2013-10-22 Planning Comm MinutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSON MINUTES
October 22, 2013
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday,
October 22, 2012, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M.
The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Jr., Commissioners Howard
Roston, Michael Noonan, Doug Hennes, Robin Hennesey, Mary Magnuson, and Ansis Vilcsnins.
Those absent: None. Those present were City Planner Nolan Wall, Public Worlcs Director/City
Engineer John Mazzitello, and Consultant Planner Stephen Grittman.
AppNoval of A�enda
The agenda was approved as submitted.
AppNoval of.S'eptembeN 24, 2013 Minutes
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON,
TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 24, 2013, AS PRESENTED.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Hea�in�s
PLANNING CASE #2013-20
Edward Sweeney, 777 Wentworth Avenue
Wetland Permit for Vegetation Removal and Grading at 1562 Wachtler Avenue and 755
Wentworth Avenue
Planner Wall explained that this application is an after-the-fact Wetland Permit for removal of
vegetation and grading. The applicant lives at 777 Wentworth Avenue and the worlc was
completed with permission of the properties impacted. The area of disturbance is within one
hundred feet of a wetland or a water resource area and, therefore, requires a wetland permit.
Wetland permit applications are typically processed administratively. Staff felt that because the
worlc was completed on multiple properties a public hearing was required to ensure public
comments could be received.
Staff discovered the potential violation and notified the property owner by letter. The property
owner was ordered to cease work and address the erosion control and permitting issues
immediately. The applicant addressed the issue by installing a silt fence and matting, and also
included the seeding to be installed or has been installed on the property. Written statements
were requested by the surrounding property owners. The applicant stated that the reason for
conducting the worlc that he did was to remove dead and dying elm trees and ash trees that were
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page 1
on site in order to make room existing birch trees and other vegetation. He also completed minor
grading to create a new berm and that was setbacic approximately between 25 to 40 feet from the
creelc.
The removal of the vegetation and the grading are allowable within the buffer area with a permit
and compliance with the City's land disturbance guidance document. Staff inspected the property
after the notice and it was found to be in compliance with the document.
Staff recommended approval of this after-the-fact wetlands permit. The applicant also paid
double the fee for the after-the-fact permit.
Commissioners aslced questions regarding how staff became aware of this issue, how the City
could malce residents more aware of the requirements in these lcinds of areas, the amount of the
fee that was paid, whether or not this application would have been approved if applied for before
the activities took place, and does the City do enough to deter situations where a resident would
ask for forgiveness rather than for permission.
Mr. Edward Sweeney, 777 Wentworth Avenue, explained that he was unaware that a permit had
been required because he was not constructing a building. Commissioners aslced how much
vegetation and how many trees were removed.
Chair Field requested any public comments regarding this application.
Mr. Rob McGowan, 780 Wentworth Avenue, commented that he has lived in the area quite a
few years and believed that Mr. Sweeney did a professional job; it loolced fine, and would not
affect the creelc. He had no complaints nor has he heard of any.
Mr. Timothy Minea, 772 Ridge Place, commented that his niece and nephew were the owners of
the property on Wachtler and it was they who gave Mr. Sweeney permission to remove the
vegetation. The project was advertised as selective removal of certain trees and the replacement
with mature trees. After the project had begun they became aware that quite a large swath of land
had been cleared. They had envisioned men with chain saws and hand equipment and were
surprised at the use of land clearing equipment and additionally surprised at the substantial
amount of fill was imported to the site.
Mr. Minea also asked what the results would be if the Commission denied this application and
what the next steps would be if approved. Planner Wall responded.
Commissioner Magnuson asked if new trees had been planted, which they had been.
Mr. John Steenberg, 804 Ridge Place, stated that he would like to see in a wetland permit some
definition of where the dimensions are talcen froin when the City states that they want to have
vegetation planted within twenty-five of the creelc; from the centerline of the creelc or from the
normal high water. City Engineer John Mazzitello addressed the question by stating that it would
be measured from the normal high water level.
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page 2
Mr. Sweeney apologized for any misunderstanding between him and the Minea family. He also
stated that he planted seventeen trees and the measurements he toolc were to where the banlc
dropped off, not the high water level. He also addressed other concerns raised by Mr. Minea.
When requested, Mr. Sweeney explained the grading that had been completed.
Seeing no one else coming forward, Chair Field aslced for a motion to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO
RECOMIV�ND APPROVAL OF THE AFTER-THE-FACT WETLANDS PERMIT FOR
REMOVAL OF VEGETATION AND GRADING WITHIN THE 100' BUFFER AREA OF
WATER RESOURCE-RELATED AREA, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF
FACT
1. The project meets the intent of the Wetlands Systems Chapter of the City Code.
2. The project includes erosion and sediment control measures in compliance with the
City's Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
3. Wild mix seeding will be planted in the first 25 feet of the water resource-related buffer
area.
4. Erosion control measures will remain in place until vegetation is established.
AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
a) Applicant establish and maintain a wild growth buffer area at least 25 feet wide between
the creek and berm;
b) Approved, wild-mix seeding is planted within the buffer area this fall; and
c) Silt fence remains along the edge of the creelc until the vegetation is properly established,
as determined by the City's Engineering Department
Commissioner Roston stated that he would approve this request because by all accounts it seems
to be a mistake or a misunderstanding. However, he believes there should be more severe
consequences for after-the-fact zoning requests and applications and requested that staff discuss
that with the City Attorney.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its November 5, 2013
meeting. City Planner Nolan Wall informed everyone that the Council meeting on November 5
would start at 8:00 p.m. rather than the usua17:00 p.m.
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page 3
PLANNING CASE #2013-16
Ken and Mary Paquin, 2471 Pond Circle East
Variance for Accessory Structure within the Setbacic
Consultant Planner Grittman explained that this request is for a variance to accommodate the
location of an accessory structure within a front yard setback. The applicant began construction
on this accessory structure and when it was noticed they were given a notification by the City
that they needed to stop worlc on that and obtain the property building permit and a variance
from the setback requirements.
The partially started building is actually located in the western portion of the property, twelve
feet from the right-of-way line. The setback requirement is thirty feet. The applicants are
proposing to leave the building in its current location; however, they have identified an
alternative location that would meet the required setbacks should the application be denied.
Staff did not recommend approval of this application as the deviation from the side yard setbacic
would be out of character for this neighborhood and the applicant has identified an alternative
location for the storage shed that meets required setbacics, allowing for reasonable use of the
property. If the Commission does recommend denial, it is requested that the applicants be given
time to remove the structure from its current location to a conforming site. Staff believes this
would be a reasonable request given the time of the year.
Commissioners asked questions pertaining to the purpose of the required thirty foot setback from
the right-of-way, the landscaping and screening available in the requested location, possible
fencing in the right-of-way, other possible locations for the accessory structure on the property,
and topography issues.
Mr. Paquin was in attendance and addressed the Commission on the proposed location of the
accessory structure and his reasons for putting it there, the permissions he received from his
neighbors on the proposed location, and his reasons for not building it on the conforming
locations in his yard.
Chair Field requested any public comments regarding this application.
Mr. Jiin Neuharth, 2458 Pine Circle East, stated that if Mr. Paquin moved the structure it would
be much more conspicuous to him; whereas where it is currently located it is hardly visible to
anyone.
Seeing no others coming forward wishing to spealc, Chair Field aslced for a motion to close the
public hearing.
COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNESEY,
TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page =!
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO
RECOMIV�ND APPROVAL OF THE PAQUIN ACCESSORY STRUCTL]RE SETBACK
VARIANCE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The proposed site has unique characteristics in the neighborhood with regard to lot shape,
home design, mature vegetation, and distinctive topography, and is bounded by public
streets on two sides.
2. The additional setbacic standard imposed by a side yard frontage on a public street in
combination with the unique characteristics of the site places a substantial burden on
locating an accessory structure and constitutes a"practical difficulty" for such use.
3. The setbacic encroachinent is screened by existing vegetation on the site and is a greater
distance from the side lot line than would be required if the side yard did not abut a
public street.
4. The encroachinent as designed meets the performance standards in the code for accessory
structures in all other respects.
Commissioner Roston stated that he believes Mr. Paquin proposes to do something that is the
least intrusive to the neighborhood but is inconsistent with the city code and the Commission
should not strive to create strife in neighborhoods where everyone wants something to happen.
However, he is concerned that the commission may be inconsistent with how they treat variances
going forward. The shape of the lot malces it unique and the location of the two streets on either
side malces it imprudent to locate the accessory structure in the location that would be an
alternative but compliant.
Commissioner Noonan agreed with Commissioner Rostons' comments and added that the
maturity of the vegetation in the requested location malces it the best approach. The findings of
fact bear out this issue.
Commissioners Vilcsnins, Magnuson, and Hennes expressed their agreements with
Commissioners Roston and Noonan.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its November 5, 2013
meeting.
PLANNING CASE #2013-17
Southview Design, Inc.
Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Allow Outdoor Storage in the Industrial District
Consultant Planner Grittman stated that this request is an amendment to the zoning ordinance
that would amend the Industrial District by adding a use that was removed from the district a few
years ago as an action when the City removed building contractor yards from the Industrial
District. The applicants are requesting that a version of that contractor yard allowance. The intent
would be to accommodate the occupancy of the site by industrial contractor facility and add
outdoor storage as an allowed use in this district.
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page 5
Consultant Planner Grittman shared the draft amendment to the code with the intent to open the
door as narrowly as possible and which would allow contractor yards under a series of specific
conditions, by conditional use permit, and identifies that those contractor yards would be
specifically accessory only to landscape and building design and construction as a permitted use.
Essentially, there would be two additions to the code: 1) adding landscape and building design
and construction as a permitted use in the listing of uses and 2) adding in the conditional use list
under storage and display of materials and equipment accessory to landscaping and building
construction. The staff report identified a series of possible conditions that would be added to the
code and applicants under this code would need to demonstrate compliance with each of those to
qualify for an appropriate permit.
Consultant Planner Grittman then reviewed the conditions of the proposed code.
Commissioners aslced questions regarding the reasons for the initial policy change, any requests
since the initial policy change, and other accommodations within the City.
Mr. Chris Clifton of Southview Design Inc. expressed his reasons for choosing this site, his
desire to have his business located in Mendota Heights, and addressed the questions raised by the
Commissioners.
Chair Field requested any public comments regarding this application.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to spealc, Chair Field aslced for a motion to close the
public hearing.
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON,
TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO
RECOMIV�ND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 12-1G OF THE CITY
CODE OF THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, DAKOTA COUNTY, BY
AMENDING THE PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES 1N THE I, INDUSTRIAL
ZONING DISTRICT, PROVIDING FOR OUTDOOR STORAGE AND DISPLAY AS AN
ACCESSORY USE TO LANDSCAPE AND BUILDING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
BUSINESSES, 1NCUDING THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED 1N THE DRAFT AlVMENDMENT
Commissioner Roston, in regards to Section 2C that reads "No storage and display shall be
located on any parcel that abuts residentially zoned property", stated that staff should have a
more objective definition of `abuts' and it should give a number of feet so there are no arguments
raised about what abuts means.
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page 6
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO
REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
In response to the question raised by Commissioner Roston, Mr. Tom Sullivan, Brolcer for
Southview Design, commented that there is a residential property located across the old
abandoned road that goes between the subject property to the north. He is unsure if that house
sits in the Industrial District or is carved out. Consultant Planner Grittman stated that it could be
checked out before this is finalized. However, if it is the objective of the Commission to address
the proximity idea, staff could certainly carry that forward to Council with some guidance on
what a reasonable proximity might be and still accommodate this user.
Commissioner Roston requested that the guidance suggested by Consultant Planner Grittman be
included.
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED TO AMEND THE ORIGINAL MOTION BY, IN
ADDITION TO ABUTS, THE ORDINANCE 1NCLUDE A PROXIMITY RESTRICTION
FROM RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS THAT IS MEASURABLE. COMMISSIONER
NOONAN AGREED TO THE AlVMENDMENT OF HIS ORIGINAL MOTION.
Commissioner Magnuson noted some minor edits to the draft ordinance that did not substantially
change the intent of the ordinance.
Additional discussion occurred around why the Commission is proposing a change to the
ordinance in light of the previous removal decision by the City Council.
There being no other questions or comments by the Commission, Chair Field called for the vote.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its November 5, 2013
meeting.
PLANNING CASE #2013-18
Willin Consultants for Sprint and ISD #197 at 1897 Delaware Avenue
Conditional Use Permit for Updates to the Wireless Facility
Consultant Planner Grittman explained this property is zoned Single Family and is guided for
schools and institutional uses and is occupied by Sibley High School. Part of the school facility
includes a series of wireless antennas that the school leases to various users around the building
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page 7
itself. Sprint is requesting approval to modify existing equipment on the property by conditional
use permit. The extent of the changes are to replace out equipment that they had previously
received approval for and with slightly larger but very similar types of wall mounted antennas
and roof mounted equipment and cabinets.
Staff believed this request is consistent with code requirements for these types of installations
and recommended approval of the application.
Mr. John Naypecic, 10285 Imagery Lane, Lalceville, MN, Consultant to Sprint for this upgrade to
their equipment, addressed the Commission and answered questions.
Commissioners aslced questions regarding whether or not the existing equipment had already
been removed.
Chair Field requested any public comments regarding this application.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to spealc, Chair Field aslced for a motion to close the
public hearing.
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO
RECOMIV�ND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BASED ON THE
FOLLOWING FINDING OF FACT:
1. The proposed antenna and accessory equipment modifications meet all of the zoning
ordinance requirements and are consistent with the intent of the Conditional Use Permit
criteria allowing such features.
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
a) The existing equipment (to be replaced) shall be removed within six months of
operational migration to new equipment. Antenna and equipment removal shall include
the removal of unused mounting equipment and the repair of any damaged wall or roof
elements (from equipment anchors). The city must be notified of the time at which the
old equipment is no longer operational. A bond must be provided to the city according to
ordinance requirements.
b) The new antennas and accessory equipment cabinets shall be painted to match the color
of the building.
c) The new antennas and related equipment shall comply with all FCC regulations.
d) The new antennas and related equipment shall comply with all applicable building and
electrical codes.
e) A lease agreement exists between the applicants and the School District.
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page 8
fj Any applicable federal, state, or local licenses must be submitted to the council prior to
receiving a building permit.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its November 5, 2013
meeting.
PLANNING CASE #2013-19
James and Deborah Povolny, 912 Adeline Court
Variances for Garage and Dwelling Additions within the Setbacics
Consultant Planner Grittman explained that this property is zoned and guided for Low Density
Single Family Residential Uses and is occupied by a single family home. The applicants have an
attached garage on the east side of the house and are proposing to expand that garage further to
the east, closer to the property line and a portion of that expansion would extend to within six
feet of the side yard property line and the setbacic requirement is ten feet. They are also seelcing a
variance to accommodate the construction of a front porch that would connect to the existing
structure and extend along the front of the building. There is a clause in the City code that allows
these extensions by conditional use permit if they encroach into the front yard by fifty feet or
less. The applicants' proposal would comply with those conditional use permit terms, but
because they were proceeding under a variance for the garage they also aslced for a variance that
would apply to their porch request.
Consultant Planner Grittman then reviewed the reasons provided by the applicants for the
variance requests.
Staff did not recommended approval of the variance for the proposed garage addition as the
home and garage were constructed in their current configuration without the need for a variance
in order to comply with required setbacics, other alternatives are available which would lceep the
proposed garage expansion in compliance with setbacic requirements, and three-car garages are
not the standard in the area.
Staff recommended approval of the variance for the covered front porch as it would appear that
the proposal would be allowed under the terms of the conditional use permit.
Commissioners aslced questions pertaining to the location of the current garage structure, the
seelcing of a variance for the porch rather than the conditional use permit, and garage
alternatives.
Mr. James Povolny addressed the Commission voicing his disagreement that three-car garages
are not the standard in the area and commented on the garage placement alternatives mentioned
by staff.
Chair Field requested any public comments regarding this application.
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page 9
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to spealc, Chair Field aslced for a motion to close the
public hearing.
COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS,
TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO
RECOMIV�ND APPROVAL OF THE POVOLNY COVERED PORCH SETBACK
VARIANCE FOR SETBACK ENCROACHMENT BASED ON THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The proposed covered porch is a reasonable use of the subject property.
2. The cul-de-sac lot creates a condition where the front setbacic is curved to parallel the
street and the current location of the home parallel to the west property line results in the
encroachinent when the roofline of the garage is extended to the west edge of the home in
the proposed design.
3. The proposed covered porch cannot be accommodated within the required setbacics
without altering the design given the location of the garage offset from the existing home.
4. The setback encroachinent is minimal, and is offset by areas of the same frontage in
which the setback is greater than the requirement.
5. The encroachinent as designed is not incompatible with the uses and character of the
neighborhood or locale.
6. The request would have most likely been approved if brought forward as a conditional
use permit.
Commissioner Roston noted for the record that the reason the Commission would approve this
variance request is because if it had been brought forward as a conditional use permit the
decision would have ended up in the same place and it would be a waste of time to start over
with a conditional use permit request.
Commissioner Vilcsnins agreed with Commissioner Rostons' comments.
Chair Field recommended that this reasoning should be included in the Findings of Fact for
Approval of the Povolny Covered Porch Setback Variance for Setback Encroachinent.
Consultant Planner Grittman agreed with this suggestion. Commissioner Vilcsnins accepted the
amendment to the motion.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO
RECOMIV�ND DENIAL OF THE POVOLNY GARAGE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR
SETBACK ENCROACHMENT BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The proposed garage addition setbacic encroachinent is inconsistent with the intent of the
ordinance to promote green space, preserve drainage and utility easement corridors, and
minimize crowding between residential properties.
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page 10
2. The majority of homes in the area have two-car garages, so maintaining the existing
garage configuration with only two vehicle stalls allows for the continued reasonable use
of the property.
3. The accommodation of a third vehicle stall could be provided if the garage were located
farther toward the rear of the property or if additional lot area were acquired from the
adjacent property owner in order to meet the setbacic without a variance.
4. While alternatives to the variance may be less convenient, the proposed encroachinent
into the required setbacic area constitutes an unreasonable use of the setbacic area.
Commissioner Hennes stated that he was agreeable to the variance request as it is such a
miniscule piece of property.
Commissioner Hennessey agreed and wondered if the average person would even notice it.
Commissioner Roston agreed but believes it should be a text amendment or a conditional use
permit; otherwise the commission would start getting onto a slippery slope. He would lilce to see
Mr. Povolny have his garage but believes it needs to be handled with an amendment to the
zoning code as opposed to a variance.
Additional discussion toolc place regarding the encroachinent and the `practical difficulties' or
`unique circumstances' required to approve a variance request.
There being no further discussion, Chair Field called for the vote:
AYES: 5
NAYS: 2 (HENNES, HENNESEY)
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its November 5, 2013
meeting.
VeNbal Revierv
Planner Wall gave the following verbal review:
PLANNING CASE #2013-15 Paul and Shannon Burke Critical Area Permit
• Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Planner Wall shared that October is National Community Planning Month through the American
Planning Association and highlighted an activity that he and Mr. Mazzitello have been involved
in, that being the Future Cities Competition at Friendly Hills Middle School.
COMMISSIONER HENNESSEY MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES,
TO ADJOi_JRN THE MEETING AT 8:52 P.M.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
October 22, 2013 lle�rdota Heights� Pla�r�ri�rg C'orixrixission lleeti�rg Page 11