1994-02-22 Planning Comm Minutes1
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 22, 1994
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was
held on Tuesday, February 22, 1994, in the City Hall Council
Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at
7:30 o'clock P.M. The following Commission members were present:
Koll, Dreelan, Duggan, Hunter, Tilsen, Friel and Dwyer. Also
present were Public Works Director Jim Danielson, Planning
Consultant John Uban, and Administrative Assistant Kevin
Batchelder.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Duggan moved to approve the January 25, 1994
minutes.
Commissioner Koll seconded the motion.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSTAIN: 2, Friel and Dwyer
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Chair Dwyer opened the floor for nominations
election of officers.
Commissioner
Commissioner
Chair.
Commissioner
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
for the annual
Friel moved to recommend the re-election of
Dwyer as Chair and Commissioner Duggan as Vice-
Koll seconded the motion.
HEARING:
CASE NO 94-03
TUMINELLY SUBDIVISION
Chair Dwyer introduced the application for subdivision by
Carmen Tuminelly and described the location of the property as
the northeast quadrant of Highway 110 and I-35E. Dwyer stated
this property begins at the end of the highway frontage road
that serves the Crown Point neighborhood.
2
Mr. Tuminelly stated that he was a 38 year resident of Mendota
Heights and that over the last 25 years he had produced many
quality developments in Mendota Heights including Ivy Falls
East and Somerset Park. Mr. Tuminelly stated he had acquired
the subject property for the purpose of developing it as
single family housing. He stated he is proposing a five lot
subdivision on 3.5 acres of land. He stated he is willing to
work with the City to upgrade the frontage road along his
property.
Mr. Tuminelly stated he intends to live on Lot 1 of the
proposed subdivision. He stated the road was placed in order
to avoid trees so that they may be saved. Mr. Tuminelly
stated he plans to add additional landscaping around the
perimeters of the property.
Mr. Bill Brown, surveyor, stated the proposed landscaping
consisted of 24 new spruce trees between 5' and 10° tall. He
stated this would visually screen I-35E and would help to
dampen sound. He stated a row of trees would be added along
the north side of Lot 1.
Mr. Tuminelly stated he intended to pay the deferred
assessments on the property and that there would be no
assessments against the properties. He stated that he will
pay for the cul-de-sac and that all necessary sewer and water
utilities exist to serve the site.
Bill Brown explained the locations of the utility connections
with the water main being along the frontage road, the sewer
along the north property line from Crown Point, the gas
utility along the frontage road and the electric available
from the east property line.
Chair Dwyer stated the Planner's Report raised a number of
questions and listed them as:
Improvement of the frontage road.
The width and maintenance of the private road/drive.
The screening of Lot 1.
The orientation of the home on Lot 1.
Landscaping and noise attenuation of the homes.
Chair Dwyer described the site plan as a 3.5 acre parcel that
has one existing home with four new homes proposed. Dwyer
stated the existing homes drives the configuration of the
design with flag lots being the result. He stated the flag
lots have a tail that abuts the public cul-de-sac and then the
lot widens where the building envelope is proposed. Dwyer
stated a variance is required for such flag lots because they
do not have the required lot width on a public street. Dwyer
stated a hardship must be demonstrated for a variance.
3
Commissioner Tilsen stated his opinion is that the City is
trying to go too far with the use of flag lots and that this
is not good for long term planning. Tilsen stated he
attempted to redesign this proposal, but that there were no
real evident solutions. He inquired what other options
besides flag lots had been considered by the developer. He
stated a hardship needs to be established.
Commissioner Tilsen stated he doesn't want the front yard of
one home looking into the backyard of another home. He stated
the rear yards should not face the freeways, but that the
garage side of the house should. Commissioner Tilsen stated
that flag lots should be a last resort. He stated that there
is a clear choice that a public road could be extended to
avoid the use of private drives and flag lots.
Commissioner Tilsen inquired about the Westover parcel which
appears to be land locked by this parcel of land. Tilsen
inquired if the City had any obligations to provide access to
this parcel.
Commissioner Duggan also stated he is concerned with the use
of flag lots. Duggan inquired how the individual homes would
be accessed from the shared driveway. Mr. Brown demonstrated
how the drives for Lots 2, 3 and 4 would work. Mr. Brown
stated that Lot 1 would access directly off the cul -de -sac.
Commissioner Duggan added that it would depend on where the
individual home buyer desires to place the home.
Mr. Tuminelly stated that he has been building for 35 years
and has never built a garage that was not aligned properly.
Commissioner Duggan stated that he is concerned the buffer for
Lots 1 and 2 may not be effective from the highway. Mr.
Tuminelly described the windows as glazed Hurd windows that
are energy efficient and sound proofed. He stated there would
be poured concrete walls in the basement.
Commissioner Duggan stated that past practice is to keep cul-
de -sacs under 500 feet for emergency service purposes,
however, the proposed cul -de -sac might provide adequate
turnaround. He inquired about the number of trees proposed to
be removed. Mr. Tuminelly stated that 5 trees would be
removed and that 40 trees would be added.
Mr. Brown stated that Hastings Nursery would be moving ten to
fifteen foot spruce trees onto the property. Mr. Brown
described the existing tree cover and the shrub screen
separating Crown Point. Mr. Tuminelly stated that trees would
be relocated on the site, if possible.
4
Commissioner Duggan inquired about the proposal for Lot 5
taking the driveway for existing home. Mr. Brown stated the
existing drive will be removed and that a new drive will be
remounted. Mr. Brown described the shared driveway for Lots
2, 3 and 4. He stated these three flag necks would total to
45 feet in width and that a shared driveway would reduce the
number of drives in this area. Mr. Brown stated that a 16
foot wide paved surface is proposed with 2 foot wide gravel
shoulders for a total of 20 feet in width to meet fire truck
requirements. Mr. Brown stated that Lot 1 width will meet all
the setback requirements where the house pad is proposed.
Chair Dwyer inquired of Commissioner Duggan about his
objections to flag lots. Commissioner Duggan stated his
concerns are aesthetics and traffic confusion on shared
driveways. Duggan stated he would like to know how each
individual lot would access the shared driveway. Mr.
Tuminelly responded he doesn't yet know where individual
owners want their homes placed. Mr. Tuminelly stated that
each home must receive a driveway permit under the City's
Zoning Ordinance and that all driveways will be reviewed by
the City.
Commissioner Hunter stated he had no problem with the use of
flag lots. He stated he felt this subdivision would work with
four lots and inquired what is the hardship in adding the
fifth lot. Mr. Tuminelly stated that his hardship consisted
of the limited access to this property, the location of the
existing home and the development costs. Commissioner Hunter
stated a financial hardship was not to be considered.
Mr. Tuminelly stated he bought a piece of land that he desires
to develop with his 100 percent best effort. He stated he
can't put in trees, build the cul-de-sac, and pay the street
assessments without calling it a hardship. He stated that
with his proposal the existing deferred assessments will be
paid and that no new assessments will be put on the parcels.
Mr. Tuminelly stated he will build his own home here and that
he happens to like the proximity to the freeway and does not
mind the noise.
Commissioner Hunter stated he had driven the frontage road,
that it is in poor condition and doesn't seem adequate. Mr.
Tuminelly stated he would participate in upgrade of the road
if the City assesses other properties fairly. He stated he
would also like to see guardrails added too. He stated he was
willing to participate in the costs of road improvements but
that he was not willing to bear the brunt of the costs, only
pay his fair share. He stated he intends to pay the deferred
assessments.
5
Commissioner Dreelan inquired about the two existing storage
sheds. Tuminelly stated one would remain. Commissioner
Dreelan inquired about the covenants and restrictions against
further subdivision. Mr. Tuminelly stated that all lots would
have prohibitions against further subdivision and that buyers
would have to sign this agreement. Commissioner Dreelan
stated she was concerned about freeway noise and the width of
the private drive. She stated she would like Fire Marshal
review of the private drive.
Commissioner Friel stated he was sympathetic with respect to
the difficult access and the length of the cul-de-sac, and
that for this issue there may be no other choice but a
variance. Commissioner Friel stated that there appeared to be
no justification for private streets in this area and that a
16 foot wide driveway was too narrow. Mr. Friel stated a
public right of way requirement is 60 feet in width and that
this proposal is far short of that.
Commissioner Friel stated that a 20 foot wide private drive is
as small as they have allowed. He stated that public health,
safety and welfare is a concern with private streets and that
mutual easements for shared driveways have been a problem.
Friel stated that with 60 foot public streets the developer
would be able to avoid flag lots.
Commissioner Friel stated the Planning Commission was
obligated to make recommendations based on the Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinance and that the current proposal is not up
to those requirements and is a public health, safety and
welfare concern.
Mr. Brown stated that this proposal is very similar to the
McMahon subdivision the City recently approved with a 1,200
foot driveway to a home with a private easement over another
lot. He stated the paved portion of this drive is wider.
Commissioner Friel stated that in this case there are three
lots, not one.
Mr. Brown stated that each proposed lot has frontage on Carmen
Court, a public street with private drives serving Lots 2,3
and 4 through a 45 foot wide area created by the three necks
of the flag lots. Mr. Friel stated this does not meet the
required public frontage. Mr. Brown responded that is why the
applicant is seeking a variance. Mr. Brown stated that the
existing home sits in the middle of the property and that
extending the public cul-de-sac would not serve the site well
and would drive the homes closer to the freeway. Mr. Brown
stated the proposal allows access to both east and west sides
of the property.
6
Commissioner Friel responded that this affects the number of
lots but not the ability to comply with the ordinance. Mr.
Tuminelly stated that the proposal allows the homes to stay
away from the freeway, that he is providing a buffer and that
he will live in one of the homes closest to the freeway as he
is not bothered by the noise.
Commissioner Koll stated she felt the developers intentions
were good, as were the plans submitted. She inquired of staff
about the proposed lot sizes and how they compare to Crown
Point. Public Works Director James Danielson stated that
15,000 square feet is the minimum lot size in Mendota Heights.
Danielson stated that most Crown Point homes appeared to have
lots of 20,000 sq. ft. and that the lots on proposed Carmen
Court range in size from 22,000 sq. ft. to 38,000 sq. ft.
Commissioner Koll inquired of staff if there was a minimum for
public frontage when a flag lot is being proposed. Planning
Consultant John Uban stated the City does not specify minimums
for flag lots but has approved a wide variety over the years.
Planner Uban stated that these lots are on the small side of
any range as they are 15' individually and 45° combined. He
stated in the case of a single flag lot you would need to meet
the Fire Code requirement of 20 feet plus some shoulder. Uban
stated it was dependent on the number of driveways and that
important considerations are the width of the lot where the
home is proposed to be placed and the circulation.
Commissioner Koll stated her main concern was the street
access. Mr. Brown stated the paved portion of the shared
driveway was 16 feet with 2 foot wide gravel shoulders. Mr.
Brown stated Lots 2, 3 and 4 will converge at Carmen Court
inside a 45 foot corridor. He stated one drive will branch to
Lot 4 and another serves Lots 2 and 3. He stated that private
easements will give legal rights for access and that
maintenance will be provided through an Association Agreement.
Mr. Brown stated that the existing frontage road has no
turnaround and that the proposed cul-de-sac would provide this
for emergency vehicles and other public vehicles such as snow
plows. He stated this enhances the situation.
Mr. Brown demonstrated the individual building envelopes and
the setbacks at the request of Commissioner Koll. Mr. Brown
stated each building envelope met the required setbacks and
that there would be options for home placements within these
envelopes.
Chair Dwyer opened the public hearing for comments.
Mr. Richard Leitner, of 897 Highway 110, stated he shared some
of the Planning Commission's concerns and inquired about the
storm water drainage. Mr. Brown stated the existing
topography did not require much in the way of grading to
accomplish adequate drainage. He stated that the existing
home is on the high point of the property and that the
property drains towards the frontage road. He stated the new
homes would be graded to do the same. He stated that no new
storm sewer improvements are anticipated and that the new hard
surface will drain towards Carmen Court. Mr. Brown stated the
eastern portion of the site will remain undeveloped and that
its drainage would remain the same.
Mr. Leitner inquired about the hydrant placement. Mr. Brown
stated that it would be at the two corners. Mr. Leitner
stated that he felt Lot 2 was not accessible to a hydrant
seeing as the hydrant was on the far side of the home. Mr.
Leitner stated his main concern was the frontage road traffic
and the condition of the road. He stated that MnDOT has not
maintained it for at least 15 years and that the City does not
plow it. He stated the road is unsafe, crumbly and ready to
fall apart and that it would not be a good idea to add traffic
to it. He felt the entrance to Highway 110 needs an upgrade
before any new lots can be considered.
Ms. Shawne O'Gara, of 919 Crown Point, stated that the noise
from the freeway is intense and that berming and screening do
not solve the problem. She stated she is also concerned about
the deer population.
Chair Dwyer inquired about her windows. Ms. O'Gara stated
that they are double pane windows and that there are fully
grown trees on the berm between her house and the freeway and
it is still quite loud with noise coming from Highway 110 too.
Commissioner Friel moved to close the public hearing.
Commissioner Dreelan seconded the motion.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Commissioner Friel moved to recommend that City Council deny
the subdivision and variance application on the basis that it
fails to meet the lot width requirement of the Zoning
Ordinance and the access to public street requirements of the
Subdivision Ordinance, that no hardship has been established
or demonstrated and that the proposal is not consistent with
the public health, safety and welfare.
Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 2 (Hunter and Roll)
8
Chair Dwyer called for a five minute recess at 8:40 o'clock
p.m.
HEARING:
CASE NO. 94-04
ST. THOMAS ACADEMY
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE
Chair Dwyer reconvened the meeting at 8:45 o'clock p.m. and
introduced Planning Case No. 94-04, St. Thomas Academy's
request for a Conditional Use Permit for Athletic Stadium and
a Height Variance for Light Standards. Chair Dwyer described
the location of the football field at St. Thomas Academy and
stated that in addition to the agenda packet the applicants
had a handout this evening that includes additional detailed
plans for the Commission to review.
Mr. John Greying, Headmaster at St. Thomas Academy, stated
that St. Thomas Academy welcomed the opportunity to present
their plans for an athletic stadium. Mr. Greying stated that
the Academy has been involved in a long range planning process
for two years with their parents, alums and students and that
there is a need for a football, soccer and track facility that
provided the impetus for the proposed athletic stadium. He
stated they have been planning this particular complex since
October.
Mr. Greying introduced Gary Turpening, architect, Bill Maken,
Board member, Keith Severson, who would discuss lights, Jerry
Brown, Alumni Director, who would discuss parking, Jack Zahr,
Athletic Director, who would discuss scheduling and traffic,
Kevin Berg, Rob Nord and Bob Slater, Dean of Students.
Mr. Greying stated it is their intention to fully share the
rationale and plans for the proposal. He stated this athletic
facility would help St. Thomas provide a primary academic goal
and that 8096- of their students participate in some athletic
program. Mr. Greying stated it was their intention to bring
their home football games to their own campus and that both
the State League and the St. Paul Suburban Conference dictate
night games. Mr. Greying stated they currently have a year to
year lease with the University of St. Thomas for their
football games. He stated this does not help them with soccer
and track.
Mr. Greying stated that St. Thomas Academy's facilities are
always open to the City and Mend-Eagan and that one quarter of
their students are residents. He stated the stadium would
allow them to provide a first rate educational experience.
Mr. Turpening, Architect, described the site location (within
St. Thomas' 55 acre campus) with the Convent of the Visitation
9
to the east, IOS office building to the west, Roger's Lake to
the north and vacant land along I-35E to the south. Mr.
Turpening stated there is a rise of 14 to 16 feet from Mendota
Heights Road and that the stadium would be built into the
hill. He stated it was not a structure, per se, that it will
fit into the contour of the hill. Mr. Turpening outlined the
grading of the hill. He stated the track would be built
around the field. Mr. Turpening reviewed the site plan.
Mr. Turpening stated the track will be rebuilt, that on the
north side there would be 16 rows of seats with each row being
186 feet long to seat approximately 1,500 people. In the
center would be a press box/control room. He stated the
control room consisted of 3 rooms with the football
association in one room, and the home and visitor teams in the
other rooms. He stated it was a misnomer to call it a "press
box", although the press may be invited in. He stated the
existing school building was 300 feet to the north of the
accessory structure.
Mr. Turpening reviewed a cross section that demonstrated the
elevation of the field, the bleachers and control room, the
campus and building, the lake and the neighborhood to the
north. Mr. Turpening stated that four light standards are
proposed at 70 feet in height. He demonstrated on the cross
section, that due to grades, these poles are only a few feet
higher than the existing building. He stated that the lights
will be blocked to the north by the building and the elevation
grades and that there was no light problem to the west or
south.
Mr. Turpening reviewed the details of the site plan including
existing parking, handicapped spaces that would be provided,
the proposed walkway to the stadium, and the handicap walkway
to the field. Mr. Turpening stated that the walkway to the
stadium is at a slight slope and enters the stadium at the
top, thus providing an excellent entrance for all visitors.
Mr. Turpening described the emergency access gate that enters
at field level and faces Mendota Heights Road. He stated
there is also a walkway to the school for the locker rooms.
Mr. Turpening stated that four light standards will be added
and that to properly place them the existing bleachers on the
south of the existing football field will need to be reduced.
He stated they are proposing a six foot security fence around
the facility. He reviewed a front view elevation from field
level and stated there are sixteen rows of bleachers proposed
with 4 aisles. He also reviewed elevations of the lights to
the school, and a side view elevation of the stadium.
Mr. Keith Severson discussed the proposed lighting. He stated
these lights are similar to those recently constructed at
10
Simley High School. He stated there would be an average of 50
foot candles of light on the playing field produced by the
seventy (70) foot tall light standards. He stated the
standards are 4/10 steel, galvanized with tamper resistant
access doors to the inside of the base. He stated there would
be little light spillage outside the playing field and stated
that at 270 feet from the end zone there would approximately
.7 foot candles of light. He stated that at 370 feet away
there would be approximately .2 foot candles of light which he
described as negligible. He stated that to the north at 270
feet distance there would be .5 foot candles of light. He
stated that given the distance and the grades there would be
little effect on any residential property.
Mr. Severson stated that shield louvers can be designed to
handle any reflection of light and that it is 1,400 feet to
1,700 feet to the nearest homes. He stated that in cases
where homes are adjacent to athletic fields that .5 foot
candles is the standard that is strived for He listed some
fields in the Twin Cities, including Simley, that have similar
structures. He stated the highest rung of lights is at 70
feet.
Mr. Jerry Brown, Alumni Coordinator, described the existing
parking at St. Thomas. He stated that, with the Planner's
calculations, there would be 2,300 seating capacity which
would require 767 parking stalls. Mr. Brown stated it was
unlikely that there would ever be a full house. He described
the existing parking as:
Location Number of Spaces
Existing Lot - Striped Spaces 223
Existing Bus Turnaround 56
Cul-de-sac - Striped Spaces 13
Faculty/Staff Lot 65
Lake Buildings 28
Convent of Visitation (Agreement) 150
Subtotal 535
Mr. Brown stated that they have had a "good neighbor"
relationship with IOS for the use of their parking spaces,
however, they are selling their business and the new owners
will not be known until April 1st. He stated they intend to
discuss parking with the new owners for the four or five
nights a year that there would be football games. He stated
there are 200 spaces in this lot and that it has been used in
the past primarily by Mend-Eagan and for baseball.
Mr. Brown described possible areas for parking expansion as
the old. tennis court site, the north expansion area and the
11
south expansion area. Mr. Brown stated the tennis court area
could be converted to parking, if desired by the City, and
that 100 spaces could be provided in this area. He stated
that approximately 40 cars could be parked on the grass in
what he termed the "north expansion area ". He stated the
south expansion area, behind the baseball field, is very large
and accessible from Mendota Heights Road and could be improved
to hold 60 spaces.
Mr. Brown stated that their average football attendance figure
peaked three years ago at 1,092. He stated this would require
340 spaces according to the parking ratios. Mr. Brown stated
they don't anticipate traffic problems, that the two schools
currently have 1,200 people attending daily. He stated the
gym has been full for basketball games with 1,300 people and
they have not experienced traffic or parking problems with
crowds of this size. He stated the Grandparents Day attracts
500 people in addition to the 800 students, staff and faculty,
that the students park at Visitation on these days. He stated
other similar sized crowds are attracted for Parent /Teacher
conferences, the St. Thomas Auction, and Alumni events.
Mr. Brown stated that St. Thomas does not promote or deny on-
street parking, but that often people will park on the street
and ignore open spaces in the lot. He stated for an overflow
football crowd the on- street parking would accommodate
parking. He stated that 950 was their largest attendance in
1993. He reiterated that St. Thomas is already experiencing
the levels of traffic that would be generated by a football
game.
Mr. Jack Zahr, Athletic Director, stated he would address
three issues, traffic, football scheduling and projected
attendance. Mr. Zahr stated that there are no anticipated
changes in traffic for football games and that opposing teams
will be given directions to enter from Mendota Heights Road.
He stated there is always a Police presence at these events
and that they have had crowds of 1,300 for recent basketball
events without traffic problems. He stated soccer and track
do not draw large crowds and that only four or five home
football games would be held each year.
Mr. Zahr stated that there would be four home football games,
2 playoff games if there is a good season, 2 soccer games, 2
JV football games, and Visitation Soccer games for a total of
12 to 14 regularly scheduled events. Mr. Zahr stated that the
St. Paul Suburban Conference has mandated that games begin at
7 p.m. and they should end by 9:30 p.m.
Mr. Zahr stated that projected attendance anticipates an
average of 969 spectators and that the proposed seating
stretches from the 20 yardline to the 20 yardline.
12
Commissioner Tilsen commended St. Thomas for their
presentation. Commissioner Tilsen stated that the City's
ordinance requires the Commission to interpret that the
stadium will be filled to its full size if used. He stated
the reality is that the facility are not always full and that
the size of the proposed stadium is determined on calculations
that are driven by the 20 yardline to 20 yardline layout.
Commissioner Tilsen stated he has a concern for safety with
people crossing Mendota Heights Road. He stated that this
facility, if full, is double the size of the basketball crowds
and that any planning review must consider the possibility of
2,300 spectators. Commissioner Tilsen stated that parking is
an issue and that any approval should be conditioned on proof
of parking and possibly no-parking signs.
Commissioner Tilsen stated that lighting is also a concern and
that Mendota Heights is known for its rural character and
ambience. Tilsen stated the lake is a sensitive area for
noise and lights and that the level of noise from a football
crowd and game should be acknowledged. He stated that Roger's
Lake residents have a right to expect to keep the light levels
as they currently exist. He stated the lighting may change
the character of this area. He inquired if reflective
shielding would be installed without questions if the City so
desired.
Commissioner Tilsen stated that overall this is a fine plan
and that solutions are available for a long term plan. He
asked the architect if there were similar facilities. Mr.
Turpening replied that this is a unique facility because of
the grades and the access from the top of the stadium as
opposed to the traditional access from field level. He stated
the use of the terrain is ideal.
Commissioner Duggan commended St. Thomas on their
presentation. Mr. Duggan stated that often those making the
proposal think it is great, but that those looking at it may
have problems with it. Commissioner Duggan stated that in
this case the pluses clearly outweigh the minuses and that he
is in favor of this project.
Commissioner Duggan felt the change in landscaping was a
definite benefit and that any new trees will be an
enhancement. Duggan stated that the control room is 16 feet
in height and accessory structures are allowed to be only 15
feet in the R-1 zone and that a variance would be needed for
this as well. Planner Uban stated that with the structure
being terraced into the hill there is no significant impact
with the proposed height of the control room.
13
Commissioner Duggan inquired about the impact of the lights on
the apartments to the west. Mr. Severson stated that the
distance is 1,400 feet to the apartments and 1,700 feet to
Roger's Lake neighborhood. Mr. Severson explained the spill
light as:
distance foot candles
270 feet distance .7
370 feet distance .2
back of end zone 40.0
Mr. Severson stated that a footcandle reading of .2 is roughly
equivalent to a full moon. Commissioner Tilsen stated that
there will be a noticeable glow from a distance and that this
will change the character of the sky in that area.
Commissioner Duggan stated he is comfortable that lighting is
not a major problem in this area. Mr. Severson stated that
visors or baffles can minimize light spillage and that the
glow would be greatest during low cloud weather conditions.
Handicapped parking, walkways, gates, control room and
televising the games was discussed. Commissioner Duggan
stated that the elevation of the field is 884 feet above sea
level and that the seventy foot lights would be at an
elevation 954. Duggan stated that the courtyard area of St.
Thomas is at an elevation of 920 and that the building itself
is 30 feet tall and its elevation would be at 950 and that at
the most four feet of light standards would be visible. Mr.
Turpening stated that given the grades of the neighborhood to
the north that the building and grades would shield the
lights.
Mr. Turpening described the grading and construction of the
proposed stadium.
Commissioner Hunter stated he had no further questions and he
feels the parking issue has been addressed.
Chair Dwyer inquired what was the largest attendance crowd
from which the average was computed. Mr. Greying stated that
would be slightly over 1,000 people at a game at St. Thomas
University. Chair Dwyer inquired why a stadium was considered
essential for an academic experience and what percentage of
students played football. Mr. Greying stated that maybe 35 %.
of the students played football and that 80 96 are involved in
some form of athletics.
Chair Dwyer inquired if people park on Mendota Heights Road
now. Mr. Greying stated that yes people do, even when the
parking lot is empty. Chair Dwyer stated he knew this would
continue and that this should be addressed now. He stated his
14
major concern was traffic at the Dodd Road - Mendota Heights
Road intersection. He stated that even as few as 12 new
events a year will not help the situation. Mr. Greving again
stated St. Thomas' experience with large crowds.
Chair Dwyer inquired if the 20 yardline to 20 yardline layout
was necessary and if the 30 yardline to 30 yardline had been
considered as an option. Mr. Greving stated that the Planner
had calculated seating on an 18 inch of bench space per person
formula (based on the Fire Code). Mr. Greving stated that the
20 to 20 layout allows fans from both teams to spread out and
that people like to have some elbow room.
Chair Dwyer inquired why this was labeled a "stadium" because
the underlying land use does not permit this, according to the
ordinance. Mr. Greving replied that technically there is only
an auxiliary building (control room) and bleachers being added
and the intent is to improve and enhance the athletic program.
Commissioner Duggan stated that with a calculation based on 22
inches of bench per person that a more realistic capacity of
1,218 could be expected. Mr. Turpening replied the 18 inch
standard is building code for exits, hallways and stairways,
but that it is realistic to assume it is more than 18 inches.
Commissioner Dreelan commended St. Thomas on their work and
inquired about the functioning of the emergency access gate.
Mr. Greving explained the perimeter landscaping along Mendota
Heights Road and how the access road would cross to the field.
Commissioner Dreelan inquired about traffic on Lake Drive.
Mr. Greving stated that St. Thomas will discourage use of Lake
Drive and will communicate Mendota Heights Road as the access
to the stadium. He stated there would only be four or five
major events per year.
Commissioner Friel stated that he grew up near Central High
School in St. Paul, about the same distance as he now is from
St. Thomas Academy. He stated he is concerned with traffic,
lighting and noise. He stated he felt the crowd noise issue
has not been given adequate consideration, especially how it
will travel across Rogers Lake. He stated he can see lights
from Sibley High School and hear their band practices and that
it does produce an effect.
Commissioner Friel wondered why seating for 2,600 was being
provided when their high attendance for football games is
around 1,000 people. Mr. Greving stated that they will retain
some of the existing seating which is on west and that they
are adding 1,200 to 1,500 seating with the new stadium. He
stated that visitors and fans will spread out and cover the
seating. He stated a playoff game may attract 2,000 people.
15
Commissioner Friel inquired if St. Thomas intended to lease
this field in addition to the 12 to 14 regularly scheduled
events. Mr. Greying replied that only Mend-Eagan and
Visitation use their field at this time and that the other
schools in their conference have their own facilities.
Commissioner Friel inquired if there were complaints about
noise, lights and parking at the University where they play
their games. Mr. Greying stated that the University has had
an on-going battle with the neighborhood regarding parking but
that he is unaware of complaints about lights or noise.
Commissioner Friel stated that the Zoning Ordinance only
addresses stadiums in the B-3 Business District as a
conditional use. He stated that stadiums are not an accessory
use that is allowed in the R-1 District. Commissioner Friel
stated that this proposal has all the qualities of a stadium
and inquired of staff how the Planning Commission could be
considering a proposal for a stadium in an R-1 Zoning
District, that stadiums are only allowed where addressed in
the Ordinance.
Planner Uban stated that first of all, calling this facility
a stadium is an exercise in semantics and that typically a
high school football field is not equivalent to a true
stadium. Uban stated that a stadium is a free standing
structure unassociated with a high school and operated on a
for profit basis and would be appropriately located in the B-3
Zoning district. Uban stated that almost every high school
has a football field with seating facilities. Uban stated
that schools are a conditional use in the R-1 District and
that they are assumed to come with libraries, auditoriums,
gymnasiums, swimming pools, etc. Uban stated that, as a
planner, he assumes a field facility comes along with a high
school and that this type of structure is part of the school
and therefore appropriate to be considered as a conditional
use in the R-1 District.
Commissioner Friel stated that it was still a public use with
traffic, noise and lights and that he is hard pressed to
interpret a stadium as a conditional use in the R-1. He
stated this request is moving from the use of the fields in
the daytime to use of the facility at night. He stated that
the language of the ordinance had been ignored and that he
felt it was necessary to receive an opinion from the City
Attorney.
Chair Dwyer stated that he felt this was unnecessary, that the
Planning Commission could handle the interpretation. Chair
Dwyer stated it was appropriate to proceed with the
application.
16
Commissioner Koll stated she supports the request and the her
concerns have been addressed in the previous discussion. Koll
stated that conditions could be recommended to address
lighting, parking and traffic. Koll stated she felt
comfortable with parking arrangements off campus. Koll stated
she felt the major issue was the traffic at the intersection
of Dodd Road and Mendota Heights Road,
Chair Dwyer opened the public hearing.
Mr. Bob Tousignant, owner of vacant property across the road
from the proposed facility, stated that he is within 300 feet
of the field and he would hope the City would place as a
condition the use of light shields, baffles and louvers so
that his property values are not affected. Chair Dwyer stated
that Mr. Tousignant's property was zoned R-1 but guided as LB-
PUD. Mr. Severson stated that one light standard could be
modified with baffle fixtures to alleviate light spillage in
this direction.
Mr. Tousignant stated that when the Mendota Bridge is opened
the traffic situation at Dodd Road and Mendota Heights Road
may be alleviated somewhat. He also stated he would not like
spectators parking on his property.
Mr. Richard Spicer stated that St. Thomas has proven to be a
good neighbor to both the City and Mend-Eagan Athletic
Association and that they provide fields every night for
little league baseball games. He stated that this request
should be given consideration and that the really big events
will only occur 4 or 5 nights per year. Spicer stated that
traffic and parking have never been a problem on Parent's
Night which is a big draw.
Commissioner Duggan moved to close the public hearing.
Commissioner Hunter seconded the motion.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Commissioner Tilsen moved to recommend that City Council grant
approval for a Conditional Use Permit and Height Variance for
Light Poles and Control Room, as proposed with the following
conditions:
1. That approval be conditioned on the signalization of the Dodd
Road and Mendota Heights Road intersection.
2. More parking be provided with a plan for proof of parking for
700 vehicles on campus.
) 3. Maximized use of shielding for the lights so that Roger's Lake
and all neighbors are shielded.
(
17
Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion with a clarification
of the first condition, which he felt was beyond the control
of the city and in the hands of MnDOT.
Following a discussion of the signalization of this
intersection, Commissioner Tilsen withdrew Condition No. 1
from the motion.
Commissioner Koll requested a clarification on "maximum
shielding" of the lights. Commissioner Tilsen stated that his
intent was to provide a condition under which St. Thomas
Academy would be required to shield lights, without question,
if the City so desired. The Commission agreed that all four
lights should be shielded.
Commissioner Koll stated that St. Thomas Academy's
calculations demonstrated that they already have 735 parking
spaces. Commissioner Duggan suggested that St. Thomas work
with city staff to identify parking spaces and to concoct a
proof of parking plan under which St. Thomas Academy would
agree to provide should parking become a problem.
The Planning Commission discussed parking and shielding of
lights. They determined the applicant would have to
demonstrate 700 parking spaces.
Commissioner Friel offered a friendly amendment to the motion
that the recommendation be conditioned upon an opinion from
the City Attorney to the effect that the facility proposed is
not a stadium within the meaning of Section 17.2(2) of the
City's Zoning Ordinance having in mind that Stadiums are
specifically addressed in that section. Friel stated that if
the facility proposed by the applicant is a stadium that the
applicants must return, if they wish to proceed, with an
application for rezoning and a conditional use permit pursuant
to Section 17.2(2).
Commissioner Tilsen accepted the friendly amendment.
Commissioner Tilsen restated his motion to recommend that City
Council grant approval for a Conditional Use Permit and Height
Variance for Light Poles and Control Room, as proposed with
the following conditions:
1. That the applicant demonstrate 700 parking spaces through
existing parking and proof of parking plan.
2. That all four lights be shielded and diffused with appropriate
baffles, louvers or shields.
) 3. That the City Attorney opine to the effect that the facility
proposed is not a stadium within the meaning of Section 17.22
18
of the City's Zoning Ordinance having in mind that Stadiums
are specifically addressed in that section. Friel stated that
if the facility proposed by the applicant is a stadium that
the applicants must return, if they wish to proceed, with an
application for rezoning and a conditional use permit pursuant
to Section 17.2(2).
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Dwyer called a five minute recess at 10:45 o'clock p.m.
Chair Dwyer reconvened the meeting at 10:50 o'clock p.m.
SENIOR HOUSING SITE SELECTION
Chair Dwyer stated that the Planning Commission had been
meeting for several months to discuss site selection and the
proposed senior housing complex in cooperation with Dakota
County HRA. Chair Dwyer stated that staff had provided input
with regards to the identified sites and the criteria for
location as provided by the HRA.
Chair Dwyer identified the preferred sites as determined by
the Planning Commission in January as:
Site Number Location Priority
7 Shopping Center site High
6 TH 149 R.O.W. South
of TH 110 High
5 TH 149 R.O.W. North
of TH 110 High
4 Curley Site Low
1 Garron Site Low
Commissioner Friel inquired if 100.% of the seniors will come
from within the County. Kari Gill, Deputy Director of Dakota
County HRA, responded that yes, all residents in their
facilities have come from that facility's defined market area
or are family members of residents in the area.
Commissioner Friel inquired if Mendota Heights residents were
on the waiting lists. Gill responded that she did not know
but could obtain that information. Commissioner Friel
inquired if the County constructed and owned the title to the
facility. Gill answered yes to both questions.
Commissioner Friel inquired about assurances that Dakota
County HRA would continue to operate the facility as it
exists. Ms. Gill responded that they maintain and operate the
facility through a cooperative agreement with the City and