HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019/03/20 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - Planning Commission - RegularAGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6:00 P.M.
MARCH 20, 2019
1. Call to order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes: February 20, 2019
3. Hearings
A. Best Cleaners Conditional Use Permit and Variance
Applicant: Robert Colehour (Best Cleaners, Inc.)
Location: 8105 Minnetonka Blvd
Case No.: 19-02-CUP and 19-03-VAR
4. Other Business
5. Communications
6. Adjournment
STUDY SESSION
1. Mixed Use zoning district – update
2. Prep for city council study session on April 8
If you cannot attend the meeting, please call the Community Development office, 952.924.2575.
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please
call the administration department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of
meeting.
1
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
FEBRUARY 20, 2019 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Matt Eckholm, Jessica Kraft,
Carl Robertson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Lisa Peilen (excused); Claudia Johnston-Madison, Joe Tatalovich,
Alanna Franklin (youth member)
STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison, Jacquelyn
Kramer, Clint Pires, John McHugh
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes: January 16, 2019 and February 6, 2019
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner
Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0
3. Public Hearings
A. Zoning Ordinance – Small Cell Aesthetic Requirements
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case Nos: 19-04-ZA
Gary Morrison, assistant zoning administrator, presented the staff report. The
applicant requests an amendment to the zoning ordinance to Sections 36-142
and 36-367 regarding communication towers and antennas.
The intent of the amendment is to clarify existing regulations pertaining to small
wireless facilities and remove references regarding communication towers and
antennas located in the public rights of way, from the zoning ordinance and
move it to chapter 24 of the city code, which is where it regulates public uses in
the right-of-way. We want to make sure the design criteria is consistent with
both Chapters 24 and 36.
Design criteria would require all the equipment; wires, brackets and cables to be
inside of the poles to ultimately end up with a cleaner look. All this is being
considered in anticipation of the 5G network which is expected to roll out over
the next few years.
2
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
February 20, 2019
Page 2
Both the federal government and the State have passed laws and rules that are
intended to streamline the process for the implementation of this infrastructure.
And in doing so they have put some significant restrictions on local governments’
abilities to regulate the installation of these facilities in the local right-of-way.
However, the city does have until April 15, 2019, to adopt aesthetic guidelines,
to help minimize the impact aesthetically of these facilities in the public right-of-
way.
Commissioner Carper, asked Mr. Morrison a question relating to page 12 of the
planning commission packet under section 36.142 – sub 16. Micro-wireless
facility, whose exterior antenna, if any, is no longer than 11 inches. Why such a
unique measurement?
Mr. Morrison states the section was taken directly out of chapter 24 in an
attempt to be consistent with how the city already defines these regulations. It’s
also staff’s understanding the definition comes from other agencies and is the
universal standard in the industry.
Commissioner Robertson, asked about the possibility of an antennae being
needed where an existing pole or decorative pole is already placed, would we
need to add an additional pole nearby or is there a way to modify an existing
pole to accommodate the equipment internally and maintain the same style
pole?
Mr. Morrison responded the intent of Chapter 24, that the company installing a
pole in the public right-of-ways, they will have to install a pole that matches the
design in the district and keep all the equipment inside the pole. This new pole
could replace an existing pole. All the design specifications will be in a manual
that will be available to anybody upon request.
Chair Eckholm opened the public hearing.
Nathan Monsen, 2700 Ottawa Ave. S., asked if the proposed regulations vary by
zoning areas within the city.
Mr. Morrison responded that in today’s codes the height of towers is regulated
differently per zoning district and in some cases the placement of where they
can be on the property; those regulations are existing in today’s code and not
anticipated to change. Primarily what we’re doing is taking existing language in
today’s zoning ordinance that regulates the right-of-way, taking it out of Chapter
36 and putting it into Chapter 24 and addressing some of these aesthetic
standards.
3
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
February 20, 2019
Page 3
Mr. Monsen inquired if there is a conversation or desire of different rules based
on federal and state regulations, that there can be different requirements or
regulations based on residential versus commercial districts.
Mr. Morrison responded that the way its setup now is anything on residential
property is only intended to serve the residents of that property, so any antenna
meant to serve the general public is not allowed on any residential property. It
can be allowed only on commercial or non-residential for the general public.
Sean Walther, planning and zoning supervisor, added that it is possible for these
poles to be installed in the public right-of-way in a residential area.
Mr. Monsen stated his question still stands. In public right-of-way, is there any
desire for different regulations for these kind of towers between residential?
Mr. Morrison, stated this is where the aesthetic guidelines come into play, with
the concealing of the equipment in the towers. As, when it comes to the right-of-
way that’s where the city’s design standards come into play; they are deemed
public right-of-way, the utility has the right to locate within them.
Bruce Browning, 3225 Dakota Ave. S., asked for clarification about the city
ordinance. How does the state of Minnesota react to this, are they okay with this
as well? Do you seen any legalities that could become a problem later down the
line?
Mr. Walther, responded that the States statutes were amended prior to the
release of the latest federal communication rules; which also reduced the city’s
ability to regulate items in the right-of-way. So, from the State legislature point
of view they’re essentially echoing the changes that have occurred at the federal
government level.
Mr. Browning, asked about the 5G network and if there is an idea of about how
many antennas it will require to get the coverage they need; how quickly it might
end up occurring – due to the demand but keeping the aesthetics a priority still;
and which providers are coming in?
Mr. Morrison responded that it is unknown how many antennas or providers
may come in and believes it will roll out in the higher demand areas and it will
require a fair number due to the demand.
Mr. Browning noted the city’s attempt to roll out wireless internet some years
ago and how strongly the community opposed the appearance and the number
4
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
February 20, 2019
Page 4
of poles that were installed in the boulevards in residential areas. He assumes
the city is attempting to avoid this from happening again in the future.
Chair Eckholm closed the public hearing and brought it back to the
commissioners.
Commissioner Carper complimented city staff for their effort and time put into
creating such ordinances.
Commissioner Robertson also acknowledged the city’s effort and made a motion
to recommend approval of the ordinance amending section 36-142 and 36-367
pertaining to small wireless facilities. Commissioner Kraft seconded the motion.
The motion passed 4-0.
4. Other Business. None.
5. Communications:
o Study Session is being held after meeting to discuss the Historic Walker
Lake study and home occupations.
o Boards and Commissions meeting will be held on Monday, February 25at
5:30 p.m. which is also open to the public and will be broadcast.
6. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 6:24 p.m.
STUDY SESSION
The study session commenced at 6:30 p.m.
1. Historic Walker Lake
Jennifer Monson, planner, spoke about the small area revitalization plan and
design guidelines for Historic Walker Lake that started in 2018. The goal of the
study is to identify ways to maintain the characteristics and the feel of the district
as redevelopment and reinvestment occurs in the area. Also, the city would like to
keep the scale of the district small and walkable, and maintain the neighborhood
commercial district.
Ms. Monson explained the history of the Walker Lake area. This was the historic
downtown of St. Louis Park, which was developed by T.B. Walker who later
helped start the Walker Art Center.
5
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
February 20, 2019
Page 5
Currently there are approximately 105 businesses with about 1,500 employees. In
2016 there was an Activation Grant from Hennepin County to help brand the area
as Historic Walker Lake. There has been open street events, outreach to the
neighborhood and business owners to get input on the vision for the district. The
city is planning major infrastructure improvements in the area in 2019 and 2020.
In 2018 a small area revitalization plan was kicked off and a consultant was hired
to help determine the best path forward for implementation of the plans. This
study will include a parking analysis, as a lot of businesses cannot meet the
zoning ordinance for parking requirements; zoning code recommendations; and
design guidelines to help maintain the character that exists today.
The consultants have already surveyed 40% of the businesses. A lot of the
business owners have mentioned the lack of access; the connection of Lake Street
to Highway 7 was closed and it has become a bit more difficult to access the area
and a lot of people don’t know what businesses are located there. The businesses
want to start a business association, which they can use to help with marketing of
the area, get to know the neighbors and create events with one another.
An item being looked at in conjunction with Historic Walker Lake are regulatory
changes. To make sure our code allows the uses of a brewery, food hall, and other
changes that might be needed for these new business to be allowed in the area.
Other than gentrification, the only worry the area owners and resident are
concerned of is making sure everything that has been presented thus far, moves
forward.
2. Home Occupations (no written report)
Mr. Walther reviewed staff’s responses to questions the planning commission
raised regarding firearm sales following the public hearing.
As of January 2019 there are six federal firearm licensed holders (FFL) in St.
Louis Park. Five of those are home occupations and Frontiermen is the sixth. All
responsible persons go through an extensive process including background checks
and an in-person interview, done by the Bureau of Alcohol and Tobacco Firearms
and Explosives.
City staff has tried to find the research mentioned in one of the letters received
during the public hearing, but no such study has been found. The closest thing
staff found was a study to do a study, which did not appear to have any bearing on
the current discussion
The planning commissioners had also asked if there have been incidences of
violence at or due to the home based firearm sales, in comparison with
6
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
February 20, 2019
Page 6
commercial locations. The police department reviewed all police calls within the
past ten years at all addresses that hold FFL’s and there were no incidences of
violence, burglary or stolen inventory reported.
Commissioner Robertson asked why is this being proposed. He stated he feels this
is a mis-direction in response to the concerns brought up by the students at St.
Louis Park after the Florida High School shooting and this may not be enough of
an action.
Mr. Walther acknowledged that the students’ concerns initiated the city council’s
inquiry regarding city firearm sales regulations and policies in the city. This
proposed change to the home occupations regulations is being proposed, because
that review highlighted discrepancy in city policy, whereby firearm sales in
commercial districts are prohibited from being within 350 feet of a residential
area, and yet firearm sales are being allowed as a home occupation in a residential
property. This change would prevent any more home occupations from starting
up. This does not eliminate the current businesses that are already operating.
Those home occupations would be allowed to continue as a non-conforming use,
because they were operating before the new rules were adopted. It would also
prevent existing home occupations from expanding.
Commissioner Kraft stated the city may want to take a position to prevent new
FFL home occupations from coming into the community. It might be something
we should change now and put into effect to save from the trouble of doing it in
the future when there may be more businesses effected.
Chair Eckholm asked if rules should be added to further regulate the FFL home
occupations, if not prohibiting them, in order to ensure that if problems occur in
the future, that the city could act to achieve compliance or shut them down.
Commissioner Robertson believed this ordinance isn’t addressing the concerns of
the students and protecting them from violence. With the request of change from
the students within St. Louis Park it’s not enough of a difference moving forward
and then telling them something was done.
Commissioner Carper suggested examples of other regulations that may be put
into place.
Discussion from group ended with agreement of sending out another public
hearing notification as it has been some time since the hearing was held and to
gather the feedback from council when it moves forward.
Mr. Walther provided an update about the Ground Floor Window Transparency
ordinance. The council requested that the planning commission attend the April
7
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
February 20, 2019
Page 7
8th study session to discuss the item and also go over the 2019 work plan at the
same time.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elena Roberts
Recording Secretary
8
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Best Cleaners Building Expansion
Meeting: Planning Commission
Meeting Date: March 20, 2019
Agenda Item: 3a
3a. Title: Best Cleaners building expansion
Location: 8105 Minnetonka Boulevard
Case number: 19-02-CUP, 19-03-VAR
Applicant: Robert Colehour
60 day review: April 19, 2019
120 day review: June 18, 2019
Recommended Actions:
•Chair to close public hearing.
•Motion to recommend approval of the conditional use permit and variance with the
conditions recommended by staff.
Request: Robert Colehour of Best Cleaners requests a conditional use permit (CUP) and
variance to construct a building addition and expand the existing laundromat and dry cleaning
business.
Site Information:
Texa-Tonka Shopping Center
Minnetonka Boulevard
Utah Avenue Texas Avenue Project Site:
8105 Minnetonka Blvd.
9
Agenda Item No. 3a Best Cleaners building expansion
Meeting Date: March 20, 2019
Site Area: 0.6 acres
Comprehensive plan: COM Commercial
Zoning: C-2 General Commercial
Neighborhood: Aquila
Current and proposed use: Laundromat and dry cleaning
Surrounding uses: Multi-family on west and south, commercial on north and east
Proposed Use: The applicant proposes a 2,909 square foot addition to the existing 4,680 square
foot building, in order to expand the existing laundromat and dry cleaning business. As part of
this expansion, landscaping will be improved on the site.
Building design: The existing one story building was constructed in 1961 and includes a partial
basement. The applicant proposes to expand the existing building to the south. The building
expansion would be one story tall with a full basement. The basement level would be used for
storage and mechanical equipment. The existing building contains laundromat and dry cleaning
facilities. The addition will contain additional dry cleaning processing facilities, two offices, and
a new ADA accessible bathroom. Staff recommends the conditions of approval include
compliance with all building code regulations.
Variance request: The applicant requests a variance to reduce the west side setback from 15
feet to 5 feet in order to construct the building addition.
Zoning Regulations:
Conditional use permit – in-vehicle sales. The existing building includes a drive-through window
where customers can drop off and pick up dry cleaning. The zoning code defines this feature as
“in-vehicle sales,” which requires a conditional use permit in the C-2 zoning district and must
meet the following conditions.
1.Drive-through facilities and stacking areas shall not be located within 100 feet of any
parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an
occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions,
and community centers, unless the entire facility and stacking areas are separated from
the lot in an R district by a building wall. The drive-through window is located on the
east side of the building. The parcel to the east of the project site is zoned C-2. The
parcel to the west of the site is zoned R-C High-Density Multi-Family Residence. The
drive-through facilities and stacking area are fully screened and separated from the
residential use by the building.
2.Stacking shall be provided for six cars per customer service point and shall comply with
all yard requirements. The business usually generates stacking of 2-3 cars, which
complies with all yard requirements. The proof of parking site plan shows six car
stacking.
3.This use shall only be permitted when it can be demonstrated that the operation will not
have a significant adverse effect on the existing level of service on adjacent streets and
intersections. The business has used the drive-through window for many years, and staff
10
Agenda Item No. 3a Best Cleaners building expansion
Meeting Date: March 20, 2019
has received no complaints. Staff does not anticipate any adverse effects from its
continued use.
4.The drive-through facility shall be designed so it does not impede traffic or impair
vehicular and pedestrian traffic movement, or exacerbate the potential for pedestrian or
vehicular conflicts. The typical stacking of 2-3 cars does not impede traffic in the parking
lot nor access to or from the site.
5.Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or
arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating
significant traffic on local residential streets. The site is accessed from Utah Avenue. The
use does not generate significant traffic on local residential streets.
6.Any canopy constructed as part of this use shall be compatible with the architectural
design and materials of the principal structure. The canvas canopy complies with all
required architectural standards. The canopy must comply with the 5% bright accent
color limit required by code.
7.The use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan including any provisions of the
redevelopment chapter and the plan by neighborhood policies for the neighborhood in
which it is located and conditions of approval may be added as a means of satisfying this
requirement. The current and proposed uses, including the drive-through window, are in
conformance with the comprehensive plan.
Conditional use permit – general requirements. In addition to the conditions above, the site
must meet the following general review requirements for conditional use permits.
1.Consistency with plans. The use of this property is consistent with and supportive of
principles, goals, objectives, land use designations, redevelopment plans, neighborhood
objectives, and implementation strategies of the comprehensive plan. Staff identified no
conflicts between the proposed project and the comprehensive plan.
2.Nuisance. It is not detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the
community as a whole. It will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and
enjoyment of properties, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, parking facilities on
adjacent streets, and values of properties in close proximity to the conditional use. This
condition is met. Best Cleaners has operated on site for many years, and staff has
received no complaints regarding the business nor the drive-through window.
3.Compliance with code. It is consistent with the regulations, intent and purpose of City
Code and the zoning district in which the conditional use is located. With the exception
of the requested side yard variance, the proposed plan meets the conditions required
for in-vehicle sales.
4.Consistency with service capacity. It will not have undue adverse impacts on
governmental facilities, services or improvements which are either existing or proposed.
Services will not be adversely impacted by the proposed building expansion.
5.Site design. It is consistent with the design and other requirements of site and landscape
plans prepared by or under the direction of a professional landscape architect or civil
engineer registered in the state and adopted as part of the conditions imposed on the
use by the city council. With the exception of the side yard setback request, the site
11
Agenda Item No. 3a Best Cleaners building expansion
Meeting Date: March 20, 2019
meets all design and landscaping requirements. An analysis of the variance request
follows.
6.Consistency with utilities. It is consistent with the City’s stormwater, sanitary sewer, and
water plans. The proposed design is consistent with all city plans
General zoning requirements:
Factor Required Proposed Met?
Use Laundromat & dry cleaning No change Yes
Height 6 stories or 75 feet One story or 15.58 feet Yes
Building
Materials
Minimum of 60% Class I
materials
Class I on addition : 92% Yes
Off-Street
Parking
24 spaces Surface parking: 18
On-street parking: 4
Proof of parking: 2
Total parking: 24
Yes
Bicycle Parking 4 spaces 4 spaces Yes
Floor Area Ratio 2.0 0.29 Yes
Setbacks Front (north): 5 feet
Side (west): 15 feet
Side (east): 5 feet
Rear (south): 15 feet
Front (north): 55 feet
Side (west): 5 feet
Side (east): 69 feet
Rear (south): 15 feet
Yes
Variance
Yes
Yes
Sidewalks Required along all street
frontages
Provided along all street
frontages
Yes
Stormwater
Management
Required on-site Provided on-site Yes
Landscaping Trees: 13
Shrubs: 79
Trees: 13
Shrubs: 79
Yes
Tree
Replacement
2.16 caliper inches 20 caliper inches Yes
Building materials: The existing building elevations consist of painted brick, glazing, and canvas
canopy. The new addition would consist of over 90% class 1 materials including masonry stucco
and glazing.
Zoning code Section 36-366 Architectural Design states, “No building may display more than
five percent of any elevation surface in bright, pure accent colors.” Staff finds the existing
yellow canopy makes up more than 5% of the north building elevation, and is thus in violation
of this provision. Staff recommends including a condition of approval stating the existing
canopy should be renovated to reduce the amount of bright pure accent color to not more than
12
Agenda Item No. 3a Best Cleaners building expansion
Meeting Date: March 20, 2019
5% of the north building elevation, and the proposed canopy extension should be designed to
ensure that bright accent color(s) make up 5% or less of the east building elevation.
Landscaping: The zoning code requires a minimum of 13 canopy trees and 79 shrubs on site,
and the proposed site plan meets these planting minimums. The applicant will also plant native
grasses along the south side of the property.
Lighting: The lighting plan shows one new wall pack on the east side of the building addition.
This light, and all existing lights, comply with city lighting standards. Staff has received no
lighting complaints on the property.
Solid Waste: Due to the building expansion, the site will be required to comply with the city’s
solid waste requirements. These conditions of approval include screening all trash receptacles
and providing recycling facilities on site. The applicant is currently working with their service
provider and the city’s Solid Waste Program Specialist to develop a solid waste plan.
Stormwater Management: The applicant proposes Best Management Practices (BMP) of a new
catch basin with sump bottom for this site. A final Stormwater Management Plan will be
submitted prior to the permit application. The project will be required to comply with all
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit and city erosion control permit requirements as
conditions of approval.
Variance Analysis:
Yards: The existing and proposed site plan meet the north, east, and south yard requirements.
The existing building is five feet from the west lot line; the zoning code requires the side yard to
be 15 feet because the adjacent property to the west is zoned residential. The applicant
proposes extending the building addition along the same setback as the existing building, and
thus lengthening the nonconformity. The applicant requests a variance to bring both the
existing and proposed building into compliance with the zoning code. The following is an
analysis of the criteria required by code to be considered when reviewing variances:
1.The effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community.
No negative impacts upon the health, safety and welfare of the community are anticipated
from granting this side yard variance. A public utility is located on the property adjacent to
the existing building. South of the utility and adjacent to the portion of the subject property
where the addition will be constructed is improved with an apartment building. The
apartment building is approximately 25 feet from the proposed addition. Staff believes the
proposed addition does not impact the health, safety and welfare of those living in the
apartment because it is 25 feet away, which exceeds the requirements for distance
between buildings located in the same development in the RC district. If two apartment
buildings of the same size were constructed on the same property, they could be as close as
15 feet apart.
13
Agenda Item No. 3a Best Cleaners building expansion
Meeting Date: March 20, 2019
Staff have received no complaints regarding the existing building’s west side setback. The
building addition will have the same side yard width as the existing building. Staff do not
anticipate negative impacts of the proximity of the addition on the nearby properties.
2.The request is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The intent
of the ordinance is to ensure sufficient space between buildings and uses to avoid negative
impacts on neighboring properties. As noted above, the proposed building is 25 feet away
from the apartment building, while a second apartment building could be constructed on
the property and be only 15 feet away from the first apartment building. Additionally, the
proposed addition will not have equipment or vents facing the apartment building. This
project will also bring the site into compliance with landscaping and architectural
requirements in the zoning code.
3.The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The expansion of the existing
business supports the city’s strategic priority of providing a broad range of housing and
neighborhood oriented development. The expansion is needed to meet the demands of the
neighborhood and business growth.
4.The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying
with the zoning ordinance. “Practical difficulties,” as used in connection with the granting of
a variance, means that:
a.The property owner proposes to use the property for a land use that is permitted in the
zoning district in which the land is located. A variance can be requested for dimensional
items required in the zoning ordinance, including but not limited to setbacks and height
limitations. Laundromats and dry cleaning services are both permitted uses in the C-2
zoning district. The applicant requests a variance from the dimensional standard for the
west side yard.
b.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created
by the landowner. The variance request is due to the existing building and the shape of
the lot. The side setback variance would allow the construction of an addition that
improves the efficiency of business operations, minimizes loss of off-street parking, and
maintains traffic flow on the site.
c.The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The
variance would allow the building addition to be built at the same distance from the side
lot line as the existing building, which has been on the property since 1961.
d.Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The building
expansion would allow more efficient business operations while maintaining code-
required on-site parking and landscaping.
5.There are circumstances such as or including the shape, topography, water conditions, or
other physical conditions unique to the property. The location of the building addition allows
the most efficient business operations based on the location of the existing building.
Additionally, the west side of the property slopes down and away from the building
14
Agenda Item No. 3a Best Cleaners building expansion
Meeting Date: March 20, 2019
addition, providing a natural buffer between the building addition and the apartment
building.
6.The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. The variance allows the most efficient layout and
expansion of the property owner’s business.
7.The granting of the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to the
adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets, increase the
danger of fire, or endanger public safety. The proposed addition will not cast shadows on
the apartment building, and the proposed layout reduces congestion on the street by
preserving on-site parking.
8.The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is
necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty. As stated above, the variance allows for the most
efficient layout of the building addition.
Public feedback: Staff posted a ‘proposed development’ sign on the site and project
information on the city website and social media. A neighborhood meeting was not held. Staff
received no comments from the public.
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit and 10.0 feet side
yard variance to allow the building expansion and 5.0 feet side yard at 8105 Minnetonka
Boulevard, subject to the following conditions:
1.The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the Official
Exhibits. The official exhibits include:
a.Sheet 1: Site Plan
b.Sheet 1A: Demonstration Stalls Site Plan
c.Sheet 2: Lower Level Floor Plan
d.Sheet 3: Main Level Floor Plan
e.Sheet 4: East & South Elevations
f.Sheet 5: West & North Elevations
g.Sheet L1: Lighting Plan
h.Survey
2.The existing canopy shall be renovated to reduce the amount of bright pure accent
color to 5% or less of the north building elevation, and the proposed canopy
extension should be designed to ensure that bright accent color(s) will be 5% or less
of the east building elevation.
3.All vents and equipment on the new building addition must be at least 30 feet from
the west property line.
4.All new utilities shall be buried.
5.The site shall comply with the city’s solid waste requirements.
15
Agenda Item No. 3a Best Cleaners building expansion
Meeting Date: March 20, 2019
6.All required permits shall be obtained prior to starting construction, including but
not limited to:
a.NPDES grading/construction permit.
b.City of St. Louis Park building, erosion control, and right-of-way permits. The
following conditions shall be met before issuance of the erosion control
permit:
i.Provide gutter connection details.
ii.Provide a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
iii.Provide separate utility and grading plans
iv.Define the change in impervious surface and percent of site to
determine stormwater management requirements.
v.Define site contamination assessment.
c.Minnehaha Creek Watershed District stormwater management permit.
7.Prior to issuing the building permit, the following conditions shall be met:
a.Applicant shall submit a financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of
credit in the amount of 125% of the costs of landscaping.
b.Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by the applicant and owner.
c.Obtain a SAC determination letter from Met Council and submit it to the
Inspections Department when building permits are submitted.
d.Architect of record will need to provide a complete code review.
e.Architect of record will need to provide ADA review and show how 20% of
building cost will be invested into ADA improvements.
8.In addition to other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative
fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval.
Attachments: Aerial, development plans
Prepared by: Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
16
Agenda Item No. 3a Best Cleaners building expansion
Meeting Date: March 20, 2019
Aerial:
Minnetonka Boulevard Utah Avenue Existing
Building
Proposed
addition
Apartment
Building
Utility
Equipment
25 feet between addition
and apartment building
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Meeting: Planning Commission
Meeting Date: March 20, 2019
Study Session Item: 1
1.Title: Mixed Use Zoning District City Council Update and Draft Ordinance
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review the draft ordinance and provide any feedback to staff.
SUMMARY: In December 2018, city council approved the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for
submittal to the Metropolitan Council. It is expected that the Metropolitan Council will approve
the plan by April 1, 2019, and city council will adopt the plan immediately following. The plan
re-guides several properties on the Future Land Use Map in the city to mixed use. Therefore, it
is a high priority to update the mixed-use zoning ordinance so it is consistent with the 2040
Land Use Plan goals.
On March 11, 2019 the city council reviewed some of the major elements of the amended
mixed-use zoning district including building orientation, controlling the building height based on
the street width, setbacks, stepbacks, build-to-lines, maximum building length, uses, and
density bonuses. City council discussed each topic, and responded positively to all of the
proposed amendments. Strong support was voiced for the density bonus amendment, and city
council requested the list of items allowed as part of the density bonus remain small. The
council expressed appreciation and thanked planning commission and staff for their work.
The attached draft ordinance reflects planning commission and city council’s recommendations.
NEXT STEPS: Unless additional feedback received from the planning commission requires
another study session, staff will schedule a public hearing for early May.
ATTACHMENTS: Draft ordinance
Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, Planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
26
DRAFT Mixed Use Ordinance
ARTICLE IV. ZONING DISTRICTS
DIVISION 9. M-X MIXED USE DISTRICT
Sec. 36-261. Purpose.
The purposes of the M-X mixed use district are to:
(1) Provide appropriate areas for and facilitate quality mixed use development in activity centers that
are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s land use and transportation goals and strategies;
(2) Provide a variety of residential housing types and densities to assure activity and support a mix of
uses, and enhance the housing choices of city residents;
(3) Integrate new mixed use development with its surroundings by encouraging connections for
pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles and by assuring sensitive, compatible use, scale, and
operational transitions to neighborhood uses;
(4)Encourage reductions in impervious surface by minimizing surface parking and retain open space
by encouraging taller buildings for high-density uses; and
(5) Ensure high quality architectural design and materials, and promote innovative site design.
(Code 1976, § 14:5-8A)
Sec. 36-262. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this section, shall have
the meanings ascribed to them in this subsection, except where the context clearly indicates a different
meaning.
Affordable commercial space means a specified reduction of commercial rent based on the fair
market commercial rents for the building.
Building Height to Street Width means the percentage of the building height compared to the
adjacent street width. The street width means half of the right-of-way width, including all
sidewalks, easements and setbacks. This regulation shall not prohibit additional building height
with the addition of a stepback.
Example: Building height is 60 percent of the street width.
| centerline
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
27
Build-to Zone means the minimum and maximum distance a structure may be placed from a lot
line. Build-to zones are measured from the outside edge of any public access easement for
sidewalk or the right-of-way, if no public access easement for sidewalk is required or exists.
Commuter Bicycle Facilities means bike lockers, on-site showers, and a bicycle repair station.
Courtyard means an outdoor area enclosed by a building facade on at least 3 sides and open to
the sky.
Frontage means the building and lot area facing and directly adjacent to a street right-of-way
line.
Frontage, Primary means a frontage that receives priority over other frontages, defining a
higher level of pedestrian orientation. The primary frontages is identified in the comprehensive
plan as a collector or arterial. If there are two primary streets, or no primary streets, the Zoning
Administrator shall determine the most appropriate frontage to serve as the primary street.
Orientation of other parcels along the street and status of the street shall be considered.
Frontage, Secondary means a frontage that is secondary to the Primary Frontage, requiring less
streetwall coverage and lower transparency levels, and permitting more interruptions by
driveways. Secondary frontages are all frontages not identified as a primary frontage, and are
categorized as a side yard abutting a street.
Impervious Site Coverage means the percentage of a lot developed with principal or accessory
structures and impervious surfaces, such as driveways, sidewalks, and patios.
Lot Line Coverage means the minimum percent of lot frontage that must contain a building.
Occupied Space means an interior building space regularly occupied by the building users. It
does not include storage areas, utility space, or parking.
Pedestrianway means an open and available pathway designed for use by pedestrians; it can be
located mid-block allowing pedestrian movement from one street to another without traveling
along the block’s perimeter.
Story, Ground. Also referred to as ground floor means the first floor of a building that is level to
or elevated above the finished grade on the front and corner facades, excluding basements or
cellars.
Story, Half means a story either in the base of the building, partially below grade and partially
above grade, or a story fully within the roof structure with transparency facing the street.
Story, Upper. Also referred to as upper floor means the floors located above the ground story of
a building.
Street Face means the facade of a building that faces a street right-of-way.
Transparency means the measurement of the percentage of a facade that has highly
transparent, low reflectance windows measured between 2’ and 8’ above grade. Mirrored glass
is not permitted.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
28
Yard, Street means the space on a lot between the principal structure and the primary or
secondary street frontage line or street side lot line for the lot and extending to any minimum
side or rear setback line.
Yard Definition. Yard is defined in Section 36-3 Definitions. For the purposes of this Section, the
following standards shall supplement and, where inconsistent, supersede the definition of
Section 36-3:
1.Side and Rear Yards Abutting Other Lots, an Alley, or a Rail Right-of-Way means a property
located in an area designated as Mixed Use MX, only yards abutting a lot, an alley, or a rail
right-of-way at the lot line, and not a street, waterway or other Primary or Secondary
frontage, are considered side or rear yards.
2.Front Yards and Side Yards abutting a street are regulated through the designation of
Primary and Secondary frontages.
Visible Basement means a half story partially below grade and partially exposed above with
required transparency on the street facade.
Zoning Administrator means the zoning administrator or her/his designee.
Sec. 36-263. Mixed use restrictions and performance standards.
The following restrictions and performance standards shall govern structures and uses permitted in any
MX mixed use district:
(1) All buildings shall have a vertical mix of land uses, such as residential and commercial, with a
strong pedestrian orientation. A use on the ground floor must be different from a use on an upper
floor. The second floor may be designed to have the same use as the ground floor so long as there
is at least one more floor above the second floor that has a different use from the first two floors.
At least one of the floors shall contain residential dwelling units.
(2) More than one mixed-use building may be placed on one lot in the MX District.
(3) Along at least 75 percent of the primary frontage, the building must be designed for non-
residential uses. Lobbies and amenity areas serving a residential use in the building shall not count
as a non-residential use.
(4) All non-residential uses located on the ground floor primary and secondary frontage shall have a
direct and primary access to and from the primary and/or secondary frontage building façade and
the access shall remain open during business hours.
(5) All business activities including but not limited to sales, rentals, service, storage, merchandise
display, repair, and processing, except for off-street vehicular parking and off-street loading, shall
be conducted wholly within an enclosed structure except as specifically permitted elsewhere in
this chapter.
(6) Outdoor storage shall be prohibited except when specifically permitted elsewhere in this chapter.
(7) Business uses shall front on a public way or an interior arcade.
(8) All delivery service entrances to a building shall be from a public alley, service-alley, off-street
parking lot, or all deliveries shall be made from the curb.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
29
(9) All trash, garbage, waste materials, trash containers, and recycling containers shall be located
within the building or behind all build-to-lines and shall be kept in the manner required by this
Code. All trash handling and loading areas shall be screened from view within a waste enclosure
which shall be constructed of the same materials as the principal building.
(10) There shall be no vehicular access within 50 feet of the intersection of the projection of the
nearest curblines of any public streets to a parcel on which a commercial use is operated.
(11) No storage, display or parking of vehicles shall be allowed in any of the required yards or
landscaped areas.
(12) Surface parking spaces, mechanical equipment, refuse and recycling areas, and loading areas shall
not be located within any build-to zone, minimum setback, or street yard.
(13) New structures and structures which expand the gross square footage of the structure by more
than 50 percent shall be required to place all utility service lines underground. Any new service to
an existing building shall be placed underground.
(14) Vehicular access for all non-residential uses shall be from a roadway identified in the
comprehensive plan or as a collector or arterial or otherwise located so that access can be
provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets.
(15) Sidewalks shall be provided along all sides of the lot that abut a public street.
(16) A separate pedestrian access shall connect the principal building to the public street or a public
trail, on all sides of the lot which front on a public right-of-way or public trail. This access shall be
separated from parking areas by curbed, landscaped islands which have a minimum width of 20
feet inclusive of sidewalk. If a transit stop is located on any adjacent public street, access shall be
located convenient to that transit stop.
Sec. 36-264. Uses.
(1)Permitted uses (P). Uses listed in Table 36-264 with a “P” symbol are permitted by-right in the
Frontage Types in which they are listed.
(2)Uses permitted in limited stories (PL). Uses listed in Table 36-264 with a “PL” symbol are
permitted by-right in the Frontage Types in which they are listed, provided that the uses are
located in the upper stories of a structure; the basement; or in the ground story, a minimum of
30 feet behind any primary street façade and behind a permitted use.
(3)Uses permitted with conditions (PC). Uses listed in Table 36-264 with a “PC” symbol are
permitted provided compliance with the listed conditions and requirements.
(4)Uses permitted by conditional use permit (CUP). Uses listed in Table 36-264 with a “CUP” symbol
require a Conditional Use Permit; refer to 36-33 Conditional Use Permits.
Table 36-264 Mixed Use District Uses
Primary Frontage Secondary Frontage
RESIDENTIAL & LODGING USES
Multifamily Residential PC PC
Live-Work Unit PC PC
Roominghouse PL PL
State-licensed residential facility PL PL
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
30
Primary Frontage Secondary Frontage
Group home/non-statutory PL PL
Nursing Home PL PL
Hotel/Motel PC PC
Bed and Breakfast establishment PC PC
CIVIC & INSTITUTIONAL USES
Education/Academic PL P
Museum/Library Category P P
Police/Fire Station PC PC
COMMERCIAL USES
Brewery/Micro-distillery PC PC
Business/trade school/college PL P
Dental Office P P
Food Service P P
Grocery Store PC PC
Liquor Store CUP CUP
Medical Office P P
Offices PL P
Private Entertainment (Indoor) CUP CUP
Research and development PL P
Retail, less than 8,000 square feet P P
Retail, 8,000 square feet or larger PC PC
Retail, Large Item PC PC
Restaurants PC PC
Service facilities, less than 8,000 square feet P P
Service facilities, 8,000 square feet or larger PC PC
INDUSTRIAL USES
Catering PC PC
Studios PC PC
Printing process/supply PC PC
Showrooms PC PC
TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE USES
Communication antennas CUP CUP
Sec. 36-265. Uses permitted with conditions (PC).
Multifamily Residential Category. For the Mixed-Use District, the following exceptions apply:
(1) Shall be located in the upper stories of a structure; the basement; or in the ground story,
a minimum of 30 feet behind any primary street façade and behind a permitted use, or
on a secondary, rear, or side facade.
(2) Dwelling unit entrances are not required to be internal to the building, and individual
exterior entrances are encourage for ground floor units
(3) Balconies shall serve a single dwelling unit
(4) Buildings are discouraged from being massive in scale or institutional in appearance.
(5) Use may include leasing and/or property management offices, gym or other fitness
facilities for tenants, and meeting rooms as accessory uses.
Live-Work Unit.
(1) The units shall only be located on a Secondary Street Frontage.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
31
Hotel/motel.
(1) Shall be located in the upper stories of a structure; the basement; or in the ground story,
a minimum of 30 feet behind any primary street façade and behind a permitted use.
(2) Rooms shall be accessed from the interior of the building.
(3) Secondary service uses may also be provided, such as food service, meeting rooms,
pools, and fitness rooms as accessory uses.
Bed and Breakfast establishment.
(1) Shall be located in the upper stories of a structure; the basement; or in the ground story,
a minimum of 30 feet behind any primary street façade and behind a permitted use.
(2) Rooms shall be accessed from the interior of the building.
(3) Secondary service uses may also be provided, such as food service and meeting rooms as
accessory uses.
Police/Fire Station.
(1) Garage doors are permitted on the front facade.
(2) Stations are exempt from maximum driveway widths.
Brewery/Micro-distillery.
(1) The brewery/distillery shall not produce more than 20,000 barrels of malt liquor or cases of
hard liquor per year.
(2) The following additional conditions apply:
a.The maximum overall gross floor area is limited to 20,000 square feet.
b.A taproom and/or retail outlet is required and shall be located in the Primary Street
storefront of the building.
c.The taproom and/or retail outlet shall occupy a minimum of 20 percent of the gross
floor area with no maximum limit.
d.Retail outlet does not include liquor store, which shall be permitted only in
accordance with the requirements for liquor store uses for the frontage type.
(3) This use may also include associated facilities such as offices and small scale warehousing, but
distribution is limited to vans and small trucks. Distribution access shall be from the rear.
Grocery Store.
(1) When the grocery store is part of a mixed use development with residential or office uses
above the grocery, the following applies:
a.No activity results in any noxious or offensive odors, sounds, vibrations, emissions, or
any external nuisances upon adjacent properties.
b.Hours of operation, including deliveries, shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m.
Retail, 8,000 square feet or larger.
(1) The retail space shall have an exterior entrance on the primary facade.
(2) The retail space shall be located at a corner of the building or near a primary building
entrance.
(3) The retail space shall not occupy more than 25 percent of the gross floor area of the ground
floor.
Retail, Large Item
(1) The establishment shall be less than 20,000 square feet in size.
Restaurant
(1) Restaurants with or without intoxicating liquor licenses.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
32
a.If there is a wine and/or beer liquor and/or intoxicating liquor license, there shall be no
separate bar area within the restaurant.
Service Facilities, 8,000 square feet or larger.
(1) The retail space shall have an exterior entrance on the primary facade.
(2) The retail space shall be located at a corner of the building or near a primary building
entrance.
(3) The service space shall not occupy more than 25 percent of the gross floor area of the
ground floor.
Catering; studio; printing process/supply; showrooms.
(1) This use may also include associated facilities such as offices and small scale warehousing,
but distribution is limited to vans and small trucks. Distribution access shall be from the rear.
(2) The maximum overall gross floor area is limited to 12,000 square feet.
(3) A showroom or retail outlet is permitted.
(4) If located on a Secondary Frontage the following additional conditions apply:
a.The use is permitted only in specifically designated live/work spaces on the ground floor
and with its own exterior entrance.
b.Distribution shall be from a designated loading area only.
(5) If located on a Primary Frontage, the following additional conditions apply:
a.A showroom and/or retail outlet is required and shall be located in the Primary Street
storefront of the building.
b.The showroom and/or retail outlet shall occupy a minimum of 25 percent of the gross
floor area.
Sec. 36-266. Uses permitted by conditional use permit (CUP). Uses listed in Table 36-364 with a “CUP”
symbol require a Conditional Use Permit; refer to 36-33 Conditional Use Permits.
Liquor Store.
(1) The lot must be at least 1,000 feet from the property line of a site containing a pawnshop,
currency exchange, payday loan agency, firearms sales or sexually-oriented business. The distance
shall be measured from the portion of the center or building occupied by the liquor store.
Private Entertainment (Indoor).
(1) Shall not be located in a building with a residential use.
(2) No activity results in any noxious or offensive odors, sounds, vibrations, emissions, or any
external nuisances upon adjacent properties.
(3) If there is a wine and/or beer license, the following additional conditions shall apply:
a.There shall be no separate bar area within the establishment.
b.If the above conditions are not met, a private indoor entertainment with a wine
and/or beer license may apply for a conditional use permit under Section 36-33.
Communication antennas.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
33
(1) Shall be developed in accordance with 36-368 Communication towers and antennas, except
that communication antennas located in the MX district shall be co-located atop a permitted
building.
Sec. 36-267 Accessory Uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory uses in any MX district.
(1)Accessory Off-Street Parking. The following are types of accessory parking permitted:
a.Parking Lot.
b.Accessory Parking Ramp.
i.Accessory parking ramps may be located only behind the rear of the building.
ii.Accessory parking ramps located on the secondary frontage shall have active uses on the
ground floor street facing facades, and.
iii.Accessory parking ramps shall meet the façade requirements for the building.
c.Accessory Parking in the Building. Parking may be provided in the rear of the building or fully
in any basement, and shall meet the façade requirements for the building.
d.Residential parking may be allowed for more than 24 hours.
(2) Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and not to exceed
10 percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use.
(3) Outdoor seating and service of food and beverage, subject to the following conditions:
a.Shall be directly adjacent to the structure containing the associated use;
b.No speakers or other electronic devices which emit sound are permitted if the use is
located within 500 feet of a residential use;
c.The hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. if the use is located
within 500 feet of a residential use; and
d.Additional parking will not be required if the outdoor seating area does not exceed 500
square feet or ten percent of the gross floor area of the principal use, whichever is less.
Parking will be required at the same rate as the principal use for that portion of outdoor
seating area in excess of 500 square feet or ten percent of the gross building area,
whichever is less.
(4)Bar, if accessory to a restaurant, hotel or private entertainment (indoor).
(5)Catering, if accessory to a restaurant, food service, delicatessen, grocery store or retail bakery.
(6) Visitor lodging associated with residential care facilities.
(7) Warehouse/storage which is necessary for a permitted use and not to exceed 20 percent of the
gross floor area of the associated permitted use.
(8) Home occupations complying with all of the conditions in the R-C district.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
34
(9) Outdoor sales are permitted only as accessory uses with garden and nursery sales.
(10) Public transit stops/shelters.
(11) Community gardens
(12) Accessory Utility Structures including:
a.Anaerobic digesters;
b.Small wind energy conversion system, as defined in 36-4 Definitions.
c.Solar energy systems. A solar energy system with a supporting framework that is either
placed on, or anchored in, the ground and that is independent of any building or other
structure; or that is affixed to or an integral part of a principal or accessory building,
including but not limited to photovoltaic or hot water solar energy systems which are
contained within roofing materials, windows, skylights, and awnings.
d.Cisterns and Rainwater Collection Systems. A container or series of containers for the
collection and reuse of rainwater. A cistern may be exempted from inclusion in the Site
Impervious Area calculation.
e.Where accessory utility structures are permitted with conditions, the following apply:
i.Accessory Use. The equipment shall be located on a lot with a building and is a
secondary use for the lot.
ii.Roof Mounted Location. Roof mounted equipment shall be located per one of the
following:
1.Pitched Roof. Locate the equipment on a rear facing surface of the roof, if
feasible for communication purposes.
2.Flat Roof. Locate the equipment towards the rear portion of the roof, where
visibility is limited from the street to the maximum extent possible.
iii.Ground Mounted Location. Ground mounted equipment is limited to the rear
yard. Equipment may be located in the side yard if the equipment is screened
from the street with an opaque wall, of the same or similar material of the street
facade of the building.
iv. Height. The height of the equipment is either a maximum of 12 feet or the
maximum that is not visible from any street sidewalk, whichever is greater.
v.Performance Standards. When noxious or offensive odors, sounds, vibrations,
emissions, or any external nuisances upon adjacent properties, including truck
traffic, will be generated by this accessory use above any generated by the
principal use, a conditional use permit is required. Refer to 36-33 Conditional Use
Permits.
vi. Freestanding Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS). Refer to Sec. 36-369, with
the exception of the following requirements which shall replace the provisions of
Table 36-369 A for all projects within the-Mixed use District:
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
35
1.Height Limit: 110 feet
2.Maximum Number of WECS per lot: 2
3.Minimum Lot Size: 1.5 acres
Sec. 36-268. Dimensional standards and general requirements.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 36-32, the following standards and requirements cannot be
modified or waived except as specifically stated:
(1) The maximum nonresidential density is 1.5 FAR and the maximum residential density is 50 units
per acre. In determining density, the total nonresidential floor area or number of residential units
shall be divided by the land associated with each use, including building coverage and parking areas
associated with the use and a proportion of the on-site usable open space. Stormwater ponds and
public/private streets and alleys shall be excluded from land calculations. Maximum densities may
be increased by up to 50 percent based on Table 36-268.
Table 36-268
3 points 10% increase in density
6 points 20% increase in density
9 points 30% increase in density
12 points 40% increase in density
15 points 50% increase in density
a.Meet the requirements of the city’s Inclusionary Housing Policy (5 points)
b.Meet the requirements of the city’s Green Building Policy (5 points)
c.Affordable commercial space for retail less than 8,000 square feet, food service, and
restaurant uses (4 points):
i.10 percent at 50 percent fair market rent; or
ii.20 percent 60 percent fair market rent
d.On-site Renewable Energy Sources
i.100% percent of building’s energy (3 points)
ii.50% percent of building’s energy (1 point)
e.Publically accessible outdoor space (plaza/courtyard/community gardens) (3 points)
f.Commuter Bicycle Facilities provided onsite (1 points)
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
36
i.A minimum of 10 percent of the required bicycle parking facilities shall be provided
as bike lockers, on-site showers shall be available for building occupants, and a
bicycle repair station shall be provided.
(2) The development site shall include a minimum of 12 percent designed outdoor recreation area
based on private developable land area.
(3) Building shall be constructed to the following form requirements specific to the frontage type.
Primary Frontage Secondary Frontage
BUILDING SITING
Minimum Primary Lot Line Coverage 80% 50%
Build-to Zone 10’ to 15’ 10’ to 20’
Maximum Building Length 200 feeta
HEIGHT
Building to Street Width Minimum 60% 60%
Building to Street Width Maximum 100% 200%
Minimum Height 2 stories 2 stories
Maximum Height for sites guided MX in
the Comprehensive Plan
6 storiesb or 75 feet, whichever is less
Maximum Height for sites guided TOD in
the Comprehensive Plan
10 storiesb or 125 feet, whichever is less
Primary Ground Story Height 12’ to 20’c 12’ to 20’c
All Other Stories Height 10’ to 15’ 10’ to 15’
FAÇADE
Minimum Ground Story Transparency 65% 30%
Minimum Required Transparency per
Story
20% on street facing facades; 12% on rear and
side facades
Entrance Elevation Each street entrance shall be within 30” of
adjacent street sidewalk average grade
a.Maximum Building Length may be increased up to 50 percent if a pedestrianway is
provided. These pedestrianways can be pedestrian easements and pathways or exterior
through building linkages at least every 200 feet.
b.Step-backed stories. All stories that exceed the maximum building to street ratio shall be
stepped back from the front façade a minimum of 10 feet and a maximum of 30 feet.
c.Tall stories: 18’ or more in floor-to-floor ground story height counts as 2 stories toward
maximum building height.
(4) Side and Rear Yards:
a.Buildings with side or rear property lines adjacent to R-1 or R-2 zoned and used districts
shall have a maximum building height of 40 feet, and minimum side and rear yards of 15
feet. Buildings may exceed 40 feet in height if the portion of the building above 40 feet is
stepped back from the side and rear property lines a distance equal to the additional
height.
(5) A minimum of 12% of the site area shall be developed outdoor recreation area if residential uses
are included in the building.
(6) Transparency.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
37
a.Large sections of walls with no windows shall be prohibited along the ground floor primary
and secondary frontages;
b.Window paintings and signage shall cover no more than 10 percent of the total window
and door area.
c.No more than 10 percent of the ground floor window and door area shall be opaque glass;
d.Visibility into the building shall be maintained for a minimum depth of three feet;
e.Areas of glazed transoms above a canopy or architectural feature element are encouraged;
f.Interior staff break rooms, storage areas, utility closets and trash areas shall not be visible
from the exterior of the building.
(7) Buildings constructed after adoption of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived must
utilize at least 80 percent class I materials on each building face and no class III materials on any
building face that is visible from public areas within the development or from off the site. The class
I materials requirement may be reduced to 60 percent if a balance of architectural interest and
visual compatibility is provided through approval of the following:
a.A variety of compatible materials and colors;
b.Architectural features;
c.Canopies over sidewalks; and
d.Pedestrian-scale details.
(8) Parapet walls shall be utilized to completely screen rooftop equipment from ground and street
level view and rooftop equipment must be painted to match the color of the roof in order to
minimize the visual impact as viewed from other buildings.
(9) Developments shall include sidewalks and/or bikeways along all private and public street rights-of-
way as determined appropriate and on-site pedestrian/bicycle facilities that provide logical
connections to off-site uses and are separated from off-street surface parking areas by curbed,
landscaped islands a minimum of 20 feet in width inclusive of sidewalk.
(10) Developments served by public transit must provide at least one transit stop that conveniently
serves the development.
(11) Driveway location. Vehicular driveway access is managed through the primary and secondary
street frontages. The order of access is as follows:
a.An alley permits unlimited access.
b.If no alley exists, one driveway per secondary street frontage is permitted.
c.If no other option exists, one driveway may be permitted off the primary street and shared
access with abutting properties is encouraged.
(12) Signage shall be allowed with the following conditions:
a.Pylon signs are prohibited;
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
38
b.Freestanding monument signs shall utilize the same exterior materials as the principal
buildings and shall not interfere with pedestrian, bicycle or automobile circulation and
visibility.
c.Maximum allowable number, sizes, heights and yards for signs shall be regulated by
Section 36-362, MX requirements.
d.Wall signs of non-residential uses shall only be placed on the ground floor and exterior
walls of the occupied tenant lease space, and/or a monument sign.
e.Wall signs shall not be included in calculating the aggregate sign area on the lot if they
meet the following outlined conditions:
i.Non-residential wall signs permitted by this section that do not exceed seven
percent of the exterior wall area of the ground floor tenant lease space.
ii.The sign is located on the exterior wall of the ground floor tenant lease space from
which the seven percent sign area was derived.
iii.No individual wall sign shall exceed 100 square feet in area.
f.Pedestrian scale signs visible from public sidewalks shall be encouraged. Such signs shall
be no more than three feet in vertical dimension unless flush with the building wall.
(13) A development agreement is required as part of the development approval and shall address, at
a minimum, approved site and building design criteria, approved sign locations and design
criteria, construction phasing, density bonus features, specifications for affordable commercial
space, cash escrow or letter of credit for construction of on-site and off-site improvements
generated by the development, and maintenance.
(14) The development shall comply with all other applicable chapter provisions unless specifically
modified by subsections (1) through (13) of this section.
Amendment to Section 36-115 Land Use
Land uses permitted in limited stories. Land uses listed as “permitted in limited stories” are permitted
subject to all of the requirements of land uses permitted by right plus those additional controls which
specify the story of a building the use can occur. Land uses permitted in limited stories do not require a
public hearing process.
***********
36-361 Parking Regulations
**
(k) Design Requirements
**
(10)Yards. Required parking areas shall be subject to the following requirements:
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
39
a.In the R-4 and R-C districts, parking areas shall be subject to the requirements for front
yards and side yards abutting a street.
b. In the C-2, O, I-P and I-G districts, parking areas shall be permitted in the front yard and
side yards abutting a street, provided that the yard shall not be reduced to less than five
feet. (Ord. No. 2466-15, 5-18-2015)
c.In the C-1 and MX districts:
1. Parking spaces and drive aisles shall not be located between a building and a street,
except that a through lot may have parking between the building and less prominent street,
as determined by the Zoning Administrator.
2. The minimum yard requirement for parking spaces and drive aisles shall be zero (0.0)
when located adjacent to a non-residential district
3. The minimum yard requirement for parking spaces and drive aisles shall be eight feet
when abutting a residentially zoned property.
4. The minimum yard requirement for parking spaces shall be five feet when adjacent to a
street. (Ord. No. 2466-15, 5-18-15)
***********
36-362 Sign Regulations
**
(f) General provisions. Subject to the following regulations, signs are a permitted accessory use in
all use districts:
**
(12)Durable Materials. All permanent sign faces and supports shall be made of durable materials.
Canvas, cloth and similar materials such as flexible vinyl, are not allowed except for canopies,
awnings and temporary signs other than pedestrian signs. Awnings shall be constructed of
heavy canvas fabric, metal, and/or glass. Plastic, vinyl, and backlit awnings are prohibited. All
permanent wood signs must be constructed of durable hardwood products. The wood must
be treated against rot and decay, and cannot be constructed of plywood, chipped wood,
hardboard, fiber board or similar materials. Sign Support structures shall not be constructed
of wood
************
36-366 Architectural design
**
(b) Standards.
(1) Building Design.
**
g.All developments shall consider the effect of sun angles and shade patterns on other
buildings. All new multiple-family and nonresidential buildings and additions thereto shall
be located so that the structure does not cast a shadow that covers more than 50 percent of
another building wall for a period greater than two hours between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.
for more than 60 days of the year. This section will not prohibit shading of buildings in an
industrial use district, two or more buildings on the same lot in the MX district, or as
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
40
approved for buildings covered by the same PUD, CUP, or Special Permit. Shading of
existing public spaces and outdoor employee break areas shall be minimized to the extent
reasonable and possible.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: Mixed-Use District
41
Meeting: Planning Commission
Meeting Date: February 6, 2019
Study Session Item: 2
2.Title: Prep for city council study session on April 8
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
•Review 2019 work plan
•Review the staff report and meeting minutes from January 16, 2019 regarding ground
floor window transparency
•Discuss the commission’s approach to the city council meeting
SUMMARY: Every year, planning commission prepares a work plan to guide activities and
priorities. This year, city council is meeting briefly with the chair of each board and commission
to discuss and approve the work plan. Planning commission will meet with city council on April
8, 2019 to discuss the work plan, as well as another topic.
City council directed staff to draft an ordinance to regulate ground floor window transparency
on commercial buildings. Staff and the planning commission worked on a draft ordinance over
several study sessions. Following the public hearing, the commission voted 6-0 to recommend
denial of the ordinance amendment. Subsequently, staff provided a report to city council to
update them on the negative recommendation. The city council requested to discuss the issue
with planning commission directly before providing direction to city staff on the next steps in
the process.
The commission has approximately 30 minutes to discuss each item with city council. Staff
wanted to set aside some time for planning commissioners to discuss how they would like to
approach that time with city council.
If staff can provide any further direction regarding city council’s expectations for the meeting,
we will share that during the study session.
Supporting Documents: 2019 work plan
January 16, 2019 staff report and meeting minutes (excerpt)
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
42
Board and Commission
Annual Workplan
Approved: November 19, 2018
Updated: February 6, 2019 Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019 (Study Session Item No. 2)
Title: 2019 Work Plan
Work Plan│ Planning Commission
City of St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities
Time
Frame
Initiative Strategic
Priorities
Purpose
(see page 2 for definitions)
Outcome (fill in after
completed)
Ongoing Review development applications, hold
study sessions and hearings in order to
make informed recommendations to city
council
☐New Initiative
☐Continued
Initiative
☒Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☐Commission Initiated Project
☐Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q2-Q4 Rezoning based on the future land use
changes in the comprehensive plan
☒New Initiative
☐Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☐Commission Initiated Project
☒Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q3-Q4 Texa-Tonka Neighborhood Commercial
Node small area plan
☒New Initiative
☐Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☐Commission Initiated Project
☐Council Initiated Project
☒Report Findings (council requested)
☐Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q2-Q3 Historic Walker-Lake revitalization plan ☐New Initiative
☒Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☐Commission Initiated Project
☐Council Initiated Project
☒Report Findings (council requested)
☐Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q3-Q4 Food access study ☒New Initiative
☐Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☒1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☐Commission Initiated Project
☒Council Initiated Project
☒Report Findings (council requested)
☐Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
43
Board and Commission
Annual Workplan
Approved: November 19, 2018
Updated: February 6, 2019 Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019 (Study Session Item No. 2)
Title: 2019 Work Plan
Q1-Q2 Mixed-Use zoning district requirements ☐New Initiative
☒Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☒Commission Initiated Project
☐Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q1 C-1 district retail/service/liquor store
size requirements
☐New Initiative
☒Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☐Commission Initiated Project
☒Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q1 Ground floor commercial window
transparency requirements
☐New Initiative
☒Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☐Commission Initiated Project
☐Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q1 Small cell wireless facilities ordinance ☐New Initiative
☒Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☒N/A
☒Commission Initiated Project
☐Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q2-Q4 Architectural materials requirements ☐New Initiative
☒Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☒N/A
☒Commission Initiated Project
☐Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q2-Q4 Accessory dwelling unit ordinance ☒New Initiative
☐Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☐Commission Initiated Project
☒Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q2-Q4 Form-Based Code for Transit Oriented
Development areas
☐New Initiative
☒Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☒Commission Initiated Project
☐Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
44
Board and Commission
Annual Workplan
Approved: November 19, 2018
Updated: February 6, 2019 Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019 (Study Session Item No. 2)
Title: 2019 Work Plan
1.St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
2.St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship.
3.St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development.
4.St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
5.St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement
OR Other
Q4 Transitional industrial zoning district and
work toward formal adoption
☐New Initiative
☐Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☒Commission Initiated Project
☐Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q1-Q4 Home occupation zoning requirements
and work toward formal adoption
☒New Initiative
☒Continued
Initiative
☐Ongoing
Responsibility
☐1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3
☐4 ☐ 5
☐N/A
☐Commission Initiated Project
☒Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
Q1-Q4 Identify strategies to broaden
participation and reduce barriers to
public participation. Review notification
methods, online opportunities to submit
input, and consider when providing
translation services, transportation or
child care may be warranted.
☐New Initiative
☐Continued
Initiative
☒Ongoing
Responsibility
☒1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
☐4 ☒ 5
☐N/A
☒Commission Initiated Project
☐Council Initiated Project
☐Report Findings (council requested)
☒Formal Recommendation (council
requested)
45
Board and Commission
Annual Workplan
Approved: November 19, 2018
Updated: February 6, 2019 Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019 (Study Session Item No. 2)
Title: 2019 Work Plan
Purpose: definitions
Modifications:
Work plans may be modified, to add or delete items, in one of three ways:
•Work plans can be modified by mutual agreement during a joint work session.
•If immediate approval is important, the board or commission can work with their staff liaison to present a modified work plan for city
council approval at a council meeting.
•The city council can direct a change to the work plan at their discretion.
•Project initiated by the board or commission
Commission Initiated Project
•Project tasked to a board or commission by the city council
Council Initiated Project
•Initiated by the city council
•Board and commission will study a specific issue or topic and report its findings or comments to the city council in
writing
•No direct action is taken by the board/commission
Report Findings
•Initiated by the city council
•Board and commission will study a specific issue or topic and makes a formal recommendation to the city council on
what action to take
•A recommendation requires a majoirty of the commissioners' support
Formal Recommandation
46
Board and Commission
Annual Workplan
Approved: November 19, 2018
Updated: February 6, 2019 Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019 (Study Session Item No. 2)
Title: 2019 Work Plan
Parking Lot
Items that are being considered by the board/commission but not proposed in the annual work plan. Council approval is needed if the
board/commission decides they would like to move forward with an initiative.
Initiative Comments:
Water conservation and
water recycling
Explore ways to encourage reduced water use, capture and reuse of storm water, and protect ground water
resources.
Housing analysis Explore setting a policy targets for different housing types present in the city, unmet demand for different
housing types, and ratio of owned vs. rental units.
Planning Commission Meeting
Date: January 16, 2019
Agenda Item #5D
5D. Zoning guidelines for ground floor street facing transparency requirements
Case No.: 18-70-ZA
Recommended
Action:
Chair to close public hearing.
Motion to recommend approval of the Zoning Ordinance
Amendment pertaining to Section 36-4 Definitions and Section
36-366 Architectural Design to establish transparency
requirements for ground floor street facing facades in the C-1 and
C-2 Districts, and retail, service, and restaurant uses in the O and
CP Districts.
Request: Staff is requesting an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to Section 36-366 to
establish transparency requirements for ground floor street facing facades in the C-1 and C-2
Districts, and retail, service, and restaurant uses in the O and BP Districts, and to Section 36-4
Definitions to define transparency.
Background: In summer 2018, city council directed staff and the planning commission to
consider zoning standards for ground floor window transparency to increase vibrancy along the
city’s commercial streets. The planning commission and city council have since discussed the
importance of ground floor transparency requirements and have provided feedback on a draft
ordinance during several study sessions.
The city has regulated the amount of ground floor transparency in planned unit developments
to increase the interaction between the internal spaces of a building with the public realm. One
of the city’s goals is to allow people inside buildings to easily observe street life, and improve
public safety. Ground floor transparency regulations are particularly important in areas where
there is high pedestrian traffic, as transparency can help create a vibrant and safer street.
Ground floor windows and transparent doors may also strengthen the commercial viability of a
use by attracting customers and adding to the enjoyment of the pedestrian’s experience on the
street.
The attached draft ordinance responds to feedback from the planning commission and city
council. The intent of the ordinance is to be flexible, especially for small businesses and existing
buildings, yet provide for a safe and active pedestrian realm and vibrant streets.
The limitations on window paintings and signage that are included in the ordinance would be
applied to all businesses, existing and new in the districts listed above. The remainder of the
ordinance will be applied when upgrades and renovations to buildings occur. The regulations
establishing a minimum percentage of transparency on the front and side street facing facades
does not apply to existing buildings. This requirement will be enforced on all new buildings and
buildings which expand the gross square footage of the building by more than 50 percent.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
48
Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, Planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached amendment to the
Zoning Ordinance pertaining to definitions and architectural design.
Attachments: Ground floor transparency ordinance draft
49
Section 36-4 Definitions
************
Ground Floor Transparency means the measurement of the percentage of a facade that has highly
transparent, low reflectance windows at the pedestrian level, measured between 2’ and 8’ above grade.
************
36-366 Architectural design
**
(b) Standards.
**
(3) Ground floor transparency.
a.The following façade design guidelines shall be applicable to all ground floor street-facing
facades in the C-1 and C-2 Districts, and retail, service, and restaurant uses in O and BP
Districts:
i.Window paintings and signage shall cover no more than 10 percent of the total
window and door area.
ii.Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum depth of three (3) feet.
Display of merchandise is allowed within this three (3) feet.
iii. Interior storage areas, utility closets and trash areas shall not be visible from the
exterior of the building.
iv. No more than 10 percent of total window and door area shall be glass block,
mirrored, spandrel, frosted or other opaque glass, finishes or material including
window painting and signs. The remaining 90 percent of window and door area
shall be highly transparent, low reflectance windows with a minimum sixty percent
transmittance factor and a reflectance factor of not greater than 0.25.
v.For all new buildings constructed after January 1, 2019, and existing buildings
which expand the gross square footage of the building by more than 50 percent,
the minimum ground floor transparency shall be 65 percent on the front façade,
and 20 percent on all other ground floor street facing facades.
vi. The city acknowledges a degree of flexibility may be necessary to adjust to unique
situations. Alternatives that provide an increase in pedestrian vibrancy and street
safety including but not limited to public art and pedestrian scale amenities may
be considered and may be approved by the Zoning Administrator, unless the
development application requires approval by City Council, in which case the City
Council shall approve the alternate transparency plan.
(3)(4) Additions and accessory structures. The exterior wall surface materials, roof treatment,
colors, textures, major divisions, proportion, rhythm of openings, and general architectural
character, including horizontal or vertical emphasis, scale, stylistic features of additions,
exterior alterations, and new accessory buildings shall address and respect the original
architectural design and general appearance of the principal buildings on the site and shall
comply with the requirements of this section.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
50
(4)(5) Screening.
a.The visual impact of rooftop equipment shall be minimized using one of the following
methods. Where rooftop equipment is located on buildings and is visible within 400 feet
from property in an R district, only the items listed in subsections 1 and 2 shall be used.
1. A parapet wall.
2. A fence the height of which extends at least one foot above the top of the rooftop
equipment and incorporates the architectural features of the building.
3. The rooftop equipment shall be painted to match the roof or the sky, whichever is most
effective.
b. Utility service structures (such as utility meters, utility lines, transformers, aboveground
tanks); refuse handling; loading docks; maintenance structures; and other ancillary
equipment must be inside a building or be entirely screened from off-site views utilizing a
privacy fence or wall that is at least six feet in height. A chain link fence with slats shall
not be accepted as screening.
c.All utility services shall be underground except as provided elsewhere in this chapter.
(5)(6) Parking ramps. All new parking ramps shall meet the following design standards:
a.Parking ramp facades that are visible from off the site shall display an integration of
building materials, building form, textures, architectural motif, and building colors with
the principal building.
b. No signs other than directional signs shall be permitted on parking ramp facades.
c.If the parking ramp is located within 20 feet of a street right-of-way or recreational trail,
the facade facing the street shall be subject to the same requirements for exterior surface
materials as for buildings.
(6)(7) Awnings and canopies.
a.Awnings and Canopies.
1. Construction. Awnings and canopies shall have noncombustible frames. If an awning
can be collapsed, retracted or folded, the design shall be such that the awning does not
block any required exit.
2. Projection. Awnings and canopies less than 25 feet in width may extend up to two feet
from the face of the nearest curb line measured horizontally.
3. Clearance. All portions of any awning and canopy shall provide at least eight feet of
clearance or any walkway and twelve feet of clearance over nay driveway or roadway.
4. Supports. Canopy posts or other supports located within a public right-of-way or
easement shall be placed in a location approved by the city engineer.
b. Permit required. A building permit shall be issued prior to the installation of any awning
or canopy. In addition to the building permit, an encroachment agreement shall be issued
by the city engineer prior to the installation of any awning or canopy that extends into,
upon or over any street or alley right-of-way, park or other public property. The
encroachment agreement shall include provisions that hold the owner of the awning or
canopy liable to the city for any damage which may result to any person or property by
reason of such encroachment or the removal of such encroachment. Additional conditions
may be imposed on encroachment permits to protect the health, safety or welfare of the
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
51
public or to protect nearby property owners from hardship or damage or to protect other
public interests as determined by the city engineer.
c.Submission requirements. The following information shall be submitted prior to the
installation of an awning or canopy.
1. Application form and fee. A separate fee shall be required for the building permit and
encroachment agreement.
2. Dimensioned and scaled site plan and building elevations.
3. Four sets of drawings for each awning or canopy proposed.
d. Projections to be safe. All such projections over public property shall be structurally safe,
shall be kept in a safe condition and state of repair consistent with the design thereof and
repaired when necessary in the opinion of the city engineer or building official by and at
the expense of the person having ownership or control of the building from which they
project.
e.Removal upon order. The owner of an awning or canopy, any part of which projects into,
upon, over or under any public property shall upon being ordered to do so by the city
engineer remove at once any part or all of such encroachment and shall restore the right-
of-way to a safe condition. Such removal and restoration of the right-of-way will be at the
sole expense of the property owner. The city may, upon failure of the property owner to
remove the encroachment as ordered, remove the encroachment, and the reasonable costs
of removing such encroachment incurred by the city shall be billed and levied against the
property as a special assessment.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
52
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION ST.
LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
January 16, 2019 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Matt Eckholm, Jessica Kraft,
Claudia Johnston-Madison, Lisa Peilen, Carl Robertson,
Joe Tatalovich, Alanna Franklin (youth member)
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Monson, Sean Walther
1.Call to Order – Roll Call
2.Approval of Minutes of December 19, 2018
Commissioner Joe made a motion to approve the December 19, 2018 minutes.
Commissioner Lisa seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-
0.
3.Public Hearings
A.Zoning Ordinance – window transparency on ground floor street facing
facades
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 18-70-ZA
Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Peilen pointed out a business on Minnetonka Blvd that has
windows with brown paper. And asked if the proposed ordinance would require
this business to remove the paper.
Ms. Monson said that the ordinance being proposed would require the building
on Minnetonka to remove the paper coverings.
Commissioner Peilen asked Sean directly about the page four of the definitions
with part B. (under parking ramps) saying, “no signs other than directional signs
shall be permitted on parking ramp facades”. Peilen asked the question, could
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
53
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
DATE
Page 2
there possibly be another legitimate reason to have a sign; like “parking for
residents only” or some other legitimate reason besides directions?
Mr. Walther addresses Mr. Chair and Commissioner Peilen saying the sign being
described as a option, as far as, “residents only” for instance, does fall under our
directional sign category in our ordinance. What were concerned about are the
name plate, kind of advertising signs for development, which we do not allow.
Commissioner Peilen asks “so you don’t think this type of wording precludes”.
Mr. Walther said he believes what Peilen is describing falls under the directional
sign definition and says “I am going off the cuff from memory as I was not
prepared for that question. But, that is how I recall how that works”.
Peilen says she’ll take Mr. Walther’s word for it, but still thinks there are
legitimate reasons for another possible sign.
Commissioner Carper said he would like to pursue that particular issue right
now, the one that Commissioner Peilen brought up. So, what if we had some
adjacent businesses and they want to place a sign that says, parking for ‘XYZ’
store, for Mrs. Todds for various types of things, to indicate that these business
are adjacent and if there is no street level parking available and that this is where
they are expected to park”. Would this be acceptable as a directional sign? Or, is
it crossing over to advertising since we are mentioning specific businesses?
Mr. Walther says this a close call but the ordinance does limit the size of the sign
and that it’s possible that some verbiage or copy within the sign that may direct
customers that way, whether or not it included an actual name of a business or a
logo may be questionable. And, we would have to look into each of those. I
would just point out, I understand it is of some interests but it is not a part of the
amendments that are included into todays proposed ordinance. This is an
established policy and rule that has been in place for many years.
Commissioner Carper says, perhaps this is an opportunity to adjust something to
meet some needs, seeing we seem to be more restrictive on some other things
as well and I would think that probably because the City is operating 2 of the
major ramps on Excelsior Blvd. and adjacent to Excelsior and Grand that perhaps
the City may want to give an opportunity to place that kind of information for
the businesses that are adjacent as well.
Mr. Walther says, he agrees that if this is a raised issue to explore further, we
certainly can do so but I wouldn’t recommend that we do that at this time and
that be an item for later consideration. That’s the short answer.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
54
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
DATE
Page 3
Commissioner Carper agrees that, that is appropriate. Thank you.
Commissioner Eckholm also has a question about the signage. If a development
was to include a ramp as a part of their overall development plan and they
wanted to make use of space that was fronting the street or pedestrians fronted
retail would that verbiage preclude them being able to put their own signage on
the first floor retail level.
Mr. Walther said if the signage is on the store front of the business use that
would not preclude that.
Commissioner Kraft has a question about retail that has not been released yet.
So if there is an empty store front, how you are going to treat the opacity there,
often times because there is no occupant, you want to cover up those windows
to make it feel more welcoming. Would that be allowed under this ordinance?
Mr. Walther says we do limit the sq. footage even under that scenario of how
much signage is allowed for lease signs for instance or now renting signs and so
it would still be under that restriction. Jennifer, how have you contemplated
something like that for coverage of windows? My impression is that it would not
change that.
Ms. Monson said she agrees with Mr. Walther and says this ordinance is for
occupied spaces and so they would have to meet the sign code for the leasable
texts on the building, but this wouldn’t preclude covering it up while its
unoccupied.
Commissioner Carper asks Ms. Monson a question relating to the window
coverage. He asks to take another look at the slide that discusses the coverage
applying to existing locations. Top line of the slide it says “limitations on window
paintings signage would be applied to all existing and new businesses”.
Commissioner Carper says he’s done a drive-by survey to get a feel of what’s
happening and existing right now. And he thinks what to make note of and has
been discussed before is Trader Joe’s has an inward facing store front to their
parking lot and they provide the required transparency there for their own
purposes but it does not sound like there it will be regulated because it’s not on
a primary walking or driving route. Yet on Excelsior Blvd you find signs there and
those signs are in my opinion, to avoid having the back of shelving that is directly
up against those walls for the display of merchandise for customer selection. CVS
Pharmacy is another of such places. We also see buildings that are solid capacity,
in terms of their facing parking areas or parking lots and you can see that at
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
55
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
DATE
Page 4
Lunds & Byerly’s and at the target that is adjacent across the street along with
other that are on 36th St. can you explain how we are going to handle that.
Ms. Monson explained that for the example of Trader Joe’s they are approved
under a plan review development and have their own specific signage
regulations and requirements and often times the revert back to the regular
code. But we would have to double check to see what the plan review
development says. As for, the Lunds and Byerly’s example we would have to see
what’s considered for that particular lot, what’s considered street facing facade
and what’s the front versus the side lot since it’s such a large lot.
Carper, what kind of situations do we have in other centers such as the Texa-
Tonka Center at the intersection of Mtka Blvd and Texas
Ms. Monson said she believes the Texa-Tonka center has mostly window
signage, does not have any opaic windows or mirrored windows. It’s just a lot of
text written on the windows and signs within the window space which is a lot
easier to take down and remove versus removing and changing out windows.
Commissioner Carper asks if the city is choosing to be an arbiter of what a
window looks like in terms of the display or what is placed on that whether it
wines up being shelving with items on that window that aren’t necessarily
displayed for the public out there but they are items for customers within the
store.
Ms. Monson says as long as it’s visible within the first three feet of the space, we
don’t care what is placed there.
Commissioner Carpers asks Ms. Monson does he understand her to say anything
that is within 3 feet of a window is not permitted.
Ms. Monson clarifies that no it is permitted as long as you can see past it so
you’re allowed to display merchandise within the first 3 feet as long as it doesn’t
block the view into the space.
Commissioner Carper asks what kind of percentage of that view into the space is
being discussed
Ms. Monson says it would be the 90%, so you’re allowed to block 10% of the
total window façade percentage and then 90% you would have to be able to see
into.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
56
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
DATE
Page 5
Commissioner Peilen has a couple follow-ups, one she wanted to support the
idea of the parking thing and taking a look at it to make sure that the language
which is strong and clear does not preclude putting up signs such as guest
parking and employee parking.
Mr. Chair says he does see all those as directional signage it’s not quote “turn
here or right turn only” but its directing who can park where.
Commissioner Peilen says just taking a look at the parking and asks about signs in
the windows. What about temporary signs of business that may have an annual
half off sale and it’s a big sign. Are they able to have a temporary sign?
Ms. Monson answers yes, they can have a temporary sign as long as they follow
the temporary sign code requirements.
Commissioner Carper states to Ms. Monson about the several cities she’s cited
and their expectations for designing this ordinance but felt they were
generalized. He asks if there is a list that backs up the data being given.
Ms. Monson says yes she does have a list such as: Boulder, C.O., Seattle, W.A.,
City of St. Paul, Cincinnati and Denver about a dozen or so cities that were
looked at including our own ordinance and what’s been applied in existing
mixed-use building within St. Louis Park.
Commissioner Carper ask Ms. Monson if she consulted with any professional
such as Architects who are designing the store buildings, store planners who plan
the inside of them and even potential business who may want to move into the
community but could change their mind due to the nature of this ordinance.
Ms. Monson explained they have discussed this with the planning commission
which has a variety of ground and architecture and other design services and
retail experience, also reached out to the city of St. Paul as they have adopted
similar standards for their Grand Ave corridor. However, they were unable to
provide their specific standards. But we did look into what they implemented
into that area and why, along with reading staff reports about discussions with
City Council and why they chose those requirements.
Commissioner Carper explains with him having extensive history in retail he’s a
bit uncomfortable with what he’s hearing here. Were any other areas surveyed
that are popular for what you are looking at Ex.) Hopkins 50th in France, the
uptown are and also the Linden Hill area to see what is happening there.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
57
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
DATE
Page 6
Ms. Monson explains yes it was looked into and more specifically with the city of
Minneapolis they have pedestrian overlay zones and they’re a little less specific
with regards to transparency and reflecting standards. It’s more the building
percentage requirements, they require a certain percentage of transparency
along the ground floor as it deals with the pedestrian and walkability of the area
so scale and more massing of the buildings themselves
Mr. Chair says if there are no more questions from staff, he will open the public
hearing. Seeing no one is here the public hearing was closed bringing the
discussion back to the commission.
Mr. Chair explains how they’ve had several discussions along this line and still is
uncomfortable with this type of an ordinance and understands where we’re
trying to go. But, believes you can’t design by formula as it won’t work things can
get very monotonous, everything looks the same and see’s this area as better set
as guidelines as far as goals to discuss with architectural groups design groups,
developers as far as what we would like to see. It doesn’t seem to give the
architect enough freedom and makes it very limiting. Just don’t think it will work,
again the idea behind it is understood. It almost becomes form based zoning and
Commissioner Eckholm says his first reaction would be to disagree but,
remembers attending a downtown Minneapolis meeting where they were
discussing the new YMCA that was going to go on Nicollet and they had space
that was going to be used for program events but they knew that if they were
having an event there are groups that need a certain level of modesty, so they
designed motion like windows and presented it saying, these motion windows
can be turned on or turned off and can have transparency sometimes but not all
the time and it seemed to be an innovative solution but because of the way the
ordinance was written and their overlay was written they said no, absolutely not
you need to leave those completely unobstructed. Moving forward maybe we
look at density - with the point we’ll be looking at later, it’s finding a way where
someone comes with and innovative solution to the problem where they don’t
meet the spirit of it but not necessarily the letter. If we can figure out a way to
have the reverse it would be better.
Ms. Monson says under No. 6 in the ordinance it says, “the ordinance realizes
that not everyone can or should meet this ordinance. That there is flexibility in
the ordinance for staff or city council, planning commission to alter those
requirements”.
Mr. Chair says this is a thought, but it’s still not clear with the variation and how
well it can be received.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
58
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
DATE
Page 7
Commissioner Carper explains he is uncomfortable with the ordinance and
doesn’t think all businesses can get a PUD like Trader Joe’s. There is also the rent
per sq. ft. and when you’re not able to use all the sq. ft. like the window space
then it can cause businesses not to get there ideal location and cause lost
revenue. Thinks this may need more research before approving.
Ms. Monson explains she feels the ordinances and can be easily met like that of
Trader Joe’s and Cub Foods.
Commissioner Peilen expresses that the ordinance is a response to a problem
with a couple facilities but it goes far into regulating and is still in the thought
and thinking process of the ordinance.
Mr. Chair responds that zoning codes are increasing cost and understands that
there are good reasons to it and believes we need to also focus on affordable
commercial space.
Commissioner Kraft believes the intent of the ordinance is great, but believes
there are other ways to make a more active and inviting streetscape. Suggests to
start thinking of ways to equally prioritize different options; transparency is one
option another is art along with other multitude creative solution to better meet
the intent of what were after.
Commissioner Carper says he agrees with spirit on intent of the ordinance but
feels this may need more work and review into it by possibly breaking it into
parts. At this time cannot agrees to pass it.
Mr. Chair asks Mr. Walther what his thoughts are if they should pass the
ordinance and take the chance it wouldn’t pass or to table it and see it brought
back again soon.
Mr. Walther says there is no specific direction to favor. This was a City generated
request by Council and we would like to see it come to them at some stage for
their action and they do want the Planning Commissions input.
Mr. Chair says there was good conversation on it recently and feels some of
things that were troubling don’t seem to be addressed far enough and make
sure City Council has enough information on where the Planning Commission
stands. My preference would be to go forward with the vote.
Commissioner Carper says he has one more point of clarification for the
audience that may be watching or listening that we are a recommending body
we are not an approving body. The City Council can choose to react on this
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
59
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
DATE
Page 8
ordinance in any matter they should choose, so a yes and no do not guarantee
anything.
Mr. Chair asks if he would like to follow that up with a motion.
Commissioner Carper move’s that the Planning Commission approve the zoning
ordinance on window transparency on the ground-floor street facing facades
applicant City of St. Louis Park case number 18-70-ZA
Mr. Chair asks for a second motion.
Commissioner Peilen seconds the motion.
Mr. Chair says the motion does not carry on a vote of 0-6
Mr. Walther says we need to have an affirmative motion. That particular vote did
not carry there will need to be an alternative motion provided to either amend
it, deny it, recommended denial or to table.
Mr. Chair says he looks for a second motion.
Commissioner Carper gives a second motion, to deny the zoning ordinance for
window transparency on the ground-floor street facing facades, Applicant City of
St. Louis Park case number 18-70-ZA and Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the
motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0
4.Other Business
5.Communications
6.Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30pm and was followed by a study session.
STUDY SESSION
2Density bonuses and mixed-uses of zoning district to draft ordinance.
Ms. Monson says she wants to highlight what the 2040 comprehensive plan defines as
mix use, it requires a variety of mix of use development like commercial, residential and
office etc. The goal is to create pedestrian scale buildings that have active ground floor
uses, along the front facade and residential above. Buildings will approximately have a
mix of 75 – 85% of residential use and 15 – 25% of commercial or other uses. Taller
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
60
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
DATE
Page 9
buildings are allowed and the density range in the mixed use district goes from 20 units
per acre to 75 units per acre. All of the land that is being re-guided, most of it already
zoned for C-2 which does allow for mix use buildings and allows up to 50 units per acre
with a Conditional Use permit. So, the 50 units per acre is being used a starting point for
our ordinance, because it requires different regulations and if it gets rezoned as a mix
used zoning district then there is that potential to go to the higher level of density. So
we ask tonight is this something you are interested investigating further into. We are
looking for input on things you may want to see more of, what you like or don’t like.
Commissioner Peilen asks the question pertaining to a previous issue that came up for a
mix use building, where one member thought it wasn’t mixed use enough and therefore
did not support it and refers back to the slide where it talks about percentages. Would
this building have met the mixed-use standards.
Ms. Monson refers to the full draft of the ordinance which is in the back of the packet
stating 25% of the ground floor can to be a part of the residential space, used for
management office of such, but cannot be used for residential amenities while the rest
of the 75% has to be commercial non-residential use.
Mr. Walther clarifies the purpose of this provision in the comprehensive plan is to give
some indication for our long term infrastructure planning and the metropolitan council
to we might anticipate in uses for this category. This is only a guidance not a define all.
Commissioner Kraft, asks for clarification on the Green Building policy as it seems close
to the Renewable Energy resource policy.
Ms. Monson, agrees that the two policies overlap a bit but the Green Building policy
requires you to follow a green building system like LEAD and SB30/30, but you are not
required to get it certified and has to meet the goals of 20/30.
Mr. Walther goes into detail on how TIF works within the City as it relates to the point
system in the Green Building policy.
Commissioner Eckholm suggest an option relating to the renewable energy sources; if a
building is going to put in a backup system, they could use a batter backup versus a
diesel backup and this would in turn qualify the developer to receive a point towards
the point system.
Mr. Chair suggests a possible bus stop of sorts for the building; in front or close to it and
this would give it a higher density as well.
Commissioner Carpers suggest a possible public meeting space for groups.
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
61
Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
DATE
Page 10
After moving on from the topic of affordable commercial and the point system, Mr.
Walther mentions that a lot of definition still needs to happen on the density ordinance
piece. It seems as though we have a broken code as the mixed use district in the code
right now does not function and needs to be replaced.
The comprehensive plan has moved forward with the Council and we are expected to
hear back in March to mid-March, at which time we can start to implement it. The
reason for urgency on getting it submitted and started is also due to some of the zoning
districts could change or be different than how they are listed now and changes will
need to be made.
Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, presented the 2019 work plan report to the
commission and made sure there are no questions relating to it or anything to add.
Commissioners agree there may be items they want to bring to the Council to review,
they will bring those items at a later time.
Mr. Walther brings up changes that are afoot, in addition to the standard meeting with the
City Council there is a new process being implemented during the board of commissions,
which are being implemented for all commissions. Such as suggestions that the
commission may want to bring forward of their own.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elena Roberts
Office Assistant
Planning Commission meeting of March 20, 2019
Title: 2019 Work Plan
62