Loading...
04 07 2026 City Council MinutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, April 7, 2026 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, was held at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota, CALL TO ORDER Mayor Levine called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Councilors Lorberbaum, Paper, Mazzitello, and Maczko were also present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Levine presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Mazzitello moved adoption of the agenda. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PUBLIC COMMENTS No one from the public wished to be heard. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Levine presented the consent agenda and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilor Lorberbaum moved approval of the consent agenda as presented. a. Approval of March 17, 2026, City Council Work Session Minutes b. Approval of March 17, 2026, City Council Minutes c. Approval of March 17, 2026, City Council Closed Session Meeting d. Acknowledge Minutes from the January 27, 2026, Planning Commission Meeting e. Acknowledge Minutes from the February 24, 2026, Planning Commission Work Session Meeting f. Authorize the Purchase of Fire Department Turn -Out Gear g. Approve a Massage Therapist License h. Approve Engineering/Public Works Department Out of Metro Travel Request i. Approve Police Department Out of Metro Travel Request j. Approve Resolution 2026-23 Proclaiming April 24, 2026, Arbor Day in Mendota Heights k. Approve 2025 Audit Fund Consolidation 1. Approve Office Support Assistant Hire m. Approval of Claims List Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PRESENTATIONS No items scheduled. PUBLIC HEARING No items scheduled. NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) RESOLUTION 2026-22 APPROVING THE LEXINGTON HEIGHTS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT — FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN; AND ORDINANCE NO. 606 APPROVING A ZONING AMENDMENT TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT (PLANNING CASE NOS. 2025-16 AND 2026-03) Community Development Manager Sarah Madden provided a brief background on this item. She explained that the Council was being asked to approve Resolution 2026-22 approving a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment — Final Development Plan, for the Lexington Heights Planned Unit Development; and adopt Ordinance No. 606 approving a Zoning Amendment to Planned Unit Development Overlay District. John Riley, applicant, and Amanda Frost, Chase Real Estate, introduced themselves. Councilor Mazzitello noted a reference to a Japanese lilac tree that is not allowed and is mentioned in the packet. He received confirmation that tree species had been removed from the landscape plan. Councilor Maczko thanked the applicant for the adjustments that have been made to improve the flow and aesthetics. He asked if the applicant had spoken with the neighbor to the north. Mr. Riley commented that he has had conversations with Roger, and he had attended some of their neighborhood meetings. He stated that he had mentioned the potential driveway alignment but had not spoken with the neighbor to advise him that the option was chosen to move forward. He stated that this is the best option for traffic flow, and they have planned additional screening. He stated that if the Council desires, they could table this, and he could have that conversation with the neighbor, as he wants to make sure he is comfortable with the plan, as he has been supportive of the project. Councilor Maczko commented that he would support tabling this for that reason. He stated that he was also interested in the plans for landscaping and screening on that side. He commented that some of the April 7, 2026, Mendota Heights City Council Page 2 of 10 species are beautiful, but he was unsure how well they would do for screening to block headlights during the winter months. Ms. Frost commented that the landscaping plan can be changed as needed. Councilor Maczko stated that he has another issue he would like to discuss with staff prior to the next meeting, related to the park dedication fee, and believed that tabling would be the best decision. Councilor Lorberbaum stated that at the last meeting, there were many residents from the apartments who spoke positively about the property and the ownership. She acknowledged that the applicant has made changes to address the comments of the Council and public and thanked him for that. She referenced the narrative from the applicant, which mentions the conversion of the basketball court into two pickleball courts, and also mentions the conversion of the tennis court into two pickleball courts. She asked for clarification on whether the basketball court or the tennis court would be converted. Mr. Riley stated that the plan shows that they will be keeping the tennis court and adding the pickleball courts where the basketball court is. He noted that there is enough space to keep the basketball court as well and add pickleball courts to the north. Councilor Lorberbaum acknowledged that this will most likely be tabled and hoped that the applicant could clarify those details on the plans before the next meeting. Councilor Mazzitello stated that he does not object to tabling but also believed that they could move this forward with conditions that the building and grading permits would not be granted until certain conditions are met. He asked the applicant to work with the Natural Resources Coordinator or their landscape architect to randomize the species on the landscaping plan to assist in the prevention of tree loss from pests/disease. Councilor Maczko moved to table CONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM TO THE APRIL 21, 2026, CITY COUNCIL MEETING, Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 B) RESOLUTION 2026-25 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 655 CALLAHAN PLACE (PLANNING CASE NO. 2026-04) Community Development Manager Sarah Madden provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked to consider Resolution 2026-25, approving a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for M&M Home Contractors to allow for a residential building height of 20 feet at 655 Callahan Place. Councilor Paper asked for more information on the setback. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that the minimum and maximum setbacks were shown, based on the average of the two adjacent structures. April7, 2026, Mendofa Heights City Caenvcil Page 3 of 10 Councilor Paper stated that the garage of the new structure would be in line with the existing homes, but the remainder of the home is behind the other two homes and asked how that would fulfill the stringline. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that the setback requirement is for the principal structure, and an attached garage is considered to be part of the principal structure for the purpose of setbacks. Councilor Paper stated that this home is stepped back so far that it will be in the backyard of several homes. He stated that the garage takes up the entire footprint of a neighboring home. He commented that this home does not seem to fit the existing character of the immediately surrounding homes. He was unsure if anything could be done to pull the structure forward to be more in line with the other homes. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that the home is compliant with the setbacks. Councilor Maczko stated that a new home on South Lane is similar with athree-car garage on the front and the home set further back and similarly wondered how the neighbors felt about that. He recognized that could be an unintended consequence of the Zoning Code update, and perhaps they need to have additional discussion on that in the future. Mayor Levine appreciated the conversation about potential issues with the City Code but asked that the discussion focus on the application before them. Mayor Levine invited those present to provide input. Brian Ross, 653 Callahan Place, stated that he lives to the east of the proposed home and has lived in the neighborhood for 46 years. He commented that this area is desirable because of the spacious and tranquil feel with larger lots and quiet neighborhoods. He reviewed the criteria that must be met for conditional uses and did not feel that this use would be compatible with the existing neighborhood. He stated that his home is 2,950 square feet, and the property to the west of the proposed home is 2,534 square feet, with building heights around 15 feet. He stated that the previous home on this lot that was torn down was similar in size and is proposed to be replaced with a 5,621 square foot, 2046ot tall home. He did not find this to be compatible, as it will alter the look of Callahan Place, infringe on privacy, and set the precedent of oversized redevelopment that erodes the modest, established character that has been protected. He stated that the proposed structure would extend 39 feet beyond the back of his home, just ten feet from his property line. He asked that the Council deny this plan as it is not compatible with adjacent homes. Dave Ross, 651 Callahan Place, stated that he has lived in his home for 50 years and has lived in Mendota Heights for his entire life because he enjoys the character of the community. He commented that he is a real estate broker and appraiser and believed that the proposed plan is out of line with the surrounding neighborhood. He commented that on Callahan Place, there is 80 to 120 feet between homes, where this proposal would place a house ten feet from the neighbor. He asked the Council to envision someone building an addition of 40 feet past their home, ten feet from the property line. He commented on the negative impact this will have on its immediate neighbors and the overall neighborhood. He believed that the Planning Commission and City Council should review the regulations to prevent things like this from occurring in Mendota Heights, as this community is not like others, and this is an established neighborhood. dpril 7, 202ti, Mendom Heights Ciry Council Page 4 ofl0 Joe Husbands, 659 Callahan Place, commented that he is the other direct neighbor and echoed the comments of the two previous speakers as he shares those same concerns. He stated that at the Planning Commission meeting, the presentation stated that no one responded to the plans but noted that he called City Hall and was told that the plans would not be available until the item was on the agenda. He questioned how people could respond when the plans were not available. He stated that the residents in the neighborhood were not prepared, as they did not have access to the plans until the meeting. He expressed concerns with a home of this size being placed between two more modest homes on either side and in the overall neighborhood. Mike Fritz, applicant, stated that he is present to address any questions related to the request for the CUP. He stated that when they designed the home, they designed it to meet all City Codes and ordinances for the building permit application and setbacks. Councilor Maczko asked why the applicant would be before the Council if all City Code regulations were met by the request. Mr. Fritz commented that they are present to request a CUP for the building height, but in terms of the other comments related to orientation, scale, and setback, they meet all of those requirements. Councilor Maczko stated that the applicant does need permission for the building height. He asked what would happen if the CUP were denied. Mr. Fritz replied that he was not prepared to answer that, as they would potentially have to redesign, which would cause additional time and money. Councilor Paper asked how building height is measured for the neighboring homes. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that the measurement of the adjacent properties is less than 15 feet, and the ordinance does not allow staff to set an average less than 15 feet, as that is the minimum threshold. She estimated that the adjacent homes are between 13 and 14 feet. She stated that the CUP allows a height of 20 feet. Mr. Fritz stated that the application shows a height of 17.6 feet following that measurement method. Councilor Paper asked how the midpoint is determined, specifically what the bottom is. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that the bottom for the measurement is the average front grade of the home. Mr. Fritz provided additional clarification on the method of measurement that was used in the last application he was involved in. Councilor Paper commented that this is a much taller roof than the two adjacent homes and commented that it is important to try to match the character of the existing homes. He asked if this home is speculative or whether this is a buyer -involved home. �lpril7, 2026, Mendota Heights City Council ppge g o, f/ p Mr. Fritz commented that the main roof is an eight -pitch, and they tried to keep this as small as possible. Councilor Lorberbaum commented that it looks like there is a second floor in the front because of windows above the main door. Mr. Fritz replied that those are architectural design windows, and there is no second floor in that location. Councilor Lorberbaum asked how the general welfare of the community is defined, given the comments of the neighbors. City Attorney Amy Schmidt replied that there is no specific statutory definition for the general welfare of the community. She stated that it is subjective, based on the surrounding properties and standards established in the Code that are specific. She stated that if the home were below the height that requires a CUP, this application would not be before the Council. Councilor Lorberbaum asked if being uncomfortable with a home 39 feet past her home, ten feet from the property line, would meet the definition of detrimental to the general welfare of the community. City Attorney Amy Schmidt replied that would be the perspective of one person, not a general perspective. Councilor Paper asked and received confirmation that the peak above the garage and master bedroom are reasonably close in height and asked how much taller the center peak is. Mr. Fritz stated that he does not have that exact dimension. He stated that peak is higher based on the width of the truss. He estimated about 30 inches. Councilor Maczko commented that if the scale is correct, that would be about five feet. Community Development Director Sarah Madden provided additional clarification on where the 20-foot measurement was determined. Councilor Paper commented that it is such a big difference from the neighboring homes. Councilor Mazzitello provided clarification on the measurement within City Code and the measurement of 20 feet as determined by City staff. He stated that in the other home the applicant was speaking of the main body peak was also the highest peak. Mr. Fritz commented that all setbacks as proposed meet the requirements of the City, and as proposed, the 20-foot height would also be under the maximum allowed by the City through a CUP. Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2026-25, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR RESIDENTIAL BUILDING HEIGHT AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 655 CALLAHAN PLACE, Mayor Levine seconded the motion. April 7, 2026, Menclata Heights Ci(y Council Aage ti of ]0 Further discussion: Councilor Mazzitello stated that they have been dealing with the issue for over 20 years in Mendota Heights, as new homes that are built do not match the architectural trends of the past. He stated that he lives in one of those neighborhoods and has had almost one dozen lots in his neighborhood redeveloped with large homes with property values over $1,000,000 in an older subdivided neighborhood. He stated that the Zoning Code update attempted to address this issue while being cautious of maintaining property rights. He stated that the CUP was developed to provide a method to allow larger building heights and provide an opportunity for neighbors to speak their concerns. He stated that not building the home was not an option that was provided. He stated that a CUP is a permitted use by condition, and if the applicant meets those conditions, it is very difficult to deny the request, as that could lead to legal issues. He stated that the applicant has met all of the Zoning Code requirements, including the conditions for a building height of 20 feet within the CUP. He stated that it would be nice to have the issues between property owners addressed while still allowing the new home to be developed. He stated that this is a single -story home that follows the trend of higher gabled roofs. He stated that they do not have a mechanism to deny this, as all requirements are met. City Attorney Amy Schmidt stated that it is important to remember that neighborhood opposition is not a basis for denial of a CUP. Councilor Maczko stated that he agrees with the comments from Councilor Mazzitello and recalled the previous discussions the Council had with McMansions being built, where they were out of character with the neighborhood. He could not fathom that the proposed home is in character or scale with the existing homes. He stated that placing a home of this scale and price in a neighborhood where homes are valued around $500,000 would be pricing residents out of the community. He stated that homes in Mendota Heights sell themselves and did not believe that this home fits the character of this neighborhood. He stated that he would be willing to table this to find if there is a way to make this work; otherwise, he will vote against this. Mayor Levine commented that the sentence referencing the character and scale of the home was a statement from staff in response to the issue of the proposed use not being detrimental to the general welfare of the community. She asked if that sentence was related to the structure or the roof specifically. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that the statement is referring to the roof height, as the request is related to the proposed height. Mayor Levine commented that the Council needs to focus on the roof and building height, as the structure is compatible with City Code. She reviewed the conditions that must be considered for a CUP request and urged the Council to be careful with the job they need to do today. She agreed that the comments from the neighbors are reasonable, but that is outside of the job of the Council tonight, as the request is specific to the roof height and related conditions of the CUP. Councilor Maczko asked about the conditions that the request meets. Mayor Levine provided additional context on the conditions within the CUP that are considered. She stated that if the structure had a height of 15 feet, the request would not even be before them, and this home could proceed with construction. April 7, 2026, A4endota Heights City Council Page 7 of 10 Councilor Maczko clarified that the issue before them then is whether the home would be less impactful with a height of 15 feet rather than 20 feet. City Attorney Any Schmidt stated that City Code uses the language "would not seriously depreciate property values", and if the Council determines that the request of the applicant would not seriously depreciate property values, that would be a reason to approve the CUP. She stated that she is not an appraiser but did not think it would be a reasonable conclusion that a five-foot difference in the height of a roof would seriously depreciate property values in the surrounding area. Councilor Maczko received confirmation that if this were denied, the same structure could be built with a height of five feet less. He recognized that this is an architectural element that is meant to improve the aesthetic. City Attorney Amy Schmidt stated that a denial without a legal basis could lead to a different outcome. She stated that in a denial, the Council would need to make findings of fact to support that denial. Councilor Maczko recognized that it would be harder to justify that afive-foot difference in height would be the main generator in the home, being out of character with the scale of surrounding homes. City Attorney Amy Schmidt reminded the Council of the conditions that a request must meet within the CUP requested. She stated that the language related to scale is not included in the language from the Code. Councilor Maczko stated that he realizes they do not have much to stand on because all other elements of the City Code are met by this request. Mayor Levine commented that if this is an issue the Council wants to revisit, they can do that in the future, but this request must be considered under the Code as it exists now. She stated that the Planning Commission shared those concerns but also understood its job to review the request under the City Code. Councilor Maczko recognized the precedent that is set by allowing the first home, as this trend then continues with redevelopment and ultimately the character changes. Councilor Paper commented that the property line on the east side will be greater than it was before the previous home. He stated that he is also frustrated that there does not seem to be a way to deny the request. He noted that this footprint will generate more runoff than it did before and was interested in how that would be managed to ensure that it does not impact neighbors. He stated that it appears that most of the existing vegetation between the properties lies mostly on neighboring properties and asked how that would be protected. Mayor Levine noted that those questions were asked and addressed at the Planning Commission meeting. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that the home on the west side brought forward those questions and asked for protection of their trees. He noted that the neighbor and applicant met after the meeting to have an additional conversation. He stated that this property would be required to implement a stormwater BMP to manage stormwater, and there should be a net reduction in runoff post -construction. April 7, 2026, Mendota Heights Ciry Cou�acil Page 8 of IO He recognized the concern of the property owner to the east and noted that perhaps moving the home forward 10 feet would alleviate some of those concerns. Councilor Mazzitello commented that would require a variance. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden commented that there are some issues of grammar that will come forward to the City Council in the future for additional discussion when it comes to the averaging. Councilor Mazzitello noted that the CUP would still stand as a separate issue. Councilor Paper asked if the retaining walls were decorative. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that there is some grade stability provided, and all retaining walls are under four feet. Councilor Paper asked if a distance from the property line is required for retaining walls. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that a retaining wall cannot be placed in an easement but otherwise could be placed up to the property line. Councilor Lorberbaum stated that the home is compliant with the Code, with the exception of the height of the roof. She recognized that a denial would not stand up legally. She felt that a newer home in the community may increase the value of neighboring homes. She stated that across the street from this home is a house with a much taller roof, which then makes this home compatible with the neighborhood. She recognized that there was no reason to deny this request. Councilor Lorberbaum moved to call the question. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 1 (Maczko) Ayes: 3 Nays: 2 (Maczko and Paper) C) MUNICIPAL CAMPUS PROJECT UPDATE City Administrator Jacobson provided a brief project update. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS City Administrator Jacobson announced upcoming community events and activities. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilor Paper wished everyone a happy spring. April7, 2026, Mendota Heights CiryCouncil Poge 9 of 10 Councilor Maczko stated that he missed the last Council meeting. He stated that he was surprised by the number of people who opposed the cellular tower at the Planning Commission, as when he campaigned, the lack of cellular service was the top complaint he received from residents. He stated that his kids do not have a landline, as the use of cellular phones seems to be the trend for households. He recognized that without that coverage, someone would be unable to call public safety services. He stated that the City worked hard to find a provider that would be willing to come into the community to provide better service. He hoped that those without service and experiencing issues with service would speak up prior to the next Council meeting. He stated that the Council spends a lot of time and energy in an attempt to make the best decisions. Councilor Lorberbaum stated that she watched the Planning Commission meeting and was also surprised. She recognized that people most often attend a meeting to voice their opposition, which means that those in favor of the request did not show up. She hoped that those in favor of the request would speak up. She stated that today is World Health Day and April is National Gardening Month. She noted that there are a variety of options for purchasing trees being offered by the City. She wished everyone a meaningful Easter, Nowruz, and Passover. Councilor Mazzitello wished everyone blessings of the season. He continued his walk towards the 2501h birthday of the nation and shared a historical fact from April 7, 1776, ADJOi.JRN Councilor Mazzitello moved to adjourn. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mayor Levine adjourned the meeting at 7:52 p.m. Stephiinie B: Levine Mayor ATTEST: C1 Nan y Bar City Clerk Apri17, 2026, Mendota Heights City Council Page 10 oj10