHQUHFRPPHQGLQJRUGHFLGLQJRQDYDULDQFHZKLFKJHQHUDOO\IDOOLQWRWZRFDWHJRULHV L
SUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV DQG LL LPSDFWWRWKHFRPPXQLW\
7KH³SUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV´WHVWFRQWDLQVWKUHHSDUWV L WKHSURSHUW\RZQHUSURSRVHVWRXVHWKHSURSHUW\LQ
D UHDVRQDEOHPDQQHU QRWRWKHUZLVHSHUPLWWHGE\WKH]RQLQJRUGLQDQFH LL WKHSOLJKWRIWKHSURSHUW\RZQHU
LVGXHWRFLUFXPVWDQFHVXQLTXH WRWKHSURSHUW\QRWFUHDWHGE\WKHSURSHUW\RZQHU DQG LLL WKHYDULDQFHZLOO
QRWDOWHUWKHHVVHQWLDOFKDUDFWHU RIWKHQHLJKERUKRRG$OVRHFRQRPLFFRQVLGHUDWLRQVDORQH GRQRWFRQVWLWXWH
SUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV
6HFWLRQ/ ( IXUWKHUUHIHUHQFHVRWKHUYDULDEOHVWKH&LW\FDQFRQVLGHUZKHQJUDQWLQJRUGHQ\LQJD
YDULDQFHQRWHGDVIROORZV
x Effect of variance upon health, safety, and welfare of the community.
x Existing and anticipated traffic conditions.
x Effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and the risk to public safety.
x Effect on the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan.
x Granting of the variance is not a convenience to the applicant, but necessary to alleviate a practical
difficulty.
PC Page #51
3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R 0 &DVKLOO 3DJH
:KHQFRQVLGHULQJDYDULDQFHUHTXHVWWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQPXVWGHWHUPLQHLIWKHVHVWDQGDUGVKDYH
EHHQPHWLQJUDQWLQJDYDULDQFHDQGSURYLGHILQGLQJVRIIDFWVWRVXSSRUWVXFKDUHFRPPHQGDWLRQWRWKH
&LW\&RXQFLO,IWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQGHWHUPLQHVWKH$SSOLFDQWKDVIDLOHGWRPHHWWKHVHVWDQGDUGVRU
KDV QRW IXOO\ GHPRQVWUDWHG D UHDVRQDEOHQHVV LQ WKH JUDQWLQJ RIVXFK YDULDQFH WKHQ ILQGLQJVRIIDFW
VXSSRUWLQJDUHFRPPHQGDWLRQRIGHQLDOPXVWEHGHWHUPLQHG
$VSDUWRIDQ\YDULDQFHUHTXHVW$SSOLFDQWVDUHUHTXLUHGWRSUHSDUHDQGVXEPLWWKHLURZQUHVSRQVHVDQG
ILQGLQJVZKLFKIRUWKLVFDVHDUHQRWHGEHORZ LQitalic WH[W
7KHSURSHUW\RZQHUSURSRVHVWRXVHWKHSURSHUW\LQDUHDVRQDEOHPDQQHU QRWRWKHUZLVHSHUPLWWHG
E\WKH]RQLQJRUGLQDQFH
ƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ͛ƐZĞƐƉŽŶƐĞ͗/ƐƚŚŝƐsĂƌŝĂŶĐĞƌĞĂƐŽŶĂďůĞ͍zĞƐ͕ĂƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƐŝnjĞŝƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽƐƚŽƌĞĂůůŽĨƚŚĞ
ĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJƚŽƉƌŽƉĞƌůLJŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶĂůŽƚŽĨϴĂĐƌĞƐ͘DLJƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJďĂĐŬƐƵƉƚŽƚŚĞsĂůůĞLJWĂƌŬĂŶĚƚŚĞ
DĞŶĚŽƚĂ,ĞŝŐŚƚƐWĂƌϯŐŽůĨĐŽƵƌƐĞ͘/ŚĂǀĞǀĞƌLJĨĞǁŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ͘dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞǁŝůůŶŽƚďĞĂďůĞƚŽďĞ
ǀŝĞǁĞĚďLJƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ͘dŚĞƌĞĨŽƌĞ͕ŝƚǁŝůůŶŽƚĂĨĨĞĐƚƚŚĞŚĞĂůƚŚ͕ƐĂĨĞƚLJ͕ĂŶĚǁĞůĨĂƌĞŽĨƚŚĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͕ŽƌƉŽƐĞ
ĂŶLJƌŝƐŬƚŽƚŚĞƉƵďůŝĐƐĂĨĞƚLJĂŶĚǁŝůůŶŽƚĂĨĨĞĐƚƚŚĞǀĂůƵĞŽĨƉƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐŝŶƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĂƌĞĂ͘
6WDII¶V5HVSRQVH )RUDSURSHUW\RIWKLVVL]HLWPD\VHHPIDLURUUHDVRQDEOHWRDOORZRZQHUVZLWK
ODUJHUSDUFHOVWRUHTXHVWDGGLWLRQDOVWUXFWXUDOVWDQGDUGV HVSHFLDOO\LILWLVGHWHUPLQHGWKHSURMHFWZLOO
KDYHOLWWOH RUQRLPSDFWV XSRQWKHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\DQGPRUHSDUWLFXODUO\ WKHVXUURXQGLQJSURSHUWLHV
7KHFLW\PXVWGHWHUPLQHLIWKHUHTXHVWHGYDULDQFHV WRH[FHHGWKHPD[LPXPDFFHVVRU\JDUDJHVL]HXQGHU
D &83 DQG H[FHVV JDUDJH KHLJKW VWDQGDUGV DUH UHDVRQDEOH DQG KDV WKH $SSOLFDQW DGHTXDWHO\
GHPRQVWUDWHGRUSURYHQWKLVLVDUHDVRQDEOHUHTXHVWDQGSURYLGHVXSSRUWDEOHDUJXPHQWVWKLVSURMHFW
DQGYDULDQFH LVDFFHSWDEOH
7KHSOLJKWRIWKHSURSHUW\RZQHULVGXHWRFLUFXPVWDQFHVXQLTXH WRWKHSURSHUW\QRWFUHDWHGE\
WKHSURSHUW\RZQHU
ƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ͛ƐZĞƐƉŽŶƐĞ͗/ůŝǀĞŽŶĂŶϴĂĐƌĞƉĂƌĐĞůŽĨůĂŶĚĂŶĚĂŵƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐĂǀĂƌŝĂŶĐĞƚŽďƵŝůĚĂϲϬĨŽŽƚǁŝĚĞ
ďLJϰϬĨŽŽƚĚĞĞƉƐƚŽƌĂŐĞƐŚĞĚ͘DLJƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŝƐƵŶŝƋƵĞŝŶƚŚĂƚŝƚŝƐŽŶĞŽĨƚŚĞůĂƌŐĞƌƉƌŝǀĂƚĞƉĂƌĐĞůƐŽĨůĂŶĚŝŶƚŚĞ
ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJĂŶĚŝƚƚĂŬĞƐĂƐƵďƐƚĂŶƚŝĂůĂŵŽƵŶƚŽĨĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚƚŽƉƌŽƉĞƌůLJĐĂƌĞĨŽƌŝƚ͘dŚĞƌĞĨŽƌĞ͕ŝƚŝƐŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJƚŽ
ďƵŝůĚĂƐƚŽƌĂŐĞŐĂƌĂŐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƐŝnjĞƚŽƐƚŽƌĞĂŶĚŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶƚŚĞĂŵŽƵŶƚŽĨĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJƚŽƉƌŽƉĞƌůLJĐĂƌĞ
ĂŶĚŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƉĂƌĐĞů͘^ŽŵĞŽĨƚŚĞĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚŶĞĞĚĞĚĂƌĞƐŶŽǁďůŽǁĞƌƐ͕ƵƐŚŵĂŶĂƌƌLJůůŐŽůĨĐĂƌƚ͕
ďĂĐŬƉĂĐŬďůŽǁĞƌƐ͕ĨĞƌƚŝůŝnjĞƌƐƉƌĞĂĚĞƌƐ͕ůĂǁŶŵŽǁĞƌƐ͕ƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐ͕ǁŽŽĚĐŚŝƉƉĞƌƐ͕ƚƌŝŵŵĞƌƐ͕ƚƌĂŝůĞƌƐĂŶĚĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ
ĨŽƌĐĂƌŝŶŐĨŽƌŵLJĂƉƉůĞƚƌĞĞƐ͘/ŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶĂϲϬĨŽŽƚdžϭϮϬĨŽŽƚŝĐĞƌŝŶŬŝŶŵLJƐŝĚĞLJĂƌĚĂŶĚŶĞĞĚĂĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJƚŽƐƚŽƌĞ
ƚŚŝƐĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ/ůŝŬĞƚŽŚĂǀĞĂĐůĞĂŶLJĂƌĚĂŶĚůŝŬĞƚŽƚĂŬĞĐĂƌĞŽĨŵLJĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ͕ƐŽ/ĚŽŶŽƚǁĂŶƚƚŽůĞĂǀĞ
ĂŶLJƚŚŝŶŐŽƵƚŝŶƚŚĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘/ĂůƐŽǁĂŶƚƚŽďĞƌĞƐƉĞĐƚĨƵůĨŽƌƚŚŽƐĞŝŶƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͕ƚŽŬĞĞƉĂĐůĞĂŶLJĂƌĚ
ĨƌĞĞŽĨĐůƵƚƚĞƌĂŶĚĚĞďƌŝƐ͘
6WDII¶V5HVSRQVH 7KHFLW\ZLOODGPLWWKLVSURSHUW\LVWUXO\³XQLTXH´ZKHQFRPSDUHGWRPDQ\RWKHU
VLQJOHIDPLO\UHVLGHQWLDOSURSHUWLHVWKURXJKRXWWKHFLW\$JDLQWKHFLW\PXVWGHWHUPLQHLIWKHUHTXHVWHG
YDULDQFHWRDOORZWKHLQFUHDVHGJDUDJHDUHDDQGKHLJKWDQGWKHUHDVRQVVWDWHGKHUHLQIRUWKHDGGHG
VWRUDJHVSDFH E\WKH$SSOLFDQWDUH³XQLTXH´HQRXJKWRVXSSRUWVXFKDYDULDQFHDSSURYDO
7KH YDULDQFH ZLOO QRW DOWHU WKH HVVHQWLDO FKDUDFWHU RI WKH QHLJKERUKRRG DQG HFRQRPLF
FRQVLGHUDWLRQVDORQH GR QRWFRQVWLWXWHSUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV
ƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ͛ƐZĞƐƉŽŶƐĞ͗dŚŝƐƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞǁŝůůŵĂƚĐŚŵLJĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐŚŽŵĞĂŶĚďůĞŶĚŝŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŽĨ
ƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞŝƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚƚŽŵĂƚĐŚŵLJĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐŚŽƵƐĞƵƐŝŶŐƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƐƚŽŶĞĂŶĚ
ƐƚƵĐĐŽŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐĂƐ/ŚĂǀĞŽŶŵLJŚŽŵĞ͘/ƉůĂŶƚŽƵƐĞƚŚĞĞdžĂĐƚƐĂŵĞƐŚŝŶŐůĞĨŽƌƚŚĞƌŽŽĨƚŽŵĂŬĞƐƵƌĞƚŚĞ
ƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƐŵĂƚĐŚĞĂĐŚŽƚŚĞƌ͘
PC Page #52
3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R 0 &DVKLOO 3DJH
6WDII¶V5HVSRQVH 7KHH[LVWLQJQHLJKERUKRRGLVDOOUHVLGHQWLDOLQFKDUDFWHU7KHSODFHPHQWRIWKLV
JDUDJHQHDUWKHHDVWHGJHDQGORZHUDUHDRIWKHSURSHUW\DORQJZLWKNHHSLQJWKHH[LVWLQJZRRGODQGV
VXUURXQGLQJWKHSURSHUW\DORQHVKRXOGUHGXFHDQ\YLVXDOLPSDFWVDQGSURYLGHDGHTXDWHEXIIHUDQG
VFUHHQLQJ IRUP WKH QHLJKERUV 6WDII GRHV QRWEHOLHYH WKH ODUJHUJDUDJHZRXOGDOWHUWKHHVVHQWLDO
FKDUDFWHURIWKHQHLJKERUKRRG
5HVWULFWLRQVRQ*UDQWLQJ9DULDQFHV
7KHIROORZLQJUHVWULFWLRQVVKRXOGEHFRQVLGHUHGZKHQUHYLHZLQJDYDULDQFH
D Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
:KHQZHLJKLQJWKHHFRQRPLFIDFWRU V RIDYDULDQFHDSSOLFDWLRQWDNLQJHFRQRPLFFRQVLGHUDWLRQV
DORQHVKRXOGQRWEHWKHRQO\UHDVRQIRUGHQ\LQJ RUHYHQDSSURYLQJDYDULDQFH,QWKLVSDUWLFXODU
FDVHWKHSURSHUW\RZQHULVUHTXHVWLQJWRDGGDQRYHUVL]HGJDUDJHWKDWEHWWHUVXLWVKLVSHUVRQDO
VWRUDJHQHHGVZKLFKLVOLNHO\PRUHRIDQDGGHGQHHGRQWKLVSDUFHOWKDQDVPDOOHURUQRUPDOVL]HG
ORWLQWKHFLW\7KLVQHZRYHUVL]HGGHWDFKHGJDUDJHZLOOPRVWGHILQLWHO\SURYLGH WKHDGGHGVWRUDJH
VSDFHLQGLFDWHGE\WKH$SSOLFDQWDVDQHFHVVLW\ DQGWRVRPHH[WHQWWKHQHZJDUDJHDGGVHFRQRPLF
YDOXHWRWKHSURSHUW\YDOXH DQGRUPDUNHWDELOLW\
$OWKRXJKWKH$SSOLFDQWVWDWHVWKHJDUDJHVKRXOGQRWLPSDFWDQ\QHLJKERULQJSURSHUWLHVLWLV
UHTXLUHGWRGHPRQVWUDWHUHDVRQDEOHSUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHVLQVXSSRUWLQJRUJUDQWLQJRIDYDULDQFH,W
LVQRWFOHDUKRZHFRQRPLFFRQVLGHUDWLRQVDORQHPD\DIIHFWWKHRXWFRPHRIWKLVYDULDQFHUHTXHVWDV
WKH\GRQRWDSSHDUWREHWKHVROH UHDVRQIRUUHMHFWLQJWKLVYDULDQFH
b)Variances are only to be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan.
7KHVXEMHFW SURSHUW\LV]RQHG52QH)DPLO\5HVLGHQWLDO DQGLVGHVLJQDWHG/5/RZ'HQVLW\
5HVLGHQWLDOLQWKHFXUUHQW&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQDQGWKHSURSRVHG3ODQ&HUWDLQODQGXVH
JRDOVDQGSROLFLHVDUHQRWHGEHORZ
x LUG #1: Maintain and enrich the mature, fully developed residential environment and
character of the community.
x LUP #5: Emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and a high general aesthetic level
in community development and building.
x LUP #2.2.2: Emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and a high general aesthetic
level in community development and building.
7KH JXLGLQJ SULQFLSOHV LQ WKH FRPSUHKHQVLYH SODQ SURYLGH IRU PDLQWDLQLQJ SUHVHUYLQJ DQG
HQKDQFLQJH[LVWLQJVLQJOHIDPLO\QHLJKERUKRRGV7KHSURSRVHGRYHUVL]HGJDUDJHVWUXFWXUH VKRXOG
QRWSRVHDQ\WKUHDWRUFUHDWH DQ\ QHJDWLYHLPSDFWVWRWKHUHVLGHQWLDOFKDUDFWHURIWKHQHLJKERUKRRG
DQGSURYLGHV DVXEVWDQWLDOLQYHVWPHQWLQWRDSURSHUW\WRHQKDQFHLWVRYHUDOOXVHDQGHQMR\PHQWE\
WKHRZQHU7KHSURSRVHGJDUDJHDOVRSRVHVQRWKUHDWRUDQ\HIIHFWon light and air, as well as the
danger of fire and the risk to public safety. 7KLVQHZJDUDJHDQGUHTXHVWIRUYDULDQFHFDQEHYLHZHG
RUFRQVLGHUHGLQKDUPRQ\ZLWKWKHJHQHUDOSXUSRVHRIWKH]RQLQJRUGLQDQFHDQGFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKH
FXUUHQWDQGSURSRVHGODQGXVHSODQVIRUWKHFRPPXQLW\
PC Page #53
3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R 0 &DVKLOO 3DJH
$/7(51$7,9(IRU&83$33529$/6
3HU&LW\&RGHRQ&RQGLWLRQDO8VHV
Section 12-1L-6.E.2 Denial Of Permit: Conditional uses may be denied by resolution of the city council,
and such resolution shall include a finding and determination that the conditions required for approval
do not exist. No application for a conditional use which has been denied wholly or in part shall be
resubmitted for a period of six (6) months from the date of said order of denial, except on grounds of new
evidence or proof of change of conditions found to be valid by the planning commission.
7\SLFDOO\ZKHQODQGXVHDSSOLFDWLRQVDUHUXQRUWLHGWRJHWKHU LHYDULDQFHZLWKFRQGLWLRQDOXVHSHUPLW
WKH\PXVWEHFRQVLGHUHGWRJHWKHU DQGHLWKHUDSSURYHGRUGHQLHGWRJHWKHU,QWKLVFDVHWKH$SSOLFDQWFOHDUO\
KDVDODUJHHQRXJKSDUFHOWRDOORZDQDGGLWLRQDOVTIWGHWDFKHGJDUDJH WKDWFRXOGPHHWFRGHZLWKRXW
YDULDQFHV:LWKWKLVVDLGVKRXOGWKHFLW\GHQ\WKHUHTXHVWIRUYDULDQFHWRWKH$SSOLFDQWVWDIILVRIIHULQJ
IRUDGGHGFRQVLGHUDWLRQDZDLYHUWRWKHVL[PRQWKUHILOLQJSHULRGRQWKH&83DSSOLFDWLRQLQWKLVFDVH
SURYLGHGWKH$SSOLFDQWVXEPLWVDUHYLVHGEXLOGLQJSODQDQGVLWHSODQ RIDQHZGHWDFKHGJDUDJHWKDWPHHWV
WKHVTIWDUHDVWDQGDUG ORWVDFUHV DQGGRHVQRWH[FHHGIHHWLQKHLJKWRUUHTXLUHDQ\RWKHU
YDULDQFHV
$/7(51$7,9(6IRU$&7,21
5HFRPPHQGDSSURYDORIWKHFRQGLWLRQDOXVHSHUPLWZLWKYDULDQFHVWRDOORZD SURSRVHGGHWDFKHG
RYHUVL]HGJDUDJHXSWRVTIWLQDUHDDQGXSWRIW PLGSRLQWPHDVXUH DQGIWLQ
RYHUDOO KHLJKWEDVHGRQWKHIROORZLQJILQGLQJVRIIDFWWKDWVXSSRUWWKHJUDQWLQJRIWKHFRQGLWLRQDO
XVHSHUPLWDQGYDULDQFHVUHTXHVWHGKHUHLQ
$3XUVXDQWWR&LW\&RGH7LWOH'$FFHVVRU\6WUXFWXUHVUHVLGHQWLDOSURSHUWLHVRIDFUHVRU
JUHDWHUDUHDOORZHGWRKDYHRQHDGGLWLRQDOGHWDFKHGJDUDJHXSWRVTIWLQVL]HE\PHDQVRID
FRQGLWLRQDOXVHSHUPLW KRZHYHUWKH$SSOLFDQWLQWKLVFDVHKDVUHTXHVWHGFHUWDLQYDULDQFHVWR
H[FHHGWKHVL]H DUHD DQGKHLJKWOLPLWVSODFHGRQDFFHVVRU\VWUXFWXUHV1HYHUWKHOHVVWKH$SSOLFDQW
KDVGHPRQVWUDWHGDUHDVRQDEOHQHHGDQGMXVWLILFDWLRQIRUWKHRYHUVL]HGJDUDJHZKLFKLVVXSSRUWHG
E\WKHIROORZLQJILQGLQJVRIIDFWV
L 7KHSURSRVHGRYHUVL]HGGHWDFKHGJDUDJHRQWKHVXEMHFWUHVLGHQWLDOSURSHUW\ LVIRXQGWREHLQ
JHQHUDOO\FRQIRUPDQFHZLWKPDQ\RWKHUSURYLVLRQVDQGVWDQGDUGVRIWKH&LW\&RGHDQGPHHWV
RWKHUUHODWHG&LW\&RGHVWDQGDUGV VXFKDVVHWEDFNVDSSHDUDQFHDQGDHVWKHWLFV
LL 7KHODUJH DFUHV VXEMHFWSURSHUW\ LVVRPHZKDWXQLTXHZKHQFRPSDUHGZLWKRWKHUW\SLFDO
VLQJOHIDPLO\UHVLGHQWLDOSURSHUWLHVLQWKH FRPPXQLW\ WKHUHIRUHWKHSURSRVHGRYHUVL]HG
GHWDFKHGJDUDJHXQGHUWKLVDSSOLFDWLRQFDQEHFRQVLGHUHGDUHDVRQDEOHUHTXHVW DQGPD\EH
YLHZHGDVEHLQJFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKH&LW\&RGHDQG&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ
LLL 7KHSURSRVHGRYHUVL]HGGHWDFKHGJDUDJHZLOOQRWFDXVHRUFUHDWHDQ\QHJDWLYHLPSDFWVWRWKH
VXUURXQGLQJSURSHUWLHVRUVXEMHFWSURSHUW\
LY 7KHSURSRVHGRYHUVL]HGGHWDFKHGJDUDJHZLOOQRWEHGHWULPHQWDOWRWKHKHDOWKVDIHW\RU
JHQHUDO ZHOIDUHRIWKH FRPPXQLW\ VKRXOG QRW FDXVH DQ\ VHULRXVWUDIILF FRQJHVWLRQQRU
KD]DUGV ZLOOQRWVHULRXVO\GHSUHFLDWHVXUURXQGLQJSURSHUW\YDOXH DQGVDLGXVHDSSHDUVWREH
LQKDUPRQ\ZLWKWKHJHQHUDOSXUSRVHDQGLQWHQWRIWKH&LW\&RGHDQGWKH&RPSUHKHQVLYH
3ODQ
PC Page #54
3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R 0 &DVKLOO 3DJH
Y 7KHSURSRVHGRYHUVL]HGGHWDFKHGJDUDJH ZLOOEHFRPSOLDQWZLWKWKHFRQGLWLRQVLQFOXGHGLQ
WKH&LW\&RGHWKDWDOORZLWE\FRQGLWLRQDOXVHSHUPLW
YL 7KH SURSRVHG RYHUVL]HG GHWDFKHG JDUDJH UHSUHVHQWV D UHDVRQDEOH UHLQYHVWPHQW LQ D
UHVLGHQWLDOSURSHUW\DQGQHLJKERUKRRGWKDWLVFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKH&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ¶VJRDOV
IRUUHVLGHQWLDOODQGXVHV
%8QGHU7LWOH/$RIWKH&LW\&RGHWKH&RXQFLOPD\ RQO\JUDQWYDULDQFHVIURPWKHVWULFW
DSSOLFDWLRQRIWKHSURYLVLRQVRIWKH&RGHLQFDVHVZKHUHWKHUHDUH³SUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV´LQFDUU\LQJ
RXWWKHVWULFWOHWWHURIWKHUHJXODWLRQVRIWKH&RGH³3UDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV´FRQVLVWVRIDWKUHHSDUW
WHVW L WKH$SSOLFDQWSURSRVHVWRXVHWKHSURSHUW\LQDUHDVRQDEOHPDQQHUQRWRWKHUZLVHSHUPLWWHG
E\WKH&RGH LL WKHSOLJKWRIWKH$SSOLFDQWLVGXHWRFLUFXPVWDQFHVXQLTXHWRWKHSURSHUW\QRW
FUHDWHGE\WKH$SSOLFDQW DQG LLL WKHYDULDQFHLIJUDQWHGZLOOQRWDOWHUWKHHVVHQWLDOFKDUDFWHURI
WKHQHLJKERUKRRG(FRQRPLFFRQVLGHUDWLRQVDORQHGRQRWFRQVWLWXWH³SUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV´
&7KH$SSOLFDQWKDVPHWWKHEXUGHQRIGHPRQVWUDWLQJWKHUHTXLVLWH³SUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV´LQRUGHUWR
MXVWLI\WKHJUDQWLQJRID9DULDQFHWRDOORZWKHRYHUVL]HGJDUDJHQRWWRH[FHHG VTIWLQDUHD
RUH[FHHGWKHKHLJKWRIIW DQGIWZLWKWKHIROORZLQJILQGLQJV
L 7KHSURSRVHGRYHUVL]HGJDUDJHLVFRQVLGHUHGD UHDVRQDEOHUHTXHVWRQWKHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\
GXHWRWKHQHHGWRSURYLGHVXLWDEOHDQGDGGLWLRQDOVWRUDJHQHHGVIRUWKHKRPHRZQHUVGXHLQ
SDUWWRWKHRYHUVL]HG DFUHV DQGXQLTXHFKDUDFWHURIWKHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\
LL 7KLVODUJHUVXEMHFWSURSHUW\SURYLGHVXQLTXHFLUFXPVWDQFHV IRUVXSSRUWLQJRUDOORZLQJWKH
JUDQWLQJRIWKLVYDULDQFH
LLL 7KHYLVXDOLPSDFWVRUHIIHFWRIWKHRYHUVL]HGGHWDFKHGJDUDJH DW WKLVORFDWLRQ DSSHDUV
PLQLPDOERWKRQWKHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\DQGZLWK WKHVXUURXQGLQJQHLJKERUKRRG DQGWKHUHIRUH
DSSURYLQJWKHSURSRVHGRYHUVL]HGGHWDFKHGJDUDJHXQGHUWKLVYDULDQFH DQG&83 ZLOOQRW
DOWHUWKHHVVHQWLDOFKDUDFWHURIWKHQHLJKERUKRRG
'7KH SURSRVHG JDUDJH ZLOO QRW EH GHWULPHQWDO WR WKH KHDOWK VDIHW\ RU JHQHUDO ZHOIDUH RI WKH
FRPPXQLW\ VKRXOG QRW FDXVH DQ\ VHULRXV WUDIILF FRQJHVWLRQ QRU KD]DUGV ZLOO QRW VHULRXVO\
GHSUHFLDWHVXUURXQGLQJSURSHUW\YDOXH DQGVDLGXVHDSSHDUVWREHLQKDUPRQ\ZLWKWKHJHQHUDO
SXUSRVHDQGLQWHQWRIWKH&LW\&RGHDQGWKH&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ
(7KH&LW\KDVFRQVLGHUHGWKHIDFWRUVUHTXLUHGE\7LWOH/(RIWKH&LW\&RGHLQFOXGLQJEXW
QRWOLPLWHGWRWKHHIIHFWRIWKH9DULDQFHXSRQWKHKHDOWKVDIHW\DQGZHOIDUHRIWKHFRPPXQLW\
H[LVWLQJDQGDQWLFLSDWHGWUDIILFFRQGLWLRQVWKHHIIHFWRIWKH9DULDQFHRQWKHGDQJHURI ILUHDQGWKH
ULVNWRSXEOLFVDIHW\DQGXSRQWKHYDOXHRISURSHUWLHVLQWKHVXUURXQGLQJDUHDDQGXSRQWKH
&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQDQGKDVGHWHUPLQHGWKLVYDULDQFHDVVRFLDWHGZLWKWKLVFRQGLWLRQDOXVHSHUPLW
ZLOOQRWDIIHFWRUSRVHDQ\QHJDWLYHLPSDFWVXSRQWKHQHLJKERUKRRGRUWKHFRPPXQLW\LQJHQHUDO
)$SSURYDORIWKLV9DULDQFHLVIRU%DFKHORU$YHQXHRQO\DQGGRHVQRWDSSO\RUJLYHSUHFHGHQWLDO
YDOXHWRDQ\RWKHUSURSHUWLHVWKURXJKRXWWKH&LW\$OOYDULDQFHDSSOLFDQWVPXVWDSSO\IRUDQG
SURYLGHDSURMHFWQDUUDWLYHWRWKH&LW\WRMXVWLI\DYDULDQFH$OOYDULDQFHUHTXHVWVPXVWEHUHYLHZHG
LQGHSHQGHQWO\E\&LW\VWDIIDQGOHJDOFRXQVHOXQGHUWKHUHTXLUHPHQWVRIWKH&LW\&RGH
PC Page #55
3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R 0 &DVKLOO 3DJH
*7KHIDFWXDOILQGLQJVDQGDQDO\VLVIRXQGLQWKH3ODQQLQJ6WDII5HSRUWIRU3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R
GDWHGDQGSUHVHQWHG$SULO Rn file with the City of Mendota Heights LVKHUHE\IXOO\
LQFRUSRUDWHGLQWR5HVROXWLRQ1RBBBB >ILQDOQXPEHUWREHDGGHGODWHU@
+3XUVXDQWWR&LW\&RGH6HFWLRQ/ 9DULDQFHVWKHFLW\KDV WKHDXWKRULW\WRSODFHUHDVRQDEOH
FRQGLWLRQVXSRQWKHSURSHUW\VXEMHFWWRWKLV9DULDQFHUHTXHVWDQGFRQGLWLRQVPXVWEHGLUHFWO\
UHODWHGWRDQGURXJKO\SURSRUWLRQDOWRWKHLPSDFWFUHDWHGE\WKHYDULDQFH&RQGLWLRQVUHODWHGWRWKLV
WUDQVDFWLRQDUHDVIROORZV
7KHQHZGHWDFKHGJDUDJHPXVWPDWFKWKHRYHUDOODUFKLWHFWXUHDQGGHVLJQRIWKHH[LVWLQJ
UHVLGHQWLDOGZHOOLQJRQWKHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\
7KHSURSRVHGJDUDJHDGGLWLRQDQGDOORWKHUSURSRVHGLPSURYHPHQWVVKDOOEHFRQVWUXFWHGLQ
FRPSOLDQFHZLWKDOODSSOLFDEOH&LW\&RGHDQG6WDWHRI0LQQHVRWD%XLOGLQJ&RGHVWDQGDUGV
1RSDUWRIWKHXSSHUUDIWHUVHFWLRQVRIWKHJDUDJHVKDOOEHXVHGIRUDGGHGVWRUDJHOLYDEOHRU
KDELWDEOHVSDFH
7KHDSSOLFDQWVKDOOREWDLQDEXLOGLQJSHUPLWSULRUWRDQ\H[FDYDWLRQRUFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKH
QHZJDUDJHDGGLWLRQ
$OOJUDGLQJDQGFRQVWUXFWLRQDFWLYLW\ZLOOEHLQFRPSOLDQFHZLWKDSSOLFDEOHIHGHUDOVWDWH
DQGORFDOUHJXODWLRQV DQGFRGHVDVZHOODVLQFRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKH&LW\¶V/DQG'LVWXUEDQFH
*XLGDQFH'RFXPHQW)XOOHURVLRQDQGVHGLPHQWDWLRQPHDVXUHVZLOOEHSXWLQSODFHSULRUWR
DQGGXULQJJUDGLQJDQGFRQVWUXFWLRQZRUNDFWLYLWLHV
$SSURYDORIWKHYDULDQFHLVFRQWLQJHQWXSRQ &LW\&RXQFLODSSURYDORIWKHDSSOLFDWLRQDQG
FRUUHVSRQGLQJVLWHSODQ,IWKHYDULDQFHLVDSSURYHGE\WKH&LW\&RXQFLOWKH$SSOLFDQW
VKDOOREWDLQDEXLOGLQJSHUPLWIRUFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKHSURSRVHGDGGLWLRQZLWKLQRQH\HDU
IURPVDLGDSSURYDOGDWH
5HFRPPHQGGHQLDORIWKHFRQGLWLRQDOXVHSHUPLWZLWKYDULDQFHVWRDOORZD SURSRVHGGHWDFKHG
RYHUVL]HGJDUDJHXSWRVTIWLQDUHDDQGXSWRIW PLGSRLQWPHDVXUH DQGIWLQ
RYHUDOO KHLJKW EDVHG RQ WKH ILQGLQJVRIIDFW WKDW FRQILUP WKH $SSOLFDQW IDLOHG WR PHHW WKH
EXUGHQ V RISURRIRUVWDQGDUGVLQJUDQWLQJRIWKHYDULDQFHUHTXHVWHGKHUHLQQRWHGDVIROORZV
$ 8QGHU 7LWOH /$ RI WKH &LW\ &RGH WKH &LW\ PD\ RQO\ JUDQW YDULDQFHV IURP WKH VWULFW
DSSOLFDWLRQRIWKHSURYLVLRQVRIWKH&RGHLQFDVHVZKHUHWKHUHDUH³SUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV´LQFDUU\LQJ
RXWWKHVWULFWOHWWHURIWKHUHJXODWLRQVRIWKH&RGH³3UDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV´FRQVLVWVRIDWKUHHSDUW
WHVW L WKH$SSOLFDQWSURSRVHVWRXVHWKHSURSHUW\LQDUHDVRQDEOHPDQQHUQRWRWKHUZLVHSHUPLWWHG
E\WKH&RGH LL WKHSOLJKWRIWKH$SSOLFDQWLVGXHWRFLUFXPVWDQFHVXQLTXHWRWKHSURSHUW\QRW
FUHDWHGE\WKH$SSOLFDQW DQG LLL WKHYDULDQFHLIJUDQWHGZLOOQRWDOWHUWKHHVVHQWLDOFKDUDFWHURI
WKHQHLJKERUKRRG(FRQRPLFFRQVLGHUDWLRQVDORQHGRQRWFRQVWLWXWH³SUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV´
% 7KH&LW\KHUHE\GHWHUPLQHVWKH$SSOLFDQWKDVQRWPHWWKHEXUGHQRIGHPRQVWUDWLQJWKHUHTXLVLWH
³SUDFWLFDOGLIILFXOWLHV´LQRUGHUWRMXVWLI\WKHJUDQWLQJRIDYDULDQFHIRUDQLQFUHDVHGJDUDJHVWUXFWXUH
EH\RQGWKHVTIWDVDOORZHGXQGHU&LW\&RGH7LWOH'RUWKHJDUDJHWRH[FHHGWKH
PD[LPXPKHLJKWRIIWXSWRIHHW RUIWRYHUDOO7KHSURSRVHGRYHUVL]HGGHWDFKHG
JDUDJHLVQRWHVVHQWLDOWRWKHRYHUDOOHQMR\PHQWDQGFRQWLQXHGXVHRIWKHSURSHUW\ DQGLVWKHUHIRUH
QRWFRQVLGHUHGDUHDVRQDEOHXVHRIWKHSURSHUW\
PC Page #56
3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R 0 &DVKLOO 3DJH
& %HFDXVHWKH&LW\ILQGVWKDWWKHILUVWSURQJRIWKHWKUHHSDUWWHVW UHDVRQDEOHXVHRIWKHSURSHUW\ LV
QRWPHWE\WKH$SSOLFDQWWKH&LW\QHHGQRWFRQVLGHUWKHUHPDLQLQJWZRSURQJVRIWKHWHVW XQLTXH
FLUFXPVWDQFHVRIWKHSURSHUW\DQGHVVHQWLDOFKDUDFWHURIWKHQHLJKERUKRRG
7DEOHWKHUHTXHVWDQGGLUHFWVWDIIWRH[WHQGWKHDSSOLFDWLRQUHYLHZSHULRGDQDGGLWLRQDOGD\V
LQFRPSOLDQFHZLWK0167$7
5(&200(1'$7,21
6WDIILVGHIHUULQJWKHILQDOUHFRPPHQGDWLRQRQWKLVFDVHWRWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ DQGXSRQFORVLQJWKH
SXEOLFKHDULQJDQGGLVFXVVLRQVUHODWHGWRWKLVLWHPSOHDVHJLYHFDUHIXOFRQVLGHUDWLRQWRRQHRIWKH ILUVWWZR
DOWHUQDWLYHV QRWHGDERYH
$77$&+0(176
$HULDOVLWHPDS
3ODQQLQJDSSOLFDWLRQLQFOXGLQJVXSSRUWLQJPDWHULDOV
6XUYH\DQG*DUDJH(OHYDWLRQ3ODQV
PC Page #57
^/d /D' ^
>KK</E'^Khd,tZʹdKtZ^ EdZE K&&, >KZs Eh
>KK</E't ^d Z>zʹdKtZ^t >>/E'
PC Page #58
3ODQQLQJ&DVH1R 0 &DVKLOO 3DJH
>KK</E'EKZd, Z>zʹdKtZ^>Kd/KEK&E t'Z'
WWZKy/Dd >Kd/KEK&E t'Z' ;EKd DZ</E'^d< ^ʹZ /Z> ^Ϳ
PC Page #59
666666666666666666666666666666666666666666
66
75$,/5'%$&+(/25$9(
(9(5*5((1.1/
687721/1
'((575$,/37 :$&+7/(5$9(35,9$7(52$''((5
7
5
$,
/
&
7
%$&+(/25$9(18(
0LNH&DVKLOOUHV
&LW\RI
0HQGRWD
+HLJKWV
6&$/(,1)((7
*,60DS'LVFODLPHU
7KLVGDWDLVIRULQIRUPDWLRQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHVXEVWLWXWHGIRUDWUXHWLWOHVHDUFKSURSHUW\DSSUDLVDOSODW
VXUYH\RUIRU]RQLQJYHULILFDWLRQ7KH&LW\RI0HQGRWD+HLJKWVDVVXPHVQROHJDOUHVSRQVLELOLW\IRUWKHLQIRUPDWLRQFRQWDLQHG
LQWKLVGDWD7KH&LW\RI0HQGRWD+HLJKWVRUDQ\RWKHUHQWLW\IURPZKLFKGDWDZDVREWDLQHGDVVXPHVQROLDELOLW\IRUDQ\HUURUV
RURPLVVLRQVKHUHLQ,IGLVFUHSDQFLHVDUHIRXQGSOHDVHFRQWDFWWKH&LW\RI0HQGRWD+HLJKWV
&RQWDFW*RSKHU6WDWH2QH&DOODWIRUXWLOLW\ORFDWLRQVKRXUVSULRUWRDQ\H[FDYDWLRQ
PC Page #60
PC Page #61
20'3URSRVHG
[
'HWDFKHG *DUDJH
PC Page #62
PC Page #63
PC Page #64
PC Page #65
PC Page #66
PC Page #67
PC Page #68
Planning Staff Report
MEETING DATE:May 25, 2021
TO:Planning Commission
FROM:Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:Planning Case 2021-05
VARIANCE for Additional Driveway
APPLICANT:Joe Opack
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 662 Ivy Falls Court
ZONING/GUIDED:R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential
ACTION DEADLINE:July 2, 2021
INTRODUCTION
Joe Opack, owner of 662 Ivy Falls Court is requesting a variance to allow a new half-ci rcle shaped driveway
on the subject property.
A public hearing notice for this item was published in the local newspaper and notice letters were mailed
to all surrounding properties within 350-feet of the subject property. The applicant has provided a
“Neighbor Signatures of Consent” from six (6) of his neighbors not objecting to the variance request. The
city received no other comments or objections from neighboring residents.
BACKGROUND
The subject parcel is generally located at the southwest corner of Ivy Falls Court and Sylvandale Road;
measures approx. 160’ x 140’ or 0.52 acres of lot area; has a 5,083-sf. dwelling built in 1971, with a two
car attached garage. The garage faces and is served by a driveway coming off Ivy Falls Court (to the north).
PC Page #69
According to the Applicant/Owner, the home – even though addressed off Ivy Falls Court, actually has its
main or front door entryway on the east side, facing Sylvandale Road(see image below - left). The driveway
off Ivy Falls Court is bituminous with an approximate 25’ wide opening at the curb line, which meets City
Code. There is a separate door/access along the north side coming off the driveway, but the owners state
this is more of a side-door/non-main entryway (see image below – right).
The property at one time had a slight curvilinear
sidewalk on the east side that leading out from
the front door entryway on to Sylvandale Road
(see ESRI aerial image 2015 –right). It appears
this sidewalk was removed by the previous
owners sometime around 2016.
According to the Applicant’s narrative:
“We are in the process of doing a number
of projects to the home, one of which is
hopefully gaining access to our "front" or
"main" door. The home is on a corner lot
and the main door is oriented towards
Sylvandale. Currently there is not any
access. There is evidence that there used
to be a sidewalk from that door to
Sylvandale. The previous owners of the
home took out that sidewalk and changed
the address from 1231 Sylvandale to 662
Ivy Falls Ct.”
The Applicant is requesting to add a new half-
circle/crescent shaped driveway off Sylvandale
Road, in order to serve the main front entryway
for visitors and their own needs (see sketch
image – right).
The new driveway would consists of two,
twelve-foot (12’) wide access points off
Sylvandale Road, a bituminous paved surface
12-feet in even width inside the property, and
approx. 150-feet in length. The apex of the
driveway will meet up with a small set of blue-
stone stairs leading to the front, covered
entryway facing Sylvandale Rd.
PC Page #70
City Code Section 12-1E-1.B provides regulations for driveways in residential districts, especially with
setbacks and widths:
4.Driveways shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from side lot lines and shall be no greater than
twenty five feet (25') wide at the property line. All driveways constructed to serve single-
family dwellings on corner lots shall be set back a minimum of thirty feet (30') from the
property lines adjacent to the street corner.
City staff has consistently held that the twenty-five foot (25’) width standard – at the property line, means
the total amount of driveways on one property or street frontage must not exceed this amount. Since corner
lots usually have more lot frontage than a typical interior platted lot, there may be some flexibility or leeway
to granting corner lots with the same twenty-five foot standard along each street frontage. However, since
our Code does not grant this flexibility, a variance is in order.
VARIANCE ANALYSIS
City Code Section 12-1L-5 governs variance requests. The city must consider a number of variables when
recommending or deciding on a variance, which generally fall into two categories: (i) practical difficulties;
and (ii) impact to the community.
The “practical difficulties” test contains three parts: (i) the property owner proposes to use the property in
a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance; (ii) the plight of the property owner
is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner; and (iii) the variance, if
granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality or neighborhood. It is also noted that economic
considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
In addition, variances are only to be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Section 12-1L-5(E)(1) further provides other issues the city may consider when granting or denying a
variance, noted as follows:
x Effect of variance upon health, safety, and welfare of the community.
x Existing and anticipated traffic conditions.
x Effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and the risk to public safety.
x Effect on the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan.
x Granting of the variance is not a convenience to the applicant, but necessary to alleviate undue
hardship or difficulty.
When considering a variance request, the Planning Commission must determine if these standards have
been met in granting a variance, and provide findings of facts to support such a recommendation to the City
Council. If the Planning Commission determines the Applicant has failed to meet these standards, or has
not fully demonstrated a reasonableness in the granting of such variance, then findings of fact supporting a
recommendation of denial must be determined.
As part of any variance request, Applicants are required to prepare and submit their own responses and
findings, which for this case, are noted below (in italic text), followed by a brief staff response:
1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted
by the zoning ordinance.
Applicant’s Response: Currently there is not a sidewalk or driveway access to the main front door of
the home. We feel that the side access being the only option and having multiple stone steps leading
to it could present difficulties in the winter months for older relatives. Our parents from out of town
visit us often for extended stays.
PC Page #71
Staff Response: There are a number of properties scattered throughout the city that have similar
crescent shaped drives and/or dual access drive openings on street frontages. In fact, there are three
properties just to the immediate northeast of this site at 1200, 1205 and 1220 Sylvandale Road; and one
about one block south at 1289 Sylvandale Rd. (see aerial image –below/right).
As stated previously, there may be some
room for “flexibility” to granting corner
lots with some added allowance to
driveway width standards, since these lots
typically have longer street frontages than
a typical interior lot. Limiting access
points along any street frontage is ideal;
however, on a local, neighborhood street
such as Sylvandale Road, in which vehicle
(and non-motorized/pedestrian) traffic is
relatively low, it may seem reasonable to
allow the added driveway off this
roadway, in order to better serve the front
entryway, as the Applicant/Owner has
clearly demonstrated that exists today.
The impervious surface coverage
expected to occur by installing this
driveway also appears nominal,
particularly when taking into account the
larger corner lot size and open space that
will remain.
When we analyze the “reasonableness” of this request, the city can take into account similar
development patters or existing uses that may contain similar driveways, however, decision-makers
should be careful not to grant this variance solely based on any other “precedent established” lands or
driveways; and must weigh the evidence and applicability of the request being presented for
independent consideration on this property only. The Planning Commission [the City] will need to
determine if this requested variance is reasonable and in harmony with the general purpose and spirit
of City Code.
2. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by
the property owner.
Applicant’s Response: The previous owners changed the address of the home with possible future
intentions of changing the floor plan to create a different main entry. After changing the address,
landscaping was done to “block off” the main entrance (front door).
Staff Response:Although staff acknowledges corner lots are not entirely “unique” in this city, and
even though they are a bit larger or have more street frontage than a typical interior platted lot, at times
they can and do present some challenges or unique situations for homeowners to address, especially
when proposing or dealing with new development and/or site improvements.
In this case, the Owner is presenting a unique situation that was created by the development of the home
on the corner lot back in 1971, where the main home and front-door entryway clearly faces towards
Sylvandale Road, but the main access point/entryway into the home has defaulted to the Ivy Falls Court
side, which does not work for the owners or their visitors. Dwellings on corner lots are allowed to have
their choice of the address off one or the other street; and in this case, the home started off with an
address off Sylvandale but later transitioned to Ivy Falls Court by action of the previous owners.
PC Page #72
Code currently provides that all driveways shall be no greater than 25' wide at the property line, and set
back a minimum 30’ from the property lines adjacent to the street corner. The existing and proposed
driveways either do meet or would meet both of these design standards – but only when measured along
respective street frontage of the property. No added allowance is provided for additional driveways
with corner lots; but the planning commission (the City) may wish to give some consideration or
support an interpretation that this City Code section may permit a driveway(s) of 25’ in width along
each frontage. If agreed, then this property may have some unique circumstances that may be used to
support his variance.
3. The variance, if granted will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
Applicant’s Response: This would be a conservative driveway design with an appearance that is not
unlike many other homes in the neighborhood with half-circle driveways.
Staff Response:The surrounding neighborhood is all residential in character; and a handful of
properties have or consists of similar style crescent/dual access driveways. This new driveway
represents a small investment by the Applicant to include an added entrance feature that will ideally
serve and draw visitors to the existing and established front entryway to the home, which seems very
reasonable in this case. The driveway is “conservative” in its design as a 12-wide surface, which will
only permit one way vehicle movements in and out from this driveway.
The Applicant has stated they intend to screen the new driveway with landscaping; and demonstrated
on their site plan that the new driveway lines up with the neighboring driveways across the street
(commendable); and the amount of new hard/impervious surface is nominal in comparison to the
remaining open space left on the lot. This new driveway should not look out of place, or detract from
the overall design and feel of the existing dwelling, or impact and detract from the neighboring
properties in this neighborhood. Staff believes the essential character of the neighborhood would not
be altered by granting this variance.
4. Restrictions on Granting Variances.
The following restrictions should be considered when reviewing a variance:
a) Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
When weighing the economic factor(s) of a variance application, taking economic considerations
alone should not be the only reason for denying - or even approving a variance. In this particular
case, the property owner is simply requesting to install a new narrow driveway along the established
front entryway to the home. The new driveway should not impact any neighboring properties.
Although we can conclude this new driveway provides some access convenience and small
economic value to the property, the Applicant has demonstrated other practical difficulties in this
case, and some reasonable explanations for requesting this variance. It is not clear how economic
considerations alone may affect the outcome of this variance request, as they do not appear to be
the sole reason for rejecting this variance.
b)Variances are only to be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Staff finds that the request can be viewed in harmony with the purposes and intent of the R-1 One
Family Residence district; as Code requires off-street parking for vehicles in residential districts,
and allowing for more suitable space to park visitor vehicles on the property (driveway) as opposed
to the street should be encouraged.
PC Page #73
The subject property is designated as LR-Low Density Residential in the current 2030
Comprehensive Plan, and the same is called for proposed 2040 Plan. Certain land use goals and
policies are noted below:
x LUG #1: Maintain and enrich the mature, fully developed residential environment and
character of the community.
x LUP #5: Emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and a high general aesthetic level
in community development and building.
x LUP #2.2.2: Emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and a high general aesthetic
level in community development and building.
The guiding principles in the comprehensive plan provide for maintaining, preserving, and
enhancing existing single-family neighborhoods. The requested variance would preserve the
residential character of the neighborhood and would provide a substantial investment into a
property to enhance its overall use and enjoyment by the owner.
The proposed garage poses no threat or any effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and
the risk to public safety. This new driveway and request for variance can be viewed or considered
in harmony with the general purpose of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the current and
proposed land use plans for the community.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Recommend APPROVAL of the Variance for the additional driveway, which would exceed the
25-foot width allowed at the property line, based on the following findings-of-fact that support
the granting of the variance requested herein, noted as follows:
A.Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from the strict
application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying
out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three-part
test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted
by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not
created by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of
the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.”
B.The Applicant has met the burden of demonstrating the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to
justify the granting of the Variance requested herein, by:
i.) the request for the variance to allow the added driveway, and therefore the additional
driveway width, is deemed relatively minor in its overall scope and impacts, and can be
considered in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinances; as the
Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner;
ii.) the existing conditions of the property and placement of the home, which was not created by
the current homeowner, presents a case of a practical difficulties and unique situation to the
homeowner wishing to provide an additional driveway and off-street parking area for the
residential property, and said driveway improvement will be more convenient to the
homeowner and future owners of the property;
iii.) the requested variance are considered a reasonable request and the impacts caused by the
increased driveway widths will not negatively affect the adjacent or neighboring properties;
PC Page #74
iv.) approving this variance would not change the essential character of the neighborhood, as the
neighboring properties and residential neighborhood area will not be affected by the approval
of this variance;
v.) approving the variance preserves the residential character of the neighborhood, and provides
a reasonable amount of investment into a property to enhance its overall use and enjoyment
by the owner; and
vi.) the new driveway/parking area is considered in harmony with the general purpose of the
zoning ordinance and consistent with the current and proposed land use plans for the
community.
C.The City has considered the factors required by Title 12-1L-5E1 of the City Code, including but
not limited to the effect of the Variance upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community,
existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect of the Variance on the danger of fire and the
risk to public safety, and upon the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the
Comprehensive Plan, and has determined this Variance will not affect or pose any negative impacts
upon the neighborhood or the community in general.
D.Approval of the Variance is for 662 Ivy Falls Court only, and does not apply or give precedential
value to any other properties throughout the City. All variance applicants must apply for and
provide a project narrative to the City to justify a variance. All variance requests must be reviewed
independently by City staff and legal counsel under the requirements of the City Code.
E.The factual findings and analysis found in the Planning Staff Report for Planning Case No. 2021-
05, dated and presented May 25, 2021 (on file with the City of Mendota Heights), is hereby fully
incorporated into Resolution No. 2021-____. (final number to be assigned later)
F.The City has the authority to place reasonable conditions upon the property subject to this variance
request, and said conditions must be directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact
created by the variance. Conditions of approval as related to this transaction are as follows:
1. A driveway permit shall be obtained prior to any installation or construction of the new
driveway.
2. 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. Full erosion and sedimentation measures will be put in place prior to
and during grading and construction work activities.
3. The Applicant must provide an effective screen of the driveway from Sylvandale Road
with landscaping consisting of native and pollinator friendly plantings.
4. Approval of the variance is contingent upon City Council approval of the application and
corresponding site plan. If the variance is approved by the City Council, the Applicant
shall obtain a permit for construction and installation of the proposed driveway addition
within one (1) year from said approval date.
2. Recommend DENIAL of the variance request, based on the findings of fact that confirm the
Applicant failed to meet the burden(s) of proof or standards in granting of the variance requested
herein, noted as follows:
A. Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from the strict
application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying
PC Page #75
out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three-part
test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted
by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not
created by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of
the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.”
B. The City of Mendota Heights hereby deems the Applicant has not met the burden of demonstrating
the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to justify the granting of a variance for the additional
driveway, which would exceed the 25-foot width allowed at the property line, and further hereby
declares:
i.) the proposed added driveway is not essential to the overall enjoyment and continued use of
the property;
ii.) the added driveway is not considered a reasonable addition or improvement of the property,
since the subject property already has an existing and functional driveway to serve the
homeowners needs;
iii.) the proposed added driveway is inconsistent with the intent of the City Code to limit driveway
widths at the street curb/property lines, and increases unneeded impervious surface coverage
on the lot; and
iv.) the proposed driveway may negatively affect or alter the essential character of the
neighborhood, and is therefore not supported.
C. Because the City finds that the first prong of the three-part test (reasonable use of the property) is
not met by the Applicant, the City need not consider the remaining two prongs of the test (unique
circumstances of the property and essential character of the neighborhood).
3. Table the request and direct staff to extend the application review period an additional 60 days,
in compliance with MN STAT. 15.99.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission give careful consideration of the variance of the proposed
driveway as requested herein, and the Commission should make a motion on one of the three alternatives
of action noted above. The commission may choose to accept or modify the proposed findings-of-facts
and/or conditions as presented under the first two alternatives if needed.
Attachments
1. Aerial/Site Location Map
2. Planning Application – with Variance Response (Narrative)
3. Driveway Site Plan
4. Exterior Dwelling Pics – Interior Floor Plan Images
5. Images of Neighboring Properties w/ Dual Access Driveways
PC Page #76
662 IVY FALLS COURT (Opack)662 IVY FALLS COURT (Opack)
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed.
This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or
for zoning verification.
Map Scale
1 inch = 54 feet1 inch = 54 feet
5/18/2021
PC Page #77
([LVWLQJ+RXVH
([LVWLQJ'ULYHZD\
3URSHUW\/LQH
PC Page #78
([LVWLQJ+RXVH
([LVWLQQ
New Driveway with
two - 12' wide curb cuts
NEW DRIVEWAY SITE PLAN
PC Page #79
PC Page #80
PC Page #81
PC Page #82
PC Page #83
PC Page #84
PC Page #85
PC Page #86
PC Page #87
PC Page #88
PC Page #89
Images of Neighboring Properties w/ Dual Access Driveways
1289 SYLVANDALE ROAD
1200 SYLVANDALE ROAD
PC Page #90
1205 SYLVANDALE ROAD
1220 SYLVANDALE ROAD
PC Page #91
Planning Staff Report
MEETING DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Mendota Heights Planning Commission
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 566 – Amending Title 5 – Police Regulations and Title 12 –
Zoning Regarding Temporary Keeping of Goats for Prescribed Grazing
Introduction
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a draft ordinance which would allow the temporary
keeping of goats on properties for prescribed grazing purposes only. Prescribed grazing refers to the
natural elimination of certain invasive or noxious vegetation by goats, with said grazing allowed by special
permit only.
Background
At the June 18, 2019 regular council meeting, a resident addressed the city council requesting the city give
consideration to allowing goats on his private property, for the expressed purpose of helping to control the
large amount of buckthorn on his parcel.
On October 28, 2019, the City Council conducted a follow-up Workshop Meeting, whereby staff
introduced the subject and presented preliminary information and examples of other city ordinances
regulating goats in various metro communities. The Council provided a few comments or suggestions,
such as requiring written permission from the neighbors, perimeter fencing height, and setback restrictions
from bodies of water. The Council instructed city staff to begin preparing an ordinance regulating such
animals, and present the findings and proposed ordinance to the Planning Commission for further study
and recommendations.
Goats are not allowed to be kept within the city limits at this time. However, in 2014 the city council
allowed a demonstration or pilot project for a number of goats to be allowed in the Oheyawahe/Pilot Knob
Park area on a temporary basis, in order to help control or manage a large infestation of buckthorn and
other invasive vegetation that had overgrown this area. This first ever goat grazing project turned out to
be very successful, and helped spur the notion to allowing goats in other parts of the community.
Dogs, cats, and chickens are identified as “domesticated” animals allowed by Code, but limited in numbers
or by special permit. Horses are also allowed in residential zones with specific standards related to shelter
placement (100’ from nearest residence). With the problematic and prolific growth of buckthorn and other
PC Page #92
invasives throughout the state and metro area, many cities have seen or experienced increased demand or
request from homeowners seeking permission to naturally manage buckthorn (and other invasives) with
grazing goats.
A growing number of metro-wide communities now permit or allow the keeping of goats (either temporary
or permanent) inside city limits, with specific (limited) permits for goats to occupy and graze personal
properties. The goats are mostly allowed under a temporary permit on sites, usually up to 30-days in most
cases, which serve as a natural mean of providing invasive vegetation management and control, without the
need for chemicals, herbicides, or extra human/manual labor such as cutting, clearing and removal of brush
materials.
Prescribed grazing with goats is a popular tool being used nationally and regionally to manage buckthorn
and other invasive and noxious vegetation. Buckthorn infestations can form dense growth on properties,
which may lead inhibiting and destroying native or preferred vegetation, such as trees and shrubs that help
promote or foster pollinator friendly species, or affect natural habitat for native insects, birds and mammals.
Because growth of invasive species is uninhibited, it is up to the humans to manually manage the spread of
the invasive vegetation.
Benefits of using goats to control invasive vegetation include they typically are more time and cost effective
than conventional removal methods, they reduce use of pesticides, and they easily address areas of
challenging geography such as steep slopes. However, it is also known that annual treatment of invasive
species such as buckthorn is required to limit establishment of new seedlings, which may include annual
use of goats, herbicide, and mechanical treatment.
Government agencies such as Dakota County and cities such as Minneapolis, St. Paul, Burnsville,
Lakeville, Minnetonka and more have utilized goats for buckthorn management on public land; while other
cities such as Eagan, Burnsville, Mahtomedi, Cottage Grove, Bloomington, Maplewood, Hudson WI, and
Inver Grove Heights have developed (or are developing) ordinances that allow the temporary keeping of
goats for prescriptive grazing by permit.
Ordinance Research & Information
At the previous February 23, 2021 meeting, staff provided an introductory memo on a proposal to allow
goat grazing (by special permit) in the community. This memo included information on the City of
Burnsville’s Policy No. 5.198, titled “Use of Prescribed Grazing for Land Management”, along with an
example of an “Animal Event Permit” to allow goats for prescribed grazing. While a policy may work
for some communities, the City of Mendota Heights does not use or develop very many policies related
to specific land uses or activities in the community. Ordinances, by themselves provide more “teeth”
when it comes to standards, provisions, and enforcement of certain regulations.
Since the February 23rd meeting, city staff has been following the development of a recent and similar
ordinance with our neighboring community of Inver Grove Heights. IGH has developed a very
comprehensive and detailed ordinance, and MH staff felt this ordinance and its provisions can easily be
developed into our own ordinances, and reflects well to the needs of our own property owners.
Please also know this draft ordinance will require extensive city attorney review; and as such, this ordinance
may need to be reviewed first at the May 25th meeting; tabled or delayed to a follow-up meeting if necessary.
Staff will provide an update on the status of this legal review at the meeting.
PC Page #93
Recommendation
Give initial review and consideration of Draft ORDINANCE NO. 566 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
PART OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY CODE TITLE 5 - POLICE REGULATIONS AND TITLE 12 –
ZONING REGARDING THE TEMPORARY KEEPING OF GOATS FOR GRAZING PURPOSES.
Should the Planning Commission determine this draft ordinance at this time adequately fulfills the intent
and purpose to allowing for the temporary keeping of goats on properties, and meets the general goals and
policies of the 2030 / 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the commission may choose to make a motion to
recommend approval of this draft ordinance and forward on to city council for final considerations.
If the Planning Commission feels this ordinance requires further study, analysis or information to make a
determination or recommendation, the commission can make a motion to TABLE this matter to a later
meeting date.
The Planning Commission may also wish to discuss or request if a Joint Workshop Meeting with the City
Council, or perhaps even with the Parks Commission, is needed to fully discuss these new standards and
regulations being proposed under this new ordinance; and have this matter brought back for follow-up
consideration at a later meeting date.
PC Page #94
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 566
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PART OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY CODE
TITLE 5 - POLICE REGULATIONS AND TITLE 12 – ZONING
REGARDING THE TEMPORARY KEEPING OF GOATS FOR GRAZING PURPOSES
The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, does hereby ordain:
Section 1.
City Code Title 5 – POLICE REGULATIONS is hereby amended as follows:
Title 5-3-1: Definitions is hereby amended by adding (underlined text) the following definitions:
GOAT: means an animal in the subspecies of Capra aegagrus hircus.
GRAZING: means goats eating vegetation.
PRESCRIBED GRAZING: means the temporary use of goats as a landscape management
technique to control the growth of invasive and noxious vegetation at a specific location and for a
defined length of time. For the purpose of this definition, goats used for prescribed grazing are not
considered pets or farm animals.
PRESCRIBED GRAZING PERMIT: means a permit issued that allows prescribed grazing within
City limits.
Section 2.
City Code Title 5 – POLICE REGULATIONS is hereby amended by adding the underlined
language and deleting the double-line struck-through language, and renumbering subsequent
sections as follows:
5-3-11: TEMPORARY KEEPING OF GOATS FOR PRESCRIBED GRAZING:
A. Purpose. The purpose of this this Section is to establish conditions under which the temporary
and periodic use of a limited number of goats for invasive and noxious vegetation control is
permitted and to establish the requirements for doing so in order to protect the environment
and the health, safety, and welfare of the general population.
B. Prescribed Goat Grazing Permit Required. No goat may be kept, maintained or harbored on
any property in the city unless a goat grazing permit has been approved and issued. A permit
may be granted only for:
1. A parcel or lot of record that is 0.5 acres or more in size; or
PC Page #95
2. A prescribed grazing area located on more than one parcel or lot provided the grazing areas
on each parcel/lot are contiguous and an aggregate of 0.5 acres or more in size.
C. Application for Permit. The applicant must submit the following information for the request to
be considered.
1. An applicant shall complete an application form provided by the City and filed with the
City Clerk. The applicant shall also pay the application fee for the permit which shall be
established by the City fee schedule. Permit fees shall not be prorated or refundable.
2. A detailed site plan of the premises on which prescribed grazing is sought to occur,
including the location and the dimensions of the proposed grazing area, a list of the
vegetation existing on the site and sought to be controlled by the prescribed grazing.
a. The full name and address of the following persons:
b. The applicant; and
3. The owner(s) of the premises on which prescribed goat grazing is sought to occur and for
which the permit would apply.
4. The street address of the premises on which prescribed grazing is sought to occur and for
which the permit would apply.
5. The number of goats to be kept on the premises under the permit, not to exceed one (1)
goat per every one-tenth (0.10) acre of the prescribed grazing area.
6. A list of person(s) owning, providing, managing and monitoring the goats, including their
full name, address, and 24-hour contact information accompanied by evidence of liability
insurance as required by this Section.
7. The type of fencing to be used for the required enclosure, and date the temporary fence
will be installed.
8. Date the goats will arrive on the premises for which the permit would apply, and the
latest date the goats will be removed from the premises for which the permit would apply.
9. A statement certifying whether the property’s homeowners’ association rules, if any,
prohibit the keeping of goats on the property for which the permit is sought.
10. The signature of the owner(s) of the premises where the prescribed grazing will occur.
11. Any other and further information as the City deems necessary.
D. Granting or Denying Issuance of Permit. The City may grant a permit under this Section
provided the application filed demonstrates compliance with the requirements of this
section. TheCityshalldeny a permithereunderforany ofthefollowingreasons:
1. Theapplicationisincompleteorcontainsfalse,fraudulentordeceptive statements.
PC Page #96
2. The applicant does not or has not complied with one or more of the provisions of this
Section.
3. The premises for whichthepermitis sought, including, but not limitedto, the proposed
grazing area, is not in compliance with any provisions of this subdivision,otherCity
Codeprovisionsorstatelawsrelatingtozoning, health, fire, buildingorsafety.
4. Theapplicantorownerofthepremiseswheretheprescribedgrazingisto occurhasbeen
previouslyconvictedof a violationunderthisSectionwithin thepasttwo(2)years.
5. The ownerof thegoats hasviolated anyprovision hereunder,oronmore thantwo prior
occasions,theowner'sgoatshavebeenfoundrunningat large.
E. Duration of permit.The duration of a permit under thissection shall be as follows:
1. Prescribedgrazingshall not be permittedformorethanthirty(30)consecutivedays.No more
than two (2) prescribed grazing permits may be issued within one (1)calendar year for the
same property. There shall be a minimum of thirty (30) days between the expiration of the
first permit issuedand the secondpermitissuedin a twelve (12) month period.
F. Conditions of Permit. The keeping of goats ispermitted pursuant to a permit granted under this
Section,subjectto the following conditions:
1. Transferability of permit. A permit issued hereunder shall be nontransferable and shall be
solelyfor the propertylistedon the permit.
2. Liabilityinsurance.The provider or owner of the goat(s)tobeutilized under the permitshall
have and maintain insurance coverage for claims arising from prescribed grazing in the
amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 general aggregate and shall provide
to the City proof of the required insurance coverage prior to issuance of the permit. The
City shall have no liability for any damages that may be caused by goats kept on a property
pursuant to a prescribed grazing permit. The permit holder shall be responsible for any
damage caused by goats used for prescribed grazing purposes.
3. Monitoring: Goat provider or owner must have staff available to respond to any emergency
complaints or concerns at all times of day or night. Applicant will furnishanemergency
contact number whenapplyingfor permit.
4. Right-of-Entry for Inspection. The premises for which a permit is issued shall, at all
reasonable times, be open to inspection by the city staff determine compliance with the
permit, other City Code provisions andstatelaws relatingto zoning, health, fire, building or
safety.
5. Number of goatspermitted.Nomorethantwo(2)goatsperevery one-tenth (0.10) acre of the
prescribed grazing areashall be on the premisesat one time under the permit.
6. Proper enclosures. The prescribed grazing area shall be fully and securely enclosed with
proper enclosures, and fullymaintainedfor the duration of the prescribedgrazingpermit,as
PC Page #97
required and provided herein. Fencing must be designed to prevent escape by goats and to
protect the goats from the intrusion of other predatory animals.All sides of the enclosure(s)
shall be ofsufficient height and the bottom of the enclosures shall be constructed orsecured
in a manner as to prevent the goats from escaping over or under the enclosure(s). The
prescribedgrazingactivityshall be fullyand properly enclosedatalltimes.Itis unlawful and
a violation of the permit foranygoat to be allowedtorun at large during the duration ofthis
permit.An enclosure shallmeet the followingrequirements:
a. Permanent enclosures. Fences and structures constructed to enclose prescribed grazing
goats, but intended to remain at the expiration of the prescribed grazing activity, shall
comply with the regulations for the zoning district in which the prescribed grazing is
locatedandshall be permittedseparatelyfrom the prescribed grazing activity.
b. Temporaryenclosures.
i. Temporary fencing and structures for the sole purpose of enclosing prescribed
grazing goats shall be allowed for the duration of the prescribed grazing. All
temporary fencing or structures shall be removed within seven (7) days of the
removalof the goatsfrom the premisesasrequired under the permit.
ii. Temporaryfences must not exceed six-feet (6’) in height.
iii. Temporary fences may be electric or electrified as specified in the approved
prescribed grazing permit. Where electric fences are used, a double fence system
with a non-electric outer fence,maintained a minimum of three (3) feet from the
electric fence, is required to serve as a safety barrier to reduce the possibility of the
public coming in contact with the electric fence. If an existing natural barrier or
permanent structure existasto prevent contactwith or serveas a barrierto the electric
fence,then the second outer fencemay not be required for the applicable segment of
fencing.
iv. The outer fencemay be allowed up to the property line of the premises on which the
permitapplies,andshall not be locatedwithinany public or private right-of-way.
7. Signage, Temporary: The permit holder shall install and maintain temporary signs on the
premises for the duration of the permitas follows:
a.Signsrequiredfor duration of permit.
b.A signshall be locatedoneach side of the enclosed areaand visible to the public.
c.Thesigns must containemergencycontact information of the owner of the goat(s).
d.Thesignsshall be setback a minimum of ten (10) feetfrom property lineiffreestanding,
or placed on the enclosurefence.
e.All signsshall be removed whengoatsareremoved from the premises.
PC Page #98
f.Any electric or electrified fence in association with prescribed grazing must have a
warningsign posted on every boundary of the enclosureatleasteveryfifty(50)feet along
each side of the fence.Thewarningsignshallclearlyidentify the electricfence.Nosingle
sign shall exceed four (4) square feet in area. Each sign shall be clearly visible on the
approachto the fenceand be posted on or within one (1) foot of the electricorelectrified
fence.
8. Shelter: No temporary sheltersallowed. / Temporary shelters for the goats may be allowed
as per the discretion of the provider. [need PC input]
9. Herd Specifics: Only females, neutered male goats or unneutered male goats less than six
months old thataccompanyfemalegoatsareallowed.
10. Odor and Cleanliness: The property must be maintainedin a clean, sanitary condition so as
to be freefrom offensive odors, fly breeding, dust, and generalnuisance conditions. A plan
to dispose of goat manure in a safe and adequate manner with removal of waste within 24
hours.
11. Noise: It shall be unlawful for any person to keep or harbor a goat which habitually bleats.
Habitual bleating is defined as bleating for repeated intervals of at least five (5) minutes
with less than one (1) minute of interruption. The bleating must also be audible off of the
owner’s or caretaker’s premises.
12. Naturalresources protection. Prescribedgrazing shall not adverselyaffectsignificantnatural
resources.Prescribedgrazingactivitiesshallcomplywith the following:
a.Prescribed grazing activities shall comply with the best management practices
established by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources, Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District, and all other
pertinent agencies.
b.Prescribed grazing activities shall not impair water quality as defined by the Federal
CleanWaterAct.
c.Threatened or endangered plant species shall not be negatively impacted by prescribed
grazingactivities.
d.Prescribedgrazing must comply withany wetland or shoreland regulations setforthin the
City Code
13. Conservation easements. If the proposed prescribed grazing area is within a conservation
easement, all requirements of the conservation easement must be met. If the terms of the
conservation easementsdo not allow prescribed grazing, then the permit will be denied.
G. Feedingand care of goats. All supplemental feed for the goats shall be securely storedin water-
tight and vermin-proof containers. All goats on the premises shall have daily access to fresh
drinking water (not fromnearbylakes, ponds, etc.). Allgoatsused under the permitshallreceive
proper veterinarytreatment andregular deworming. In the event that a prescribed grazing goat
PC Page #99
becomes ill, hurt, or perishes, the permit holder and the owner of the goat is responsible for
immediate on-sitecareorremoval of the goatfrom the property.
H. Violationand Penalties. If a violation of the terms of thisSection or the prescribed goat grazing
permitis found, the Cityshallgivewritten notice thereofto the permit holder. If the violationis
not remediedwithinten (10) days of the dateofthenotice, a misdemeanor citationmaybeissued
and/or the prescribed goat grazingpermitmaybe revoked following notice and a hearingbefore
the City Council. The City Clerk may summarily revoke a permit if a permit holder’s goat(s)
have been found running atlargeontwo(2)ormoreoccurrenceswithin the term of the permit.
5-3-1112: EXEMPTIONS FROM PROVISIONS:
and
5-3-1213: PENALTY:
Section 3.
City Code Title 12 – ZONING is hereby amended as follows:
Title 12-5-1: RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE is hereby amended by adding the
underlined language and deleting the double-line struck-through language, and renumbering
subsequent sections as follows:
12-5-10: TEMPORARY GOAT GRAZING
A. The temporary and periodic use of a limited number of goats for invasive and noxious
vegetation control on residential properties is permitted subject to the review and approval of
a Prescribed Goat Grazing Permit, as per City Code Title 5-3-11.
12-5-1011: ABATEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
and
Title 12-8-1: COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE is hereby amended
by adding the underlined language and deleting the double-line struck-through language, and
renumbering subsequent sections as follows:
12-8-8: TEMPORARY GOAT GRAZING
A. The temporary and periodic use of a limited number of goats for invasive and noxious
vegetation control on commercial or industrial properties is permitted subject to the review and
approval of a Prescribed Goat Grazing Permit, as per City Code Title 5-3-11.
12-8-89: ABATEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
PC Page #100
Section 4.
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according
to law.
Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this _____ day of June, 2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
ATTEST
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
PC Page #101
BURNSVILLE EAGAN HASTINGS COTTAGE GROVE MAPLEWOOD FARIBAULT MAHTOMEDI BLOOMINGTON PURPOSE/ALLOWED USE Grazing of controlling significant invasive, noxious or unwanted vegetation Prescribed grazing shall mean the use of goats as a landscape management technique to control the growth of undesirable vegetation, including noxious weeds and invasive plant or trees at a specific location for a defined length of time. temporary and periodic use of limited number of goats for invasive species and other weed control permit the temporary keeping of goats brought in for the purpose of vegetation management where vegetation, which may include nonnative, invasive or noxious species cannot be otherwise reasonably removed using conventional methods. to permit the keeping and maintenance of goats and sheep brought in temporarily for the purpose of vegetation management. This section amends the Maplewood Zoning Code to allow the temporary keeping of goats and sheep in the Small-Lot Single-Dwelling & Rural Conservation Dwelling zoning district. specified period and for the express purpose of controlling invasive and/or noxious vegetation temporary and periodic use of a limited number of goats for invasive species and other weed control is permitted and to establish the requirements for doing so in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general population. only allowed where vegetation, which may include non-native, invasive or noxious species, cannot otherwise be reasonably removed using conventional mechanical methods, such as buckthorn. Is allowed only where vegetation, which may include non-native, invasive or noxious species, cannot otherwise be reasonably removed using conventional mechanical methods. Must be managed under a written plan indicating the pre-grazing plant species inventory, the targeted species for control and frequency of monitoring for evaluating management goals. FEE N/A Initial license: $50. Renewal: $25 $50 (grazing permit) $50/year (grazing permit) $75 (grazing permit) $25 (General Zoning Compliance Certificate) $50 $193 annual, $96 Temp LOT SIZE parcel, lot or contiguous area of 0.5 acres or greater parcel, lot or contiguous area of 0.5 acres or greater At least 1.5 acres N/A N/A N/A parcel, lot or contiguous area of 0.5 acres or greater Is not allowed on sites less than one acre in size. ZONING DISTRICTS N/A N/A A – Agriculture, I -1 Industrial Park, and PI – Public Institution Zoning Districts only allowed in all zoning districts and is not subject to the regulations in Zoning Ordinance allowed in all zoning districts for vegetation management with a permit Prescribed grazing shall be limited to properties that are primarily used for public, semi-public, or institutional uses, such as parks, trails, public or private schools & other lots at the discretion of the city planner if contiguous with allowed properties N/A N/A APPROVAL PROCESS Annual permit required for the contractor. Property owner applies for the permit. Detailed site plan required Property owner applies for the permit. Detailed site plan required. Initial inspection by city required. Property owner applies for the permit. Detailed site plan required. The Officer shall grant a permit for the temporary keeping of goats after the property owner has obtained the written consent of at least 60 percent of the property owners of privately or publicly owned real estate that are located adjacent (i.e., sharing property lines) on the outer boundaries of the premises for which the permit is being requested, or in the alternative, proof that the applicant’s property lines are one hundred fifty (150) feet or more from any house or business. Permit required. No information specified. Property owner applies for the permit. Detailed site plan required. Initial City staff inspection required Requires an annual or temporary commercial animal license. NUMBER OF GOATS ALLOWED Max of 2 goats per every 1/10 acres of enclosed grazing area Max of 2 goats per every 1/10 acres of enclosed grazing area The number of goats allowed per permit shall be determined based on the size of the area where goats will be kept. Up to four goats on parcels that are 10,000 square feet in area or less, with one additional goat per every 1,000 square feet of lot area over 10,000 square feet. Up to four (4) goats on parcels that are ten thousand (10,000) square feet in area or less, with one (1) additional goat per every one thousand (1,000) square feet of lot area over ten thousand (10,000) square feet, to a maximum of seventy-five (75) goats per parcel. N/A Max of 2 goats per every 1/10 acres of enclosed grazing area Herd size must not exceed one goat per every one-tenth acre of the designated enclosure area. PC Page #102
DURATION of PERMIT Max of 2 times per year Max of 30 days per event with 30 days in-between events. under 2 acres: max 30 days. 2 times per year. Min 60 days between events. 2 acres or more: at the discretion of city staff. Permits not granted Dec - March up to 30 days. Two permits per year Up to 30 consecutive days or 60 days in any 12-month period No property owner or person shall store on a property goats or sheep for more than sixty (60) days in any twelve (12) month period under 2 acres: max 30 days. 2 times per year. Min 60 days between events. 2 acres or more: at the discretion of city staff under 2 acres: max 30 days. 2 times per year. Min 60 days between events. 2 acres or more: at the discretion of city staff Is allowed for no more than 30 consecutive days per location on a site. A minimum of 30 days must pass before goats may graze the same location. Is not allowed December through March. LIABILITY INSURANCE Contractor must have proof of Natural Resources Department public liability insurance, covering all operations for the sum of at least $2,000,000 against liability for bodily injuries to one person from the accident, $2,000,000 for the injury of two or more persons, and for at least $2,000,000 against liability for damage or destruction of property. Contractor must have proof of insurance coverage for claims arising from prescribed grazing activity in the amount of $1,000,000.00 per occurrence and $2,000,000.00 general aggregate and shall provide to the city proof of coverage prior to the issuance of the permit. The City shall have no liability for any damage that may be caused by goats kept on a property pursuant to this section. Property owners and permittees under this section shall be jointly and severally liable List of person(s) managing and monitoring the goats has proof of liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence. Proof of effective insurance policy or a copy thereof providing liability insurance covering claims arising out of the prescribed grazing activity. No $ specified. The owner of the goat(s) to be utilized under the permit shall have and maintain insurance coverage for claims arising from prescribed grazing in the amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 general aggregate and shall provide to the City proof of the required insurance coverage prior to issuance of the permit. The City shall have no liability for any damages that may be caused by goats kept on a property pursuant to a prescribed grazing permit. The permit holder shall be responsible for any damage caused by goats used for prescribed grazing purposes. Permit app: Attach a certificate of liability insurance of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury MONITORING ./ ENFORCEMENT N/A Site open to inspection at all times. The permit holder under this subdivision must occupy the premises for which the permit is issued at all times that the permit is in effect and goats are present on the premises. Site open to inspection at all times Site open to inspection at all times N/A Supervision: The prescribed gazing service must list on its grazing permit application contact information for the party responsible for promptly addressing issues associated with prescribed grazing on the specified property. The responsible party shall be available to be contacted at all hours of the day and all days of the week. Site open to inspection at all times. provide 24-hour contact telephone number of the person who owns the goats to be used for the prescribed grazing; N/A NUISANCE CONTROL N/A N/A The property must be maintained in a clean, sanitary condition so as to be free from offensive odors, fly breeding, dust, and general nuisance conditions. A plan to dispose of goat manure in a safe and adequate manner with removal of waste within 24 hours. Habitual Bleating. It shall unlawful for any person to keep or harbor a goat which habitually bleats. Habitual bleating is defined as bleating for repeated intervals of at least 5 minutes with less than 1 minute of interruption. The bleating must also be Goats shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance to the occupants of adjacent property. All sites on which goats or sheep are kept or maintained shall be kept clean from filth, garbage, and any substances which attract rodents. The site shall be cleaned frequently enough to control odor. Manure shall not be allowed to accumulate in a way that causes an unsanitary condition or causes odors detectible on another property clean from filth, garbage and any substances which attract rodents. The premises shall be cleaned frequently to control the odor. Manure shall not be allowed to accumulate in a way that causes an unsanitary condition or causes odors detectible on another property. Goats shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance to the occupants of adjacent property. prohibits harboring of a goat which habitually bleats. Habitual bleating is defined as bleating for repeated intervals of at least Goats used for prescribed grazing must have animal wastes regularly removed from shelters if shelters are provided. PC Page #103
audible off of the owner’s or caretaker’s premises. five (5) minutes with less than one (1) minute of interruption. The bleating must also be audible off of the premises for which the permit is issued. FENCE / ENCLOSURES Fencing required. No front yard fencing. Comply with existing fence and screening codes. Energized fencing allowed. If energized fence is within 30 feet of other property, double fencing required. Fencing required. No front yard fencing. Comply with existing fence and screening codes. Temporary removed in 5 days of end date. Energized fencing allowed and double fencing is required. goats must be contained by an adequate containment fence at all times. If an electric fence is used it must display a warning that the fence is electric. Fencing required. Temporary removed in 7 days of end date. Energized fence must have warning signs. Fencing required. Fencing required. No front yard fencing. Permanent must comply with existing fence and screening codes. Energize fencing allowed and double fencing may be required per city planner. Fencing required. Comply with existing fence and screening codes. Temporary removed in 5 days of end date. Energize fencing allowed and double fencing is required. Goats used for prescribed grazing are required to be fenced using permanent or temporary fencing and may be provided a shelter from the weather within their fenced enclosure. Fencing is required and must be designed to prevent escape by goats and access by other animals. Temporary enclosure fencing must be removed within seven calendar days after the expiration of the license duration or the goats are removed, whichever occurs first. NOTIFICATIONS Apply 15 days in advance of work. Notify City within 10 days of work. Notify city the day of work. N/A N/A Notice given to property owners within 150 feet of the grazing area. If, within 10 days of such notice, there are objections by 75% of the property owners in the notice area, then the permit must be approved by the Council. N/A N/A N/A N/A SIGNAGE If visible to the public, notification sign required with emergency contact. Size specified. Signs required for duration of permit N/A Warning signs on electric fence N/A Notification sign and warning sign for energized fence Notification sign and warning sign for energized fence 11) Signs must not exceed four square feet in size and must be placed in conspicuous locations near the fenced enclosure, but not in any right-of way areas. (12) Signs must warn the public to not enter the grazing enclosure and to not pet or feed the goats. SHELTERS Shelters, if provided, must follow all City structure and setback requirements. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Shelters, if provided, must: (A) Not be located in a front yard area, (B) Be less than 200 square feet, (C) Be less than seven feet in height, (D) Be set back a minimum of 100 feet from any lot used residentially and 150 feet from any dwelling on a neighboring lot, (E) Be designed for the use and built in a workmanship manner using approved materials, and (F) Be removed within seven calendar days of the expiration of the license duration or the goats are removed from the Property, whichever occurs first. PC Page #104
Planning Commission Memo
MEETING DATE:May 25, 2021
TO:Mendota Heights Planning Commission
FROM:Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:Preliminary Review of Draft Ordinance No. 568 – New Mississippi River
Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) Ordinance
Introduction
The Planning Commission is being asked to review the attached Ordinance No. 568, which represents the
beginning steps in the replacement and creation of a new Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area
(MRCCA) Ordinance for the community.
Background
In 2016, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) revised the rules and regulations
governing development within the MRCCA for all those communities that contain a MRCCA boundary;
and provided a very useful model ordinance for those affected communities to use or implement into their
own city codes.
Local communities within the corridor are required to complete a MRCCA plan as a separate chapter of
their Comprehensive Plan Update; and complete an official zoning ordinance update (amendment) by end
of 2021. The City was notified in January that the DNR has given its approval for the City’s proposed
MRCCA plan; and the remainder of the Plan is still under review with the Metropolitan Council.
At the February 2, 2021 council meeting, the City Council was presented with Ordinance No. 562, an
Interim Ordinance Placing a Moratorium on Proposed Development, Subdivision or Certain Construction
and Building Activity Requiring a Permit for Properties Situated in the Critical Area Overlay District. This
ordinance was unanimously adopted by the council. During this 12-month moratorium period, city staff
will be able to research and present information to the planning commission and city council for further
consideration.
There is no public hearing scheduled on this item; nor any official action to be taken on this item. Staff
requests the planning commission review this draft ordinance and proceed accordingly.
PC Page #105
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 568
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12 ZONING
CHAPTER 3 CRITICAL AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT
Chapter 3
MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA
OVERLAY DISTRICT
SECTION:
12-3-1: AUTHORITY, POLICY and INTENT
12-3-2: GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS
12-3-3: ADMINISTRATION
12-3-4: MRCCA DISTRICTS
12-3-5: SPECIAL LAND USE PROVISIONS
12-3-6: STRUCTURE HEIGHT, PLACEMENT AND LOT SIZE
12-3-7: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE FACILITIES
12-3-8: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES
12-3-9: VEGETATION MANAGEMENT
12-3-10: LAND ALTERATION STANDARDS AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
12-3-11: SUBDIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
12-3-12: SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS
12-3-13: OFFICIAL REVIEW PROCESS
12-3-14: NOTIFICATION TO RESOURCE AGENCIES
12-3-15: EXEMPTIONS
PC Page #106
12-3-1: FINDINGS AUTHORITY, POLICY and INTENT
A. Statutory Authorization. This Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) overlay
district chapter is adopted pursuant to the authorization and policies contained in Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 116G, Minnesota Rules, Parts 6106.0010-6106.0180, and the planning and
zoning enabling legislation in Minnesota Statutes 462 and 473.
B. Policy. The Legislature of Minnesota has delegated responsibility to local governments of the
state to regulate the subdivision, use and development of designated critical areas and thus
preserve and enhance the quality of important historic, cultural, aesthetic values, and natural
systems and provide for the wise use of these areas.
C. Intent. (from City of Minneapolis) The Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area
regulations are intended to:
1. Establish districts under which building height and structure placement are regulated
to protect and enhance the Mississippi River's resources and features consistent with
the natural and built character of each district.
2. Identify development standards and considerations for land uses that have potential
to negatively impact primary conservation areas and public river corridor views.
3. Establish standards that protect primary conservation areas and public river corridor
views from development impacts and ensure that new development is sited consistent
with the purpose of the MRCCA.
4. Establish design standards for private facilities that are consistent with best
management practices and that minimize impacts to primary conservation areas,
public river corridor views and other resources identified in the MRCCA plan.
5. Establish design standards for public facilities that are consistent with best
management practices and that minimize impacts to primary conservation areas,
public river corridor views and other resources identified in the MRCCA plan while
recognizing that they serve the public interest by providing access to the Mississippi
River corridor or require locations within the river corridor and therefor require some
flexibility.
6. Establish standards that sustain and enhance the biological and ecological functions
of vegetation; preserve the natural character and topography of the MRCCA; and
maintain stability of bluffs and critical area steep slopes and ensure stability of other
erosion-prone areas.
7. Establish standards that protect water quality from pollutant loadings of sediment,
nutrients, bacteria, and other contaminants; and maintain stability of bluffs,
shorelines, and other areas prone to erosion.
PC Page #107
8. To create standards for subdivisions and development or redevelopment of large
sites that protect and enhance the natural and scenic value of the MRCCA,
protect and restore biological and ecological functions of primary conservation
areas, and encourage restoration of natural vegetation where restoration
opportunities have been identified in the MRCCA Plan.
12-3-2: GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS:
A. Jurisdiction. The provisions of this chapter apply to land within the river corridor boundary as
described in the State Register, volume 43, pages 508 to 519 and shown on the city’s official
zoning or MRCCA maps on file with the city.
B. Enforcement. The city zoning administrator and public works director are jointly responsible
for the administration and enforcement of this chapter. Any violation of its provisions or
failure to comply with any of its requirements including violations of conditions and safeguards
established in connection with grants of variances or conditional uses constitutes a
misdemeanor and is punishable as defined by law. Violations of this chapter can occur
regardless of whether or not a permit is required for a regulated activity listed in Section XX.
C. Severability. If any section, clause, provision, or portion of this chapter is judged
unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this chapter
shall not be affected thereby.
D. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. It is not intended by this chapter to repeal, abrogate, or
impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, where this chapter
imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this chapter shall prevail. All other chapters or
sections inconsistent with this chapter are hereby repealed to the extent of the inconsistency
only.
E. Underlying Zoning. Uses and standards of underlying zoning districts apply except where
standards of this overlay district are more restrictive.
F. Definitions. Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases used in this chapter shall be
interpreted to give them the same meaning they have in common usage and to give this chapter
its most reasonable application. For the purpose of this chapter, the words “must” and “shall”
are mandatory and not permissive. All distances, unless otherwise specified, are measured
horizontally.
ACCESS PATH means an area designated to provide ingress and egress to public waters.
ADJACENT means having a boundary that physically touches or adjoins.
AGRICULTURAL USE means a use having the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes,
section 40A.02.
ALTERNATIVE DESIGN means subdivision design methods such as conservation design,
transfer of development density, or similar zoning and site design techniques that protect open
space and natural areas.
PC Page #108
BARGE FLEETING means temporarily parking and securing barges on the river, on or off
channel, while tows are assembled or broken up.
BIOLOGICAL AND ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS mean the functions of vegetation in
stabilizing soils and slopes, retaining and filtering runoff, providing habitat, and recharging
groundwater.
BLUFF means a natural topographic feature having:
(a) A slope that rises at least twenty-five (25) feet and the grade of the slope averages eighteen
(18) percent or greater, measured over a horizontal distance of twenty-five (25) feet, from
the toe of the slope to the top of the slope. Where the slope begins below the ordinary
high-water level, the ordinary high-water level is the toe of the slope. [See Figure 1 –
below]; or
Figure 1. Bluff and Bluff Impact Zone Diagram
(b) A natural escarpment or cliff with a slope that rises at least ten (10) feet above the ordinary
high-water level or toe of the slope, whichever is applicable, to the top of the slope, with a
slope of seventy-five (75) degrees or greater. [See Figure 2 – below].
Figure 2. Natural Escarpment Bluff and Bluff Impact Zone Diagram
PC Page #109
BLUFF IMPACT ZONE (BIZ) means a bluff and the land located within 20 feet of the bluff.
See Figures 1 and 2.
BLUFFLINE means a line delineating the top of the bluff. More than one bluffline may be
encountered proceeding landward from the river. See Figures 1 and 2.
BLUFF, TOE OF means a line along the bottom of a bluff, requiring field verification, such
that the slope above the line exceeds eighteen (18) percent and the slope below the line is
eighteen (18) percent or less, measured over a horizontal distance of twenty-five (25) feet. See
Figures 1 and 2.
BLUFF, TOP OF means a line along the top of a bluff, requiring field verification, such that
the slope below the line exceeds eighteen (18) percent and the slope above the line is eighteen
(18) percent or less, measured over a horizontal distance of twenty-five (25) feet. See Figures
1 and 2.
BUILDABLE AREA means the area upon which structures may be placed on a lot or parcel
of land and excludes areas needed to meet requirements for setback, rights-of-way, bluff
impact zones, historic properties, wetlands, designated floodways, land below the ordinary
high water level of public waters, and other unbuildable areas.
BUILDING means a structure with two or more outside rigid walls and a fully secured roof
and affixed to a permanent site.
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE means a document written after a compliance inspection,
certifying that the development complies with applicable requirements at the time of the
inspection.
CITY means the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
COMMISSIONER means the commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources.
CONDITIONAL USE means a use having the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes,
chapters 394 and 462.
CONSERVATION DESIGN means a pattern of subdivision that is characterized by grouping
lots within a portion of a parcel, where the remaining portion of the parcel is permanently
protected as open space.
CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION means a pattern of subdivision that is characterized by
lots that are spread regularly throughout a parcel in a lot and block design.
DECK means a horizontal, unenclosed, aboveground level structure open to the sky, with or
without attached railings, seats, trellises, or other features, attached or functionally related to a
principal use or site.
DEVELOPER has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.03.
PC Page #110
DEVELOPMENT has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.03.
DISCRETIONARY ACTION means an action under this chapter related to land use that
requires a public hearing by local ordinance or statute, such as preliminary plats, final
subdivision plats, planned unit developments, conditional use permits, interim use permits,
variances, appeals, and rezoning.
DOCK has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules, chapter 6115.
ELECTRIC POWER FACILITIES means equipment and associated facilities for generating
electric power or devices for converting wind energy to electrical energy as identified and
defined under Minnesota Statutes, section 216E.
ESSENTIAL SERVICES mean underground or overhead gas, electrical, communications,
steam, or water distribution, collection, supply, or disposal systems, including storm water.
Essential services include poles, wires, mains, drains, pipes, conduits, cables, fire alarm boxes,
traffic signals, hydrants, navigational structures, aviation safety facilities or other similar
equipment and accessories in conjunction with the systems. Essential services does not include
buildings, treatment works as defined in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 115.01, electric power
facilities or transmission services.
FEEDLOT has the meaning given for animal feedlots under Minnesota Rules chapter 7020.
FLOODPLAIN has the meaning given the meaning given under Minnesota Rules chapter
6120.
FULLY RECONSTRUCTS means the reconstruction of an existing impervious surface that
involves site grading and subsurface excavation so that soil is exposed. Mill and overlay and
other resurfacing activities are not considered fully reconstructed.
HARD-SURFACE TRAIL means a trail surfaced in asphalt, crushed aggregate, or other hard
surface, for multi-purpose use, as determined by local, regional, or state agency plans.
HISTORIC PROPERTY means an archaeological site, standing structure, site, district, or other
property that is:
(a) Listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the State Register of Historic Places
or locally designated as a historic site under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 471;
(b) determined to meet the criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places or
the State Register of Historic Places as determined by the director of the Minnesota
Historical Society; or
(c) An unplatted cemetery that falls under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, chapter 307,
in consultation with the Office of the State Archaeologist.
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE means a constructed hard surface that either prevents or retards the
entry of water into the soil and causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities and at
PC Page #111
an increased rate of flow than prior to development. Examples include rooftops, decks,
sidewalks, patios, parking lots, storage areas, and driveways, including those with concrete,
asphalt, or gravel surfaces.
INTENSIVE VEGETATION CLEARING means the removal of all or a majority of the trees
or shrubs in a contiguous patch, strip, row, or block.
INTERIM USE has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 394 and 462.
LAND ALTERATION means an activity that exposes the soil or changes the topography,
drainage, or cross section of the land, excluding gardening or similar minor soil disturbances.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT means counties, cities, and townships.
LOCAL PARK AGENCIES mean the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board and the Three
Rivers Park District.
LOT has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules chapter 6120.
LOT WIDTH means the shortest distance between lot lines measured at both the ordinary high-
water level and at the required structure setback from the ordinary high-water level. [See Figure
3 – below].
Figure 3. Lot Width Diagram
MARINA has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules chapter 6115.
MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA (MRCCA) means the area within the
River Corridor Boundary (See Section xx-xx-xx).
MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA (MRCCA) Plan means a chapter in the
city’s comprehensive plan.
MOORING FACILITY has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules chapter 6115.0170.
PC Page #112
NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITY means a plant community that has been identified as part of
the Minnesota Biological Survey or biological survey issued or adopted by a local, state, or
federal agency.
NATURAL-SURFACE TRAIL means a trail composed of native soil and rock or compacted
granular stone, primarily intended for hiking, equestrian, or mountain bike use, as determined
by local, regional, or state agency plans.
NATURAL VEGETATION means any combination of ground cover, understory, and tree
canopy that, while it may have been altered by human activity, continues to stabilize soils,
retain and filter runoff, provide habitat, and recharge groundwater.
NONCONFORMITY has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, Section xx-xx-xx.
NONMETALLIC MINING means the construction, reconstruction, repair, relocation,
expansion, or removal of any facility for the extraction, stockpiling, storage, disposal, or
reclamation of nonmetallic minerals such a stone, sand, and gravel. Nonmetallic mining does
not include ancillary facilities such as access roads, bridges, culverts, and water level control
structures. For purposes of this subpart, “facility” includes all mine pits, quarries, stockpiles,
basins, processing structures and equipment, and any structures that drain or divert public
waters to allow mining.
OFF-PREMISES ADVERTISING SIGNS means signs that direct attention to a product,
service, business, or entertainment venue that is not exclusively related to the premises where
the sign is located.
ORDINARY HIGH-WATER LEVEL (OHWL) has the meaning given under Minnesota
Statutes, section 103G.005.
OVERLAY DISTRICT means a zoning district that is applied over one or more previously
established zoning districts, establishing additional or stricter standards and criteria for covered
properties in addition to those of the underlying zoning district. Overlay districts are often used
to protect historic features and natural resources such as shoreland or floodplain.
PARCEL has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.03.
PATIO means a constructed hard surface located at ground level with no railings and open to
the sky.
PICNIC SHELTER means a roofed structure open on all sides, accessory to a recreational use.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) means a method of land development that merges
zoning and subdivision controls, allowing developers to plan and develop a large area as a
single entity, characterized by a unified site design, a mix of structure types and land uses,
and/or phasing of development over a number of years. Planned unit development includes
any conversion of existing structures and land uses that utilize this method of development.
PLAT has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, sections 505 and 515B.
PC Page #113
PORT means a transportation complex established and operated under the jurisdiction of a port
authority according to Minnesota Statutes, section 458.
PRIMARY CONSERVATION AREAS (PCA) means resources and features, including shore
impact zones, bluff impact zones, floodplains, wetlands, gorges, areas of confluence with
tributaries, natural drainage routes, unstable soils and bedrock, native plant communities,
cultural and historic properties, and significant existing vegetative stands, tree canopies, and
other resources identified in local government plans.
PRIVATE FACILITIES mean private roads, driveways, and parking areas, private water
access and viewing facilities, decks and patios in setback areas, and private signs.
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER means an engineer licensed to practice in Minnesota.
PUBLIC FACILITIES mean public utilities, public transportation facilities, and public
recreational facilities.
PUBLIC RECREATION FACILITIES mean recreational facilities provided by the state or a
local government and dedicated to public use, including parks, scenic overlooks, observation
platforms, trails, docks, fishing piers, picnic shelters, water access ramps, and other similar
water-oriented public facilities used for recreation.
PUBLIC RIVER CORRIDOR VIEWS means views toward the river from public parkland,
historic properties, and public overlooks, as well as views toward bluffs from the ordinary high
water level of the opposite shore, as seen during the summer months and documented in the
MRCCA chapter of the comprehensive plan.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES mean all transportation facilities provided by
federal, state, or local government and dedicated to public use, such as roadways, transit
facilities, railroads, and bikeways.
PUBLIC UTILITIES mean electric power facilities, essential services, and transmission
services.
PUBLIC WATERS has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005.
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR is a person designated by the City Administrator and approved
by City Council as being jointly responsible for the administration of this chapter.
READILY VISIBLE means land and development that are easily seen from the ordinary high-
water level of the opposite shore during summer months.
RESOURCE AGENCY means a federal, state, regional, or local agency that engages in
environmental, natural, or cultural resource protection or restoration activities, including
planning, implementation, and monitoring.
RETAINING WALL means a vertical or nearly vertical structures constructed of mortar and
rubble masonry, rock, or stone regardless of size, vertical timber pilings, horizontal timber
PC Page #114
planks with piling supports, sheet pilings, poured concrete, concrete blocks, or other durable
materials.
ROCK RIPRAP means natural coarse rock placed or constructed to armor shorelines,
streambeds, bridge abutments, pilings and other shoreline structures against scour, or water or
ice erosion.
RIVER CORRIDOR BOUNDARY means the boundary approved and adopted by the
Metropolitan Council under Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.06, as approved and adopted by
the legislature in Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.15, and as legally described in the Sate
Register, volume 43, pages 508 to 518.
RIVER-DEPENDENT USE means the use of land for commercial, industrial, or utility
purposes, where access to and use of a public water feature is an integral part of the normal
conduct of business and where the use is dependent on shoreline facilities.
SELECTIVE VEGETATION REMOVAL means the removal of isolated individual trees or
shrubs that are not in a contiguous patch, strip, row, or block and that does not substantially
reduce the tree canopy or understory cover.
SETBACK means a separation distance measured horizontally.
SHORE IMPACT ZONE (SIZ) means land located between the ordinary high-water level of
public waters and a line parallel to it at a setback of 50 percent of the required structure setback
or, for agricultural use, 50 feet landward of the ordinary high water level. [See Figure 4 –
below].
Figure 4: Shore Impact Zone Diagram
SHORELINE FACILITIES means facilities that require a location adjoining public waters for
ingress and egress, loading and unloading, and public water intake and outflow, such as barge
facilities, port facilities, commodity loading and unloading equipment, watercraft lifts,
PC Page #115
marinas, short-term watercraft mooring facilities for patrons, and water access ramps.
Structures that would be enhanced by a shoreline location, but do not require a location
adjoining public waters as part of their function, are not shoreline facilities, such as restaurants,
bait shops, and boat dealerships.
SPECIAL PURPOSE UNITS OF GOVERNMENT means the University of Minnesota, the
St. Paul Port Authority, watershed management organizations established under Minnesota
Statutes, chapter 103B, watershed districts established under Minnesota Statutes, chapter
103D, and any other unit of government other than local government or a state or regional
agency.
STATE OR REGIONAL AGENCY means the Metropolitan Airports Commission, Minnesota
Historical Society, University of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources, Department of
Transportation, Metropolitan Council and other state agencies.
STEEP SLOPE means a natural topographic feature with an average slope of twelve(12) to
eighteen (18) percent, measured over a horizontal distance equal to or greater than fifty (50)
feet, and any slopes greater than nineteen (19) percent that are not bluffs.
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES means facilities for the collection,
conveyance, treatment, or disposal of storm water.
STRUCTURE means a building, sign, or appurtenance thereto, except for aerial or
underground utility lines, such as sewer, electric, telephone, or gas lines, and utility line towers,
poles, and other supporting appurtenances.
SUBDIVISION has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 462.352.
SUBSURFACE SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM (SSTS) has the meaning given under
Minnesota Rules, part 7080.1100.
TRANSMISSION SERVICES means:
A. Electric power lines, cables, pipelines, or conduits that are:
(1) used to transport power between two points, as identified and defined under Minnesota
Statutes, section 216E.01, subdivision 4; or
(2) For mains or pipelines for gas, liquids, or solids in suspension, used to transport gas,
liquids, or solids in suspension between two points; and
B. Telecommunication lines, cables, pipelines, or conduits.
TREELINE means the more or less continuous line formed by the tops of trees in a wooded
area when viewed from a particular point. The treeline is determined during all seasons as if
under full foliage.
PC Page #116
TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA means the area over which the Metropolitan
Council has jurisdiction according to Minnesota Statutes, section 473.121 subdivision 2.
VARIANCE has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 394.22.
WATER ACCESS RAMP means a boat ramp, carry-down site, boarding dock, and approach
road, or other access that allows launching and removal of a boat, canoe, or other watercraft
with or without a vehicle and trailer.
WATER-ORIENTED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE means a small building or other
improvement, except stairways, fences, docks, and retaining walls, that, because of the
relationship of its use to public waters, needs to be located closer to public waters than the
normal structure setback. Examples include gazebos, screen houses, fish houses, pump houses,
and detached decks and patios.
WATER QUALITY IMPACT ZONE means land within the shore impact zone or within 50
feet of the OHWL of the river, whichever is greater, and land within 50 feet of a public water,
wetland, or natural drainage route.
WETLAND has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005.
WHARF has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules, part 6115.0170.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR is a person designated by the City Administrator and approved
by City Council as being jointly responsible for the administration of this chapter.
12-3-3: ADMINISTRATION:
A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to identify administrative provisions to ensure this
chapter is administered consistent with its purpose.
B. Permits. A critical area permit is required for the construction of buildings or building
additions, including construction of decks, retaining walls, signs, the installation and/or
alteration of sewage treatment systems, vegetation removal consistent with Section XX and
land alterations consistent with Section XX.
C. Variances. Variances to the requirements under this chapter may only be granted in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357 and must consider the potential impacts of variances
on primary conservation areas (PCAs), public river corridor views (PRCVs), and other
resources identified in the MRCCA plan. In reviewing the variance application, the city shall:
1. Evaluate the impacts to these resources. If negative impacts are found, require conditions
to mitigate the impacts that are related to and proportional to the impacts, consistent with
Section XX; and
2. Make written findings that the variance is consistent with the purpose of this chapter as
follows.
PC Page #117
a. The extent, location and intensity of the variance will be in substantial compliance with
the MRCCA Plan;
b. The variance is consistent with the character and management purpose of the MRCCA
district in which it is located;
c. The variance will not be detrimental to PCAs and PRVCs nor will it contribute to
negative incremental impacts to PCAs and PRVCs when considered in the context of
past, present and reasonable future actions; and
d. The variance will not negatively impact other MRCCA resources identified in the city’s
MRCCA Plan such as wetlands, river overlooks, parks and open space, etc.
D. Conditional and interim use permits. All conditional and interim uses required under this
chapter must comply with Minnesota Statutes, section 462.3595 and must consider the
potential impacts on primary conservation areas, public river corridor views, and other
resources identified in the city’s MRCCA plan. In reviewing the application, the city shall:
1. Evaluate the impacts to these resources and if negative impacts are found, require
conditions to mitigate the impacts that are related to and proportional to the impacts,
consistent with Section XX; and
2. Make written findings that the conditional use is consistent with the purpose of this
chapter as follows.
1. The extent, location and intensity of the conditional use will be in substantial
compliance with the MRCCA plan;
2. The conditional use is consistent with the character and management purpose of
the MRCCA district in which it is located;
3. The conditional use will not be detrimental to PCAs and PRVCs nor will it
contribute to negative incremental impacts to PCAs and PRVCs when considered in
the context of past, present, and reasonable future actions; and
4. The conditional use will not negatively impact other resources identified in the city’s
MRCCA plan, such as wetlands, river overlooks, and parks and open space.
E. Conditions of approval. The city shall evaluate the impacts to PCAs, PRCVs and other
resources identified in the MRCCA Plan, and if negative impacts are found, require
conditions to mitigate the impacts that are related to and proportional to the impacts.
Mitigation may include:
1. Restoration of vegetation identified as “vegetation restoration priorities” identified in the
city’s MRCCA plan.
2. Preservation of existing vegetation;
PC Page #118
3. Increasing, enhancing, and or connecting habitat for pollinators, birds, and other
wildlife;
4. Stormwater runoff management;
5. Reducing impervious surface;
6. Increasing structure setbacks;
7. Wetland and drainage route restoration and/or preservation
8. Limiting the height of structures;
9. Modifying structure design to limit visual impacts on the PRCVs; and
10. Other conservation measures.
F. Nonconformities.
1. All legally established nonconformities as of the date of this ordinance may continue
consistent with Minnesota Statutes 462.357 Subd. 1e.
2. New structures erected in conformance with the setback averaging provisions of
Section XX are conforming structures.
3. Site alterations and expansion of site alterations that were legally made prior to the
effective date of this ordinance are conforming. Site alterations include vegetation,
erosion control, storm water control measures, and other nonstructural site
improvements.
4. Legally nonconforming principal structures that do not meet the setback requirements
of Section XX may be expanded laterally provided that:
a. The expansion does not extend into the shore or bluff impact zone or further
into the required setback than the building line of the existing principal structure
[See Figure 5 – below]; and
b. The expanded structure’s scale and bulk is consistent with that of the original
structure and existing surrounding development.
Figure 5. Expansion of Nonconforming Structures
PC Page #119
G. Accommodating disabilities. Reasonable accommodation for ramps and other facilities to
provide persons with disabilities access to the persons’ property, as required by the federal
Americans with Disabilities Act and the federal Fair Housing Act and as provided by
Minnesota Rules, chapter 1341, must:
1. Comply with Sections XX; or
2. If Sections XX cannot be complied with, ramps or other facilities are allowed with an
administrative permit provided:
a. The permit terminates on either a specific date or upon occurrence of a particular
event related to the person requiring accommodation; and
b. Upon expiration of the permit, the ramp or other facilities must be removed.
12-3-4: MRCCA DISTRICTS:
A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to establish districts under which building height and
structure placement are regulated to protect and enhance the Mississippi River’s resources
and features consistent with the natural and built character of each district.
B. MRCCA District Map. The locations and boundaries of the MRCCA districts established by
this chapter are shown on the MRCCA Overlay District Map which is incorporated herein by
reference. The district boundary lines are intended to follow the centerlines of rivers and
streams, highways, streets, lot lines, and municipal boundaries, unless a boundary line is
otherwise indicated on the map. Where district boundaries cross property that has not be
subdivided, the district boundary line is determined by the use of dimensions or the scale
appearing on the map. For purposes of determining the application of this chapter to any
particular parcel of land, the above referenced map shall be on file in the office of the zoning
administrator and shall be available for inspection and copying.
PC Page #120
C. District Description and Management Purpose. The MRCCA within the city is divided into
the following MRCCA Districts:
1. Rural and Open Space (ROS).
a. Description. The ROS District is characterized by rural and low-density development
patterns and land uses, and includes land that is riparian or visible from the river, as
well as large, undeveloped tracts of high ecological and scenic value, floodplain, and
undeveloped islands. Many primary conservation areas exist in the district.
b. Management purpose. The ROS District must be managed to sustain and restore the
rural and natural character of the corridor and to protect and enhance habitat, parks and
open space, public river corridor views, and scenic, natural, and historic areas.
2. River Neighborhood (RN).
a. Description. The RN district is characterized by primarily residential
neighborhoods that are riparian or readily visible from the river or that abut
riparian parkland. The district includes parks and open space, limited
commercial development, marinas, and related land uses.
b. Management purpose. The RN district must be managed to maintain the
character of the river corridor within the context of existing residential and
related neighborhood development, and to protect and enhance habitat, parks
and open space, public river corridor views, and scenic, natural, and historic
areas. Minimizing erosion and the flow of untreated storm water into the river
and enhancing habitat and shoreline vegetation are priorities in the district.
3. Separated from River (SR).
a. Description. The SR district is characterized by its physical and visual distance from
the Mississippi River. The district includes land separated from the river by distance
topography, development, or a transportation corridor. The land in this district is not
readily visible from the Mississippi River.
b. Management purpose. The SR district provides flexibility in managing development
without negatively affecting the key resources and features of the river corridor.
Minimizing negative impacts to primary conservation areas and minimizing erosion
and the flow of untreated storm water into the river are priorities in the district.
providing public access to and public views of the river, and restoring natural
vegetation in riparian areas and tree canopy are priorities in the district.
12-3-5 SPECIAL LAND USE PROVISIONS
A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to identify development standards and
considerations for land uses that have potential to negatively impact primary conservation
areas and public river corridor views.
PC Page #121
B. Underlying zoning. Uses within the MRCCA are generally determined by underlying
zoning, with additional provisions for the following land uses:
1. Agricultural use. Perennial ground cover is required within 50 feet of the ordinary high
water level and within the bluff impact zone.
2. Feedlots. New animal feedlots and manure storage areas are prohibited. Existing animal
feedlots and manure storage areas must conform with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7020.
3. Forestry. Tree harvesting and biomass harvesting within woodlands, and associated
reforestation, must be consistent with recommended practices in Conserving Wooded
Areas in Developing Communities: Best Management Practices in Minnesota.
4. Nonmetallic mining. Nonmetallic mining requires a conditional use permit or interim use
permit issued by the local government, subject to the following:
a. New nonmetallic mining is prohibited within the shore impact zone and bluff impact
zone and within the required structure setback from the bluffline and OHWL;
b. Processing machinery must be located consistent with setback standards for structures
as provided in Section XX;
c. Only one barge loading area, which must be limited to the minimum size practicable,
is permitted for each mining operation;
d. New and, where practicable, existing nonmetallic mining operations must not be
readily visible and must be screened by establishing and maintaining natural
vegetation. The unscreened boundaries of nonmetallic mining areas are limited to only
the barge loading area;
e. A site management plan must be developed by the operator and approved by the local
government before new nonmetallic mining commences. Operations must be
consistent with the site plan throughout the duration of operations at the site. The site
management plan must:
i. Describe how the site will be developed over time with an emphasis on minimizing
environmental
ii. risk to public waters;
iii. Explain where staged reclamation may occur at certain points during the life of the
site;
iv. Address dust, noise, storm water management, possible pollutant discharges, days
and hours of operation, and duration of operations; and
v. Describe any anticipated vegetation and topographic alterations outside the pit, and
reclamation plans consistent with the stated end use for the land; and;
PC Page #122
f. Existing and new nonmetallic mining operations must submit land reclamation plans
to the local government compatible with the purposes of this ordinance.
5. River-dependent uses. River-dependent uses must comply with the following design
standards:
a. Structures and parking areas, except shoreline facilities and private roads and
conveyances serving river-dependent uses as provided in Section XX, must meet the
dimensional and performance standards in this Chapter must be designed so that they
are not readily visible, and must be screened by establishing and maintaining natural
vegetation;
b. Shoreline facilities must comply with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6115 and must:
i. Be designed in a compact fashion so as to minimize the shoreline area affected;
and
ii. Minimize the surface area of land occupied in relation to the number of
watercraft or barges to be served; and
c. Dredging and placement of dredged material are subject to existing federal and state
permit requirements and agreements.
6. Wireless communication towers. Wireless communication towers require a conditional or
interim use permit and are subject to the following design standards:
a. The applicant must demonstrate that functional coverage cannot be provided through
co-location, a tower at a lower height, or a tower at a location outside of the MRCCA;
b. The tower must not be located in a bluff or shore impact zone; and
c. Placement of the tower must minimize impacts on public river corridor views.
d. Comply with the general design standards in Section XX.
12-3-6 STRUCTURE HEIGHT, PLACEMENT AND LOT SIZE
A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish standards that protect primary
conservation areas and public river corridor views from development impacts and ensure
that new development is sited consistent with the purpose of the MRCCA.
B. Structure height. Structures and facilities must comply with the following standards unless
identified as exempt in Section XX.
1. ROS District: the lesser of height standard as determined by the underlying zoning district
or thirty-five (35) feet.
2. RN District: the lesser of height standard as determined by the underlying zoning district
or thirty-five (35) feet.
PC Page #123
3. SR district: Height is determined by underlying zoning, provided the allowed height is
consistent with that of the mature tree line, where preset, and existing surrounding
development, as viewed from the OHWL of the opposite shore.
4. For properties on or abutting the Mississippi River, the height of structures shall be
measured on the side of the structure facing the river.
5. In addition to the conditional use permit requirements of Section XX, criteria for
considering whether to grant a conditional use permit for structures exceeding the height
limits must include:
a. Assessment of the visual impact of the proposed structure on public river corridor
views, including views from other communities;
b. Determination that the proposed structure meets the required bluff and OHWL
setbacks;
c. Identification and application of techniques to minimize the perceived bulk of the
proposed structure, such as:
i. Placing the long axis of the building perpendicular to the river;
ii. Stepping back of portions of the facade;
iii. Lowering the roof pitch or use of a flat roof;
iv. Using building materials or mitigation techniques that will blend in with the
natural surroundings such as green roofs, green walls, or other green and brown
building materials;
v. Narrowing the profile of upper floors of the building; or
vi. Increasing the setbacks of the building from the Mississippi River or blufflines;
d. Identification of techniques for preservation of those view corridors identified in the
MRCCA Plan; and
e. Opportunities for creation or enhancement of public river corridor views.
C. Structure and Impervious Surface Placement.
1. Structures and impervious surface must not be placed in the shore or bluff impact zones
unless identified as an exemption in Section XX.
2. Structures and facilities must comply with the following OHWL setback provisions unless
identified as exempt in Section XX.
a. ROS District: 200 feet from the Mississippi River
PC Page #124
b. RN District: 100 feet from the Mississippi River.
3. Structures and facilities must comply with the following bluffline setback provisions unless
identified as exempt in Section XX:
a. ROS District: 100 feet.
b. RN District: 40 feet.
c. SR District: 40 feet.
4. Where principal structures exist on the adjoining lots on both sides of a proposed building
site, the minimum setback may be altered to conform to the average of the adjoining
setbacks, if the new structure's scale and bulk riverward or bluffward of the setbacks
required under Sections XX and XX are consistent with adjoining development. [See
Figure 6 – below].
Figure 6. Structure Setback Averaging
5. Subsurface sewage treatment systems, including the septic tank and absorption area, must
be located at least 75 feet from the ordinary high water level of the Mississippi River and
all other public waters.
D. Lot Size and Buildable Area.
1. All new lots must have adequate buildable area to comply with the setback requirements
of Sections XX and XX so as to not require variances to use the lots for their intended
purpose.
12-3-7 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE FACILITIES
A. Purpose. To establish design standards for private facilities that are consistent with best
management practices and that minimize impacts to primary conservation areas, public river
corridor views and other resources identified in the MRCCA plan.
PC Page #125
B. General design standards. All private facilities must be developed in accordance with the
vegetation management and land alteration requirements in Sections XX and XX.
C. Private roads, driveways, and parking areas. Except as provided in Section XX, private roads,
driveways and parking areas must:
1. Be designed to take advantage of natural vegetation and topography so that they are not
readily visible;
2. Comply with structure setback requirements according to Section XX; and
3. Not be placed within the bluff impact zone or shore impact zone, unless exempt under
Section XX and designed consistent with Section XX.
D. Private water access and viewing facilities.
1. Private access paths must be no more than:
a. Eight feet wide, if placed within the shore impact zone; and
b. Four feet wide, if placed within the bluff impact zone.
2. Private water access ramps must:
a. Comply with Minnesota Rules, parts 6115.0210 and 6280.0250; and
b. Be designed and constructed consistent with the applicable standards in Design
Handbook for Recreational Boating and Fishing Facilities.
3. Design and construction of private stairways, lifts, and landings are subject to the
following standards:
a. Stairways and lifts must not exceed four feet in width on residential lots. Wider
stairways may be used for commercial properties and residential facilities held in
common, if approved by a conditional use permit;
b. Landings for stairways and lifts on residential lots must not exceed 32 square feet
in area. Landings larger than 32 square feet area allowed for commercial properties
and residential facilities held in common, if approved by a conditional use permit;
c. Canopies or roofs are prohibited on stairways, lifts, or landings;
d. Stairways, lifts, and landings must be located in the least visible portion of the lot
whenever practical; and
e. Ramps, lifts, mobility paths, or other facilities for persons with physical disabilities
are allowed for achieving access to shore areas according to Section 7.43 A. – D,
and as provided under Section 3.9.
PC Page #126
4. One water-oriented accessory structure is allowed for each riparian lot or parcel less
than 300 feet in width at the ordinary high water level, with one additional water-
oriented accessory structure allowed for each additional 300 feet of shoreline on the
same lot or parcel. Water-oriented accessory structures are prohibited in the bluff
impact zone and must:
a. Not exceed 12 feet in height;
b. Not exceed 120 square feet in area; and
c. Be placed a minimum of 10 feet from the ordinary high water level.
E. Decks and patios in setback areas. Decks and at-grade patios may encroach into the required
setbacks from the ordinary high water level and blufflines without a variance, when consistent
with Sections XX and XX, provided that:
1. The encroachment of the deck or patio into the required setback area does not exceed 15
percent of the required structure setback;
2. The area of the deck or patio that extends into the required setback area occupies no more
than 25 percent of the total area between the required setback and the 15 percent using the
formula:
[Required setback depth (feet) x 0.15 x lot width (feet) = maximum total area]
3. The deck or patio does not extend into the bluff impact zone. [See Figure 7 – below].
Figure 7. Deck and Patio Encroachment
PC Page #127
12-3-8 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES
A. Purpose. To establish design standards for public facilities that are consistent with best
management practices and that minimize impacts to primary conservation areas, public river
corridor views and other resources identified in the MRCCA plan. Public facilities serve the
public interest by providing public access to the Mississippi River corridor or require locations
in or adjacent to the river corridor and therefore require some degree of flexibility.
B. General design standards. All public facilities must be designed and constructed to:
1. Minimize visibility of the facility from the river to the extent consistent with the purpose
of the facility;
2. Comply with the structure placement and height standards in Section XX, except as
provided in Section XX;
3. Be consistent with the vegetation management standards in Section XX and the land
alteration and storm water management standards in Section XX, including use of practices
identified in Best Practices for Meeting DNR General Public Waters Work Permit GP
2004-0001, where applicable;
4. Avoid primary conservation areas, unless no alternative exists. If no alternative exists, then
disturbance to primary conservation areas must be avoided to the greatest extent
practicable, and design and construction must minimize impacts; and
5. Minimize disturbance of spawning and nesting times by scheduling construction at times
when local fish and wildlife are not spawning or nesting.
6. Minimize disturbance during bird migration and nesting times by scheduling
construction at times when birds are not migrating or nesting.
C. Right-of-way maintenance standards. Right-of-way maintenance must comply with the
following standards:
• Vegetation currently in a natural state must be maintained to the extent feasible;
• Where vegetation in a natural state has been removed, native plans must be planted and
maintained on the right-of-way; and
• Chemical control of vegetation must be avoided when practical, but when chemical control
is necessary the chemicals used must be in accordance with the regulations and other
requirements of all state and federal agencies with authority over the chemical’s use.
D. Crossings of public waters or public land. Crossings of public waters or land controlled by
the commissioner are subject to approval by the commissioner according to Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 84.415 and 103G.245.
E. Public utilities. Public utilities must comply with the following standards:
PC Page #128
1. High-voltage transmission lines, wind energy conversion systems greater than five (5)
megawatts, and pipelines are regulated according to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 216E,
216F, and 216G, respectively; and
2. If overhead placement is necessary, utility facility crossings must minimize the visibility
of the facility from the river and follow other existing right of ways as much as
practicable.
3. The appearance of structures must be as compatible as practicable with the surrounding
area in a natural state with regard to height and width, materials used, and color.
4. Wireless communication facilities, according to Section XX.
F. Public transportation facilities. Public transportation facilities shall comply with structure
placement and height standards in Section XX. Where such facilities intersect or abut two
or more MRCCA districts, the least restrictive standards apply. Public transportation
facilities must be designed and constructed to give priority to:
1. Providing scenic overlooks for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians;
2. Providing safe pedestrian crossings and facilities along the river corridor;
3. Providing access to the riverfront in public ownership; and
4. Allowing for use of the land between the river and the transportation facility.
G. Public recreational facilities. Public recreational facilities must comply with the following
standards:
1. Buildings and parking associated with public recreational facilities must comply with the
structure placement and height standards in Section xx-xx, except as provided in Section
xx-xx;
2. Roads and driveways associated with public recreational facilities must not be placed in
the bluff or shore impact zones unless no other placement alternative exists. If no
alternative exists, then design and construction must minimize impacts to shoreline
vegetation, erodible soils and slopes, and other sensitive resources.
3. Trails, access paths, and viewing areas associated with public recreational facilities and
providing access to or views of the Mississippi River are allowed within the bluff and
shore impact zones if design, construction, and maintenance methods are consistent
with the best management practice guidelines in Trail Planning, Design, and
Development Guidelines.
(a) Hard-surface trails are not allowed on the face of bluffs with a slope exceeding
thirty (30) percent. Natural surface trails are allowed, provided they do not exceed
eight (8) feet in width.
PC Page #129
(b) Trails, paths, and viewing areas must be designed and constructed to minimize:
i. Visibility from the river;
ii. Visual impacts on public river corridor views; and
iii. Disturbance to and fragmentation of primary conservation areas.
4. Public water access facilities must comply with the following requirements:
(a) Watercraft access ramps must comply with Minnesota Rules chapters 6115.0210
and 6280.250; and
(b) Facilities must be designed and constructed consistent with the standards in the Design
Handbook for Recreational Boating and Fishing Facilities.
5. Public signs and kiosks for interpretive or directional purposes are allowed in the bluff or
shore impact zones, provided they are placed and constructed to minimize disturbance to
these areas and avoid visual impacts on public river corridor views. If illuminated, the
lighting must be fully shielded and be directed downward.
6. Public stairways, lifts, and landings must be designed as provided in Section XX.
12-3-9 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT
A. Purpose. To establish standards that sustain and enhance the biological and ecological
functions of vegetation; preserve the natural character and topography of the MRCCA; and
maintain the stability of bluffs and steep slopes and ensure stability of other erosion-prone
areas
B. Applicability. This section applies to:
1. Shore impact zones;
2. Areas within 50 feet of a wetland or natural drainage route;
3. Bluff impact zones;
4. Areas of native plant communities; and
5. Significant existing vegetation stands identified in the MRCCA plan.
C. Activities allowed without a vegetation permit.
1. Maintenance of existing lawns, landscaping and gardens;
2. Removal of vegetation in emergency situations as determined by the city;
3. Right-of-way maintenance for public facilities meeting the standards in Section XX;
PC Page #130
4. Agricultural and forestry activities meeting the standards of Section XX, items a and b;
5. Selective vegetation removal, provided that vegetative cover remains consistent with the
management purpose of the MRCCA District, including the removal of:
(a) Vegetation that is dead, diseased, dying, or hazardous;
(b) Vegetation to prevent the spread of diseases or insect pests;
(c) Individual trees and shrubs; and
(d) Invasive non-native species.
D. Activities allowed with a vegetation permit.
1. Only the following intensive vegetation clearing activities are allowed with a vegetation
permit:
(a) Clearing of vegetation that is dead, diseased, dying, or hazardous;
(b) Clearing to prevent the spread of diseases or insect pests;
(c) Clearing to remove invasive, non-native species;
(d) Clearing to prepare for restoration and erosion control management activities consistent
with a plan approved by the city;
(e) The minimum necessary for development that is allowed with a building permit or as
an exemption under Section xx.
2. General Performance Standards. The following standards must be met, in addition to a
restoration plan under Section xx, item (6), in order to approve a vegetation permit:
(a) Development is sited to minimize removal of or disturbance to natural vegetation;
(b) Soil slope stability, and hydrologic conditions are suitable for the proposed work as
determined by the City Engineer;
(c) Clearing is the minimum necessary and designed to blend with the natural terrain and
minimize visual impacts to public river corridor views and other scenic views;
(d) Vegetation removal activities are conducted to expose the smallest practical area of soil
to erosion for the least possible time, and to avoid bird migration and nesting seasons;
and
(e) Any other condition determined necessary to achieve the purpose of this section.
E. Prohibited activities. All other intensive vegetation clearing is prohibited.
PC Page #131
F. Vegetation restoration plan
1. Development of a vegetation restoration plan and reestablishment of natural vegetation is
required.
(a) For any vegetation removed with a permit issued under Section xx;
(b) Upon failure to comply with any provisions in this section; or
(c) As part of the planning process for subdivisions as provided in Section xx.
2. Restoration Plan Performance Standards. The vegetation restoration plan must satisfy the
application submittal requirements in Section xx and:
(a) Vegetation must be restored in one or more of the following restoration priority areas:
i. Areas with soils showing signs of erosion, especially on or near the top and
bottom of steep slopes and bluffs;
ii. Shoreline areas within 25 feet of the water with no natural vegetation, degraded
vegetation, or planted with turf grass;
iii. Areas on steep slopes and bluffs that are visible from the river with no natural
vegetation, degraded vegetation, or planted with turf grass; or
iv. Other approved priority opportunity area, including priorities identified in the
MRCCA plan, if none of the above exist.
(b) Include vegetation that provides suitable habitat and effective soil stability, runoff
retention, and infiltration capability. Vegetation species, composition, density, and
diversity must be guided by nearby patches of native plant communities and by Native
Vegetation Establishment and Enhancement Guidelines.
(c) Any highly erodible soils disturbed during removal and/or restoration must be
stabilized with deep-rooted vegetation with a high stem density.
(d) Vegetation removed must be restored with native vegetation to the greatest extent
practicable. The area (square feet) of the restored vegetation should be similar to that
removed to the greatest extent practicable
(e) For restoration of removed native plant communities restored vegetation must also
provide biological and ecological function equivalent to the removed native plant
communities. The area (square feet) of the restored vegetation should be equivalent to
that removed.
(f) Be prepared by a qualified individual; and
(g) Include a maintenance plan that includes management provisions for controlling
invasive species and replacement of plant loss for three (3) years.
PC Page #132
3. The city will issue a certificate of compliance after the vegetation restoration plan
requirements have been satisfied.
12-3-10 LAND ALTERATION STANDARDS AND STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT
A. Purpose. To establish standards that protect water quality from pollutant loadings of sediment,
nutrients, bacteria, and other contaminants, and maintain the stability of bluffs, shorelines, and
other areas prone to erosion.
B. Land Alteration
1. Within the bluff impact zone, land alteration is prohibited, except for the following, which
are allowed by permit.
(a) Erosion control consistent with a plan approved by the City and consistent with Section
xx
(b) The minimum necessary for development that is allowed as an exception under Section
XX; and
(c) Repair and maintenance of existing buildings and facilities.
2. Within the water quality impact zone, land alteration that involves more than ten (10) cubic
yards of material or affects an area greater than one thousand (1,000) square feet requires
a permit.
C. Rock riprap, retaining walls, and other erosion control structures.
1. Construction, repair, or replacement of rock riprap, retaining walls, and other erosion
control structures located at or below the OHWL must comply with Minnesota Rules,
Chapters 6115.0215, subpart 4, item E and 6115.0216, subpart 2. Work must not proceed
until approved by the commissioner, permitted by the US Army Corps of Engineers, and
any other permits are obtained. [See Figure 8 – below].
Figure 8. Riprap Guidelines
PC Page #133
2. Construction or replacement of rock riprap, retaining walls, and other erosion control
structures within the bluff impact zone and the water quality impact zone are allowed with
a permit consistent with provisions of Section XX provided that:
(a) If the project includes work at or below the OHWL, the commissioner has already approved
or permitted the project.
(b) The structures are used only to correct an established erosion problem as determined by
the city.
(c) The size and extent of the structures are the minimum necessary to correct the erosion
problem and are not larger than the following, unless a professional engineer determines
that a larger structure is needed to correct the erosion problem:
i. Retaining walls must not exceed five (5) feet in height and must be placed a minimum
horizontal distance of ten (10) feet apart; and
ii. Riprap must not exceed the height of the regulatory flood protection elevation.
3. Repair of existing rock riprap, retaining walls, and other erosion control structures above
the OHWL does not require a permit provided it does not involve any land alteration under
Section XX.
D. Stormwater management
1. In the bluff impact zone, stormwater management facilities are prohibited, except by permit
if:
(a) There are no alternatives for storm water treatment outside the bluff impact zone on the
subject site;
(b) The site generating runoff is designed so that the amount of runoff reaching the bluff
impact zone is reduced to the greatest extent practicable;
PC Page #134
(c) The construction and operation of the facility does not affect slope stability on the
subject property or adjacent properties; and
(d) Mitigation based on the best available engineering and geological practices is required
and applied to eliminate or minimize the risk of slope failure.
2. In the water quality impact zone, development that creates new impervious surface, as
allowed by exemption in Section XX, or fully reconstructs existing impervious surface of
more than ten thousand (10,000) square feet requires a storm water permit. Multipurpose
trails and sidewalks are exempt if there is down-gradient vegetation or a filter strip that is
at least five (5) feet wide.
3. In all other areas, storm water runoff must be directed away from the bluff impact zones or
unstable areas.
E. Development on steep slopes. Construction of structures, impervious surfaces, land alteration,
vegetation removal, or other construction activities are allowed on steep slopes if:
1. The development can be accomplished without increasing erosion or storm water runoff;
2. The soil types and geology are suitable for the proposed development; and
3. Vegetation is managed according to the requirements of Section XX.
F. Compliance with other plans and programs. All development must:
1. Be consistent with Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103B and local water management plans
completed under Minnesota Rules chapter 8410;
2. Meet or exceed the wetland protection standards under Minnesota Rues, chapter 8420; and
3. Meet or exceed the floodplain management standards under Minnesota Rules, chapter
6120.5000-6120.6200.
G. Conditions of land alteration permit approval
1. Temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control measures retain sediment onsite
consistent with the best management practices in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual;
2. Natural site topography, soil and vegetation conditions are used to control runoff and
reduce erosion and sedimentation;
3. Construction activity is phased when possible;
4. All erosion and sediment controls are installed before starting any land disturbance activity;
5. Erosion and sediment controls are maintained to ensure effective operation;
6. The proposed work is consistent with the vegetation standards in Section XX; and
PC Page #135
7. Best management practices for protecting and enhancing ecological and water resources
identified in Best Practices for Meeting DNR General Public Waters Work Permit GP
2004-0001.
H. Compliance with other plans and programs. All development must:
1. Be consistent with Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103B, and local water management plans
completed under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 8410;
2. Meet or exceed the wetland protection standards under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8420; and
3. Meet or exceed the floodplain management standards under Minnesota Rules, sections
6120. 5000 –6120.6200.
12-3-11 SUBDIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Purpose.
(a) To protect and enhance the natural and scenic values of the MRCCA during development
or redevelopment of the remaining large sites;
(b) To establish standards for protecting and restoring biological and ecological functions of
primary conservation areas on large sites; and
(c) To encourage restoration of natural vegetation during development or redevelopment of
large sites where restoration opportunities have been identified in MRCCA plans.
B. Applicability.
1. The design standards in this section apply to subdivisions, planned unit developments, and
master-planned development and redevelopment of land involving ten (10) or more acres
for contiguous parcels that abut the Mississippi River and twenty (20) or more acres for all
other parcels, including smaller individual sites within the following developments that are
part of a common plan of development that may be constructed at different times:
(a) Subdivisions;
(b) Planned unit developments; and
(c) Master-planned development and redevelopment of land.
2. The following activities are exempt from the requirements of this section.
(a) Minor subdivisions consisting of two (2) or fewer lots;
(b) Minor boundary line corrections;
(c) Resolutions of encroachments;
PC Page #136
(d) Additions to existing lots of record;
(e) Placement of essential services; and
(f) Activities involving river-dependent commercial and industrial uses.
3. Application materials. Project information listed in Section XX must be submitted for all
proposed developments.
4. Design standards.
(a) Primary conservation areas, where they exist, must be set aside and designated as
protected open space in quantities meeting the following as a percentage of total parcel
area:
i. CA-RN District: 20%
ii. CA-SR District: 10% if the parcel includes native plant communities or provides
feasible connections to a regional park or trail system, otherwise no requirement.
(b) If the primary conservation areas exceed the amounts specified in Section XX, then
protection of native plant communities and natural vegetation in riparian areas shall be
prioritized.
(c) If primary conservation areas exist but to not have natural vegetation (identified as
restoration priorities in the MRCCA Plan), then a vegetation assessment must be
completed to evaluate the unvegetated primary conservation areas and determine
whether vegetation restoration is needed. If restoration is needed, vegetation must be
restored according to Section XX.
(d) If primary conservation areas do not exist on the parcel and portions of the parcel have
been identified in the MRCCA Plan as a restoration area, vegetation must be restored
in the identified areas according to Section XX and the area must be set aside and
designated as protected open space.
(e) Storm water treatment areas or other green infrastructure may be used to meet the
protected open space requirements if the vegetation provides biological and ecological
functions.
(f) Land dedicated under Chapter XX, Article X, Section XX of this code for public river
access, parks, or other open space or public facilities may be counted toward the
protected open space requirement.
(g) Protected open space areas must connect open space, natural areas, and recreational
areas, where present on adjacent parcels, as much as possible to form an interconnected
network.
5. Permanent protection of designated open space
PC Page #137
(a) Designated open space areas must be protected through one or more of the following
methods:
i. Public acquisition by a government entity for conservation purposes;
ii. A permanent conservation easement, as provided in Minnesota Statutes, chapter
84C;
iii. A deed restriction; or
iv. Other arrangements that achieve an equivalent degree of protection.
(b) Permanent protection methods must ensure the long-term management of vegetation
to meet its biological and ecological functions, prohibit structures, and prohibit land
alteration, except as needed to provide public recreational facilities and access to the
river.
6. [NEWPORT] Alternative design standards. The city [may] [will] consider the following
alternative design option to increase the permanent protection of Primary Conservation
Areas (PCAs) in subdivisions and other new developments in the MRCCA District and
encourage restoration of native vegetation communities. The City [may] [will] grant
density bonuses to increase the permanent protection of PCAs and/or native plant
communities up to thirty (30) percent of the parcel area in the CA-RN and CA-SR Districts.
Protection and restoration must be accomplished consistent with the requirements of this
section.
The City may award additional development units based on the size of the area protected,
as follows:
(a) Density bonuses. The City may approve density bonuses for a major subdivision when
the proposed subdivision meets the objectives and requirements of this chapter and
Article VI of the city code to protect and preserve bluffs, steep slopes, native
vegetation, natural resources, views of the bluffs area, and open space.
The city shall determine the amount and location of the density bonus permitted for each
major subdivision based on site conditions, zoning district regulations, and potential
impacts to the site and surrounding areas. The maximum density bonus for a subdivision
shall be twenty percent (20%) for single-family development and thirty percent (30%) for
multifamily developments.
6. [MINNEAPOLIS] Alternative design standards. Alterative design standards may be
considered through a planned unit development or cluster development. Individual lots in
a planned unit development or cluster development are not required to meet the design
standards of this section if it can be demonstrated that the overall development is in
compliance with the standards and purpose of this section.
PC Page #138
12-3-12: SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS:
3. Site Plan Required: No building permit, zoning approval, or subdivision approval shall be
issued for any action or development located in an area covered by this chapter until a site
plan has been prepared and approved in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
4. Site Plan Application: An official critical are permit application with a completed site plan
shall be filed with the zoning administrator containing evidence adequate to show that the
proposed use will conform with the standards set forth in this chapter. Three (3) full sets
of plans (either 22” x 34” or 24” x 36” sized sheets), three (3) tabloid sized (11” x 17”)
plan sets, plus an electronic file (PDF preferred) of the full application materials shall be
submitted to the zoning administrator.
5. Site Plan Contents. A fully detailed Survey or Site Plan drawn to scale appropriate to the
size of the project and suitable for the review to be performed, shall contain the following
information:
a. A detailed description or narrative prepared by the owner(s) or developer(s) of the
proposed project or development.
b. A complete and legible legal description, address and location of the property, with the
name and address of the legal registered owner(s) or developer(s) of the property.
c. A detailed plan identifying the subject property, adjoining lands, roads, railroads,
existing subdivisions, any primary conservation areas (PCA); public river corridor
views, ordinary high-water level (OHWL) of any adjacent or affected wetlands
features, blufflines and all required setbacks.
d. Existing topography as indicated on a contour map having a contour interval no greater
than two feet (2') per contour; the contour map shall also clearly delineate any bluff
line, all streams, including intermittent streams and swales, rivers, water bodies, and
wetlands located on the site.
e. A plan delineating the existing drainage of the water setting forth in which direction
the volume, and at what rate the stormwater is conveyed from the site in setting forth
those areas on the site where stormwater collects and is gradually percolated into the
ground or slowly released to stream or lake.
f. A description of the soils on the site including a map indicating soil types by areas to
be disturbed as well as a soil report containing information on the suitability of the soils
for the type of development proposed and for the type of sewage disposal proposed and
describing any remedial steps to be taken by the developer to render the soils suitable.
All areas proposed for grading shall be identified by soil type, both as to soil type of
existing topsoil and soil type of the new contour. The location and extent of any erosion
areas shall be included in the soils description.
g. A description of any features, buildings, or areas which are of historic significance.
PC Page #139
h. A plan indicating the proposed finished grades of the project development site
illustrating contours at the same intervals proposed above or as required to clearly
indicate the relationship of proposed changes to existing topography and remaining
features.
i. A landscape plan drawn to an appropriate scale including dimensions, distance,
location, type, size, and description of all existing and significant vegetation, clearly
locating and describing any vegetation proposed for removal and all proposed
landscape materials which will be added to this site as part of the development. All
new landscaping must include native varieties of deciduous, coniferous and ornamental
trees and shrubs, along with new pollinator friendly plants and vegetation.
j. A proposed drainage plan of the developed site delineating in which direction, volume,
and at what rate stormwater will be conveyed from the site and setting forth the areas
of the site where stormwater will be allowed to collect and gradually percolate into the
soil, or be slowly released to stream or lake. The plan shall also set forth hydraulic
capacity of all structures to be constructed or exiting structures to be utilized, including
volume or holding ponds and design storms.
k. An erosion and sedimentation control plan indicating the type, location, and necessary
technical information on control measures to be taken both during and after
construction including a statement expressing the calculated anticipated gross soil loss
expressed in tons/acres/year both during and after construction.
l. The proposed size, alignment, height, and intended use of any structures, including
retaining walls, to be erected or located on the site.
m. A clear delineation of all areas which shall be paved or surfaced including a description
of the surfacing material to be used.
n. A description of the method to be provided for vehicular and pedestrian access to the
proposed development and public access to the river and/or public river view
opportunities both before and after development; a description of the development's
impact on existing views of and along the river.
o. A description of all parking facilities to be provided as part of the development of the
site including an analysis of parking needs generated by the proposed development.
p. A delineation of the area or areas to be dedicated for public use.
q. A delineation of the location and amounts of excavated soils to be stored on the site
during construction.
r. Any other information pertinent to that particular project, which in the opinion of city
staff and/or the applicant is necessary or helpful for the review of the project.
G. Minor Development: In the case of a minor development and/or minor changes involving a
single-family dwelling, and if the project plans conform to the general standards of the
PC Page #140
MRCCA overlay district, the city administrator shall bring the request to the attention of the
city council at its next regular meeting following receipt of an administrative critical area
permit application. The city council shall review such request without a public hearing, and
may, if it so determines exempt the applicant from complying with any unduly burdensome
requirements of this chapter.
Projects eligible for exemption from this section include, but are not limited to minor building
additions, decks, fences, driveways, walkways, stairs, open patios or outdoor sitting areas,
accessory storage sheds, gazebo, chicken coops, retaining walls two feet (2’) / four feet (4’) or
less in height, landscaping materials and gardens, and similar structures. Proposed projects
and sites must comply with the following conditions:
1. No part of a minor building addition or improvement shall impact any area with slopes
greater than eighteen percent (18%).
2. No part of a minor building addition or improvement shall impact, disturb or be situated in
a bluffline setback area as defined by this chapter, whether on the same parcel or on
abutting parcel of land , or any area with slopes greater than forty percent (40%).
3. The proposed minor building addition shall not expand the enclosed area of the principal
or accessory structures by more than four hundred (400) square feet.
4. The proposed building addition or improvement shall not increase or exceed the height of
any existing structure.
5. The proposed project shall be in compliance with all other requirements of this chapter,
and any other applicable regulations.
6. The proposed minor building addition or improvement shall not result in significant
changes to the existing finished grade.
12-3-13: OFFICIAL REVIEW PROCESS:
Proposed developments or activities within the MRCCA shall be subject to the following review
procedure:
A. Referral to Planning Commission: Except as otherwise provided in subsection 12-3-5D Minor
Developments) of this chapter, the zoning administrator shall refer all site plans to the planning
commission.
B. Planning Commission Notice and Hearing on Application and Site Plan: The planning
commission shall hold a public hearing affording an opportunity for all parties interested to be
heard, and the city shall give not less than ten (10) nor more than thirty (30) days' notice of the
time and place of such hearing published in the designated legal newspaper for the city, and
such notice shall contain a description of the land and the proposed use. At least ten (10) days
before the hearing, the city shall mail a notice to the owner(s) of the property in question and
to each of the property owners within three hundred fifty feet (350') of the outside boundaries
PC Page #141
of the land described in the site plan. Failure of the city to mail such notice or failure of the
property owners to receive said notice shall not invalidate the proceedings.
Within sixty (60) days after the date of a complete application as determined by the city, and
unless the statutory review period as provided for under Minnesota Statute §15.99 is extended
or waived by the applicant, the planning commission shall forward a written report to the
council stating and confirming its findings and recommendations, either by separate resolution
or written meeting minutes from said hearing.
C. City Council Consideration or Hearing on Application and Site Plan. Within thirty (30) days
after the receipt of the report and recommendation of the planning commission, the city council
shall meet and give full consideration of the application, site plan, written report and
recommendation, without a public hearing.
If the planning commission fails to make a report or recommendation to the city council within
sixty (60) days after the acceptance of the application and site plan, and unless the statutory
review period has been expressly waived by the applicant as allowed under Minnesota Statute
§15.99, the city shall set an additional public hearing before the city council within thirty (30)
days after the expiration of said sixty (60) day period. Failure to receive a report from the
planning commission as herein provided shall not invalidate the proceedings or action of the
council.
The city shall give not less than ten (10) nor more than thirty (30) days mailed notice of the
time and place of such hearing to the owner(s) of the property in question and to each of the
property owners within three hundred fifty feet (350') of the outside boundaries of the land
described in the site plan. Failure of the property owners to receive the notice shall not
invalidate the proceedings. At the hearing, the council may take final action upon the
application and site plan, or may continue the hearing for further investigation and study. The
council may also request further information and report from the applicant or planning
commission. Any proposed amendment to the procedure section of this chapter, or any
proposed amendment to this chapter, may be referred to the planning commission for its
consideration and recommendations.
12-3-14: NOTIFICATION TO RESOURCE AGENCIES.
A. Amendments to this chapter and to the MRCCA plan must be submitted to the
Commissioner as provided in Minnesota rules, part 6106.0070, Subp. 3, items B-I, and via
email to the appropriate DNR Area Hydrologist.
B. Notice of public hearings for discretionary actions, including critical area permits, conditional
and interim use permits, variances, appeals, rezonings, preliminary plats, final subdivision
plats, master plans, and PUDs, must be sent to the following entities at least thirty (30) days
prior to the hearing:
1. To the Commissioner in a format prescribed by the DNR;
2. To the National Park Service; and
PC Page #142
3. Where building heights exceed the height limits specified in Section XX as part of the
conditional use or variance process, to the adjoining local governments within the
MRCCA, including those with overlapping jurisdiction and those across the river.
C. Notice of final decisions for actions in Section XX, including findings of fact, but be sent to
the Commissioner, the National Park Service, and adjoining local governments within the
MRCCA within ten (10) days of the final decision.
D. Requests to amend district boundaries must follow the provisions in Minnesota Rules, part
6106.0100, Subp. 9, item C.
E. The DNR will be notified at time of application submittal of master plans, PUDs, preliminary,
and final plats.
12-3-15 EXEMPTIONS
A. Purpose. To provide exemptions to structure placement, height, and other standards for specific
river or water access-dependent facilities as provided in Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.15
Subd. 4.
B. Applicability.
1. Uses and activities not specifically exempted must comply with this Chapter. Uses and
activities exempted under shore impact zone and bluff impact zone must comply with the
vegetation management and land alteration standards in Sections XX and XX.
2. Uses and activities in Section XX are categorized as:
(a) E - Exempt. This means that the use or activity is allowed;
(b) (E) - Exempt if no alternative. This means that the use or activity is allowed only if
no alternatives exist; and
(c) N - Not exempt. This means that a use or activity is not exempt and must meet the
standards of this ordinance.
(d) n/a – not applicable.
PC Page #143
3. Use and activity exemptions classification
(a) General uses and activities.
Use or Activity Setbacks Height
Limits
SIZ BIZ Applicable standards with which the
use or activity must comply
Industrial and utility structures requiring
greater height for operational reasons
(such as elevators, refineries and
railroad signaling towers)
N E N N Structure design and placement must
minimize interference with public
river corridor views.
Barns, silos, and farm structures N E N N
Bridges and bridge approach roadways E E E (E) Section XX
Wireless communication towers E E N N Section XX
Chimneys, church spires, flag poles,
public monuments, and mechanical
stacks and equipment
N E N N
Historic properties and contributing
properties in historic districts
E E E E Exemptions do not apply to additions
or site alterations
(b) Public utilities.
Use or Activity Setbacks Height
Limits
SIZ BIZ Applicable standards with which the
use or activity must comply
Electrical power facilities E E E (E) Section
Essential services (other than storm
water facilities)
E E E (E) Section
Storm water facilities E N E (E) Section
Wastewater treatment E N E N Section
Public transportation facilities E N (E) (E) Section
PC Page #144
(c) Public recreational facilities.
Use or Activity Setbacks Height
Limits
SIZ BIZ Applicable standards with which the
use or activity must comply
Accessory structures, such as
monuments, flagpoles, light standards,
and similar park features
E E (E) (E) Section X; within BIZ, only on slopes
averaging less than 30%. Exemptions
do not apply to principal structures.
Picnic shelters and other open-sided
structures
E N (E) N Section X
Parking lots (E) N (E) (E) Section X; within BIZ, only within 20
feet of toe of bluff; not on face of
bluff; and must not affect stability of
bluff
Roads and driveways (E) N (E) (E) Section X
Natural-surfaced trails, access paths, and
viewing areas
E N E E Section X
Hard-surfaced trails and viewing
platforms
E N E (E) Section X; within BIZ, only on slopes
averaging less than 30%
Water access ramps E N E (E) Section X
Public signs and kiosks for interpretive or
directional purposes
E N E (E) Section X
(d) River-dependent uses.
Use or Activity Setbacks Height
Limits
SIZ BIZ Applicable standards with which the
use or activity must comply
Shoreline facilities E N1 E (E) Section XX. Exemptions do not apply
to buildings, structures, and parking
areas that are not part of a shoreline
facility
Private roads and conveyance structures
serving river-dependent uses
E N1 E (E) Section XX
1 River-dependent commercial, industrial, and utility structures are exempt from height limits only if greater height is required for operational reasons.
PC Page #145
(e) Private residential and commercial water access and use facilities.
Use or Activity Setbacks Height
Limits
SIZ BIZ Applicable standards with which the
use or activity must comply
Private roads serving 3 or more lots (E) N N (E) Section XX; in BIZ, only on slopes
averaging less than 30%. Exemption
does not apply to private roads
serving fewer 3 lots or to private
driveways and parking areas
Access paths E N E E Section XX
Water access ramps E N E N Section XX
Stairways, lifts, and landings E N E E Section XX
Water-oriented accessory structures E N E N Section XX
Patios and decks E N N N Section XX
Directional signs for watercraft (private) E N E N Section XX; exemption does not apply
to off-premise advertising signs
Temporary storage of docks, boats, and
other equipment during the winter
months
E N E N
Erosion control structures, such as rock
riprap and retaining walls
E N E (E) Sections XX
Flood control structures E N E (E) Section XX
PC Page #146