2002-08-27 Planning Comm MinutesPlanning Commission Meeting
August 27, 2002
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 27, 2002
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 27, 2002 in
the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.
The following Commissioners were present: Acting Chair Friel, Commissioners B. McManus, Dolan, and M.
McManus. City Staff present were Public Works Director Jim Danielson and Administrative Assistant Patrick
C. Hollister. Also present was Planner Steve Gritlman. Minutes were recorded by Becki Shaffer.
Excused: Chair Lorberbaum, Commissioners Betlej and Hesse.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DOLAN, TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 23'm AS PRESENTED.
4 Ayes
0 Nayes
Motion Carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING CASE #02 -27
SARA AND TODD HULSE
754 WOODRIDGE DRIVE
SUBDIVISION OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY INTO THREE PROPERTIES
This item has been removed from the agenda at the applicant's request and will not be
rescheduled at this time.
PLANNING CASE #02 -30
TIM WALSH
2452 MORSON CIRCLE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Mr. Grittman reviewed the applicant to construct a 6 -ft. fence within 30 -ft. of a street. Mr. Grittman said the
ordinance allows 3 -ft. maximum height. The fence would match the size and design of the neighbor and is
Planning Commission Meeting
August 27, 2002
intended to provide privacy to the rear yard. Mr. Grittman said the City previously adopted an amendment that
would allow this type of fence with a condition use permit, particularly where the yards face the main streets.
Commissioner M. McManus asked if the neighbor had applied for a conditional use permit when that fence was
constructed. Mr. Grittman said a variance would have been required at that time and the neighbor would have
had to obtain approval. It is noted that a variance was lower cost than a conditional use permit.
Commissioner Dolan asked what the status is of the ordinance. Mr. Grittman said this ordinance was adopted
after the previous owners application.
Timothy Walsh, 2452 Morson Circle, asked that the fee of $350.00 be waived of $300.00 as the variance would
have cost less. Mr. Walsh feels that the $350.00 is a high fee when comparing to the cost of the project. Acting
Chair Friel said that a variance is harder to obtain than a conditional use permit. Acting Chair Friel said the
Commission has no power to grant this request and must be granted by the City Council.
Acting Chair Friel opened the public hearing, there being no one present to speak,
COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DOLAN, TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
4 AYES
0 NAYS
MOTION CARRIED
Acting Chair Friel closed the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS, TO
APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BASED ON THE REQUIREMENTS AS
PRESENTED BEING MET.
4 AYES
0 NAYS
MOTION CARRIED
Acting Chair Friel said this would come before the City Council on September 3rd to request approval of the
conditional use permit and waiver of fee.
PLANNING CASE #02 -31
PHILIP GOLDMAN
1926 SOUTH LANE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Commissioner Dolan excused himself from the Commission as Mr. Goldman is an associate of his.
2
Planning Commission Meeting
August 27, 2002
Mr. Grittman reviewed a map showing the location of the property. Mr. Grittman said the applicant is
requesting approval to construct a second accessory building on his property. It is noted this accessory building
is a gazebo, and is unattached from the home. There is also another detached building on the property, which is
on ample size to accommodate both buildings. Mr. Grittman said that the two buildings would be of different
purposes (one being recreational, and one being storage) and would not give the property a cluttered appearance.
Mr. Goldman declined comment but offered to answer any questions.
Acting Chair Friel opened the public hearing, there being no one present to speak,
COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
3 AYES
0 NAYS
MOTION CARRIED
Acting Chair Friel closed the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS, TO
APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AS PRESENTED.
3 AYES
0 NAYS
MOTION CARRIED
Acting Chair Friel said this would come before the City Council on September 3rd to request approval of the
conditional use permit.
Mr. Goldman thanked the City Staff for all the assistance that was given.
PLANNING CASE #02 -32
MICHAEL PATTEN
641 CALLAHAN PLACE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Mr. Grittman reviewed the site plan showing the location of the proposed detached garage. Mr. Grittman said
the zoning ordinance is set up to allow attached garages up to 1,200 -sq. ft., and larger by conditional use permit.
Mr. Grittman said a detached garage requires a conditional use permit. Mr. Grittman said the applicant is
seeking to convert the existing attached garage into a workshop and storage space, and construct a larger garage
that is 1,600 -sq. ft. adjacent to the existing attached garage space. The driveway would be reconstructed to
provide access to the detached garage as well as the surface currently in place. Mr. Grittman noted that two
trees would need to be removed.
3
Planning Commission Meeting
August 27, 2002
Mr. Grittman said the City has approved a number of detached garages previously, and in this particular case,
Staff has tried to determine whether this situation is similar to those cases. Mr. Grittman said it does not appear
to be so, and found an issue in that other areas, detached garages were a common feature of the neighborhood.
Mr. Grittman said this property was about 1 acre and would allow attaching a garage to the existing one. This
would allow for both garages to remain as garages as it is keeping within the allotted size requirements, thus
reducing the amount of driveway to be installed and would eliminate the need to remove trees.
Commissioner Dolan asked Mr. Grittman to describe the reason for the ordinance preferring attached garages as
opposed to detached. Mr. Grittman said he would speculate it would an architectural and style issue.
Commissioner M. McManus asked if there were any discussions with the applicant regarding alternatives in
designing for an additional garage, detached or attached. Mr. Grittman said there has not been.
Acting Chair Friel said the preference to attached garages results in all homes in the community presenting to
the street three huge doors.
Michael Patton, 641 Callahan Place, shared pictures of his property showing three different views from
neighbor's angles. Mr. Patton said his reasons to not attach the garage would be the blocking of the view from
his deck on the back of the house, as well as being a roof line issue. Mr. Patton said the existing garage (20 -ft.
deep) is not large enough for his truck, which the new garage would be 28 -ft. deep.
Mr. Patton showed a drawing of what the home would look like with an attached garage, giving a longer version
of the home, with two double garage doors side by side.
Acting Chair Friel said it would be preferred to remove the garage door on the existing garage and place a
smaller door.
Mr. Patton said that the existing garage would be used, as storage and he would like to keep the existing garage
door.
Acting Chair Friel said that by putting up an attached garage and getting rid of the other garage door, Mr.
Patton could have a 1,200 -sq. ft. garage. With a detached garage, the maximum would only be 750 -sq. ft.
Acting Chair Friel said that in either case, the existing garage door would have been changed so it cannot admit
an automobile in the existing attached garage.
Mr. Grittman said that there is a provision in the ordinance that allows no more than a doublewide and a
singlewide garage door, or three singlewide garage doors. That is a clause that applies specifically to attached
garages that are more than 1,200 -sq. ft. in size. Mr. Grittman said there is no garage door limitation if the
attached garage space is under 1,200 -sq. ft. Mr. Grittman said that with the attached garage, the space would be
under 1,200 -sq. ft. and would allow for both garage doors to remain. However, if the garage would be more
than 1,200 -sq. ft., there can be no more than three single garage door sizes.
4
Planning Commission Meeting
August 27, 2002
Commissioner M. McManus asked the applicant if, by attaching the garage to the existing, would it not be the
same depth as the existing garage, and that the applicant needs a deeper garage. Mr. Patton said that was the
problem, as by adding additional feet to the rear, the roofline would not line up correctly.
Commissioner B. McManus said if there are two garage doors, then there are two garages. Regardless of one
not being used as a garage, it still looks like two garages.
Commissioner B. McManus commented on the storage of an RV that is proposed to be placed between the
existing garage and the proposed detached garage. Administrative Assistant Hollister said that under the City's
current ordinance, can be placed on the side of a house as long as it doesn't not stick out in front of the house.
Mr. Hollister added that only one garage may be on the property, either detached or attached. Commissioner B.
McManus said he maintains that the applicant has an attached garage and a detached garage shown in his plan.
Acting Chair Friel said there should be some alternatives the applicant should address. Acting Chair Friel said
the applicant would have a better chance for approval if he changed the existing garage door to a single garage
door, and then having the attached garage as proposed. Acting Chair Friel said it would be more likely to pass if
the applicant would attach the garage and have three separate doors, or one single and one double.
Acting Chair Friel opened the public hearing, there being no one present to speak,
COMMISSIONER DOLAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS, TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
4 AYES
0 NAYS
MOTION CARRIED
Acting Chair Friel closed the public hearing.
Commissioner M. McManus said it has been customary to have signatures of neighbors obtained. Mr. Grittman
said that was common with a variance request, however in this instance, the neighbors are notified of the public
hearing. Commissioner M. McManus expressed her concerns regarding the recommendation of the design for a
detached garage and reducing the door size of the existing attached garage, or have the applicant change the
proposal to build an attached garage, allowing for both garage doors and giving the home a longer appearance.
She would rather see the first option of reducing the existing garage door and building a detached garage as
proposed.
Commissioner Dolan agrees with Commissioner M. McManus' comments.
Commissioner B. McManus said this request could be tabled to allow the applicant to consider some
redesigning.
Acting Chair Friel said he shares the concerns of Commissioner B. McManus and asked Mr. Patton if he would
consider doing so. Mr. Patton said he was not opposed to changing the door structure on the existing garage.
5
Planning Commission Meeting
August 27, 2002
Mr. Danielson said that if Mr. Patton decides to do so, he would only have to apply for a permit and would not
have to come before the Council.
COMMISSIONER DOLAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS, TO
APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DETACHED GARAGE WITH THE
CONDITION THAT THE EXISTING GARAGE IS REMODELED TO REMOVE THE EXISTING
GARAGE DOOR OPENING AND REPLACED BY A DOOR OPENING NO WIDER THAN 6 -FT.
BASED UPON THE FINDINGS THAT A DETACHED GARAGE IN THIS LOCATION IS
COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
4 AYES
0 NAYS
MOTION CARRIED
Acting Chair Friel said this would come before the City Council on September 3rd to request approval of the
conditional use permit.
OTHER BUSINESS
PLANNING CASE #02 -33
ST. THOMAS ACADEMY
949 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD
PUD CONCEPT PLAN FOR A HOCKEY ARENA
Mr. Grittman reviewed the site plan showing the location of the proposed St. Thomas Hockey Rink site located
on a parcel adjacent to Mendota Heights Road, and south of the existing St. Thomas Academy campus. The
proposal is to use the east portion (approx. 9.45 acres) of that property to construct a hockey ice rink for use by
the school as well as the University of St. Thomas and some local associations.
Mr. Grittman said the applicant has applied for this permission under a PUD with the intent of tying the two
sites together as one. The concept is to permit the arena to be considered an accessory building on the school
facility.
Mr. Grittman said that in looking at this proposal from a land use standpoint, it has conflicting land use and
zoning designations. It is currently zoned R -1, Single Family Residential, but is guided in the land use plan as a
limited business PUD, which is usually associated with a B -1 zoning district in the city. The Planner feels that
there is a point of intersection between those two designations in that a school arena -type facility appears to be
one of those intersection points. In an R -1 district, these types of uses are allowed by conditional use permits, or
by a permitted use for a school facility. The Planner does not feel it is necessary to rezone the property or
amend the land use plan to accommodate this particular use.
6
Planning Commission Meeting
August 27, 2002
Mr. Grittman said this proposal is presented for discussion of the land use and site plan, and essentially the
features of the parking lot and building. Some additional landscaping would also need to be done. The proposal
is to develop approximately 270 parking spaces on the site. The facility is designed to have 1,000 seats to
accommodate the needs of the University. Mr. Grittman said it is rare that the 270 parking spaces would be
occupied except for the games and the practice times that would use only about 50 spaces at that time. It is also
proposed that overflow parking could be accommodated from the existing athletic field on the north side of
Mendota Heights Road.
Mr. Grittman said more detailed site planning and landscaping planning would have to be done.
Acting Chair Friel said asked Mr. Grittman to address the concern with the Pilot Knob parcel it is not being
used in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Grittman said that on the Pilot Knob proposal, the land
use was clearly at odds with the direction of the land use plan which was planned for commercial but was zoned
residential. Mr. Grittman said that under one scenario, looking at commercial use that would be consistent with
the zoning but was clearly at odds with the land use plan, and the second scenario looked at a residential project
that was consistent with the residential use plan but at odds with the zoning. Mr. Grittman said that in this case,
an athletic arena, especially one associated with a school, appears to be consistent with either residential or
commercial classification.
Acting Chair Friel asked Mr. Grittman about the concern between the University of St. Thomas and the City
Council regarding the economics of building this arena without a paid use by others than St. Thomas in order to
cover operational expenses. Acting Chair Friel said that to the extent this facility would be used on a fee basis
by others, it is not an accessory building, but a commercial facility. Mr. Grittman said he would agree with that
aspect, but is not sure that the City can regulate the schools athletic facilities that way under any scenario. Mr.
Grittman said he assumes that the facilities would be used by other organizations that are not school related.
Acting Chair Friel said he believes that there is are different standards with facilities such as swimming pools
and their relation to the economics to cover operational expenses, and that hockey facilities throughout the
metro area may have a different standing.
Commissioner M. McManus asked if the shared parking would be an approved alternative. Mr. Grittman said
that could be a condition of approval if the Commission so desires. Mr. Grittman said that compared to other
arenas around the area, the size of this facility is larger in seating capacity for the University use than other high
school facilities. Mr. Grittman said that whether or not there is a peak use of the facility during most game
situations is questionable. Commissioner M. McManus said she would favor overflow parking versus paving
more land.
Commissioner Dolan said the last thing the City needs is to pave a huge parking field that would not be used
very much and would be an eyesore. He favors overflow parking as well.
Commissioner Dolan said there were plans of possible expansion and asked how that would occur. Mr.
Grittman said that would occur on the same parcel. Mr. Grittman said the western 12+ acres would be used for
some other type of development, which has not been identified as of this time.
7
Planning Commission Meeting
August 27, 2002
Commissioner Dolan asked about the traffic flow. Mr. Grittman reviewed the site map and showed how the
traffic would be directed.
Commissioner B. McManus asked how close the overflow parking and residential homes would be to the
proposed facility. Mr. Grittman showed the location of the parking and homes on the map. Mr. Grittman said
the zoning in the area of the school site and the visitation site are R -1, and the land located south of Mendota is
R -1 with some industrial zoning to the west.
Frank Lange, University of St. Thomas /St. Thomas Academy Board Member in charge of this project, answered
questions from the Commission.
Commissioner M. McManus asked where any additional facilities would be located. Mr. Lange said if there
were any additional ice sheet, it would go attached to the existing building to the west, however there are no
current plans at this time to do so. Mr. Grittman said there would be no need for additional parking.
Acting Chair Friel asked how many games would be played. Mr. Lange said the Academy plays 27 to 30
games, half of which are away games. The University is about the same. Mr. Lange said there is a youth
hockey program that will be using the facility during the evenings, and there is no room in the schedule for any
additional usage by other high schools.
ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATE - PA TRICK HOLLISTER
• Mr. Grittman and Mr. Hollister reviewed the information presented regarding "First Ring Futures" Forum
presented by Myron Orfield. This forum will be held at 7:00 pm on September 9, 2002 at the Richfield City
Hall Council Chambers. Mr. Hollister asked for anyone wishing to attend.
VERBAL REVIEW - JIM DANIELSON
• Planning case #02 -25: Sheila and Jim Rothman - request for a condition use permit to construct a dock on
Pagel Pond. The City Council directed the Rothman's to remove the dock, as well as having other docks in
similar situations in the city to be removed.
• Planning case #02 -26: Royal Redeemer Lutheran Church - request for variance for fence height was
approved as recommended.
• Planning case #02 -28: David Napier/ Thomas Irvine Dodge Nature Center - request to move a barn building
from the Ridder property to the nature center was approved subject to the two lots being combined.
• Planning case #02- 29:Denny and Chris Matykiewicz - variance request to expand garage was approved as
recommended from the Commission. Because of an objection from the neighbor however, the Council
8
Planning Commission Meeting
August 27, 2002
asked the applicant to move the expansion to allow for 8 -ft. from the lot line and moving the addition to the
back another foot.
COMMISSIONER DOLAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS, TO
ADJOURN.
4 AYES
0 NAYS
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:00 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Becki Shaffer, Recording Secretary
9