Loading...
09.b Draft minutes 12-02-2025 Planning Commission December 2, 2025 The Scandia Planning Commission held their regular monthly meeting on the above date. The meeting was conducted in-person and virtually over an electronic platform. All participants who joined the meeting remotely could hear each other and contribute to discussions. Chair Travis Loeffler called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. The following were in attendance: Commissioners Mary Cullen, Laszlo Fodor, Jan Hogle, Perry Rynders, and Chair Travis Loeffler. Staff present: City Planner TJ Hofer, City Administrator Kyle Morell and City Clerk Brenda Eklund. City Council member liaison Kirsten Libby was absent. PUBLIC FORUM James Conlan, Larkspur Avenue, said he is a neighbor to the applicant for this evening’s Variance request and has no objections. APPROVAL OF AGENDA, MINUTES Rynders, seconded by Fodor, moved to approve the agenda as presented. The motion carried unanimously. Rynders. seconded by Fodor, moved to approve the November 4, 2025 minutes as presented. The motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE FROM A WETLAND SETBACK TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SUBSURFACE SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM LOCATED AT 19230 LARKSPUR AVENUE NORTH. JON SPRINGER, APPLICANT Planner Hofer described the application for a variance from a wetland setback to replace an existing legally nonconforming septic system at 19230 Larkspur Avenue North. The current septic system is located 36.6 feet from a wetland boundary where 75 feet is required. A septic designer has located a new mound system at 41.1 feet from the wetland, a reduced encroachment into the wetland. Planner Hofer noted than an onsite measurement must be verified before work begins to ensure a deck post setback of 10 feet is met. Planner Hofer described the findings for staff approval. The noncompliant septic system must be replaced and the property is encumbered with wetland setbacks which limit usable space on the lot of record. Washington County noted concerns of a well setback, and recommended a condition to ensure compliant well casing and depth. The MN Department of Health believes the well is compliant, and not needing an increased setback to 100 feet. Hofer said this is to be verified before septic installation. A condition of approval included combination of the two separate parcels which are under common ownership. Planner Hofer recommended adding a condition that the applicant address the County’s direction to verify the well casing and depth with the County. Rynders, seconded by Fodor, moved to open the public hearing at 7:20 pm. Motion carried 5-0. Scandia Planning Commission December 2, 2025 Page 2 of 7 There were no comments. Rynders, seconded by Fodor, moved to close the hearing. Motion carried 5-0. Chair Loeffler provided a recap of the site visit where he met with the homeowner. Loeffler said it was a wooded lot with no surprises, approximately 400 feet from Big Marine Lake. Loeffler said the location for the new septic system is reasonable and the only place on the property where a new system can be installed. Loeffler said the owner tried buying land from the neighbors to gain area but it didn’t work out. Loeffler noted that the setback is improving in the new location. Commissioner Rynders questioned if the Big Marine Sewer System can be connected into. Administrator Morell said it is not within a reasonable distance for a connection. James Conlan, Larkspur Avenue provided a history of the 201 septic system lines which run on Langly Avenue saying it would be difficult to hook into. Commissioner Rynders said there is capacity on the Bliss Sewer System. Commissioner Rynders questioned if the property is within the utility service area adopted with an ordinance in 2021 which mandate connections to the community septic system. Clerk Eklund provided the appendix map for the utility area and it was confirmed that this property is not in the mandated service area. Rynders, seconded by Fodor, moved to approve a variance for a septic system located within a wetland setback with conditions as recommended by staff with an amendment to add a condition for well and septic as described by staff. Motion carried 5-0. The recommendation to approve the variance will be presented to the City Council at their meeting on December 16th. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 153.400.030 REGARDING EXTERIOR LIGHTING STANDARDS FOR PROPERTIES ZONED AP, AG-C, RR-G, RR-N, AND V-N Planner Hofer introduced a draft amendment to the UDC which would amend the language for exterior lighting standards for residential and ag zoning districts. Hofer explained the concerns from a newly constructed dwelling on 182nd Street for which a request for council action was heard at the Council meeting on October 21, 2025. The Council found that the pictures of the extreme intensity of the exterior lighting did not align with their expectations and directed staff to research increased standards for residential lighting to address the issue. Planner Hofer explained the increased requirement for shielding to mirror language of standards in commercial districts – to require a cutoff that directs light at an angle of 90 degrees or less and cannot direct light upwards. Hofer recommended a graphic be included in the code section to show what this means that light has to go towards the ground and not upwards. Scandia Planning Commission December 2, 2025 Page 3 of 7 Planner Hofer proposed adding a modified standard related to height of lights found in standards for commercial zoning districts, The language would set the maximum height for pole-mounted lights to 18 feet and for a light source on a building to not exceed the height of the building. Planner Hofer recommended the amendments will allow for better enforcement tools for lighting. Planner Hofer said that the regulation of color temperature of lights was discussed at the October 21st Council meeting but staff believes this would not be appropriate to regulate and nearly impossible to enforce. Mandating that “all lights have to be warm” would be impractical to enforce and result in numerous nonconformities in the city. Planner Hofer concluded that staff recommends approval of ordinance amendments for exterior lighting standards, with any amendments the Commission deems necessary. Rynders, seconded by Fodor, moved to open the public hearing at 7:45 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. Sam Devita, 182nd Street: Questioned language in paragraph c which states no light source shall be located on a roof. How do you define roof? The lighting on the identified residence is on the eaves. Devita had concerns that the proposed language is not clear, saying light is going away from the structure. Devita agreed that lighting color is challenging to enforce but cool white light is very different from warm light Can there be any language to encourage warm lighting? The light on this residence makes it appear as a commercial property with its cool light. A property owner on182nd Street said new technology is providing novelty items that may not be classified as illumination light such as a “light wall or light curtain”. The speaker said these are concerning and can be quite offensive. A light curtain selling online for under $200 measures 14’ by 7’. This type of lighting could be a future problem to consider. There were no further public comments. Rynders, seconded by Fodor, moved to close the public hearing at 7:51 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. Chair Loeffler said he has a history with the city’s lighting ordinance to preserve night skies, and he supports this ordinance amendment. Loeffler said light on adjacent properties is a leading complaint, and the images in the meeting packet are shocking at how bright they are. This house has brightness on the second story, and the angle of the soffits does not direct light downward but rather outward. Loeffler said the lighting shown in the photos does not fit the community. Commissioner Hogle said it appears to be security lighting. The owner may want them intense and bright, but this is in opposition to what the city wants. Planner Hofer explained that following the complaint, staff contacted the builder to disconnect and dim the offensive lights and he provided a quick response. The builder acknowledged that Scandia Planning Commission December 2, 2025 Page 4 of 7 the lights were too bright Staff met onsite last month to discuss other issues on the property and were told the electrician changed the light intensity within the fixture to a lowered level. Hofer said the intensity was the biggest violation of the current ordinance because they were not calibrated. Hofer said these are rare incidences. Staff has tried to observe the current light settings but the lights have been off when staff drives by after sunset. Commissioner Cullen asked Mr. Devita what the lighting looks like now. Mr. Devita said the lights are at a lower intensity and taken down a notch but still too bright. The lights are not on every night and he has seen them on two occasions since the owner moved in in November. Devita said the lights in the small eave above the garage door seemed reasonable. Commissioner Cullen asked if the initial lighting levels identified in October violated the existing code. Planner Hofer said it did. Lights must be directed downward which the ordinance provides language for, but this amendment will clarify shielding because the current code is not specific enough. Commissioner Cullen said the existing ordinance language can address exterior lighting. The amendments seem to be confusing. Cullen asked are we solving a problem or creating more problems? Cullen said that we should consider if the code has tools already to shut down this situation. If not, then propose amendments that will. Planner Hofer said the intensity standard does but additional standards will clarify what is acceptable and what is not. Hofer said lighting does not need to be hooded if it doesn’t reach adjacent property. The complaint identified that light was directed out, and the amendment to be added will address this. Hofer said there is no shielding tool now. Commissioner Cullen said the changes would address a separate situation, not the one discussed using the existing rules. Planner Hofer stated that staff is looking at how to avoid future situations like this. Administrator Morell said that limits on broadcasting light to an adjacent property was asked for by residents to address an issue that exists. Staff is doing two things: to work within the existing code to establish a basis to address the existing violation now and to make changes to avoid this in the future so that lighting on new houses is not an issue. Morell said the Commission should consider how do we want residential lighting standards to be other than shining light on your neighbor. Staff is using this new home as an example to address an issue. To avoid lighting violations in the future, should the city amend the code, saying soffit lights are more popular than ever. Regarding height limits, the code allows houses to be a maximum height of 35’. This could broadcast light very far – should we consider limiting height on residential properties? Planner Hofer stated that “roof” is not defined in the code but is the area where the shingles are. Chair Loeffler said that lighting up an intersection is in violation. A height limit is good idea. Loeffler said in our community downlight means downward directed light, not out or up. Scandia Planning Commission December 2, 2025 Page 5 of 7 Commissioners discussed the exception for lighting on roofs to highlight an architectural feature. Planner Hofer said this language came from the commercial lighting section and staff can strike roof language. Regarding maximum height, Hofer said the Commission can add language to improve and protect night skies. Commissioners Rynders and Hogle recommended the amendment not strike the first sentence in paragraph a. Shielding as it clarifies the intent: “The light source must be hooded or controlled so as not to light adjacent property in excess of the maximum intensity as defined throughout this Section.” Commissioner Rynders asked if mandating light at an angle of 90 degrees or less is enough. Rynders said light can still go outward. Planner Hofer said 90 degrees is typical; less than 90 degrees is more difficult for builders to measure and difficult for fixtures to actually achieve that. Commissioner Hogle asked if a large farm has a light on a pole which exceeds the height limit but the light does not reach another property – does this amendment disallow this? Administrator Morell said the language as written would make this a violation, but there should be an exemption for utility light poles. Chair Loeffler said the intent is not to regulate security or temporary lights, but rather lights that are on all the time. The Commission discussed lights on soffits and if they can be limited by number, time limits or not allowed over a certain height. Mr. Devita stated that if the property which brought this concern did not have lights over 18 feet in height, there would be a lot less light from the property. He asked if there can be a limit of soffit lights over a certain height, as there are a lot of them on this house. Planner Hofer said they have to pick a height number that makes sense - is it 16, 12, 10 feet? There could be types of lights prohibited or soffit lights above X feet, but there could be commercial buildings that need security lighting. Chair Loeffler stated that the language should prohibit light shining onto an adjacent property and leave it at that. Planner Hofer said that if that is the goal then paragraph c can be struck in its entirety Chair Loeffler summarized the recommended changes to the proposed amendment – keep the first line in paragraph a., add a diagram image for shielding, strike all of paragraph c. for pole height and features on roofs. Commissioner Rynders sad he would like to leave in roof lighting as not allowed, and write the paragraph to state “Light source shall not exceed height of building and not allowed on the roof.” Scandia Planning Commission December 2, 2025 Page 6 of 7 Rynders, second by Hogle, moved to approve modifications of the exterior lighting ordinance as proposed, with the exceptions to leave the first sentence in paragraph a (shielding) and in paragraph c (height) to strike the first sentence and to end the second sentence at the word roof. Chair Loeffler asked if language can be added to encourage warm light as a standard? Planner Hofer said that this could be a recommendation in character area standards as a code housekeeping amendment to add later, but as a recommendation rather than a standard. Commissioner Fodor said he doesn’t want to exclude a deck situated on a roof to not have lights. Planner Hofer said without a specific example, this could be discussed at a later time. Motion carried 4-1 by a roll call vote with Commissioner Cullen opposed. Cullen stated she has concerns that the ordinance amendment sweeps up too many things that everybody does on a regular basis. The recommendation to approve the amendment to the lighting ordinance will be presented to the City Council at their meeting on December 16th. CITY COUNCIL UPDATES Planner Hofer reported that ordinance amendments for fencing and site plan reviews were approved by the City Council on the November 18th consent agenda. The ordinance amendment to allow public amenities within a wetland setback was also approved. Staff included Watershed comments gathered after the Planning Commission meeting last month. Expansion of Non-Conforming Structures Planner Hofer said he introduced the Commission’s recommendation to alter the code language for nonconformities to the Council. The Council asked staff not to pursue changes as they appreciate how the code language works for administrative approval and review. Hofer said the existing process works well but additional review criteria can be looked for a better process when a future amendment is pursued for legal corrections to match state statute language for nonconformities. Planner Hofer reported that the Met Council is preparing communities for the mandated 2050 Comprehensive Plan updates due in June 2028. Hofer said he will bring a report to a future meeting noting the elements of the plan to work on. Hofer said he will encourage the Council to begin work in 2026. FUTURE ITEMS: Next meeting – January 6, 2026 Planner Hofer said there are no applications moving forward at this time. If no applications are received by the deadline, staff will cancel the January meeting. ADJOURNMENT Rynders, seconded by Hogle, moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Scandia Planning Commission December 2, 2025 Page 7 of 7 Respectfully submitted, Brenda Eklund, City Clerk