Loading...
PC 07-23-2024July 23, 2024 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 1 of 6 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 23, 2024 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 23, 2024 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, Cindy Johnson, Brian Petschel, Brian Udell, and Andrew Katz. Those absent: Commissioner Jason Stone. Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of June 25, 2024 Minutes COMMISSIONER KATZ NOTED THAT THE MINUTES WERE EXTREMELY DETAILED AND WELL PUT TOGETHER. CHAIR FIELD AGREED. COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JUNE 25, 2024. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 Hearings A) CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, ZONING CODE UPDATE Chair Field recognized that almost two years of effort has gone into this process, including workshops and public meetings to receive informal input. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp explained that the final draft of the Zoning Code Update has been prepared for presentation before the Commission. The City has prepared proposed amendments to Tile 12: Zoning to adopt a revised zoning title and corresponding Zoning Map. Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; no comments or objections to this request were received. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp 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). July 23, 2024 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 2 of 6 Staff recommended approval of this application. Chair Field commented that this update is intended to make things clearer and more simplified of what is required for both staff and members of the public. Commissioner Petschel asked if there would need to be a provision related to permitted uses in the wetlands for restorative dredging. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp replied that would be part of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) and would be more appropriate under the environmental title. She stated that there is language in there about the buffer and the dredging is included within WCA. Commissioner Katz thanked staff for pointing out how to address the issue from the industrial user that submitted a letter. Chair Field opened the public hearing. John Maczko, 751 Cheyenne Lane, recognized that there has been a lot of work, and this has come a long way from the start noting that he has attended all but one meeting on this topic. He stated that he is happy with the way the smaller lots have been resolved. He expressed concern with the public/semi-public overlay, as that would use a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) rather than a variance request. He recognized that would make things easier for the schools, but would also provide the City with less discretion to deny a request. He asked if the definition of government building or structure is detailed enough, asking if the County owned senior housing would fall under that definition. He also referenced the issue of lighting, specifically relating to City owned park land and fields, asking if there are standards for those uses that should be articulated similar to the school uses. He referenced the impervious surface standards noting that having something is better than nothing, although he was unsure what the right numbers would be. He used the scenario of a current lot that is currently at 50 percent impervious and would like to replace the driveway, asking if they would be able to do so or whether they would need to meet the new standards. He also asked, in that scenario, where the home would be able to request an addition. He referenced the PUD overlay districts, which make sense for the things already in existence. He asked if the Council would still have the ability to deny a new request within that district, or whether it would be similar to a CUP, where only conditions could be added. Kate Christensen, 2280 Ocala Court, referenced accessory dwelling units (ADUs), noting that she has attended many meetings on that topic. She believed that the prior consensus was that ADUs should not be permitted and believed that should be added as a use that is not allowed. She believed that impervious surface should be capped at 35 percent. She also did not believe that BMPs should be allowed to increase impervious surface as that could be removed by the next homeowner. She referenced farming, noting that is marked as P in all residential zones, which she interpreted to mean primary use. She stated that residential should be the primary use in those zones. She asked if there should be a placeholder on the VRBO regulations, as it seems the City is close to completing that ordinance. July 23, 2024 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 3 of 6 Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp referenced the use of a CUP versus a variance for the public/semi-public district, noting that the Commission discussed that at length, and it was the consensus of the Commission that these uses are already established, and the requests are being approved, therefore the variance process seemed burdensome because a practical difficulty must be found. She stated that the CUP allows the conditions to be tailored to each unique property. She stated that clarifying language could be added to the government building or structure to exclude residential, but explained that the density is controlled by the underlying zoning district. She stated that the Commission did not discuss adding lighting standards for City owned parks. She commented that related to impervious surface limitations, an existing lot would still be able to replace their driveway, but the nonconformity would not be allowed to expand. She stated that the City can deny a PUD overlay request as that would be a rezoning request and therefore would not be similar to a CUP or variance process. She commented that language was added that accessory buildings cannot be used for habitable space, but that could also be added as a line item on the table but noted that could cause confusion. She stated that the impervious surface cap was discussed at length and in a joint worksession, the Council agreed to evaluate how this functions after one year and two year to determine if the BMP language should be removed. She noted that if a BMP were added, it would be tracked and recorded against a property. She explained that P does not mean principal, but permitted, as referenced by the resident in relation to farming. She stated that if the VRBO ordinance is completed by the time this is ready for adoption, it would absolutely be added. Mr. Matsco commented that he used the high-density residential use as an example of a government structure, but noted that there are other examples to consider such as a detention center, and therefore believed that language would benefit by being more specific. 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 CORBETT, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Corbett asked if the intention would be for the Commission to adopt the changes to pass on to the City Council. Chair Field confirmed that would be one option, but changes could also be made and either passed to the Council or the item could return for additional review. Commissioner Katz recognized that perhaps the Commission should have discussed lighting standards for the parks. Commissioner Petschel commented that there are lighting pollution standards within the existing ordinances and regulations. He commented that there is a measurable standard related to light bleed. July 23, 2024 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 4 of 6 Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek confirmed that requirement does exist within the existing Code, although perhaps not within the zoning standards. Commissioner Petschel commented that he did not believe that would need to be addressed within zoning as well. He noted that when it comes to parks, the applicant would be the City and therefore did not believe the City would need to be bound in terms of lighting for parks. Commissioner Johnson commented that some of the parks are heavily bound by residential areas and do not have much lighting in some areas, where light pollution is an issue for other parks. Commissioner Petschel commented that it would still be an application of the City and request for the City to itself to act above what is allowed by Code. Commissioner Katz asked if other cities have park lighting regulations. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp commented that some cities have a general lighting standard, not specific to parks, that provides some guidance. She stated that while there is some guidance in the City Code, it is not in detail. She stated that other cities follow the same process of Mendota Heights. Commissioner Katz asked if the cities that have specific regulations also have different requirements for different uses and whether specific times are also identified. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp replied that most standards have commercial and industrial standards and then more general requirement of hooded and downcast lighting for residential. She commented that is also a big standard to police for residential properties, and therefore many cities will exclude residential properties. Commissioner Johnson commented that historically Mendota Heights is a dark city. She stated that she would not want to put a standard that would encourage more lighting. She believed that spaces that are dark spaces should continue to be respected. Commissioner Katz stated that if lighting standards were added, they could require the lights to be turned off by a certain time. Commissioner Petschel commented that there are light pollution standards and that has been addressed as part of a CUP request. He stated that the biggest issue that the City has had was the Viking Lakes sign that was casting shadows when it first opened, but recognized that is in another community. Commissioner Katz stated that he was thinking more about the industrial area and perhaps new lighting standards should be considered. July 23, 2024 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 5 of 6 Community Development Manager Sarah Madden commented that there are lighting standards that apply to business, commercial, industrial, and PSPO and provided that section of the Code for reference. Commissioner Corbett asked if they should take the discussion offline for a bit as he feels that there are still gaps and there is not a rush to approve this. Commissioner Katz stated that he could support that request as well. Commissioner Petschel asked if Commissioner Corbett would be proposing another workshop. Commissioner Corbett stated that he would find it appropriate to have another workshop to review the comments that have been discussed. Chair Field noted that the Commission has had this since last week but recognized that it is not light reading. Commissioner Corbett noted that he was out of town last week and therefore could not begin his review until Monday. He also felt that this would be hard for the public to read and digest within the last week. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp commented that a tracked changes version is not available or feasible given the language and structure changes. She stated that there is subjectivity as to what someone considers substantiative changes, as the same policy objective is achieved. Commissioner Corbett stated that for that reason he would want to compare the existing language to the newly proposed language. He stated that the additional time may also allow the VRBO ordinance to be included. Commissioner Petschel commented that if this is tabled, they will end up at a meeting next month doing the same thing. Commissioner Corbett stated that he would like the additional time to consider the suggestions brought forward today, using the example of government building/structures. Commissioner Katz agreed that perhaps that should be more specific given the government owned residential facility that has experience recent issues and concerns. He stated that he would agree to hold a workshop to address these items. Commissioner Johnson stated that her concern would be with timing as she would like to wrap this up. She agreed that there are a few concerns that should be addressed but would want that to be done in a timely manner with a deadline of when they are going to send this to the Council. Commissioner Corbett suggested that they only table the topic for this one time to allow additional time for digestion and to address the concerns that were raised tonight. July 23, 2024 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 6 of 6 COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT, TO TABLE CONSIDERATION OF THE ZONING CODE UPDATE WITH THE CONDITION THAT A WORKSHOP WILL BE HELD PRIOR TO THE NEXT REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING TO RECONSIDER THE REQUEST. Further discussion: Community Development Manager Sarah Madden commented that she would need to follow up through email to find a potential date. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that next Tuesday would be open for a workshop, but August would have some constraints given Night to Unite and the Primary Election. Commission Katz asked and received consensus of the Commission that a workshop could be held on Tuesday, July 31st. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 New and Unfinished Business Staff Announcements / Updates Community Development Manager Sarah Madden provided an update on recent actions of the City Council related to planning requests. She stated that she will follow up with the date for the workshop, and noted that a public hearing would not be required at the next regular meeting for the Zoning Code update as the public hearing was held and closed tonight. Adjournment COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:43 P.M. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0