On the agenda: North Oaks meeting — License Plate Reader (Apr 30)

CITY OF NORTH OAKS
Regular Planning Commission Meeting City Council Meeting
Thursday, April 30, 2026
7:00 PM, City Council Chambers are at 100 Village Center Drive, Room 150, North Oaks, MN
55127

MEETING AGENDA

Remote Access - One or more members of the Planning Commission may attend the meeting via interactive
technology and others will participate in person in Council Chambers (Community Room, 100 Village
Center Drive, Suite 150, North Oaks, MN) during the meeting. Members of the public are welcome to
attend. Any person wishing to monitor the meeting electronically from a remote location may do so by
calling the following Zoom meeting videoconference number: 1-312-626-6799, Webinar ID: 861 0908
7849 or by joining the meeting via the following link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86109087849

1.

Call To Order

2.

Roll Call

3.

Pledge

4.

Approval of Agenda

5.

Approval of Previous Month's Minutes

5a.

Approval of the Minutes of the February 26, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting
Planning Commission Minutes 2.26.26.pdf

6.

Business Action Items

6a.

Public Hearing - Discussion and possible action on a Conditional Use Permit for grading in excess of 100
cubic yards for a property located at 5 Catbird Lane
2026-04-30 PC Packet_5 Catbird CUP.pdf

6b.

Discussion and possible action on structure setbacks table
Proposed Setback Structures.xlsx

7.

Commissioner Report(s)

7a.

Engineering update

8.

Adjourn - The next Planning Commission meeting will be held on Thursday, May 28th, 2026.
Planning Commission April 30, 2026

1

North Oaks Planning Commission
Regular Meeting Minutes
City of North Oaks Community Meeting Room
February 26, 2026
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Cremons called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
Chair Cremons welcomed Commissioners Rich Kingston and Ilya Berchenko back to the
Commission. Kingston and Berchenko were recently sworn in for new three-year terms.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Dave Cremons, Commissioners Rick Anderson, Ilya Berchenko, Aaron
Harkins, Rick Kingston, David Loegering, Bob Ostlund, City Council Liaison Mark
Azman
Staff Present: City Administrator Kevin Kress, City Attorney Bridget Nason, City
Planner Zeke Peters, City Engineer Jupe Hale
Present Via Electronic Means: City Septic Inspector Brian Humpal
Others Present: Kenny Ronnan from NineNorth
Absent: None
A quorum was declared present
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chair Cremons led the Commission in the Pledge of Allegiance
4. CITIZEN COMMENTS
Bill McNee of 11 Sunset Lane spoke to the commission. He expressed support for the
revised septic ordinance but suggested that it go further to require that all septic systems
should be inspected when a home is sold. He also suggested that all cesspool systems
should immediately be considered non-compliant systems and be required to be replaced
within two years.
5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioners added an item to approve Rick Kingston as Vice Chair of the
Commission.
MOTION by Anderson, seconded by Berchenko, to approve the agenda as
amended. Motion carried unanimously.
6. APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MONTH’S MINUTES
MOTION by Anderson, seconded by Ostlund, to approve the Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of September 25, 2025. Motion carried unanimously.

2

Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting

February 26, 2026

7. BUSINESS ACTION ITEMS
a. Appointment of Commissioner as Rick Kingston as Vice Chair for 2026
MOTION by Cremons, seconded by Loegering, to appoint Rick Kingston as Vice
Chair of the Planning Commission for 2026. Motion carried unanimously.
b. Consideration of Variance to Setback for 11 Creekside Lane.
City Planner Zeke Peters presented the application. The variance request is for a 6-foot
setback for a swimming pool where 30 feet is required, and a 17-foot setback for related
pool equipment. The home in question is owned by Jessica and Shane Slominski and is
located at 11 Creekside Lane. The property is zoned Residential Single Family, Medium
Density. The applicants are requesting the variance so they can build a therapy pool for
their children, two of whom have Cerebral Palsy.
City Planner Peters indicated that the pool meets all standards except for the requirement
that it be 30 feet from the lot line. Because the lot is a corner lot and there is a wetland in
the back, the best location for the pool is on the side yard. The owner of the property that
abuts the side yard is St. Paul Water, so it would not directly impact any neighbors. The
pool is pending approval from the Architectural Supervisory Committee.
City Administrator Kevin Kress shared that he worked with the applicant back in the fall
and looked at various designs. The proposed pool design seemed to be the best option.
Commissioner Ostlund noted that it is important to think about precedent for variance
applications, and what impact they will have when the property changes hands. Chair
Cremons stated that he did not believe this application would be setting a precedent since
it is a unique situation and the setback variance would not impact any neighbors.
MOTION by Kingston, seconded by Berchenko, to approve the setback variance
request for the property located at 11 Creekside Lane, subject to the conditions
outlined in the staff report. Motion carried unanimously.
c. Consideration of Revised Septic Ordinance
Chair Cremons introduced the topic of the revised septic ordinance. A working group
started looking at the ordinance in June of 2025. This working group is comprised of
Chair Cremons, City Councilor Mark Azman, City Administrator Kevin Kress, City
Attorney Bridget Nason and City Planner Kendra Lindahl. Mayor Krista Wolter also
participated in some of the discussions, as well as City Septic Inspectors Brian Humpal
and Chris Uebe. The goal was to bring the ordinance into compliance with state
requirements and to address issues that are arising with an increasing number of homes
needing septic system replacement due to aging systems. A primary issue has been the
need for more septic system setback variances since lots have limited space for

3

Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting

February 26, 2026

replacement systems. Although a long-term goal is to potentially get access to City
sewer, the hope is that updating the current ordinances will help bridge the gap between
the present and when future sewer access becomes a possibility. The MPCA has reviewed
a preliminary draft of the new ordinance and has given their approval.
Chair Cremons shared the first substantive change is to eliminate the 5,000 square foot
requirement for septic sites and replace it with language that states size suitability must
be determined by an expert.
A second change was a new section on redevelopment and expansion of existing homes.
The working group defined redevelopment as changes to a home in which more than 50%
of the exterior walls are being removed, or if a resident is adding more than 500 square
feet to a home. When a home is being redeveloped, the new ordinance proposes that two
septic sites must be identified as part of the plan. One of these sites could be an existing
site that is functioning properly, but a backup site would need to be identified as well.
There was not consesus among the working group for a requirement to have a point-ofsale compliance inspection. Ramsey County does not have a point-of-sale requirement,
rather, it allows each city to make the determination if it wants to have one. The revised
ordinance does require a compliance inspection on a current system if a home is being redeveloped and there is a plan to continue to use the existing system. In addition, the
ordinance adds added a requirement that homeowners with a cesspool or seepage pit who
are planning to sell their home must either have the City Septic Inspector evaluate
whether the system is still functioning properly OR obtain a compliance inspection and
get a certificate of compliance. This gives homeowners with older systems that are still
functioning properly some flexibility, but still encourages the replacement of noncompliant systems.
If a system is deemed non-compliant, it must be replaced. If the system is an imminent
threat to public health and safety, it must be replaced within 10 months. This time frame
is not a change from the previous ordinance. If a system is non-compliant but not an
imminent threat to public health and safety, it must be replaced within 24 months.
All systems are required to be pumped and inspected every two years. The bi-annual
pumping is not a formal compliance inspection, but does involve a basic inspection that
looks for any red flags that a system may not be functioning properly. Although many
other communities only require pumping every three years, the two-year timeframe is
designed to help identify any problem systems earlier rather than later.
Another change to the ordinance was altering the setback requirement from 30 feet to 15
feet. This provides more options for septic sites for each lot and reduces the number of
variances that the Planning Commission will need to consider.
Commissioners discussed the merits and drawbacks of the various points, including
whether to require inspections at point of sale, whether inspections should be triggered by

4

Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting

February 26, 2026

bedroom additions or other improvements, and how to strike a balance between
compliance and overregulation.
Commissioners also discussed long-term uncertainty regarding the potential for
municipal sewer. There was some concern expressed for whether residents would delay
septic replacement in the hopes that sewer hookup would become available. On the other
hand, there was concern expressed about forcing expensive septic compliance if sewer
availability is on the horizon. Overall, the Commissioners agreed that a balance needs to
be struck between short-term septic compliance and long-term infrastructure planning.
No formal action was taken on the proposed ordinance changes, but the working group
will use feedback from the discussion to work on it further. Planning Commissioners
were encouraged to send additional feedback via email or call City Administrator Kress
directly. Planning Commissioners will continue the conversation at a future meeting and
will eventually refer it to Council with their recommendation.
d. Discussion on Structures/Improvements Within the Setback
Chair Cremons shared that NOHOA has been approached by residents with more
requests for structures within setback areas. Examples of the types of structures include
firepits, play structures, retaining walls, etc. The current City ordinance does not allow
for any structures to be placed within a setback, but NOHOA is requesting that the City
take a look at the ordinance and see if there might be some allowances that could be
made. Chair Cremons said that he will circulate a memo among Commissioners to gather
feedback and the discussion will continue at a future meeting.
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
Chair Cremons noted that a continuation of the License Plate Reader Program was
recently approved by City Council at their February 26th meeting earlier in the evening.
The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Thursday, March 26, 2026 at
7:00 p.m.
ADJOURN
MOTION by Anderson, seconded by Kingston to adjourn the meeting at 8:54 p.m.
___________________________________

___________________________________

Kevin Kress, City Administrator

Dave Cremons, Chair

Date Approved_______________________

5

PLANNING REPORT
TO:

North Oaks Planning Commission

FROM:

Kendra Lindahl and John Uphoff, City Planners
Kevin Kress, City Administrator
Bridget Nason, City Attorney
Jupe Hale, City Engineer

DATE:

April 30, 2026

RE:

Conditional Use Permit at 5 Catbird Lane (city file 26-02)

Date Application Submitted

March 10, 2026

Date Application Determined Complete:

March 12, 2026

Planning Commission Meeting Date:

April 30, 2026

60-day Review Date:

May 11, 2026

City Council Meeting Date:

May 14, 2026

120-day Review Date:

July 10, 2026

REQUEST
David Eggert has requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit for land reclamation involving more than
100 cubic yards of soil for the construction of a new home.
An application for an administrative permit for the proposed
home to exceed 35 feet has been submitted and will be
administratively processed upon approval of the CUP.
BACKGROUND
This site is currently undeveloped. There is a wetland
located on the western side of the property.
The applicant submitted a letter from NOHOA approving the
plans with conditions.

Figure 1 - Subject Parcel

1

6

Zoning and Land Use
This 3.48-acre property is guided Low Density Residential and is zoned Residential Single Family – Low
Density (RSL). The southeast corner of the property is located in the Shoreland Overlay District for Black
Lake. Black Lake is classified as a Natural Environment Lake.
PLANNING ANALYSIS
Shoreland Standards
Chapter 153 (Shoreland Management Area) of the City Code
establishes the shoreland standards. This lot is a non-riparian lot of
record. There are no shoreland standards that would apply to this lot.
Since the property is located in the Shoreland District, the application
was forwarded to the DNR. The DNR has not provided any
comments.
Setbacks
The proposed single-family home exceeds the 30-foot minimum
setback requirements at all property lines and street easements. The
front elevation is setback 34.7 feet from the roadway. The south side
elevation is setback 33.1 feet from the south lot line. The back
elevation is setback 103.4 feet from the wetland on the west side of
the lot. The north side elevation is setback 129.7 feet from the north
lot line.

Figure 2 - Site Survey

Size
The FAR worksheet shows a floor area of 10,743 square feet and a 0.099 Floor Area Ratio (FAR), which
complies with the maximum 0.12 FAR allowed by the City.
Septic
The plans show primary and secondary septic areas on the north side of the property. The design and
location are subject to review by the septic inspector. This has been added as a condition of approval.

2

7

Land Reclamation CUP
Section 151.027 (D) allows, as a conditional use, land reclamation involving 100 cubic yards or more of soil
based on the factors set forth in 151.076 of the City Code. The request is for 942.23 cubic yards (40.90 cu.
yd. cut and 983.13 cu. yd. fill).
The general conditional use permit standards have been met. Section 151.076 of the Code states, “The
purpose of this section is to provide the city with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the effect
of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health, and safety.”
The Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed conditional use and whether additional
requirements may be necessary to reduce any adverse effects. Consideration shall be given to, among
other things, the following factors:
(1) Relationship of the proposed conditional use to the Comprehensive Plan;
The proposed land reclamation does not change the use of the property.
(2) The nature of the land and adjacent land or building where the use is to be located;
The use is consistent with the surrounding land uses.
(3) Whether the use will in any way depreciate the area in which it is proposed;
The proposed single-family home use will not negatively impact adjacent property values.
(4) The effect upon traffic into and from the land and on adjoining roads, streets, and highways;
The proposed single-family home use will not create a traffic impact.
(5) Whether the use would disrupt the reasonable use and enjoyment of other land in the neighborhood;
The proposed single-family home use will not cause a negative impact to the use and enjoyment of other
land in the neighborhood.
(6) Whether adequate utilities, roads, streets, and other facilities exist or will be available in the near future;
The applicant is proposing a septic system and well. The septic and well locations meet setback
requirements. The final septic design must be reviewed and approved by the City.
(7) Whether the proposed conditional use conforms to all of the provisions of this chapter;
3

8

The proposed request would comply with the ordinance if the conditional use permit for land reclamation
and the administrative permit for building height is approved.
(8) The effect upon natural drainage patterns onto and from the site;
The drainage/grading plan that was submitted shows the finished grading will work with existing drainage
patterns.
(9) Whether the proposed use will be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort,
convenience, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city;
The use, as proposed, will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort,
convenience, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city.
(10) Whether the proposed use would create additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and
services and whether or not the use will be detrimental to the economic welfare of the neighborhood or city;
and
The use, as proposed, will not create additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services
and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the neighborhood or city.
(11) Whether the proposed use is environmentally sound and will not involve uses, activities, processes,
materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, land, or the
general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, wastes, toxins, glare, or
odors.
Beyond initial construction activity, and based on erosion control requirements, the proposed residential
use and grading activity will not be detrimental to the environment or surrounding area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based on the preceding review, Staff finds that the Conditional Use Permit standards are met. If the
Planning Commission recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit, staff recommends the following
conditions:
1. The home shall be constructed in accordance with the plans received on February 17, 2026, except as
modified by the conditions in this section and any minor revisions required by the City’s Building
Official.
2. Erosion control shall be in place prior to the beginning of construction.
4

9

a. Erosion control measures such as silt fence must be installed downstream of all proposed grading, in order
to ensure proper containment of sedimentation on site. Extra care shall be taken to maintain all existing
erosion control measures to ensure sedimentation due to grading activities is not tracked off site.
b. Applicant shall amend the Earthwork and Erosion Control plan so that the linetype with the “S” in it is
correctly labeled as “Proposed Silt Fence.”
c. Applicant shall ensure that grading and filling work does not result in the deposit of additional stormwater
runoff onto adjacent properties.
3. Final plans shall be approved by the Building Official prior to the commencement of construction. Plans must be
in compliance with the maximum 0.12 FAR requirement at the time of approval by the Building Official.
4. All lighting on the single-family home shall be downcast and shielded in accordance with Section 151.031 of the
City Code.
5. The applicant shall comply with all applicable local, state, and watershed district rules and regulations.
6. Both the primary and secondary septic sites shall be protected during construction. Plans shall be
updated to show how the sites will be protected during construction.
7. The applicant must grade the property according to the approved grading plan and ensure that
stormwater runoff doesn’t impact adjacent properties.
8. The applicant must submit a landscape plan to show vegetation/erosion control on the slope between
the back of the home and the wetland on the west side of the property prior to issuance of a building
permit.
9. The applicant must apply for a building permit and receive approval prior to beginning construction.
10. The applicant must apply for a septic permit and receive approval prior to beginning construction.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A:
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D:
Exhibit E:
Exhibit F:
Exhibit G:
Exhibit H:

Location Map
Applicant Narrative received March 10, 2026
Site Survey dated March 9, 2026
Earthwork and Erosion Control Plans dated March 9, 2026
NOHOA Letter dated January 29, 2026
NOHOA Letter dated February 23, 2026
FAR worksheet received February 17, 2026
City Engineer email dated April 21, 2026
5

10

PLANNING COMMISSION OPTIONS
In consideration of the Conditional Use Permit application, the Planning Commission has the following
options:
A) Recommend approval of the application with conditions, based on the applicant's submission, the
contents of this report and other evidence available to the Planning Commission.
•

This option should be utilized if the Planning Commission finds the proposal adheres to all City
Code requirements or will do so with conditions.

B) Recommend denial of the application with findings for denial clearly articulated.
C) Table the request for further study.
a. This option should be utilized if the Planning Commission feels the proposal is
appropriate and should move forward, but that certain design aspects need to be
amended and brought back before a recommendation for approval can be given.

6

11

12

RE: Application has been made to the City of North Oaks for the following:
Type of Permit: Conditional Use Permit
Location: 5 Catbird Lane
Date: 3/10/2026
Purpose: Excavate, cut, and fill in amounts as described in the grading and drainage as part of
this submittal.
Narrative:
•
•

•
•
•
•

•
•

The topography before and after the land reclamation has been included in the
attached/submitted survey.
The existing natural drainage of the land and the land adjacent thereto, and the drainage
of the land after the proposed reclamation had been included in the attached/submitted
surveys.
The purpose of this land reclamation is to support the construction needs of a new custom
single-family home as designed by our client and Brick & Linen Architecture.
The date of beginning and completion of this land reclamation will depend on city
approvals. We are ready to start as soon as we have a permit and road restriction lift.
We propose to control erosion by means of installing and regularly maintaining silt
fencing.
The number and types of vehicles will fluctuate. We plan to use a track hoe excavator,
bulldozer, and skid steer, along with various soil compaction equipment, all held on site
once delivered/mobilized.
We plan to maintain silt fencing and large rock-based track-out devices to ensure
minimal track-out occurs from the site.
Little to no effect on land, lakes, streams, or groundwater will occur. All drainage has
been designed to work around the home and ultimately filter to the same areas it did prior
to construction.

harrisoncustombuildersllc.com

13

For questions or concerns, please contact:
Harrison Custom Builders
David Eggert
5050 Highview Place
Greenwood, MN 55331
[email protected]
Phone: 602.663.0770

Thank you,
David Eggert
Harrison Custom Builders LLC

harrisoncustombuildersllc.com

14

15

16

651.792.7765
[email protected]
100 Village Center Drive | Suite 240
North Oaks, MN | 55127

David Eggert
5 Catbird Lane
North Oaks, MN 55127
January 29, 2026
RE: 5 Catbird Lane – New Home
Dear David Eggert,
I am pleased to inform you that the submittal dated January 13, 2026 has been approved by the
Architectural Supervisory Committee of the North Oaks Home Owners' Association for the following:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

o

o

Roof – Manufacturer – Owens Corning, Color – Sand Castle
Accent Roof – Standing Seam Metal Roof, Color – match asphalt shingles color
Board Siding – Manufacturer – James Hardie, Color – Aesthetic White, SW7035
Shakes – Manufacturer – Sherwin Williams, Color – Aesthetic White, SW7035
Trim, Soffit, & Accents – Color – Aesthetic White
Front Door and Garage Doors – Mahogany with Walnut Stain
Stone – Manufacturer – Fond Du Lac, Style – Natural Stone, Color – White Mortar
Windows – Manufacturer – Marvin, Exterior Color – Stone White, Sizes and Grids to be
installed in varying windows as shown in plans
Deck
▪ Deck Size – 24’ x 16’
▪ Decking Manufacturer – TimberTech
• Collection – Landmark
• Color – French White Oak
▪ Railing style – Westbury, Tuscany
• Material – Aluminum
• Color – White
Pergolas
▪ Two pergolas located in the rear of home
▪ Manufacturer – Trex
• Material – Aluminum
• Color – White
Retaining Wall
▪ Not to extend 3 feet
▪ Natural stone boulders or coordinate with the stone being used for the home
▪ Survey was provided that shows the retaining wall meeting setbacks.

The approval is contingent on the following condition(s):

Nature | Heritage | Community
17

1. Erosion Control and Tree Protection fencing shall be installed prior to start of construction.
2. In accordance with the NOHOA Tree and Forest Conservation Policy, 34 trees meeting the policy
requirements shall be replaced.
3. Proposed retaining walls shall be required to meet setback requirements.
4. The maximum driveway width at the street is 25-feet.
5. Exterior Lighting shall be non-clear glass or of a downward lighting design so there is no glare
from street and must adhere to NOHOA policy.
6. Future application along with fee shall be submitted to ASC for review and approval of the
landscape and pool plans.
The work must be completed and inspected by NOHOA within 18 months. If the project is not
completed in that time frame, it must be resubmitted to the ASC. The work to be completed must be
as submitted to the ASC. Any deviation from the submittal and approved scope of work, including
materials and colors, will need to be resubmitted to ASC for approval prior to construction.
This approval is contingent upon compliance with the requirements of all City codes and ordinances
and all related NOHOA guidelines. If a building (or other) permit is required, the application should be
made at the City Offices. Questions regarding building and zoning requirements should be directed to
the City.
Please notify NOHOA at [email protected] or 651-792-7765 when the work is complete and an
inspection will be made. All improvements should be limited to the scope of work submitted.
The North Oaks Homeowners' Association Bylaws, Article IX, Section 3. Right to a Hearing state"Any
Member who disagrees with a decision of the Architectural Supervisory Committee with respect to the
denial or approval of any Improvement proposed by the Member shall have the right to appeal the
decision of the Architectural Supervisory Committee to the Board." An appeal must be made in writing
to the NOHOA Board within thirty days from the date of this letter or your right to a hearing is waived.
The written notice shall state, in detail, the basis for the Member's appeal. The Board, following receipt
of the written notice, shall schedule a hearing within forty-five (45) days from receipt of the written
notice and provide the Member with at least ten (10) days prior written notice of the date of the
hearing. The Board may appoint a hearing panel, consisting of not fewer than three (3) Members of the
Board, to hear the matter. The Member shall be entitled to present such testimony, documentation, or
other evidence as is deemed reasonable by the Board or the hearing panel of the Board. A
representative of the Architectural Supervisory Committee shall be notified of and requested to attend
the hearing. The representative of the Architectural Supervisory Committee shall have the right to
present such testimony, documentation or other evidence as is deemed reasonable by the Board or
hearing panel of the Board. If the Member fails to attend the hearing, then the appeal shall be denied.
The Board or the hearing panel of the Board shall notify the Member and, if the appeal concerns an
action taken by the Architectural Supervisory Committee, the Architectural Supervisory Committee of its
decision within ten (10) days of the date of the hearing.
Sincerely,
ASC Committee

Nature | Heritage | Community

18

651.792.7765
[email protected]
100 Village Center Drive | Suite 240
North Oaks, MN | 55127

David Eggert
5 Catbird Lane
North Oaks, MN 55127
February 23, 2026
RE: 5 Catbird Lane – New Home
Dear David Eggert,
We are in receipt of additional information from an assessment of trees for the property at 5 Catbird
Lane. As a result of the updated information one of the conditions of approval in the letter dated
January 29, 2026, has been modified to the following:
1. In accordance with the NOHOA Tree and Forest Conservation Policy, 10 trees meeting the policy
requirements shall be replaced.
The work must be completed and inspected by NOHOA within 18 months. If the project is not
completed in that time frame, it must be resubmitted to the ASC. The work to be completed must be
as submitted to the ASC. Any deviation from the submittal and approved scope of work, including
materials and colors, will need to be resubmitted to ASC for approval prior to construction.
This approval is contingent upon compliance with the requirements of all City codes and ordinances
and all related NOHOA guidelines. If a building (or other) permit is required, the application should be
made at the City Offices. Questions regarding building and zoning requirements should be directed to
the City.
Please notify NOHOA at [email protected] or 651-461-8667 when the work is complete and an
inspection will be made. All improvements should be limited to the scope of work submitted.
Sincerely,
ASC Committee

Nature | Heritage | Community
19

20

From: Jupe Hale <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2026 1:50 PM
To: Kendra Lindahl, AICP <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: 5 Catbird Lane
Good afternoon Kendra –
I reviewed the subject application and offer the following comments:
GRADING PLAN: I have verified that the grading plan meets with our requirements and is
reasonable. The slopes from the back of structure to the wetland boundary are approximately
1:6, which is certainly acceptable from an erosion and maintenance perspective. I presume that
the architect/engineer has done some soil borings on land this close to wetlands to verify that
the subsurface soils can support the structure. I do not have any concerns with the
groundwater elevations relative to the walkout floor, as the walkout floor is generally at existing
grade or in some cases on fill above existing grade.
I would like to request a modification to the legend in the Earthwork and Erosion Exhibit, so that
the linetype with the “S” in it is correctly labeled as “Proposed Silt Fence” to avoid confusion.
There is no seeding or landscape plan, so would like to confirm the intent for the
vegetation/erosion control on the slop between back of house and wetland.
Last, I note the relocation of the driveway to the north end of the lot. In reviewing the
surrounding lots, this is acceptable.
Please let me know any questions you may have.
Thank you,
Jupe

Jupe Hale
Senior Director, Municipal Services

612.875.2156 (o)
701 Xenia Avenue S, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
wsbeng.com

For a list of WSB employee licenses and certifications visit here.
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee.
If you are not the addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this email by unintended
recipients is strictly prohibited. WSB does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which arise as a result
of electronic transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard copy.

21

PC Member Name:
Proposed Setback Structure
Elevated decks
Patios
Retaining walls
Staircases
Sidewalks
Playsets
Sport Courts
Utility Buildings
Septic Systems
Solar Panels
Wells
Antennas
Satellite Dishes
Fire Pits
Driveways
Parking Areas
Inground Pools
Pool Decks
Above-Ground Pools
Decorative Boulders
Monuments
Light Fixtures
Rocks/Pavers in Landscaping
Driveway Monuments
Fences
Replacement of Existing Structure
Grading or Filling

30 feet

15 feet

10 feet

No setback

22