2021-09-23 Council packetCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Thursday, September 23, 2021 –
6:00 pm
Mendota Heights City Hall
4:30 pm - A reception will be held before the meeting to honor City Administrator Mark
McNeill who will be retiring at the end of September. All are welcome to attend.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Adopt Agenda
5. Consent Agenda
a. Approval of September 9, 2021 City Council Minutes
b. Acknowledge May 19, 2021 Airport Relations Commission Meeting Minutes
c. Acknowledge June 3, 2021 Airport Relations Commission Work Session Meeting Minutes
d. Acknowledge July 13, 2021 Airport Relations Commission Work Session Meeting Minutes
e. Acknowledge July 13, 2021 Airport Relations Commission Joint Meeting Minutes with the City
of Eagan ARC
f. Approve Resolution 2021-76 Accepting a Tree Donation for Victoria Road
g. Approve Purchase of Replacement Plow Truck
h. Approve Resolution 2021-78 Order Feasibility Report-Centre Pointe Street Improvement Project
i. Approve Purchase of a Replacement Fire Truck
j. Approve Resolution 2021-80 Providing for the Sale of $2,630,000 in General Obligation Bonds,
Series 2021A
k. Approval of the August 2021 Building Activity Report
l. Approval of Claims List
m. Recognition of City Administrator Mark McNeill’s Retirement
6. Citizen Comment Period (for items not on the agenda)
*See guidelines below
7. Public Hearings - none
8. New and Unfinished Business
a. Resolution 2021-77 Calling for a Public Hearing on a Right-of-Way Vacation
b. Resolution 2021-79 Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract for the Ridge Place Sanitary
Sewer and Streambank Repair Project
c. Professional Services Contract for the Wentworth Warming House Replacement
d. Consider the Adoption of Ordinance No. 568 – the new Mississippi River Corridor Critical
Area Overlay District and approve the summary publication
9. Community Announcements
10. Council Comments
11. Adjourn
Guidelines for Citizen Comment Period: “The Citizen Comments section of the agenda
provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the
agenda. All are welcome to speak.
Comments should be directed to the Mayor. Comments will be limited to 5 minutes per person
and topic; presentations which are longer than five minutes will need to be scheduled with the
City Clerk to appear on a future City Council agenda. Comments should not be repetitious.
Citizen comments may not be used to air personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to
make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council members will not
enter into a dialogue with citizens, nor will any decisions be made at that presentation.
Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Citizen comments will not be used as
a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made, but rather for hearing the
citizen for information only. If appropriate, the Mayor may assign staff for follow up to the
issues raised.”
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Thursday, September 9, 2021
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 Duggan, Paper, Mazzitello were also
present. Councilor Miller arrived at 6:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Levine presented the agenda for adoption.
Councilor Duggan stated that he would like to have additional City Council discussion regarding the city
owned property located at Marie and Delaware Avenue, before the approval of 5m. Claims list.
Mayor Levine noted that item 5m. is part of the Consent Agenda items, therefore it could be pulled at that
time for additional discussion.
Councilor Mazzitello moved adoption of the agenda.
Councilor Paper seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Levine presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval.
Councilor Duggan moved approval of the consent calendar as presented, pulling items f, g, and m.
a. Approval of August 16, 2021 City Council Work Session Minutes
b. Approval of August 17, 2021 Council Work Session Minutes
c. Approval of August 17, 2021 City Council Minutes
d. Approve August 25, 2021 Council Special Meeting Minutes and Work Session Minutes
e. Acknowledge August 9, 2021 Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes
September 9, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 2 of 8
f. Approve Resolution 2021-72 Cancellation of License Agreement with Joe and Danalee Buhler,
760 Upper Colonial Drive
g. Acknowledge July 2021 Par 3 Financial Report
h. Approve Resolution 2021-69 Receipt of Donations for Park Celebration
i. Authorize Purchase of Turnout Gear for Fire Department
j. Accept Wetland Delineation Report and Determination for Parcels Located within the Potential
Sullivan Acres Development at 1707 Delaware Avenue
k. Approve July Fire Synopsis Report
l. Approve July Treasure’s Report
m. Approval of Claims List
Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
F) APPROVE RESOLUTION 2021-72 CANCELLATION OF LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH
JOE AND DANALEE BUHLER, 760 UPPER COLONIAL DRIVE
Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided background information on the license
agreement the city has with property owners Joe and Danalee Buhler of 760 Upper Colonial Drive. He
noted that the Buhlers had a fence and garden area encroaching into the park land area. The license
agreement allowed the fence and garden area to remain until the fence was moved or the property was
sold. He stated that the fence has now been moved onto their legal property boundary of the rear yard and
therefore the license agreement should be canceled.
Councilor Paper asked if the gardens are still in place. Mr. Benetti replied that some of the plants were
removed, and some remain.
Councilor Mazzitello moved to approve RESOLUTION 2021-72 CANCELLATION OF LICENSE
AGREEMENT WITH JOE AND DANALEE BUHLER, 760 UPPER COLONIAL DRIVE.
Councilor Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
G) ACKNOWLEDGE JULY 2021 PAR 3 FINANCIAL REPORT
Mayor Levine stated that she was impressed that the revenue of the Par 3 exceeds what had been budgeted
for and the expenses have come in under budget. She recognized the hard work of staff.
Councilor Duggan moved to acknowledge JULY 2021 PAR 3 FINANCIAL REPORT.
Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
September 9, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 3 of 8
M) APPROVE CLAIMS LIST
Councilor Duggan stated that he wonders what the City was getting in return for the payment to the School
District for maintaining the city owned property at Marie and Delaware Avenue. His understanding was
that the City was supposed to receive use of the tennis courts and fields. He stated that if the City is paying
approximately $20,000 per year for the maintenance of this property, there should be some type of return.
City Administrator Mark McNeill stated that this is a concern in terms of availability. He noted that staff
has been in contact with the School District, and they are willing to dissolve the Joint Powers Agreement.
He stated that the title of the property has been reviewed by our City Attorney and it has been determined
that the sale of the property is possible. He noted that he could bring this back to the next meeting for
formal consideration.
Councilor Duggan agreed that he would like to move that item forward and dissolve the agreement.
City Administrator Mark McNeill suggested that the payment to the School District for the maintenance
of this property be omitted from the claims list and noted that it can become part of the negotiations with
the School District.
Councilor Paper asked if it would be appropriate to discuss this item in a work session setting. He
commented that this is a big decision, and wants to ensure that proper discussion occurs.
Councilor Mazzitello suggested that the School District representatives attend the meeting.
Mayor Levine asked if this is a Council level discussion or whether that discussion should occur with City
staff.
Councilor Paper stated that he would like the Council to be involved to ensure that everyone understands
the issue.
City Administrator Mark McNeill confirmed that he can attempt to schedule a joint meeting with the City
Council and representatives from the School District.
Councilor Duggan moved to approve the CLAIMS LIST, omitting the payment of $21,327.86 to ISD 197.
Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No one from the public wished to be heard.
PUBLIC HEARING
No items scheduled.
September 9, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 4 of 8
NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A) RESOLUTION 2021-71 APPROVE VARIANCE FOR 684 3RD AVENUE
(PLANNING CASE NO. 20215-15/ZACHARY ROBINSON)
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that the Council was being asked to adopt a
resolution approving a variance to allow the expansion of an existing legal, nonconforming residence in
the R-1 Zone. The applicant and property owner is Zach Robinson.
Comments from the public included Zach Robinson, the applicant. He stated that he appreciates working
with City staff and the support of his neighbors on his request.
Councilor Duggan thanked Mr. Robinson for his work to find something that improves the property and
the neighborhood.
Councilor Mazzitello commented that this is exactly the issue that arose in development of the
Comprehensive Plan. He noted that there are hundreds of properties in the community that do not meet
the current standards and therefore an accommodation should be allowed for those properties that want to
improve without going through the variance process.
Mr. Robinson stated that he would agree as he did not have any idea that changes to his home would
require a variance because it is legal nonconforming. He stated that he would be happy to provide his
information in an anonymous form for others to use as a guide.
Mayor Levine commented that the Planning Commission did an excellent job vetting this request. She
noted that this was a very thorough and complete application.
Councilor Paper commented that this is a nice project that will freshen up the property and will fit well
within the neighborhood.
Councilor Duggan moved to approve RESOLUTION 2021-71 APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR 684
3RD AVENUE.
Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
B) ADOPTING PRELIMINARY BUDGET AND LEVY
1. RESOLUTION 2021-73 APPROVE PROPOSED 2021 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE 2022
2. RESOLUTION 2021-74 ADOPT PRELIMINARY 2022 BUDGET
3. RESOLUTION 2021-75 APPROVE FINAL 2021 TAX LEVY FOR SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT
1 COLLECTIBLE 2022
Finance Director Kristen Schabacker provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being
asked to adopt a preliminary budget and proposed levy for Fiscal Year (FY) 2022. She noted that the
Council is proposing a 2022 levy of $11,269,170 which is a 7.5% increase from fiscal year 2021.
September 9, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 5 of 8
The 2022 budget for all funds is proposed to be $18,201,647. The proposed city tax rate is set at 39.395.
For an average priced home value of $438,000, the city taxes to be paid would be $1,768, which is a 7.79%
increase from 2021.
Ms. Schabacker reviewed the new costs for the budget which would include a new FT Park and Recreation
Manager position, an additional contribution to the Firefighter pension, a cost of living adjustment for
employees, additional funding for employee health insurance, and an increase in the workers
compensation premium costs.
Ms. Schabacker reviewed the list of capital items proposed for 2022, to be purchased from the General
Fund, from proceeds from the sale of The Village vacant lots, and from the Special Parks fund, the Cable
Fund, and the Par 3 Fund. Equipment certificates will also be used to purchase a Ladder truck for the Fire
Department.
Councilor Miller arrived at the meeting.
Mayor Levine thanked staff for the clear and concise presentation.
Councilor Duggan referenced the fire radios and thermal imaging cameras. He asked if the Fire
Department could share that equipment with the Police Department.
Councilor Miller explained the ways the Fire Department would use the thermal imaging cameras during
fires. He stated the Police Department would be welcomed to use the cameras if they have a need.
City Administrator Mark McNeill noted that, in the past, a consultant recommended a heat sensing camera
that could be used for search and rescue scenarios and noted that thermal imaging cameras would not work
for that use. He noted that the fire radios will be installed in vehicles and could not be shared.
Councilor Duggan referenced the Wentworth warming house, which is mentioned in two places. Ms.
Schabacker explained that two sources of funding are being used for that project. She stated that the City
did receive grant funds towards that project as well.
Councilor Paper asked for the status of the dugouts for Mendakota Park. Public Works Director Ryan
Ruzek stated that staff is still soliciting quotes for the dugouts. He noted that new concrete platforms will
be completed this fall and bids should be completed in order for the dugouts to be installed in the spring.
Councilor Duggan commented that the Fire Department ladder truck is very expensive, but it will replace
two trucks. He provided details on the proposed increase to the Fire Relief Pension Fund, noting that the
City is lucky to have volunteer firefighters.
Councilor Mazzitello asked if the Mendakota Park dugouts would be a 2021 expenditure. Mr. Ruzek
replied that would be funded from the Special Parks Fund and therefore does not impact the levy.
Councilor Mazzitello stated that there were a number of purchases included for the Par 3 and noted that
part of the reason those purchases are possible is because of the success the course has had the last two
years.
September 9, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 6 of 8
Councilor Mazzitello stated that the depreciation of equipment allows for long-term planning. He
commented that equipment certificates are being used for the ladder truck because of the current low
interest rates. He noted that this budget represents good governance and good use of taxpayer dollars.
City Administrator Mark McNeill advised that staff will bring back equipment certificates for the Council
to approve prior to October 1st.
Mayor Levine referenced the 2022-2026 Capital Improvement Plan, which helps the City to plan for the
future needs of the city.
Mayor Levine provided additional details on the brine plow and noted that it is great to see the City
replacing equipment that is better for the environment.
Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2021-73 APPROVING PROPOSED 2021 TAX
LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 2022.
Councilor Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Councilor Miller moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2021-74 ADOPTING 2022 PRELIMINARY BUDGET.
Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2021-75 APPROVING FINAL 2021 TAX LEVY
FOR SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT NO. 1 COLLECTIBLE IN 2022.
Councilor Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
C) ACCEPT VALLEY PARK FOREST ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
Natural Resources Technician Krista Spreiter provided background information on a proposal from RES,
Inc. for the completion of the proposed Valley Park Forest Enhancement project. The project includes
restoration and enhancement of approximately 11 to 15 acres of Valley Park to improve degraded upland
vegetation communities, enhance sensitive and degraded areas, reduce sloping and gully erosion, and
connect ongoing restoration projects and efforts already in progress within Valley Park.
Councilor Paper referenced the hand burning, which will take place in the winter, and asked if that would
happen this winter. Ms. Spreiter provided additional details and confirmed that the work would occur this
winter.
Councilor Duggan asked if any of this area is within the Critical Area. Ms. Spreiter confirmed that this is
within the Critical Area corridor and the plans follow the necessary regulations.
September 9, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 7 of 8
Mayor Levine asked if there are any results from the water quality study for the creek. Ms. Spreiter
confirmed that the study is still being completed.
Mayor Levine commented that she has noticed where some work has been completed by Great River
Greening and she noted that some buckthorn has begun to grow back in that area. She asked if there is a
plan for long-term maintenance. Ms. Spreiter provided additional details on the process. She noted that
a portion of buckthorn can be removed but it is hard to keep it at bay when there continues to be buckthorn
in an adjacent area. She explained that completing a large project like this will help to prevent buckthorn
from returning. She stated that as projects become established, maintenance will be less of a need although
some maintenance will continue to be needed.
Mayor Levine commented that Xcel Energy is already doing work in this area and asked what percentage
of Valley Park is already being enhanced by Xcel. Ms. Spreiter commented that nine to ten acres are
being restored by Xcel. Mayor Levine commented that it would make sense to complete this project at
the same time as it doubles the impact. She thanked Xcel for their work at Valley Park.
Councilor Duggan moved to approve AUTHORIZATION TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO
ISSUE A “NOT-TO-EXCEED” PURCHASE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 TO RES, INC.
Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS
City Administrator Mark McNeill announced that aeration will be taking place at the Par 3. He advised
of the upcoming Bogie with the Blue Par 3 event which provides residents the opportunity to golf with
Police and Fire personnel. On September 18, there will be an event called Light Up the Night glow dance
and party.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilor Miller commented that kids have returned to school and everyone should be more aware when
out and about. He stated that he witnessed vehicles traveling at high speeds on Mendota Heights Road
past the middle school. He encouraged vehicles to be mindful of the student pedestrians in that area.
Councilor Paper thanked City Administrator Mark McNeill for completing his last budget cycle with the
City and thanked the other members of staff who worked diligently on the budget. He noted the private
donors who assisted with the Park Celebration. He noted the upcoming football game between St. Thomas
Academy and Cretin Derham Hall taking place on September 17th at TCO Stadium.
Councilor Duggan commented that there are colorful reminders about water usage on Dodd Road. He
stated that he notices drivers on their cell phones, which they should not be. He congratulated The
Copperfield, the newest restaurant in the community. He sent best wishes to all the schools that have now
reopened. He congratulated City Administrator Mark McNeill as he has one last Council meeting
September 9, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 8 of 8
remaining before retiring. He stated that he recently attended a meeting and Dakota County would like to
establish a home that could be used to provide a safe space for youth. He suggested the City be more
active in the process.
Councilor Mazzitello commented that on Saturday our country will commemorate the 20th anniversary of
the most horrible day he has lived through. He stated that in the 20 years since the terrorist attacks on the
Twin Towers in New York City, over 1,000,000 Americans have been deployed to protect this country.
He stated that on September 17th at Twin City Orthopedic Stadium there will be a game between two of
the greatest local rivals--St. Thomas Academy, and Cretin-Durham Hall High Schools. He stated that this
will be a very entertaining football game that will renew the friendly rivalry.
Mayor Levine thanked the Council for the comments.
ADJOURN
Councilor Duggan moved to adjourn.
Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Mayor Levine adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m.
____________________________________
Stephanie Levine
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION MINUTES
MAY 19, 2021
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission was held on
Wednesday, May 19, 2021 in the City Council Chambers of Mendota Heights City Hall.
1. Call to Order/Roll Call
Chair Gina Norling called the meeting to order at 6:00 pm. The following commissioners
were present: Gina Norling, David Sloan, William Dunn, Kevin Byrnes, Arvind Sharma, Jim
Neuharth, and Jeff Hamiel.
Staff present: Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson, and City Administrator Mark
McNeill.
2. Approval of Agenda
There were no additions or corrections to the agenda. Motion by Dunn, second by Sloan to
accept the agenda as printed. Motion carried 7-0.
3. Approval of Minutes
Consideration was made of the Minutes of the March 17, 2021 meeting. No corrections or
changes were offered. Motion by Sharma, second by Dunn to approve as written. Motion
carried 7-0.
4. Public Comments
There were no members of the public who wished to comment.
5. Unfinished and New Business
a. ARC Strategic Goals Discussion
Chair Norling presented proposed strategic priorities for the ARC. She wants the ARC
priorities to coincide with the City Council’s strategic goals which had been adopted
earlier in the year. Her goals for the Commission were:
• Democracy of ideas
• Amplify Human Imagination
• Aggregate Collective Wisdom
• Give everyone a chance to opt in.
She said that the unwritten mission is to ensure that Mendota Heights has its fair share
of air noise. After discussion, it was decided by consensus that the more accurate
mission would be to “Ensure that Mendota Heights receives an equal, or no more than
its fair share of air noise.”
The MASAC was discussed, and why that concept had failed in the early to mid-1990’s.
Chair Norling also reviewed the ARC’s powers and duties as outlined in the City Code.
Chair Norling asked that the ARC has a larger discussion. Byrnes said that the presence
of former City Councilor Liz Petschel meant that the ARC probably didn’t need to
provide the City Council with regular updates, but that with Ms. Petschel’s retirement,
that should be given consideration.
Chair Norling reviewed the City’s Mission and Vision statements, and the five Strategic
two year priorities. She asked that the ARC think about what a future state scenario
might be. She proposed that ARC have a special meeting in June, where each
commissioner would come back with an idea to brainstorm a future scenario for ARC.
Sloan asked for clarification as to what could be done, and how much flexibility ARC can
have. In response, McNeill reviewed the City’s five priorities, and said that the closest
thing for the ARC to pursue would be the enhancement of City services. He said that
with the loss of former Councilor Petschel, there is an even greater need to educate and
interact with the community on airport noise issues. Jacobson spoke about the need to
let residents know that they can be heard when they have a complaint, rather than it
being lost to data when they report it to MSP. She suggested that maybe ARC members
could respond when complaints are brought to city hall, rather than a NOC staff
member.
Dunn said, as an example, C-130’s were a question, and that at one time they didn’t
qualify for being listed in the top 10 noise complaint generators, they are now. Hamiel
said that, in his experience, when people have someone to listen to a complaint and
then have a connection with someone who is able to respond to questions, he found
that people are generally satisfied.
It was stated that the ARC could be a sounding board for the community. Jacobson said
that MAC now has a community engagement office.
b. Establish ARC Work Session Meeting Date
It was decided that a special meeting could be held at 6 pm on Thursday, June 3. The
July meeting would be a joint meeting with the Eagan ARC.
6. Acknowledge Receipt of Reports and Correspondence
a. Review of Airport Operation Statistics
i. Complaint Information— It was noted that, since Sally Lorberbaum is no longer
on the Commission, she will not be doing complaints. Sloan said that there
should be a discussion about who is going to do what in terms of responsibilities
for preparation of the reports.
ii. Runway Use Information-- Neuharth said that the charts looked to be fine, and
that they are back within the control lines again.
iii. Turboprop Information—Neuharth said that he had just received the turboprop
information, and will go through it prior to the next meeting.
iv. Noise Monitor Information—Dunn commented that by comparison, Minneapolis
is noisier than Mendota Heights, but that it has five to seven times the number
of flights.
b. MAC Monthly Reports—March 2021
There were no comments
7. NOC Meeting
Jacobson reported that there had been a “light” agenda at the NOC meeting which had
been held earlier in that day. The Committee had receive an update on Converging
Runway Operations at MSP. Jacobson said that Rebecca McPherson of the FAA had said
that there is no FAA legal requirement to do community engagement and it is not the
norm for this instance. However, the FAA has committed to doing more outreach and it
will be virtual.
She said that the airlines gave updates, and each reported that things were slowly
returning to normal; Delta is no longer blocking middle seats. Brad Juffer had talked
about engagement, and said that the May listening session was small in numbers of
attendees.
8. MAC Monthly Reports
There were no comments.
9. Adjourn
Chair Norling asked for a motion to adjourn. Motion by Dunn, second by Sloan.
Motion carried 7-0. The meeting adjourned at 7:01 PM.
Minutes Taken By:
Mark McNeill,
City Administrator
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES
JUNE 3, 2021
A work session meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission was held on
Thursday, June 3, 2021 in the City Council Chambers of Mendota Heights City Hall.
1. Call to Order/Roll Call
Chair Gina Norling called the meeting to order at 5:59 pm. The following commissioners were
present: Gina Norling, David Sloan, William Dunn, Kevin Byrnes, Arvind Sharma, Jim
Neuharth, and Jeff Hamiel.
2. Strategic Planning Session
Chair Norling said that the purpose of the work session was to share the Commissioner’s future
state scenario, and brainstorm how the ARC should operate according to the City Code. She
invited ideas from the Commissioners and discussion followed.
Norling said that she would like to charter an initiative to mitigate the City’s air noise exposure,
and mitigate air noise where possible. She thought that it could be done by neighborhoods.
Byrnes said that we should take advantage of people moving into or remodeling in the 65 dB DNL
area. Realtors could be educated, and that the city could be doing more on prevention. Dunn
agreed, but felt that the education should come through the City Council. He felt that the City
could educate new residents.
Hamiel said that over the years MAC had insulated 17,000 homes at a cost of $500 million. He
said that he would be worried about scaring people away who were considering a move to
Mendota Heights. He was concerned about Mendota Heights getting a bad reputation for airport
noise. He did agree that there are better window options, even for those homes outside of the
65 DNL contour.
Sloan stated that he hadn’t checked airport noise prior to moving into the Copperfield
neighborhood in 1989, but that noise was a problem. He said they had organized their own
neighborhood ARC. In later years, the city organized what is now the ARC. In his current Augusta
Shores neighborhood, the construction and insultation is better. He said that his HOA might be
able to talk more about noise as a welcoming committee topic.
Neuharth said that we need to give a history whenever we educate; the noise has improved over
the years. One area to improve communications is regarding military planes, so that people know
that the City can’t control those. Sharma agreed that military planes are a major source of noise.
He suggested having the National Guard speak at a community celebration. McNeill suggested
social media as a communications tool regarding military planes, as well as turbo props and
remodeling information.
Sharma said Westchester, NY, has an option for residents to be called back after registering a
complaint. He said that maybe the ARC could do that for Mendota Heights callers. That way,
people would feel like they have been heard.
Hamiel noted concern about the impact of projected growth in airport usage, and what impact
that growth would have on vehicular traffic patterns in neighboring communities. The forecasts
show growth to 48 million airport users in 2030, and 54 million in 2035. He was concerned about
TH 62 becoming a freeway due to increased airport usage.
Norling then asked about next steps. Discussed were ideas such as keeping track of data; creating
near term goals; enhancing city services; looking at the ARC Rules of Order; maintaining and
improving City assets (including intangibles like websites and processes); encouraging and
supporting parks; and conserving Natural Resources.
Norling said that she would map what had been discussed at this session, and would send it out
for comments.
Norling said that she wanted to make certain that Mendota Heights receives no more than its fair
share of airport noise. Sloan said that ARC is more advisory than the other two city commissions,
and that complaints are an important part with which it has to deal. Neuharth cautioned against
creating unrealistic expectations. Byrnes said that we can’t change the planes, but maybe we
can change people complaints and expectations.
3. Adjournment
Chair Norling adjourned the work session meeting at 7:25 pm.
Minutes Taken By:
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES
JULY 13, 2021
A work session meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission was held on
Tuesday, July 13, 2021, in the 1st Floor Training Room of Eagan City Hall.
1. Call to Order/Roll Call
Chair Gina Norling called the meeting to order at 5:30 pm. The following commissioners were
present: Gina Norling, David Sloan, William Dunn, Kevin Byrnes, Arvind Sharma, and Jeff
Hamiel. Absent (Excused): Jim Neuharth
Staff present: City Administrator Mark McNeill
2. Commission Priorities and Work Plan Discussion
Chair Norling reviewed the draft of the work priorities which had been discussed at the June 3,
2021 work session. She and those present reviewed the strategies, action items, and action
timing (whether 2021, 2022, or “parked”). Where possible, the participants also determined to
whom the strategy should be assigned, estimated budgetary needs, and desired outcomes. Chair
Norling noted that there were only two meetings remaining in 2021.
Chair Norling said that the items being discussed were the strategies which were determined at
the previous June work session, but that all items were on the table.
The commission discussed educational opportunities, including representing ARC at the
upcoming community “coffee and conversation” event to be held on August 14. Hamiel and Dunn
volunteered to represent ARC at that time. Whether to have a table at the Fire Department’s
October Open House could be decided at the September meeting.
It was asked that the City’s Communication Coordinator be invited to attend the September ARC
meeting to talk about the Friday News, and other communications tools.
Chair Norling said that she would update her notes, and get them to city staff for the final draft.
3. Adjournment
Chair Norling adjourned the work session meeting at 6:27 pm.
Minutes Taken By:
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION JOINT MEETING MINUTES
CITIES OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS AND EAGAN
EAGAN CITY HALL
JULY 13, 2021
A joint meeting of the Airports Relations Commissions of the Cities of Mendota Heights and
Eagan was held on Tuesday, July 13, 2021, in Eagan City Hall.
1. Call to Order/Roll Call
Chair Michael Johnson of the Eagan ARC called the meeting to order at 6:32 pm. Eagan ARC
members in attendance included: Michael Johnson, Jeff Spartz, William Raker, and Louis
Lundberg. The following Mendota Heights commissioners were present: Chair Gina
Norling, David Sloan, William Dunn, Kevin Byrnes, Arvind Sharma, and Jeff Hamiel. Absent
(Excused): Jim Neuharth.
Eagan staff present: Assistant City Administrator Dianne Miller
Mendota Heights staff present: City Administrator Mark McNeill
MAC staff present: Dana Nelson, Brad Juffers, Brian Ryks
2. Introductions
The individuals present introduced themselves.
3. Presentation—State of the Airport
MAC Executive Director Brian Ryks discussed the current state of the MSP airport and the
impacts of COVID on airport operations. He said that they had made efforts to retain
employees as much as possible, and so had lost only about 50 of the original compliment of
650 pre-COVID employees. He reported that the Airport had received $158 million in CARES
Federal assistance, and another $118 million in American Rescue Plan funds. Passenger
flights have picked up since Memorial Day, and were currently at 72% of 2019 numbers.
Parking was at 60% of pre-pandemic totals, and international flights were at 40%.
He discussed CDC issues and cleanliness. Ryks also stated that one of the biggest challenges
was obtaining enough employees—there were currently 400 openings for concession
workers alone.
5. Updates on Current Efforts
Eagan Chair Johnson reported that they were keeping an eye on Runway 17, now that flight
volumes were increasing. He said that Eagan had been approached on the Consent Decree,
along with Minneapolis and Richfield. That was being considered for an extension, rather
than a sunsetting. He also said that they were looking at their strategic goals, and that
those would be reported to their City Council.
Chair Norling of Mendota Heights said that the Mendota Heights ARC was working to align
its strategic goals with the City’s strategic planning goals. She suggested that the Chairs
and Vice-Chairs of each ARC should meet jointly at the end of this year so that an agenda for
the next joint meeting could be set. Chair Johnson agreed that that might avoid possible
duplication of efforts.
6. Other Business
There was no other business presented.
7. Adjourn
Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 7:25 PM.
Minutes Taken By:
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: September 23, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 2021-76 Tree Donation – Victoria Road
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked accept a donation from Donald Salisbury for planting two trees in the
island on Victoria Road.
BACKGROUND
There is a small island in front of 1831 & 1837 Victoria Road just south of Marie Avenue. This
island has a city trail, a donated park bench, and an ash tree which is beginning to shows signs of
infestation from the emerald ash borer.
DISCUSSION
Donald Salisbury, from 1837 Victoria Road asked if he could donate funds for the city to trim
the ash tree and install two new replacement trees. The large ash tree on the island will
hopefully provide a few years of useful life before it will be completely deceased from the ash
borer. The two newly planted trees will then have a head start on replacement for when the ash
tree will need to be removed.
BUDGET IMPACT
The $500 donation will be used toward the purchase and installation of the two new trees including
mulch and a watering saddle.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends accepting the donation of $500 from Donald Salisbury.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion pass RESOLUTION 2021-76, A RESOLUTION
FORMALLY ACCPETING A GIFT FOR A TREE DONATION. This action requires a
simple majority vote.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2021-76
FORMALLY ACCEPTING A GIFT FOR A TREE DONATION
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights desires to follow Minnesota Statute 465.03
“Gifts to Municipalities”; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Statute requires a resolution to accept gifts to municipalities;
and
WHEREAS, the City has previously acknowledged gifts with a resolution; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights has duly considered this
matter and wish to acknowledge the civic mindedness of citizens and officially recognize their
donations.
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City
of Mendota Heights formally accepts $500 from Donald Salisbury for a donation to plant two
trees in the horseshoe island on Victoria Road. The city will also trim an adjacent ash tree to
provide sunlight to the new trees.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this twenty third day of September,
2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
ATTEST
_________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
DATE: September 23, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E. Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Approve Purchase of a Replacement Plow Truck
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve the purchase of a replacement plow truck from the State contract.
DISCUSSION
As part of the 2022 budget process, $205,000 is preliminarily budgeted in the street department’s
budget to purchase a replacement Mack plow truck.
A quote from the state contract was obtained from Nuss Truck & Equipment in the amount of
$121,838 for the truck cab which would then be outfitted by Towmaster for an additional $122,227.
The total amount of the new truck is $244,065 less a $40,000 trade-in value of the existing truck
totals $204,065.
BUDGET IMPACT
$205,000 is preliminarily budgeted in the 2022 Street Budget for the purchase of the replacement
plow truck.
Staff is requesting this authorization ahead of the final budget due to the current schedule of the
truck not being in the possession of the city until December of 2022 if ordered today.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approve the purchase of the Mack Plow
Truck in the amount of $204,065, as quoted from Nuss Truck & Equipment and Towmaster.
ACTION REUQIRED:
If the City Council concurs with the recommendation, they should pass a motion authorizing staff
to purchase a Mack Plow truck from Nuss Truck & Equipment and outfit by Towmaster for a total
of $204,065.
This action requires a simple majority vote.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: September 23, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 2021-78 Order Feasibility Report for the Centre Pointe Street
Improvements
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve resolution 2021-78 ordering a feasibility report for Centre
Pointe Street Improvements.
BACKGROUND
The Centre Pointe Street Improvements have been identified in the 2022-2026 Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP). These streets currently have failing bituminous surfaces and are in
need of repair.
DISCUSSION
The Centre Pointe Street Improvement project proposes to rehabilitate Acacia Boulevard,
Carmen Lane, Centre Pointe Boulevard, Centre Pointe Curve, Centre Pointe Drive, Commerce
Drive, Dakota Drive, Lemay Avenue, Pilot Knob Road, and Waters Drive.
Treatment methods and improvements will be further identified in the feasibility process.
BUDGET IMPACT
The CIP identifies construction costs of $3,562,500 for the Centre Pointe Street Improvement
Project. The costs will be refined during the feasibility process. The project is proposed to be
funded by special assessments, municipal bonds, municipal state aid, and utility funds.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council adopt the resolution authorizing the preparation of a feasibility
report for Centre Pointe Street Improvements.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council wishes to enact the staff recommendation, it should pass a motion adopting A
RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE
CENTRE POINTE STREET IMPROVEMENTS. This action requires a simple majority
vote.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2021-78
A RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE
CENTRE POINTE STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, it is proposed to construct improvements on certain streets in the industrial
park and business also including improvements to frontage roads along Highway 62. The streets
proposed to be assessed in the feasibility report include: Acacia Boulevard, Carmen Lane, Centre
Pointe Boulevard, Centre Pointe Curve, Centre Pointe Drive, Commerce Drive, Dakota Drive,
Lemay Avenue, Pilot Knob Road, and Waters Drive in Mendota Heights including the
construction of reclaimed aggregate base, concrete curb and gutter, bituminous surfacing, trail
improvements, storm sewer repair and improvements, ADA improvements and appurtenant
work; and
WHEREAS, this project is identified in the City’s 2022-2026 Capital Improvement Plan;
and
WHEREAS, it is proposed to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost
of the improvements, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that
the proposed improvements be referred to the Public Works Director for study and that he is
instructed to report to the Council with all convenience and speed advising the Council in a
preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvements are necessary, cost-effective and
feasible and as to whether they should best be made as proposed or in connection with other
improvements, and the estimated costs for the improvements as recommended.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this twenty third day of September,
2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
ATTEST
___________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
HWY 62
LEXINGTON AVECENTRE POINTE CUR
TIMMY S T
VICTORIA CUR
THERES A S T
4TH S
T
HWY 13VICTORIA RD
WILLIAM CTACACIA DRVICTORIA RD S
I-35EPATRICIA S T
CENTRE POINTE DR
DAKOTA DR
D S
T S UMMIT LN
LEMAY LAKE DR CENTRE POINTE BLVDE
S
T
GLENHILL RDHUNTER LNMARY ADELE AVE
LA
K
E
A
U
G
U
S
T
A
D
R
MENDOTA RD RAMP
VICTORIA CT
HWY 13
HWY 62
I-35ETh is im a g e ry is copyrig h te d a nd lice nse d b y Ne a rm a p US Inc, wh ich re ta ins owne rsh ip of th e im a g e ry. It is b e ing provide d b y Da kota Cou nty u nde r th e te rm s ofth a t lice nse . Unde r th a t lice nse , Da kota Cou nty is a llowe d to provide a cce ss to th e “Offline Copy Add-On for Gove rnm e nt”, on wh ich th is im a g e se rvice s isb a se d, a t 6-inch re solu tion, six m onth s a fte r th e ca ptu re da te , provide d th e u se r a cknowle dg e s th a t th e im a g e ry will b e u se d in th e ir norm a l cou rse of b u sine ssa nd m u st not b e re sold or distrib u te d for th e pu rpose of dire ct com m e rcia l b e ne fit or g a in. By a cce ssing th is im a g e ry, th e u se r a cknowle dg e s th e se te rm s a nda ffirm s com plia nce . h ttps://g isim g .co.da kota .m n.u s/m rsid/b a se _a e ria lph otog ra ph y_2020_sprg /Ne a rm a p_Da kota Cou nty_S IGNED.pdf
Exhibit A - Centre Pointe/Dakota Drive City ofMe ndotaHe ig h tsDa te : 9/9/2021
S torm S e we r Im prove m e nts
Pa ve m e nt Re cla m a tion (Typ.)
Pa ve m e nt Re cla m a tion (Typ.)
Pa ve m e nt Re cla m a tion (Typ.)
Tra il Re h a b ilita tion (Typ.)
Pa ve m e nt Re cla m a tion (Typ.)
HWY 13
HW
Y
5
5PILOT KNOB RDS IBLEY MEMORIAL
WA
T
E
R
S
D
R
LEM
A
Y
L
A
K
E
R
D
LEMAY AVE
ACACIA BLVD
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
E
D
R
KENDON LN
LAKEVIEW AVE
LEMAY
LAKE
DR
FURLONG AVE
ACACIA DR
VICTORY AVE
HWY 13HWY 55Th is im ag ery is copyrig h ted and licensed b y Nearm ap US Inc, wh ich retains ownersh ip of th e im ag ery. It is b eing prov ided b y Dakota County under th e term s ofth at license. Under th at license, Dakota County is allowed to prov ide access to th e “Offline Copy Add-On for Gov ernm ent”, on wh ich th is im ag e serv ices isb ased, at 6-inch resolution, six m onth s after th e capture date, prov ided th e user acknowledg es th at th e im ag ery will b e used in th eir norm al course of b usinessand m ust not b e resold or distrib uted for th e purpose of direct com m ercial b enefit or g ain. By accessing th is im ag ery, th e user acknowledg es th ese term s andaffirm s com pliance. h ttps://g isim g .co.dakota.m n.us/m rsid/b ase_aerialph otog raph y_2020_sprg /Nearm ap_DakotaCounty_S IGNED.pdf
Exhibit B - Industrial Streets City ofMendotaHeig h tsDate: 9/9/2021
Pav em ent Reclam ation (Typ.)
Mill and Ov erlay
Trail Reh ab ilitation (Typ.)
Mill and Ov erlay
Park Entrance Im prov m ents
Trail Construction to Dog Park
1485 374162199
181179
171
170
169164
307
207
156
154150
1062
14697 95140
479313790
13588
129 12792
125 1249112382 115801207877110108
71
70
73
10210063
10458555351504315341403833148111282625
24 2264181716
15
7 13
53 7
189715125
38
170
14
0
108
179
199199100307
1005
8
25123
11010050150
15HWY 62I-35E R AMPCR OWN POINT DRMENDOTA R D LOOP
CR
O
W
N
C
I
R
HWY 62
HWY 62
Th is im ag ery is copyrig h ted and licensed b y Nearm ap US Inc, wh ich retains ownersh ip of th e im ag ery. It is b eing prov ided b y Dakota County under th e term s ofth at license. Under th at license, Dakota County is allowed to prov ide access to th e “Offline Copy Add-On for Gov ernm ent”, on wh ich th is im ag e serv ices isb ased, at 6-inch resolution, six m onth s after th e capture date, prov ided th e user acknowledg es th at th e im ag ery will b e used in th eir norm al course of b usinessand m ust not b e resold or distrib uted for th e purpose of direct com m ercial b enefit or g ain. By accessing th is im ag ery, th e user acknowledg es th ese term s andaffirm s com pliance. h ttps://g isim g .co.dakota.m n.us/m rsid/b ase_aerialph otog raph y_2020_sprg /Nearm ap_DakotaCounty_SIGNED.pdf
Exhibit C - Carmen Lane City ofMendotaHeig h tsDate: 9/9/2021
Pav em ent R eclam ation (Typ.)
Widen Street/Install Curb
Trail R eh ab ilitation (Typ.)
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: September 23, 2021
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director
FROM: Dave Dreelan, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Approve Purchase of Replacement Fire Truck
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to approve a Purchase Order for the replacement vehicle for Ladder 10
in the Fire Department.
DISCUSSION
For many months, a committee has been researching options for the replacement of Ladder 10,
which has served the MHFD since 1998. It is a vehicle which contains a ladder and an elevated
master stream. It has seen a lot of repairs, and is in need of replacement.
An FY2022 Budget Improvement Package is attached, which gives more detail regarding the
truck.
When the FY2022 preliminary budget was approved on September 9, the Council affirmed that it
would proceed with the replacement. Elsewhere on the September 23 agenda is a bond sale,
which would include the selling of municipal equipment bonds to finance the acquisition of this
vehicle.
The truck purchase would come from the Houston-Galveston Area Council (HGAC), a
cooperative purchasing agreement of which the City of Mendota Heights is a member.
Minnesota recognizes HGAC and similar joint purchasing cooperatives as meeting the
competitive bidding process. Purchasing from a joint purchasing agreement such as HGAC
means that the City does not have to go through a competitive purchasing arrangement on its
own, as this meets those needs.
The low bid was for a Rosenbauer-brand truck, which was submitted by General Safety Fire
Apparatus of Wyoming, Minnesota.
Extrication Tool-- The Fire Department also plans to purchase a “Jaws of Life” type of auto-
extrication tool as part of the funding for the truck purchase. This is a critically important piece
of equipment., and the Department currently uses a borrowed one. A committee will be formed
to research the options, and will make a recommendation to the Council.
BUDGET IMPACT
The base price for this truck is $914,244. However, assuming the sale of Equipment Notes is
approved, it will allow pre-payment for both chassis and aerial ladder before they reach the
Rosenbauer plant in Minnesota. As such, the City will be able to reduce the overall price by an
additional $15,860, for a total truck price of $898,384. There may be some minor additional
increases or decreases to this amount as the order is finalized.
It should also be noted that committing to this purchase now will allow the City to avoid a price
increase on October 1st, which is expected to be an addition 1.5% to 3%.
The purchase of the auto-extrication tool and the truck as recommended will therefore be below
the $950,000 estimate that was discussed with the Council during the FY 2022 budget review.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the City Council authorize the submittal of the Purchase Order to HGAC, as
attached.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize the submittal of the Purchase Order with
HGAC, for the purchase of a Rosenbauer aerial truck, at a price of $898,384, with the
understanding that the final price may vary slightly.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: September 23, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director
SUBJECT: 2021 Bond Issue
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to authorize the sale of $2,630,000 Bonds to finance the 2021 Ivy Falls East Street
Project ($1,080,000), equipment certificates for the purchase of a new fire truck ($980,000) and the
refunding of the 2013A Bond Issue ($570,000). The City will realize approximately $30,000 of savings
annually by refunding the 2013 issue.
BACKGROUND
The City has ordered the Ivy Falls East improvement project to be completed this construction season.
Tonight we will begin the process to issue bonds to finance these projects. For this project we will be
issuing general obligation bonds. I have contacted Ehlers & Associates to assist us with the issuance of
these bonds. The schedule is as follows:
Pre-Sale Review by Council September 23, 2021
Distribute Official Statement Week of October 18th, 2021
Conference with Rating Agency Week of October 18th, 2021
Award Sale of Bonds November 3, 2021
Estimated Closing Date November 23, 2021
Ehlers has prepared a Pre-Sale report that is attached for your review. We will be issuing $2,630,000
General Obligation Improvement Bonds for the street project with a term of 10 years. The assessment
interest rate will be at 2% over the true interest costs of the bonds issued.
BUDGET IMPACT
The bonds will be paid with a combination of special assessments and an amount levied each year for the
annual bond payments. The refunding of the 2013 bond issue will result in an approximate savings of
$30,000 annually over the remaining term of the bonds.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that council pass a motion to adopt Resolution 2021-80 “RESOLUTION PROVIDING
FOR THE SALE OF $2,630,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2021A.”
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2021-80
Resolution Providing for the Sale of
$2,630,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2021A
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota has heretofore determined that it
is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $2,630,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2021A (the
"Bonds"), to finance various street improvements to the Ivy East Neighborhood, the purchase of a fire truck,
and to provide for a current refunding of the 2013A GO Improvement Bonds in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ("Ehlers"), as its
independent municipal advisor for the Bonds in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60,
Subdivision 2(9);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota,
as follows:
1. Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to assist the City for the sale of
the Bonds.
2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 6:00 p.m. on November 3, 2021, for the
purpose of considering proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds.
3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby
authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the
Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by City Council Member
_______________________ and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the
following City Council Members voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Dated this 23rd day of September, 2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
___________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
-
-
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$2,630,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2021A
Issue Summary - New Money & Current Refunding 2013A GO Imp Bds
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA Rates plus 15bps
Total Issue Sources And Uses
Dated 11/23/2021 | Delivered 11/23/2021
Improvements Equipment
Current Ref
2013A GO
Imp
Issue
Summary
Sources Of Funds
Par Amount of Bonds $1,080,000.00 $980,000.00 $570,000.00 $2,630,000.00
Transfers from Prior Issue Debt Service Funds --260,000.00 260,000.00
Prepaid Assessments 136,675.00 --136,675.00
St. Paul Regional Water Funds 570,472.77 --570,472.77
Storm Water Utility Funds 131,620.00 --131,620.00
Total Sources $1,918,767.77 $980,000.00 $830,000.00 $3,728,767.77
Uses Of Funds
Total Underwriter's Discount (1.200%)12,960.00 11,760.00 6,840.00 31,560.00
Costs of Issuance 24,228.14 21,984.79 12,787.07 59,000.00
Deposit to Capitalized Interest (CIF) Fund -8,940.44 -8,940.44
Deposit to Project Construction Fund 1,876,762.70 940,000.00 -2,816,762.70
Deposit to Current Refunding Fund --810,000.00 810,000.00
Rounding Amount 4,816.93 (2,685.23)372.93 2,504.63
Total Uses $1,918,767.77 $980,000.00 $830,000.00 $3,728,767.77
Series 2021A GO Bonds CR | Issue Summary | 9/16/2021 | 2:39 PM
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$2,630,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2021A
Issue Summary - New Money & Current Refunding 2013A GO Imp Bds
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA Rates plus 15bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
11/23/2021 -----
08/01/2022 --13,958.61 13,958.61 -
02/01/2023 125,000.00 0.350%10,131.25 135,131.25 149,089.86
08/01/2023 --9,912.50 9,912.50 -
02/01/2024 360,000.00 0.350%9,912.50 369,912.50 379,825.00
08/01/2024 --9,282.50 9,282.50 -
02/01/2025 355,000.00 0.450%9,282.50 364,282.50 373,565.00
08/01/2025 --8,483.75 8,483.75 -
02/01/2026 250,000.00 0.600%8,483.75 258,483.75 266,967.50
08/01/2026 --7,733.75 7,733.75 -
02/01/2027 250,000.00 0.700%7,733.75 257,733.75 265,467.50
08/01/2027 --6,858.75 6,858.75 -
02/01/2028 255,000.00 0.850%6,858.75 261,858.75 268,717.50
08/01/2028 --5,775.00 5,775.00 -
02/01/2029 255,000.00 0.950%5,775.00 260,775.00 266,550.00
08/01/2029 --4,563.75 4,563.75 -
02/01/2030 260,000.00 1.000%4,563.75 264,563.75 269,127.50
08/01/2030 --3,263.75 3,263.75 -
02/01/2031 255,000.00 1.200%3,263.75 258,263.75 261,527.50
08/01/2031 --1,733.75 1,733.75 -
02/01/2032 130,000.00 1.250%1,733.75 131,733.75 133,467.50
08/01/2032 --921.25 921.25 -
02/01/2033 115,000.00 1.350%921.25 115,921.25 116,842.50
08/01/2033 --145.00 145.00 -
02/01/2034 20,000.00 1.450%145.00 20,145.00 20,290.00
Total $2,630,000.00 -$141,437.36 $2,771,437.36 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $15,151.78
Average Life 5.761 Years
Average Coupon 0.9334704%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.1417628%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.1464024%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 0.9296803%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.5613050%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 0.9334704%
Weighted Average Maturity 5.761 Years
Series 2021A GO Bonds CR | Issue Summary | 9/16/2021 | 2:39 PM
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$2,630,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2021A
Issue Summary - New Money & Current Refunding 2013A GO Imp Bds
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA Rates plus 15bps
Detail Costs Of Issuance
Dated 11/23/2021 | Delivered 11/23/2021
COSTS OF ISSUANCE DETAIL
Municipal Advisor $33,000.00
Bond Counsel $12,000.00
Rating Agency Fee $13,000.00
Miscellaneous $1,000.00
TOTAL $59,000.00
Series 2021A GO Bonds CR | Issue Summary | 9/16/2021 | 2:39 PM
9/7/2021 Mendota Heights Building Activity Report Mike Andrejka, Building Official
August 1, 2021 thru August 31, 2021 January 1, 2021 thru August 31, 2021 January 1, 2020 thru August 31, 2020 January 1, 2019 thru August 31, 2019
Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected
SFD 1 715,600.00$ $7,485.64 SFD 10 6,921,610.00$ $72,925.90 SFD 5 2,740,715.00$ $30,341.45 SFD 5 4,036,742.00$ 39,824.00$
Apartment 0 -$ $0.00 Apartment 0 -$ $0.00 Apartment 1 14,000,000.00$ $95,628.64 Apartment 1 9,135,000.00$ 63,519.64$
Townhouse 0 -$ $0.00 Townhouse 2 1,000,000.00$ $8,641.88 Townhouse 0 -$ $0.00 Townhouse 0 -$ -$
Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ -$
Misc 88 1,672,425.67$ 26,290.88$ Misc 589 12,821,656.87$ 161,106.86$ Misc 477 6,452,866.08$ 84,602.21$ Misc 480 6,570,830.73$ 121,400.81$
Commercial 0 -$ $0.00 Commercial 13 10,031,310.35$ $87,844.01 Commercial 10 1,352,090.00$ $12,377.44 Commercial 19 11,430,117.00$ 45,778.39$
Sub Total 89 2,388,025.67$ 33,776.52$ Sub Total 614 30,774,577.22$ 330,518.65$ Sub Total 493 24,545,671.08$ 222,949.74$ Sub Total 505 31,172,689.73$ 270,522.84$
Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected
Plumbing 23 $2,388.58 Plumbing 167 $16,781.90 Plumbing 123 $10,950.20 Plumbing 163 24,650.67$
Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 -$
Sewer 1 $75.00 Sewer 19 $1,425.00 Sewer 13 $975.00 Sewer 7 525.00$
Mechanical 28 $2,695.44 Mechanical 283 397.00$ $30,885.22 Mechanical 216 $19,395.78 Mechanical 203 28,241.50$
Sub Total 52 5,159.02$ Sub Total 469 49,092.12$ Sub Total 352 $31,320.98 Sub Total 373 53,417.17$
License No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected
Contractor 0 $0.00 Contractor 0 $0.00 Contractor 0 $0.00 Contractor 271 13,550.00$
Total 141 2,388,025.67$ 38,935.54$ Total 1083 30,774,577.22$ 379,610.77$ Total 845 24,545,671.08$ 254,270.72$ Total 1149 31,172,689.73$ 337,490.01$
NOTE: All fee amounts exclude SAC, WAC and State Surcharge. Amounts shown will reflect only permit, plan review fee and valuation totals
Request for City Council Action
DATE: September 23, 2021
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
Staff Senior Management Team
SUBJECT: Acknowledge City Administrator Mark McNeill’s Retirement
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to acknowledge the retirement of City Administrator Mark McNeill.
BACKGROUND
Mark McNeill was appointed as the City Administrator in February, 2015. He will be retiring
from his position on September 30.
Mark’s career has encompassed more than 45 years of service to city government. Prior to
working for Mendota Heights, he served for nearly nineteen years as City Administrator of
Shakopee, and held similar appointments in Savage, Minnesota, and Mason City, Iowa.
Mark has also shared his time and talents with numerous professional organizations including
Metro Cities (a municipal advocacy group of 96 cities in the Twin Cities area); the Metropolitan
Area Management Association; and the Minnesota City/County Management Association where
he served as president. He also served on the League of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors.
ACTION RECOMMENDED
As part of acknowledging Mr. McNeill’s retirement, prior the city council meeting, a retirement
reception beginning at 4:30 pm will be held in Mark’s honor. The public is invited to attend.
I, along with the Senior Management team, recommend that the City Council acknowledge the
contributions of City Administrator McNeill to the betterment of the City of Mendota Heights
and congratulate him on his retirement from public service.
ACTION REQUESTED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion formally acknowledge the contributions of City
Administrator McNeill to the betterment of the City of Mendota Heights and congratulate him on
his retirement from public service.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: September 23, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 2021-77 Calling for a Public Hearing on Right-of-Way Vacation for a
portion of Mohican Court
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve Resolution 2021-77 calling for a public hearing on a right-of-
way vacation request by petition.
BACKGROUND
The city of Mendota Heights received a petition for vacating a portion of Mohican Court right-
of-way adjacent to 736 Mohican Court, Lot 1, Block 21, Friendly Hills Rearrangement. A copy
of the petition and plat are attached which shows the areas of right-of-way that were dedicated
for public use.
DISCUSSION
State Statute governs the procedure for vacating a public way. A petition for vacating a public
way requires signatures from a majority of the abutting land owners having an interest in the
land. When considering a vacation, a city may vacate only if it is in the best interest of the
public. The Council may determine if this vacation is in the best interest of the public, the
Council is also not required to act on a vacation petition if they so desire.
If the Council desires to proceed with the vacation, a drainage and utility easement would be
necessary for maintenance of existing private utilities. If Council feels that this right-of-way
may proceed to a public hearing, notices will be sent to all properties in the Friendly Hills
Rearrangement plat and all properties within 350 feet of this vacation location.
BUDGET IMPACT
The Mendota Heights fee schedule includes a required $250 application fee to cover mailing and
recording fees and staff time.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council approve the resolution calling for a public hearing if they agree
that the vacation petition should proceed to the public hearing.
ACTION REQUIRED
Staff recommends that the City Council pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 2021-77,
“RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN EASEMENT
VACATION COMMENCED BY PETITION – MOHICAN COURT”. This action requires
a simple majority vote.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-77
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN EASEMENT VACATION
COMMENCED BY PETITION – MOHICAN COURT
WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to Minnesota Statute §412.851, desires to vacate
a portion of the platted Mohican Court adjacent to Lot 1, Block 21, Friendly Hills
Rearrangement, Dakota County, Minnesota; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mendota Heights City Council will
consider the vacation of right-of-way and a public hearing shall be held on such proposed
vacation on the 19th day of October, 2021, before the City Council in the Mendota Heights City
Hall located at 1101 Victoria Curve at 6:00 p.m.
The City Clerk is hereby directed to give published, posted, and mailed notice of such hearing as
required by law.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this twenty third day of September,
2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
BY________________________________
ATTEST Stephanie Levine, Mayor
BY_________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
?((G!.66666666666 6 6 6 6 6 6 6666!!2
732
736
740
731
750
735
750
744
729
754 728
737
162
9590
96
79
199
78
7710510710011569
36
167
177 6412121057877
96
M
O
H
I
C
A
N
C
T
736 Mohican CourtROW Vacation
Date: 8/5/2021
City of
Mendota
Heights040
SCALE IN FEET
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: September 23, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 2021-79 Accept Bids and Award Contract for the Ridge Place Sanitary
Sewer and Streambank Repair Project
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve Resolution 2021-79 accepting bids and awarding a contract for
the Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer and Streambank Repair Project.
BACKGROUND
Council approved the construction plans for the Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer and Streambank
repairs and authorized to bid the project at the August 17, 2021 meeting.
DISCUSSION
Six bids (see below) were received per the online bidding platform of QuestCDN on Tuesday,
September 14, 2021, at 2:00 p.m. for the Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer and Streambank Repairs.
NAME OF BIDDER AMOUNT OF BID
Urban Companies $367,310.00
US SiteWork $403,738.50
Meyer Contracting, Inc. $473,452.04
Minger Construction Co., Inc. $475,928.00
Geislinger & Sons $536,582.50
Sunram Construction, Inc. $722,973.00
Urban Companies submitted the lowest responsible bid of $367,310.00. Their bid was more than
the Engineer's Estimate of $346,000 but within the estimated range of $330,000-$399,000.
Urban Companies is a contractor with many years of experience with an office in St. Paul,
Minnesota. Staff recommends them for this contract.
The project plans and specifications provide flexibility in the construction schedule as a means to
reduce costs. The contractor is allowed to perform the necessary work between October 2021
and May 2022. However, once the contractor begins its operations it will be required to
complete the work within 30 business days with the exception of some final repairs and
restoration which may be completed in June of 2022.
BUDGET IMPACT
The Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer and Streambanks repairs are proposed to be financed by Sewer
Utility Funds and Storm Sewer Utility Funds. This project may be eligible for funding from the
American Rescue Plan, however, the Sanitary Utility Fund does have an adequate balance to
proceed with the project.
The Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund has identified this need for several years and has reserved
$315,000 for the sewer portion of the project. The streambank stabilization of Interstate Valley
Creek has been identified in the Storm Water Utility Fund and an estimated $150,000 has been
reserved for the streambank portion of the project.
Barr Engineering has provided an Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Cost and is estimating a
contract of $346,000 for the project within a range of $330,000-$399,000.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council accept the bid and award the construction contract to Urban
Companies for their bid in the amount of $367,310.00.
ACTION REQUIRED
If City Council wishes to implement the staff recommendation, they should pass a motion
adopting A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR
THE RIDGE PLACE SANITARY SEWER AND STREAMBANK REPAIR PROJECT.
This action requires a simple majority vote.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2021-79
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE RIDGE
PLACE SANITARY SEWER AND STREAMBANK REPAIRS
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the proposed replacement of a sewer
main and streambank stabilization and appurtenant work, bids were received, opened, and tabulated
according to law and the following bids were received complying with said advertisement:
NAME OF BIDDER AMOUNT OF BID
Urban Companies $367,310.00
US SiteWork $403,738.50
Meyer Contracting, Inc. $473,452.04
Minger Construction Co., Inc. $475,928.00
Geislinger & Sons $536,582.50
Sunram Construction, Inc. $722,973.00
and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Director recommended that the lowest responsible bid
submitted by Urban Companies of St. Paul, Minnesota, be accepted, and;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council as
follows:
1. That the bids for the Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer and Streambank Repair project are hereby
received and accepted.
2. That the bid of Urban Companies of St. Paul, Minnesota, submitted for the construction of the
above described improvements be and the same is hereby accepted.
3. That the contract be awarded to Urban Companies of St. Paul, Minnesota, and that the Mayor
and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver any and all contracts and
documents necessary to consummate the awarding of said bids.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this twenty third day of September,
2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
ATTEST
___________________________ _____________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk Stephanie Levine, Mayor
Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer & Streambank Repairs (#7968638)Owner: Mendota Heights MN, City ofSolicitor: Barr Engineering, Bloomington, MN09/14/2021 02:00 PM CDTLine Item Item CodeItem DescriptionUofM Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension1 1.05A Mobilization/DemobilizationLS1 31500 $31,500.00 $17,500.00 $17,500.00 $51,940.00 $51,940.00 $22,995.00 $22,995.00 $33,000.00 $33,000.00 $22,500.00 $22,500.00 $47,800.50 $47,800.502 1.05B F&I Silt FenceLF 18003.6 $6,480.00 $5.50 $9,900.00 $2.90 $5,220.00 $2.01 $3,618.00 $2.00 $3,600.00 $2.00 $3,600.00 $2.75 $4,950.003 1.05C F&I Sediment Control LogLF 15004 $6,000.00 $5.50 $8,250.00 $2.90 $4,350.00 $3.61 $5,415.00 $4.25 $6,375.00 $3.50 $5,250.00 $4.25 $6,375.004 1.05D F&I Construction Entrance‐RockLS1 3600 $3,600.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,105.00 $2,105.00 $750.00 $750.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $850.00 $850.005 1.05E F&I Silt Fence BaffleLS1 2000 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,600.00 $2,600.00 $773.20 $773.20 $825.00 $825.00 $750.00 $750.00 $800.00 $800.006 1.05F Clearing and GrubbingLS1 3000 $3,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $14,120.00 $14,120.00 $7,669.07 $7,669.07 $8,500.00 $8,500.00 $7,450.00 $7,450.00 $8,500.00 $8,500.007 1.05G Control of Water, DewateringLS1 20000 $20,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $16,570.00 $16,570.00 $17,796.51 $17,796.51 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $156,725.00 $156,725.008 1.05H Sanitary Sewer Bypass PumpingLS1 20000 $20,000.00 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 $18,010.00 $18,010.00 $9,040.35 $9,040.35 $47,000.00 $47,000.00 $5,600.00 $5,600.00 $130,250.00 $130,250.009 1.05I "F&I 27"" Sanitary Sewer Pipe and Appurtenances"LF 180250 $45,000.00 $417.00 $75,060.00 $405.00 $72,900.00 $585.62 $105,411.60 $340.00 $61,200.00 $300.00 $54,000.00 $769.00 $138,420.0010 1.05J Subsurface Sanitary Sewer Soil TestingLS1 1000 $1,000.00 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $3,390.00 $3,390.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $4,850.00 $4,850.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.0011 1.05K F&I MH‐25 ImprovementsLS1 3000 $3,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $3,430.00 $3,430.00 $3,448.49 $3,448.49 $5,300.00 $5,300.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $7,200.00 $7,200.0012 1.05L F&I Riprap Toe ProtectionLF 1150110 $126,500.00 $100.00 $115,000.00 $115.00 $132,250.00 $176.44 $202,906.00 $152.00 $174,800.00 $291.00 $334,650.00 $135.00 $155,250.0013 1.05M F&I Boulder Cross VaneEACH 4 3100 $12,400.00 $4,000.00 $16,000.00 $2,720.00 $10,880.00 $7,296.72 $29,186.88 $4,500.00 $18,000.00 $10,000.00 $40,000.00 $1,900.00 $7,600.0014 1.05N Import TopsoilCY 22055 $12,100.00 $35.00 $7,700.00 $55.00 $12,100.00 $67.00 $14,740.00 $60.00 $13,200.00 $37.00 $8,140.00 $37.25 $8,195.0015 1.05O F&I Dogwood Live StakesEACH 2308.5 $1,955.00 $10.00 $2,300.00 $26.00 $5,980.00 $3.35 $770.50 $3.60 $828.00 $3.25 $747.50 $16.00 $3,680.0016 1.05P Restoration AreaACRE 1.5900 $1,350.00 $10,000.00 $15,000.00 $3,470.00 $5,205.00 $19,033.85 $28,550.78 $19,500.00 $29,250.00 $9,700.00 $14,550.00 $1,900.00 $2,850.0017 1.05Q1 Riparian South & West Seed MixLB1524.5 $367.50 $100.00 $1,500.00 $49.00 $735.00 $32.99 $494.85 $35.00 $525.00 $32.00 $480.00 $35.00 $525.0018 1.05Q2 Wet Meadow South & West Seed MixLB595 $475.00 $100.00 $500.00 $161.00 $805.00 $102.44 $512.20 $110.00 $550.00 $100.00 $500.00 $115.00 $575.0019 1.05Q3 Residential Turf Grass Seed MixLB 1004.6 $460.00 $5.00 $500.00 $2.80 $280.00 $4.64 $464.00 $5.00 $500.00 $4.50 $450.00 $6.00 $600.0020 1.05R F&I SodSY 11508.9 $10,235.00 $6.00 $6,900.00 $32.00 $36,800.00 $10.31 $11,856.50 $11.00 $12,650.00 $10.00 $11,500.00 $14.00 $16,100.0021 1.05S F&I Erosion Control BlanketSY 9003 $2,700.00 $3.00 $2,700.00 $2.40 $2,160.00 $3.61 $3,249.00 $4.00 $3,600.00 $3.50 $3,150.00 $4.50 $4,050.0022 1.05T F&I Straw MulchACRE 1.1 1500 $1,650.00 $5,000.00 $5,500.00 $1,735.00 $1,908.50 $1,185.56 $1,304.12 $1,250.00 $1,375.00 $1,150.00 $1,265.00 $1,525.00 $1,677.50$311,800.00$367,310.00$403,738.50$473,452.04$475,928.00$536,582.50$722,973.001note 8/11/2021 engineers estimate included an additional $35,000 (not included in tabulation above) for soil correction . Project was estimated to be $330,000 (‐5%) to $399,000 (+15%)Engineer Estimate1Total Base Bid:Sunram Construction, Inc.Geislinger & SonsMinger Construction Co. Inc.Meyer Contracting Inc. US SiteWorkUrban Companies
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: September 23, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Authorize Professional Services Contract for the Wentworth Warming House
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to authorize a professional services contract with Barbeau Architects, Inc.
for an architectural design package relating to the Wentworth Park warming house replacement.
BACKGROUND
City Council requested a replacement of the Wentworth Park warming house to be considered
for expansion including restrooms, additional storage and other amenities.
DISCUSSION
Due to rising lumber costs and construction in general, the warming house is estimated to meet
the competitive bidding requirements per State Statute. State Statute requires any construction
greater than $175,000 be competitively bid. For this process to occur, the city will need
architectural drawings and a bid package.
Staff solicited three architectural firms for quotes. Two firms provided a quote for the service.
Barbeau Architects, Inc., submitted a quote of $15,600 to provide this service. The second quote
was from CNH Architects and was for a quote of $29,400. The biggest difference between the
quotes is the low quote from Barbeau Architects, does not include mechanical and electrical
design. The quote from CNH Architects does not include any construction phase amounts. The
project is currently planned to be bid requiring a design-build by the general contractor.
BUDGET IMPACT
The costs of this professional services contract is proposed to be paid for out of the Special Park
Fund and State Outdoor Recreation Grant.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the Council authorize a professional services contract with Barbeau Architects,
Inc. for development of architectural drawings of the Wentworth Park warming house.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize staff to execute an agreement with Barbeau
Architects, Inc. for the Wentworth Park Warming House for a fixed fee of $15,600. This action
requires a simple majority vote.
2 September 2021
Mr. Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROPOSAL FOR:
WENTWORTH PARK WARMING HOUSE BUILDING
Dear Mr. Ruzek:
In response to your request for a Professional Services proposal the following is submitted:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The project consists of a 1,200 s.f. one-story community building with an 8’ covered entry area substantially as
depicted in the concept drawings as received by Barbeau Architects, Inc., and identified as “Option 1”, as
prepared by TKDA. Project drawings must be completed for early spring 2022 bidding and construction with an
early fall 2022 completion date.
Exterior wall materials will be cementitious siding (wood look) and cultured stone with aluminum windows
and an aluminum entrance system. The roof shall be asphalt composition shingles or similar. The building
structure shall be wood framing with wood roof trusses and wood roof deck. The foundation will have concrete
footing, concrete block foundation walls. The floor will be a concrete slab-on-grade. Whether or not the building
is to be provided with sprinkler fire protection is to be determined.
Interior materials will be selected for durability and low maintenance.
ADA, Energy, and other local codes will require compliance
The Project General Contractor will be selected by competitive bidding.
Structural engineering services and construction drawings for the Project will be furnished by an
engineering consultant under contract with the Architect.
Civil engineering and Landscape Architecture services, construction drawings including grading,
drainage and utility plans if required, will be by the Owner.
Plumbing, HVAC and Electrical engineering design and construction documents and services will be
furnished on a design-build basis by the selected General Contractor. The Architect will provide
architectural CAD drawings to the Contractor in support of his efforts, as well as information describing
the general bidding criteria for plumbing, HVAC, and electrical work as determined by the Owner.
Bidding/negotiation and construction administration services will be the responsibility of the Architect as
described herein.
The Owner will provide a CAD drawing of the Site indicating the building location with respect to the
adjacent site features and a soil boring (geo-technical) report for the Architect's and Engineer’s use.
Mr. Ryan Ruzek
2 September 2021
Page two
SCOPE OF BASIC SERVICES AND COMPENSATION
1. Schematic Design: Preparation of preliminary Floor Plans, Elevations and Sections to
demonstrate the project layout and general exterior finishes based upon the concept drawings
furnished by the Owner. Review of the Site Plan previously provided by the Owner to show the
relationship of the building plan with the parking lot and other elements of the Site. Preparation
of a preliminary Building Code review.
2. Design Development: Based upon the approved Schematic drawings, preparation of
Architectural and Engineering Drawings and other documents for review and approval to
confirm the general Project scope and relationships, dimensioned and to scale. Preparation of
preliminary COMCheck energy code compliance document. Necessary coordination meetings
and consultations. Distribution of CAD files to the Project team.
3. Construction Documents: Preparation of final Architectural and Engineering drawings,
specifications and other documents for bidding, permit and construction of the Project.
Specifications will be on the drawing sheets. Necessary coordination meetings and
consultations. Distribution of CAD files to the Project team.
4. Bidding Phase: Assist the Owner in selecting up to 3 qualified General Contractors bid the
project. Electronic distribution of the Project Bidding Documents (Drawings and Specifications)
to the invited General Contractors. Responses to RFIs and preparation of addenda to the
Bidding Documents as necessary. Receipt of bids and review of same with the Owner.
5. Construction Phase Distribution of CAD files to the General Contractor for his use in
developing HVAC, Plumbing and Electrical drawings and specifications for the Project.
Review, approval and distribution of shop drawings and other submittals from the General
Contractor. Responses to Contractor RFIs. Construction review consisting of a minimum of 8
architectural/engineer visits or meetings on-site during the Construction Phase. Review and
certification of the Contractor’s Applications for payment. Substantial Completion inspection.
Execution of necessary certifications.
6. Fees for Basic Services as described above:
ARCHITECTURAL $11,800.00
STRUCTURAL ENGRG. $ 3,800.00
TOTAL $15,600.00
Fee percentage by Phase:
Schematic Design 10%
Design Development 25%
Construction Drawings 45%
Bidding/Negotiation 5%
Construction Phase 15%
Mr. Ryan Ruzek
2 September 2021
Page three
7. Additional Services/Reimbursables: Additional services determined necessary during this Project
will be billed on an hourly basis or as otherwise agreed, when authorized by the Owner.
Standard AIA reimbursables (prints, postage and delivery and mileage) will be billed at 1.1
times out-of-pocket cost.
Hourly Rates: Principal Architect $160.00
Engineers per their rates schedules
8. Exclusions: The following services are not included in Basic Services. They shall be provided when and
if authorized by the Client and shall be paid for in addition to the compensation for Basic Services.
A. Re-zoning, variance, or other special site related municipal approval services.
B. Services in connection with multiple designs for bidding purposes or re-bidding.
C. Services in connection with public streets or public utilities.
D. Revisions to final drawings or other documents when such revisions are inconsistent with
approvals or instructions previously given, or are due to other causes not solely within the
control of the Architect.
E. Construction phase services other than those indicated as a part of Basic Services.
G. Models or perspective renderings.
H. Mechanical or Electrical engineering services.
I. Land Surveys, Civil engineering or Landscape Architecture services.
9. Billing Procedures: The Architect shall invoice the Client for Basic and Additional Services
and reimbursable expenses on a monthly basis. The amount of the invoice shall be due and payable
within thirty (30) days of the date on the invoice. Compensation shall be based on the percentage of
work completed during the month within each phase.
10. Project Scope: If the scope of the Project changes the compensation to the Architect shall be
equitably adjusted.
Submitted by: Accepted by:
BARBEAU ARCHITECTS, INC. (Architect) City of Mendota Heights (Owner & Client)
Thomas A. Barbeau Authorized Representative
President
Date: 9/2/21 Date:
BARBEAU ARCHITECTS, INC.
1000 Blue Gentian Road Suite 135
Eagan, MN 55121
Request for City Council Action
DATE: September 23, 2021
TO: Mayor Levine and City Council; City Administrator McNeill
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 568 – Amending Title 12 – Zoning with the Mississippi River Corridor
Critical Area (MRCCA) Overlay District Ordinance [Planning Case No. 2021-07]
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to give consideration of a proposed ordinance amendment, which would replace
(in its entirety) the existing Chapter 3 – Critical Area Overlay District of Title 12 – Zoning, with a new
Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Overlay District chapter. This ordinance amendment applies to
those properties located within the established Miss. River Corridor area, as identified on the attached
MRCCA Map – Figure 9-2.
BACKGROUND
The Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) is a land corridor along the Mississippi River in
the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. It comprises 72 miles of river and 54,000 acres of surrounding land in
30 local jurisdictions. Land uses in the MRCCA are regulated by cities and townships through locally
adopted MRCCA plans and ordinances that comply with Minnesota Rules Chapter 6106. A Community’s
ordinances regulate structure placement, structure height, vegetation clearing, land alteration, and
subdivision of land to preserve the corridor’s unique natural, recreational, and cultural features.
The MRCCA was designated in 1976 by Executive Order following passage of the Minnesota Critical
Areas Act of 1973. The MRCCA was the first and remains the only critical area in the state. In 1988, the
National Park Service designated the Mississippi National River & Recreation Area, which shares the same
border as the MRCCA.
In 2009, the Minnesota Legislature directed the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to
establish rules to replace the 35+ year old standards and guidelines under Executive Order 79-19
(Designation of Mississippi River as a Critical Area). The DNR initiated this process by soliciting
comments on the scope of the rulemaking, and launched an extensive public involvement process, including
the formation of focused working groups comprised of professional planners, engineers, scientists,
consultants and interest groups to advise the development of new draft rules. Although the DNR completed
draft rules in 2011; this project was put on hold and the DNR’s authority to continue the rulemaking expired.
In 2013, the Minnesota Legislature restored the DNR’s rulemaking authority and made changes to the
statutory language guiding rule development to better address local government concerns. After this
rulemaking restarted, the DNR again met with local governments numerous times individually and in
groups to obtain input on the 2011 draft rules, as well as with other agencies and interest groups. The DNR
made revisions to the 2011 draft rules based on feedback received, and as a result an initial document
referred to as the “working draft rules” was completed, which led to the formation of the first MRCCA
“model ordinance” in 2016. This draft document was prepared by the DNR for all of those metropolitan
communities situated along the Mississippi River with similar critical area overlay districts, including the
City of Mendota Heights.
Local communities within the corridor are required to complete a MRCCA plan as a separate chapter of
their 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update; and complete an official zoning ordinance update (amendment) by
end of 2021. The City was notified in January 2021 that the DNR has given approval of the City’s proposed
MRCCA plan (Ch. 9 of the 2040 Plan), and staff is now happy to report the 2040 Comprehensive Plan has
been approved by the Metropolitan Council.
At the February 2, 2021 council meeting, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 562, an Interim
Ordinance Placing a Moratorium on Proposed Development, Subdivision or Certain Construction and
Building Activity Requiring a Permit for Properties Situated in the Critical Area Overlay District. During
this moratorium period, staff was able to research and present information related to this new MRCCA
ordinance to the planning commission for review, comments and suggestions.
On February 23, 2021, city staff presented to the planning commission a version of the MRCCA Model
Ordinance from DNR, dated 02/02/2021, for discussion purposes only. No public hearing or official action
was taken at that meeting.
On May 25, 2021, staff presented a draft Ordinance No. 568 to the planning commission, again with no
public hearing or official action taken at that meeting. Due to the complicated and detailed nature of this
ordinance, it was suggested to hold a separate Workshop Meeting with city staff and the planning
commission, whereby the group would review and focus its attention on the creation of this new and
important ordinance. This workshop was held on June 10th, whereby an updated draft ordinance document
was created and directed to be placed on the next June 22nd meeting.
This ordinance was created using the 02/22/2021 and 06/23/2021 MRCCA model ordinance documents
provided by the DNR to all the affected local jurisdictions. (Note: due to its size, the model ordinance is
not being provided in this packet, but can be made available to any councilmember if requested.)
SUMMARY OF NEW ORDINANCE
Under the existing Critical Area (CA) Overlay ordinance, the city uses this chapter to regulate development
and construction activities for properties in this corridor area. This corridor is situated primarily along the
north/northwesterly sections of the city, and is a single or unified overlay area established and mapped out
by the DNR. This original Critical Area boundary did not change under this new update; however, this
overlay district has now been separated into three (3) overlay districts: ROS – Rural and Open Space; RN
– River Neighborhood; and SR – Separate from River (refer to MRCCA map Figure 9-2).
A significant change from the old to the new MRCCA chapter is definitions. Under the original ordinance
the city only had eight (8) terms or definitions; while under the new draft ordinance there are ninety-two
(92) new terms/definitions. The Planning Commission elected to add a few new definitions (than what was
offered under the model ordinance), namely “Keystone Species”, “Public Works Director”, “Zoning
Administrator” and “Underground Springs”.
Administratively, all new development or construction work will still require a critical area permit (note:
city staff will continue to use “Critical Area Permit” as the identifier on the permit application). Variances
to any requirement(s) of this chapter can also be requested and approved, subject to a complete application
review and consideration (hearing) process by the PC and Council.
Conditional use permits (CUP) and interim use permits (IUP) are also allowed for certain activities or uses.
Under the old ordinance, a CUP was required to permit any activity on slopes greater than 18% but not less
than 40% (no work allowed on slopes 40% or more). This is no longer allowed under this new ordinance,
as the Bluff Impact Zone (BIZ) must be left as a protected area, and not impacted or affected by any major
construction work or other strictly regulated activities. CUPs or IUPs are allowed to approve any
Nonmetallic Mining, Wireless Communication Towers, Stairways/Lifts/Landings, or a request to exceed
structure height limitations.
The general or overall structure setback standards under the CA were 40-ft. from a bluffline; and 100-ft.
from normal high water mark of any water body. Under the new rules, all structures and impervious
surfaces must not be placed in the shore or bluff impact zones, unless exempted under the ordinance. The
ROS district requires a 200-ft. setback from the Miss. River’s or 150-ft. from the Minn. River’s OHWL;
RN: 100-ft. from Miss. River; and SR: not applicable since these parcels do not front on either Mississippi
or Minnesota River bodies. Structure setbacks from blufflines are as follows: ROS: 100-ft. ; RN: 40-ft.;
and SR: 40-ft.
Decks and Patios will again be regulated, but allowed with certain, limited setback encroachments
(depending on the physical characteristics of the individual property).
The new ordinance also provides for updated and very detailed regulations and standards for Vegetation
Management (12-3-9) and Land Alterations and Stormwater Management (12-3-10) in the corridor.
Staff also provided a more detailed and expanded submittal requirements under the Site Planning
Requirements in Section 12-3-12. One slight change to the new ordinance is that any critical area permit
or other will only require a public hearing at the planning commission, and does not need a separate or
additional hearing at the city council. City Council retains the final decision-making and authority on
granting any permit or application requested in the MRCCA district.
The draft ordinance also includes a five part table at the end of uses and activities that are generally
identified as either exempt or non-exempt; and includes an additional amendment to Title 4: Public Health
and Safety; Chapter 3 Weeds; Noxious Vegetation in which the city is required to exempt the height of
ground cover vegetation in certain areas of MRCCA properties.
DISCUSSION
The City can use its legislative authority when considering action on a zoning code amendment request and
has broad discretion, provided said action is constitutional, rational, and in some way related to protecting
the health, safety and general welfare of the public.
RECOMMENDATION
At the June 22, 2021 meeting, staff presented the updated draft MRCCA ordinance to the Planning
Commission. Upon closing the hearing, and no comments from the public, the Planning Commission
recommended unanimously (4-0 vote) to approve the proposed Ordinance No. 568 as presented herein.
This ordinance has been submitted to DNR for review, and as of the preparation of this report, staff has not
received official written or final approval from DNR, but anticipate such approval may come prior to the
September 23 City Council meeting. If this DNR approval has not been received by the date of the council
meeting, staff will request the item be pulled from this agenda and held off until the next meeting of October
5, 2021.
This ordinance has been reviewed and approved for language and content by the city attorney.
ACTION REQUIRED
City Council may either affirm this recommendation and make a motion to adopt the proposed Ordinance
No. 568 as presented; make a motion to deny the ordinance; or table the ordinance to a future meeting date.
Action to approve the ordinance requires a simple-majority vote of the council.
Staff also requests the council consider adopting the related Summary Publication of Ordinance No. 568,
and note this action requires 4/5 majority vote of the council to approve.
4
MENDOTA
LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO
T
A
RI
V
E
R
ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA
LA
K
E
L
EMA
Y
GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W
MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR
SI
BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR
WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL
MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL
VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE
Mississippi RIver Critical Area District Map
City of Mendota Heights
µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet
MRCCA DISTRICTS
CA-ROS Rural & Open Space
CA-RN River Neighborhood
CA-SR Separated from River
CA-RTC River Towns & Crossing
City boundary
Open Water
June 2019
Source: City of Mendota Heights,
Dakota County, 2017
FIGURE 9-2
Map 9-2 MRCCA - District Map
Created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017
MENDOTA
LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO
T
A
RI
V
E
R
ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA
LA
K
E
L
EMA
Y
GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W
MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR
SI
BL
EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR
WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL
MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL
VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE
Mississippi RIver Critical Area District Map
City of Mendota Heights
µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet
MRCCA DISTRICTS
CA-ROS Rural & Open Space
CA-RN River Neighborhood
CA-SR Separated from River
CA-RTC River Towns & Crossing
City boundary
Open Water
June 2019
Source: City of Mendota Heights,
Dakota County, 2017
FIGURE 9-2
MENDOTA
LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO
T
A
RI
V
E
R
ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA
LA
K
E
L
EMA
Y
GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W
MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR
SI
BL
EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR
WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL
MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL
VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE
Mississippi RIver Critical Area District Map
City of Mendota Heights
µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet
MRCCA DISTRICTS
CA-ROS Rural & Open Space
CA-RN River Neighborhood
CA-SR Separated from River
CA-RTC River Towns & Crossing
City boundary
Open Water
June 2019
Source: City of Mendota Heights,
Dakota County, 2017
FIGURE 9-2
MENDOTA
LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO
T
A
RI
V
E
R
ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA
LA
K
E
L
EMA
Y
GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W
MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR
SI
BL
EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR
WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL
MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL
VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE
Mississippi RIver Critical Area District Map
City of Mendota Heights
µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet
MRCCA DISTRICTS
CA-ROS Rural & Open Space
CA-RN River Neighborhood
CA-SR Separated from River
CA-RTC River Towns & Crossing
City boundary
Open Water
June 2019
Source: City of Mendota Heights,
Dakota County, 2017
FIGURE 9-2
June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 10 of 14
C) PLANNING CASE 2021-07
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS – ZONING CODE AMENDMENT (MRCCA)
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that the Commission is being asked to once
again review the proposed Ordinance No. 568, the new Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area
(MRCCA) Ordinance for the community. This draft ordinance includes a number of added
comments and suggested revisions offered by the Commission at the June 10, 2021 Planning
Commission Workshop meeting.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a planning staff report and a presentation
on this planning item to the Commission (which is available for viewing through the City’s
website).
Staff recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions.
Commissioner Johnson suggested replacing “natural vegetation” with “native vegetation”.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted a new definition which was added for
keystone species at the recommendation of Commissioner Johnson. He referenced another
addition of “underground springs” and that added definition as well.
Commissioner Petschel asked for the opinion of the Commission as to including keystone species
as an exemption from selective vegetation removal and whether the Commission would want to
take away the ability to selectively remove a tree. He stated that would be a big change and would
like to have discussion.
Acting Chair Lorberbaum agreed that is a good point as there may be a reason behind it.
Commissioner Johnson stated selective vegetation removal could be done without a permit but if
it is a keystone species, she believes a permit should be needed.
Commissioner Petschel stated that keystone species is a lot of information that he does not entirely
understand and would not want to endorse something he does not understand.
Commissioner Johnson commented that she is working to create a list of keystone species for
Minnesota.
Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked whether it would be reasonable for a homeowner to expect to
know that they would need to get the list.
Commissioner Katz commented that he would hope that any homeowner in this area doing this
type of work would be working with staff.
Commissioner Petschel stated that it is not incumbent for a homeowner to know what they should
or should not do, but to ensure proper remediation is completed if something is done that should
June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 11 of 14
not be. He stated that his concern would be that he does not know what keystone species are and
whether he would support including that.
Commissioner Johnson stated that she is working to provide a consolidated list to staff that could
be used.
Commissioner Petschel stated that he likes the idea of it, but it seems to be a bit of a power grab
to say we are going to say that things can selectively be removed except for a list that has not yet
been developed and will be added to. He stated that he dislikes that things can be added without
review. He asked if the City has oversight as to what is added to the list of keystone species.
Commissioner Johnson provided examples of keystone species and stated that the list is based on
research information, but the City does not have oversight.
Commissioner Petschel stated that his concern is that it is a placeholder statement that can be added
to without oversight. He stated that the idea is solid, but the execution is flimsy.
Commissioner Katz stated that he would compare it similar to a homeowners association. He
stated that if someone is purchasing property within this area, they would be held to a different
standard.
Commissioner Johnson commented that this area already falls under the rules of another authority.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti referenced the proposed language that was
suggested to be added. He stated that keystone species can be removed from the definition and
could instead be added under another area related to selective vegetation removal.
Commissioner Johnson stated that she does not believe removal of keystone species should not be
allowed but believed it should be allowed with a permit.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti asked for the opinion of the Commission related
to the definition of structure. It was the consensus of the Commission to use the State definition.
It was the consensus of the Commission to move underground springs to “u” as underground
springs rather than “s”.
Commissioner Katz asked what is being done to protect the underground springs once identified.
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that it would be treated the same way as another water
source.
Commissioner Johnson referenced the “conserving wooded areas in developing communities” is
a link and whether that information is being provided by link.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that is a link.
June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 12 of 14
Commissioner Petschel asked if links should be provided within an ordinance. He noted that links
go dead all the time and if that information is important, it should be provided in an external
document as the link could go away.
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that the additional statement could be included, as
published by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The Commission agreed.
Commissioner Johnson referenced language related to screening using natural vegetation. She
stated that she would like to see a percentage of native vegetation included.
Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked if it would be preferred to use native rather than natural.
Commissioner Johnson stated that she did not believe entirely native would be necessary, but a
percentage of native would be preferred.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that there are not many river-
dependent uses and did not think the additional language is needed.
Acting Chair Lorberbaum stated that she would prefer “A through D” rather than “A-D” on page
93.
Commissioner Petschel noted on page 96/97 and asked if that area is mapped out anywhere as to
the properties that would be subject to section five.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that is identified in the MRCCA
chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and includes a map. He stated that there are certain areas
identified by the DNR that have established vegetative stands.
Commissioner Petschel stated that these standards apply to properties not just along the bluff but
also properties across the street and the City should be cautious as to how landowners would be
constrained.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti displayed the map with the vegetative stands
identified.
Commissioner Petschel asked if there is a similar map of areas of native planting communities.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that there is not such a map.
Commissioner Petschel commented that he could see that being used as a weapon during a public
hearing through comments by a neighbor.
Commissioner Johnson read the definition.
Commissioner Petschel stated that he would support that item. He explained that his concern was
that there would be someone that wants to remove a building and replace that with a new one, but
June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 13 of 14
the neighbors use that language to prevent the action, using the letter of the law rather than the
spirit of the law.
Commissioner Johnson commented that it is well defined and therefore she did not believe that
would be a concern.
Commissioner Petschel reviewed the language that could be added related to selective removal of
keystone species that could be allowed with a vegetation permit.
Commissioner Johnson noted on page 98, Item F2B, it should read, include “native” vegetation.
Acting Chair Lorberbaum noted that the link in that statement should be made as a reference. She
noted on page 99, Item 3, it mentions City staff and asked for clarification on who that would refer
to.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted that could be clarified to read Public Works
Director or Zoning Administrator.
Commissioner Katz stated that his concern would be with whether the name of the position
changes when staff turns over.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted that “staff” could be removed, and it could
just read “to the satisfaction of the City”.
Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked if that would then mean the City Council.
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that Public Works Director could be used.
Acting Chair Lorberbaum referenced the use of the language “may be allowed” and commented
that seems wishy washy and asked if different language should be used such as “shall be allowed”.
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that he would interpret it as “may” gives the
Commission more power whereas “shall” would give the applicant more power. It was the
consensus of the Commission to use “may”.
Commissioner Johnson noted another link that should be replaced with a reference.
Acting Chair Lorberbaum noted on page 104, 12-3-12, the section begins with Item 3 and should
instead start with “A”. It was noted that the item numbers in that section should be replaced with
letters and sub-items should be numbered.
Commissioner Petschel asked if section E has enough specifics and prohibitions given that the
City does not allow the construction of chicken coops on grades greater than 18 percent. He stated
that under the general case of development, such restrictive language is not included.
June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 14 of 14
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that he does prefer the term “may” as it provides leeway
to deny an application even if the documentations are provided.
Commissioner Petschel stated that it just seemed to be a contrast that the minor items are very
specific, but the larger developments are not as specific.
Commissioner Johnson referenced a commented received from former Commissioner Magnuson
related to definitions, under bluff and asked for clarification.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that had been corrected.
Acting Chair Lorberbaum opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked for a motion to
close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 4
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO 568 WITH THE CHANGES AS NOTED
BY THE COMMISSION.
AYES: 4
NAYS: 0
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated city staff will be working with the city
attorney to finalize language, verify section references and content; and stated the City Council
would consider this proposed ordinance at its July 20, 2021 meeting.
Page 1 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 568
AN ORDINANCE REPLACING AND AMENDING
TITLE 12 ZONING, CHAPTER 3 CRITICAL AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT OF
THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY CODE WITH A NEW TITLE 12 ZONING, CHAPTER 3
MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA (MRCCA) OVERLAY DISTRICT
AND
PART OF TITLE 4 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY, CHAPTER 3 WEEDS; NOXIOUS
VEGETATION
The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, does hereby ordain:
Section 1.
City Code Title 12 – ZONING, Chapter 3 Critical Area Overlay District is hereby amended in
its entirety as follows:
SECTION:
12-3-1: Authority, Policy and Intent
12-3-2: General Provisions and Definitions
12-3-3: Administration
12-3-4: Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) Districts
12-3-5: Special Land Use Provisions
12-3-6: Structure Height, Placement and Lot Size
12-3-7: Performance Standards for Private Facilities
12-3-8: Performance Standards for Public Facilities
12-3-9: Vegetation Management
12-3-10: Land Alteration Standards and Stormwater Management
12-3-11: Subdivision and Land Development Standards
12-3-12: Site Plan Requirements
12-3-13: Official Review Process
12-3-14: Notification to Resource Agencies
12-3-15: Exemptions
Page 2 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
12-3-1: AUTHORITY, POLICY AND INTENT:
A. Statutory Authorization. This Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) overlay district
chapter is adopted pursuant to the authorization and policies contained in Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 116G, Minnesota Rules, Parts 6106.0010 - 6106.0180, and the planning and zoning
enabling legislation in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462 and 473.
B. Policy. The Legislature of Minnesota has delegated responsibility to local governments of the
state to regulate the subdivision, use and development of designated critical areas and thus
preserve and enhance the quality of important historic, cultural, aesthetic values, and natural
systems and provide for the wise use of these areas.
C. Intent. The Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area regulations are intended to:
1. Establish districts under which building height and structure placement are regulated to
protect and enhance the Mississippi River's resources and features consistent with the natural
and built character of each district.
2. Identify development standards and considerations for land uses that have potential to
negatively affect primary conservation areas and public river corridor views.
3. Establish standards that protect primary conservation areas and public river corridor views
from development impacts and ensure that new development is established consistent with
the purpose of the MRCCA.
4. Establish design standards for private facilities that are consistent with best management
practices and that minimize impacts to Primary Conservation Areas (PCAs), Public River
Corridor Views (PRCVs) and other resources identified in the MRCCA plan.
5. Establish design standards for public facilities that are consistent with best management
practices and that minimize impacts to primary conservation areas, public river corridor views
and other resources identified in the MRCCA plan while recognizing that they serve the public
interest by providing access to the Mississippi River corridor or require locations within the
river corridor and therefor require some flexibility.
6. Establish standards that sustain and enhance the biological and ecological functions of
vegetation; preserve the natural character and topography of the MRCCA; and maintain
stability of bluffs and critical area steep slopes and ensure stability of other erosion-prone
areas.
7. Establish standards that protect water quality from pollutant loadings of sediment,
nutrients, bacteria, and other contaminants; and maintain stability of bluffs, shorelines, and
other areas prone to erosion.
8. To create standards for subdivisions and development or redevelopment of sites that
protect and enhance the natural and scenic value of the MRCCA, protect and restore
biological and ecological functions of primary conservation areas, and encourage restoration
of native vegetation where restoration opportunities have been identified in the MRCCA Plan.
Page 3 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
12-3-2: GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS:
A. Jurisdiction. The provisions of this chapter apply to land within the river corridor boundary as
described in the State Register, volume 43, pages 508 to 519 and shown on the city’s official
zoning or MRCCA maps on file with the city.
B. Enforcement. The city zoning administrator and public works director are jointly responsible
for the administration and enforcement of this chapter. Any violation of its provisions or failure
to comply with any of its requirements, including violations of conditions and safeguards
established in connection with grants of variances or conditional uses, constitutes a
misdemeanor and is punishable as defined by law. Violations of this chapter can occur
regardless of whether or not a permit is required for a regulated activity listed in Section 12-
3-3.
C. Severability. If any section, clause, provision, or portion of this chapter is judged
unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this chapter
shall not be affected thereby.
D. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. It is not intended by this chapter to repeal, abrogate, or
impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, where this chapter
imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this chapter shall prevail. To the extent any
other chapters or sections are inconsistent with this chapter, the provisions of this chapter
shall prevail.
E. Underlying Zoning. Uses and standards of underlying zoning districts apply except where
standards of this chapter are more restrictive.
F. Definitions. Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases used in this chapter shall be
interpreted to give them the same meaning they have in common usage and to give this
chapter its most reasonable application. For the purpose of this chapter, the words “must”
and “shall” are mandatory and not permissive. All distances, unless otherwise specified, are
measured horizontally.
ACCESS PATH means an area designated to provide ingress and egress to public waters.
ADJACENT means having a boundary that physically touches or adjoins.
AGRICULTURAL USE means a use having the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes,
section 40A.02.
ALTERNATIVE DESIGN means subdivision design methods such as conservation design,
transfer of development density, or similar zoning and site design techniques that protect open
space and natural areas.
BIOLOGICAL AND ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS mean the functions of vegetation in
stabilizing soils and slopes, retaining and filtering runoff, providing habitat, and recharging
groundwater.
BLUFF means a natural topographic feature having:
Page 4 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
A. A slope that rises at least 25 feet where the grade of the slope averages 18 percent or
greater, measured over any horizontal distance of 25 feet, from the toe of the slope to the
top of the slope. Where the slope begins below the ordinary high water level, the ordinary
high water level is the toe of the slope [See Figure 1 – below];
FIGURE 1: BLUFF DIAGRAM
or
B. A natural escarpment or cliff with a slope that rises at least ten feet above the ordinary
high water level or toe of the slope, whichever is applicable, to the top of the slope, with a
slope of 75 degrees or greater [See Figure 2 – below].
FIGURE 2: NATURAL ESCARPMENT BLUFF AND BLUFF IMPACT ZONE DIAGRAM
BLUFF IMPACT ZONE (BIZ) means a bluff and land located within 20 feet of the bluff. See
Figure 2 for natural escarpment or cliff example and Figure 3 for more common bluff
example.
FIGURE 3: TOE, TOP AND BLUFF IMPACT ZONE DIAGRAM
Page 5 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
BLUFFLINE means a line delineating the top of the bluff. More than one bluffline may be
encountered proceeding landward from the river. See Figure 2 for natural escarpment or cliff
example and Figure 3 for more common bluff example.
BLUFF, TOE OF means a line along the bottom of a bluff, requiring field verification, such that
the slope above the line exceeds eighteen (18) percent and the slope below the line is
eighteen (18) percent or less, measured over a horizontal distance of twenty-five (25) feet.
See Figure 2 for natural escarpment of cliff example and Figure 3 for more common bluff
example.
BLUFF, TOP OF means a line along the top of a bluff, requiring field verification, such that the
slope below the line exceeds eighteen (18) percent and the slope above the line is eighteen
(18) percent or less, measured over a horizontal distance of twenty-five (25) feet. See Figures
1 and 2.
BUILDABLE AREA means the area upon which structures may be placed on a lot or parcel
of land and excludes areas needed to meet requirements for setback, rights-of-way, bluff
impact zones, historic properties, wetlands, designated floodways, land below the ordinary
high water level of public waters, and other unbuildable areas.
BUILDING means a structure with two or more outside rigid walls and a fully secured roof and
affixed to a permanent site.
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE means a document written after a compliance inspection,
certifying that the development complies with applicable requirements at the time of the
inspection.
CITY means the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
COMMISSIONER means the commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources.
CONDITIONAL USE means a use having the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes,
chapters 462.
Page 6 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
CONSERVATION DESIGN means a pattern of subdivision that is characterized by grouping
lots within a portion of a parcel, where the remaining portion of the parcel is permanently
protected as open space.
CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION means a pattern of subdivision that is characterized by lots
that are spread regularly throughout a parcel in a lot and block design.
DECK means a horizontal, unenclosed, aboveground level structure open to the sky, with or
without attached railings, seats, trellises, or other features, attached or functionally related to
a principal use or site.
DEVELOPER has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.03.
DEVELOPMENT has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.03.
DISCRETIONARY ACTION means an action under this chapter related to land use that
requires a public hearing by local ordinance or statute, such as preliminary plats, final
subdivision plats, planned unit developments, conditional use permits, interim use permits,
variances, appeals, and rezoning.
DOCK has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules, chapter 6115.
ELECTRIC POWER FACILITIES means equipment and associated facilities for generating
electric power or devices for converting wind energy to electrical energy as identified and
defined under Minnesota Statutes, section 216E.
ESSENTIAL SERVICES mean underground or overhead gas, electrical, communications,
steam, or water distribution, collection, supply, or disposal systems, including storm water.
Essential services include poles, wires, mains, drains, pipes, conduits, cables, fire alarm
boxes, traffic signals, hydrants, navigational structures, aviation safety facilities or other
similar equipment and accessories in conjunction with the systems. Essential services does
not include buildings, treatment works as defined in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 115.01,
electric power facilities or transmission services.
FEEDLOT has the meaning given for animal feedlots under Minnesota Rules, chapter 7020.
FLOODPLAIN has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules, chapter 6120.
FULLY RECONSTRUCTS means the reconstruction of an existing impervious surface that
involves site grading and subsurface excavation so that soil is exposed. Mill and overlay and
other resurfacing activities are not considered fully reconstructed.
HARD-SURFACE TRAIL means a trail surfaced in asphalt, crushed aggregate, or other hard
surface, for multi-purpose use, as determined by local, regional, or state agency plans.
HISTORIC PROPERTY means an archaeological site, standing structure, site, district, or
other property that is:
(a) Listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the State Register of Historic Places
or locally designated as a historic site under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 471;
Page 7 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
(b) determined to meet the criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places or
the State Register of Historic Places as determined by the director of the Minnesota
Historical Society; or
(c) An unplatted cemetery that falls under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, chapter 307,
in consultation with the Office of the State Archaeologist.
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE means a constructed hard surface that either prevents or retards
the entry of water into the soil and causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities
and at an increased rate of flow than prior to development. Examples include rooftops, decks,
sidewalks, patios, parking lots, storage areas, and driveways, including those with concrete,
asphalt, or gravel surfaces.
INTENSIVE VEGETATION CLEARING means the removal of all or a majority of the trees or
shrubs in a contiguous patch, strip, row, or block.
INTERIM USE has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 462.
KEYSTONE SPECIES means a species on which other species in an ecosystem largely
depend, such that if it were removed the ecosystem would change drastically.
LAND ALTERATION means an activity that exposes the soil or changes the topography,
drainage, or cross section of the land, excluding gardening or similar minor soil disturbances.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT means counties, cities, and townships.
LOT has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules, chapter 6120.
LOT WIDTH means the shortest distance between lot lines measured at both the ordinary
high-water level and at the required structure setback from the ordinary high-water level. [See
Figure 3 – below].
FIGURE 3: LOT WIDTH DIAGRAM
MARINA has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules, chapter 6115.
Page 8 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA (MRCCA) means the area within the
River Corridor Boundary (refer to separate definition noted herein).
MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA PLAN means a chapter in the City of
Mendota Heights comprehensive plan.
MOORING FACILITY has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules, chapter 6115.0170.
NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITY means a plant community that has been identified as part of
the Minnesota Biological Survey or biological survey issued or adopted by a local, state, or
federal agency.
NATIVE VEGETATION means vegetation comprised of plant species, other than noxious
weeds or invasive vegetation, that are indigenous to a region, and which reasonably could
occur or flourish naturally on a site.
NATURAL-SURFACE TRAIL means a trail composed of native soil and rock or compacted
granular stone, primarily intended for hiking, equestrian, or mountain bike use, as determined
by local, regional, or state agency plans.
NATURAL VEGETATION means any combination of ground cover (excluding any vegetation
considered invasive), understory, and tree canopy that, while it may have been altered by
human activity, continues to stabilize soils, retain and filter runoff, provide habitat, and
recharge groundwater.
NONCONFORMITY has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 394.22.
NONMETALLIC MINING means the construction, reconstruction, repair, relocation,
expansion, or removal of any facility for the extraction, stockpiling, storage, disposal, or
reclamation of nonmetallic minerals such a stone, sand, and gravel. Nonmetallic mining does
not include ancillary facilities such as access roads, bridges, culverts, and water level control
structures. For purposes of this subpart, “facility” includes all mine pits, quarries, stockpiles,
basins, processing structures and equipment, and any structures that drain or divert public
waters to allow mining.
OFF-PREMISES ADVERTISING SIGNS means signs that direct attention to a product,
service, business, or entertainment venue that is not exclusively related to the premises where
the sign is located.
ORDINARY HIGH-WATER LEVEL (OHWL) has the meaning given under Minnesota
Statutes, section 103G.005.
OVERLAY DISTRICT means a zoning district that is applied over one or more previously
established zoning districts, establishing additional or stricter standards and criteria for
covered properties in addition to those of the underlying zoning district. Overlay districts are
often used to protect historic features and natural resources such as shoreland or floodplain.
PARCEL has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.03.
PATIO means a constructed hard surface located at ground level with no railings and open to
the sky.
Page 9 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
PICNIC SHELTER means a roofed structure open on all sides, accessory to a recreational
use.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) means a method of land development that merges
zoning and subdivision controls, allowing developers to plan and develop a large area as a
single entity, characterized by a unified site design, a mix of structure types and land uses,
and/or phasing of development over a number of years. Planned unit development includes
any conversion of existing structures and land uses that utilize this method of development.
PLAT has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, sections 505 and 515B.
PORT means a water transportation complex established and operated under the jurisdiction
of a port authority according to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 458.
PRIMARY CONSERVATION AREAS (PCA) means resources and features, including shore
impact zones, bluff impact zones, floodplains, wetlands, gorges, areas of confluence with
tributaries, natural drainage routes, underground springs, unstable soils and bedrock, native
plant communities, cultural and historic properties, and significant existing vegetative stands,
tree canopies, and other resources identified in local government plans.
PRIVATE FACILITIES mean private roads, driveways, and parking areas, private water
access and viewing facilities, decks and patios in setback areas, and private signs.
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER means an engineer licensed to practice in Minnesota.
PUBLIC FACILITIES mean public utilities, public transportation facilities, and public
recreational facilities.
PUBLIC RECREATION FACILITIES mean recreational facilities provided by the state or a
local government and dedicated to public use, including parks, scenic overlooks, observation
platforms, trails, docks, fishing piers, picnic shelters, water access ramps, and other similar
water-oriented public facilities used for recreation.
PUBLIC RIVER CORRIDOR VIEWS (PRCVs) means views toward the river from public
parkland, historic properties, and public overlooks, as well as views toward bluffs from the
ordinary high water level of the opposite shore, as seen during the summer months and
documented in the MRCCA chapter of the comprehensive plan.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES mean all transportation facilities provided by
federal, state, or local government and dedicated to public use, such as roadways, transit
facilities, railroads, and bikeways.
PUBLIC UTILITIES mean electric power facilities, essential services, and transmission
services.
PUBLIC WATERS has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005.
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR is a person designated by the City Administrator and approved
by the City Council as being jointly responsible for the administration of this chapter.
Page 10 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
READILY VISIBLE means land and development that are easily seen from the ordinary high-
water level of the opposite shore during summer months.
RESOURCE AGENCY means a federal, state, regional, or local agency that engages in
environmental, natural, or cultural resource protection or restoration activities, including
planning, implementation, and monitoring.
RETAINING WALL means a vertical or nearly vertical structure constructed of mortar and
rubble masonry, rock, or stone regardless of size, vertical timber pilings, horizontal timber
planks with piling supports, sheet pilings, poured concrete, concrete blocks, or other durable
materials.
ROCK RIPRAP means natural coarse rock placed or constructed to armor shorelines,
streambeds, bridge abutments, pilings and other shoreline structures against scour or water
or ice erosion.
RIVER CORRIDOR BOUNDARY means the boundary approved and adopted by the
Metropolitan Council under Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.06, as approved and adopted
by the legislature in Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.15, and as legally described in the Sate
Register, volume 43, pages 508 to 518.
RIVER-DEPENDENT USE means the use of land for commercial, industrial, or utility
purposes, where access to and use of a public water feature is an integral part of the normal
conduct of business and where the use is dependent on shoreline facilities.
SCOUR means the localized removal of material from the streambed by flowing water, and is
the opposite of fill.
SELECTIVE VEGETATION REMOVAL means the removal of isolated individual trees or
shrubs that are not in a contiguous patch, strip, row, or block and that does not substantially
reduce the tree canopy or understory cover.
SETBACK means a separation distance measured horizontally.
SHORE IMPACT ZONE (SIZ) means land located between the ordinary high-water level of
public waters and a line parallel to it at a setback of 50 percent of the required structure
setback or, for agricultural use, 50 feet landward of the ordinary high water level. [See Figure
4 – below].
FIGURE 4: SHORE IMPACT ZONE DIAGRAM
Page 11 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
SHORELINE FACILITIES means facilities that require a location adjoining public waters for
ingress and egress, loading and unloading, and public water intake and outflow, such as barge
facilities, port facilities, commodity loading and unloading equipment, watercraft lifts, marinas,
short-term watercraft mooring facilities for patrons, and water access ramps. Structures that
would be enhanced by a shoreline location, but do not require a location adjoining public
waters as part of their function, are not shoreline facilities, such as restaurants, bait shops,
and boat dealerships.
STEEP SLOPE means a natural topographic feature with an average slope of twelve percent
(12%) to eighteen percent (18%), measured over a horizontal distance equal to or greater
than fifty (50) feet, and any slopes greater than eighteen percent (18%) that are not bluffs.
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES means facilities for the collection, conveyance,
treatment, or disposal of storm water.
STRUCTURE means anything constructed or installed or portable, except for aerial or
underground utility lines such as sewer, electric, telephone, or gas lines, and utility line towers,
poles, and other supporting appurtenances, the use of which requires a location on a parcel
of land. It includes a movable structure while it is located on land which can be used for
housing, business, commercial, agricultural, or office purposes either temporarily or
permanently. Structure also includes fences, decks, billboards, swimming pools, and
advertising signs.
SUBDIVISION has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 462.352.
SUBSURFACE SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM (SSTS) has the meaning given under
Minnesota Rules, part 7080.1100.
TRANSMISSION SERVICES means:
A. Electric power lines, cables, pipelines, or conduits that are:
(1) used to transport power between two points, as identified and defined under
Minnesota Statutes, section 216E.01, subdivision 4; or
Page 12 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
(2) for mains or pipelines for gas, liquids, or solids in suspension, used to transport
gas, liquids, or solids in suspension between two points; and
B. Telecommunication lines, cables, pipelines, or conduits.
TREELINE means the more or less continuous line formed by the tops of trees in a wooded
area when viewed from a particular point. The treeline is determined during all seasons as if
under full foliage.
UNDERGROUND SPRING means a place where water moving underground finds an
opening to the land surface and emerges, sometimes as just a trickle, and in some cases only
after a storm event, and in some cases seen in a continuous flow of water.
VARIANCE means any modification or variation of official controls that a municipality has
approved in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357, subd. 6(2).
WATER ACCESS RAMP means a boat ramp, carry-down site, boarding dock, and approach
road, or other access that allows launching and removal of a boat, canoe, or other watercraft
with or without a vehicle and trailer.
WATER-ORIENTED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE means a small building or other
improvement, except stairways, fences, docks, and retaining walls, that, because of the
relationship of its use to public waters, needs to be located closer to public waters than the
normal structure setback. Examples include gazebos, screen houses, fish houses, pump
houses, and detached decks and patios.
WATER QUALITY IMPACT ZONE means land within the shore impact zone or within 50 feet
of the OHWL of the river, whichever is greater, and land within 50 feet of a public water,
wetland, or natural drainage route.
WETLAND has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005.
WHARF has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules, part 6115.0170.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR is a person designated by the City Administrator and approved
by the City Council as being jointly responsible for the administration of this chapter.
12-3-3: ADMINISTRATION:
A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to identify administrative provisions to ensure this
chapter is administered consistent with its purpose.
B. Permits. A critical area permit is required for the construction of any new structure, building(s)
or building additions, including construction of decks, retaining walls, signs, the installation
and/or alteration of sewage treatment systems, vegetation removal consistent with Section
12-3-9 and land alterations consistent with Section 12-3-10.
C. Variances. Variances to the requirements under this chapter may only be granted in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357 and must consider the potential impacts
Page 13 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
of variances on primary conservation areas (PCAs), public river corridor views (PRCVs), and
other resources identified in the MRCCA plan. In reviewing the variance application, and
before granting a variance, the city shall:
1. Evaluate the impacts to these resources. [If negative impacts are found, require
conditions to mitigate the impacts that are related to and proportional to the impacts, and
consistent with Section 12-3-3.E (below); and
2. Make written findings that the variance is consistent with the purposes and scope of this
chapter as follows.
a. The extent, location and intensity of the variance will be in substantial compliance with
the MRCCA Plan;
b. The variance is consistent with the character and management purpose of the MRCCA
district in which it is located;
c. The variance will not be detrimental to PCAs and PRCVs nor will it contribute to
negative incremental impacts to PCAs and PRCVs when considered in the context of past,
present and reasonable future actions; and
d. The variance will not negatively affect other MRCCA resources identified in the city’s
MRCCA Plan such as wetlands, river overlooks, parks and open space.
D. Conditional and Interim Use Permits. All conditional and interim uses required under this
chapter must comply with Minnesota Statutes, section 462.3595 and 462.3597 respectively,
and must consider the potential impacts on primary conservation areas, public river corridor
views, and other resources identified in the city’s MRCCA plan. In reviewing the application,
and before granting a conditional or interim use permit, the city shall:
1. Evaluate the impacts to these resources and if [negative impacts are found, require
conditions to mitigate the impacts that are related to and proportional to the impacts] ?,
consistent with Section 12-3-3.E (below); and
2. Make written findings that the conditional or interim use is consistent with the purpose of
this chapter as follows.
a. The extent, location and intensity of the conditional or interim use will be in substantial
compliance with the MRCCA plan;
b. The conditional or interim use is consistent with the character and management
purpose of the MRCCA district in which it is located;
c. The conditional or interim use will not be detrimental to PCAs and PRCVs nor will it
contribute to negative incremental impacts to PCAs and PRCVs when considered in the
context of past, present, and reasonable future actions; and
d. The conditional or interim use will not negatively affect other resources identified in the
city’s MRCCA plan, such as wetlands, river overlooks, and parks and open space.
Page 14 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
E. Conditions of Approval and Mitigation. The city shall evaluate the impacts to PCAs, PRCVs
and other resources identified in the MRCCA Plan, and if negative impacts are found, require
conditions to mitigate the impacts that are related to and proportional to the impacts.
Mitigation may include, but is not limited to:
1. Restoration of vegetation identified as “vegetation restoration priorities” in the city’s
MRCCA plan.
2. Preservation of existing vegetation;
3. Increasing, enhancing, and or connecting habitat for pollinators, birds, and other wildlife;
4. Stormwater runoff management;
5. Reducing impervious surfaces;
6. Increasing structure setbacks;
7. Wetland and drainage route restoration and/or preservation
8. Limiting the height of structures;
9. Modifying structure design to limit visual impacts on the PRCVs; and
10. Other conservation measures.
F. Nonconformities.
1. All legally established nonconformities as of the date of this ordinance may continue and
will be regulated consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357, Subd. 1e.
2. New structures erected in conformance with the setback averaging provisions of Section
12-3-6.C.4 are conforming structures.
3. Site alterations and expansion of site alterations that were legally made prior to the
effective date of this ordinance are conforming. Site alterations include vegetation, erosion
control, storm water control measures, and other nonstructural site improvements.
4. Legally nonconforming principal structures that do not meet the setback requirements of
Section 12-3-6.C may be expanded laterally provided that:
a. The expansion does not extend into the shore or bluff impact zone or further into the
required setback than the building line of the existing principal structure [See Figure 5 –
below]; and
b. The expanded structure’s scale and bulk is consistent with that of the original structure
and existing surrounding development.
FIGURE 5: EXPANSION OF NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES DIAGRAM
Page 15 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
G. Accommodating disabilities. Reasonable accommodation for ramps and other facilities to
provide persons with disabilities access to the person’s property, as required by the federal
Americans with Disabilities Act and the federal Fair Housing Act and as provided by Minnesota
Rules, chapter 1341, must:
1. Comply with Sections 12-3-6 to 12-3-15; or
2. If Sections 12-3-6 to 12-3-15 cannot be complied with, ramps or other facilities are allowed
with an administrative permit provided:
a. The permit terminates on either a specific date or upon occurrence of a particular event
related to the person requiring accommodation, provided that the permit’s termination date
may be extended or the termination event may be modified upon request, as required by
federal and state law; and
b. Upon expiration of the permit, the ramp or other facilities must be removed.
12-3-4: MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA (MRCCA) DISTRICTS:
A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to establish districts under which building height and
structure placement are regulated to protect and enhance the Mississippi River’s resources
and features consistent with the natural and built character of each district.
B. MRCCA District Map. The locations and boundaries of the MRCCA districts established by
this chapter are shown on the MRCCA Overlay District Map which is incorporated herein by
reference. The district boundary lines are intended to follow the centerlines of rivers and
streams, highways, streets, lot lines, and municipal boundaries, unless a boundary line is
otherwise indicated on the map. Where district boundaries cross property that has not be
subdivided, the district boundary line is determined by the use of dimensions or the scale
appearing on the map. For purposes of determining the application of this chapter to any
particular parcel of land, the above referenced map shall be on file in the office of the zoning
administrator and shall be available for inspection and copying.
Page 16 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
C. District Description and Management Purpose. The MRCCA within the city is divided into the
following three (3) separate MRCCA Districts:
1. Rural and Open Space (ROS).
a. Description. The ROS District is characterized by rural and low-density development
patterns and land uses, and includes land that is riparian or visible from the river, as well
as large, undeveloped tracts of high ecological and scenic value, floodplain, and
undeveloped islands. Many primary conservation areas exist in the district.
b. Management purpose. The ROS District must be managed to sustain and restore the
rural and natural character of the corridor and to protect and enhance habitat, parks and
open space, public river corridor views, and scenic, natural, and historic areas.
2. River Neighborhood (RN).
a. Description. The RN district is characterized by primarily residential neighborhoods
that are riparian or readily visible from the river or that abut riparian parkland. The district
includes parks and open space, limited commercial development, marinas, and related
land uses.
b. Management purpose. The RN district must be managed to maintain the character of
the river corridor within the context of existing residential and related neighborhood
development, and to protect and enhance habitat, parks and open space, public river
corridor views, and scenic, natural, and historic areas. Minimizing erosion and the flow of
untreated storm water into the river and enhancing habitat and shoreline vegetation are
priorities in the district.
3. Separated from River (SR).
a. Description. The SR district is characterized by its physical and visual distance from
the Mississippi River. The district includes land separated from the river by distance,
topography, development or a transportation corridor. The land in this district is not readily
visible from the Mississippi River.
b. Management purpose. The SR district provides flexibility in managing development
without negatively affecting the key resources and features of the river corridor. Minimizing
negative impacts to primary conservation areas and minimizing erosion and the flow of
untreated storm water into the river are priorities in the district. In addition, providing public
access to and public views of the river, and restoring natural vegetation in riparian areas
and tree canopy are also priorities in the district.
12-3-5: SPECIAL LAND USE PROVISIONS:
A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to identify development standards and considerations
for land uses that have potential to negatively impact primary conservation areas and public
river corridor views.
Page 17 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
B. Underlying zoning. Uses within the MRCCA are generally determined by underlying zoning,
with additional provisions for the following land uses:
1. Agricultural use. Perennial ground cover is required within 50 feet of the ordinary high
water level and within the bluff impact zone.
2. Feedlots. New animal feedlots and manure storage areas are prohibited. Existing animal
feedlots and manure storage areas must conform with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7020.
3. Forestry. Tree harvesting and biomass harvesting within woodlands, and associated
reforestation, must be consistent with recommended practices in Conserving Wooded Areas
in Developing Communities: Best Management Practices in Minnesota.
4. Nonmetallic mining. Nonmetallic mining requires a conditional use permit or interim use
permit issued by the local government, subject to the following:
a. New nonmetallic mining is prohibited within the shore impact zone and bluff impact
zone and within the required structure setback from the bluffline and OHWL;
b. Processing machinery must be located consistent with setback standards for
structures as provided in Section 12-3-6.C;
c. Only one barge loading area, which must be limited to the minimum size practicable,
is permitted for each mining operation;
d. New and, where practicable, existing nonmetallic mining operations must not be
readily visible and must be screened by establishing and maintaining natural vegetation.
The unscreened boundaries of nonmetallic mining areas are limited to only the barge
loading area;
e. A site management plan must be developed by the operator and approved by the local
government before new nonmetallic mining commences. Operations must be consistent
with the site plan throughout the duration of operations at the site. The site management
plan must:
(1) Describe how the site will be developed over time with an emphasis on minimizing
environmental risk to public waters;
(2) Explain where staged reclamation may occur at certain points during the life of the
site;
(3) Address dust, noise, storm water management, possible pollutant discharges,
days and hours of operation, and duration of operations; and
(4) Describe any anticipated vegetation and topographic alterations outside the pit,
and reclamation plans consistent with the stated end use for the land; and;
f. Existing and new nonmetallic mining operations must submit land reclamation plans
to the local government compatible with the purposes of this ordinance.
Page 18 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
5. River-dependent uses. River-dependent uses must comply with the following design
standards:
a. Structures and parking areas, except shoreline facilities and private roads and
conveyances serving river-dependent uses as provided in Section 12-3-15, must meet the
dimensional and performance standards in this Chapter must be designed so that they
are not readily visible, and must be screened by establishing and maintaining natural
vegetation;
b. Shoreline facilities must comply with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6115 and must:
(1) Be designed in a compact fashion so as to minimize the shoreline area affected;
and
(2) Minimize the surface area of land occupied in relation to the number of watercraft
or barges to be served; and
c. Dredging and placement of dredged material are subject to existing federal and state
permit requirements and agreements.
6. Wireless communication towers. Wireless communication towers require a conditional or
interim use permit and are subject to the following design standards:
a. The applicant must demonstrate that functional coverage cannot be provided through
co-location, a tower at a lower height, or a tower at a location outside of the MRCCA;
b. The tower must not be located in a bluff or shore impact zone; and
c. Placement of the tower must minimize impacts on public river corridor views.
d. Comply with the general design standards in Section 12-3-8.B.
12-3-6: STRUCTURE HEIGHT, PLACEMENT AND LOT SIZE:
A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish standards that protect primary
conservation areas and public river corridor views from development impacts and ensure that
new development is sited consistent with the purpose of the MRCCA.
B. Structure height. Structures and facilities must comply with the following standards unless
identified as exempt in Section 12-3-15.
1. ROS District: the lesser of the height standard as determined by the underlying zoning
district or thirty-five (35) feet.
2. RN District: the lesser of the height standard as determined by the underlying zoning
district or thirty-five (35) feet.
3. SR district: Height is determined by the underlying zoning district, provided the allowed
height is consistent with that of the mature tree line, where preset, and existing surrounding
development, as viewed from the OHWL of the opposite shore.
Page 19 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
4. Height shall be measured on the side of the structure facing the Mississippi River.
5. In addition to the conditional use permit requirements of Section 12-3-3.D, criteria for
considering whether to grant a conditional use permit for structures exceeding the height limits
must include:
a. Assessment of the visual impact of the proposed structure on public river corridor
views, including views from other communities;
b. Determination that the proposed structure meets the required bluff and OHWL
setbacks;
c. Identification and application of techniques to minimize the perceived bulk of the
proposed structure, such as:
(1) Placing the long axis of the building perpendicular to the river;
(2) Stepping back of portions of the facade;
(3) Lowering the roof pitch or use of a flat roof;
(4) Using building materials or mitigation techniques that will blend in with the natural
surroundings such as green roofs, green walls, or other green and brown building
materials;
(5) Narrowing the profile of upper floors of the building; or
(6) Increasing the setbacks of the building from the Mississippi River or blufflines;
d. Identification of techniques for preservation of those view corridors identified in the
MRCCA Plan; and
e. Opportunities for creation or enhancement of public river corridor views.
C. Location of Structure and Impervious Surfaces.
1. Structures and impervious surfaces must not be placed in the shore or bluff impact zones
unless identified as an exemption in Section 12-3-15.
2. Structures and facilities, including impervious surfaces, must comply with the following
OHWL setback provisions unless identified as exempt in Section 12-3-15.
a. ROS District: 200 feet from the Mississippi River and 150 feet from the Minnesota
River.
b. RN District: 100 feet from the Mississippi River.
c. SR District: (not applicable in the City of Mendota Heights)
3. Structures and facilities including impervious surfaces, must comply with the following
bluffline setback provisions unless identified as exempt in Section 12-3-15:
Page 20 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
a. ROS District: 100 feet.
b. RN District: 40 feet.
c. SR District: 40 feet.
4. Where principal structures exist on the adjoining lots on both sides of a proposed building
site, the minimum setback may be altered to conform to the average of the adjoining setbacks,
if the new structure's scale and bulk riverward or bluffward of the setbacks required under
Sections 12-3-6.C.2 and 12-3-6.C.3 are consistent with adjoining development. [See Figure 6
– below].
FIGURE 6: STRUCTURE SETBACK AVERAGING DIAGRAM
5. Subsurface sewage treatment systems, including the septic tank and absorption area,
must be located at least 75 feet from the ordinary high water level of the Mississippi River and
all other public waters.
D. Lot Size and Buildable Area.
1. Lots abutting the Mississippi River in the ROS District must be at least two hundred feet
(200’) in width, unless alternative design methods are used that provide greater protection of
the riparian area.
2. All new lots must have adequate buildable area to comply with the setback requirements
of Sections 12-3-6.C.2 and 12-3-6.C.3 so as to not require variances to use the lots for their
intended purpose.
12-3-7: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE FACILITIES:
A. Purpose. To establish design standards for private facilities that are consistent with best
management practices and that minimize impacts to primary conservation areas, public river
corridor views and other resources identified in the MRCCA plan.
Page 21 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
B. General design standards. All private facilities must be developed in accordance with the
vegetation management and land alteration and storm water management requirements in
Sections 12-3-9 and 12-3-10.
C. Private roads, driveways, and parking areas. Except as provided in Section 12-3-15, private
roads, driveways, and parking areas must:
1. Be designed to take advantage of natural vegetation and topography so that they are not
readily visible;
2. Comply with structure setback requirements according to Section 12-3-6.C; and
3. Not be placed within the bluff impact zone or shore impact zone, unless exempt under
Section 12-3-15 and designed consistent with Section 12-3-8.B.
D. Private water access and viewing facilities.
1. Private access paths must be no more than:
a. Eight feet (8’) wide, if placed within the shore impact zone; and
b. Four feet (4’) wide, if placed within the bluff impact zone.
2. Private water access ramps must:
a. comply with Minnesota Rules, parts 6115.0210 and 6280.0250; and
b. be designed and constructed consistent with the applicable standards in Design
Handbook for Recreational Boating and Fishing Facilities.
3. Design and construction of private stairways, lifts, and landings are subject to the following
standards:
a. Stairways and lifts must not exceed four feet (4’) in width on residential lots. Wider
stairways may be used for commercial properties and residential facilities held in common,
if approved by a conditional use permit;
b. Landings for stairways and lifts on residential lots must not exceed thirty-two (32)
square feet in area. Landings larger than 32 square feet are allowed for commercial
properties and residential facilities held in common, if approved by a conditional use
permit;
c. Canopies or roofs are prohibited on stairways, lifts, or landings;
d. Stairways, lifts, and landings must be located in the least visible portion of the lot
whenever practical; and
e. Ramps, lifts, mobility paths, or other facilities for persons with physical disabilities are
allowed for achieving access to shore areas according to Section 12-3-7.D.3.a. through d.
(as noted above), and as provided under Section 12-3-3.G.
Page 22 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
4. One water-oriented accessory structure is allowed for each riparian lot or parcel less than
three-hundred feet (300’) in width at the ordinary high water level, with one additional
water-oriented accessory structure allowed for each additional 300 feet of shoreline on the
same lot or parcel. Water-oriented accessory structures are prohibited in the bluff impact
zone and must:
a. Not exceed twelve feet (12’) in height;
b. Not exceed one hundred twenty (120) square feet in area; and
c. Be placed a minimum of ten feet (10’) from the ordinary high water level.
E. Decks and patios in setback areas. Decks and at-grade patios may encroach into the required
setbacks from the ordinary high water level and blufflines without a variance, when consistent
with Sections 12-3-9 and 12-3-10, provided that:
1. The encroachment of the deck or patio into the required setback area does not exceed
fifteen percent (15%) of the required structure setback;
2. The area of the deck or patio that extends into the required setback area occupies no
more than twenty five percent (25%) of the total area between the required setback and the
15 percent using the formula:
[Required setback depth (ft.) x 0.15 x lot width at setback (ft.) x 0.25 = maximum total area]
3. The deck or patio does not extend into the bluff impact zone. [See Figure 7 – below].
FIGURE 7: DECK AND PATIO ENCROACHMENT DIAGRAM
F. Fences. Fences between principal structures and the river are allowed if fences are:
1. not higher than six feet (6’);
2. not located within the SIZ and BIZ; and
3. not located in the regulatory floodplain.
Page 23 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
12-3-8: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES:
A. Purpose. To establish design standards for public facilities that are consistent with best
management practices and that minimize impacts to primary conservation areas, public river
corridor views and other resources identified in the MRCCA plan. Public facilities serve the
public interest by providing public access to the Mississippi River corridor or require locations
in or adjacent to the river corridor and therefore require some degree of flexibility.
B. General design standards. All public facilities must be designed and constructed to:
1. Minimize visibility of the facility from the river to the extent consistent with the purpose of
the facility;
2. Comply with the structure placement and height standards in Section 12-3-6, except as
provided in Section 12-3-15;
3. Be consistent with the vegetation management standards in Section 12-3-9 and the land
alteration and storm water management standards in Section 12-3-10, including use of
practices identified in Best Practices for Meeting DNR General Public Waters Work Permit GP
2004-0001, where applicable;
4. Avoid primary conservation areas, unless no alternative exists. If no alternative exists,
then disturbance to primary conservation areas must be avoided to the greatest extent
practicable, and design and construction must minimize impacts; and
5. Minimize disturbance of spawning and nesting times by scheduling construction at times
when local fish and wildlife are not spawning or nesting.
6. Minimize disturbance during bird migration and nesting times by scheduling construction
at times when birds are not migrating or nesting.
C. Right-of-way maintenance standards. Right-of-way maintenance must comply with the
following standards:
1. Vegetation currently in a natural state must be maintained to the extent feasible;
2. Where vegetation in a natural state has been removed, native plants must be planted and
maintained on the right-of-way; and
3. Chemical control of vegetation must be avoided when practical, but when chemical control
is necessary the chemicals used must be in accordance with the regulations and other
requirements of all state and federal agencies with authority over the chemical’s use.
D. Crossings of public waters or public land. Crossings of public waters or land controlled by the
Commissioner are subject to approval by the Commissioner according to Minnesota Statutes,
sections 84.415 and 103G.245.
E. Public utilities. Public utilities must comply with the following standards:
Page 24 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
1. High-voltage transmission lines, wind energy conversion systems greater than five (5)
megawatts, and pipelines are regulated according to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 216E, 216F,
and 216G respectively; and
2. If overhead placement is necessary, utility facility crossings must minimize the visibility of
the facility from the river and follow other existing right of ways as much as practicable.
3. The appearance of structures must be as compatible as practicable with the surrounding
area in a natural state with regard to height and width, materials used, and color.
4. Wireless communication facilities must comply with Section 12-3-5.B.6.
F. Public transportation facilities. Public transportation facilities shall comply with the structure
placement and height standards in Section 12-3-6. Where such facilities intersect or abut two
or more MRCCA districts, the least restrictive standards apply. Public transportation facilities
must be designed and constructed to give priority to:
1. Providing scenic overlooks for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians;
2. Providing safe pedestrian crossings and facilities along the river corridor;
3. Providing access to the riverfront in public ownership; and
4. Allowing for use of the land between the river and the transportation facility.
G. Public recreational facilities. Public recreational facilities must comply with the following
standards:
1. Buildings and parking associated with public recreational facilities must comply with the
structure placement and height standards in Section 12-3-6, except as provided in Section
12-3-15;
2. Roads and driveways associated with public recreational facilities must not be placed in
the bluff or shore impact zones unless no other placement alternative exists. If no alternative
exists, then design and construction must minimize impacts to shoreline vegetation, erodible
soils and slopes, and other sensitive resources.
3. Trails, access paths, and viewing areas associated with public recreational facilities and
providing access to or views of the Mississippi River are allowed within the bluff and shore
impact zones if design, construction, and maintenance methods are consistent with the best
management practice guidelines in the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ Trail
Planning, Design, and Development Guidelines.
a. Hard-surface trails are not allowed on the face of bluffs with a slope exceeding thirty
percent (30%). Natural surface trails are allowed, provided they do not exceed eight feet
(8’) in width.
b. Trails, paths, and viewing areas must be designed and constructed to minimize:
(1) Visibility from the river;
(2) Visual impacts on public river corridor views; and
Page 25 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
(3) Disturbance to and fragmentation of primary conservation areas.
4. Public water access facilities must comply with the following requirements:
a. Watercraft access ramps must comply with Minnesota Rules, chapters 6115.0210 and
6280.0250; and
b. Facilities must be designed and constructed consistent with the standards in the
Design Handbook for Recreational Boating and Fishing Facilities.
5. Public signs and kiosks for interpretive or directional purposes are allowed in the bluff or
shore impact zones, provided they are placed and constructed to minimize disturbance to
these areas and avoid visual impacts on public river corridor views. If illuminated, the lighting
must be fully shielded and be directed downward.
6. Public stairways, lifts, and landings must be designed as provided in Section 12-3-7.D.3.
12-3-9: VEGETATION MANAGEMENT:
A. Purpose. To establish standards that sustain and enhance the biological and ecological
functions of vegetation; preserve the natural character and topography of the MRCCA; and
maintain the stability of bluffs and steep slopes and ensure stability of other erosion-prone
areas.
B. Applicability. This section applies to:
1. Shore impact zones;
2. Areas within 50 feet of a wetland or natural drainage route;
3. Bluff impact zones;
4. Areas of native plant communities; and
5. Significant existing vegetation stands identified in the MRCCA plan.
C. Activities allowed without a vegetation permit.
1. Maintenance of existing lawns, landscaping and gardens;
2. Removal of vegetation in emergency situations as determined by the city;
3. Right-of-way maintenance for public facilities meeting the standards in Section 12-3-8.C;
4. Agricultural and forestry activities meeting the standards of Section 12-3-5.B.1 and 12-3-
5.B.3;
5. Selective vegetation removal, provided that vegetative cover remains consistent with the
management purpose of the MRCCA District, including the removal of:
Page 26 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
a. Vegetation that is dead, diseased, dying, or hazardous;
b. Vegetation to prevent the spread of diseases or insect pests;
c. An individual tree or shrub; and
d. Invasive non-native species.
D. Activities allowed with a vegetation permit.
1. Only the following intensive vegetation clearing activities are allowed with a vegetation
permit:
a. Clearing of vegetation that is dead, diseased, dying, or hazardous;
b. Clearing to prevent the spread of diseases or insect pests;
c. Clearing to remove invasive, non-native species;
d. Selective removal of keystone species;
e. Clearing to prepare for restoration and erosion control management activities
consistent with a plan approved by the city; and
f. The minimum necessary for development that is allowed with a building permit or as
an exemption under Section 12-3-15.
2. General Performance Standards. The following standards must be met, in addition to a
restoration plan under Section 12-3-9.F, in order for the City to approve a vegetation permit:
a. Development is sited to minimize removal of or disturbance to natural vegetation;
b. Soil slope stability, and hydrologic conditions are suitable for the proposed work as
determined by the City Engineer;
c. Clearing is the minimum necessary and designed to blend with the natural terrain and
minimize visual impacts to public river corridor views and other scenic views;
d. Vegetation removal activities are conducted to expose the smallest practical area of
soil to erosion for the least possible time, and to avoid bird migration and nesting seasons;
and
e. Any other condition determined necessary to achieve the purpose of this section.
E. Prohibited activities. All other intensive vegetation clearing is prohibited.
F. Vegetation restoration plan.
1. Development of a vegetation restoration plan and reestablishment of native vegetation is
required.
a. For any vegetation removed with a permit issued under Section 12-3-9.D (above);
Page 27 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
b. Upon failure to comply with any provisions in this section; or
c. As part of the planning process for subdivisions as provided in Section 12-3-11.
2. Restoration Plan Performance Standards. The vegetation restoration plan must satisfy the
application submittal requirements in Section 12-3-12 and:
a. Vegetation must be restored in one or more of the following restoration priority areas:
(1) Areas with soils showing signs of erosion, especially on or near the top and
bottom of steep slopes and bluffs;
(2) Shoreline areas within twenty-five feet (25’) of the water with no natural
vegetation, degraded vegetation, or planted with turf grass;
(3) Areas on steep slopes and bluffs that are visible from the river with no natural
vegetation, degraded vegetation, or planted with turf grass; or
(4) Other approved priority opportunity areas, including priorities identified in the
MRCCA plan.
b. Include native vegetation that provides suitable habitat and effective soil stability,
runoff retention, and infiltration capability. Vegetation species, composition, density,
and diversity must be guided by nearby patches of native plant communities and by
Native Vegetation Establishment and Enhancement Guidelines;
c. Any highly erodible soils disturbed during removal and/or restoration must be
stabilized with deep-rooted vegetation with a high stem density.
d. Vegetation removed must be restored with native vegetation to the greatest extent
practicable. The area (square feet) of the restored vegetation should be similar to that
removed to the greatest extent practicable.
e. For restoration of removed native plant communities, restored vegetation must also
provide biological and ecological function equivalent to the removed native plant
communities. The area (square feet) of the restored vegetation should be equivalent
to that removed.
f. Be prepared by a qualified individual or a licensed professional familiar with and
experienced with native landscape materials and planting techniques, and
g. Include a maintenance plan that includes management provisions for controlling
invasive species and replacement of plant loss for three (3) years.
3. The city will issue a certificate of compliance after the vegetation restoration plan
requirements have been completed to the satisfaction of Public W orks Director.
Page 28 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
12-3-10: LAND ALTERATION STANDARDS AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT:
A. Purpose. To establish standards that protect water quality from pollutant loadings of sediment,
nutrients, bacteria, and other contaminants, and maintain the stability of bluffs, shorelines,
and other areas prone to erosion.
B. Land Alteration.
1. Within the bluff impact zone (BIZ), land alteration is prohibited, except for the following,
which are allowed only by permit.
a. Erosion control consistent with a plan approved by the City and consistent with Section
12-3-10.F.
b. The minimum necessary for development that is allowed as an exception under
Section 12-3-15; and
c. Repair and maintenance of existing buildings and facilities.
2. Within the water quality impact zone, land alteration that involves more than ten (10) cubic
yards of material or affects an area greater than one thousand (1,000) square feet requires a
permit.
C. Rock riprap, retaining walls, and other erosion control structures.
1. Construction, repair, or replacement of rock riprap, retaining walls, and other erosion
control structures located at or below the OHWL must comply with Minnesota Rules, part
6115.0215, Subp. 4, item E, and 6115.0216, Subp. 2. Work must not proceed until approved
by the commissioner, permitted by the US Army Corps of Engineers and all other permits are
obtained. [See Figure 8 – below].
FIGURE 8: RIPRAP GUIDELINES DIAGRAM
Page 29 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
2. Construction or replacement of rock riprap, retaining walls, and other erosion control
structures within the bluff impact zone and the water quality impact zone are allowed with a
permit consistent with the provisions of Section 12-3-10.F provided that:
a. If the project includes work at or below the OHWL, the commissioner must approve or
permit the project.
b. The structures are used only to correct an established erosion problem as determined
by the city.
c. The size and extent of the structures are the minimum necessary to correct the erosion
problem and are not larger than the following, unless a professional engineer
determines that a larger structure is needed to correct the erosion problem:
(1) Retaining walls must not exceed five (5) feet in height and must be placed a
minimum horizontal distance of ten (10) feet apart; and
(2) Riprap must not exceed the height of the regulatory flood protection elevation.
3. Repair of existing rock riprap, retaining walls, and other erosion control structures above
the OHWL does not require a permit provided it does not involve any land alteration.
D. Stormwater management.
1. In the bluff impact zone, stormwater management facilities are prohibited, except by permit
if:
a. There are no alternatives for storm water treatment outside the bluff impact zone on
the subject site;
b. The site generating runoff is designed so that the amount of runoff reaching the bluff
impact zone is reduced to the greatest extent practicable;
c. The construction and operation of the facility does not affect slope stability on the
subject property or adjacent properties; and
d. Mitigation based on the best available engineering and geological practices is required
and applied to eliminate or minimize the risk of slope failure.
2. In the water quality impact zone, development that creates new impervious surface, as
allowed by exemption in Section 12-3-15, or fully reconstructs existing impervious surface of
more than ten thousand (10,000) square feet requires a storm water permit. Multipurpose
trails and sidewalks are exempt if there is down-gradient vegetation or a filter strip that is at
least five feet (5’) wide.
3. In all other areas, storm water runoff must be directed away from the bluff impact zones
or unstable areas.
E. Development on steep slopes. Construction of structures, impervious surfaces, land
alteration, vegetation removal, or other construction activities may be allowed on steep slopes,
except for those areas in the BIZ, and only if:
Page 30 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
1. The applicant can demonstrate that the proposed development can be accomplished
without increasing erosion or storm water runoff;
2. The soil types and geology are suitable for the proposed development; and
3. Vegetation is managed according to the requirements of Section 12-3-9.
F. Conditions of land alteration permit approval. No permit for land alteration shall be approved
unless:
1. Temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control measures to retain sediment
onsite are consistent with the best management practices in the Minnesota Stormwater
Manual;
2. Natural site topography, and soil and vegetation conditions are used to control runoff and
reduce erosion and sedimentation;
3. Construction activity is phased when possible;
4. All erosion and sediment controls are installed before starting any land disturbance
activity;
5. Erosion and sediment controls are maintained to ensure effective operation;
6. The proposed work is consistent with the vegetation standards in Section 12-3-9; and
7. Best management practices are used for protecting and enhancing ecological and water
resources as identified in Best Practices for Meeting DNR General Public Waters Work Permit
GP 2004-0001.
G. Compliance with other plans and programs. All development must:
1. Be consistent with Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103B, and local water management plans
completed under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 8410;
2. Meet or exceed the wetland protection standards under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8420;
and
3. Meet or exceed the floodplain management standards under Minnesota Rules, sections
6120. 5000 – 6120.6200.
12-3-11: SUBDIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
A. Purpose.
1. To protect and enhance the natural and scenic values of the MRCCA during development
or redevelopment of the remaining large sites within the corridor;
2. To establish standards for protecting and restoring biological and ecological functions of
primary conservation areas on large sites; and
Page 31 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
3. To encourage restoration of native vegetation during development or redevelopment of
large sites where restoration opportunities have been identified in MRCCA plans.
B. Applicability.
1. The design standards in this section apply to subdivisions, planned unit developments,
and master-planned development and redevelopment of land involving ten (10) or more acres
for contiguous parcels that abut the Mississippi River and twenty (20) or more acres for all
other parcels, including smaller individual sites within the following developments that are part
of a common plan of development that may be constructed at different times:
a. Subdivisions;
b. Planned unit developments; and
c. Master-planned development and redevelopment of land.
2. The following activities are exempt from the requirements of this section.
a. Minor subdivisions consisting of two (2) or fewer lots;
b. Minor boundary line corrections;
c. Resolutions of encroachments;
d. Additions to existing lots of record;
e. Placement of essential services; and
f. Activities involving river-dependent commercial and industrial uses.
3. Application materials. Project information listed in Section 12-3-12 must be submitted for
all proposed developments.
4. Design standards.
a. Primary conservation areas, where they exist, must be set aside and designated as
protected open space in quantities meeting the following as a percentage of total
parcel area:
(1) CA-ROS District: 50%
(2) CA-RN District: 20%: and
(3) CA-SR District: 10% if the parcel includes native plant communities or provides
feasible connections to a regional park or trail system, otherwise no requirement.
b. If the primary conservation areas exceed the amounts specified in Section 12-3-
11.B.4.(a), then protection of native plant communities and natural vegetation in
riparian areas shall be prioritized.
Page 32 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
c. If primary conservation areas exist but to not have natural vegetation (identified as
restoration priorities in the MRCCA Plan), then a vegetation assessment must be
completed to evaluate the unvegetated primary conservation areas and determine
whether vegetation restoration is needed. If restoration is needed, vegetation must be
restored according to Section 12-3-9.F.
d. If primary conservation areas do not exist on the parcel and portions of the parcel have
been identified in the MRCCA Plan as a restoration area, vegetation must be restored
in the identified areas according to Section 12-3-9.F and the area must be set aside
and designated as protected open space.
e. Storm water treatment areas or other green infrastructure may be used to meet the
protected open space requirements if the vegetation provides biological and ecological
functions.
f. Transfer of development rights or the dedication of steep slopes, drainageways and
wetlands as allowed under Section 11-1-8, or the dedication of land for public uses,
including (but not limited to) public river access, parks, other open spaces or public
facilities, and as allowed under Section 11-5-1 of the Mendota Heights City Code, may
be counted toward the protected open space requirement.
g. Protected open space areas must connect open space, natural areas, and recreational
areas, where present on adjacent parcels, as much as possible to form an
interconnected network.
5. Permanent protection of designated open space
a. Designated open space areas must be protected through one or more of the following
methods:
(1) Public acquisition by a government entity for conservation purposes;
(2) A permanent conservation easement, as provided in Minnesota Statutes, chapter
84C;
(3) A deed restriction; or
(4) Other arrangements that achieve an equivalent degree of protection.
b. Permanent protection methods must ensure the long-term management of vegetation
to meet its biological and ecological functions, prohibit structures, and prohibit land
alteration, except as needed to provide public recreational facilities and access to the
river.
6. Alternative design standards. The city will consider the following alternative design option
to increase the permanent protection of Primary Conservation Areas (PCAs) in subdivisions
and other new developments in the MRCCA District and encourage restoration of native
vegetation communities:
a. The City will grant density bonuses to increase the permanent protection of PCAs
and/or native plant communities up to twenty percent (20%) of the parcel area in the
Page 33 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
CA-RN and CA-SR Districts, provided the protection and restoration of the entire
development site is consistent with the requirements of this section;
b. The City will approve density bonuses for a subdivision when the proposed subdivision
meets the objectives and requirements of this chapter to protect and preserve bluffs,
steep slopes, native vegetation, natural resources, views of the bluffs area, and open
space; and
c. The city shall determine the amount and location of the density bonus permitted for
each subdivision based on site conditions, zoning district regulations, and potential
impacts to the site and surrounding areas.
d. Alterative design standards may be considered through a planned unit development
or cluster development. Individual lots in a planned unit development or cluster
development may not be required to meet the design standards of this section if it can
be demonstrated that the overall development is compliant with the standards and
purpose of this section.
12-3-12: SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS:
A. Site Plan Required: No building permit, zoning approval, or subdivision approval shall be
issued for any action or development located in an area covered by this chapter until a site
plan has been prepared and approved in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
B. Site Plan Application: An official critical are permit application with a completed site plan shall
be filed with the zoning administrator containing evidence adequate to show that the proposed
use will conform with the standards set forth in this chapter. Three (3) full sets of plans (either
22” x 34” or 24” x 36” sized sheets), three (3) tabloid sized (11” x 17”) plan sets, plus an
electronic file (PDF preferred) of the full application materials shall be submitted to the zoning
administrator. No permit application shall be reviewed until it is complete.
C. Site Plan Contents. A fully detailed Survey or Site Plan drawn to scale appropriate to the size
of the project and suitable for the review to be performed, shall contain the following
information:
1. A detailed description or narrative prepared by the owner(s) or developer(s) of the
proposed project or development.
2. A complete and legible legal description, address and location of the property, with the
name and address of the legal registered owner(s) and developer(s) of the property.
3. A detailed plan identifying the subject property, adjoining lands, roads, railroads, existing
subdivisions, any primary conservation areas (PCA); public river corridor views, ordinary high-
water level (OHWL) of any adjacent or affected wetlands features, bluff-lines and all required
setbacks.
4. Existing topography as indicated on a contour map having a contour interval no greater
than two feet (2') per contour. The contour map shall also clearly delineate any bluff line, bluff
Page 34 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
impact zone, all streams, including intermittent streams and swales, rivers, water bodies, any
identifiable underground springs, and wetlands located on the site.
5. A plan delineating the existing drainage of the water setting forth in which direction the
volume, and at what rate the stormwater is conveyed from the site. The plan must also include
those areas on the site where stormwater collects and is gradually percolated into the ground
or slowly released to a stream or lake.
6. A description of the soils on the site, including a map indicating all soil types by area to be
disturbed. The description shall also include a soil report containing detailed information on
the suitability of the soils for the type of development proposed as well as for the type of
sewage disposal proposed. The plan must also describe any remedial steps to be taken by
the developer to render the soils suitable. All areas proposed for grading shall be identified
by soil type, both as to soil type of existing topsoil and soil type of the new contour. The
location and extent of any erosion areas shall be included in the soils description.
7. A description of any features, buildings, or areas which are of historic significance.
8. A plan indicating the proposed finished grades of the project development site illustrating
contours at the same intervals proposed above or in more detail if required to clearly indicate
the relationship of proposed changes to existing topography and remaining features.
9. A landscape plan drawn to an appropriate scale, including dimensions, distance, location,
type, size, and description of all existing and significant vegetation, clearly locating and
describing any vegetation proposed for removal and all proposed landscape materials which
will be added to the site as part of the development. All new landscaping must include native
varieties of deciduous, coniferous and ornamental trees and shrubs, along with new pollinator
friendly plants and vegetation, and no invasive species.
10. A proposed drainage plan of the developed site delineating in which direction, volume,
and at what rate stormwater will be conveyed from the site and setting forth the areas of the
site where stormwater will be allowed to collect and gradually percolate into the soil, or be
slowly released to a stream or lake. The plan shall also set forth the hydraulic capacity of all
structures to be constructed or exiting structures to be utilized, including volume or holding
ponds.
11. An erosion and sedimentation control plan indicating the type, location, and necessary
technical information on control measures to be taken both during and after construction,
including the calculated anticipated gross soil loss expressed in tons/acres/year both during
and after construction.
12. The proposed size, placement, alignment, height, and intended use of any structures,
including retaining walls, to be erected or located on the site.
13. A clear delineation of all areas which will be paved or surfaced including a description of
the surfacing material to be used.
14. A description of the method to be provided for vehicular and pedestrian access to the
proposed development and public access to the river and/or public river view opportunities
both before and after development. The description must also include the development's
impact on existing views of and along the river.
Page 35 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
15. A description of all parking facilities to be provided as part of the development, including
an analysis of parking needs generated by the proposed development.
16. A clear delineation of the area or areas to be dedicated for public use.
17. A clear delineation of the location and amount of excavated soils to be stored on the site
during construction.
18. Any other information pertinent to the project, which in the opinion of city staff and/or the
applicant, is necessary or helpful for the review of the project.
D. Minor Development: A minor development and/or minor change involving a single-family
dwelling, may be approved by the City Council without a public hearing if the project plans
conform to the general standards of this chapter. The city administrator shall bring the request
to the attention of the city council at its next regular meeting following receipt of an
administrative critical area permit application.
Eligible projects include, but are not limited to, minor building additions, decks, fences,
driveways, walkways, stairs, open patios or outdoor sitting areas, accessory storage sheds,
gazebos, chicken coops, retaining walls two feet (2’) or less in height, landscaping materials
and gardens, and similar structures. Proposed projects and sites must comply with the
following conditions:
1. No part of the project shall impact any area with slopes greater than eighteen percent
(18%).
2. No part of the project shall impact, disturb or be situated in a bluffline setback area as
defined by this chapter, whether on the same parcel or on an abutting parcel of land ,
3. The proposed project shall not expand the enclosed area of the principal or accessory
structures by more than two hundred (200) square feet.
4. The proposed project shall not increase or exceed the height of any existing structure.
5. The proposed project shall be in compliance with all other requirements of this Chapter,
and any other applicable regulations.
6. The proposed project shall not result in significant changes to the existing finished grade.
7. The proposed project areas shall include native vegetation.
12-3-13: OFFICIAL REVIEW PROCESS:
Proposed developments or activities within the MRCCA shall be subject to the following review
procedure:
A. Referral to Planning Commission: Except as otherwise provided in subsection 12-3-12.G
(Minor Developments) of this chapter, the zoning administrator shall refer all critical area
permits and site plans to the planning commission.
Page 36 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
B. Planning Commission Notice and Hearing on Application and Site Plan: The planning
commission shall hold a public hearing affording an opportunity for all parties interested to be
heard. The city shall give not less than ten (10) nor more than thirty (30) days' notice of the
time and place of the hearing. Notice of the hearing shall be published in the designated legal
newspaper for the city, and shall contain a description of the land and the proposed use. At
least ten (10) days before the hearing, the city shall mail a notice to the owner(s) of the
property in question and to each of the property owners within three hundred fifty feet (350')
of the outside boundaries of the land described in the site plan. Failure of the city to mail such
notice or failure of the property owners to receive said notice shall not invalidate the
proceedings.
Within sixty (60) days after the date the city receives a complete application , and unless the
statutory review period as provided for under Minnesota Statute §15.99 is extended or waived
by the applicant, the planning commission shall conduct a hearing and forward a written report
to the city council stating its findings and recommendation.
C. City Council Consideration on Application and Site Plan. W ithin thirty (30) days after the
receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning commission, the city council
shall meet and give full consideration to the application, site plan, written report and
recommendation, without a public hearing.
If the planning commission fails to make a written report or recommendation to the city council
within sixty (60) days after the acceptance of the application and site plan, and unless the
statutory review period has been expressly waived by the applicant as allowed under
Minnesota Statute §15.99, the city shall set an additional public hearing before the city council.
The hearing must be held within thirty (30) days after the expiration of the sixty (60) day period.
Failure to receive a written report and recommendation from the planning commission shall
not invalidate the proceedings or action of the city council.
The city shall give not less than ten (10) nor more than thirty (30) days mailed notice of the
time and place of a hearing to the owner(s) of the property in question and to each of the
property owners within three hundred fifty feet (350') of the outside boundaries of the land
described in the site plan. Failure of the property owners to receive the notice shall not
invalidate the proceedings.
After its consideration of an application and site plan, either with or without a public hearing,
the city council may take final action upon the application and site plan or may continue the
hearing for further investigation and study. The city council may also request further
information from the applicant or from the planning commission.
D. Any proposed amendment to this chapter may be referred to the planning commission for its
consideration and recommendations.
12-3-14: NOTIFICATION TO RESOURCE AGENCIES:
A. Amendments to this chapter and to the MRCCA plan must be submitted to the Commissioner
as provided in Minnesota rule, part 6106.0070, Subp. 3, items B-I, and via email to the
appropriate DNR Area Hydrologist.
Page 37 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
B. Notice of public hearings for discretionary actions, including critical area permits, conditional
and interim use permits, variances, appeals, rezonings, preliminary plats, final subdivision
plats, master plans, and PUDs, must be sent to the following entities at least twenty (20) days
prior to the hearing:
1. The Commissioner in a format prescribed by the DNR;
2. National Park Service; and
3. Where proposed building heights exceed the height limits specified in Section 12-3-6 as
part of the conditional use or variance process, to the adjoining local governments within the
MRCCA, including those with overlapping jurisdiction and those across the river.
C. Notice of final decisions for actions in Section 12-3-13, including findings of fact, must be sent
to the Commissioner, the National Park Service, and adjoining local governments within the
MRCCA within (10) days of the final decision.
D. Requests to amend district boundaries must follow Minnesota Rule part 6106.0100, Subp. 9,
item C.
E. The DNR must be notified of master plans, PUDs, preliminary and final plats at the time of
application submittal.
12-3-15: EXEMPTIONS:
A. Purpose. To provide exemptions to structure placement, height, and other standards for
specific river or water access-dependent facilities as provided in Minnesota Statutes, section
116G.15 Subd. 4.
B. Applicability.
1. Uses and activities not specifically exempted in this section must comply with this Chapter.
Uses and activities exempted under shore impact zone and bluff impact zone must comply
with the vegetation management and land alteration standards in Sections 12-3-9 and 12-
3-10.
2. Uses and activities in Section 12-3-15.B.3 are categorized as:
a. E - Exempt means that the use or activity is allowed;
b. (E) - Exempt if no alternative means that the use or activity is allowed only if no
alternatives exist; and
c. N - Not exempt means that a use or activity is not exempt and must meet the
standards of this chapter.
d. n/a – not applicable.
3. Use and activity exemptions classification
Page 38 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
a. General uses and activities.
Use or Activity Setbacks Height
Limits
SIZ BIZ Applicable standards with
which the use or activity
must comply
Industrial and utility structures
requiring greater height for
operational reasons (such as
elevators, refineries and railroad
signaling towers)
N E N N Structure design and
placement must minimize
interference with public river
corridor views.
Barns, silos, and farm structures N E N N
Bridges and bridge approach
roadways
E E E (E) Section 12-3-8
Wireless communication towers E E N N Section 12-3-5.B.6
Chimneys, church spires, flag poles,
public monuments, and mechanical
stacks and equipment
N E N N
Historic properties and contributing
properties in historic districts
E E E E Exemptions do not apply to
additions or site alterations
b. Public utilities.
Use or Activity Setbacks Height
Limits
SIZ BIZ Applicable standards with
which the use or activity
must comply
Electrical power facilities E E E (E) Section 12-3-8
Essential services (other than storm
water facilities)
E E E (E) Section 12-3-8
Storm water facilities E N E (E) Section 12-3-10
Wastewater treatment E N E N Section 12-3-8
Public transportation facilities E N (E) (E) Section 12-3-8
Page 39 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
c. Public recreational facilities.
Use or Activity Setbacks Height
Limits
SIZ BIZ Applicable standards with
which the use or activity
must comply
Accessory structures, such as
monuments, flagpoles, light
standards, and similar park features
E E (E) (E) Section 12-3-8; within BIZ,
only on slopes averaging
less than 30%. Exemptions
do not apply to principal
structures.
Picnic shelters and other open-sided
structures
E N (E) N Section 12-3-8
Parking lots (E) N (E) (E) Section 12-3-8; within BIZ,
only within 20 feet of toe of
bluff; not on face of bluff;
and must not affect stability
of bluff
Roads and driveways (E) N (E) (E) Section 12-3-8
Natural-surfaced trails, access
paths, and viewing areas
E N E E Section 12-3-8
Hard-surfaced trails and viewing
platforms
E N E (E) Section 12-3-8; within BIZ,
only on slopes averaging
less than 30%
Water access ramps E N E (E) Section 12-3-8
Public signs and kiosks for
interpretive or directional purposes
E N E (E) Section 12-3-8
d. River-dependent uses.
Use or Activity Setbacks Height
Limits
SIZ BIZ Applicable standards with
which the use or activity
must comply
Shoreline facilities E N1 E (E) Section 12-3-5.B.5.
Exemptions do not apply to
buildings, structures, and
parking areas that are not
part of a shoreline facility
Private roads and conveyance
structures serving river-dependent
uses
E N1 E (E) Section 12-3-5.B.5.
1 River-dependent commercial, industrial, and utility structures are exempt from height limits only if
greater height is required for operational reasons.
Page 40 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
e. Private residential and commercial water access and use facilities.
Use or Activity Setbacks Height
Limits
SIZ BIZ Applicable standards with
which the use or activity
must comply
Private roads serving 3 or more lots (E) N N (E) Section 12-3-7; in BIZ, only
on slopes averaging less
than 30%. Exemption does
not apply to private roads
serving fewer 3 lots or to
private driveways and
parking areas
Access paths E N E E Section 12-3-7
Water access ramps E N E N Section 12-3-7
Stairways, lifts, and landings E N E E Section 12-3-7
Water-oriented accessory structures E N E N Section 12-3-7
Patios and decks E N N N Section 12-3-7.E
Temporary storage of docks, boats,
and other equipment during the
winter months
E N E N
Erosion control structures, such as
rock riprap and retaining walls
E N E (E) Sections 12-3-10.C, 12-3-
10.E, and 12-3-10.F
Flood control structures E N E (E) Section 12-3-10
Page 41 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
Section 2.
City Code Title 4 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY, Chapter 4 Weeds; Noxious Vegetation is
hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the double-line struck-
through language as follows:
4-3-2: WEEDS AND NOXIOUS VEGETATION PROHIBITED 1:
A. Height Restriction; Accumulations Prohibited: It shall be unlawful for any owner, lessee or
occupant, or any agent, servant, representative or employee of any such owner, lessee or
occupant having control of any occupied or unoccupied lot or land or any part thereof in the
city to permit or maintain on any such lot or land, or on or along the sidewalk, street or alley
adjacent to the same between the property line and the curb or middle of the alley or for ten
feet (10') outside the property line if there is no curb, any growth of weeds, grass or other rank
vegetation to a greater height than twelve inches (12"), or any accumulation of dead weeds,
grass or brush. (1981 Code 1001 § 1; amd. 2003 Code)
B. Exemption. Any ground cover vegetation located in the following areas is hereby exempt
from height restrictions:
1. shore impact zones;
2. areas within fifty feet (50’) of a wetland or natural drainage way;
3. bluff impact zones;
4. areas of native plant communities; and
5. significant vegetative stands, with said areas identified under Title 12 Zoning, Chapter 3,
Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) Overlay District ordinance.
Ground cover vegetation and any vegetation management within the MRCCA Overlay District
shall comply with the Vegetation Management requirements and standards of Section 12-3-9
of City Code Title 12, Chapter 3 and any Vegetation Management Permits approved by the
city.
B.C. Poisonous Plants: It shall be unlawful for any such person or persons to cause, suffer or
allow poison ivy, ragweed or other poisonous plant or plants detrimental to health to grow on
any lot or land in such manner that any part of such ivy, ragweed, or other poisonous or harmful
weed shall extend upon, overhang or border any public place or allow the seed, pollen or other
poisonous particles or emanations therefrom to be carried through the air into any public place.
(1981 Code 1001 § 1)
Page 42 City of Mendota Heights - MRCCA Amendment Ord. No. 568
Section 3.
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication
according to law.
Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this ____ day of ______________, 2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
ATTEST
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 568
SUMMARY PUBLICATION
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12 ZONING
CHAPTER 3 CRITICAL AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT
WITH NEW
CHAPTER 3 MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA (MRCCA)
OVERLAY DISTRICT
AND
AMENDING PART OF TITLE 4 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY,
CHAPTER 3 WEEDS; NOXIOUS VEGETATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, on September 23, 2021, Ordinance No. 568 was
adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that, because of the lengthy nature of Ordinance No.
568, the following summary of the ordinance has been prepared for publication.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the ordinance adopted by the City Council replaces
the entirety of Title 12: Zoning, Chapter 3: Critical Area Overlay District with Chapter 3:
Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) Overlay District. This ordinance was adopted
in accordance with state law and in consultation with the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources. The ordinance establishes districts, development standards, design standards, and other
regulations for land use that are designed to protect primary conservation areas and public river
corridor views from developmental and other adverse impacts. The ordinance also amends part of
Title 4: Public Health and Safety, Chapter 3 Weeds; Noxious Vegetation by exempting ground
cover vegetation from certain height limitations in specific areas within the MRCCA district.
A printed copy of the whole ordinance is available for inspection by any person during the
City’s regular office hours at the office of the City Administrator/City Clerk or on the City’s
website.
PASSED, ADOPTED and APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION by the City Council of
the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, this 23rd day of September, 2021.
CITY COUNCIL OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
/s/Stephanie Levine, Mayor
Attest:
/s/ Lorri Smith, City Clerk