HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021/07/21 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - Planning Commission - Regular Planning commission meeting
July 21, 2021
6:00 p.m.
If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call Sean Walther at 952.924.2574 or the
administration department at 952.924.2525.
Planning commission
The St. Louis Park Planning Commission is meeting in person at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005
Minnetonka Blvd. in accordance with the most recent COVID-19 guidelines. Some members of
the planning commission may participate by electronic devise or telephone rather than by
being personally present at the meeting.
Members of the public can attend the planning commission meeting in person or watch the
meeting by webstream at bit.ly/watchslppc and on local cable (Comcast SD channel 17 and
HD channel 859). Visit bit.ly/slppcagendas to view the agenda and reports.
Members of the public who want to address the planning commission during the hearing(s) on
the regular meeting agenda may attend the meeting in person or call the number noted be low
next to the corresponding item. Call when the meeting starts at 6:00 p.m. and follow
instructions provided. Comments will be taken during the public hearing in the order they are
received and must relate to the item being discussed on the agenda.
Agenda
1. Call to order – roll call
2. Approval of minutes – June 16, 2021
3. Hearings
3a. Zoning ordinance amendment pertaining to medical marijuana dispensaries
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 21-25-ZA
Public hearing phone number: 952.562.2886
4. Other Business
5. Communications
6. Adjournment
Future scheduled meeting/event dates:
August 4, 2021 – planning commission regular meeting
August 18, 2021 – planning commission regular meeting
September 1, 2021 – planning commission regular meeting
September 23, 2021 – planning commission regular meeting
1
Planning commission meeting
July 21, 2021
STUDY SESSION
1. Green building policy revisions (oral presentation only, no staff report)
2. Wooddale Station Redevelopment introduction
3. City council chambers orientation for commissions (oral presentation only, no staff
report)
2
Planning commission
June 16, 2021
6:00 p.m.
If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call Sean Walther or the administration
department at 952.924.2525.
Planning commission
Members present: Jim Beneke, Matt Eckholm, Courtney Erwin, Jessica Kraft,
Sam Tift, Tom Weber, Joffrey Wilson
Members absent: Imran Dagane
Staff present: Jacquelyn Kramer, Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison, Sean Walther
Guests: none
1. Call to order – roll call
2. Approval of minutes – June 2, 2021
Commissioner Beneke made a motion, and Commissioner Kraft seconded, to approve the
minutes of June 2, 2021, as presented . The motion passed 6-0.
3. Hearings
3a. Zoning ordinance amendment pertaining to home occupations
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No: 21-24-ZA
Mr. Morrison presented the report.
Commissioner Wilson asked if there has been demand for operating businesses out of
homes historically in the city . Mr. Morrison stated there has not been a request for
home salon or barber but it was brought up as an equity issue . He stated this is most
likely the primary drive for that.
Commissioner Kraft stated the planning commission has been looking at home
occupations for a while and salons and barbers were not allowed initially as a home
occupation . It came forward as an item for further discussion.
Commissioner Beneke asked if when the council discussed this, did accessory dwelling
units come up specifically . Mr. Morrison stated yes. The concern comes with potential
nuisance in accessory buildings such as garages, so they continue to be excluded from
being used for home occupations. At this time , only occupants of an accessory dwelling
units are allowed to conduct a home occupation in the accessory dwelling unit within
the proposed ordinance.
Chair Eckholm opened the public hearing.
3
There were no callers on the line.
Chair Eckholm closed the public hearing.
Chair Eckholm stated the work staff did to update this ordinance has been very good
and this brings the ordinance more in line with what the average person likely assumes
to be allowed . He will support this.
Commissioner Beneke stated he also supports the ordinance, adding the ordinance
offers more equitable opportunities.
Commissioner Beneke made a motion, and Commissioner Weber seconded, to accept the
zoning ordinance amendment pertaining to home occupations. The motion passed 6-0.
4. Other Business - none
5. Communications
Mr. Walther noted the commission will have a study session immediately following
adjourning the regular meeting. The topics to be discussed include daycare regulations,
an introduction of a development proposal anticipated for the site north of the future
Beltline Blvd. Light Rail Transit Station, and a discussion about the joint study session
commissioners had with the city council regarding the 2021 work plan. He stated the
July 7 planning commission meeting is cancelled and the next regular meeting will be
July 21.
6. Adjournment – 6:18 p.m.
STUDY SESSION
The study session commenced at 6:19 p.m.
1. Daycare ordinance introduction
Mr. Morrison presented the report.
Commissioner Wilson stated there are some great parks in the city and leveraging those,
while lessening barriers to childcare , is worthwhile pursuing.
Commissioner Kraft stated she would hate to lose a dedicated park space at daycares.
Also, she stated there are peak times for drop off/pick up and parents are stuck circling;
she cautioned on parking reduction.
Chair Eckholm stated possibly incorporating a parking management plan would be in
order especially during peak times. He added traffic flow and parking needs to be safe
with children coming in and out.
4
Chair Eckholm asked why the ordinance is so stringent in various areas. Mr. Morrison
stated it hasn’t been reviewed in many years and may be outdated. Chair Eckholm
stated he supports urban designs with rooftop play areas. He would want to support
that especially if there are no parks nearby.
Commissioner Weber agreed. He stated the ordinance should make it as easy as
possible for daycares and would defer to the state on regulation here.
Commissioner Tift also agreed . He asked if in the past when setting up daycares near a
highway and what are the safety standards that are looked at. Mr. Morrison stated in
the one near Highway 100, the highway is elevated so there is a concrete barrier; it was
determined to be safe there. He noted fences and barriers would help with safety
issues.
Commissioner Weber asked if there has been the same type of issues with people
wanting to do in-home day care in St. Louis Park and not being able to because of
commercial day cares. Mr. Morrison stated in-home daycares operate under a different
set of city, state , and county rules. He had not heard of any barriers to in-home day care
in the city.
Chair Eckholm stated Highway 7, 100 and 169 used to be surface highways, so perhaps
in the past the fences and barriers were needed since there was no grade or setback. He
added with the way highways are constructed now, there are barriers in place and more
fully developed . He stated possibly setback is not needed but only fencing would be
used if needed.
Commissioner Kraft noted most play areas are fenced in so this is probably not asking
something daycares do not already do.
Mr. Morrison stated the fencing or barrier will be needed for safety reasons regardless
of the location.
Commissioner Weber asked if there are playgrounds in nearby schools and if daycares
would be able to utilize those assets as well as park playgrounds.
Commissioner Kraft stated she feels it is important that a daycare not share a park and
have a dedicated play area within its property. She stated she is concerned about there
not being a dedicated space located right at the daycare itself. She asked if the state
requires a dedicated play area. Mr. Morrison stated the state allows local parks as a
substitute to the required on-site play area.
Chair Eckholm stated he is not comfortable asking a daycare to use a certain park and
not also have a dedicated on-site play space.
Commissioner Weber added he did not intend that the city’s ordinance would need to
follow all of the state regulations.
5
Mr. Walther stated Commissioner Beneke serves as the school board liaison on the
commission and asked him if there are any shared aspects of this with schools.
Commissioner Beneke stated the schools are limited in the number of preschool
programs they can run but he was not sure about sharing the playgrounds. He added
there might be rules of not bringing outside groups to play at school playgrounds during
the day but noted he would check into this.
2. Sherman Associates proposed Beltline Boulevard Station Redevelopment
Ms. Monson presented the report.
Chair Eckholm stated the unit count is set on the development. He asked when they go
ahead with phase 2, would additional units be able to be added? Ms. Monson stated the
developer is locked into their unit mix for the most part. She stated the site plan is still
at five to six stories ; one building will be at seve n stories.
Commissioner Weber asked if the developer is in talks with a grocer. Ms. Monson stated
yes.
Commissioner Beneke asked if there is a park and ride included in the development. Ms.
Monson stated the hope was to have a lower amount of cars allowed at the park and
ride at 268 parking slots and up to 98 for resident use.
Mr. Walther added this one will be a park and ride and there is also another at Louisiana
Avenue as well.
Commissioner Beneke asked if the EAW is worrisome at all. Ms. Mon son stated there
are some soil problems, but it is nothing out of the ordinary for St. Louis Park. She noted
issues that came up in the area have been solved and the developer will be applying for
grants to help.
Commissioner Weber asked if phase 1 happens and then in phase 2 the affordable gets
cancelled, does the city have safeguards in place on this? Ms. Monson stated yes and
that will all be included in the contracts. She also noted there will TIF applied for by the
developer as well, to help with th is. Mr. Walther stated typically the financing takes
about two years to set up in a development like this.
Commissioner Wilson asked if there will be infrastructure provided in the development,
so it is not more expensive to add this in the future. Ms. Monson stated yes, noting
there will be conduit and EV chargers included in the development.
Commissioner Kraft asked for the timeline for phase 2 being built and what it will look
like before phase 2 is built. Ms. Monson stated she knows the park and ride will have to
be set before light rail begins operation . Phase 2 should be completed then or shortly
thereafter, as the developer will have their tax credits by then.
6
Chair Eckholm asked if there is pressure from the grocer for surface parking. He stated
he sees a lot of parking in the development and would like to see it broken up a bit, such
as 90-degree parking or parallel parking in the actual implementation.
Commissioner Beneke noted the water quality in Bass Lake, noting the development
might be able to help the water quality there as well, when following all the
requirements. Ms. Monson stated this is correct. Ms. Walther added some of the water
management issues have already been addressed following the watershed
requirements.
Chair Eckholm asked what the vision is related to retail at the development. Ms.
Monson stated the city is working to keep that in there and the developer is looking at a
coffee shop. Commissioner Weber stated but Nordicware has a coffee shop right across
the street already. Ms. Monson stated that is correct, adding the city only wants
something there and does not have a preference as to what it is.
3. 2021 Work Plan
Mr. Walther state d this portion of the meeting is for the commission to make comments
related to the work plan and councils debrief. He added if there was specific direction
for staff, they would also appreciate that feedback as well.
Chair Eckholm asked about the council’s stance on the analysis of build size for
residential buildings and putting that on the back burner.
Mr. Walther stated that is correct, adding there were only two councilmembers in
support of the amendment provided by staff. He noted council will further discuss this
and come back to the commission with more direction.
Commissioner Beneke asked if the concern was the size of single-family homes. Mr.
Walther stated yes and noted there were several proposals on how to address this but
the council did not support the items brought forth by staff.
Commissioner Beneke asked if this relates at all to the percentage of rentals vs. owner
occupied units. Mr. Walther stated there was some conversation around two-family
dwellings in lower density areas and identify areas where three and four-plex’s might be
appropriate. This item may be another area the council will look into to help support
first-time home ownership.
Chair Eckholm asked if there is any way to look at having more owner-occupied
multifam ily housing. Mr. Walther stated there are some issues with state regulations on
this type of building not moving ahead in the state. Mr. Walther stated condos are
currently not being pursued at all in the state.
Commissioner Wilson agreed there is opportunity with condos, but challenges to get
there.
7
Mr. Walther added there are also different construction requirements when converting
apartments to condos, and in building condos.
Chair Eckholm asked if these discussions related to triplexes and quads would be
worthwhile to include in the work plan as there seems to be interest by the council on
this. He added also that the council was interested in early discussions on neighborhood
commercial uses within residential neighborhoods. He noted this might be related to
food security and having grocery stores close by in neighborhoods.
Mr. Walther stated there are two paths to look at multiple items: bring individual items
to the commission and council over a year or two or to look at everything at once and
pursue a more sweeping amendment that takes in all these topics. Chair Eckholm stated
this is helpful to hear and a good concept.
Commissioner Beneke stated this would be a way to work out any issues over two years
vs. rushing in and doing everything at once. Mr. Walther agreed.
Commissioner Wilson agreed there is benefit in taking things one at a time and being
mindful that all things are interconnected.
Mr. Walther stated that there may be room to add to the work plan list but stated it is a
large list at this point. He added the transit-oriented development district zoning code
amendment is a huge topic for staff and a consultant may be brought in to help on this
item.
Mr. Walther noted the city hall HVAC equipment has all been updated and has been
used at city council meetings. He noted the city council chambers also have dividers that
can be used at the dais and if the commission is interested in utilizing these, they are
available. He added all are welcome to use masks as they so choose to. He noted the
public will now be invited to all futu re meetings and the commissioners can also be
seated six feet apart if so desired.
Mr. Walther stated he will work with facilities on the commission’s requests for the in -
person meeting space. He added there will no longer be Webex meetings and no longe r
a call-in number to listen to meetings, although there will still be a call-in number for
public hearings. He also added if residents want to participate in study sessions, they
will have to be at the meeting in person.
4. Adjournment – 7:50 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Sean Walther, liaison Matt Eckholm, chair member
8
Planning commission: Regular meeting
Meeting date: July 21, 2021
Agenda item: 3a
3a Zoning ordinance amendment pertaining to medical marijuana dispensaries
Case Number: 21-25-ZA
Applicant: Scott Landsman, representing Leaf line Industries, LLC
Review Deadline: 60-day deadline: 8/7/21, 120-day deadline 10/6/21
Recommended
motions:
Chair to close the public hearing.
Motion to recommend denial of the ordinance pertaining to marijuana
dispensaries in the C-1 neighborhood commercial district.
Summary of request: Scott Landsman, representing Leafline Industries applied for a text
amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow marijuana dispensaries in the C-1 neighborhood
commercial district with the following conditions:
The condition for marijuana dispensary is that it shall be limited to a distribution facility
in the form of a retail store that sells and distributes medical cannabis and medical
cannabis products. Medical cannabis is any species of the genus cannabis plant, or any
mixture or preparation of them, including whole plant extracts and resins for a patient
with a qualifying medical condition enrolled in the registry program administered by the
State of Minnesota. Medical cannabis products are any delivery device or related
supplies and educational material use d in the administration of medical cannabis. No
other form of marijuana dispensary shall be allowed.
Leafline Industries would like to open a marijuana dispensary at 8225 Highway 7 which is zoned
C-1 neighborhood commercial.
Attached to the report is a narrative written by the applicant that describes the State of
Minnesota regulations governing the sale of medical use marijuana and describing Leafline’s
facilities and experiences.
Background: A marijuana dispensary land use category was created by the city in January of
2021, and is defined as follows:
Marijuana dispensary means a dispensary location where patients or consumers can
access cannabis in a legal and safe manner. Users get assistance from experts (bud
tenders) who find an optimal dosage and recommend the delivery method to achieve
optimal results when using medical cannabis.
Marijuana dispensaries, however, were intentionally not permitted in any zoning district. By
creating a separate land use category specific to marijuana dispensaries, the city clarified that
marijuana dispensaries are not to be considered pharmacies or similar uses, and therefore,
could not be allowed anywhere a pharmacy is currently permitted. This approach allow s the
city time to study and deliberate marijuana sales in St. Louis Park and determine if dispensaries
should be permitted, where they should be permitted, under which co nditions.
9
Regular meeting meeting of July 21, 2021 (Item No. 3a)
Title: Zoning ordinance amendment pertaining to medical marijuana dispensaries
Analysis: The applicant proposes to amend the zoning ordinance to allow medical use
marijuana sales in the C-1 neighborhood commercial district. The applicant chose to amend this
district because the available commercial space they found is zoned C-1 neighborhood
commercial. While this application meets the needs of the applicant, it is not sufficient reason
alone for the city to approve the application resulting in marijuana dispensaries being
permitted on any property zoned C-1 neighborhood commercial. The city has not yet
undertaken a study of marijuana sales, medical or recreational use .
The applicant’s intent is to draft the ordinance to allow medical use marijuana sales only. This is
intended to address the possibility that recreational use marijuana sales may someday be
legalized in the state and medical marijuana dispensaries become recreational marijuana
dispensaries. Staff finds that the proposed language is insufficient for the following reasons:
1. Properties located in the C-1 neighborhood commercial district are small commercial
properties that are adjacent to residential uses. Because of their close proximity to
residential uses, the zoning ordinance currently prohibits uses such as liquor stores, pawn
shops, firearm sales and payday loans. Staff believes marijuana dispensaries have similar
community perceptions and impacts as these uses and should be prohibited in the C-1
neighborhood district for the same reasons.
2. A concentration of the uses above, including marijuana dispensaries, could have a negative
impact on the image of the neighborhood, community character and property values that
contributes to real or perceived problems or issues. Therefore, if the city allow s marijuana
dis pensaries, consideration should be given to separating these use s an appropriate
distance from other uses , including residential, other dispensaries, liquor stores, pawn
shops and payday loans. Additional study would be needed to determine what conditions
should apply.
3. It is prudent for the city to proceed cautiously when considering how to regulate marijuana
dispensaries. The intent of this application may be to allow marijuana dispensaries for
medical use only, however, the regulations governing marijuana use in Minnesota is
uncertain, and national trends indicate legalizing recreational use marijuana sales is
becoming more likely . It is reasonable to assume that if the state eventually legalizes
recreational use marijuana, then existing medical use marijuana sales facilities will desire
to transition to include recreational use marijuana sales. Therefore, staff recommends only
allowing medical marijuana dispensaries where the city would potentially support
marijuana dispensaries that include recreational use .
Before the city approves a marijuana dispensary, the city needs to prepare for this new
industry. It needs to determine where the city will allow marijuana sales , in what manner
should it be approved (permitted, permitted with conditions, or conditional use permit) and
under which conditions. Should there be setbacks from residential and other uses such as liquor
stores, other marijuana dispensaries, pawn shops etc.? For comparison, the city currently limits
liquor stores, pawn shops, firearms sales, and payday loans mostly to the C-2 general
commercial district. None of them are allowed in the C-1 neighborhood commercial district.
Each of the uses are allowed by conditional use permit in the C-2 general commercial district,
10
Regular meeting meeting of July 21, 2021 (Item No. 3a)
Title: Zoning ordinance amendment pertaining to medical marijuana dispensaries
and there are several conditions required that are specific to these uses including a 1,000-foot
setback from each of these listed uses and a 350-foot setback from residential.
There are additional complications to allowing the sale of marijuana in St. Louis Park. The
zoning ordinance may not be the only city ordinance that would need to be amended. The
applicant identified other potential conflicts with city regulations, including restrictions on
electronic delivery devices and prohibition of the sale of products containing marijuana. The
city should evaluate and amend other city ordinances along w ith the zoning ordinance as
opposed to amending the zoning ordinance first, then evaluating and amending other city
ordinances. The building and energy department is reviewing its licensing regulations to ensure
compliance with State law.
Staff recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the ordinance pertaining to marijuana
dispensaries in the C-1 neighborhood commercial district.
Next Steps: The city council is tentatively scheduled to consider the planning commission
recommendation on August 2, 2021.
Attachments: Zoning ordinance text amendment narrative
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, assistant zoning administrator
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning and zoning supervisor
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Planning commission: Study session
Meeting date: July 21, 2021
Study session item: 2
2 Proposed Wooddale Station Redevelopment
Location: 5850 36th Street & 5802 36th Street
Applicant: Saturday Properties & Anderson Companies
Owner: City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
Standal Properties
Summary of request: In February 2021, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
(EDA) entered into an agreement with Anderson Companies and Saturday Properties to develop
a mixed -use, mixed-income, transit-oriented development at the Southwest Light Rail Transit
(SWLRT) Wooddale Avenue Station Site. The initial concept plan includes 17,000 square feet of
ground floor commercial uses and 283 residential units, including 10% of the units available at
50% area median income (AMI), 10% of the units available at 60% AMI, and 80% of the units at
market rate.
Site information:
19
Regular meeting meeting of July 21, 2021 (Item No. 2)
Title: Proposed Wooddale Station Redevelopment
Site area (acres): 3.08 acres
Current use: vacant commercial building Surrounding land uses:
One-story commercial building North: Wooddale LRT Station
East: commercial and industrial uses
South: TowerLight senior living
West: Wooddale Avenue
Current 2040 land use guidance Current zoning
TOD - transit oriented development MX-1 vertical mixed use
Proposed 2040 land use guidance Proposed zoning
TOD - transit oriented development PUD planned unit development
Background: In August 2020, the city’s Economic Development Authority distributed a request
for proposals (RFP) for the SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station Site . The EDA envisions the
Wooddale Avenue Station Site to be an active, vibrant and connected place where people can
affordably live, work and recreate with the opportunities and advantages of proximity to LRT.
The site is expected to become an important community hub for mixed-income housing,
neighborhood business and transit. The EDA sought a development that provide s:
• An abundance of affordable multifamily housing that exceeds the city’s Inclusionary
Housing Policy requirements and facilitates multicultural and intergenerational living
(i.e. includes larger size units);
• Smaller scale, affordable, ground floor commercial spaces conducive for neighborhood
businesses;
• Attractive, bold and creative architecture;
• Building and site designs that incorporate numerous “green” elements including
renewable energy sources designed to achieve net zero carbon emissions at the site and
serve as a showcase for environmental sustainability;
• Numerous accommodations for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and automobiles,
including electric bikes, electric vehicles, and possibly car sharing;
• A public plaza or community space with unique community landmark or feature;
• High quality site ame nities and public art;
• Connections to nature through green features such as enhanced landscaping, green
roofs or living wall systems.
Present considerations: In February 2021, the EDA entered into an agreement with Anderson
Companies and Saturday Properties to develop a mixed-use, mixed-income, transit -oriented
development at the Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) Wooddale Avenue Station Site. The
initial concept plan includes 17,000 square feet of ground floor commercial uses and 283
residential units, including 10% of the units available at 50% area median income (AMI), 10% of
the units available at 60% AMI, and 80% of the units at market rate. There is also a large public
plaza facing the SWLRT Wooddale Ave. Station.
20
Regular meeting meeting of July 21, 2021 (Item No. 2)
Title: Proposed Wooddale Station Redevelopment
Proposed site plan
A neighborhood meeting was held on February 10, 2021 to gather initial comments from the
Elmwood and Sorensen neighborhoods. The concept plans were well received and most of the
neighbors in attendance at the meeting are excited for this proposal to move forward.
Planning commission study session: Staff will present the conceptual site plan to the planning
commission during the July 21, 2021 study session. Staff requests the commission discuss and
provide feedback on the proposal.
Next steps: In the coming months, the planning commission will be asked to consider a
preliminary and final plat, and a preliminary and final planned unit development for the site .
Recommendations: Discuss and provide feedback on the proposed development for the
Wooddale Station Site Redevelopment
Supporting documents: Discussion, site plan, concept images
Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, senior planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning and zoning supervisor
21
22
39 39Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Exhibit D
Preliminary Site Plan
36 th St.
W
o
o
d
d
a
l
e
A
v
e
.Yosemite Ave.East
Building
West Building
East
Lobby
West
Lobby
Wooddale
Lawn
Resident
Amenity
Deck over
Parking
Ea
s
t
S
k
y
Dec
k
West
Sky DeckDog
Run
LRT Dro
p
Pub
l
ic
Pa
r
k
ing
Retail
Parkin
g
Access
Reta
i
lPar
k
ingAcces
s
Resident
Parking
Entry L1
Possible PV ArrayPossible PV Array
Resident
Parking
Entry L0
Bi
ke
Pa
r
k
ing
Bi
ke
Pa
r
k
ing
Bike Parki
n
g
Bike Parking
Bypass
SWLRT
W
o
o
d
d
al
e
A
v
e. St
ati
o
n
Bus Stop
BNSF
H
e
a
v
y
R
ail
Cedar L
ak
e
Bik
e Tr
ail
Level 0
Resident Parking
below entire
building footprint
241 spaces
N
Level 1
Resident Parking
behind active
Amenity Spaces
and below
amenity deck 121
Spaces
Level 1
Public Parking
12 angled surface
parking and 29
interior spaces
43 total
Grade Level of
West Building
Commercial/Retail
and Resident Lobby
23
EntryEnt
ry
20-0430St LouiS Park | M inneS ota 3November 6, 2020Wooddale RFP - Park Central
rEndErEd Floor Plan - ground Floor
COMMUNITY /
COWORKING LOBBY
24
43 43Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Exhibit E
Conceptual Images
25
44 44Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Corner of 36th and Yosemite
Plaza edge along Station
26
45CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Corner of Wooddale and 36th
Overhead of Plaza
Exhibit E
Conceptual Images
27
46 Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies
Movies in the Park
Wooddale Lawn
Plaza Entry off Wooddale Ave
28