Loading...
2022-02-22 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2022 - 7:00 PM Mendota Heights City Hall – Council Chambers 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights MN 55118 1.Call to Order / Roll Call 2.Election of Planning Commission Chair and Vice Chair for Year 2022 3.Approve the January 25, 2021 Regular Meeting Minutes 4.Public Hearings a.CASE No. 2021-02 Conditional Use Permit to allow for new cellular/wireless antenna arrays to be added to the existing cellular monopole tower – located at 894 Sibley Memorial Highway (Dish Wireless LLC – Applicant / NCWPCS MPL 27 Site Tower Holding LLC – Owners) 5.New / Unfinished Business 6. Adjourn Meeting PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Request for Planning Commission Action MEETING DATE: February 22, 2022 TO: Mendota Heights Planning Commissioners FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Election of Planning Commission Chair and Vice Chair for Year 2022 Introduction Pursuant to Title 2-1-3 of the City Code, the organizational meeting of the planning commission is held in February of each calendar year. Reappointments and new members are recognized, and elections are held for the Chair and Vice-Chair positions. Discussion At the December 7, 2021 regular meeting, the City Council re-appointed Commissioners Katz, Petschel and Toth for new three year terms. The city appreciates their continued service to the community and planning commission. Title 2-1-3 of the City Code requires election of a planning commission chairperson and vice chairperson at the February regular meeting of each year. The term of both officers will be for one year, effective immediately at this meeting, with term positions ending at the February 2023 meeting. Upon completion of the Call to Order / Roll Call action by current Chair Litton Field, Mr. Field will temporarily hand over the election process to the city staff liaison Community Development Director Benetti, who will initiate the officer elections process. The staff liaison will start the elections by asking for nominations from the commission. Any commissioner can begin the process by nominating one or more commissioner for each role, or nominate themselves for each position. Action Required Action No. 1: Commissioners nominate one (or more) commissioner for the role of Chair; close the nominations; and make the selection by simple majority vote; and Action No. 2: Commissioners nominate one (or more) commissioner for the role of Vice-Chair; close the nominations; and make the selection by simple majority vote. Upon the completion of the election, the staff liaison will turn the official duties back over to the Chair to preside over the reaming portions of the meeting. PACKET PG. # 1 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PACKET PG. # 2 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 25, 2022 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, January 25, 2022 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 December 28, 2021 Minutes Commissioner Lorberbaum noted on page two, the fifth paragraph from the bottom, it should state, “…three which were the native trees, the native plants, and pollinator friendly species…” On page seven, the third paragraph, it should state, “…lower spot that does not rain drain…” On page seven, the third paragraph from the bottom, it should state, “…removed and that it is was the…” On page 12, the third paragraph, it should state, “…recommendations rather than buffers buffer requirements.” On page 15, the fifth line, it should state, “…collaboration between City staff and the Catholic Cemetery staff rather…” COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 28, 2021 WITH THE NOTED CHANGES. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Hearings A) PLANNING CASE 2021-23 SOUTHVIEW DESIGN/CATHOLIC CEMETERIES, 2101 LEXINGTON AVENUE SOUTH – WETLANDS PERMIT (TABLED FROM DECEMBER 28, 2021 MEETING) Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that at the December 28, 2021 regular meeting, Southview Design, acting on behalf of Catholic Cemeteries, presented a Wetlands Permit application for review which would allow new landscaping and pond embankment improvements for the memorial pond located in Resurrection Cemetery. This item was presented under a public hearing and with no persons wishing to be heard that night, the Commission closed the hearing on this matter. Upon subsequent discussion with the application, it was deemed by the Planning PACKET PG. # 3 Commission that the proposed 10-foot-wide layer of river rock surrounding the pond, along with ordinary bluegrass/rye grass seed mix around the pond edge, was not sufficient to provide added water quality treatment or meet certain surface water management and land disturbance guidance standards. The Commission chose to table this item and directed the applicant to work with the City’s Natural Resources staff to develop a native plant buffer that aligns with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, the Surface Water Management Plan, and Land Disturbance Guidance Document for the improvement of water quality. Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that the applicants met with City staff to discuss a revised plan; and staff encouraged the designers to forgo the river rock layer around the pond and encouraged a smaller/lower growing wetland seed mix that is more suitable to areas in and around wetlands or stormwater ponds. The updated plan presented back to the Planning Commission illustrates that rock layer removed; and disturbed areas created by the previous vegetation removals around the pond will be seeded with a MnDOT Seed Mix #33-261. The types of seed and plant varieties are noted on the seed mix list document. 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 this application based on the findings and with conditions. Commissioner Johnson appreciated staff working with the applicant and appreciated the use of the seed mix. She asked how tall the plants are anticipated to grow. Community Development Director Tim Benetti believed the range was three to five feet. He noted that it would be maintained using Prairie Restoration. He commented that the cemetery would like to have low growing plant material to ensure the pond could be visible to visitors. Commissioner Johnson noted that she believes the plant materials grow three to eight feet and therefore wanted to ensure the applicant was okay with that height. Chair Field recognized that the public hearing had been closed at the last meeting and asked if the Commission would like to reopen the hearing. COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Taylor Wald, Southview Design, was present to address any questions of the Commission. He commented that most of the plants in the seed mix would be within the three-to-five-foot range of growth. He commented that the desire is to open up views across the cemetery and they believe this seed mix would accomplish that goal. PACKET PG. # 4 Commissioner Katz asked if the work is still anticipated for March. Mr. Wald replied that the seeding would most likely be done a bit later, but by May in order to provide the optimal results. Commissioner Lorberbaum asked the narrowest and the largest width of the buffer around the pond. Mr. Wald replied that in the narrowest section the buffer would be ten feet and the widest would be about 80 feet. Dave Kemp, Catholic Cemeteries, commented that this pond has been an eyesore for many years. He stated that there is a feature to the unborn which is a tranquil and quiet place and therefore they would like to have visibility to the water. He stated that after meeting with City staff they understand the purpose of having the buffer. He stated that they would like to maintain the openness of the pond for visitors to enjoy. Commissioner Johnson asked if there is going to be a fountain. Mr. Kemp confirmed that they would like to have a fountain so that visitors can see the water and hear the sound of running water. Commissioner Johnson commented that there is a thought that when you are placing a fountain into a stormwater pond it vaporizes the chemicals. Mr. Kemp stated that the only chemical they use is to treat dandelions in the spring. Commissioner Johnson stated that perhaps a bubbler would be considered. Seeing no one further coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WETLANDS PERMIT TO CATHOLIC CEMETERIES AND FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2101 LEXINGTON AVENUE SOUTH, WHICH WOULD ALLOW CERTAIN POND EMBANKMENT IMPROVEMENTS AND LANDSCAPING AROUND THE ESTABLISHED WETLAND FEATURE, BASED ON THE FINDINGS-OF-FACT AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. THE REVISED LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR RESURRECTION CEMETERY DATED JANUARY 18, 2022, ALONG WITH THE MNDOT SEED MIX LIST #33-261 SHALL PACKET PG. # 5 BE THE APPROVED PLAN AND VEGETATION REPLACEMENT FOR THIS WETLANDS PERMIT/PLANNING CASE NO. 2021-23. 2. ANY GRADING AND/OR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY RELATED TO THE POND IMPROVEMENT WORK SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS AND CODES, AS WELL AS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY’S LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT. 3. FULL EROSION/SEDIMENTATION MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK AND MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. EROSION BARRIERS SHALL BE PLACED ALONG THE OUTER EDGES OF THE POND SITE AND POND EDGE AND REMAIN IN PLACE THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT AND THE SURROUNDING LANDS HAVE BEEN PROPERLY RESTORED. 4. ANY NEW SITE CONSTRUCTION OR REMOVAL SHALL OCCUR ONLY BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 A.M. AND 8:00 P.M. WEEKDAYS; AND 9:00 A.M. TO 5:00 P.M. ON WEEKENDS. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its February 2, 2022 or February 15, 2022 meeting. B) PLANNING CASE 2022-01 ELLE MASON, 693 MULBERRY LANE – VARIANCE Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Elle Mason, owner, and resident of 693 Mulberry Lane, is requesting a Variance to City Code Section 12-1D-3.C.1.a, which regulates the number of accessory structures permitted in a residential district. Ms. Mason is seeking an allowance to keep a newly constructed 20’ x 24’ (480 sq. ft.) attached garage with an existing 720 sq. ft. detached garage in the R-1 One Family Residential District. Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; the applicant provided a list of adjacent homeowners who support his variance request, and no other comments or objections 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 recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions. Commissioner Katz asked if the variance were approved and the detached garage were to remain, would that variance carry forward to the next homeowner. PACKET PG. # 6 Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that if approved, the variance would run with the property. He stated that in the future, if the garage were removed, the right to have the detached garage would be removed as well. He noted that repairs to siding or the roof would be allowed but if the structure were damaged and needed to be rebuilt, a new variance would need to be requested. Commissioner Katz asked if the driveway to the detached garage would be under the variance as well. Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that the existing driveway is an existing nonconforming attribute to the garage. He stated that staff will speak with the property owner to work with the neighbor, as the driveway does appear to encroach on the property line. He noted that is a civil matter that will need to be worked out between the property owners and reviewed some possible solutions the property owners could agree to. He clarified that the driveway is not part of this request as it has existed for over 30 years. Chair Field commented that it is a private land use manner that is not within the purview of the Commission. Commissioner Corbett asked if this size of accessory structure would require a ten-foot setback. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that a ten-foot setback or half the height of the home would be required for the garage side setback. He commented that currently the detached garage is about five feet from the side and back property lines. Commissioner Corbett commented that the structure would be nonconforming based on recent updates to the City Code. He asked if variances for the setbacks would also be required. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that would not be necessary. Commissioner Petschel clarified that the variance request is for the attached garage currently under construction as the detached garage was already existing. Commissioner Johnson stated that if the variance is approved, the setback would become part of the nonconforming status of the existing garage. Chair Field commented that if the attached garage were converted to living space, there would be no discussion on this matter. He stated that the detached garage is already legal nonconforming. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that if a legal nonconforming structure is damaged more than 50 percent and reconstructed, it would need to be built to meet the current standards. Commissioner Lorberbaum asked if the detached garage could not be called an accessory structure because of the size. She asked if a Conditional Use Permit could be issued calling the detached garage an accessory structure if the garage door were replaced with a regular door. PACKET PG. # 7 Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that the detached garage is considered an accessory structure. He provided additional details on the lot size thresholds for an accessory structure of this size. Commissioner Lorberbaum commented that the detached garage is being used for storage and asked if it would be legal to require the detached garage to be removed within a set time period once the home and attached garage are completed. Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that when conditions are placed on an application, especially a variance, they have to be proportional. He did not recommend a sunset or temporary allowance. He stated that the applicant would like to keep the detached garage and attached garage. He stated that the Commission should provide a recommendation on that request. Commissioner Lorberbaum stated that it is her understanding that the detached garage space is needed at this time but may not be needed once construction is completed. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that the applicant would like to keep both structures. He stated that the detached garage is in good shape, and he did not see a reason it should be removed and would like to provide the applicant the ability to keep that structure. Chair Field opened the public hearing. Elle Mason, applicant, stated that she would like to have a functional garage to use during the winter. She stated that she purchased the home four years ago without realizing the steepness of the driveway and commented that as they become older, it is getting harder to snow blow the steep driveway to the detached garage. She stated that they trusted an honest looking young man to assist in their remodel but in the end that contractor did not pull a permit or has the required inspections completed. She commented that she currently has a lawsuit with the contractor who has also been sued three times recently and is also under investigation by the State. She commented on the difficulties of stopping construction at this time of year. She provided details on the additional expense that this lawsuit has caused them along with the practical difficulties in their home. She stated that she is having trouble finding a licensed contractor that would like to take on this job to complete. She commented that she loves her neighborhood and her neighbors, and they have all been supportive. She stated that if she would have known the requirement for a variance, she may have chosen a different option such as moving to a new home. She thanked the Commission for its consideration. Chair Field expressed sympathy for what the applicant is going through. Commissioner Johnson asked if there is anything that could have helped the applicant in terms of communication or knowing what would have been required. Ms. Mason stated that perhaps written communication that could be shared with the neighbors would be helpful. She stated that if this story could be shared it could perhaps prevent others from PACKET PG. # 8 getting into the same situation. She noted that she was not aware of the resources available to check the validity of a contractor’s license. Gerald Rigdon commented that he is Ms. Mason’s partner and has been with her for the past seven years. He commented that the contractor had a great website with great testimonials and came to their house with other contractors that had experience working with the contractor, therefore they had trust and faith that he would do the job. He stated that they became suspicious when the contractor stated that inspections would be done through Zoom and that is when they reached out to City staff to determine that permits have not been pulled. He stated that they have been living in the basement since October and do not have a functioning kitchen. He asked for the variance based on the context of the situation. He stated that if they would have known in advance that this was not allowed, they would have chosen a different option. He commented that they believed the proper approvals were gained through permitting. Chair Field asked if the detached garage is a component of their long-term plan. Mr. Rigdon commented that they store pool supplies and outdoor furniture in the detached garage. He noted that the slope prevents them from using the garage for vehicles during the winter months. Seeing no one further coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that this is a rare occasion, and he feels bad for the property owners. He stated that 99.9 percent of the time all contractors pulling permits are licensed through the State and understand if they mess that up, they cannot do work anymore. He stated that this contractor did the work without a permit and now has legal action pending. He stated that this is a case where work began, and staff had to stop the work to determine what could be done to help the homeowner. Chair Field asked if there is any legitimate way the application could be stalled until the work is done. He commented that in the past there have been instances where the Commission recommended denial and then let the case go the Council for the Council to make the exception. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that a stop work order has been issued, therefore no work can be done until this issue is resolved. He stated that granting the variance would issue the release of the permit that is ready to go. He believed the applicant has a contractor that is ready to fix and complete the work needed for the home once the permit is issued. COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE FOR PLANNING CASE 2022-01 BASED PACKET PG. # 9 ON THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY THAT THE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF THE LAND MAKE THE DETACHED GARAGE UNUSABLE. FURTHER DISCUSSION: COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL COMMENTED THAT THIS WOULD BE NO DIFFERENT THAN IF THE PREVIOUS BUILDER OR OWNER DID WORK THAT WAS NONCONFORMING. HE STATED THAT THE APPLICANTS ARE ON A RIDE THEY DID NOT CHOOSE TO GET ON, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO PEOPLE THAT PURCHASE A HOME AND ARE UNAWARE OF THE RULES THAT CONSTRICT THE PROPERTY. HE STATED THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS CONTACTED THE CITY TO ASK IF THERE WAS A VALID PERMIT AND DID NOT WAIT FOR THE CITY TO CONTACT THEM, WHICH SHOWS THAT THEY ARE CONCERNED WITH CONFORMING TO CITY CODE. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON STATED THAT SHE AGREES THAT THIS IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND NOT CREATED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER. SHE AGREED WITH THE UN-USABILITY OF THE GARAGE AND THAT IT CAUSES AN ISSUE. SHE STATED THAT SHE DOES HAVE CONCERN WITH THE FIVE-FOOT SETBACK AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACE BUT REALIZED THAT IS NOT PART OF THE DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM AGREED THAT THERE IS A PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY RELATED TO THE SLOPE OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS NOT OF THE MAKING OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS. SHE ALSO AGREED THAT THIS WOULD NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AYES: 6 NAYS: 1 (Katz) Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its February 2, 2021 or February 15, 2021 meeting. New/Unfinished Business Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided an update on recent City Council actions related to recommendations from the Planning Commission. He commented that elections for Chair and Vice Chair will occur at the Commission’s March meetings. He stated that the City will be returning to virtual meeting attendance the following week. Commissioner Corbett asked how action could be taken in order to spreading communication to residents to verify the credentials of licenses for contractors. Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that staff is working to put together information that could be placed on the website and City newsletter. He stated that a contractor can still be licensed by the State and not act correctly. He noted that the authority falls with the State to ensure that the contractor does not do this to another homeowner. PACKET PG. # 10 Commissioner Johnson supported the idea of reinvigorating a welcome packet to new residents and existing residents. Adjournment COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:11 P.M. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 PACKET PG. # 11 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PACKET PG. # 12 MEETING DATE: February 22, 2022 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case 2022-02 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: DISH Wireless LLC PROPERTY ADDRESS: 894 Sibley Memorial Highway ZONING/GUIDED: B-1 Limited Business/LB Limited Business ACTION DEADLINE: March 18, 2022 INTRODUCTION DISH Wireless is seeking a conditional use permit (CUP) for new cellular wireless antenna upgrades to an existing cellular monopole tower system, located at 894 Sibley Memorial Highway. Title 12-1D-14 of the Code requires CUP approval for any new or additional wireless antennas or systems to towers. BACKGROUND The subject parcel is approximately 0.76 acres (33,223 square feet) and is located between the CDI office building (910 SMH) and Riverwood Office Condos (880 SMH) and the Xcel Energy properties to the east The tower site is accessed through 880 Sibley Mem. Hwy. property. The parcel is zoned and guided for limited business. There is an existing 75-foot high monopole tower on the site, originally constructed in 1993. The property has been subject to four (4) previous CUP applications: one in 1998; two in 2010; and one in 2014. Most of these CUP requests were for adding antennas or equipment to the pole. The pole currently contains a large triangulated arrangement of antenna arrays near the top segment of the pole (for AT&T); and some smaller antenna systems just below. The applicant is proposing another upgrade to the existing tower facility by adding a new triangular system of antenna arrays, which will provide 5G network data and increased capacity to this service area. The subject property is also situated inside the Miss. River Corridor Critical Area overlay district. MRCCA Ordinance Section 12-3-5/B.6 pertains to special approval standards for new wireless communication towers. No MRCCA Permit is required for any co-locates or antenna additions to an existing tower. ANALYSIS City Code Section 12-1D-14 contains regulations regarding wireless antennas, towers, and accessory structures and requires a conditional use permit in all zoning districts. The purpose of the Code section is to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the community while accommodating the communication needs of residents and businesses, and is necessary to: 1.Avoid potential damage to adjacent properties and personal injury from tower collapse through structural standards and setback requirements. PACKET PG. # 13 2. Protect the aesthetic qualities of the community by requiring tower and antenna equipment to be screened from properties within viewing distance of the site and to be designed in a manner to blend in with the surroundings and complement existing structures. 3. Maximize the use of existing and approved freestanding antenna towers, buildings, and existing light poles for new wireless telecommunication antennas. 4. Minimize the number of freestanding antenna towers needed to serve the community by utilizing collocation. 5. Facilitate the provision of wireless telecommunication services to the residents and businesses of the city. Section 12-1D-14 contains specific evaluation criteria for determining or allowing the approval of a conditional use permit related to new wireless communication systems. Some of these criteria are not applicable, due to the nature of the pre-existing tower and structure on the site. Section 12-1D-14 also contains a provision for Administrative Procedures and Exemptions, which are typically limited to minor changes, such as repairing or replacing existing antennas and accessory structures. Whenever any provider wishes to add antennas, expand or adjust a tower (height), or install additional support accessory structures, a conditional use permit is required. The following provisions and standards have been analyzed and noted in this planning report, based on the submitted materials: D. Freestanding Antennas And Towers: 1. No freestanding antenna or antenna tower shall be allowed in any R-1, R-1A, or R-2 districts unless collocated on existing utility towers. Response: Not applicable; the subject parcel is zoned B-1 Limited Business. This tower was permitted in 1993; and has been modified four separate times by means of a CUP approval. 2. Conditions: A freestanding antenna tower shall only be permitted if the applicant can demonstrate the following to the council: a. That a building mounted or water tower mounted antenna in the manner described in subsection C of this section will not provide sufficient communication effectiveness; and b. That it is not possible or feasible to collocate on an existing freestanding antenna tower or building in the vicinity of the proposed location. Response: Not applicable, the wireless antenna facility is pre-existing. 3. Design And Color: Freestanding antenna towers must be of a monopole type design and painted eggshell. Response: The existing wireless antenna structure is a monopole type design. The upgraded equipment will be painted to match the existing equipment and monopole structure. 4. Height: All freestanding antenna towers shall be no higher than seventy five feet (75'), as measured from the ground to the highest point of any portion of the tower, antenna, or any other component attached thereto, or the distance between the base of the antenna tower and the nearest setback line, whichever is least. Response: The existing monopole was approved with a height of 75-feet in 1993; however, under Res. No. 98-94 (adopted 11/03/1998) AT&T was allowed to extend their own antenna arrays near the top up to 15’ above the existing pole – which appears to be the case in the tower elevation image noted in the DISH Wireless plans. The new antennas proposed by DISH will be placed underneath the existing AT&T system, approximately 64-feet from grade – measured at the mid-point of the antenna arrays. 5. Setbacks: All freestanding antenna towers and accessory structures must adhere to all appropriate setbacks for the given zone. PACKET PG. # 14 Response: Not applicable, the wireless antenna facility and accessory (support) structure is pre-existing; there are no plans to add or modify the height of the monopole structure, nor add another accessory structure to the site. All setbacks remain the same. E. Aesthetics: 1. Design: All freestanding antenna towers shall be of a monopole type design. The use of guyed towers is prohibited. Response: The existing wireless antenna structure is a monopole type design; there are no guy wires or other supporting materials affixed to this pole. 2. Color: a. Those portions of all freestanding antenna towers and all antennas which protrude into the air shall be painted eggshell. b. Those portions of all antennas that are flush mounted to the sides of buildings shall be painted to match the exterior of the building. Response: The new equipment will be painted to match the existing equipment and monopole structure. 3. Screening: All accessory buildings to all freestanding towers shall be screened from public view by a landscape plan according to the landscape standards of the appropriate zone and as described in subsection 12-1D-13-2.D.1 of this article subject to council review. Response: Not applicable, no external modification to the existing accessory structure is being proposed. 4. Advertising: Advertising of any kind shall not be permitted on any freestanding antenna tower, antenna, or accessory structure. Response: Not applicable; no advertising currently exists, or is proposed, for the wireless antenna facility. 5. Lighting: Artificial lighting of any kind shall not be permitted on any freestanding antenna tower, antenna, or accessory structure unless such lighting is required by the FCC, the FAA, or another federal or state regulatory body. If such a requirement exists, only the minimum amount of lighting required shall be allowed. Response: Not applicable; no tower-mounted lighting will be installed. 6. Prohibitions: Structures, functions, uses or activities that are not found by the city to be specifically necessary for the proper functioning of the antennas shall be prohibited on any antenna or tower without express permission from the city unless the city grants a waiver to this requirement. Response: The applicant is required to comply with this provision under the approvals granted under any CUP. F. Safety: 1. Report Of Compliance: For a freestanding antenna tower, the applicant must provide a report from a licensed qualified professional structural engineer certifying that the tower will meet or exceed current EIA/TIA-222-E standards including, but not limited to, standards for withstanding meteorological conditions such as high winds and radial ice. Response: The applicant has submitted a structural analysis report that may be reviewed by a City- contracted structural engineer, at the applicant’s cost, to verify compliance with the applicable standards if determined necessary by the Building Official. 2. Compliance With Building And Electrical Codes: All antennas, freestanding antenna towers, and accessory structures shall conform to all building and electrical codes. Response: The applicant is required to comply with this provision. under the approval granted under any CUP, and is made part of the new building permit approving the installation of said improvements. The PACKET PG. # 15 Building Official will require a third-party engineering or inspection firm to verify that all new antenna equipment is or will be installed according to all State of Minnesota building code and safety requirements. 3. Fencing: The applicant may be required by the council to erect a security fence around any freestanding antenna. Response: Not applicable. G. Accessory Structures For Antennas: 1. Location And General Requirements: Accessory buildings to antennas or freestanding antenna towers must lie completely within all applicable setbacks from all property lines and must otherwise conform to all requirements for accessory buildings within the description of the specific zone. 2. Architecture: a. Accessory structures and equipment buildings shall be designed to be architecturally compatible with any principal structures on the site or, in the absence of such structures, with their immediate surroundings in an aesthetically pleasing manner. b. Accessory structures shall be finished on all sides. c. The planning commission shall review and the council shall approve the design of any accessory structures and equipment buildings. Response: Not applicable, no external modification to the existing accessory structure is being proposed. H. Additional Requirements: 1. Abandoned Structures: a. Removal Required: Unused or obsolete freestanding antenna towers, antennas, structures or apparatus must be removed within six (6) months of when the operation ceases. b. Bond: A successful applicant shall provide an abandonment bond to the city equal to one and a half (11/2) times the current cost of removal and disposal of all antennas and accompanying apparatus as estimated by a consultant selected by the city and paid for by the applicant, which bond shall be used by the city to remove the antennas and apparatus should they become unused or obsolete and the applicant or its successors or assigns become disbarred or otherwise fail to remove said antennas and apparatus. Response: The applicant is required to comply with these provisions under the approvals granted under any CUP.. 2. Other Required Licenses: The applicant must submit proof of any applicable federal, state, or local licenses to the council prior to receiving a building permit. Response: The applicant stated there a no Federal licenses required to install or operate this new 5G system, other than the FCC market license for frequencies. The Applicant is required to submit proof or record of any required licensures to the city prior to issuance of a building permit, and shall comply with this provision under the approvals granted under this CUP.. 3. Interference With Public Safety Systems Prohibited: The applicant must agree in writing to support, participate in and refrain from interfering with public warning systems and public safety communications and other radio frequencies as may be regulated by the federal communications commission (FCC). Response: The applicant is required to comply with this provision under the approvals granted under any CUP. The Applicant has provided a written response to the City that: “DISH Wireless L.L.C. (“DISH”) shall comply with all FCC rules regarding interference with other radio services and all FCC rules concerning human exposure to radio frequency energy. 4. Coverage/Interference And Capacity Analyses: The applicant shall demonstrate, by providing a coverage/interference analysis and capacity analysis, that the location and height of any freestanding antenna tower or antenna as proposed is necessary to meet the communication, frequency reuse and spacing needs of the communication services system, and to provide adequate coverage and capacity PACKET PG. # 16 to areas that cannot be adequately served by locating the towers in a less restrictive district or on an existing structure, freestanding antenna tower or antenna including such in neighboring municipalities. Response: The applicant is required to comply with this provision under the approvals granted under any CUP; and has provided a written response to the City stating: “DISH Wireless L.L.C. (“DISH”) shall comply with all FCC rules regarding interference with other radio services and all FCC rules concerning human exposure to radio frequency energy. “ 5. Compliance With FCC Regulations; Noninterference Required: All new or existing telecommunications service and equipment shall meet or exceed all federal communications commission (FCC) standards and regulations and shall not interfere with any other communications, computers, laboratory equipment or manufacturing equipment, including television and other home electronics. The applicant shall provide to the city a report from a qualified professional engineer guaranteeing noninterference and a copy of the FCC approval of the antenna in regard to noninterference. Response: The applicant is required to comply with this provision under the approvals granted under any CUP; and has provided a written response to the City stating: “DISH shall comply with all FCC rules regarding interference to other radio services and human exposure to radio frequency energy. In the unlikely event that interference does occur, DISH agrees to fully cooperate with the entity experiencing interference to identify and correct, to the extent reasonably possible, any issues caused by the DISH installation.” 6. Environmental Impact Statement: In the event that the FCC or other agency or other governmental body having jurisdiction requires the applicant to submit an environmental impact statement or similar document, a copy of this document shall be submitted to the city. Response: Not applicable. 7. Nonconformances: Existing nonconforming freestanding antenna towers, antennas, or accessory structures shall be allowed to continue operation unless use of the freestanding antenna tower, antenna, or accessory structure for its intended purpose ceases for a continuous period of six (6) months, in which case, resumption of use shall require a reapplication for a conditional use permit. Response: The applicant is required to comply with this provision under the approvals granted under any CUP. 8. Area Map: All applications for either a freestanding antenna, a freestanding antenna tower, or a building mounted antenna shall be accompanied by a map of all existing towers and antennas of the same provider within a two (2) mile radius of the proposed site and all future planned antennas of the same provider for the next five (5) years within a two (2) mile radius of the proposed site. Response: A coverage map has been provided by the Applicants (attached hereto); and the Applicants will answer any additional questions the commissioners (or city council) may have on this coverage issue. 9. Costs To Applicant: All costs of an application, including, but not limited to, those incurred by city staff time and resources, engineering studies by consultants, and other data as may be required by the city staff, the planning commission or the city council shall be borne in full by the applicant. Response: The applicant is required to comply with this provision. 10. Variances: The council may at its discretion waive any or all of the requirements of this section in order to approve a unique "stealth" or "camouflage" design of freestanding antennas or poles or building mounted antennas if, in the opinion of the council, said apparatus will be sufficiently disguised as trees, light poles, church steeples, or other similar objects. Response: Not applicable; there is no variance(s) being requested with this CUP application. 11. Prohibitions: Use of mobile cell/PCS sites or COWs (cell sites on wheels), or any other temporary antenna apparatus is strictly prohibited except in the case of emergency equipment used for public PACKET PG. # 17 safety purposes for a limited time during or in the immediate aftermath of a natural disaster or other emergency. Response: The applicant is required to comply with this provision. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The proposed wireless antenna facility upgrades will not result in any significant physical change to the tower structure. The visual changes will relate primarily to the addition of the new triangular shaped antenna arrays. The facility’s location in a commercial area and distance from the river will mitigate any potential negative impacts on the surrounding properties. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit (CUP) to allow the addition of new wireless communication antenna improvements to an existing monopole wireless communications tower, located at 894 Sibley Memorial Highway, based on the attached findings-of-fact and subject to the following conditions: 1) The Applicant shall abide by all regulations in Title 12-1D-14 of the City Code, as outlined in the 02/22/2022 Planning Staff Report for Planning Case No. 2022-02. 2) The Applicant shall meet all Federal Communication Commission (FCC) standards and regulations related to the operation and maintenance of these new antenna features. 3) The applicant must submit proof of any applicable federal, state, or local licenses to the council prior to receiving a building permit. 4) A building permit must be approved prior to any installation or new construction work. The Applicants must provide the name and contact information of a private, third-party structural engineering inspection firm or structural inspector to provide reports to the city’s Building Official confirming all new work and structural additions were done in accordance with State of Minnesota Building Codes. 5) The new antennas and related equipment shall comply with all applicable electrical codes. 6) The new antenna arrays and supporting structural materials shall be painted to match the existing painted color on the tower and other systems. 7) No added lighting or advertisement of any kind, including any noticeable provider/company logo shall be placed on any part of the antenna arrays, which may be noticeable or viewed by the general public from the ground or surrounding properties. 8) The applicant shall provide to the City, as required by City Code Section 12-IJ-6.H.l.b, an abandonment bond equal to one and one half (1-1/2) times the current cost of removal and disposal of the antenna arrays and any supporting equipment. ATTACHMENTS / SUPPORTING MATERIALS 1) Project Description Narrative from DISH Wireless LLC 2) Coverage Map and Adjacent Tower Identifiers 3) Structural Evaluation Document – Crown Castle Engineering 4) Plan Set – DISH Wireless (dated 07/09/2021) PACKET PG. # 18 FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL Conditional Use Permit Request for Wireless Antenna Facility Addition 894 Sibley Memorial Highway Planning Case No. 2022-02 The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed request: 1. The proposed project is consistent with the conditional use permit requirements allowing such facilities and for providing additional antenna arrays and equipment. 2. The proposed project will not negatively affect the public health, safety and general welfare of the community. 3. Upgrading the wireless antenna facility’s antennas and equipment will help increase the data and cellular capacity in the service area. 4. The proposed project does not include any modifications to the tower height, or accessory (support) structures, so no ground disturbances will occur, and the new wireless equipment will be painted to match the existing equipment and help maintain the existing aesthetics of the tower facility. 5. Although this project is situated in the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area, these added antenna improvements are considered minor (or exempt) under the current MRCCA Ordinance of the City of Mendota Heights; and there will be no negative impacts upon the critical area related to the installation of these new antennas on the existing tower. PACKET PG. # 19 894 SIBLEY MEM. HWY 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 = 150 feet 2/17/2022 PACKET PG. # 20 Exhibit 1: Existing Wireless Antenna Facility Source: Staff PACKET PG. # 21 901 910 815-871 797-813 1392 1600 1395 1385 1387 1383 901 797-813 1396 815-871 949 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HW Y LILYDA L E R D FARMDALE RDTh is im ag ery is co pyrig h ted an d licen sed by Nearm ap US In c, wh ichretain s o wn ersh ip o f th e im ag ery. It is bein g pro vided by Dako ta Co un tyun der th e term s o f th at licen se. Un der th at licen se, Dako ta Co un ty isallo wed to pro vide access to th e “Offlin e Co py Add-On fo r Go vern m en t”,o n wh ich th is im ag e services is based, at 6-in ch reso lutio n , six m o n th safter th e capture date, pro vided th e user ackn o wledg es th at th e im ag erywill be used in th eir n o rm al co urse o f busin ess an d m ust n o t be reso ld o r 894 SIBLEY MEM. HWY.MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MNMRCCA BOUNDARIES MAP City o fMen do taHeig h ts 0 190 SCALE IN FEET Legend Mun icipal Bo un dary Mississippi River Co rrido r Critical Area (MRCCA) Bo un dary MRCCA Districts CA-ROS CA-RN CA-SR CA-RTC W ater Date: 2/8/2022 PACKET PG. # 22 901 910 815-871 797-813 1392 1600 1395 1385 1387 1383 901 797-813 1396 815-871 949 S IBLEY MEMORIAL HWY LILYDA L E R D FARMDALE RDTh is im age ry is copyrigh te d and lice nse d by Ne arm ap US Inc, wh ichre tains owne rsh ip of th e im age ry. It is be ing provid e d by Dak ota Countyund e r th e te rm s of th at lice nse . Und e r th at lice nse , Dak ota County isallowe d to provid e acce ss to th e “Offline Copy Ad d -On for Gove rnm e nt”,on wh ich th is im age se rvice s is base d , at 6-inch re solution, six m onth safte r th e capture d ate , provid e d th e use r ack nowle d ge s th at th e im age rywill be use d in th e ir norm al course of busine ss and m ust not be re sold or 894 SIBLEY MEM. HWY.MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MNMRCCA - BLUFF MAP City ofMe nd otaHe igh ts 0 190 S CALE IN FEET Legend Municipal Bound ary Mississippi Rive r Corrid or Critical Are a (MRCCA) Bound ary Bluff_Elements 18% and 75 De gre e Bluffs 18% ove r 25 ft Bluffs 20 ft bluff buffe r 75 De gre e Bluffs Date : 2/8/2022 PACKET PG. # 23 DISH Wireless L.L.C. 2355 MN-36 #400 Roseville, MN 55113 2/15/2022 RE: Project Description and Location: 894 Sibley Memorial Highway (the “Project”) To whom it may concern: This letter responds to your request for information about the Project referenced above, specifically the potential to interfere with communication facilities located nearby and conformance with the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) rules governing human exposure to radio frequency energy (see FCC OET Bulletin 65 guidelines). DISH Wireless L.L.C. (“DISH”) shall comply with all FCC rules regarding interference with other radio services and all FCC rules concerning human exposure to radio frequency energy. The FCC has granted licenses for the use of certain radio frequencies exclusively by wireless service providers, including DISH. Each wireless service provider uses specific frequencies (channels) on which to transmit and receive radio signals. Pursuant to these licenses, DISH is authorized to provide wireless service nationwide. Wireless transmitters must be type-accepted by the FCC to ensure compliance with technical standards that limit the frequencies, output power, radio frequency emissions, spurious radio noise, and other technical parameters. Wireless licensees like DISH are required to use type-accepted equipment. The assignment of frequencies and the FCC rules keep cellular radio signals from interfering with, or being interfered with by, other radio transmissions and provide guidelines outlining the limits for permissible human radio frequency exposure. DISH shall comply with all FCC rules regarding interference to other radio services and human exposure to radio frequency energy. In the unlikely event that interference does occur, DISH agrees to fully cooperate with the entity experiencing interference to identify and correct, to the extent reasonably possible, any issues caused by the DISH installation. Very truly yours, Lance LaRue Site Acquisition Specialist II PACKET PG. # 24 MNMSP0097A Coverage Map•On the coverage map to the right, green indicates Dish’s RF coverage of RSRP signal of -110 dBm or higher. PACKET PG. # 25 Structural Evaluation Date: 6/4/2021 Crown Castle 2000 Corporate Drive Canonsburg, PA 15317 (724)416-2000 Subject: Structural Evaluation Carrier Designation: DISH Network Co-Locate Site Number: MNMSP00097A Site Name:MN-CCI-T-844214 Crown Castle Designation: BU Number: 844214 Site Name: LILYDALE JDE Job Number: 659369 WO Number: 1967036 Order Number: 562263 Revision. 1 Site Data: 894 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY, LILYDALE, DAKOTA County, MN Latitude: 44° 54’ 15.1” Longitude: -93° 7’ 53.93” 75 Foot – MONOPOLE Tower Crown Castle is pleased to submit this “Structural Evaluation” to determine the structural integrity of the above- mentioned tower. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine the suitability of the tower structure to support the proposed equipment configuration listed in Table 1. Based on a comparison of loading listed in the previous analysis dated 3/2/2018, the proposed loading change will not have significant impact on the overall tower stress rating. Therefore, the final proposed equipment configuration listed in Table 1 is structurally ACCEPTABLE. Table 1: Proposed Equipment Configuration Mounting Level (ft) Center Line Elevation (ft) Number of Antennas Antenna Manufacturer Antenna Model Number of Feed Lines Feed Line Size (in) 64 64 1 MOUNTS Commscope_MC-PK8-DSH 1 1-1/2 64 1 RAYCAP RDIDC-9181-PF-48 64 3 FUJITSU TA08025-B604 64 3 FUJITSU TA08025-B605 64 3 JMA WIRELESS MX08FRO665-21 Respectfully submitted by: Maribel Dentinger, P.E. Sr Project Engineer 06/04/2021 PACKET PG. # 26 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101T-1SHEET INDEXVICINITY MAPDIRECTIONSSITE INFORMATIONPROJECT DIRECTORY11"x17" PLOT WILL BE HALF SCALE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTEDGENERAL NOTESSITE PHOTOSCOPE OF WORKxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxGOPHER STATE ONE CALLUTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF MINNESOTA(800) 252-1166WWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORGDISH Wireless L.L.C. SITE ID:MNMSP00097ADISH Wireless L.L.C. SITE ADDRESS:894 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAYLILYDALE, MN 55118MINNESOTA CODE COMPLIANCEPACKET PG. # 27 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101A-1231PACKET PG. # 28 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101A-2132PACKET PG. # 29 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101A-312453PACKET PG. # 30 147258369520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101A-4PACKET PG. # 31 147258369520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101A-5PACKET PG. # 32 A-6147258369PACKET PG. # 33 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101E-11132PACKET PG. # 34 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101E-21147258369PACKET PG. # 35 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101E-3LOAD SERVEDVOLT AMPS(WATTS)L1 L2TRIPCKT#PHASELOAD SERVEDVOLT AMPS(WATTS)L1 L2TRIPCKT#213PACKET PG. # 36 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101G-1123”PACKET PG. # 37 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101G-2361425PACKET PG. # 38 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101G-3147258369PACKET PG. # 39 RF-11234PACKET PG. # 40 RF-21ALPHABETAMX08FRO665-21MX08FRO665-21GAMMAMX08FRO665-21RETPOWER-48V(A) 0V(B) 2ABLow BandOPTICAL1POWER-48V(A) 0V(B) 2CDRETABMid BandOPTICAL1POWER-48V(A) 0V(B) 2CDRETABLow BandOPTICAL1POWER-48V(A) 0V(B)2CDRETABMid BandOPTICAL1POWER-48V(A) 0V(B) 2CDRETABLow BandOPTICAL1POWER-48V(A) 0V(B) 2CDRETABMid BandOPTICAL1CDFIBERtopbottomBottom OVPSpecific OVP modelnumber detailed inRFDS5G plumbing diagram JMA MX08FRO665-212-2-2(LB+MB)SIZEQuan Liu5- Jan- 2021SCALENoneSHEETFSCM NO DWG NO REV3SFPSFPSFPSFPSFPSFPROROWHRRORRORPUWHRPUWHRRPURRPUWHBLOBLOWHBLBLOBLBLOWHBLBLWHBLBLBLBLWHGNOGNOWHGNGNOGNGNOWHGNPUGNPUWHGNGNPUGNGNPUWH1144225533 6612345645 6123PUPUPUPUPACKET PG. # 41 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101GN-1PACKET PG. # 42 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101GN-2PACKET PG. # 43 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101GN-3xxxxxxxPACKET PG. # 44 520 South Main Street, Suite 2531Akron, OH 44311330.572.2100 Fax 330.572.2101GN-4PACKET PG. # 45