Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2023-05-02 City Council Agenda Packet
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tuesday, May 2, 2023 7:00 p.m. 1.Call to Order 2.Roll Call 3.Pledge of Allegiance 4.Adopt Agenda 5.Consent Agenda a.Approve April 18, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes b.Approve April 18, 2023 City Council Work Session Minutes c.Acknowledge January 24, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes d.Acknowledge February 8, 2023 Planning Commission Work Session Notes e.Acknowledge February 28, 2023 Planning Commission Work Session Notes f.Acknowledge April 17, 2023 Planning Commission Work Session Notes g.Approve Alcohol License – Mendota Liquor Barrel h.Approve City Clerk Out of Metro Area Travel Request i.Authorize Purchase Order for Fence Work at Mertensotto Field (Civic Center) j.Accept Resignation of Firefighter Steve Reamer k.Approval of Claims List 6.Public Comment Period (for items not on the agenda) 7.Presentations/Recognitions 8.Public Hearings Guidelines for Public Comment Period: The Public Comment Period of the agenda provides an opportunity to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. All are welcome to speak. Comments should be directed to the Council. Comments will be limited to 3 minutes per person; presentations which are longer will need to be scheduled with the City Clerk to appear on a future City Council agenda. Public comments may not be used to air personal attacks, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council members will not enter into a dialogue, nor will any decisions be made at that presentation. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. If appropriate, the Mayor may assign staff for follow up to the issues raised or occasionally called on to respond. Page 2 of 2 9. New Business a. Resolution 2023-25 Minor Subdivision and Variance at property generally located near 1941 Glenhill Road, Planning Case 2023-03 b. Resolution 2023-26 Variance at Saint Thomas Academy, Planning Case 2023-04 c. Resolution 2023-24 Amendments to the Saint Thomas Academy Conduit Debt d. City Council Strategic Priorities 10. Community Announcements 11. Council Comments 12. Adjourn Alternative formats or auxiliary aids are available to individuals with disabilities upon request. Please contact city hall at 651-452-1850 or cityhall@mendotaheightsmn.gov. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA DRAFT Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, April 18, 2023 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Levine called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilors Lorberbaum, Paper, and Mazzitello, were also present. Councilor Miller was absent. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Levine presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Mazzitello moved adoption of the agenda. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Levine presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilor Lorberbaum moved approval of the consent calendar as presented. Mayor Levine pulled items F, G, and H. a.Approval of April 4, 2023 City Council Minutes b. Acknowledge March 14, 2023 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes c.Acknowledge March 8, 2023 Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes d.Acknowledge March 22, 2023 Natural Resources Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission Joint Work Session Meeting Minutes e.Approval of Park Use Agreement with Two Rivers Athletic Association (TRAA) f.Accept Resignation of Firefighter Amy Patrick g.Appoint City Representatives to the Metropolitan Airports Commission Noise Oversight Committee h.Resolution 2023-20 Appointments to the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization i.Approve 2023 Workers Comp Renewal j.Approval of Claims List 5aCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 1 of 144 April 18, 2023 Mendota Heights City Council Page 2 of 10 Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS F) ACCEPT RESIGNATION OF FIREFIGHTER AMY PATRICK Mayor Levine acknowledged Firefighter Amy Patrick who has served the community with honor. She thanked her for her service. Mayor Levine moved to accept THE RESIGNATION OF FIREFIGHTER AMY PATRICK. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 G) APPOINT CITY REPRESENTATIVES TO THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORT COMMISSION NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE Mayor Levine recognized the members of City staff and the community members that will be serving on the committee. She thanked those that continue to serve the community. Councilor Lorberbaum moved to appoint CITY REPRESENTATIVES TO THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORT COMMISSION NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 H) RESOLUTION 2023-20 APPOINTMENTS TO THE LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION Mayor Levine recognized the two members that will be serving on behalf of the City and those that served in these positions in the past. Mayor Levine moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2023-20 APPOINTMENTS TO THE LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 PUBLIC COMMENTS John Maczko, 751 Cheyenne Lane, commented on the House omnibus bill that will go to the floor tomorrow. He recognized that City staff and the Council have been watching this topic which deals with local preemption of City regulation and zoning. He stated that this could be of concern to the City as it could change the character of the community and would also take control away from municipalities. He City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 2 of 144 April 18, 2023 Mendota Heights City Council Page 3 of 10 provided an overview of the controls that he feels would be taken away from the City and asked residents to contact their House representatives to provide their input and express concern. City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson commented that the Council will send a collective letter signed by the Mayor that opposes those three amendments. She stated that the League of Minnesota Cities and Metro Cities are also opposing the amendments. Joshua Paulson, 1709 Buchanan Street in Minneapolis, commented that he is a skateboarder that uses the Roger’s Lake skatepark and is present for that discussion. He recognized the gem that the City has in its skatepark. He stated that he attended the Commission meeting the previous week to provide input. He noted that the original proposal scaled down the size of the skatepark but added more features and he and another speaker encouraged the City to remove some of the proposed features in order to open up the space and increase safety. He commented that the skatepark is a great amenity for the community and people of all ages that use the facility. He stated that he would love to see a new skatepark in that location but also wants to see it done right so people of all skill levels can safely use the space. PRESENTATIONS No items scheduled. PUBLIC HEARING No items scheduled. NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) RESOLUTION 2023-22 POLLINATOR AWARENESS MONTH DESIGNATION Natural Resources Coordinator Krista Spreiter explained that the Council was being asked to approve Resolution 2023-22 proclaiming May as Pollinator Awareness Month in Mendota Heights. Councilor Lorberbaum moved to approve RESOLUTION 2023-22 PROCLAIMING MAY POLLINATOR AWARENESS MONTH. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Further discussion: Mayor Levine commented on the journey the City has taken to become more pollinator friendly. Councilor Lorberbaum commented that no mow May focused on homeowners whereas this effort focuses on all residents. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 B) RESOLUTION 2023-23 ARBOR DAY DESIGNATION City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 3 of 144 April 18, 2023 Mendota Heights City Council Page 4 of 10 Natural Resources Coordinator Krista Spreiter provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked to approve Resolution 2023-23 proclaiming Arbor Day in Mendota Heights. Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2023-23 PROCLAIMING ARBOR DAY. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 C) ROGER’S LAKE SKATE PARK RECOMMENDATION Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence provided background information. The Council is asked to consider a recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding the reconstruction of the existing skate park at Roger’s Lake Park. Councilor Mazzitello referenced the warranty period and asked that length of time. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence reviewed the different warranty terms. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek provided details on the estimated lifespan of the concrete pad. Councilor Paper asked for details on the period under which the City can apply for the mentioned grant program. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence replied that the bonding bill and criteria has not yet been approved. She noted that in looking at previous criteria, the City could meet some but not all. She stated that a potential timeframe has not been provided, should the funds be awarded by the legislature. She noted that a modular skatepark may not score well for the grant. Councilor Paper stated that if everything lined up and fell into place and funds were available, it would seem more likely than not that the timing would not work. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence stated that the City could submit for grant funding for phase two of a project. Councilor Paper asked if the existing features could be sold. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence replied that staff has discussed that process and would work with the City Attorney to determine what could be sold and how that could be done. Councilor Paper stated that he would appreciate that as it would seem someone could have use for those items. He noted that there were comments from two users at the Commission meeting and asked if there has been enough input from people that use the park. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence commented that ARC has been great to work with and are dialed into the skatepark community. She stated that in terms of community engagement, they have done more engagement on this project than any other project in her time with the City. She stated that the City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 4 of 144 April 18, 2023 Mendota Heights City Council Page 5 of 10 renderings are based off that engagement. She commented that two members of the community spoke at the Commission meeting and provided good insight but there were many more members of the public involved throughout this process. She stated that they will never build a facility that everyone will be happy with but believed that the users of the park would be happy with the end result. She recognized that a larger base would be desired but there are budget constraints and therefore a second phase could look to increase the size. Councilor Paper stated that as a modular park, this could be modified in the future to add more space. Mayor Levine commented that this was discussed in the worksession prior to this meeting where they discussed a looser schedule for concrete work to hopefully obtain more competitive bids. She stated that rotating the park by 90 degrees does appear to provide more space between the features. Councilor Paper asked if any of these features are specifically accessible. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence replied that the entrance to the park would be accessible, along with the concrete, and the features would be accessible to different users to some degree. She noted that she could look into that and provide an update. She commented that the park will meet ADA guidelines but that does not necessarily mean everything will be inclusive for all users. Councilor Mazzitello moved to approve THE AGREEMENT FOR THE EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION FROM AMERICAN RAMP COMPANY FOR THE ROGER’S LAKE SKATE PARK FOR A NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $217,876.72 AND APPROVE THE PLANS FOR THE CONCRETE PAD, WAIVING THE MAX PRICE BID LIMITATION AUTHORIZING SOLICITATION OF QUOTES. Councilor Lorberbaum seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 D) PICKLEBALL LIGHTS AND NOISE ABATEMENT RECOMMENDATION Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence explained that the Council was being asked to consider a recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding the use of lights at Friendly Hills Park for nighttime pickleball play. In addition, the City Council should review the Parks and Recreation Commission’s recommendation on noise abatement efforts in regards to pickleball noise at Marie Park and Friendly Hills Park. Councilor Paper asked the tree species recommended. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence replied that was not yet determined. Councilor Paper referenced the homes on Navajo and asked if both homeowners provided input, or just one. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence replied that she has received input from both of the homeowners closest to the rink, estimating about 100 feet from the homes to the rink. She stated that one City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 5 of 144 April 18, 2023 Mendota Heights City Council Page 6 of 10 of the residents seemed interested in the trees, but she has not had those conversations with the other resident. Councilor Paper asked if there would be space for more than three trees. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that the City could offer the residents more than three trees and provided more details. He stated that staff would work with the landowners on where they would like to see those trees along with the desired species. Councilor Paper asked if the tree planting would be limited to those two homes or whether that would also be offered to the homes on Pueblo. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that offering could be extended if desired by the Council. Councilor Paper referenced the cluster of trees proposed at Marie and asked what currently exists in that space. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that was unused turf grass that the City stopped mowing about six years ago and has been considered as a site for native planting. John Maczko, 751 Cheyenne Lane, commented that he is curious about using trees for noise mitigation. He stated that in his experience as a road engineer, trees have not been seen as something that mitigates noise, especially deciduous trees since they lose their leaves. He noted that spruce trees, planted in enough density and depth, could provide some noise mitigation. He did not believe three standalone trees would mitigate noise, while a clustering of coniferous trees could provide some mitigation. Mary Melzarek, 717 Navajo Lane, commented that it will be a long time before planted trees would mitigate noise. She stated that if a conifer tree is planted that could create issues with the visibility of the sightline. She stated that she would like to know all of the options and did not believe that trees would be the immediate cure all for this as they will take years to grow. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence stated that trees will not mitigate all the noise but would also not hurt the issue. She agreed that a dense grouping of trees would need to be planted in order to provide more mitigation. Councilor Mazzitello moved to NOT UTILIZE LIGHTS AT FRIENDLY HILLS FOR NIGHTTIME PICKLEBALL PLAY. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Councilor Mazzitello stated that he would be inclined to agree with the comments that trees as proposed would not provide the desired mitigation and perhaps there would be a better option. He encouraged staff to think outside of the box. He asked if the hockey boards could be taken down in the spring and put up in the fall. He stated that there are also screens that can assist in noise mitigation. He stated that he does support planting more trees in the parks but did not believe they would do much for noise mitigation. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 6 of 144 April 18, 2023 Mendota Heights City Council Page 7 of 10 Councilor Paper commented that when coniferous trees are clustered too tightly that will create a mess in the future where the trees cannot grow in a healthy manner. He stated that he would be open to any suggestion for noise mitigation. Mayor Levine commented on some of the comments received from other residents living around Friendly Hills related to noise mitigation. She commented that this is a new sport and therefore the mitigation efforts are new. She stated that using hockey rinks as pickleball courts is also new. She believed that more creative solutions would develop. She commented that there seems to be tolerance of the noise during the day but not at night and therefore believes the action the Council has taken to not use lighting will address that concern. She stated that she does like the idea of planting more trees, although realizing that it will not fully mitigate the noise. Councilor Lorberbaum asked if there is a time urgency or whether staff could complete additional research on alternatives and bring those back to the Council. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence replied that there is not an issue of timing for this matter. She stated that staff did a lot of research on mitigation efforts, including the option of installing poles and hanging the screens but it was not found to be a feasible option. Mayor Levine commented that the Parks and Recreation Commission did recommend approval to plant trees. Councilor Lorberbaum commented that if the Council does not want to take action on tree planting at this time, a motion would not be necessary. Mayor Levine recommended that the Council make a motion and then it could be discussed. Councilor Paper moved to approve THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO PLANT TREES ON OR AROUND THE SITES PINPOINTED AT MARIE PARK AND FRIENDLY HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE AGREEMENT OF ADJACENT NEIGHBORS. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Further discussion: Councilor Lorberbaum asked the definition of adjacent neighbors. Councilor Paper replied that he would consider the four homes along Pueblo as mentioned to be added for Friendly Hills. Councilor Mazzitello commented that he is not opposed to planting trees but seems that they are painted into a corner. He stated that if they do not plant trees they are perceived as not addressing the noise issue but if they do plant trees and it does not solve the issue that could also create frustration. He stated that he does support planting trees for the purpose of planting trees but does not believe it will effectively mitigate the noise. Councilor Paper commented that perhaps there are other solutions out there. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 7 of 144 April 18, 2023 Mendota Heights City Council Page 8 of 10 Mayor Levine commented that this issue is not unique to Mendota Heights as the sport gains popularity and has no doubt that technology will catch up, but it is currently lacking in terms of things that can address the noise. She stated that while the trees will not fully mitigate the noise, but they could help to some degree. Councilor Paper referenced the trees identified at Marie Park near the parking lot and asked whether that location would address anything. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that there is currently a gap in that location that would be filled with the trees. Councilor Lorberbaum commented that she is supportive of more trees in the park and nearby if there is acknowledgement that this will not solve the problem. Councilor Mazzitello commented that this is probably the best they can do at the moment. Mayor Levine agreed. She stated that the motion could be amended to remove the language for noise mitigation. Councilor Lorberbaum asked the cost for the trees. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence replied that there would be a cost of $250 per tree. Mayor Levine commented that there are funds within the budget to plant trees in the parks. She acknowledged the struggle in trying to solve a problem that cannot be solved at this time. Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence commented that parks staff will continue to look for new technology that will attempt to address the issue. Councilor Mazzitello commented that by voting in support of this motion he would see it as acknowledging there is an issue. Councilor Lorberbaum also acknowledged that this will not be the ultimate solution. Councilor Mazzitello recapped the proposed language to be added to the motion “with acknowledgment that noise from pickleball is an issue in the neighborhood and confirmed consensus in agreement by Councilor Paper. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 E) LOGIS FIBER MANAGEMENT CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION Assistant City Administrator Kelly Torkelson explained that the Dakota Broadband Board (DBB) facilitates the City’s broadband management. The DBB is in the process of finalizing plans to dissolve with an anticipated dissolution date of August 31, 2023. This also includes the termination of the DBB City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 8 of 144 April 18, 2023 Mendota Heights City Council Page 9 of 10 fiber management contract with LOGIS effective July 30, 2023. This agreement sets forth the new agreement directly between the City of Mendota Heights and LOGIS for the continued management of the City’s fiber network independent of the DBB. Mayor Levine commented that she is sorry it came to this noting that City staff did an outstanding job representing the City and its interests. She commented that generally people are stronger together and broadband is a utility. She commented that together they had cooperative pricing and grant opportunities and now to disband, each party will have their own fiber and contract without the benefit of bargaining power. She expressed disappointment that the Board will be disbanded. Councilor Lorberbaum moved to approve THE CONTRACT FOR FIBER MANAGEMENT SERVICES WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS (LOGIS) FOR THE REMAINDER OF 2023 FOR A COST OF $3,007. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Further discussion: Councilor Paper agreed that this has been very frustrating. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Mayor Levine commended City staff noting that they have expertise and represent the City well. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson announced upcoming events and activities. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilor Mazzitello commented on the House file mentioned during public comments that would subvert the City’s ability to create its own rules and character. He too urged residents to reach out to their representatives prior to the hearing the following day. Councilor Lorberbaum commented that today is tax day. She reminded residents about the Newsie Musical at a local school and reviewed the showtimes. She noted the upcoming Touch a Truck event and Coffee with the Council. She encouraged residents to come to the Coffee with the Council events to provide input. She stated that a worksession was held earlier in the night where they discussed priorities. She stated that the Planning Commission has been working hard to update the ordinances and noted that the Planning Commission will be holding a workshop on that topic next week. Councilor Paper reminded residents of the Scott Patrick Memorial 5k which will be held Saturday, June 3rd. He stated that the local chapter of Beyond the Yellow Ribbon is always looking to assist veterans and urged those that need assistance to reach out. Mayor Levine reminded residents of Arbor Day and the upcoming month focusing on pollinators. She encouraged residents to interact with the volunteer portal on the website and find something that interests them. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 9 of 144 April 18, 2023 Mendota Heights City Council Page 10 of 10 ADJOURN Councilor Mazzitello moved to adjourn. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Mayor Levine adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m. ____________________________________ Stephanie B. Levine Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Christine Lusian City Clerk City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 10 of 144 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA DRAFT Minutes of the City Council Work Session Tuesday, April 18, 2023 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Levine called the work session to order at 5:00 p.m. Councilmembers Lorberbaum, Mazzitello, and Paper were present. Miller was absent. Staff in attendance included City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson, Police Chief Kelly McCarthy, Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek, Assistant City Administrator Kelly Torkelson, Finance Director Kristen Schabacker, Recycling Coordinator Courtney Selstad, Natural Resource Coordinator Krista Spreiter, Park and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence, and City Clerk Christine Lusian. Natural Resources Commission Chair Heidi Swank was present as an observer. GREEN STEP CITIES PROGRAM AND SUSTAINABILITY Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence presented information on the GreenStep Cities Program inviting city council discussion and direction. Step one of the program was completed with the adoption of a resolution formalizing the cities vision. Step two of the program was completed with a number of city projects and activities. Step three requires the completion of a number of best practices. Discussion touched on the label/marketing of GreenSteps versus impacts of the projects, prioritization of all of the goals in the Natural Resource Plan and GreenSteps Program, what a policy on living/complete streets would require, utilizing the Natural Resource Commission and area experts, and mobility/public transit. Public transit ridership in Mendota Heights is low, however describing public transit options on our website would help completing a requirement in the GreenSteps program. The group agreed that direction or prioritization of goals and projects should come from the Natural Resources Plan and Natural Resource Commission and related committees with updates to the City Council twice a year. CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PRIORITIES City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson introduced proposed city council priorities and goals for 2023-2024 inviting city council discussion and direction. The proposed priorities are 1) Economic Vitality and Community Vibrancy, 2) Environmental Sustainability and Stewardship, 3)Premiere Public Services and Infrastructure, 4) Inclusive and Responsive Government. The 5bCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 11 of 144 two-year priorities provide structure and organization for daily operations. Council sets the direction for the city and staff carries out action items. Discussion included clarification of public education on culture and history and the role of the city and other agency partners, the requirement of optical allyship in public service, referring to existing guiding documents like the comprehensive plan for direction and focus, and balancing expectations with time and resources. SKATEPARK DESIGN Parks and Recreation Manager Meredith Lawrence and Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek initiated conversation on the proposed reconstruction of the Roger’s Lake Skate Park on the regular meeting agenda for a vote. Discussion covered budget and funding sources, what the surface preparation consists of, park equipment/layout options, project timing and weather, and market and expectation of rising costs. MISCELLANEOUS Paper requested bringing back the senior pass for the Mendota Heights Par 3 Community Golf Course. Lorberbaum mentioned hearing concerns from the planning commission members and residents on zoning code updates. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Levine adjourned the meeting at 6:35 p.m. ____________________________________ Stephanie B. Levine, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Christine Lusian, City Clerk City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 12 of 144 January 24, 2023 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 1 of 5 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 24, 2023 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, January 24, 2023 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Commissioners Patrick Corbett, Cindy Johnson, Brian Petschel, Brian Udell, Jason Stone, and Andrew Katz. Those absent: None Chair Field noted that since the last meeting, Commissioner Lorberbaum was elected to the City Council and Commissioner Toth has been appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission which left two vacancies. He introduced the new members of the Commission. Commissioners Udell and Stone introduced themselves. Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of October 25, 2022 Minutes COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 25, 2022. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Approval of September 28, 2022 Workshop Notes COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 28, 2022 WORKSHOP NOTES. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Approval of November 17, 2022 Workshop Notes COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 17, 2022 WORKSHOP NOTES. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 5cCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 13 of 144 January 24, 2023 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 2 of 5 Hearings A) PLANNING CASE 2023-01 HENRY (VIC) HOLEC, 1170 DODD ROAD – LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp explained that Mr. Vic Holec is requesting consideration of a simple lot line adjustment on a large parcel of land that he currently owns, located at 1170 Dodd Road. Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; one email inquiry was received regarding the potential to further subdivide the land and complete a similar process with an adjacent contiguous property. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp 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. Chair Field stated that there was an easement, which is referred to as abandoned on the plat, and asked if the City has relinquished all rights to that. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp confirmed that to be true. Chair Field opened the public hearing. Henry Vic Holec, applicant, commented that they have a backyard and hill that connects to the parcel being discussed tonight. He stated that they eventually had the opportunity to purchase that adjacent property and did so, noting that they have used that area most recently as a charity garden for the neighborhood. He stated that they would intend to continue that use as a garden and buffer from development but would like to split that portion of land to be combined with their lot to become one single parcel. Brad Clary, 1179 Ivy Hill Drive, stated that the townhome residents have watched this process evolve and have two concerns. He asked if the property is being setup for subdivision and new homes. Chair Field stated that this request is simply for a lot split and not any consideration of future development. He stated that the action tonight is simply for the split and attachment to 8 Beebe. Mr. Clary commented that he wants everyone to be on notice for the time an attempt is made to change the zoning to allow multi-family units, they will be opposed. Seeing no one further coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 14 of 144 January 24, 2023 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 3 of 5 COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT SUPPORTING THE REQUEST AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. APPLICATION SHALL FILE LOT/PARCEL COMBINATION DOCUMENTS WITH DAKOTA COUNTY INDICATING THE NEWLY DEFINED PARCEL B CREATED BY THIS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT SHALL BE ADDED TO OR COMBINED WITH 8 BEEBE AVENUE, PARCEL ID NUMBER 27-71150-04-060. 2. ALL TRANSFER OR DEED DOCUMENTS WHICH CONVEY THE PORTION OF LANDS UNDER THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT AND LOT SPLIT PROCESS SHALL BE RECORDED WITH DAKOTA COUNTY. 3. NO SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT WILL BE ALLOWED OR APPROVED ON THE PROPOSED PARCEL B AT ANY TIME. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its February 7, 2023 meeting. B) PLANNING CASE 2023-02 MICHELLE CULLIGAN ON BEHALF OF MARY CULLIGAN, 1941 GLENHILL ROAD – LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp explained that Mr. and Ms. Culligan are requesting consideration of a simple lot line adjustment on a large parcel of land that they currently own, located at 1941 Glenhill Road. Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; two inquiries from adjacent property owners requesting additional information were received. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp 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 Petschel asked if the new parcel would be sellable. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp confirmed that it could be sold. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 15 of 144 January 24, 2023 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 4 of 5 Commissioner Petschel noted that there was a previous lawsuit relating to whether the parcel would be buildable. He asked whether a parcel could be sold that would not be buildable. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp replied that the determination tonight is not whether the parcel is buildable. She stated that two new legal descriptions can be created and noted that buildability would be a separate matter. Commissioner Katz commented on a triangle sliver of land owned by the City in this area, which is listed as valley and asked if this action would have any impact on that parcel. Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp confirmed that this action would only impact the property owned by the Culligans and would not impact the City property. Chair Field opened the public hearing. Michelle Culligan, applicant, commented that this is a simple lot line adjustment. She noted that her parents live in the home at 1941 Glenhill Road and this action would recreate the lot line to attach to 1941 to create a bigger yard and better buffer. Seeing no one further coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT SUPPORTING THE REQUEST AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. APPLICANT SHALL FILE LOT/PARCEL COMBINATION DOCUMENTS WITH DAKOTA COUNTY INDICATING THE NEWLY DEFINED PARCEL B CREATED BY THIS LINE ADJUSTMENT SHALL BE ADDED TO OR COMBINED WITH 1941 GLENHILL ROAD, PARCEL IS NUMBER 27-81251-01-010. 2. ANY FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS OR DEVELOPMENT ON THE SUBJECT PARCELS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO MRCCA REVIEW AND ALL NECESSARY PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED. 3. ALL TRANSFER OR DEED DOCUMENTS WHICH CONVEY THE PORTION OF LANDS UNDER THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT AND LOT SPLIT PROCESS SHALL BE RECORDED WITH DAKOTA COUNTY. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 16 of 144 January 24, 2023 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 5 of 5 Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its February 7, 2023 meeting. Zoning Ordinance Workshop Date Discussion Chair Field asked for input on the potential workshop dates listed within the staff report. It was the consensus of the Commission to hold the Zoning Ordinance Workshop on Wednesday, February 8th at 5:30 p.m. New/Unfinished Business City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson provided an update on the recruitment for a new Community Development Director. Chair Field wished former Community Development Director Tim Benetti well in his new position. He also commended Public Works staff for the excellent job they have been doing with snow removal. Adjournment COMMISSIONER STONE MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:40 P.M. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 17 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 18 of 144 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP NOTES FEBRUARY 8, 2023 A special workshop relating to the Zoning Code Update was held on Wednesday, February 8, 2023 in the large conference room at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 5:30 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Commissioners Jason Stone, Patrick Corbett, Andrew Katz, Brian Petschel, Brian Udell, Cindy Johnson Also present: Planning Consultant Jennifer Haskamp; City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson; City Engineer Ryan Ruzek The workshop began at 5:38 p.m. Planner Haskamp summarized the Zoning Code Update Process to date. She reiterated that the Commission will see a full draft of the revised Code and noted that 75-85 percent of the code from a regulatory perspective has not changed. She reminded commission members that the process will include a review of the draft revised code by the Commission, a joint work session with the City Council, community engagement and a public hearing. Miscellaneous Topics, Housekeeping Items Accessory Building and Accessory Structure Discussion Planner Haskamp asked the Commission to keep in mind the R-1 district when discussing Accessory Building and Structures portion of the code, then we can extrapolate the intent to the other districts. Haskamp and commission members reviewed the accessory structure categories and how to differentiate the various types of accessory structures such as private garages, residential storage such as pool houses, and residential structures such as garden sheds. The Commission noted that they don’t believe that any accessory structure should be habitable. The Commission discussed what is currently allowed versus what the intent of the accessory structure ordinance is. Members discussed tree houses and pools and the inclusion or exclusion of these structures in this portion of the code. The Commission agrees that the code should allow for all lots to have a garage and that the intent of the code was to allow for a second garage based on lot size. The Commission discussed that the intent of the code is to allow for a garage and a shed of 144 square feet or less. Commission members reviewed how the code would determine the lot size, in the event that the subject lot has a pond, wetland, or goes into the right-of-way. Members recommended placing a limit on the garage door frontage to the public right-of-way. The Commission discussed if a temporary structure would fall under the accessory structure. The Commission discussed the intent of the code would that lots are allowed one storage structure up to 144 square feet and a chicken coop not to exceed a total of 81 square feet for a combined total of 225 square feet. 5dCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 19 of 144 Planner Haskamp discussed a category of an Accessory Structure, which would include sport courts, play structures, pools, tree houses, etc. The Commission reviewed what would be included in the impervious surface area, and if the lot area should include a bluff, a pond, a wetland, etc. The Commission discussed how to define buildable area, and if the impervious surface coverage minimum would apply to the buildable area, or the total lot area. Planner Haskamp noted that other codes commonly exclude ponds, lakes, wetlands, slopes, etc. when calculating the buildable area and impervious surface coverage. The Commission discussed if a proposed 35 percent impervious surface area coverage maximum is the correct standard, or if it should be 40 – 50 percent. Planner Haskamp discussed an Administrative Permit option that would allow the City to protect the waterbody, and to allow the residents to build over the impervious surface coverage maximum. The Commission discussed the option to outline in the code that if a lot is covered 50 percent by water, the resident can increase the impervious surface coverage. The Commission discussed if there is a special provision for water, if there should be special provisions for small lots. It was noted that the proposed overlay district that captures the majority of those small lots would have their own provisions. Planner Haskamp will look at the lots that are affected by large bodies of water and determine how many lots would actually be affected. The work session ended at 7:38 p.m. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 20 of 144 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP NOTES FEBRUARY 28, 2023 A special workshop relating to the Zoning Code Update was held on Wednesday, February 8, 2023 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 5:30 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Commissioners Jason Stone, Patrick Corbett, Andrew Katz, Brian Petschel, Brian Udell, Cindy Johnson Also present: Planning Consultant and Interim Community Development Director Jennifer Haskamp; City Engineer Ryan Ruzek The workshop began at 6:33 p.m. Planner Haskamp began the meeting by stating there is a full draft of the Code just about done and the draft can be completed and delivered once the Planning Commission finishes up the discussion. Miscellaneous Topics, Housekeeping Items Accessory Structures – Summary of Draft Planner Haskamp summarized the draft language for Accessory Structures based on the Commissioner’s comments from last meeting. The Commission generally agreed that the language matches the intent of the discussion from last meeting. Build-To Line/Frontage Line Planner Haskamp presented the idea of a build-to line instead of a front yard setback. A build-to range would require houses to be built in a range from the front yard, instead of being able to be built back to the rear yard setback. The Commission generally agreed to pursue this and directed Planner Haskamp to conduct an analysis of existing conditions to determine what the build-to range should be, and the Commission can give feedback on the proposed language. There were a few concerns about deeper lots and how the build-to range would address that. Traditional Neighborhood Overlay Summary Planner Haskamp summarized the Traditional Neighborhood Overlay to determine if the Commission would like to pursue the overlay. The Traditional Neighborhood Overlay is an overlay, which means it has a base zoning district of R-1. The Commission had questions and concerns about the Side Yard setbacks. Planner Haskamp stated that the Commission will receive the draft language with the full draft of the code and review that language. Residents in the audience had concerns about averaging the side yard setbacks. The Commission generally agreed that the Overlay district should be included in the draft code. The Commission can edit the language in the full draft of the code if there are concerns. Residents in the audience had concerns. The Commission reiterated that there will be a 5eCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 21 of 144 Public Hearing and residents can express their concerns with the Commission and Council after seeing the full draft. Home Occupations Planner Haskamp presented the existing Home Occupations language. The Commission agreed that the definition should be changed to address working from home. The Commission discussed that the main concern would be traffic, parking, noise, signs, storage of bulk materials, machinery. Planner Haskamp presented what other cities are doing: the home occupation shouldn’t generate more traffic than a typical residential use, parking should be included onsite, cities can also ban on-site retail sales. Planner Haskamp will draft language based on the discussion. Wetland Regulations Planner Haskamp presented that the goal for changing the Wetland Regulations is to bring them in conformance with State Regulations. The Commission generally agreed. Off-Street Parking Standards in Business and Industrial Districts Planner Haskamp generally presented the existing standards and asked the Commission if the Code should address angled parking, and other standards. The Commission generally agreed to add industry standards in the Code. Outdoor Commercial Recreation in Industrial Zones Planner Haskamp asked the Commission how they would feel about outdoor recreation being allowed in the Industrial zones. Currently, indoor recreation is allowed in the Industrial zone. The Commission discussed and generally agreed there should be a principal structure with a compatible use. Planner Haskamp will start drafting language to allow outdoor recreation as an accessory use to a compatible principal use. The Commission can then look at the language and comment on it. Public Semi-Public District Planner Haskamp presented a summary of the PSP District. As a reminder, zoning reverts back to Residential Estate if it’s not in use. Residents in the audience had concerns. The Commission and Planner Haskamp discussed a PSP Overlay District instead of a zoning district. The overlay district maintains the base zoning district while allowing PSP rights. Planner Haskamp will draft the language for the overlay district for the full draft and the Commission can give feedback on it. The PSP overlay would have it’s own setbacks. The Commission had concerns about adding PSP rights in a Residential District, such as rights for lighting. Administration and Process Planner Haskamp presented the suggested additions of a Site Plan Review and Administrative Permit. Next Steps City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 22 of 144 Planner Haskamp will deliver the draft code. The next workshop will be addressing the full draft of the Code, then there will be a joint review session with the City Council. The work session ended at 8:35 p.m. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 23 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 24 of 144 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP NOTES APRIL 17, 2023 A special workshop relating to the Zoning Code Update was held on Tuesday, April 17, 2023 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 6:00 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Commissioners Jason Stone, Patrick Corbett, Brian Petschel, Brian Udell, Cindy Johnson Also present: City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson; Planning Consultant and Interim Community Development Director Jennifer Haskamp; City Engineer Ryan Ruzek; a few residents and a property owner The workshop began at 6:10 p.m. Planner Haskamp began the meeting by stating this is a 90-95% draft, and there will still likely be changes between now, the joint session with the City Council and the public hearing. Full Draft Discussion Planner Haskamp began by summarizing the changes in the draft code and went chapter by chapter. Chapter 1 The Commission would like to add a statement from the Comprehensive Plan in the intent section of the draft code. Chapter 2 Planner Haskamp summarized the changes in Chapter 2. The Commission discussed that the Accessory Structure and Building Dimensional standards on the table might be too difficult to understand. The Commission discussed that residents might stop at the beginning of the table, instead of reading through the table. The Commission discussed rearranging the table in regards to Accessory Structure. The Commission discussed adding a statement in Chapter 1 or the beginning of each chapter that all defined terms are in the glossary. The Commission discussed the maximum setback in the RE District. The Commission agreed to remove the maximum front yard setback in the RE District. The Commission discussed allowing sheds in the R-2, R-3, business and industrial districts. The Commission discussed the impervious surface maximum. The Commission discussed the pros and cons of having an impervious surface maximum. The Commission discussed the possibility of having stormwater BMP’s, in the event that residents would like to go above the maximum impervious surface. The Commission directed Planner Haskamp to coordinate with City Engineer Ruzek to determine the appropriate impervious surface maximum. 5fCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 25 of 144 Planner Haskamp summarized the Traditional Neighborhood Overlay District. Planner Haskamp explained that any new development within the Traditional Neighborhood Overlay District would need to comply with the R1 standards. The Commission discussed the impervious and building coverage maximum for the TN-O. The Commission discussed the plats identified and directed Planner Haskamp to double check the plats in TN-O. Planner Haskamp will ask for the City Attorney’s advice about having a different standard for legal lots of record versus newly created lots. Planner Haskamp discussed the Public Semi-Public Overlay District. The Commission discussed the purpose of the Public Semi-Public Overlay District. Planner Haskamp described the differences between the Future Land Use Plan in the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Map. The Commission discussed the Planned Unit Development Overlays. Chapter 3 Planner Haskamp summarized the changes and modifications to Chapter 3. Planner Haskamp described the main changes were consolidating the uses into one chapter instead of being dispersed through the other chapters. The Commission discussed Outdoor Recreation as an Accessory Use in the Industrial District. The Commission had concerns about the size of the internal use versus the outdoor use. The Commission was generally favorable to the idea. The Commission discussed the table of uses. The work session ended at 9:01 p.m. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 26 of 144 Request for City Council Action DATE: May 2, 2023 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Christine Lusian, City Clerk SUBJECT: Alcohol License Renewal INTRODUCTION City Council is asked to approve an alcohol license renewal. BACKGROUND Renewal applicant, Mendota Liquor Barrel, has completed application requirements and paid the associated license fees for an off-sale liquor license. RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends City Council approve the off-sale liquor license for Mendota Liquor Barrel effective July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. ACTION REQUIRED If City Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the off-sale liquor license for Mendota Liquor Barrel. 5gCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 27 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 28 of 144 Request for City Council Action DATE: May 2, 2023 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Christine Lusian, City Clerk SUBJECT: Travel Request Out of Metro INTRODUCTION City Council is asked to approve registration and travel to St. Cloud for the City Clerk to attend the Minnesota Certified Municipal Clerks Institute May 8-12. BACKGROUND City policy requires council approval for educational related expenses over $1,000. The Minnesota Clerks and Finance Officers Association (MCFOA) partners with St. Cloud State University in providing the Minnesota Municipal Clerks Institute curriculum. The Minnesota Certified Municipal Clerks Institute is a three-year continuing education program leading to professional accreditation (MCMC). Each year the Institute consists of a required five day, 40 hour curriculum, for a total of 120 hours of programming over the three year period. This will be City Clerk Lusian’s second year completing the program. BUDGET IMPACT Registration, lodging, and mileage totals approximately $1,035.32 with funds available in the Administration budget. RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends City Council approve registration and travel for the City Clerk to attend the Minnesota Certified Municipal Clerks Institute. ACTION REQUIRED If City Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve registration and travel for the City Clerk to the Minnesota Certified Municipal Clerks Institute. 5hCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 29 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 30 of 144 Request for City Council Action DATE: May 2, 2023 TO: Mayo r, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Meredith Lawrence, Parks and Recreation Manager John Boland, Public Works Superintendent SUBJECT: Authorize Purchase Order for Fence Work at Mertensotto Field (Civic Center) INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to authorize a purchase order for fence work at Mertensotto Field (Civic Center). BACKGROUND Based on the City’s Park Capital Improvement Plan, the City Council included funding in the FY2023 budget for the replacement of the first and third baseline fencing at Mertensotto Field. The project consists of removing and replacing 280 linear feet of 4-foot-high galvanized chain link fence (fabric, top and bottom rail) and 120 linear feet of 8-foot-high galvanized chain link fence (fabric, top and bottom rail). In addition, the contractor will straighten the gate posts at the field. The quotes received for 2023 installation are as follows (lowest bidder is in bold): •Century Fence: $10,368.00 •Dakota Fence: $12,734.00 Century Fence has done work within the City of Mendota Heights and is a reputable contractor. BUDGET IMPACT The budget included $40,000 for the infield maintenance and fencing work at Mertensotto Field. On February 21, 2023 the City Council approved $28,162.50 for the field renovation work. With the approval of the fence work in the amount of $10,368, the total project cost is $38,530.50, resulting in total project costs slightly below budget. ACTION RECOMMENDED Staff recommends that the City Council approve a purchase order for the fence work at Mertensotto Field by Century Fence for $10,368. 5iCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 31 of 144 ACTION REQUESTED If the City Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the purchase order for the fence work at Mertensotto Field by Century Fence for $10,368. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 32 of 144 Request for City Council Action DATE: May 2, 2023 TO: Mayo r, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Dave Dreelan, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Resignation of Firefighter INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to accept the resignation of firefighter Steve Reamer from the Mendota Heights Fire Department. BACKGROUND Firefighter Steve Reamer has submitted his resignation from the Mendota Heights Fire Department effective April 21, 2023. Steve first joined the department as a probationary firefighter in November, 2020. BUDGET IMPACT N/A RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council accept the resignation of Steve Reamer from the Mendota Heights Fire Department effective April 21, 2023. ACTION REQUIRED If Council concurs, it should, by motion accept the resignation Steve Reamer from the Mendota Heights Fire Department. 5jCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 33 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 34 of 144 •� CITY OF ,m 1 MENDDT A HEIGHTS 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone I 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com - MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND Significant Claims Request for City Council Action May 2, 2023 Mayor, City Council and City Administrator Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director �Claims List Summary Met Council Environmental Services -March SAC & May Sewer Service Bolton & Menk -Rogers Lake Skatepark Work Dakota County PT & R-TIF & Special Assessment Billing Evolve Windows and Doors -Par 3 Clubhouse Windows Great River Greening -Invasive Species Control -Copperfield Ponds LOGIS -IT Services Master Mechanical -PW HV AC Welding Arm N01thfield Solar -Utilities Savatree -Tree Services (9 trees) SPRWS -50/50 Split Cell Tower Revenue Payment US Bank -Monthly Purchases Manual Checks Total System Checks Total Total for the list of claims for the May 2, 2023 City Council meeting RECOMMENDATION $ 114,738.77 $ 10,022.50 $ 5,810.00 $ 5,325.96 $ 7,801.89 $ 10,264.50 $ 11,250.00 $ 10,453.77 $ 8,758.00 $ 12,714.60 $ 9,431.32 $ 118,280.25 $ 133,705.90 $ 251,986.15 Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approve the list of claims for May 2, 2023. 5kCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 35 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 36 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 37 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 38 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 39 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 40 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 41 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 42 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 43 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 44 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 45 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 46 of 144 Request for City Council Action DATE: May 2, 2023 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Jennifer Haskamp, AICP, Interim Planning Services SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2023-25, Approving a Minor Subdivision and Variance of Outlot A Valley View Oak 2nd Addition, located near 1941 Glenhill Road [Planning Case No. 2023-03] INTRODUCTION City Council is asked to consider adopting a resolution of approval for a Minor Subdivision and Variance of Outlot A Valley View Oak 2nd Addition, generally located north east of the Glenhill Road and Victoria Curve intersection, as requested by Applicant Michelle Culligan, on behalf of Lawrence and Mary Culligan. BACKGROUND In January, the subject property underwent a lot line adjustment where a portion of the parcel was transferred to property located at 1941 Glenhill Road, which the Culligans also own. The Applicant is requesting that the remaining 5.2 acres be split into two (2) single-family residential lots. As part of the application, the Applicant is also requesting a Variance from City Code Section 12-3-7C to permit the existing Barn Driveway to be widened to 12-feet in those areas that cross the Bluff Impact Zone (BIZ). The proposed request does not include consideration of any improvements, such as single-family structures, landscaping, etc., as each lot is planned to be developed with a custom built single-family structure. Since the proposed lots are located within the MRCCA overlay district, all future improvements will be subject to MRCCA permitting requirements. Both the Lot Split and Variance request are interrelated but both requests must be evaluated independently to determine if they meet and comply with the established ordinance criteria. The following table is a summary of the analysis: 9aCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 47 of 144 Standard Proposed Parcel 2A Complies w/Standard? Proposed Parcel 2B Complies w/Standard? Land Use 2040 Comprehensive Plan LDR (Low Density Residential) Yes – Meets intent and density LDR (Low Density Residential) Yes – Meets intent and density Existing Zoning District R-1 One Family Residential R-1 Yes R-1 Yes In Overlay Zoning District? MRCCA Yes – area in Bluff and Bluff Impact Zone Requires variance for Driveway Yes – area in Bluff and Bluff Impact Zone Yes Lot Size Min. 15,000 SF 97,711 SF (2.24 Acres) Yes 129,032 SF (2.96 Acres) Yes Lot Width Min. 100 Feet 132.00 Feet Yes 174.41 Feet Yes Variance Required Secs. 12-3-7 C and 11-1-9 Yes Variance to encroach into BIZ for driveway (between 2 and 4 feet) No All standards met At the April 25, 2023 Planning Commission meeting, a planning report was presented, a duly noticed public hearing was held, and public comments and testimony were recorded into the public records. A copy of the 4/25/2023 planning report including the survey of the proposed conditions is attached to this memo. The City received two email comments regarding the driveway variance. Public testimony provided during the public hearing included questions and concerns regarding the impact to the BIZ due to the driveway expansion. ACTION RECOMMENDED The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request as described in Planning Case 2023-03, for Outlot A Valley View Oak 2nd Addition, with findings-of-fact that support the approval and certain conditions, as memorialized in the attached [draft] resolution. ACTION REQUESTED City Council may affirm the recommendation from the Planning Commission by adopting RESOLUTION NO. 2023-25, APPROVING A MINOR SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE AT OUTLOT A VALLEY VIEW OAK 2ND ADDITION. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 48 of 144 Res 2023-25 Page 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2023-25 RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT SPLIT (MINOR SUBDIVISION) AND VARIANCE AT OUTLOT A VALLEY VIEW OAK 2ND ADDITION [PLANNING CASE NO. 2023-03] WHEREAS, Michelle Culligan, on behalf of Lawrence and Mary Culligan, made an Application for a Lot Split (Minor Subdivision) and Variance as proposed under Planning Case No. 2023-03, and for property located at Outlot A Valley View Oak 2nd Addition as described in the Survey; and WHEREAS, the subject property is guided Low Density Residential in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and situated in the R-1 One Family Residential District; and WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to subdivision the Subject Property into two parcels, Parcel 2A and Parcel 2B as shown on the Survey; and WHEREAS, Parcel 2A is approximately 2.24 Acres and Parcel 2B is approximately 2.96 Acres; and WHEREAS, on April 25, 2023 the Mendota Heights Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed Lot Split and Variance application, and whereupon closing the hearing, recommended unanimously to approve the lot split and variance on the subject property, with certain conditions and findings- of-fact to support said approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council, that that the recommendation from the Planning Commission on Planning Case 2023-03 is hereby affirmed, and the Minor Subdivision and Variance requested for the property located at Outlot A Valley View Oak 2nd Addition, is approved based on the following findings-of-fact: 1. The proposed Lot Split (minor subdivision) created two lots, where Proposed Parcel 2A is 2.4 acres and Parcel 2B is 2.96 acres. 2. The resulting lots, Parcel 2A and 2B, meet all dimensional standards as established in the R-1 zoning district. 3. The proposed Lot Split is consistent with the Low Density Residential (LR) requirements, and the proposed use of the Lots for single-family residential uses is consistent with the intent and purpose of the LR designation. 4. The proposed Variance to encroach into the Bluff Impact Zone (BIZ) using the existing Barn Driveway alignment will have the least impact to existing vegetation and topography and minimizes the variance request to the extent possible. 5. The Applicant demonstrated that practical difficulties exist to access Proposed Parcel 2A, and that the Variance is necessary to allow reasonable use of the property. 6. The subject property is unique due to the existence of the Barn Driveway and presence of the Bluff Impact Zone and Bluff land that contains the buildable area on the parcel. 7. Approval of the minor subdivision and variance to allow for future development of the lots with single-family residential uses will not adversely impact the character of the neighborhood which is developed with low density residential uses. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 49 of 144 8. That provided the conditions of approval are met, the resulting lots and any future development will comply with the R-1 base zoning district requirements and the applicable MRCCA overlay district standards. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Minor Subdivision and Variance requested for the property located at Outlot A Valley View Oak 2nd Addition is hereby approved, with the following conditions: 1. The Applicant must record the Lot Split (minor subdivision) at Dakota County indicating the newly created Parcel 2A and Parcel 2B. 2. A detailed plan, including any significant tree removal, of the Barn Driveway expansion must be submitted for review and approval as part of the MRCCA permit process, and the expansion/widening of the driveway must be designed to minimize encroachment into the BIZ to the extent possible. 3. Any future improvements or development on the subject parcels, including the modification/expansion of the Barn Driveway, shall be subject to the MRCCA review and all necessary permits must be obtained. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 2nd day of May 2023. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ________________________________ Stephanie B. Levine, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Christine Lusian, City Clerk City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 50 of 144 PLANNING STAFF REPORT DATE: April 25, 2023 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jennifer Haskamp, AICP - SHC SUBJECT: Planning Case No. 2023-03 Minor Subdivision & Variance APPLICANT: Michelle Culligan PROPERTY ADDRESS: Outlot A Valley View Oak 2nd Addition (generally located north east of the Glen Hill Road and Victoria Curve Intersection) ZONING: R-1 One-Family Residential LAND USE: Low Density Residential (LDR) ACTION DEADLINE: July 25, 2023 (120-day Review Period) INTRODUCTION The Applicant, Michelle Culligan, on behalf of the Owners, Lawrence and Mary Culligan, is requesting consideration of a minor subdivision and variance on the property generally described as Outlot A Valley View Oak 2nd Addition. The subject property is subject to the R-1 One Family Residential Zoning District standards, and the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) overlay district standards. The proposed minor subdivision will create two lots denoted as Parcel 2A and 2B on the attached exhibits. Since the property is located in the MRCCA overlay district, a variance from City Code Section 12-3-7 C. Private Roads which stipulates that driveways may not be located in the bluff impact zone (BIZ) is required. The Applicant is requesting to access Proposed Parcel 2A by upgrading an existing Barn Driveway, and such driveway must be widened in areas that currently cross the BIZ. The staff report that follows evaluates both requests concurrently because the minor subdivision cannot be approved without demonstrating that adequate access to both lots can be provided, which requires approval of the variance request. A public hearing notice for this planning item was published in the Pioneer Press and notice letters were mailed to all properties within 350-feet of the subject property. The city has received 1 concern from a resident regarding the planning items. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 51 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-03 Page 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The Applicant has made the following requests regarding the subject property (see GIS map at right for reference): 1. Lot Split: To subdivide the subject parcel that is approximately 5.2 Acres into two (2) single family residential lots denoted on the attached exhibits submitted by the Applicant as Proposed Parcel 2A and Proposed Parcel 2B; and 2. Variance: A Variance from City Code Section 12-3-7 C to permit the existing Barn Road to be widened to 12-feet in those areas that cross the Bluff Impact Zone. The proposed request does not include consideration of any improvements, such as single-family structures, landscaping, etc., as each lot is planned to be developed with a custom single-family structure. Since the proposed lots are located within the MRCCA overlay district, all future improvements will be subject to proper MRCCA permitting requirements. ANALYSIS Both the Lot Split and Variance request are interrelated but both requests must be evaluated independently to determine if they meet and comply with the established ordinance criteria. The following table is provided as reference for the analysis that follows: Table 1. Proposed Lot Split (Minor Subdivision) and Variance Summary Standard Proposed Parcel 2A Complies w/Standard? Proposed Parcel 2B Complies w/Standard? Land Use 2040 Comprehensive Plan LDR (Low Density Residential) Yes – Meets intent and density. LDR (Low Density Residential) Yes – Meets intent and density. Existing Zoning District R-1 One Family Residential R-1 Yes R-1 Yes In Overlay Zoning District? MRCCA Yes – area in Bluff and Bluff Impact Zone Requires variance for Driveway Yes – area in Bluff and Bluff Impact Zone Yes Lot Size Min. 15,000 SF 97,711 SF (2.24 Acres) Yes 129,032 SF (2.96 Acres) Yes Lot Width Min. 100 Feet 132.00 Feet Yes 174.41 Feet Yes Variance Required Secs. 12-3-7 C and 11-1-9 Yes Variance to encroach into BIZ for driveway (between 2 and 4 feet) No All standards met. Request 1: Lot Split (Section 11-1-5 C. Exceptions, 2. Lot Split and Section 12-3-11.B.2 Exceptions to MRCCA) The Applicant is proposing to subdivide the subject parcel into two lots that will be developed with custom single-family detached residential structures. The proposed subdivision is depicted on the Applicant’s exhibit entitled Development Concept Option A – Sheet 1 of 4. Since the proposed subdivision will create City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 52 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-03 Page 3 two (2) lots from one (1) parcel, the subject subdivision request is processed as a Lot Split which is an exception to the City’s platting rules. Title 11-1-5 Compliance with Provisions; Exceptions, subsection C. 2., states the following: “Lot split request to divide a lot which is a part of a recorded plat where the division is to create two (2) lots and the newly created property line will not cause the other remaining portion of the lot to be in violation with this title or the zoning ordinance. The owner or subdivider shall prepare and submit a certified survey map containing the following information…” The subject parcel was platted as Outlot A of the Valley View Oak 2nd Addition and the proposed subdivision will create one additional lot. Therefore, the proposed subdivision into two lots meets this regulation and standard. This code section further identifies the information that must be submitted on the survey map. As depicted on Exhibits 1 through 4 submitted by the Applicant, the requisite information has been provided. Table 1 identifies the configuration of the proposed lots, and as proposed, both lots meet dimensional requirements of the R-1 One Family Residential zoning district. The subject parcel is located within the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) and is subject to the standards established for this Overlay district that are more restrictive than the R-1 base zoning district standards. Title 12-3-11.B.2. (Critical Area Subdivision and Land Development Standards) of the MRCCA standards provides an exception to the subdivision and land development standards if the subdivision is a minor subdivision (lot split) that consists of two (2) or fewer lots. As presented, the proposed lot split (minor subdivision) is not subject to the design standards established because it only creates two lots from one parcel (net increase of one lot). However, since the newly created parcels are intended to be developed with custom built single family residential structures this process must confirm that the created lots are buildable. However, since no improvements are proposed at this time, it should be noted that if the Variance and Lot Split are approved, that all future lot improvements are subject to the MRCCA permit requirements. As shown on the Development Concept (Sheet 1 of 4) Proposed Parcel 2A and 2B both have adequate buildable area outside of all setbacks, including the MRCCA bluff and bluff impact zone setback areas. However, access to the buildable area on Parcel 2A is proposed to utilize an existing (historic) Barn Driveway that must be upgraded and expanded in some areas within the Bluff Impact Zone (BIZ). Since the Barn Driveway improvements are proposed to impact and cross the BIZ, a variance to encroach within this zone is required. The variance request is summarized below, which must be considered concurrently to the request for Lot Split as denoted in Section 11-1-9 of the Subdivision Code. Request 2: Variance to Encroach ~4 to 5 Feet into the Bluff Impact Zone (Section 12-3-7 C. 3) As shown on the Development Concept Plan (Sheet 1 of 4) there is an existing Barn and Barn Driveway (demoted with a heavy black line and labeled as “APPROX DRIVE”) identified on the subject parcel. Both the Barn and the Barn Driveway have been present for decades and have extensive deferred maintenance. The Applicant proposes to utilize the existing Barn Driveway to access the future building site on Proposed Parcel 2A. As stated by the Applicant in their narrative, since the Barn Driveway is existing there is no vegetation on the travelled surface and the driveway base is fully compacted. Using this alignment will have the least amount of impact to both the bluff and BIZ, given the existence of the legally non-conforming driveway. However, given the degraded condition of the Barn Driveway to safely access the buildable area on Proposed Parcel 2A the existing Barn Driveway must be improved, and the width of the traveled surface widened by four to five feet the length of the driveway. Portions of the existing Barn Driveway cross and traverse the BIZ, which is considered a legal non-conforming use because the MRRCA overlay district establishes that driveways may not be placed in BIZ areas. Section 12-3-7 C.3 of the City Code states that “…Driveways…Not be placed within the bluff impact zone or shore impact zone, unless exempt under Section 12-3-15…” The existing Barn Driveway is not an exception, but did exist prior to the enactment of City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 53 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-03 Page 4 this standards and is therefore legally non-conforming. Since the existing Barn Driveway is a legal non- conforming use, only that area which is widened is subject to the Variance evaluation. City Staff reached out to the MnDNR regarding this analysis to determine if they had any comment regarding the proposed variance to encroach into the BIZ area by four to five feet to allow for modification of the existing Barn Driveway. Staff spoke with the MnDNR contact and a follow-up email was provided indicating that they have no comment on the variance and that they consider this request reasonable. During conversation, they affirmed that their preference would be to disturb as little BIZ area as possible, while still allowing access to the buildable area. Variance Process City Code Section 12-1L-5 establishes the process and criteria for variance requests. When considering a request, the Planning Commission and City Council must evaluate the proposal based on established criteria that generally address practical difficulties specific to the site and the potential impact to the community if the variance is granted. The “Practical Difficulties” evaluation must consider three criteria: (1) the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Zoning Ordinance; (2) the plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner; and (3) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality or neighborhood. Economic considerations alone cannot be established as the basis for Practical Difficulties but can be considered in conjunction with the other criteria. Finally, variances are only permitted when it is determined that they are in harmony with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 12-1L-5(E)(1) further provides that the City may consider the following when granting or approving a variance: • Effect of variance upon health, safety, and welfare of the community. • Existing and anticipated traffic conditions. • Effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and the risk to public safety. • Effect on the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan. • Granting of the variance is not a convenience to the applicant, but necessary to alleviate undue hardship or difficulty. The Planning Commission must determine if the standards as outlined herein have been met, and if so, appropriate findings-of-fact must be identified to support the recommendation to the City Council. If the Planning Commission determines that the Applicant has failed to meet the established standards, then findings-of-fact that support a recommendation of denial must be identified. The following Practical Difficulties analysis is provided for your consideration: 1. Are there any practical difficulties that help support the granting of this variance? (Practical Difficulties means the owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by City Code). Applicant Response: The “practical difficulties” that support the need for the variance is the owner’s desire to preserve the wooded nature of the property and utilize to the extent possible an existing non-conforming road by requesting a modest expansion of the width of the existing barn road, to the extent there are insignificant areas alongside the current barn road that technically fall within a BIZ categorization. The wooded nature of the property limits the optimal location for the driveway access to Parcel 2A. By using the existing barn road, with very modest expansion for the width of a driveway, will not require the removal of significant trees. Currently alongside the barn road is a barbed wire fence and buckthorn and similar types of underbrush. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 54 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-03 Page 5 Staff Response: Any access to the buildable area on Proposed Parcel 2A will require a driveway to cross portions of the Bluff Impact Zone (BIZ), and therefore access cannot be granted without some variance from the strict application of the City Code. To minimize the variance to the extent possible, the Applicant is proposing to utilize the existing Barn Driveway to access the buildable area on Proposed Parcel 2A. Since the Barn Driveway exists, and has been traversed for decades, this area is already highly disturbed and compacted. The surrounding vegetation is mostly invasives and ground brush. The expansion and improvement of the existing Barn Driveway will impact the surrounding area, however, it will have less impact than if a new driveway was constructed not utilizing the existing driveway alignment. Provided the driveway expansion area is planned to minimize impact, and the expansion area is completed outside of the designated Bluff, this alignment is the most reasonable access to the buildable area as shown on the Development Concept Plan. Staff believes that there is enough evidence that Practical Difficulties exist, and that using the existing Barn Driveway will minimize the potential impact to the BIZ to the extent possible provided the conditions are met. 2. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner. Applicant Response: The circumstances requiring the requested variance were not caused by the property owner, but rather are an effort to minimize the impact on any BIZ area and preserve the wooded nature of the property as much as feasible. Staff Response: The existing Barn Driveway was developed to connect to the historic barn on the site. These improvements have been on the site for decades and predate the MRCCA requirements that do not permit driveways to cross the Bluff Impact Zone (BIZ). There are other potential driveway alignment alternatives on the site, but all would impact and traverse the BIZ and have greater impact than utilizing the existing alignment. While the Property Owner created the existing barn driveway, they created the condition before the regulation existed and therefore the current alignment is established as a legally non-conforming use. Additionally, the parcel is constrained significantly by both designated Bluff and BIZ areas, which makes the buildable area non- contiguous to public road access. The Bluff and BIZ areas were established by the MnDNR and were not created by the Property Owner, but these areas significantly impact where a driveway could be located on the parcel. Staff believes that there are unique circumstances on the property including the existing location of the legally non-conforming driveway, the presence of the bluff and BIZ that constrains the buildable area on the parcel. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Applicant Response: There will be no alteration of the existing neighborhood if the variance is granted by allowing for a slight widening of an existing dirt road that has provided access to Parcel 2A for over 40 years. Staff Response: The Barn Driveway is existing and the curb cut to Glenhill Road is already constructed. If the variance is permitted, the existing Barn Driveway will be widened by approximately four to five feet and will be improved to provide safe access to the buildable area. These improvements will require some vegetative removal, however, the removal will primarily include low brush, understory tree volunteers, and invasives such as buckthorn. The driveway expansion will only be visible from the frontage at Glenhill Road, but otherwise will not change or impact the essential character of the neighborhood. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 55 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-03 Page 6 4. Restrictions on Granting Variances Consideration of the following should also be addressed as part of the variance review: a. Economic Considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The proposed variance to encroach into the BIZ by approximately four to five feet will allow for Proposed Parcel 2A to be considered a buildable lot. This will increase the value of the parcel, whereas if the variance is denied, the parcel as configured on the Development Concept plan is not buildable. While this cannot be the basis for establishing practical difficulties, it is relevant to determining if the variance is reasonable. The subject parcel is significantly larger than the City’s minimum lot size, and there is plenty of buildable area on the parcel to construct a single-family home, only the access is in question. While approval of the variance will increase the value of the land associated with Proposed Parcel 2A, the Applicant has demonstrated other practical difficulties exist and it is clear that economic considerations alone are not the sole basis for the variance request. b. Variances are only to be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan. The requested variance is to allow for adequate access to be provided to Proposed Parcel 2A associated with the Lot Split request. The proposed Lot Split creates two (2) buildable lots and each resulting lot meets all applicable standards of the R-1 zoning district and complies with the Low Density Residential (LDR) land use designation density requirements. The request to widen the existing driveway will preserve more trees and existing grades within the area, which is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan that establishes the following goals to preserve and protect natural resources to the extent possible: Natural Resources Goal 2, Policy 1: Monitor new developments for restoration and invasive plant management. Natural Resources Goal 2, Policy 6: In new development and redevelopment, retain mature trees that have high ecological value, replace lost trees, and plant additional trees if not present originally. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend approval of the variance and lot split, based on the attached findings-of-fact and based on certain conditions; or 2. Recommend denial of the variance and lot split, based on the revised findings-of-fact that the proposed minor subdivision and variance is not consistent with the City Code or Comprehensive Plan and may have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood and/or properties; or 3. Table the request; and request more information from the Applicant or city staff to be presented back to the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 56 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-03 Page 7 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the lot split and variance based on the attached findings of fact supporting the request, with conditions noted as follows: 1) Applicant must record the Lot Split (minor subdivision) at Dakota County indicating the newly created Parcel 2A and Parcel 2B. 2) A detailed plan, including any significant tree removal, of the Barn Driveway expansion must be submitted for review and approval by the City Staff. The expansion/widening of the driveway must be designed to minimize encroachment into the BIZ to the extent possible. 3) Any future improvements or development on the subject parcels, including the modification/expansion of the Barn Driveway, shall be subject to MRCCA review and all necessary permits must be obtained. 4) All transfer or deed documents which convey the portion of lands under the lot line adjustment and lot split process shall be recorded with Dakota County. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 57 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-03 Page 8 FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL Minor Subdivision and Variance Outlot A Valley View Oak 2nd Addition The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed Lot Split and Variance to encroach into the Bluff Impact Zone to widen the existing Barn Driveway: 1. The proposed Lot Split (minor subdivision) creates two lots, where Proposed Parcel 2A is 2.24 acres and Parcel 2B is 2.96 acres. 2. The resulting lots, Parcel 2A and 2B, meet all dimensional standards as established in the R-1 zoning district. 3. The proposed Lot Split is consistent with the Low Density Residential (LDR) density requirements, and the proposed use of the Lots for single-family residential uses is consistent with the intent and purpose of the LDR designation. 4. The proposed Variance to encroach into the Bluff Impact Zone (BIZ) using the existing Barn Driveway alignment will have the least impact to existing vegetation and topography and minimizes the variance request to the extent possible. 5. The Applicant demonstrated that practical difficulties exist to access Proposed Parcel 2A, and that the Variance is necessary to allow reasonable use of the property. 6. The subject property is unique due to the existence of the Barn Driveway and presence of the Bluff Impact Zone and Bluff land that constrain the buildable area on the parcel. 7. Approval of the minor subdivision and variance to allow for future development of the lots with single-family residential uses will not adversely impact the character of the neighborhood which is developed with low density residential uses. 8. That provided the conditions of approval are met, the resulting lots and any future development will comply with the R-1 base zoning district requirements and the applicable MRCCA overlay district standards. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 58 of 144 LETTER OF INTENT March 28, 2023 City of Mendota Heights extension Planning Commission 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Attn: Jennifer Haskamp jhaskamp@swansonhaskamp.com Re: Planning Application for Culligan Property - Outlot A - Glenhill Road/Victoria Curve Jennifer, the following serves as our required Letter of Intent in connection with the proposed lot split into two residential lots of the following property, which is approximately 5.2 acres of land: That part of Outlot A, VALLEY VIEW OAK 2ND ADDITION, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying south of a line drawn from the southwest corner of Lot 1, Block 1, said VALLEY VIEW OAK 2ND ADDITION to a point on the west line of said Outlot A 119.00 feet southerly of the northwest corner of said Outlot A and said line there terminating (the “Property”). This detailed narrative describing the proposed lot split, is accompanied by the items required in connection with the Planning Application, Lot Split Application, and MRCCA Variance Application. The Property does not include the northerly portion of Outlot A that has been realigned and added to 1941 Glenhill Road. Nature of Property The property is a mix of open grassy areas and woods, with an old barn located in the woods at the end of the dirt road that has been there for over 50 years (the “Barn Road”). The site consists of a rolling topography with gradual slopes as depicted on the attached exhibits. The Barn Road has been used to access the barn over the years, as well as provide access for maintenance of the Property (i.e. cutting down dead trees, chopping fire wood). Throughout the woods, there are a variety of trees, with a dense underbrush of scrub trees and weed trees that have become more and more overgrown over the years. Exhibits Exhibit A includes the following: (1) Proposed 2 lot site plan with overlay showing MRCCA BIZ and bluff boundaries, and areas outside the BIZ, as well as highlighting the Barn Road with additional variance width; City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 59 of 144 (2 ) Topography with overlay showing lot split with MRCCA BIZ and bluff boundaries, and areas outside the BIZ; (3) Aerial showing lot split with MRCCA BIZ and bluff boundaries, and areas outside the BIZ; (4) Site, Grading and Utility Plan - Proposed lot split showing adequate buildable home sites within the requirements of Mendota Heights ordinance, and highlighting the Barn Road with additional variance width. Description of Proposed Lot Split As illustrated on the attached Exhibit A-1 with the proposed site plan, we request approval to split the Property into two lots, identified as Proposed Parcel 2A and Proposed Parcel 2B. Lot parcel 2A will be approximately 2.24 acres (0.60 acres in a non-BIZ area), with access by a driveway that utilizes a portion of the existing Barn Road to minimize disturbing the surrounding wooded area. Lot parcel 2B will be approximately 2.96 acres (0.85 acres in a non-BIZ area), with access directly to Glenhill. Driveway access to both lots, and utilities/sewer, will be from Glenhill Road, effectively from the location of the existing curb cut. MRCCA Subdivision Exemption Subsection 12-3-11(B)(2)(a) specifically exempts from the requirements of Section 12-3-11, a “Minor subdivision consisting of two (2) or fewer lots.” However, in anticipation of future custom homes built on the lots, the attached Exhibits A-1 and A-4 demonstrate that a future principal residence will have more than adequate buildable area to comply with the setback requirements of Sections 12-3-6.C.3 (40’ setback from the bluffline) so as to not require variances to use the lots for their intended purpose. Also, we acknowledge that although the other provisions of the MRCCA do not apply to this specific application, such as 12-3-6 “Structure Height, Placement and Lot Size” they will need to be addressed at the time a homeowner submits an application for construction of a home on each of the lots. MRCCA Variance for Private Driveway 12-3-7 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. As demonstrated on the attached Exhibit A-1, the existing non-conforming Barn Road will provide access to the non-BIZ portion of Parcel 2A, with minimal additional width needed for the driveway. The minimal variance requested is to allow for widening as needed by approximately 4 to 5 feet to the 12’ width of a typical private driveway in the areas technically City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 60 of 144 considered BIZ. Please note that most of this variance area is where a current barbed wire fence is located, or scrub brush and buckthorn, so no significant trees or landscape will be impacted. In conclusion, the attached proposed Lot Split Application, together with accompanying application for Critical Area Variance, are hereby submitted. We look forward to working with the Planning Commission and the City Council of Mendota Heights to discuss any questions or concerns regarding the proposed application. Best Regards, City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 61 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 66 of 144 Request for City Council Action DATE: May 2, 2023 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Jennifer Haskamp, AICP, Interim Planning Services SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2023-26, Approving a Variance at Saint Thomas Academy [Planning Case 2023-04] INTRODUCTION City Council is asked to consider adopting a resolution of approval for a Variance at 949 Mendota Heights Road as requested by the Applicant, Saint Thomas Academy. BACKGROUND The Applicant, Saint Thomas Academy, is seeking a variance from the maximum permitted height of a principal structure to replace the current 1-story natatorium from the 1960’s with a new 2-story natatorium. The purpose of the replacement is to allow for the expansion of the pool and to increase the spectator/viewing capacity of the facility. Because the proposed replacement will increase the height of the structure on this portion of the building, a variance from the maximum height permitted in the R-1 zoning district is required. The footprint of the natatorium is also proposed to grow. The existing natatorium footprint is approximately 6,600 square feet and is attached to the principal building. This portion of the facility will be replaced with a new two-story natatorium with approximately 17,000 square feet which adds approximately 7,900 square feet to the facility. The pool level will include a new eight lane pool, storage rooms, offices and the main stairwell up to the second floor. The second floor is dedicated to spectator space and includes two large bleacher areas and a standing room area that overlooks the pool below with a capacity of 300 spectators. The existing natatorium has a capacity of approximately 150. A summary of the requested variance is provided in the following table: Zoning District Maximum Height Proposed Height Variance Request R-1 25-feet 36’6” to 28’8” 3’8” to 11’6” The height range is due to topographic changes on the property, not the building design. The façade of the building will match the height and massing of the existing structure and it will appear as a uniform height once completed. 9bCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 67 of 144 At the April 25, 2023 Planning Commission meeting, a planning report was presented and a duly noticed public hearing was held. A copy of the 4/25/2023 planning report including the site plan and elevations of the proposed conditions is attached to this memo. The City did not receive any inquiries regarding the variance. There was no public testimony at the public hearing. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request as described in Planning Case 2023-04, for the property located at 949 Mendota Heights Road (Saint Thomas Academy) that support the approval and certain conditions, as memorialized in the attached [draft] resolution. ACTION REQUESTED City Council may affirm the recommendation from the Planning Commission by adopting RESOLUTION NO. 2023-26, APPROVING A VARIANCE AT 949 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD (SAINT THOMAS ACADEMY). City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 68 of 144 Res 2023-26 Page 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2023-26 RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE AT 949 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD (SAINT THOMAS ACADEMY) [PLANNING CASE 2023-04] WHEREAS, Saint Thomas Academy made an Application for a Variance as proposed under Planning Case No. 2023-04, and for the property located at 949 Mendota Heights Road; and WHEREAS, the subject property is guided Public/Semi-Public in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and situated in the R-1 One Family Residential District; and WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes a new two-story natatorium which requires a variance from the maximum height standard for a principal structure within the R-1 District; and WHEREAS, the height of the new natatorium will be 28’8” to 36’6”; and WHEREAS, on April 25, 2023, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed Variance application, and whereupon closing the hearing, recommended unanimously to approve the variance on the subject property, with certain conditions and findings-of-fact to support said approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the recommendation from the Planning Commission on Planning Case No. 2023-04 is hereby affirmed, and the Variance requested for the property located at 949 Mendota Heights Road, is approved based on the following findings-of-fact: 1. The proposed replacement of the existing natatorium with a new modern natatorium facility is consistent with the current use of the subject property as a school campus. 2. The subject property is guided Public/Semi-Public in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and a school facility and its associated facilities are consistent with this land use designation. 3. The school campus and its associated facilities are established as a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district, and the proposed natatorium replacement project is attached to the principal building on site. 4. The proposed variance of the replacement natatorium to exceed the maximum height by 3'8" to 11'6" will match the existing façade of the east elevation and create a seamless architectural appearance. 5. Provided the conditions of the Variance approval are met, the proposed project will not adversely impact the character of the surrounding neighborhood. 6. The Applicant has successfully demonstrated that practical difficulties exist that warrant the approval with conditions of the variance request to exceed the maximum permitted height of a principal building. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Variance requested for the property located at 949 Mendota Heights Road is hereby approved, with the following conditions: City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 69 of 144 1. All parking must be accommodated on-site during any event held at the Natatorium. If additional parking is needed, the plan to accommodate parking must be submitted for review and approval by the City Staff. 2. The landscape plan shall be updated to increase the number of replacement trees planted east of the proposed expansion area. 3. The Applicant must obtain all necessary permits from the Public Works Director and comply with the Land Disturbance requirements. 4. The Applicant must obtain all required City permits, including but not limited to, a Grading Permit and Building Permit. 5. The Applicant must obtain any necessary permits from all applicable agencies with jurisdiction over the project. 6. If any changes to the plan set are proposed, the Applicant must come back to the City to determine the proper permitting process. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 2nd day of May 2023. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ________________________________ Stephanie B. Levine, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Christine Lusian, City Clerk City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 70 of 144 PLANNING STAFF REPORT DATE: April 25, 2023 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jennifer Haskamp, AICP - SHC SUBJECT: Planning Case No. 2023-03 VARIANCE TO EXCEED MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF A PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE APPLICANT: Saint Thomas Academy PROPERTY ADDRESS: 949 Mendota Heights Road ZONING: R-1 One-Family Residential LAND USE: Public/Semi-Public ACTION DEADLINE: July 25, 2023 (120-day Review Period) INTRODUCTION The Applicant, Saint Thomas Academy, is requesting consideration of a variance from the maximum height of a principal structure to reconstruct and expand the existing natatorium (pool house) on the Saint Thomas Academy campus located at 949 Mendota Heights Road. It should be noted that after review of the historic files it was determined that no Conditional Use Permit amendment is needed for the proposed project. A public hearing notice for this planning item was published in the Pioneer Press and notice letters were mailed to all properties within 350-feet of the subject property. The city has received 0 inquiries from adjacent property owners requesting additional information regarding the planning item. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The Applicant, Saint Thomas Academy, is seeking a variance from the maximum permitted height of a principal structure to replace the current 1-story natatorium from the 1960’s with a new 2-story natatorium. The purpose of the replacement is to allow for the expansion of the pool and to increase the spectator/viewing capacity of the facility. Because the proposed replacement will increase the height of the structure on this portion of the building, a variance from the maximum height permitted in the R-1 zoning district is required. The existing natatorium footprint is approximately 6,600 square feet and is attached Area of Application City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 71 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-04 Page 2 to the principal building. This portion of the facility will be replaced with a new two-story natatorium with approximately 17,000 square feet which adds approximately 7,900 square feet to the facility. The design includes two levels – a pool level and the spectator level. The pool level will include a new pool with eight (8) lanes, storage rooms, offices and the main stairwell up to the second floor. The second floor is dedicated to spectator space and includes two large bleacher areas and a standing room area that overlook the pool below. ANALYSIS NOTE that this review process is corrected to exclude the need for an amendment to the CUP. Based on the proposed project a Variance from the maximum height is the only required land use application process required. As shown on the plan set, the existing natatorium is located and attached to the northeast corner of the existing principal building. The existing natatorium is estimated to be 20 to 25-feet tall as viewed from the parking lot with a footprint of approximately 6,600 square feet based on Dakota County GIS records. The proposed project will remove and replace the existing facility with a new two-story natatorium that is taller and has a larger footprint. A summary of the requested variance is provided in the following table: Zoning District Maximum Height Proposed Height Variance Request R-1 25-feet 36’6” to 28’8” 3’8” to 11’6” Depending on the position on the site where you view the addition the height of the structure ranges between 28’8” on the northeast and 36’6” at the main entrance into the facility. The range in height is due to topographic changes near this portion of the property, not the building design. The façade of the building will match the height and massing of the existing structure and it will appear as a uniform height once completed. Other Applicable R-1 Dimensional Standards The proposed project is also subject to dimensional review based on the R-1 zoning district to determine that the proposed addition is consistent with the other requirements of the zoning ordinance. The following summary is provided for your reference: Setbacks As shown on Sheet C3.01 Site Plan of the submission, the footprint of the replacement structure will expand east from the existing footprint by approximately 50-feet and by approximately 15-feet to the north. The new entrance into the facility will be from the south elevation where a new stairwell and access into the facility will be constructed. While the expansion of the facility is moving closer to Lake Drive, the setback from the road is over 240-feet and complies with the R-1 Setback requirements. Parking The proposed project replaces and expands the existing natatorium use, increasing the size of the facility by approximately 7,900 SF. The expansion encroaches further east, and as a result causes the internal roadway to be shifted approximately 10-feet from its current location. This shift results in losing approximately 6 parking stalls. Since the facility is proposed to expand, the reduction in parking stalls is not ideal. However, staff understands that the existing facility did allow spectators, and the new layout is anticipated to better accommodate spectators (but only increase incrementally). Given that adequate parking is important, staff recommends including a condition in the variance if approved that addresses parking. The condition should state that all parking for events, etc., must be accommodated on site and within the existing parking lot. If after the facility opens it is determined that modifications are needed to the parking lot or its design to adequately accommodate parking, a Site Plan should be submitted to the City Staff for review and approval. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 72 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-04 Page 3 Architecture The proposed natatorium is designed to match the massing of the existing principal structure, but will appear more modern in character. The proposed materials of the natatorium include a mix of aluminum composite panels, glazing curtain wall system, modular brick and a translucent façade system. The cladding at the main entrance into the facility is primarily designed with modular brick and the insulated glazing system. This design will match and tied into the existing building materials, while incorporating a more modern appearance. Landscaping As shown on sheet L1.01 Landscape Plan the proposed addition will impact the existing landscaping onsite. The expansion area will require the removal of 9 trees, and the Applicant is proposing to plant 8 trees in replacement. There are no specific landscape standards within the R-1 zoning district, however, the variance is due to an increase in height and landscaping, especially with trees, can be an effective form of mitigation particularly along the edge closest to Lake Drive. Staff recommends including a condition that the landscaping plan should be updated to include additional trees directly south of the addition to help soften the appearance of the appearance as viewed from Lake Drive. The following analysis regarding the requested Variance from Maximum Height is provided: Variance Process City Code Section 12-1L-5 governs variance requests. The city must consider a number of variables when recommending or deciding on a variance, which generally fall into two categories: (i) practical difficulties; and (ii) impact to the community. The “practical difficulties” test contains three parts: (i) the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance; (ii) the plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality or neighborhood. It is also noted that economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. In addition, variances are only to be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan. Section 12-1L-5(E)(1) further provides other issues the city may consider when granting or denying a variance, noted as follows: • Effect of variance upon health, safety, and welfare of the community. • Existing and anticipated traffic conditions. • Effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and the risk to public safety. • Effect on the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan. • Granting of the variance is not a convenience to the applicant, but necessary to alleviate undue hardship or difficulty. When considering a variance request, the Planning Commission must determine if these standards have been met in granting a variance, and provide findings-of-facts to support such a recommendation to the City Council. If the Planning Commission determines the Applicant has failed to meet these standards, or has not fully demonstrated a reasonableness in the granting of such variance, then findings-of-fact supporting a recommendation of denial must be determined. As part of any variance request, Applicants are required to prepare and submit their own responses and findings, which for this case, are noted below (in italic text), followed by a brief staff response: 1. Are there any practical difficulties that help support the granting of this variance? (“practical difficulties” means the owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by City Code) City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 73 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-04 Page 4 Applicant’s Response: The owner currently maintains, operates and occupies an aquatic facility for it's learners. The current facility, built in 1960's, no longer meets the requirements of Minnesota High School League nor standard swimming pool design for competitive swimming. The proposed project will replace, in place, the aquatics component of the facility with a structure that meets todays standards. The proposed facility is larger in footprint however an increase that would be mostly be unidentifiable from the street and surrounding areas. Without this improvement the use of the current aquatic facility will continue to be compromised in the years to come due to the nature of competition requirements continuing to be modified and the safety of those participating in and viewing the events being of utmost concern. Staff’s Response: The City Code establishes that Schools and School campuses are a permitted use within the R-1 zoning district. Secondary school facilities often include extensive athletic facilities and fields, and the natatorium is typical in this type of programming. The proposed natatorium design, including two-story height is consistent with current industry trends, but because the proposed facility is located in the R-1 zoning district, the height of the facility is not permitted without a variance from the standard. The height of the replacement facility is designed to match the height of the Principal Building elevation, which will create a cohesive design along the façade and from the public right-of- way (for that portion that is visible). A practical difficulty related to the use of the School Campus is present and limits the ability to design a modern natatorium facility, which is a reasonable use of the property. 2. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner. Applicant’s Response: The property is located in an area that has limited adjacent property owners, zero being residential. The improvement would not be a change to the view from the single commercial property adjoining property or create any adverse impact on traffic to the site. Staff’s Response: The subject property has been used for the St. Thomas and Visitation school campus for decades. Residential uses surround the property, and the school use is permitted by the zoning ordinance. School properties and their programming of facility space are unique, and do not match single-family residential uses that are dominant in the R-1 zoning district. The existing school facility pre-dates the current zoning ordinance, and as such, already exceeds the maximum height on portions of the building. Further, the height standard does not adequately address non-residential structures that often have a flat-roof as opposed to a pitched roof where the average of the peak is used to calculate height. 3. The variance, if granted will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Applicant’s Response: Due to the site already containing an aquatics facility the essential character would remain exactly as it is today. Staff’s Response: The character of the neighborhood includes surrounding single-family residential uses and the existing school campus. The proposed natatorium replacement will match the existing height on the east façade to create a uniform architectural elevation. As described in the Landscape analysis, if additional vegetation is provided in the area directly east of the proposed natatorium expansion the potential visual impact from Lake Drive will be further mitigated. As proposed, the variance will not adversely impact the essential character of the neighborhood and surrounding uses. 4. Restrictions on Granting Variances. The following restrictions should be considered when reviewing a variance: a) Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The requested variance is to increase the maximum height of the structure so that a more modern natatorium facility can be constructed. The purpose of the replacement is to provide better athletic facilities to the students and is not based on economic considerations. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 74 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-04 Page 5 b) Variances are only to be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staff finds that the request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan. The school campus is a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district, and the requested variance will permit the replacement of the natatorium to be constructed to an elevation that will match the existing east façade of the principal building. The subject property is guided Public/Semi-Public in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. A school campus and its associated facilities are consistent with this land use designation. The purpose of this request is to replace an existing natatorium with a new natatorium, and no change in use is requested. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend approval of the variance, based on the attached findings-of-fact and based on certain conditions; or 2. Recommend denial of the variance, based on the revised findings-of-fact that the variance is not consistent with the City Code or Comprehensive Plan and may have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood and/or properties; or 3. Table the request; and request more information from the Applicant or city staff to be presented back to the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Variance based on the attached findings of fact supporting the request, with conditions noted as follows: 1) All parking must be accommodated on-site during any event held at the Natatorium. If additional parking is needed, the plan to accommodate parking must be submitted for review and approval by the City Staff. 2) The landscape plan shall be updated to increase the number of replacement trees planted east of the proposed expansion area. 3) The Applicant must obtain all necessary permits from the Public Works Director and comply with the Land Disturbance requirements. 4) The Applicant must obtain all required City permits, including but not limited to, a Grading Permit and Building Permit. 5) The Applicant must obtain any necessary permits from all applicable agencies with jurisdiction over the project. 6) If any changes to the plan set are proposed, the Applicant must come back to the City to determine the proper permitting process. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 75 of 144 Planning Report: Case #2023-04 Page 6 FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL Variance from Maximum Height for Replacement Natatorium at St. Thomas School Campus, located at 949 Mendota Heights Road The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed Variance request to exceed the maximum height of a principal building in the R-1 zoning district: 1. The proposed replacement of the existing natatorium with a new modern natatorium facility is consistent with the current use of the subject property as a school campus. 2. The subject property is guided Public/Semi-Public in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and a school facility and its associated facilities are consistent with this land use designation. 3. The school campus and its associated facilities are established as a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district, and the proposed natatorium replacement project is attached to the principal building on site. 4. The proposed variance of the replacement natatorium to exceed the maximum height by 3’8” to 11’6” will match the existing façade of the east elevation and create a seamless architectural appearance. 5. Provided the conditions of the Variance approval are met, the proposed project will not adversely impact the character of the surrounding neighborhood. 6. The Applicant has successfully demonstrated that practical difficulties exist that warrant the approval with conditions of the variance request to exceed the maximum permitted height of a principal building. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 76 of 144 Created With Tiny Scanner City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 77 of 144 910 915 918 919 920920 919 918920919918915920912 90 7 907 901 903 906907 SAN MHRIM=906.27 SAN MHRIM=903.34SAN MHI/E E=901.14STM MH RIM=901.62BEEHIVERIM=906.54BEEHIVERIM=906.53STM CBRIM=911.55 BEEHIVERIM=906.12 270350051010 949 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RD. ST. THOMAS ACADEMY 270350076020 949 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RD. ST. THOMAS ACADEMY 902 904 917 916 914 913 911 909 908 907 910915907907 909 910 908 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 CHAINLINK FENCE *MH INACCESSIBLE SAN MHRIM=918.97 *MH INACCESSIBLE *PIPES NOT VISIBLE SAN MHRIM=916.93 I/E NE=900.73 I/E SW=900.85 *MH INACCESSIBLE *MH INACCESSIBLEI/E E=900.46 15" HDPEI/E W=900.74 15" PVCRIM=906.36I/E W=901.24I/E S=899.17I/E W=899.30I/E N=899.32I/E S=902.23B6-12 CURB TYP. EAST LINE OF THE WEST 200 FEET OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 *MH INACCESSIBLE SAN MH RIM=908.44 WATERMAIN PER PREVIOUS DESIGN DRAWING SANITARY PER PREVIOUS DESIGN DRAWING TYP. SANITARY PER PREVIOUS DESIGN DRAWING TYP. SANITARY PER PREVIOUS DESIGN DRAWING TYP. SANITARY PER PREVIOUS DESIGN DRAWING TYP.919918917916914913919 91991891791691591491391291191 0 9 1 5 S00°01'06"W 1121.41SCULPTURE RIM=908.44 *MH INACCESSIBLE SAN MH DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION: THE NE 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 28, RANGE 23. AND THE WEST 200 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 28, RANGE 23. PROPERTY SUMMARY 1.SUBJECT PROPERTIES ADDRESS IS 949 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN., ITS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER IS 27-03500-51-010. 2.THE GROSS AREA OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 43.23 ACRES OR 1,883,214 SQUARE FEET. 3.THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED 'R1', ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, PER CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA WEBSITE. (WWW.mendota-heights.com) 4.THE BUILDING(S) AND EXTERIOR DIMENSIONS OF THE OUTSIDE WALL AT GROUND LEVEL ARE SHOWN ON THE SURVEY. IT MAY NOT BE THE FOUNDATION WALL. BENCHMARKS 1.THE VERTICAL DATUM IS BASED ON SITE DATUM. THE ORIGINATING BENCH MARKS ARE 1003 AND 1009, BOTH REFERENCED FROM THE MNDOT GEODETIC DATABASE. BENCHMARK #1 CONTROL POINT #1003, 1/2" IRON PIPE W/CAP ELEV.=916.47 BENCHMARK #2 CONTROL POINT #1009, 1/2" IRON PIPE W/CAP ELEV.=918.484 SURVEY NOTES 1.THE BEARING SYSTEM IS BASED ON THE DAKOTA COUNTY COORDINATE SYSTEM, SITE DATUM. WITH AN ASSUMED BEARING OF NORTH 00 DEGREES, 01 MINUTES, 06 SECONDS EAST FOR THE EAST LINE OF THE NE 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4, SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 28, RANGE 23. THE ORIGINATING MONUMENTS UTILIZED TO ESTABLISH THE HORIZONTAL POSITION OF THIS SURVEY WAS THE SOUTHWEST CORNER AND THE WEST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION. 2.FIELD WORK WAS COMPLETED ON 03/08/2023. OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL WIRE LIGHT SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER WATERMAIN UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC GUY ANCHOR UTILITY POLE GUARD POST UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS CHAIN LINK FENCE WOOD FENCE BUILDING LINE CONCRETE CURB BITUMINOUS SURFACE CONCRETE SURFACE WET LAND SIGN TRAFFIC MARKERS POND / WATER LINE FEMA FLOOD ZONE LINE SOIL BORING TREE LINE FOUND MONUMENT FOUND CAST IRON MONUMENT EASEMENT LINE SETBACK LINE RESTRICTED ACCESS FOUND RIGHT-OF-WAY MONUMENT SET MONUMENT MARKED LS XXXXX SECTION LINE UNDERLYING / ADJACENT LOT TIE LINE BOUNDARY LINE DEED DISTANCE(100.00) CONIFEROUS TREE TRANSFORMER BUILDING CANOPY REGULAR PARKING STALL COUNTGAS METER COMMUNICATIONS MANHOLE ELECTRIC MANHOLE GAS MANHOLE ELECTRIC METER TELEPHONE PEDESTAL CABLE TV BOX GATE VALVE / HYDRANT SANITARY MANHOLE CLEAN OUT STORM MANHOLE STORM CATCH BASIN FLARED END SECTION SPOT ELEVATION CONTOUR RETAINING WALL BLOCK RETAINING WALL STONE RETAINING WALL RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE WIRE FENCE DECIDUOUS TREE ## 0 NORTH SCALE IN FEET 20 40 LEGEND IRRIGATION SPRINKLER HEAD GROUND LIGHT SPRINKLER GRATE NO DATE BY CKD APPR SHEET Date License # Print Name: DRAWN BY DESIGNED BY CHECKED BY I hereby certify that this plan, survey, or reportwas prepared by me or under my direct supervisionand that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor underthe laws of the State of Minnesota. PROJECT NO. PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT SUBMITTAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS COMMENT Engineering | Surveying | Planning | Environmental 24.1S (LMS TECH) | EMILY CASTANIAS, PE (MN) | 3/24/2023 2:06:03 PML:\PROJECTS\51767\CAD\SHEETS\51767-C2.01-EXCND.DWG:1© 2021 Sambatek ST. THOMAS ACADEMYPOOL BUILDING MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MNPRELIMINARY 51767 03/24/23 BAA BAA MRS MARK SALO PRELIMINARY 24.1S (LMS TECH) | EMILY CASTANIAS, PE (MN) | 3/24/2023 2:06:03 PML:\PROJECTS\51767\CAD\SHEETS\51767-C2.01-EXCND.DWG:1EXISTING CONDITIONS C2.01 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 78 of 144 April 4, 2023 Ryan Ruzek Public Works Director City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Subject: Saint Thomas Academy, Variance Application Please find responses below for the comments from Ryan Ruzek with the City of Mendota Heights received on March 27th, 2023, regarding the Saint Thomas Academy Project. We have provided a response to each comment. Comments have all been addressed and incorporated into the revised plans and documents. Stormwater: 1. NPDES Construction Stormwater permit not needed. Response: Acknowledged 2. All other requirements for projects over 5,000 sf must be met within the Land Disturbance Guidance Document and City Code Title 14: Stormwater Management. Response: The previous expansion project from 2012 contains an existing approved Stormwater Management Report dated 04/19/2012. In the 2012 plans, the development resulted in a net increase of 91,980 sf of new impervious. The previous development required 0.5 inches of abstraction over the net new impervious, per the stormwater management requirements at that time. Per the approved 2012 report, the required abstraction volume was 3,833 cf, and the constructed basin contains 5,691 cf of abstraction volume. This means that the existing basin provided 1,858 cf of excess abstraction volume at the time of construction. The current proposed plans result in 0.451 acres of new/disturbed impervious, and 0.151 acres of net new impervious. The total required volume to treat the new/disturbed impervious for this project (At current standards of 1.1”) is 1,800 cf. Therefore, the existing b asin was designed with sufficient excess capacity to accommodate the proposed redevelopment. It is proposed that existing water quality and abstraction volume can be met within the existing infiltration basin constructed in 2012. 3. An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, as well as plans for permanent stormwater treatment, must be submitted meeting the requirements of the Land Disturbance Guidance Document and City Code Title 14: Stormwater Management. Response: An Erosion and Sediment Control plan has been added to the provided Preliminary Civil plan set. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 101 of 144 St. Thomas Academy April 4, 2023 Page 2 Landscaping Recommendations: 4. Plan calls for removal of 9 trees, but only calls for replacing/planting 8. Are there room for more trees? Response: Additional tree added. 5. Replace one of the maple species with a native overstory species, such as oak, in order to increase diversity. Response: Acknowledged. 6. Replace rock mulch with shredded wood mulch. Response: Acknowledged. 7. Is there room for additional landscaping, including beneficial pollinator plants, instead of turf grass? Response: It is accepted best practice to not place pollinator plants near high pedestrian traffic areas out of safety concerns for those who may have severe allergic reactions to insect stings. We would want to limit our plant selection to low shrubs (a precaution against providing places for people to hide), and non-flowering cultivars or ornamental grasses. Sincerely, Chad Ayers, PE Emily Castanias, PE Project Manager Project Engineer City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 102 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 103 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 104 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 105 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 106 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 107 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 108 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 109 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 110 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 111 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 112 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 113 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 114 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 115 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 116 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 117 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 118 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 119 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 120 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 121 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 122 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 123 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 124 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 125 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 126 of 144 Request for City Council Action DATE: May 2, 2023 TO: Mayo r, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director SUBJECT: Amendments to Saint Thomas Academy Conduit Debt INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to pass the attached resolution consenting to amendments to St. Thomas Academy conduit debt and execute the Third Amendment to Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note, Series 2010. BACKGROUND The City has received a request from St. Thomas Academy to approve modifications to be made to their conduit debt. There is a memo attached from the Taft legal team outlining the request. This action does not result in any costs/liabilities to the City. In 2016, the City adopted procedures for conduit debt issued by the City. As stated in that policy, when changes to underlying documents are made and require Council action, a non-refundable fee of $1,500 is to be deposited with the City. This has been past practice for amendments to previously issued conduit debt. St. Thomas Academy is asking for this fee to be waived and/or reduced as they will be back in September 2024 for additional amendments to these bonds. There is not a provision in the procedures relating to the waiving or reduction of fees. BUDGET IMPACT Council should discuss the non-refundable $1,500 fee and whether it could be waived and/or reduced. RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approve the attached resolution and approve the execution of the Third Amendment to Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note (St. Thomas Academy), Series 2010 and Authorizing the Execution of Documents Related Thereto. Additionally, Council should discuss the requested waiver or reduction of the fee relating to this refunding. This action requires a simple majority vote of the city council. 9cCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 127 of 144 90054154v3 1 Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was duly held at City Hall in said City on Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 7:00 P.M. The following Council members were present: and the following were absent: Council member ___________________ then introduced the following written resolution and moved its adoption: A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES REVENUE REFUNDING NOTE (ST. THOMAS ACADEMY PROJECT), SERIES 2010, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS RELATED THERETO The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council member __________________, and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 128 of 144 90054154v3 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. _______ A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES REVENUE REFUNDING NOTE (ST. THOMAS ACADEMY PROJECT), SERIES 2010, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS RELATED THERETO WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 10-63 of the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota (the “City”), adopted on August 17, 2010 (the “Original Resolution”), and Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.152 to 469.165, as amended (the “Act”), the City issued its Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note, Series 2010 (St. Thomas Academy Project) dated September 1, 2010 (as amended from time to time, the “Note”), in the original aggregate principal amount of $6,310,000, to U.S. Bank National Association, a national banking association (the "Lender"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to a Loan Agreement dated September 1, 2010, between the City and the Borrower (the “Loan Agreement”), the City loaned the proceeds of the Note to St. Thomas Academy, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (the “Borrower”), for the purpose of refinancing the acquisition, construction, and equipping of a middle school addition and the renovation and remodeling of the Borrower’s existing facilities, including the acquisition of unimproved land adjacent thereto and the expansion of a parking lot located in the City, which facilities are owned and operated by the Borrower (the “Project”), and the Borrower agreed to repay the Note in specified amounts and at specified times sufficient to pay in full when due the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Note; and WHEREAS, the City pledged and granted a security interest in all of its rights, title, and interest in the Loan Agreement to the Lender (except for certain rights of indemnification and to reimbursement for certain costs and expenses) pursuant to a Pledge Agreement (the “Pledge Agreement”) dated September 1, 2010 between the City and the Lender; and WHEREAS, in order to document certain changes to the terms of the Note agreed upon by the Lender and the Borrower, pursuant to Resolution 2015-56 of the City Council of the City adopted on July 21, 2015, the City executed the Amendment to Note dated September 1, 2015, which was consented to by the Borrower and the Lender, and entered into the First Amendment to Loan Agreement dated September 1, 2015, between the City and the Borrower and consented to by the Lender; and WHEREAS, in order to document certain additional changes to the terms of the Note agreed upon by the Lender and the Borrower, pursuant to Resolution 2020-44 of the City Council of the City adopted on August 4, 2020, the City executed the Second Amendment to Note dated September 1, 2020, which was consented to by the Borrower and the Lender; and WHEREAS, the Note is currently owned by the Lender; and WHEREAS, the interest rate on the Note is currently a variable rate that is to be adjusted on the first day of each calendar month to a rate based upon the one-month LIBOR rate, as further City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 129 of 144 90054154v3 2 described in the Note (the “Current Index”), and City has been advised by the Lender that the Current Index is being phased out effective June 30, 2023, and will no longer be available after that date; and WHEREAS, the Borrower and the Lender have agreed to replace the Current Index with Daily Simple SOFR (as defined in the Third Amendment to Note to be executed by the City and consented to by the Lender and the Borrower (the “Third Amendment to Note”)) effective June 1, 2023, in anticipation of the phase-out of the Current Index (the “Modification”); City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 130 of 144 90054154v3 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, as follows: 1. The City approves the Modification and authorizes the execution of the Third Amendment to Note, a substantially final form of which has been provided to the City; and 2. The Third Amendment to Note is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP as bond counsel to the City; provided that delivery of the Third Amendment to Note shall be conclusive evidence of approval. Except as amended or modified by the Third Amendment to Note, all terms and conditions of the Note remain in full force and effect. 3. The Mayor and the City Administrator are hereby authorized to execute and deliver the Third Amendment to Note and any other related documents on behalf of the City. 4. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, on May 2, 2023. By: ___________________________________ Its: Mayor ATTEST: By: Its: Clerk City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 131 of 144 90054154v3 4 CERTIFICATE STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ) I, Christine Lusian, duly appointed, acting and qualified Clerk of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota (the “City”), do hereby certify that I have examined the records and minute book of the City Council of the City for its meeting on May 2, 2023, and the attached copy of the RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES REVENUE REFUNDING NOTE (ST. THOMAS ACADEMY PROJECT), SERIES 2010, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS RELATED THERETO was approved and is a true and correct copy of the proceedings relating to said Resolution. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ____ day of __________, 2023. Christine Lusian, Clerk City of Mendota Heights City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 132 of 144 90054155v2 2200 IDS Center, 80 South 8th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Tel: 612.977.8400 | Fax: 612.977.8650 taftlaw.com MEMORANDUM TO:City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota FROM:Catherine Courtney; Dan Andersen DATE:April 25, 2023 RE:Resolution Regarding Modification of Conduit Note Enclosed is a resolution for consideration by the City Council at its upcoming meeting on May 2, 2023. As more fully set forth below, the resolution approves the amendment of certain interest rate mechanisms in a conduit note issued by the City of Mendota Heights (the “City”) for the benefit of St. Thomas Academy, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (the “Borrower”). The proposed amendments do not affect the City’s obligations under the note—the City will continue to have no duty to make any payments or pledge any security to the repayment of the note, both of which remain the responsibility of the Borrower. Background Acting as an issuer of conduit bonds, the City issued its Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note, Series 2010 (St. Thomas Academy Project) (the “Note”) to U.S. Bank National Association, a national banking association (the “Bank”), on September 1, 2010. The City loaned the proceeds of the Note to the Borrower for the purpose of refinancing the acquisition, construction, and equipping of a middle school addition and the renovation and remodeling of the Borrower’s existing facilities, including the acquisition of unimproved land adjacent thereto and the expansion of a parking lot located in the City, which facilities are owned and operated by the Borrower. The Borrower agreed to repay and secure the Note to the Bank. The City did not pledge any payment or security in connection with the Note. The Bank has advised us that the interest rate on the Note is currently a variable rate based on the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”)—a key benchmark rate for setting the interest rates on adjustable rate loans around the world. On June 30, 2023, LIBOR is being phased out and will no longer be available. This necessitates a change to the benchmark rate used to set interest rates on the Note. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 133 of 144 90054155v2 April 25, 2023 Page 2 Proposed Council Action Under the terms of the Note, the Bank has the discretion to select a comparable benchmark rate to replace LIBOR upon its unavailability. In order to document this change, the Bank has requested that the City and the Borrower enter into an amendment to the Note in the form of a Third Amendment to Note (the “Third Amendment”). A substantially final version of the Third Amendment is enclosed with this memorandum. The City is being asked to approve the execution of the Third Amendment evidencing the new rates for the Note. Enclosed with this memorandum is a draft resolution for your consideration that approves the form of the Third Amendment and authorizes its execution. Effect The Third Amendment does not affect the City’s obligations under the Note or create any new liabilities for the City. The City will not be responsible for paying any bank or legal fees in connection with the execution of the Third Amendment or for making any payments or pledging any security to the repayment of the Note. The Bank is coordinating the drafting and execution of the documents, and we, as Bond Counsel to the City, will be issuing an opinion that the revisions do not adversely affect the tax-exempt status of the Note. If you have any questions, please call Dan Andersen at 612.977.8290. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 134 of 144 90054156v4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Third Amendment to Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note (St. Thomas Academy Project), Series 2010 Effective Date: May [__], 2023 WHEREAS, on September 1, 2010, the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota (the “Issuer”) issued to U.S. Bank National Association, a national banking association (the “Lender”), the Issuer’s $6,310,000 Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note (St. Thomas Academy Project), Series 2010, which was amended by an Amendment to Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note (St. Thomas Academy Project), Series 2010, dated September 1, 2015, executed by the City and consented to by St. Thomas Academy, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (the “Borrower”) and the Lender, and further amended pursuant to that certain Second Amendment to Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note (St. Thomas Academy Project), Series 2010, dated as of September 1, 2020, executed by the City and consented to by the Borrower and the Lender (collectively, and as amended from time to time, the “Current Note”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to a Loan Agreement dated as of September 1, 2010, between the Issuer and the Borrower, as amended by a First Amendment to Loan Agreement dated as of September 1, 2015, between the Issuer and the Borrower and consented to by the Lender (collectively, the “Loan Agreement”), the Borrower agreed to repay the Current Note in specified amounts and at specified times sufficient to pay in full when due the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Current Note; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a Pledge Agreement (the “Pledge Agreement”) dated as of September 1, 2010 between the Issuer and the Lender, the Issuer pledged and granted a security interest in all of its rights, title, and interest in the Loan Agreement to the Lender (except for certain rights of indemnification and to reimbursement for certain costs and expenses); and WHEREAS, the Lender and the Borrower have informed the Issuer that they have agreed to certain changes in the terms of the Current Note due to the anticipated unavailability of the one-month LIBOR rate (as further described in the Current Note) after June 30, 2023; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution of the Issuer adopted on May 2, 2023 (the “Resolution”), the Issuer has agreed to the requested changes to the terms of the Current Note; and WHEREAS, this Amendment is authorized to be attached to the Current Note to evidence the amendments made hereby. City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 135 of 144 90054156v4 1. The Current Note is hereby amended by deleting paragraph 2 in its entirety and replacing it with the following: 2. Effective as of September 1, 2020, and on September 1, 2024 (each a Reset Date), interest on each advance hereunder shall be accrue and be adjusted to accrue at an annual rate equal to the product of (a) the sum of (i) the Credit Spread (as that term is defined herein) plus (ii) the Liquidity Premium (as that term is defined herein) plus (iii) the greater of (x) zero percent (0.0%) and (y) Daily Simple SOFR (as that term is defined herein), times (b) the Multiplier (as the term is defined herein). The term “Daily Simple SOFR” means, for any day, an interest rate per annum equal to the greater of (i) zero percent (0.0%) and (ii) SOFR (as that term is defined herein) for the day that is five SOFR Business Days (as that term is defined herein) prior to (A) if such day is a SOFR Business Day, such day, or (B) if such day is not a SOFR Business Day, the SOFR Business Day immediately preceding such day, reset as and when Daily Simple SOFR changes; provided that if SOFR is not published on such SOFR Business Day due to a holiday or other circumstance that Bank deems in its sole discretion to be temporary, the applicable SOFR rate shall be the SOFR rate last published prior to such SOFR Business Day. Any change in Daily Simple SOFR due to a change in SOFR shall be effective from and including the effective date of such change in SOFR without notice to Borrower. The term “SOFR” means, with respect to any SOFR Business Day, a rate per annum equal to the secured overnight financing rate for such SOFR Business Day published by the SOFR Administrator on the SOFR Administrator’s Website. The term “SOFR Administrator” means the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (or a successor administrator of the secured overnight financing rate). The term “SOFR Administrator’s Website” means the website of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, currently at http://www.newyorkfed.org, or any successor source for the secured overnight financing rate identified as such by the SOFR Administrator from time to time. The term “SOFR Business Day” means any day (other than a Saturday or Sunday) on which banks generally are open in New York City, New York for the conduct of substantially all of their commercial lending activities and interbank wire transfers can be made on the Fedwire system except a day on which the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) recommends that the fixed income departments of its members be closed for the entire day for purposes of trading in United States government securities. The term “Credit Spread” means the then-current credit spread as determined by the Lender for a similarly situated borrower as the Borrower based on the Lender’s then-current underwriting standards, and with credit City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 136 of 144 90054156v4 S-3 administration approval, including, without limitation, factors such as the current credit profile, market conditions and current and historical operating performance. The term “Liquidity Premium” means the internal funding cost component determined by the Lender, in its sole discretion, based upon the current costs of term variable funding in the wholesale market. The term “Multiplier” means the percentage determined by the Lender, in its sole discretion, to assure the Lender a market rate of return on a tax exempt equivalent basis under the Act (as that term is defined in the Loan Agreement). If the rate index described above shall become permanently unavailable or shall cease to exist, Bank may, in its discretion, designate a successor to the interest rate described above (which may include a successor index and a spread adjustment), taking into consideration any selection or recommendation of a replacement rate by any relevant agency or authority and evolving or prevailing market conventions. In connection with the selection and implementation of any such replacement rate, Bank may make any technical, administrative or operational changes that Bank decides may be appropriate to reflect the adoption and implementation of such replacement rate. Bank does not warrant or accept any responsibility for the administration or submission of, or any other matter related to SOFR or with respect to any alternative or successor rate thereto, or replacement rate thereof, including without limitation whether any such alternative, successor or replacement rate will have the same value as, or be economically equivalent to, SOFR. Bank’s internal records of applicable interest rates shall be determinative in the absence of manifest error. 2. All other terms and provisions of the Current Note remain in full force and effect. (signature page to follow) City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 137 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 138 of 144 90054156v4 S-1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, St. Thomas Academy, and U.S. Bank National Association have caused this Third Amendment to Note to be duly executed in their names as of the Effective Date. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA By______________________________ Its Mayor By______________________________ Its Administrator [Amendment to Note] City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 139 of 144 90054156v4 S-2 CONSENT OF: ST. THOMAS ACADEMY By_________________________________ Its ________________________________ [Amendment to Note] City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 140 of 144 90054156v4 S-3 CONSENT OF: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION By_________________________________ Its Vice President [Amendment to Note] City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 141 of 144 City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 142 of 144 Request for City Council Action DATE: May 2, 2023 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, City Administrator Kelly Torkelson, Assistant City Administrator SUBJECT: City Council Priorities 2023-2024 INTRODUCTION The Mendota Heights City Council sets strategic priorities at each two-year mayoral election cycle. The city council has discussed and reviewed priorities and goals for 2023-2024. BACKGROUND Strategic plans serve as a communication, accountability and prioritization tool for both the city council and staff. Identifying priorities and goals helps to provide structure and organization to the city’s day-to-day operations and long-term planning. Additionally, the identification of priorities at a macro level helps to align initiatives across city departments as well as provide direction on initiatives to city advisory commissions. Proposed priority areas for 2023-24 are: Priority: Economic Vitality and Community Vibrancy Priority: Environmental Sustainability and Stewardship Priority: Premiere Public Services and Infrastructure Priority: Inclusive and Responsive Government Each priority has a series of goals that outline or further define the focus or intention of the priority. In order to achieve the stated goal, staff will develop action items and work plans which respond to and/or correspond with priorities and goals. The number of action items will vary and may depend on staff workload and city council decisions. Staff will report to the city council on a quarterly basis progress made on the identified strategic priorities and goals. Attachment: 2023-2024 City Council Strategic Priorities BUDGET IMPACT None. However, many of the Council’s goals and resulting action items are interrelated and outcomes will depend on city budgets and funding and how the City Council will want to proceed overall. ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is asked to confirm and accept the 2023-24 strategic priorities and goals. 9dCity Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 143 of 144 City of Mendota Heights 2023-2024 City Council Priorities and Goals PRIORITY 1: ECONOMIC VITALITY AND COMMUNITY VIBRANCY Goal 1.1 Support a vibrant business environment Goal 1.2 Foster a welcoming and inclusive community by promoting diversity, equity and inclusion Goal 1.3 Invest in infrastructure that supports residential and business technology connections PRIORITY 2: ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY STEWARDSHIP Goal 2.1 Integrate sustainability practices into municipal operations and infrastructure investments Goal 2.2 Enhance public knowledge and use of natural resources and sustainability best practices Goal 2.3 Lead investments in and expansion of natural resources Goal 2.4 Protect historic and natural spaces PRIORITY 3: PREMIERE PUBLIC SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE Goal 3.1 Build and maintain high-quality public facilities and infrastructure Goal 3.2 Attract and retain a talented workforce and strive to be a workplace of choice Goal 3.3 Promote responsible fiscal management practices Goal 3.4 Provide excellent public services that support a safe, engaged, and connected community PRIORITY 4: INCLUSIVE AND RESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT Goal 4.1 Expand public knowledge and awareness of city processes, policies, opportunities for engagement Goal 4.2 Generate opportunities for community gathering and connection Goal 4.3 Define strategic vision for community goals and expectations City Council | Tuesday, May 2, 2023 | Page 144 of 144