All right. Good evening. I would like to call to order the Monday, May 11, 2026, City of St. Paul Park Planning Commission Commission meeting. Um, just as a reminder, this meeting is being recorded by True Lens Community Media.
You can view city meetings live and replayed on cable channel 799. Meetings are also streamed live and archived in the city of St. Paul Park's YouTube channel. So, let's start off with a roll call. Uh, Patrick DS is here, Mr. Glidden >> present,
>> and Mr. Hagerty >> here, >> and council leazison Mr. Conrad >> here. >> All right. So, we have three people. So we have a quorum. We can conduct business tonight. So let's stand for the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. Um we've got some uh minute approval. So, I would be asking if somebody would be
willing to move to approve the minutes for the November 12th, 2025 and December 8, 2025 meetings. >> Make that motion. >> I'll second. >> Motion and second. So, all those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed?
>> Uh, minutes are approved. Tonight, we have two commission actions to look at. Um, first is a public hearing on 945 Lincoln Avenue, CUP. Mr. Sparks, if you'd help us. >> Good evening, honorable members of the
planning commission. It is a distinct honor and privilege to be with you this evening, and I swear you guys are aging in reverse, >> right? Um what we have before you tonight is a conditional use permit
application at 945 Lincoln. Uh what the idea is here is that this house, the existing house has an attached essentially one stall garage to it. It's a pretty small garage and there really
isn't room to build a second stall onto it, do it to its location, and they have a shed in the backyard in the back corner. You want to do is remove the shed, turn that into an additional twocar garage. Now, the ordinances in
this zoning district only allow one garage per property and then it allows one shed per property. And so the way that he's got his lot now, it's conforming, but they there's a conditional use
permit provision that would allow in cases for somebody to add a second garage. And this situation is the textbook reason why you would grant that cup essentially because it's a person. A lot
of the older houses, when I say older, I don't mean the really old 1800s ones. I'm talking like the ' 60s50s ones. A lot of them had one stall garages attached to them. And so h a house like that wouldn't be able to have additional
garage space without the cup. They still have to meet the size total size standard. And in this case, their uh their attached garage is like 280 square ft and the the proposed one's like 500 some. So, they're going to be under the
1,024 square ft max for garage space that you allow. And they're also under the you do the max by that or the square foot of the footprint of the house, whichever is uh less. And in this case, either way,
they'll be conforming with that code provision. And then this they'll be meeting the setbacks based on the proposed location. But, uh, what they would have to do is just get rid of the shed. that's there. The purpose of the rules that we have is
that um the city for decades this rules the rules that we have in place regarding this have been in place since for like 60 70 years probably. And what they're intending to do is limit the
number of extra structures on a lot. So the aesthetic nature of especially the eastern portion of the city is that you would have a garage and a shed. That's it. If the garage is attached just one. So we'd be limiting the number of
buildings on a lot. And in some cases where somebody has an attached garage but wants a second garage, you would just say you can have that provided you're under the total square foot limitations. You got to meet those. and then you don't add in yet another building
uh without coming back to the planning commission to look at it so you guys can check to make sure it's in the spirit and intent of the neighborhood. So essentially what we have here is um we talked with the applicant's contractor
about what they were doing and um walked through some scenarios they got the driveway has to meet the sideyard setback. The building has to meet the setback, the building has to meet the max size uh when added to the other garage and provided all that is
maintained through the building permit process. Um as on a evaluation level, this does appear to meet your review criteria. >> Just out of curiosity like as a proportion of the lot itself, how much
of it is would be covered or impervious? cuz I mean you've got the garage, the house, there's a patio. So do do we do we look at that like what's the >> we actually in this zoning the R1 district, we have no impervious max percentage. It's something we should
probably do because in the zoning districts where we have way smaller lots, we do have that. It's just this zoning district has never been tweaked over over the time over the last like couple decades. It just hasn't been tweaked. It's always been it's just the
steady R1 regular zoning district. The R2 district has a maximum impervious. And we could just say it's something similar. But in situations like this where as you're noting like somebody's now going to have a long
driveway, they're going to have a building in the back. Now we're going to be creeping up to like a 40 some percent lot coverage, 4050 and that. And that does increase runoff and sometimes you want to know what those percentages are to monitor that.
But as it stands right now, we don't necessarily regulate that in this zoning district. And the proposed construction that he has on this lot with just the two stall garage and then the attached
garage being the one stall garage. I mean, he could put that building back there and convert that one garage into living space and then not talk to you guys about it at all, right? He could just get a building permit. He wants to keep the attached garage.
Um, and based on our zoning rules, he can do this with the conditional use. So, is the proposed driveway along the side going to be graded away from the house? Right.
>> Proposed driveway exists right now. And then >> I mean the the proposed extension, right? >> Yeah. The proposed extension he'll have to show with his building permit application. Our engineer reviews the site plan. So he'll have to show the proper amount of grading away. So the 5
ft that we have and then the building separation requirements that we have allows for enough space for grading to be accommodated. >> Okay. I mean, I see we got a a cross-section back here. Um,
I mean, I just, you know, I guess my concern would be number one, I mean, there's that's a just a lot of concrete to be covering up the slot. Also, if we've got this ribbon, so there's five feet from the edge of his driveway to the property line and
I don't know. I'm so assuming the other house is 10 feet off the minimum set back off the line. So I mean >> the min yeah the minimum setback for a driveway is five >> right? >> So he's meeting that and five is
we look at 5 ft as being enough to have drainage contain like some form of drainage snow storage. But again, I mean it if like in some situations you
maybe we would want our engineer to look at it just to make sure that it actually works. >> Okay. It's a large lot. 15,000 square ft. >> It's a double lot. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Or it's it's >> 410 of an acre.
Almost half an acre. It's a pretty large lot. >> Yeah. >> Right. I mean, the problem is is that there's so much of it as though pushed up against the next house, right? That's I mean, it's on a corner. So, like the the the outside part of the I mean, he's far back from the corner. But, I mean,
just I just think about it just being pushed up against the house. I mean, maybe this person and their neighbor have a great relationship and everything everybody's happy and great about it, but um maybe the next people down the line might have a different uh idea. So, maybe one of the things that we would talk about is whether or not there's
sufficient space from the pro from the edge of his drive the extension to the next structure next door. Like, I mean, make sure there's enough grass or something that we can like suck up some water or whatever. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Know, they're pretty cool. I mean,
they're they're close. Yeah. >> Right. Yeah. Yeah. He's got a bush there in the back and there's not a lot of stuff. >> Yeah. >> In those adjacent corners. >> Um we do have somebody that signed up for
the public hearing. >> Oh, and Mr. Chair, the um rep the representative from the construction company for the property owner is also here if you wanted to ask him any questions. And he wants to talk about Third Street, not about the >> Oh, he wants to talk about
>> Yeah. >> So, he wants to talk about the next the next thing, >> right? Yes. >> Okay. Well, we're going to just we'll put that right there. Okay. Um I guess Do you want to come talk a little bit about, you know, the My issue
is again just percentage of impervious and just like what's going to happen when the snow melts and the rain's falling and and the neighbors not happy. Sure. Um, you look at every situation,
you know, with the drainage, uh, the 5 foot, I agree it's a good idea to have that 5 foot, you got plenty of yard space between the neighbors for that water to soak in, whether it's snow or it's heavy rain. And then as far as the drainage off the concrete, we don't put
an extreme pitch to it, but just enough pitch so you get proper slope away from the the house. Um, and then being Dan's um, where the garage is located in the backyard, everything's kind of going down that way anyway. So, let's say the driveway, what he has right now, we're
going to connect to, and that driveway actually slopes down to where the garage is going to be. So, we're not going to be flooding neighbors. There's basically a long um, connection piece between all the houses there. So, all the water drains down there. So, I'm not worried about
flooding a neighbor at all, just because of the yard. grade u between all the properties. So, >> if that makes sense. >> No, it just it it's just a lot of concrete and and again um the rain and the snow got to go somewhere, right?
>> Right. >> Um >> and we looked at Dan brought up the possibility of doing a gravel driveway. They don't allow for it. It's got to be hardcape and that's the unfortunate part. So, we did look into it. >> Yeah. >> Um so, yeah. So, it's either asphalt or concrete. So, we're kind of >> He's got concrete now. So, we're just
going to match what he has. I think they I could have swore I thought that property had to redo their driveway twice. >> Yeah. And we that was Dan's other concern. So how concrete is finished. Um we talked about Okay. I looked at it. I looked at what's going on. So long story
short, uh you can blame it on concrete mix. You can blame it on the finisher. You go back and forth, but it's basically the uh um you know how how fast it cures. But it's been over a year. So, basically, if you park a vehicle in a concrete driveway, you're given the chance for salt, which what he
does now. >> Um, and then it's going to roll the the finish on top. That's what happened the first time. That's probably going to happen again. So, I take gave him the piece of mind. I said the concrete mix we're going to use, which the concrete driveway company used before, is it's it's a concrete driveway mix, but we're
going to add fiber to it. So, the fiber is going to act like a binder, which is it's a it' be better for the uh the the top layers, more or less. It's not going to give the concrete extra strength. It's just a binder for the top portion of the concrete um to give it a better chance to survive from the conditions.
And given that he's be parking his cars inside now because the the finishing pro, you know, how we finish the concrete slabs, it's a hardened finish versus a broom finish. So, the chances of that concrete in the in the actual garage itself is less chance of having
issues. That's why I told him, don't park your I mean, sad, but don't park your cars on the driveway if you're worried about damage from the salt roadway. So, that's that's what it comes down to. We can put a good sealer on it. I mean, other than that, you know, I had to redo my driveway or my driveway, but
my floor in my garage. Um, so I put a good epoxy on it. Epoxy, you know, it's going to give it a better chance to survive. There's no perfect world for because of the conditions of Minnesota weather. That's all. No, I I did my own driveway not too long ago and I saw it >> I drove him down pole. I live on Lincoln so
>> saw do it twice and I'm like wow that must have really been quite and it's concrete right and his concrete they they pay for the concrete the first time >> um I can't I get them mixed up which companies to use and know that the concrete company he used was nice enough to work with them on that. So,
>> um, >> no, no, I I that's I I mean I I I don't He's following the this the the plan. He's following the CUP. That's great. I mean, I just, you know, I think that, you know, if anything, we just, as Mr. Spark said, "Let's make sure that
when we're putting in our final plans that, you know, the city engineers has to take a look and give one more little check on it so that um and again, maybe the current resident and maybe the neighbor are as tight as can be, maybe they've got a got a good relationship, but that doesn't mean that the next
neighbor or or in 10 years from now when the when when the ground moves and hot, cold, hot, cold and it it starts to heave and and we come up with a different situation that we don't have two neighbors that aren't, you know, at at odds with each other. >> No, I get it. I deal with um I deal with
St. Paul a lot and then there lot tighter lots and driveways. So, it's like, okay, always back your men, you going to flood out the neighbor, you're going to flood out, you know, so there's a lot of different scenarios, but this situation is ideal cuz the way the houses are sitting up on top and all the yards drain to the back. So, his
situation's unique. Now, big my biggest challenge is, you know, one, the slab height's got to come up a little bit. the water is going towards the garage, but what we do is we do a reverse drain. So, as the water's coming down, we just kind of shoot it to the sides by uh a little bit of slope to the concrete. >> Okay.
>> So, but yeah, I feel confident about the design. >> Okay. >> So, not worried about obviously that's a concern for us. So, we don't want to make a people unhappy. That's good builder reputation. So, all right. >> Well, thank you. We good? >> Yeah. Okay. Thanks. any thoughts, comments or
>> I think just being aware of the situation and doing the best they can to, >> you know, grade to the the best opportunity. >> Okay. Well, since everyone's talked, it is a public hearing, so I'm going to take a moment here. We're going to open up a public hearing on the applicant
here. So, if anybody would like to speak from the public on this particular application, you're welcome to. Seeing nobody coming up and speaking, I'm going to close the public hearing. Um, I guess at this point we'd be maybe looking for a motion concerning
uh whether or not we would recommend this on to the city council for approval or not. Again, Nate, you'd want to write a ask that they meet all the COP criteria. And are you also asking that maybe we
would recommend that the city engineer take a look at it before final approval to make sure that it's graded sufficiently. >> We'll put a comment into the resolution that all comments by the city engineer must be addressed and he will look at it at the he's going to look at it at the
building permit stage. >> Okay. uh because he they put contours on the lot as you could see in that area and so he'll be able to look at that and if he requires any adjustment they'll have to do it to be consistent with that. So
>> okay, >> we can add that to the resolution. Okay, >> with that I will make a motion to approve a conditional use permit for 945 Lincoln Avenue subject to city engineer
comments being addressed and moving forward for city council for approval. >> I'll second. >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? >> All right. So, it will be forwarded on to the city council with our
recommendation for approval. So with the comments made within the the notes from Mr. Sparks and again with the recommendation that uh the city council wants the city engineer to have a comment and look at it at the building permit stage. So
>> good. >> Okay. Well, thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next on our agenda is an application review for 1220 4th Street Minor
Subdivision at uh 1224th Street. There's a parcel of land that's actually three lots in width. And there's a on the middle of the two lots, there's a house with a garage. Um, and the property owner wants
to separate uh one of the three lots and it's an existing separate P already, but by zoning, you say that uh substandard lots owned in common are
by zoning combined as one lot. and require re-ubdivision before you can separate them. And then in the R1 zoning district, it has standards by how big the house can be on the lot because these lots would be
substandard in the R1. This lot's in the R2 district. If they were to do a lot line adjustment between two, the middle parcel and then the northern parcel, they could meet the minimum standards for a single family
lot in the R2 district. So then they would not be subject to those size limitations of the house, thousand square foot house and whatnot. So, what the property owner has done is they hired a surveyor and figured out a way
to add some property off the rear of the middle lot to give to the northern lot to make the northern lot a conforming lot where it could be conveyed separately by the zoning ordinance.
And because it's already platted property, it's uh allowed to go through the minor subdivision procedure, whereas the city council can wave procedural requirements.
And so if the planning commission is comfortable with this, you could simply tell the council that feel free to approve this. We endorse it. If you think that there's some complications here that require more review,
you could then re recommend to the the city council that a public hearing be held and a more thorough review of it then could happen. Now again, I point out a couple factors
here. Number one, this parcel is a separately it's a separate deed parcel. The other two are together and this third one is separate. So, it does appear that the intent was and had
they done this in the past, they could have built something on this lot and had the property owner uh being a upstanding citizen and checked on it rather than just putting it on the market. Um,
he's going through the proper procedure here whereas somebody cuz it's a separate P a lot of people wouldn't have even known to check on this, right? But Mr. Schwarz, the property owner, he knew enough about these things that he
checked on it. And we went through it with the city attorney and found that our options are number one, we could do this minor subdivision process where he adds some land to the lot to make it a
conforming lot in the R2 district for separate sale. Um or he could go through this other procedure where he comes before the planning commission and you tell them that he can build on it, but that the size of the structure is
limited. The size of the structure is going to be limited because it's in the R2 district anyway. There's a max impervious surface. They're going to have to meet the standards. As you can see from the buildable footprint area on the lot, it's got a space for a house that meets your standards. Mhm.
>> I mean, with it like we're talking like inches. >> Yeah. >> And it has a spot for a garage. It >> And so it meets your standards cuz keep in mind, like it or not, in the R2 district, minimum lot width for a single family
lots 40 ft. >> Yeah. >> So, I got a question on that because, okay, this is at the end of the block, right? >> It's um not at the end. It's see there's this block has an alley that's like a T shaped.
>> So it's next to the alley. >> Well, okay. So, okay. It's at the end of that. So, my question is is does that not count as a corner lot because it's at the end? >> No, because it's adjacent to an alley,
not a street. Corner is only street. So, so his setback to the alley is 10 ft, not the 30 ft that it would be if it were >> because it's it's got a street on one side, but then alleyway on two sides. Right. >> Right. >> Okay.
So be because it's in the alley, he can qu if this were on a corner lot, we wouldn't be having this discussion because it wouldn't be able to it would be extraordinarily difficult for a lot of 40t wide cuz actually in your zoning
if it's a corner lot, you say it has to be 50 ft wide. >> Yeah. No, that was the reason why I asked the question. And so I guess I was unsure like how do we define what's a corner lot versus not a corner lot, right? Which is I mean cuz you can
look at the you know you can pick up a map and go oh hey look it's at the end and there's corners around it. Right. So >> do we have a definition of what is a corner lot? >> Yeah it's uh when it's two public road
rights of way on one on the front one on the side. There's also a definition of a through lot, which is when you have the street on the back, the street on the front. >> Okay? >> So, um, in this case, it's a it's not a
corner lot because that's an alley. There's a different setback to alleys and so that doesn't impact the property as much. It does squeeze the building pad a little bit because it could have been 5 ft further if this were not an alley on the side.
>> Yeah. And then he's proposing to use the alley for access to the garage. >> Which alley? >> The alley behind. So you'd have to come in. I I suppose they could theoretically put it have it face the alley to the north or the alley
to the east. I mean, they could do it either way, >> right? Cuz the plan shows it could. And and again like the setback on the front I can't remember what they show that being but um >> 10 feet >> 20 >> 20 because you can reduce that front
setback in the R2 district to I believe you don't have to be 20 you could be 15 as well. So they're showing what the maximum setback would be. There's also a minimum setback which is lesser than that. So they could even pull it up a
little bit and still meet code. But as it stands, um, >> so just out of curiosity, what and I don't have my a blowup version and I don't have a my little spy glass here.
What is the distance from the the proposed garage site to the north south running alley? >> 10. I think you're allowed 10 if you're access not accessing off of it, five if you are and they show it as 10 on both.
>> So, >> okay, >> they're showing what the maximum setbacks are at all times. So, the worst case scenario is what they're showing, but there are some additional considerations that they could do >> in their worst case
>> their worst case scenario. Right. >> Right. So it is a smaller lot and you know but that is what we allow because commissioners this is what the plat of this area was originally like and the
zoning reflects that. It allows people to build down to the original plat. It doesn't force them to go to higher standards. But he's, you know, and also like if somebody were to buy this lot and want to build something
that doesn't meet the setbacks, I mean, we'd probably be sitting here saying, "Well, guys, we told you that this was a tight lot and you knew that there were going to be these issues." So, I mean, you'd be in you'd be on solid ground to like push
back on any variances here cuz it is what it is. I mean, if you're going to make a lot this small, I mean, again, the lot already exists. They're just looking for endorsement that it's a buildable lot. And we're telling them it is, but you got to add some square footage to it to meet the
minimum lot size. And then it's a conforming lot. So with that, I mean, I think what you have here, while it may look odd compared to especially the lots that you have on the east side of town,
on the east side of the railroad tracks, again, this is on the west side of the railroad tracks where some of the lots are smaller, >> right? >> And you push the garages to the back on that side, too. Like that's where we have either have to have the garage behind the house or it has to be
sideloaded in that area. So it fits with the standards that you guys came up with for that side of town. And you know, so he could theoretically plat this lot
just as it is there right now. And so it does meet zoning. It's got a separate P. And because of all those factors on a staff level, we think that taking this approach as a minor subdivision
is acceptable in these situations. Had this not been a separately conveyable piece of land that was only caught because the property owner did the amount of due diligence that not a lot of people do, we'd probably be saying
this should go through more of a robust process. But since they can demonstrate conformance and it is a separate P already by adding this land to it to make it meet the minimum standards of the zoning
ordinance for lot area, we feel that that is an acceptable step to take. >> Right. So I mean you're so you're pushing the property line closer to the existing house on the other two lots. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I mean, so there's a I think was it about a 7 and 1 half foot setback
from the main line and 5T from the I mean, you're going to be able to reach out the window and shake hands with each other. Um, >> that's just the setbacks are 5T. >> Yeah, I know. I long arms. Yeah. I mean, uh,
I mean, you know, and it's the thing, you know, I look at, you know, it's mean this there's a lot of tree cover on this lot. Um, this lot also is, you know, across a short alleyway from, you know, three other residences. I mean, it's like I mean just I guess I mean I I mean I don't know
maybe it just building a bare minimumsized house on a little tiny I mean there just seemed to me to be a I'm sure that this is probably a pretty it would be a pretty significant change
to the area again given it's a it's open it's it's a it's it's a wooded area. I mean, it I'm guessing that the the neighbors probably are accustomed to not having a big house like right up against the alleyway. Um
I don't know. >> Well, I mean, your zoning ordinance allows lots this size, this width, >> and he's adding property to the lot to make it conform. um your alternative would be that you I
mean I don't know how you would in the end like at the end outcome of this it'd be difficult to deny this without doing a moratorum and changing your zoning standards to be bigger. It's just the
nature of the lot. Um but you know I guess we got two facts at play here that are things that the commission needs to look at. number one is the minor subdivision procedure which he's seeking which doesn't require a
public hearing and number two the actual outcome of this and as I stated number one on a staff level we feel that he's crossing that threshold because it is a separate PI parcel anyway just happens
to be owned in common thus requiring this action to take to correct that. If somebody else had this lot, they'd be arguing that it's buildable and it would have a good argument even though it didn't meet the minimum lot area because it meets the width and
it should be an existing lot. But since it's owned in common, he's taking the chunk of land out of the middle lot, adding it to this lot to make it meet the minimum lot area, which then
meets the zoning standards. So based on those factors, uh it appears that this would be something that could be approved as a minor subdivision and that the argument would be that
again it's an existing separate P of land that Mr. Schwarz bought with the other properties. And so because he owns them in common, he's got to take this step and he's correcting the lot area standard, which is better. It's the
minimum lot standard. Somebody could buy a block in this part of town and chop them into these 40s that are this little bit over 5,000 square ft. The edges just have to be 50. And it'd meet it'd meet zoning. I mean, people typically don't
do that because like I was saying about the garage rules in this area, if you don't have a functioning alley, >> you can't you silo. >> Yeah, you can do a silo. Yeah. >> Yeah. You can't It doesn't work. But if you have an alley, it does work. And in
this case, he does. So, >> um, did they want to speak on this one? >> No. Uhuh. Just on Third Street in general. >> Oh. Do we have a opportunity for generalized commentary? We could create one >> adaptation for it. You're as chairman,
you can open up for commentary. >> Well, let's let's knock this one out first. Um, >> I hear what you're saying, which is this is might be one of those ones where you don't we don't have a lot of options or choices where it might be sort of a it
would be a it would be a very reluctant recommendation from me. I I just uh I I'm not a big fan of these kinds of really small lot houses. Um I grew up in South St. Paul. I mean I mean the lot I
mean they were like postage stamps. >> Mhm. >> And when I say you could reach out your window and shake hands with your neighbor, >> I'm not exaggerating. You could literally do that. And so um and I get for the particular area um maybe it's uh
conforming but I I'm like I said it'll I mean at this point I guess it' be up to somebody to make a motion and that you know to basically decide whether or not we want to send it to city council with our recommendation or for approval or
not with um the caveats of following the setbacks. and all the engineer or the city engineer sort of uh recommendations as in your staff comments in your letter, but um yeah, it's uh it may be a reluctant yes
for me, I >> don't know how everybody else feels. I mean, that's >> Are there public utilities there? I know on Fifth Street and kind of Fourth Street >> it cuts off. I'm going to get the crossroad wrong, but I know in Fourth and Fifth Street there are no public utilities on one or two of the blocks.
Isn't that part of your recommendation that they got to pull in utilities? Yeah. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> So if >> if the utilities are difficult to put in, I mean, that's >> Yeah. >> I mean, >> that's the homeowner's issue. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. That >> Well, it may be cost prohibitive. I
mean, right. I mean, sure, that's the point. >> Could be. >> Right now, they're just trying to get through the first step. And he's doing he's following the process. He's trying to do the right thing. So, >> and the final lot size will be 5600 square ft. >> Yep. Okay. >> So, he had to increase
>> y >> the area of the lot because of the alley. The way that the alley shape is, it chops off the corner of the lot. So, it doesn't meet >> what >> I didn't write the R2 ordinance. Full disclosure, it was something that was
written shortly before I arrived on the scene. It was in relationship to the um like the last comp plan we did was the 2040 comp plan. It was something from the 2030 comp plan where they came up with this and they came up with these
standards and they c they made the the R2 district was originally called the southwest area residential district if you remember that and they what they did was they were trying to come up with a way to default to the original plat. So that they did was they looked at what
the lot sizes in the plat were. But for some reason, this one lot doesn't meet the original plat standards, which is a extreme anomaly, which is why he has to add some property to it to make it meet that standard. Um, you guys were
involved with refining that zoning district and renaming it and we fixed some of the things that weren't working with it by practice. you know, you come up with these ideas and concept and when some things happen and we talked about having another discussion on some of
these standards related to the garages in the future because people get confused by that standard, but >> or people want to build them in their front yard, which happened last year, which I to this day um boggles my mind how that one happened, but yeah. Yeah.
people want to put them in the front and if they aren't allowed to do that unless it's side loaded >> then you I mean I think we have a standard that says if the ones on either side of you are front facing then you
can be too but if it's not you can't and so there's people who may have that condition but they're rare >> or it or or there's a setback variable too where depend how far back everybody else is. Yes. >> You don't want yours too far out or too far back because then it looks
>> you can be within the line of the two on either side of you or that >> range that I was talking about earlier. So it's it's a zoning district that is a little complicated but it it was created for a purpose and the purpose was to allow more housing in that side of town
because as uh Ethan was not noting there are areas where the utilities are kind of spotty in that part of town. So to make it worth putting in the infrastructure, sometimes you need to create more units. So that was the intent behind it and it's worked pretty
well. But this lot's an anomaly because it should have met the original plat standard. So somebody back in 1882 really screwed up. >> All right. >> Well, I mean I guess at this point is so
it's not we don't have to have a public hearing. So, it would be up to somebody to make a motion on whether or not to recommend this to the city council. >> I'll make that motion. >> Okay, >> I'll second. >> Okay, so we got a first and a second on a recommendation for the city council to
accept um the applicants application particularly concerning the um sure I'm saying it right. Right. It's the minor subdivision. So,
and again, subject to the comments and subject to all the setback performance standards in the zoning ordinance and the comments of the city engineer. That being the motion, all those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed?
None opposed. So, the motion carries for recommendation to the city council. And we do have somebody who came in who wanted to make some public comments. There's not typically a section in the
agenda for that. But um as a chair, I'll make a motion to open up the m the meeting for some public comments. If anybody would care to second that motion. >> Second. >> So we'll take a vote. So all those in favor of opening up the planning
commission meeting for some public comments, say I. I. I. Any opposed? There are no opposed. Therefore, if is it Mr. Matter? >> Yes. >> So, Mr. Matter, if you would like to come forward, state your name and address for the record and we'll be
happy to hear some of your comments. >> Uh, which one? That one? >> Right there. Yes, there at the podium. >> Uh, Gene Matter, 1133 Marshall Avenue, St. Paul Park. Um, I know you've probably heard this before. Um,
I know the first completion of Third Street was ridiculous, but um, I'm glad to see they're making it a little better. I just saw that in the paper. Um, um,
I didn't think they went far enough, but um, I'd like a few questions here. Um, I was doing some research on the streets. Uh, the St. Paul Park have three different classifications of streets,
arterial, residential, and I thought there was a third one. This was I was reading some of the ordinances. So, there are different streets that have different classifications, which is like how often they need to be fixed,
like how much weight they can bear. Um, so there are different classifications. I don't know off the top of my head how many different classifications. I I like I say, I thought there was three. And I mean, you know, it'd be arterial would be the, you know, like the main streets, you know, like >> I live on Lincoln, so that that's a
really busy street. It's >> it's um a matter of fact, it was just the last time I think they was redone was 20 years ago, just before I moved in. >> Well, I mean, to me, Third Street was always a >> a main drag and Hastings Avenue and uh Broadway and uh the next one up would be
Pullman, I guess, in my book. But okay, I was just >> So, were you able to watch the last city council meeting where they had the the they were they had some conversations about the the construction that's going on? >> No, I I I missed that. That was probably last year when you guys were planning it all. And I was totally unaware till they
started ripping it up and then when you know when they finished it, it's like wow. Didn't you guys at this last correct recent meeting had >> they're talking about making some adjustments to the width and to the um the path and so they're looking at
making some >> costneutral changes to >> Yeah, I just read that in the paper where they're going to make each lane a foot wider and and shorten up the uh sidewalks. >> Yeah, correct. Uh who's who does the inspection final inspection on that
project when it's done >> is does Ruma or is it No um River uh >> I don't know >> not Rum River >> Rum River not >> Rum River do that I don't >> No they do the house I know they do >> they do house inspections because they
did my chimney but >> okay >> I didn't know if they did street projects >> that one I don't know who would be the final inspection. I I mean I if you ever drive down there, it almost looks like the first section,
it almost looks like that asphalt's the final final um >> final layer >> lay, >> right? >> But it's it looks terrible. >> I don't think it's the final layer. >> Yeah. So, if I could speak to that. >> Yeah, absolutely. um they haven't put on
the the top layer yet and I'm kind of a little bit aware because my son does paving. >> So those are the I don't for better lack of term the kind of the base >> layer and then they have a finish layer >> and they put that slight ramp on the edge so the plows don't tear up the
cement before they get that final layer put in. >> I think they'll actually go in and mill that down so they >> Okay. Yeah, that's what I assume. Kind of mill that crown down. Yeah, >> cuz I mean if you look at the edge where the asphalt meets the concrete, it's it's even. It's >> Yeah,
>> it almost looks final. Um then I guess I don't know if you guys probably took care of it, but um well, I mean that's just an observation, but I would say part of that sidewalks
on private property. So did you guys get a consent? >> So these are questions that are probably above our pay grade at the because these are things that we pro like that plan and the final engineering and designing that's not necessarily something that we
would have had input on. Um that might be a great question for a night when the project manager whatever was coming back in. Um or that might be a great question to give to Hugo or to the mayor because those are things that we just simply
don't have the ability to answer tonight. >> Well, I mean, the reason I noticed it is I go to the post office maybe twice a week. >> Mhm. >> And when you're walking up there, there is the the water shut off right on the
sidewalk as you walk in, which I assume is on the property line. I don't know. I mean, it might be within It's probably within the >> Not always. >> Not always. >> Yeah. Oh, >> because I do know public works is moving >> some things around. Yeah. And that's why we had to wait uh to figure out where uh
the movement was going to take place. That twoft, >> right? Cuz they need to know the the street width because if they're laying if they're they're laying fire the hydr hydrants and they're laying all that stuff there, they're going to need to know where that stuff's going to be. and and and a lot of this stuff is I mean it may be private property but some
of this might be in the the right of way that the city might have the ability to you know go into the right of way and make adjustments or do what they want in the right of way. So yes, >> it's private, but that doesn't mean that the homeowner necessarily controls what happens.
>> Oh, well the reason I it I spotted it right away is you know like in front of your house uh when they redid Marshall >> Mhm. >> the shut off is let's say eight feet from the curb. >> And that's kind of the property line. You know, if they're going to turn your
water off, they >> Yeah, they have access to it. >> And well, I mean, if I just It just struck me as odd because the concrete goes two f two feet past the water shut off.
So, that would be I assume that was just private property, but like I say, it just caught my eye. >> And I don't know when the next time the they're they're having an update on the on the construction for the for Third Street. So, you might want to keep an eye on the city website.
>> Well, >> look at the agenda. No, I mean, these are no great questions, great observations. We're just not the people that are best equipped to answer or to respond to what you're saying. Well, I guess I was
assuming, you know, you guys approved the plan from the engineer and then it went to the council, so then it was approved by them. So, but >> as far as like the final engineering like the and like the real details on that stuff, that's stuff that that's >> Oh, you don't see that? >> That would be stuff that's >> public works commission.
>> Oh, yeah. >> Oh. Oh, okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Well, thank you. >> No, but thank you for stopping. Okay. So, um on the agenda, we have no any new business anybody wants to bring up.
Um no unfinished business. So, I'd be looking for a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll make that motion. >> Second. >> All those in favor of adjourning say I. I. Any opposed? We stand adjourned. Thank you.