HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 06/12/2023ANNOTATED AGENDA
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner
RE: Planning Commission Meeting for Monday, June 12, 2023 _______________________________________________________________________________ Monday, June 12, 2023 7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE- ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Move to approve the agenda. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MONDAY, MAY 22, 2023. MOTION: Move to approve the Planning Commission minutes dated May 22, 2023. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CODE AMENDMENT FOR A FLEX SERVICE ZONING DISTRICT Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to the creation of a Flex Service zoning district.
MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing. MOTION 2: Move to approve ordinance amending City Code Chapter 11, creating a Flex
Service zoning district as represented in the June 12, 2023 staff report. B. CODE AMENDMENT FOR PARKING REGULATIONS Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating Parking regulations MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing.
MOTION 2: Move to approve ordinance amending City Code Chapter 11, relating to Parking regulations as represented in the June 12, 2023 staff report.
ANNOTATED AGENDA June 12, 2023
Page 2 VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT
VII. MEMBERS’ REPORT VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Move to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting.
AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, June 12, 2023 - 7:00 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS:
John Kirk, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Carole Mette, Robert Taylor, Daniel Grote, Frank Sherwood, Charles Weber, Phou Sivilay STAFF MEMBERS: Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner; Carter Schulze, City Engineer; Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -- ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
IV. MINUTES
A. Approval of the Planning Commission Meeting minutes dated May 22, 2023.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CODE AMENDMENT FOR A FLEX SERVICE ZONING DISTRICT
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to the creation of a Flex Service zoning district. B. CODE AMENDMENT FOR PARKING REGULATIONS Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to Parking regulations VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT
VII. MEMBERS’ REPORTS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, MAY 22, 2023 7:00 PM—CITY CENTER Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Frank Sherwood, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Carole Mette, Robert Taylor, Dan Grote, Charles Weber; Phou Sivilay
CITY STAFF: Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner; Rod Rue, City Engineer; Matt Bourne, Parks & Natural Resources Manager; Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Chair Pieper called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL
All commission members were present.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Taylor moved, seconded by Kirk to approve the agenda as amended to
consider Item VB first, then Item VA and Item VC. MOTION CARRIED 9-0.
IV. MINUTES
MOTION: Grote moved, seconded by Weber to approve the minutes of May 8, 2022.
MOTION CARRIED 9-0.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. BAKER ROAD ASSISTED LIVING (2023-02) Request for:
• Guide Plan Change from Office to Medium High Density Residential on 3.79 acres
• PUD Concept Plan Review on 3.79 acres
• PUD District Review with waivers on 3.79 acres
• Zoning Change from Office to RM-2.5 on 3.79 acres
• Site Plan Review on 3.79 acres
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 22, 2023
Page 2
Eric Reinerson, Principal at SRA, displayed a PowerPoint and detailed the
application. This was a unique reuse of the southwest quadrant of Highway 62
and Baker Road, with industrial uses to the west, Lifetime Fitness to the east, and a townhouse association to the south. This 1990s building had been built as an office, and was underutilized. The site had great potential so the parcel would be repositioned as an assisted living facility. It was wooded and well screened from
the highway. There was a wetland on the east boundary and all setbacks were met.
A low-lying area to the northwest and the hills to the west and south contributed to the natural, wooded atmosphere. Phase One would be the renovation and remodeling of the existing structure for 31 assisted living residents. A commercial kitchen, dining and group activity spaces, leisure activity spaces, and occupancy
rooms would be added. In the future the owner would wish to expand this
building. Reinerson displayed the addition with extended west and south of the existing building. It would contribute an additional 81 units along with the requisite parking. Reinerson displayed the elevations and materials, which were similar to the original materials of the current building. He explained the grading
and drainage improvements as well as the access changes. The landscape plan met
all tree replacement requirements. Where the perimeter hills dipped allowed for a pleasant view but the development would be scantly visible to neighbors, as well as a low-noise, low-traffic development.
Farr asked if the shared access could handle increased traffic during holidays, and
suggested a parking agreement with the 6200 building to accommodate this. Reinerson agreed to suggest this to the property owner. Farr asked if the receiving dock was for maintenance purposes and Reinerson replied it was for kitchen deliveries, whereas residents would be brought to the main entrance.
Mette asked if the residents would share bathrooms. Reinerson replied they did, but did not have to go through a public corridor to access it. The residents would all have private suites with a shared bathroom.
Barnhart presented the staff report. Four waivers were being requested among the
five actions. Waiver from the covered parking requirement was supported for this development, since residents don’t drive and most traffic would come from relatives and visitors. The barrel roof was added at staff’s suggestion to mimic the original design, requiring the height waiver, and the parking island at the
southwest corner of the building would be partly paved to accommodate a sidewalk and ADA ramp. The project met the landscaping requirements with tree replacement as part of Phase Two. Most of the vegetation along the south side would be kept to provide screening. A neighborhood meeting held in March and other outreach yielded no comments. Staff recommended approval.
Mette asked what zoning allowed such density, and Barnhart replied there were none; TOD and Mixed Use allowed for higher density, with 17.04 being the highest. Mette replied she was surprised there was not a higher maximum density
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 22, 2023
Page 3
requirement for a multifamily zoning district. She asked for and received
confirmation the development entitlement extended into perpetuity. Barnhart
explained any rules changes could trigger a PUD amendment. Mette asked if a previous similar developments required covered parking. Barnhart replied he did not believe there had been a formal waiver for covered parking but the plan was approved without covered parking. Mette noted there were different levels of
assisted living, and asked if memory care would depart from other requirements
of other kinds of assisted living. Barnhart replied the City was drafting requirements for the different levels of assistance (independent living, assisted living, memory care, et cetera). Kirk stated these three categories were familiar to him, and in other developments these could be mixed, complicating the
requirements. He stated he supported the waivers. Mette replied this dedicated
property was easier to address, but other developments could have different care levels that changed over time. Mette asked what the “elderly waiver” affordability category was. Barnhart
replied it related to how this project was funded, how the tenant accessed the
property, the tenant’s incomes, and what proportion of their rent was aided by the services they received. He offered to provide additional information to the City Council upon its review of this project.
Farr asked if the landscaping required the removal of significant or heritage trees.
Bourne replied perhaps one heritage tree would be removed in Phase One, and the replacement requirement was being met for Phase Two (36 trees, nonheritage). Farr asked for and received clarification the size of the tree was determined at the time of the approval of the application. Farr asked why screening was required
between residential districts. Barnhart replied it was due to the density of the
neighboring developments to the south. Farr asked if the moving van would block the circular fire lane. Barnhart replied this concern had not been raised during project review. The existing parking lot would be retained during Phase One and changed in Phase Two. He offered to alert the Fire Chief. Farr stated the two-story
addition was disproportionate with the existing four-story building. Also, the
materials did not match since the addition had a cornice but the original building did not. He suggested an addition more in keeping with the original design. MOTION: Grote moved, seconded by Taylor to close the public hearing. Motion
carried 9-0. Mette stated the architecture was her main concern, but was not able to get specific as to why this was not what she expected. She supported the waivers.
Kirk stated his support for the project. He added he was surprised Eden Prairie has a lot of assisted living but there was high demand. This was a good location, yet the architecture was a difficult question, as Farr and Mette had stated. In
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 22, 2023
Page 4
general the rules produced good results and he proposed going ahead with this
development despite its incongruities.
Grote stated the residents would be looking out at a wonderful view, which overruled the concerns about the exterior architecture. Farr agreed, and stated he trusted staff to work with the applicant on a development that had so many good
points in addition to the building design.
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Sherwood to recommend approval of the Guide Plan Change from Office to Medium High Density Residential on 3.79 acres; a PUD Concept Plan Review on 3.79 acres; a PUD District Review with
waivers on 3.79 acres; a Zoning Change from Office to RM-2.5 on 3.79 acres;
and a Site Plan Review on 3.79 acres, as represented in the staff report dated May 22, 2023 and the plans stamp dated April 28, 2023. Motion carried 9-0. B. BUSH LAKE PET HOSPITAL (2023-04)
Request for:
• Zoning Change from Office (OFC) to neighborhood Commercial (N-COM) on 1.19 acres
• PUD Concept Review on 1.19 acres
• PUD Review with waivers on 1.19 acres
• Site Plan Review on 1.19 acres
Michael Kohne of Highland Ventures, LTD, detailed the application. The proposed development was a 5,074 square foot, single-story building, which would divide 3,958 square feet for the hospital and 1,015 square feet for other commercial space. This was a vet relocation from Bloomington. There would be
no overnight boarding of pets with the exception of surgical patients.
The zoning was currently office, and the proposed change was to PUD guided commercial. The site had an unusual lot shape bounded by Hennepin Town Road and Highway 169 which resulted in design challenges that required waivers. The
landscape material, water and sewer met requirements. There were a number of
sustainable elements, including one conduit with a pole wire for EV charging in the parking lot. The anticipated start date was July 1, 2023 with a projected completion date of
January 1, 2024.
There was no shoreline and the site did not abut any water, so the flood plain Ordinance did not apply. Kohne displayed a PowerPoint and detailed the stormwater management plan with the stormwater retention system beneath the
parking lot.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 22, 2023
Page 5
Dr. Douglas Gates of Bush Lake gave a brief history and overview of the pet
hospital. Kohne displayed some renderings showing the elevation and materials.
Residents attending the neighborhood meeting had concerns about traffic but were in general supportive of the project. Sivilay asked for and received confirmation there was space between this site with
its fence and the access to the Kinderbury Hill PUD development. There would be
some vegetative screening with trees. Mette noted the retail parking was 5 spaces per 1,000 and asked if the remaining vacant space would be sufficient for the neighboring tenant. She asked what kind
of tenant the applicant was considering. Kohne did not have a specific answer but
stated the intent was to avoid filling the retail space with a high-traffic tenant (a coffee shop, et cetera), but perhaps with light retail use. Mette suggested the main landscaping island in front of hospital entrance have plantings that would survive dogs’ uses of that area. Kohne replied the rear left corner had a 10- by 15-foot
fenced in area for animals to use the restroom while on leash.
Farr suggested the EV ready accommodation have panel boards and transformers of sufficient size that could handle the additional load. He also suggested the trash enclosure be rotated 90 degrees so that the gate would open to the right (south)
and keep the doors out of public sight. He noted an opportunity for signage on the
site alongside the northbound Highway 169 frontage road and stated the tenant might request that, so the parapet should be kept at a consistent height to facilitate this and screen the mechanical units.
Taylor stated he had met with staff at the neighboring daycare center who were
concerned about sharing the parking lot. Kohne replied there was the intention to include speed bumps but this plan was not that granular. Barnhart presented the staff report. The site was currently vacant and the
applicant was seeking four actions: a zoning change from Office to Neighborhood
Commercial; a PUD Concept Review; a PUD Development District Review with waivers; and a Site Plan Review. The zoning change to Neighborhood Commercial required a waiver due to the existing lot size and depth, and this change was the best fit for the neighborhood and was supported by staff. Nothing
about the lot was changing. The setback and materials requirement were met and exceeded in this application. The access was through a shared parking easement and staff thought this connection was effective in reducing trips on Hennepin Town Road. Four parking spaces would be provided for the neighboring childcare service providing the connection. Staff recommended approval.
Mette asked if the connection had previously gone through the PUD process and wondered why it was not going through this process now. Barnhart stated this site
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 22, 2023
Page 6
had intended to be an office, but since it had never gone through the PUD process
to be rezoned as office, it was not required for this application.
Alicia Reeves, resident at 9673 Belmont Lane, stated she was speaking on behalf of a group that fully supported the hospital development but was concerned about the traffic on Hennepin Town Road. She requested the speed limit be reduced
from 45 miles per hour on the approach to the site and 40 miles per hour around
the corner along it. She also wished to hear the details about the connection with the childcare center, and suggested speed bumps and “child at play” signs. Jerry Maher, resident at 9778 Belmont Lane, stated at the exit on Belmont Lane
the next car in sight would be 112 feet to the north (three seconds at 45 miles an
hour), placing the onus upon the driver leaving Belmont Lane to change lanes or stop in time due to oncoming traffic. That was the reason for the request to lower the speed limit; however, increasing the sightline from Belmont Lane to Linden by cutting foliage would restore the street to how it looked 20 years ago at the
formation of the association which owned the land on the west side of Belmont
Lane. This was a protected wetland, so there were limitations on what could be cut. Concerned neighbors were meeting with the Traffic Engineer to brainstorm ideas. If the sightline could not be increased, the speed limit needed to be reduced and/or flashing signs need to be installed.
MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Taylor to close the public hearing. Motion carried 9-0. Kirk noted this was a difficult property for any design and found the plan to be a
good use of it. Traffic movement inside and outside of the property were the main
issues. Rue stated there were a few roads in Eden Prairie that were being reviewed for speed limits, and Hennepin Town Road was one of them. A traffic study would be required to reduce the speed limit. Enforcement was always an issue, and expansion of the sightlines was a viable option. Kirk noted there were already
meetings with the Traffic Engineer on this issue.
Mette agreed this was an important issue and wished the City Council to hear these concerns. Overall she found this site appropriate for the zoning change to Neighborhood Commercial and found the internal connection a good solution.
Farr also expressed support for the development and hoped the issue of traffic on Hennepin Town Road would be resolved in a broader discussion. He stated he could make a motion that included the condition of rotating the trash enclosure 90 degrees and raise the parapet wall on the east elevation to accommodate signage. Barnhart replied the section of the building over 20 feet tall would be considered a
second floor, which would require the applicant to come back and process a waiver at that time. Mette stated she would not support a future possible waiver that was part of a motion. She found that overly restrictive. Rather, the property
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 22, 2023
Page 7
owner could consult with the trash provider to provide a flexible solution. Farr
offered to make recommendations instead. Kirk concurred.
MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Kirk to recommend approval for a Zoning Change from Office (OFC) to neighborhood Commercial (N-COM) on 1.19 acres; a PUD Concept Review on 1.19 acres; a PUD Review with waivers on 1.19
acres; and a Site Plan Review on 1.19 acres as represented in the staff report dated
May 22, 2023 and based on plans stamp dated May 20, 2023 with the further recommendation for staff to study the orientation of the trash enclosure and the height of the east building wall in relation to the highway. Motion carried 9-0.
C. KIWATCHI (2022-11) Request for:
• Zoning Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 2.11 acres
• Preliminary Plan of four lots and three outlots on 2.11 acres Craig Schmidt, resident of Eden Prairie, introduced Todd McLouth, project engineer. Schmidt displayed a PowerPoint and detailed the application. The site
would be converted to four lots, one retained by Schmidt for his family. He displayed arial photographs and explained the site plan. Neighbors to the north would be sold 10-foot outlots and Outlot A would be deeded to the City, since it bordered a wetland. The current house would be demolished and replaced, and three lots would be sold. The proposal was consistent with the neighborhood. The
project would be completed by 2024. Sivilay asked if Schmidt had estimates for remediation of the contamination noted in the environmental study. Schmidt replied he had not, but would receiving bidding estimates once ready. Taylor remarked this project would be an upgrade
to the community. Farr also commended the project, and received clarification the northern neighbors had always expressed interest in acquiring more land, which Schmidt had given them as a neighborly gesture. Pieper asked for and received clarification this was for additions.
Mette noted to the east there was another property almost as large, and asked if
there was consideration of continuation with this neighboring lot. Schmidt replied that land was deeded to the City of Eden Prairie as wetland. Barnhart presented the staff report. All of the lots met minimum size and depth
requirements. The lot deeded to the City would have stormwater management.
Staff had received no comments from the public on this proposal. Payment would cover the deficit of trees added to the development (92 instead of 109 trees). Staff recommended approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 22, 2023
Page 8
Farr asked for and received clarification the sidewalk was on the east side of the
development (Duck Lake Road).
Mette asked if a new homeowner wishing to building a home would not need to go through the Planning Commission again, and Barnhart replied that was true. She asked how the City determined who installed the trees. Barnhart replied that
would either be completed before construction, or it would be written into the
development agreement. MOTION: Grote moved, seconded by Taylor to close the public hearing. Motion carried 9-0.
Kirk commended the addition as a good use of the land. Weber agreed this would be a marked improvement. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Grote to recommend approval of the
Zoning Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 2.1 acres; and a Preliminary Plan of four
lots and three outlots on 2.11 acres as represented in the staff report May 22, 2023 and on the plans stamp dated May 5, 2023. Motion carried 9-0. PLANNERS’ REPORT
MEMBERS’ REPORTS Pieper announced this was Rod Rue’s last meeting prior to retirement, and congratulated him for 43 years of service at Eden Prairie.
VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Sherwood moved, seconded by Grote to adjourn. Motion carried 9-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:33 p.m.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sarah Strain, Planner II
DATE: June 12, 2023 SUBJECT: Code Change – City Code Chapter 11, creating a Flex Service zoning district
BACKGROUND
The Comprehensive Plan, ASPIRE 2040, established a Flex Service land use category with the intent to provide for a mix of differing but compatible land uses that would not be permitted or are difficult to integrate into Transit Oriented (TOD) or Town Center (TC) zones. ASPIRE 2040 identified two (2) areas for this potential zoning district, circled in red in the pictures below. Most of the properties
identified and guided for Flex Service are along Martin Drive, which was subject to a Special Study
area in ASPIRE 2040. A handful of parcels at the intersection of Pioneer Trail and Pioneer Trail have also been identified, which includes the Caliber Collision parcel.
OBJECTIVES The Flex Service zoning district is intended to provide flexibility and incentives for redevelopment or reinvestment on the property without loss of existing rights and opportunities provided by current
city code. Currently, all the parcels guided for Flex Service are zoned Industrial. All of the existing
uses on these properties will be permitted uses in the Flex Service zoning district or have been approved though a Planned Unit Development. The incentives for redevelopment include reduced setbacks and lot standards, and flexible architectural standards and parking requirements. PROPOSED CODE CHANGES
Following is a summary of the proposed ordinance, by subdivision. Permitted Uses (Subd. 2) The table below compares the proposed uses that would be permitted in the Flex Service zoning
district with the C-Reg-Ser commercial district and Industrial zoning districts. The intention is to
Staff Report – Flex Service
June 12, 2023 Page 2
2
permit all existing uses on properties guided Flex Service and to allow certain commercial uses to
expand opportunities on these sites.
Permitted Use Flex Service (proposed) C-REG-SER Industrial
Commercial
Retail Sales and Services
Up to 100% GFA for properties
fronting principle arterial;
Up to 25% GFA for all other properties;
Automotive supportive sales up to
100% on all FS properties
Yes Up to 15% GFA
Day Care Facilities No Yes No
Small Brewer with Taproom Yes Yes Yes
Micro-Distillery Yes Yes Yes
Gasoline/convenience stores No Yes No
Automotive Repair, Minor Yes Yes Yes
Automotive Repair, Major Yes No Yes
Office
Business and Professional Offices Up to 15% GFA Yes Up to 50% GFA
Industrial
Gymnasium Yes No Yes
Manufacturing Yes No Yes
Warehousing Yes No Yes
Processing Yes No Yes
Wholesaling Yes No Yes
Distribution Yes No Yes
Packaging Yes No Yes
Assembly Yes No Yes
Compounding Yes No Yes
Showrooms Yes No Yes
Funeral Homes Yes No Yes
Commercial Kennels No No Yes
Sexually oriented businesses No No Yes
Public Infrastructure
Antennas & Towers, as accessory use Yes Yes Yes
Public Infrastructure Yes Yes Yes
Transit Facilities Yes Yes Yes
Staff Report – Flex Service
June 12, 2023 Page 3
3
Required Conditions (Subd. 3)
The purpose of the required conditions is to highlight the Martin Drive Special Area Study that was
conducted and approved as part of ASPIRE 2040. This study and required conditions focus on streetscaping and sidewalks to create a more cohesive area than current conditions. It also clarifies that all permitted uses must be conducted within a building except for patios related to taprooms, cocktail rooms, or other restaurant uses.
Building Bulk and Dimension Standards (Subd. 4) The proposed ordinance was developed to avoid creating additional non-conformities. As shown below, the proposed lot standards for Flex Service are less restrictive than the current Industrial zoning and is overall more flexible than the C-Reg-Ser zoning district.
Standard Flex Service (Proposed) C-REG-SER I-2 Park I-5 Park
Lot Size 15,000 sq ft 10,000 sq ft 2 acres 5 acres
Lot Width 100 ft. min. 80 200 300
Lot Depth 150 ft. min. 100 300 300
Front Yard Setback 20 (ft) 35 50 75
Side Yard Setback 10 (ft) 20 20 30
Rear Yard Setback 15 (ft) 10 25 25
Maximum Building Height 40 (ft) 40 40 40
Maximum FAR 0.3 1 Story 0.5 Multi story
0.2 1 Story 0.4 Multi story
0.3 1 Story 0.5 Multi story
0.3 1 Story 0.5 Multi story Performance Standards (Subd. 5) All new development, redevelopment, and subdivisions within the Flex Service district must comply with architectural standards established in Section 11.03, which is discussed more below.
Sites must also comply with all other requirements of Chapter 11, including but not limited to
parking, landscaping, and signage unless otherwise specified. Parking (Subd. 6) Parking is costly item to construct and maintain and may create a barrier in redevelopment, especially if properties do not have the business need for the ratios required in City Code. While
reductions in required parking could be facilitated through Planned Unit Development (PUD) waivers, several of the existing lots are small (less than one (1) acre), increasing the likelihood that several of the properties guided Flex Service would require a waiver for parking standards. The need for a PUD waiver could also be disincentivizing for redeveloping properties. In staff’s research and discussions with metro area and similarly sized communities, reduced or no parking requirements in
industrial areas like the proposed Flex Service district have been well received by both the staff and
Staff Report – Flex Service
June 12, 2023 Page 4
4
business community for on-site flexibility and to ease property redevelopment. Staff’s desire to
create flexibility and incentivize redevelopment led to the proposed parking requirements for the
Flex Service zoning district. As proposed, Flex Service properties will have two (2) options to meet parking requirements; comply to existing City Code requirements based on the site use(s) or comply with a City Council
approved parking plan. To implement a parking plan, the property owner would be required to
submit a parking plan for review including a site plan, list of proposed uses and the square footage each use will occupy, operating hours of uses, typical parking need of uses based on performance at other locations, traffic and parking data from a professional transportation organization or licensed engineer, existing and proposed impervious surface coverage, parking lot islands calculations, snow
storage locations, stormwater management, garbage/recycling locations, and any shared parking or
cross-access easements that exist for the property. All parking plans must include at least five (5) parking stalls that must be screened from the public right-of-way. Staff will review the parking plan and provide a recommendation to City Council. City Council may
approve a reduction of the number of required parking spaces in conjunction with a parking plan
upon a finding that there are no negative impacts on traffic circulation and neighboring properties. The approved parking plan will not subject to the requirements or standards of either a variance or PUD review. As part of an approved parking plan, an agreement between the City and the property owner may be recorded against the property to ensure that additional parking will be provided should
parking needs exceed the provided parking onsite. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities (Subd. 7) The Martin Drive Special Area Study highlighted streetscapes and connectedness of the Flex Service area. Additionally, the regional trail passes by the Martin Drive area on the west side, allowing for
multimodal connections. However, many of the proposed uses in the Flex Service zoning district are
automotive or truck oriented, which may limit the number of bike and walking trips to the area. To balance these conditions, sidewalks will be required to connect main entrances to sidewalks in the public right-of-way, and bicycle parking will be required at one (1) space per 20,000 square feet of industrial or commercial floor area, a significant reduction from required bicycle parking in the
Town Center and Transit Oriented Development zoning districts. For most existing building sizes,
this would be five (5) or fewer bicycle spaces, or one bicycle rack. Architectural Standards (Chap. 11, Section 11.03, Subd. K) The proposed district adopts largely the same Architectural Standards related to roofline variation
and building articulation as found in other industrial districts. Flex Service district proposes an
adjusted approach to the exterior building material requirement to accommodate the range of permitted uses and site varieties. Exterior building materials are proposed to be regulated based on street frontage rather than a per façade basis. The intention is to be both sensitive to current conditions and allow flexibility as sites redevelop or relocate from other locations in the city and to
Staff Report – Flex Service
June 12, 2023 Page 5
5
take industrial uses into account in design requirements.
The image below demonstrates how exterior building materials will be regulated. Façades fronting an arterial roadway (Hwy 5/212), outlined in red below, will be required to meet current commercial architectural standards of 75% Class I/25% Class II materials. Façades fronting other street types (collectors, local streets, etc.), outlined in yellow below, will be required to meet current industrial
architectural standards of 75% Class I/25% Class II materials. The main difference between these
regulations is the materials considered to be Class I; the industrial exterior building material standards considers specially designed precast concrete units and rock face to be Class I materials where these are considered Class II in commercial standards.
For façades without street frontages, outlined in green below, building façades will be required to
have a minimum of sixty percent (60%) Class I materials as defined by industrial standards with two (2) contrasting materials with one (1) color variation therein. The intention is to allow more accommodating design options for “back of house” operations, warehousing, and loading docks.
Signage (Chapter 11, Section 11.70) Signage standards for the Flex Service Zoning District are proposed to be consistent with Industrial districts except for tenant signs. Tenant signs in multi-tenant buildings will be allowed to be up to 15
percent of the wall area the tenant occupies, up to 50 square feet. This is an increase from the 10
percent currently allowed in Industrial districts and aligns with the tenant sign allowance in Commercial districts.
Red = Commercial Standards Yellow = Industrial Standards Green = Flexible
Industrial Standards
Staff Report – Flex Service
June 12, 2023 Page 6
6
PUBLIC OUTREACH
The Flex Service zoning district was shared conceptually with the Chamber of Commerce on May 4,
2023. A draft was posted on the Planning Department’s website. To date, staff has not received comments on the proposed zoning district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the ordinance establishing a Flex Service Zoning District as drafted.
This action creates the Flex Service Zoning District. No properties are rezoned. A rezoning action will be initiated by a property owner as part of a proposal to redevelop their property.
1
FLEX SERVICE DISTRICT 1
Subd. 1. Purpose. The intent of the Flex Service (FS) Zoning District is to provide areas for a 2
variety of compatible land uses outside of the Town Center and Transit Oriented Development 3
districts that create a flexible industrial-commercial environment for the community. The 4
purposes of the Flex Service Zoning District are to: 5
A. Convert areas previously utilized as industrial office hybrid into places with a diverse and 6
innovative mix of uses that are better situated in these areas than in other areas of the 7
City; 8
9
B. Provide alternative locations for businesses that meet auto service-oriented, indoor 10
recreational and amusement, commercial, and light industrial needs that are inconsistent 11
with the goals and visions of Town Center, TOD, and Industrial Flex Tech areas; 12
13
C. Provide opportunities for adaptive reuse of properties that provide a mutually beneficial 14
relationship to land use and community needs; 15
16
D. Provide development opportunities that can be auto service-oriented as well as pedestrian 17
accommodating and complement the scale of surrounding areas; 18
19
E. Provide a mix of uses and a more efficient, compact, and connected development pattern; 20
21
F. Guide future development to provide for and adapt to market and transportation demands; 22
23
Subd. 2. Permitted Uses 24
A. Automotive Repair, Major, when conducted exclusively in an enclosed building. 25 B. Automotive Repair, Minor, when conducted exclusively in an enclosed building. 26 C. Small Brewer with Brewer Taproom 27 D. Microdistillery with Cocktail Room 28
E. Funeral Homes 29
F. Gymnasium 30 G. Retail sales and services 31 a. Properties with frontage along a principal arterial street may utilize up to 100 32 percent of the building’s gross floor area for retail sales and services. 33
b. Properties without frontage along a principal arterial street may utilize up to 25 34
percent of the building’s gross floor area for retail sales and services. 35 c. Automotive supportive sales are permitted on any property in the FS district up to 36 100 percent of the building’s gross floor area. 37 H. Manufacturing 38
I. Warehousing 39 J. Processing 40 K. Wholesaling 41 L. Distribution 42
2
M. Packaging 43 N. Assembly 44
O. Compounding 45
P. Showrooms 46 Q. Business and professional offices, up to 15% of the building’s gross floor area 47 R. Public facilities and services 48 S. Transit facilities 49
T. Antennas and Towers, in those locations and subject to the limitations contained in City 50
Code Section 11.06 51
52 Subd. 3. Required Conditions 53 54
A. Redevelopment shall be in substantial conformance with the Martin Drive Special Area 55
Study. 56 B. Streetscaping must be incorporated to improve the aesthetics and provide cohesiveness. 57 C. Parking structures may not be included in the calculation of number of floors and FAR. 58 D. All permitted uses must be conducted within a building except for patio seating areas 59
associated with taprooms, cocktail rooms, or other restaurant uses. 60
61
Subd. 4. Building Bulk and Dimension Standards. 62
A. The following minimum standards apply in the FS district, unless otherwise noted: 63
Standard FS
Lot Size 15,000 sq ft
Lot Width 100 ft. min.
Lot Depth 150 ft. min.
Front Yard Setback 20 ft
Side Yard Setback 10 ft, both sides
20 ft total
Rear Yard Setback 15 ft
Maximum Building Height 40 ft
Maximum Floor Area Ratio
0.3 - 1 Story
0.5 - Multi story 64
B. The following minimum standards apply for all accessory structures in the FS district: 65
Standard FS
Side Yard Setback 15 feet
Rear Yard Setback 15 feet
Maximum Height 40 feet
3
66
Subd. 5. Performance Standards. 67
All new development, redevelopment, and subdivisions within the Flex Service district must 68
comply with architectural standards established in Section 11.03. Sites must also comply with all 69
other requirements of this Chapter, including but not limited to parking, landscaping, and signage 70
unless otherwise specified in this Section. 71
72
Subd. 6. Off-Street Parking Standards. 73
A. All properties in the FS district must comply with the off-street parking dimensional and 74
location requirements established in Section 11.03. The number of required parking stalls 75
must either comply with parking requirements in Section 11.03 or comply with a parking 76
plan approved through the following review process: 77
1. City Council may approve a reduction of the number of required parking spaces 78
in conjunction with a parking plan upon a finding that there are no negative 79
impacts on traffic circulation and neighboring properties. This approval is not 80
subject to the requirements or standards of either a variance or PUD review. As 81
part of an approved parking plan, an agreement between the City and the property 82
owner may be recorded against the property to ensure that additional parking will 83
be provided should parking needs exceed the provided parking onsite. 84
2. The parking plan must include the following elements: 85
a. At least five (5) off-street parking stalls provided for each property. 86
b. A site plan showing all structures, parking stalls, drive aisles, and parking and 87
structure setbacks. 88
c. Existing and proposed impervious surface coverage. 89
d. Parking lot calculations, including sizes of parking lot islands, percentage of 90
property used for parking, etc. 91
e. Snow storage areas and/or snow removal plan. 92
f. Stormwater management and water resources. 93
g. Garbage, recycling, and organics container locations. 94
h. A list of building uses/users and the area(s) they will occupy in square feet. 95
i. Operating hours of the uses/users, including peak demand 96
j. Typical parking need of the uses/users based on performance at other 97
locations, current site function, etc. 98
k. Traffic and parking data for the proposed use(s) on the site from ITE or other 99
professional transportation organization or licensed engineer. 100
l. Any shared parking or cross-access easements or agreements recorded against 101
the property. 102
m. Other items as may be requested by City staff to provide a thorough review of 103
the site. 104
105
Subd. 7. Pedestrian and Off-Street Bicycle Facility Standards. 106
4
A. Required public sidewalks and/or trails must be constructed in conformance with the 107
Comprehensive Guide Plan and the City’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan. Design must 108
conform to the requirements of the City Engineer and the City Parks and Recreation 109
Director. 110
111
B. An off-street sidewalk or multi-use trail must be provided that connects the front door of 112
principle buildings to adjacent public sidewalks, trails, or other pedestrian areas that are 113
either existing or contemplated in the Comprehensive Guide Plan, an approved City trail 114
plan, or the City’s Capital Improvement Plan. 115
116
C. Off-street bicycle parking must be provided at the following ratios: 117
1. Commercial and industrial uses – 1 space per 20,000 square feet of gross floor area 118
2. Office uses - 1 space per 15,000 square feet of gross floor area. 119
3. Public uses - 5 spaces 120
121
D. Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground and on a hard surface. Required 122
bicycle parking may be seasonal. 123
124
E. Shared Bicycle Parking. Shared off-street bicycle parking facilities may collectively 125
provide bicycle parking for more than one structure or use upon the City’s approval of a 126
shared parking plan and agreement. 127
128
F. All development or redevelopment in the FS district must provide exterior pedestrian 129
furniture in appropriate locations along public trails, sidewalks, and other public 130
gathering areas adjacent to public rights-of-way at a minimum rate of one seat for every 131
ten thousand (10,000) square feet of gross floor area. 132
133
5
Amendments to other sections 134
Text to be added is underlined. 135
To be added to Section 11.02, Definitions: 136
Automotive supportive sales means a retail place of business engaged in supplying goods 137 generally required in the operation and maintenance of automotive vehicles. These may include 138
the sale of tires, batteries, and other readily replaceable or over-the-counter automotive parts; 139
automobile accessories; washing and lubrication materials; and the supplying of other incidental 140 customer services and products. 141
To be added to 11.03, Subd 1. (Table): 142
Flex Service District FS
143
To be added to 11.03, related to Exterior Building Materials; 144 145 3. Exterior Building Materials 146
(d) The following provisions apply in the FS district. 147
(1) A minimum of seventy-five percent, (75%), of each façade of the exterior 148
building finish fronting on an arterial roadway shall consist of at least three (3) 149
contrasting, yet complementary materials, with at least one (1) color variation 150
therein, comparable in grade and quality to the following Class I materials: 151
i. Face brick; 152
ii. Natural stone; 153
iii. Glass; 154
iv. Cast Stone; 155
v. Cultured Stone; 156
vi. Architectural Precast; 157
vii. Precast Concrete Panel with an exposed aggregate of granite, marble, 158
limestone, or other natural stone material with at least two (2) architectural 159
reveals per panel; and 160
viii. Other materials equal to or better than these listed above, submitted with 161
specifications for installation and maintenance per industry standard and 162
as approved by the City Planner. 163
a. If glass is included as one (1) of the two (2) materials, the other 164
material is required to have no less than two (2) distinct color 165
variations. 166
6
b. Use of brick, natural stone, and glass may be considered as one of 167
several grounds upon which the City Council may grant waivers 168
from Exterior Building requirements through the PUD process. 169
c. Thin brick may be used in place of full brick only when it is 170
integrally cast or connected to the substrate with mortar or grout, 171
and not applied post-casting. Thin brick is excluded from the 172
waiver opportunity in section 3(d)(viii)(b). 173
(2) Building façades with street frontage along roadways classified as anything other 174
than arterial may also use the following as Class I materials towards the required 175
seventy five percent (75%) with two (2) contrasting materials with one (1) color 176
variation therein: 177
i. Specially designed precast concrete units if the surfaces have been 178
integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture and 179
smooth concrete block if scored at least twice; 180
ii. Rock face; 181
(3) Building façades not fronting any street shall be required to have a minimum of 182
sixty percent (60%) Class I materials comprised of any combination of the above 183
listed Class I materials with two (2) contrasting materials with one (1) color 184
variation therein. 185
4. Building Articulation. 186 (a) Façade Articulation. Any building façade exceeding forty (40) feet (80 feet in I-2, I-5, I-187
Gen, and FS) in length shall be designed with recesses or a minimum of four (4) inches in 188
depth in the building façade, material changes, or other methods of building articulation that 189 break perceived scale of the building or create visual interest. Rear or side yard dock walls 190 shall be exempt from this provision. 191 192
To be added to 11.03 related to Trash and Recycling 193
11.03, Subd. 3.M – trash and recycling “M. Trash and Recycling. Implementation of a trash 194 enclosure plan shall be required prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for a property 195 located in zoning districts RM 2-5, OFC, I-2, I-5, I-Gen, FS, C-Com, N-Com, C-Reg, C-Reg-196
Ser, C-Hwy, TC, TOD-E, TOD-R, TOD-MU, PUB, GC, A-C and A-OFC. This Section 197
11.03 Subdivision 3.M is applicable to applicable to all properties which have been issued a 198 building permit for new construction after the effective date of the ordinance. 199 200
To be added to 11.70 Subd. 5related to Signs 201
J. Flex Service District: FS 202
7
1. Free-standing Signs. 203
a. A lot or parcel of record having one (1) street frontage may have one (1) free-standing 204
sign not to exceed eighty (80) square feet. 205
b. Where a building site has two (2) or more street frontages, one (1) free-standing sign 206
not to exceed eighty (80) square feet is permitted on one frontage, and the additional 207
frontages are each permitted a free-standing sign not to exceed fifty (50) square feet. 208
Each allowed sign must be located on the street frontage generating the allowance. 209
c. Setback. No sign may be placed closer than ten (10) feet from any public right-of-way 210
line. 211
d. Height. No free-standing sign may exceed eight (8) feet in height. 212
e. Sign Base. The sign base may not exceed one-half (½) the maximum permitted sign 213
area. 214
f. The total sign area of any multi-faced free-standing sign may not exceed twice the 215
permitted area of a single-faced sign. 216
g. Free-standing signs that are double-faced signs must be placed back to back with not 217
more than thirty (30) inches between facings. 218
2. Wall Signs. 219
a. For façades with street frontage, the total wall signage may not exceed eighty (80) 220
square feet. 221
b. For multi-tenant buildings, one (1) wall sign per leasable space attached to the exterior 222
wall of the building at the ground floor is permitted, not to exceed fifteen percent (15%) 223
of the wall area that tenant occupies of the wall to which it is affixed, up to a maximum 224
of fifty (50) square feet. 225
c. Temporary Signs are only permitted as provided in Subdivision 4. 226
d. Sign Design. All signs shall be uniform in design, color, and placement. 227
e. Incidental signs are permitted as provided in Subdivision 4. 228
f. Sandwich board signs are permitted as provided in Subdivision 4. 229
230
To be added to Chapter 9, Subd 5, related to Recyclable Waste Collection 231
Subd. 5. Recyclable Waste Collection—OFC, I-2, I-5, I-Gen, C-Com, N-Com, C-Reg, C-232 Reg-Ser, C-Hwy, TC, TOD, MU and FS. This subdivision is applicable to all properties 233 which have been issued a building permit for new construction after the effective date of the 234
ordinance. Owners, Associations or other management entities for properties located within the 235
OFC, FS, I-2, I-5, I-Gen, C-Com, N-Com, C-Reg, C-Reg-Ser, C-Hwy, TC, TOD and MU 236
8
zoning districts shall provide to all occupants services for the Collection of Recyclable Waste 237 which accumulates on the premises in accordance with the following provisions: 238
A. Schedule. Collection services must be available on the premises and must be provided on a 239
regularly-scheduled basis. The Owner, Association or management entity may provide the 240 Collection services or may utilize a person licensed pursuant to City Code Section 5.36. 241
B. Recycling Information Required. The Owner, Association or management entity of all 242 properties zoned OFC, I-2, I-5, I-Gen, FS, C-Com, N-Com, C-Reg, C-Reg-Ser, C-Hwy, TC, 243
TOD and MU shall provide notice to the occupants of each unit which provides information on 244
the availability of Collection services, clearly describes and lists the procedures required to 245 prepare the Recyclable Waste for Collection, and identifies the dates and times of Collection. 246
C. Container Requirements. The Owner, Association or management entity of all properties 247 zoned OFC, I-2, I-5, I-Gen, FS, C-Com, N-Com, C-Reg, C-Reg-Ser, C-Hwy, TC, TOD and 248
MU shall provide containers for the Collection of Recyclable Waste and shall maintain the 249
containers in a clean and sanitary condition. The containers shall be sufficient in number and 250 size to meet the demands for recycling services created by the owners or tenants. The Owner, 251 Association or management entity shall replace stolen or broken containers and purchase 252 additional containers as needed. Containers shall be placed in a location on the premises which 253
permits access for Collection purposes but which does not obstruct pedestrian or vehicular 254
traffic and must comply with City Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 3.L. 255
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission FROM: Beth Novak- Krebs, Senior Planner
DATE: June 12, 2023 SUBJECT: Code Amendments – Parking Requirements
BACKGROUND
Staff is recommending amendments to City Code Chapter 11 to address parking requirements for compact parking stalls, shared parking, banks, day care centers, retail and gymnasiums. The intention of these changes is to provide flexibility, streamline the process of allowing shared parking between 2 or more uses, provide requirements that best suit a particular use, scale parking to a
particular use and reflect actual parking ratios and practices in the community.
DISCUSSION For your reference, staff has attached a copy of Section 11.03 H. with the proposed amendments showing with deleted language in red strikethrough and new language in red underline. The redline
version shows how the amendments fit into the overall code section.
Compact Parking Stalls Though requested by property owners, City Code does not allow the use of compact parking stalls. Staff has evaluated the use of compact parking stalls and has found that there are several benefits to
allowing them, including flexibility in the design of parking lots, more parking in smaller spaces,
and more efficient use of space. Staff recommends amending the Code to allow a percentage of the required parking for a property to be compact stalls, (see lines 22 – 28 of the attachment):
Compact Parking Stalls. Up to 10% of the required parking spaces in a parking lot, ramp, or garage may be marked for compact cars and may be counted toward required parking counts,
provided that the applicant meets the following requirements:
(a) All compact stalls must be a minimum of 8’ wide and 16’ in length for 90 degree stalls. For
spaces that are not 90 degree, the most recent standards issued by the Institute of Transportation Engineers will be applied.
(b) Compact stalls must be identified.
(c) All required drive aisles must comply with City Code requirements.
Parking Requirements for Specific Uses Parking Requirements by Use Table The Parking Requirements by Use Table includes a list of uses, for which the City has parking requirements, and the associated requirements for each use. The current table is organized by zoning
Staff Report – Code Amendment – Parking Requirements
June 12, 2023 Page 2
2
district categories (e.g. RM-6.5 and RM-2.5; COMM,A-C; OFC, A-OFC). If a use is permitted in
several zoning districts, then the parking requirement associated with that use must be listed under
each zoning district category. This can be confusing. Finding the parking requirement for a use requires the user to know the zoning of the property, which isn’t always known. Most communities arrange parking requirements by use rather than by zoning district. Staff
recommends deleting the existing table organized by zoning district and replacing it with the table
organized by use categories (e.g. Industrial, Recreational, Retail-Service and Commercial). The proposed table is easier to understand and more user friendly (see new table on pages 4 and 5). Bank Parking
City Code currently requires parking for banks at 6 stalls per 1,000 sf of gross floor area (G.F.A.).
The nature of banking has changed over the years. The use of online banking, direct deposit for payroll checks, and ATM’s has reduced the number of customers that visit a bank. Staff is recommending a reduction in the requirement to 5 parking stalls per 1,000 sf of G.F.A. Many other communities require 4 stalls per 1,000 sf of G.F.A. Although the recommended requirement is not as
low as other communities, it allows some reduction from the current requirement, addresses a
change in parking demand over time and considers the potential of a bank being repurposed, accommodating future uses. The recommendation is based on an effort to right size the parking and reduce nonconformities.
Day Care Center Parking
City Code does not have a specific parking requirement for day care centers. Because the parking needs of a day care center are unique, staff recommends adding a parking requirement that best suits that use. Staff recommends 1 stall per employee on the largest work shift plus 1 stall per company vehicle plus one stall for every 6 children the facility is licensed to care for. Based on the research of
other City Codes, this requirement is very clear, easy to understand and fits this use.
Retail/Shopping Center Parking The current parking requirement for retail stores and shops is 5 stalls per 1,000 sf of G.F.A. The requirement applies to all commercial and retail uses no matter the size of the building. Staff’s research on retail parking requirements indicates that there are some economies of scale when
buildings reach about 30,000 square feet. This research prompted staff to recommend basing the parking requirements on the size of the building. For buildings 30,000 square feet or less in size, staff is recommending a requirement of 5 stalls per 1,000 sf of gross leasable space (G.L.S.) for retail uses. When there are other uses along with retail,
parking would be based on the retail requirement plus parking based on the requirements for those specific uses.
Staff Report – Code Amendment – Parking Requirements
June 12, 2023 Page 3
3
For buildings of 30,001 – 200,000 square feet, staff is recommending a parking requirement of 4.5
stalls per 1,000 sf of G.L.A. Many of the existing commercial buildings in Eden Prairie that are
between 30,001 – 200,000 square feet, have waivers allowing 4.5 parking stalls per 1,000 sf of G.L.A. The parking in these commercial areas seems to function without issues. Since this ratio provides adequate parking in many commercial areas of the City, staff is recommending a change to fit the actual parking ratio in the community. Staff is recommending 4.5 stalls per 1,000 sf of G.L.A.
Buildings in this size range often have many opportunities for shared parking and provide for
multiple shopping opportunities within walking distance of the parking. For buildings over 200,000 square feet in size, staff is recommending 4.25 stalls per 1,000 sf of G.L.A. These larger shopping centers have shared parking and provide for combining shopping
trips.
Covered Parking Current requirements for Nursing, Assisted Living, Memory Care, and Convalescent Care include a requirement that one-half of all required parking be covered. Staff recommends removing this
requirement, as the residents in these uses often don’t drive. In the event the use converts to other
types of housing, covered parking would be required. Gymnasium Parking City Code currently requires parking for gymnasiums at 5 stalls per 1,000 sf of gross floor area
G.F.A. Gymnasiums are recreation facilities with courts, turf fields, batting cages, gymnastic studios,
etc. and having a wall height of not less than 20 feet. In an effort to scale the parking requirement to better fit this specific use, staff researched how other communities regulate parking for gymnasiums. Some communities require parking based on
specific recreational facilities in the gymnasium (i.e. per volleyball court, per basketball court, per
soccer field, per batting cage etc.). Other communities take a less detailed approach and require the parking per overall square footage of the facility (i.e. 3 stalls per 1,000 sf of G.F.A. or 3 stalls per seat of fixed seating). Staff discussed both approaches. While the first approach provides requirements tailored to each specific recreational facility in the gymnasium, it requires knowledge
of each specific facility and service in the building, which can be problematic as the facilities and
services change over time. While the second approach is less specific, the requirement is easy to understand and administer. Staff is recommending a requirement of 2.5 stalls per 1,000 sf of G.F.A. This recommendation is similar to the requirements imposed by other communities. The recommendation is based on an effort to right size the parking and reduce nonconformities for the
existing gymnasiums.
Shared Parking Shared parking is when two or more differing uses with substantially different hours of operation
Staff Report – Code Amendment – Parking Requirements
June 12, 2023 Page 4
4
share parking stalls. The City allows shared parking, but it is only allowed through a PUD. There
are many benefits to shared parking such as decreasing the total number of stalls required, more
efficient use of land, creating more centralized parking, etc. Staff is seeking to create a more streamlined process for utilizing shared parking for projects that do not require a PUD. Staff is recommending the addition of language allowing shared parking as long as the applicant complies with all of the standards and requirements set forth in the ordinance (see lines 102 – 119 of the
attachment).
(e.) Shared Parking. Off-street parking facilities for 2 or more uses with substantially different hours of operation may be provided in a shared facility. The off-street parking requirements for a development or redevelopment project may be reduced
up to 20% if the following standards can be met.
i. Parking spaces are shared between two or more complimentary uses. ii. A shared parking plan must be submitted whenever shared parking is
proposed that requires specific analysis on the peaking characteristics of the
various and future uses included.
iii. The applicant demonstrates that, because of the hours, size, and operation of the respective and future uses, there is no substantial conflict in the peak parking demands of the uses for which shared use of off-
street parking facilities is proposed, and there will be an adequate amount of parking available to meet the needs for each use.
iv. A shared parking and cross access or similar agreement must be approved by the City Planner and recorded against both properties in the County Registrar
of Titles’ or Recorder’s office with proof thereof presented to the City. The
City shall be party to the agreement and no changes shall be made to the agreement unless all parties agree. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the code amendments to parking requirements as represented in
the June 12, 2023 staff report.
Proposed Parking Amendments Attachment 5-31-23
Created: 2022-05-13 10:22:16 [EST]
(Supp. No. 4)
Page 1 of 8
SECTION 11.03. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICT, SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS AND PERFORMANCE 1
STANDARDS. 2
(Source: City Code, 9-17-1982) 3
H. Off-Street Parking Facilities. 4
1. The purposes of this Subparagraph are to: (a) prevent a shortage of curb on-street parking spaces 5
where allowed; and (b) provide a sufficient amount of off-street parking so as to utilize the streets for 6 their primary use - the safe and convenient movement of traffic. 7
2. Parking Spaces Defined. For purposes of this chapter, a parking space shall be defined according to the 8 following table of dimensions except that a parking space in a garage or carport shall not be less than 9
ten (10) feet wide and twenty (20) feet long. 10
3. Basic Requirements. 11
(a) Off-street parking facilities shall be provided at the time of initial occupancy or enlargement of a 12 structure as required by Item 4 of this Subparagraph. 13
(b) The City Manager shall determine the requirements for any use not specifically required by Item 14 4 of this Subparagraph. 15
(c) Fractional numbers of spaces as per Item 4 of this Subparagraph shall be adjusted to the next 16
higher number. 17
(Source: City Code, 9-17-1982) 18
(d) Dimensions of parking spaces. 19
Parking space and aisle width dimensions in
relation to degree of parking angle
PARKING ANGLE =
O
Deg.
20
Deg.
30
Deg.
40
Deg.
45
Deg.
50
Deg.
60
Deg.
70
Deg.
80
Deg.
90
Deg.
Parking space
width,
perpendicular to angle
9' 9' 9' 9' 9' 9' 9' 9' 9' 9'
Parking space
dimension perpendicular to aisle
9' 14'6" 16'10" 18'8" 19'5" 20' 20'8" 20'9" 20'2" 18'
Parking space dimension
parallel to
aisle
23' 24'8" 17' 13'2" 11'1" 9'10" 9' 9' 9' 9'
Aisle width 12' 11' 11' 12' 13'6" 16' 18'6" 19'6" 24' 24'
20
(Source: Ordinance No. 1-90, 2-1-1990; Ordinance No. 8-2021 , 7-13-2021) 21
Proposed Parking Amendments Attachment 5-31-23
Created: 2022-05-13 10:22:16 [EST]
(Supp. No. 4)
Page 2 of 8
4. Compact Parking Stalls. Up to 10% of the required parking spaces in a parking lot, ramp, or garage may 22
be marked for compact cars and may be counted toward required parking counts, provided that the 23 applicant meets the following requirements: 24
(a) All compact stalls must be a minimum of 8’ wide and 16’ in length for 90 degree stalls. For spaces 25 that are not 90 degree, the most recent ITE standards will be applied as determined by the City. 26
(b) Compact stalls must be appropriately identified. 27
(c) All required drive aisles must comply with City Code requirements. 28
29
4. Parking Requirement/Use* 30
DISTRICT LAND USES OFF-STREET PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS
a. Rural Same as b. below
b. R1-44, R1-22, R1-13.5,
R1-9.5
(Source: Ordinance No. 72-84, 4-5-1984)
2/D.U. 1 enclosed minimum
4/D.U. Maximum
Driveway Parking Acceptable
c. RM-6.5 and RM-2.5
Studio or Efficiency Units 1/D.U Half of all spaces must be enclosed (rounded up)
All Other Units 2/D.U
Half of all spaces must be enclosed (rounded up)
Active or Independent Senior
Living
1/D.U., plus 0.5 per unit for guest parking
Half of all spaces must be enclosed (rounded up)
Nursing Homes, Assisted
Living, Memory Care, or
Convalescent Care
1/4 beds, plus 1 space for each employee on the largest shift
Half of all spaces must be enclosed (rounded up)
d. *OFC, A-OFC (Source: Ordinance No. 9-2014, 03-13-2014; Ordinance
No. 9-87; 5-7-1987)
G.F.A. RATIO
1—60,000 s.f. 5.0/1,000 sq. ft.
60,001—70,000 sq. ft. 4.9/1,000 sq. ft.
70,001—80,000 sq. ft. 4.8/1,000 sq. ft.
80,001—90,000 sq. ft. 4.7/1,000 sq. ft.
90,001—100,000 sq. ft. 4.6/1,000 sq. ft.
100,001—150,000 sq. ft. 4.2/1,000 sq. ft.
150,001 PLUS sq. ft. 4.0/1,000 sq. ft.
e. COMM, A-C
(Source: Ordinance No. 9-
2014; 03/13/2014)
Service Stations 10+ spaces where cars are serviced
Motels, Hotels 1/guest room + 1/employee
Proposed Parking Amendments Attachment 5-31-23
Created: 2022-05-13 10:22:16 [EST]
(Supp. No. 4)
Page 3 of 8
Restaurant Type 1 Restaurant Type 2 Restaurant Type 3
(Source: Ordinance No. 22-
2007, 9-13-2007)
1/2.5 seats based on capacity 1/3 seats based on capacity 1/2 seats based on capacity
** Banks (Source: Ordinance No. 9-87;
5-7-1987)
6.0/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Retail Stores and Shops
(Source: Ordinance No. 22-
2007; 9-13-2007
5/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Arenas, Theaters, Assembly Halls
1/3 seats
Warehouses (Source: Ordinance 9-87, 5-
7-1987)
1/2 - 1,000 G.F.A.
Brewer Taproom, Cocktail
Room
1/60 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Small Brewer, Microdistillery 1/1,000 sq. ft. G. F. A.
f. IND**
Manufacturing 3/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Warehouses 1/2 - 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Office 5/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Gymnasium 5/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Brewer Taproom, Cocktail Room
1/60 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Small Brewer, Cocktail Room 1/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
g. PUB
1/3 seats in largest assembly room Places of Worship
h. Golf Course 1/3 seats in the clubhouse plus 72 spaces
31
32
Proposed Parking Amendments Attachment 5-31-23
Created: 2022-05-13 10:22:16 [EST]
(Supp. No. 4)
Page 4 of 8
33
5. Parking Requirements/Use 34
(a) Parking requirements based on type of use are listed in the following table. The requirements for 35 any use not specifically mentioned shall be designated by the City Manager. 36
37
OFF-STREET PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS
RESIDENTIAL USES
Single-family 2/D.U. minimum, 4/D.U. maximum, A minimum of 1 space must be enclosed, driveway parking acceptable
Multifamily
• Studio or Efficiency Units
1/D.U Half of all spaces must be enclosed (rounded up)
1.• All Other Units 2/D.U
Half of all spaces must be enclosed (rounded up)
• Active or
Independent
Senior Living
1/D.U., plus 0.5 per unit for guest parking
Half of all spaces must be enclosed (rounded up)
2.• Nursing Homes,
Assisted Living,
Memory Care, or Convalescent Care
1/4 beds, plus 1 space for each employee on the largest shift
Half of all spaces must be enclosed (rounded up) If independent living units
are combined with any of these uses then ½ of the required parking stalls for the independent living units shall be enclosed
OFFICE USES
G.F.A. RATIO
1—60,000 s.f. 5.0/1,000 sq. ft.
60,001—70,000 sq. ft. 4.9/1,000 sq. ft.
70,001—80,000 sq. ft. 4.8/1,000 sq. ft.
80,001—90,000 sq. ft. 4.7/1,000 sq. ft.
90,001—100,000 sq. ft. 4.6/1,000 sq. ft.
100,001—150,000 sq. ft. 4.2/1,000 sq. ft.
150,001 PLUS sq. ft. 4.0/1,000 sq. ft.
RETAIL, SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL USES
Service Stations 10+ spaces where cars are serviced
Motels, Hotels 1/guest room + 1/employee
Restaurant Type 1 1/2.5 seats based on seating capacity
Restaurant Type 2 1/3 seats based on seating capacity
Restaurant Type 3 1/2 seats based on seating capacity
Day Care Center 1 per employee on the largest work shift plus 1 per business vehicle plus 1 per every 6 kids the facility is licensed to care for
Banks 6/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. 5/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A..
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.31", Hanging: 0.38"
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.69", Hanging: 0.31"
Formatted Table
Formatted: Font: Bold
Formatted: Font: Highlight
Formatted Table
Formatted: Font: Highlight
Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0.15", Don't addspace between paragraphs of the same style, Bulleted+ Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0.15", Don't addspace between paragraphs of the same style, Bulleted+ Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted Table
Formatted Table
Proposed Parking Amendments Attachment 5-31-23
Created: 2022-05-13 10:22:16 [EST]
(Supp. No. 4)
Page 5 of 8
Brewer Taproom,
Cocktail Room
1/60 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Small Brewer,
Microdistillery
1/1,000 sq. ft. G. F. A.
Retail
G.L.A. Ratio
0-30,000 sq ft 5/1,000 sq. ft.
30,001 – 200,000 sq ft 4.5/1,000 sq. ft.
Over 200,000 sq ft 4.25/1,000 sq. ft.
Shopping Center 4.24/1,000 sq.ft.
INDUSTRIAL USES
Manufacturing 3/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Warehouses 1/2 0.5 - 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC USES
Places of Worship 1/3 seats in largest assembly room
ASSEMBLY USES
Arenas, Theaters, Assembly Halls 1/3 seats
RECREATIONAL USES
Golf Course 1/3 seats in the clubhouse plus 72 spaces
Gymnasium 5/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. 1/3 seats with fixed seating or 2.5/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
38
(Source: Ordinance No. 16-82, 1-14-1983; City Code, 9-17-1982; Ordinance No. 2-2007, 1-23-2007; Ordinance No. 39
6-2018, 5-10-2018; Ordinance No. 8-2021 , 7-13-2021) 40
*The requirements for any use not specifically mentioned shall be designated by the City Manager. 41
(Source: City Code, 9-17-1982) 42
(b) For supporting minor commercial uses within office/industrial buildings providing a supplemental 43 function to the major office and/or industrial use, the number of parking spaces for such uses 44
shall be not less than the minimum required for such uses in any other District. 45
(Source: Ordinance No. 16-82, 1-14-1983) 46
(c ) Specific parking requirements for the Transit Oriented Development District are located in 47 Section 11.26 of Chapter 11 and for the Town Center District in Section 11.27 of Chapter 11. 48
(Source: Ordinance No. 25-2016, 10-27-2016) 49
65. Development and Maintenance of Parking Areas. 50
(a) Screening and Landscaping. Off-street parking areas containing more than five (5) stalls shall be 51 screened on each side adjoining a residential use or public street. 52
(b) Minimum Distance and Setback. Parking areas for five (5) vehicles or more shall be at least ten 53 (10) feet from any side or rear lot line and 5 feet from any building. Minimum Distance and 54
Formatted Table
Formatted Table
Formatted Table
Formatted: Font: Highlight
Formatted: Section
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.69", Hanging: 0.31"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.69", Hanging: 0.31"
Proposed Parking Amendments Attachment 5-31-23
Created: 2022-05-13 10:22:16 [EST]
(Supp. No. 4)
Page 6 of 8
Setbacks in the Park and Open Space District are exempt from these requirements. Parking lot 55
setback standards for the Park and Open Space District are set forth in Section 11.37. 56
(Source: Ordinance No. 17-2017, 9-28-2017) 57
(c) Parking areas, loading facilities and driveways surfaces. Parking areas, loading facilities and 58 driveways shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete, pavers of brick, natural stone, or concrete 59 placed with gaps not exceeding one-quarter (¼) inch, turf block, or grasscrete, and graded to 60
dispose of or infiltrate all area surface water without damage to private or public properties, 61
streets, or alleys. The use of gravel, crushed rock, sand, or dirt is prohibited except when used as 62 gap material with pavers. 63
(Source: Ordinance No. 25-2016, 10-27-2016; Ordinance No. 16-2010, 11-25-2010) 64
(d) Location. Off-street parking facilities shall be on the same parcel of land as the structure they are 65
intended to serve unless there is a shared parking agreement in place between two separate 66
lots.. Space for the required facilities shall not occupy the required front yard or on a corner lot 67 more than one-half (½) of the required front yard closest to the street. 68
(Source: Ordinance No. 30-2016, 12-15-2016; Ordinance No. 72-84, 4-5-1984) 69
(e) Layout. Parking lots shall be designed to allow pedestrians to facilitate pedestrian movement 70
from their vehicles or from the public right-of-way to the building. Pedestrian 71
walkways/corridors/sidewalks shall be created at the perimeter of the parking lot and/or within 72 the parking lot to provide connection to the primary building and, when applicable, to adjacent 73 sites. Said sidewalks shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in width. These corridors can be 74
delineated by landscaping and parking lot islands, striping, and/or a paving material that differs 75
from that of vehicular areas. The corridors shall align with breaks in parking lot screening as 76 required in Section 11.03 Subdivision 3.G.5(q)(1). 77
(Source: Ordinance No. 30-2016, 12-15-2016) 78
76. Special Requirements. 79
(a) Each parking space shall have an unobstructed access from a street or aisle without moving 80 another vehicle. Exception is in an R1-44, R1-22, R1-13.5 and R1-9.5 District where parking in 81
driveways is permitted. 82
(b) Bumper rails and curbs shall be provided as determined by the City Manager. 83
(c) No servicing of vehicles shall take place in any off-street parking area. 84
(Source: City Code, 9-17-1982) 85
(d) The City may allow no more than fifteen percent (15%) of parking required pursuant to City Code 86
Section 11.03 to be constructed at a date subsequent to the time at which it would have 87
otherwise been required to be constructed under the City Code. The portion to be constructed as 88 a later date is referred to as "Proof of Parking". Proof of parking shall be allowed if: 89
i. Applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City Planner that the proposed 90 development does not require the amount of parking required under City Code; 91
ii. Applicant identifies on the site and landscape plans the location(s) in which the Proof of 92 Parking can be built in the future; 93
Proposed Parking Amendments Attachment 5-31-23
Created: 2022-05-13 10:22:16 [EST]
(Supp. No. 4)
Page 7 of 8
iii. Landscaping in excess of the minimum required and structures associated with landscaping 94
are allowed in the area identified for Proof of Parking, but no other structures shall be 95 allowed in the Proof of Parking area; and 96
iv. Applicant enters into a binding agreement recorded as a covenant against real property to 97 construct at a later date all or a portion of the Proof of Parking spaces as required by notice 98 in writing from the City Planner. 99
v. All proof of parking stalls are 9’ by 18’. 100
(Source: Ordinance No. 29-2016, 12-15-2016) 101
(e.) Shared Parking. Off-street parking facilities for 2 or more uses with substantially different hours 102
of operation may be provided in a shared facility. The off-street parking requirements for a 103 development or redevelopment project may be reduced up to 20% if the following standards can be 104 met. 105
i. Parking spaces are shared between two or more complimentary uses. 106 107
ii. A shared parking plan must be submitted whenever shared parking is proposed that requires 108 specific analysis on the peaking characteristics of the various and future uses included. 109 110 iii. The applicant demonstrates that, because of the hours, size, and operation of the respective 111 and future uses, there is no substantial conflict in the peak parking demands of the uses for 112 which shared use of off-street parking facilities is proposed, and there will be an adequate 113 amount of parking available to meet the needs for each use. 114 115 iv. A shared parking and cross access or similar agreement must be approved by the City Planner 116 and recorded against both properties in the County Registrar of Titles’ or Recorder’s office 117 with proof thereof presented to the City. The City shall be party to the agreement and no 118 changes shall be made to the agreement unless all parties agree. 119
120
87. Connecting Parking Areas with Streets. 121
(a) Vehicular traffic generated by any use shall be channeled and controlled so as to avoid 122
congestion and traffic hazards. 123
(b) The adequacy of any proposed traffic pattern shall be determined by the City Manager. Traffic 124
control measures such as warning signs, directional signs, turn lanes, channelization, illumination, 125 etc., may be required. 126
(c) All driveways abutting public streets shall be subject to the following regulations: 127
Minimum distance between driveways - twenty (20) feet. 128
Minimum driveway angle to street - thirty (30) degrees for one way streets and sixty (60) degrees for two way 129
streets. 130
Driveway widths at street curb are: 131
DRIVEWAY WIDTH MAXIMUM MINIMUM
One Way 20 feet 12 feet
Two Way 30 feet 24 feet
132
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.56"
Formatted: Indent: Hanging: 0.31"
Formatted: Indent: Hanging: 0.31"
Proposed Parking Amendments Attachment 5-31-23
Created: 2022-05-13 10:22:16 [EST]
(Supp. No. 4)
Page 8 of 8
Minimum Driveway Return Radius - six (6) feet 133
Minimum distances between the end of a driveway at the intersection of a right-of-way line and the property line 134
shall be ten (10) feet. 135
(Source: Ordinance No. 9-87, 5-7-1987) 136
(d) Parking areas, loading facilities and driveways shall be surfaced with bituminous; concrete; 137 pavers of brick, natural stone, or concrete placed with gaps not exceeding one-quarter ( 1/4/) 138 inch; turf block; or grasscrete; and graded to dispose of or infiltrate all area surface water 139
without damage to private or public properties, streets, or alleys. The use of gravel, crushed rock, 140
sand, or dirt is prohibited except when used as gap material with pavers. 141
(Source: Ordinance No. 25-2016, 10-27-2016; Ordinance No. 16-2010, 11-25-2010) 142
143
144
145
Flex Service Zoning
District
June 12 Planning Commission Meeting
Flex Service Zoning District Goals
•Implement Aspire Land Use Guide plan
•Address adaptive re-use of existing buildings in changing marketplace
•Provide flexibility for unique projects/ properties, to expand market
•Incentivize location of certain uses not ideally suited for Golden Triangle, Town
Center, and TOD areas
•Not a zone change
Properties Guided Flex Service
Two areas identified in ASPIRE: Most of these properties are currently zoned Industrial (I-2)
Flexibility
•Five main incentives:
•Flexibility in site design
•Flexibility of uses
•Flexibility in parking requirements
•Flexibility in building materials
•Flexibility in signage
Flexibility
•Site Design
•Reduced setbacks when compared to Industrial Uses (which is the majority of
the current zoning in the guided area).
Flexibility
•Flexibility of Uses
•Uses allowed in Industrial allowed in Flex Service, plus several uses currently
permitted in Commercial zoning districts, including major/minor auto repair,
gymnasiums, manufacturing, warehousing, small brewers and micro-distilleries,
and retail sales/services
•Retail restriction raised from 15% to 25%
•Parcels adjacent to principal arterial allowed upto 100%
Incentives
Flexibility
•Flexibility in parking requirements
•Meet published standard, obtain a PUD waiver, or
•Prepare an Parking Plan for Council approval.
Flexibility
•Flexibility in Building materials
•Lot frontages on arterial
streets, meet Commercial
standards
•Lot frontages on other
streets, meet Industrial
standards
•All others, 60/40 Class I and
II.
•Only adjusts building
materials
Flexibility
•Flexibility in signage:
•80 sq ft, Commercial uses allow 50 sq ft
•Wall signage allowed is same as Commercial
Questions?
PROPOSED PARKING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JUNE 12, 2023
•Reorganize regulations for clarity
•Provide flexibility for compact cars
•Revise process for shared parking
•Adjust parking requirements for certain use:
• (Banks, gymnasiums, nursing homes, large shopping
centers) and
• Define parking standards for others:
• (day care centers)
Goals and Objectives of Amendment
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
Compact Parking Stalls. Up to 10% of the required parking
spaces in a parking lot, ramp, or garage may be marked for
compact cars and may be counted toward required parking
counts, provided that the applicant meets the following
requirements:
(a) All compact stalls must be a minimum of 8’ wide and 16’ in
length for 90 degree stalls. For spaces that are not 90
degree, the most recent ITE standards will be applied as
determined by the City.
(b)Compact stalls must be appropriately
identified.
(c) All required drive aisles must comply with
City Code requirements.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
Shared Parking . Off-street parking facilities for 2 or more uses
with substantially different hours of operation may be provided
in a shared facility. The off-street parking requirements for a
development or redevelopment project may be reduced up to
20% if the following standards can be met.
•Shared between two or more complimentary uses.
•Shared parking plan
•Applicant demonstrates no substantial conflict in the peak parking demands of
the uses and adequate amount of parking to meet the needs for each use.
•Any shared parking/ cross access/ or similar agreement shall be filed as a deed
restriction on both properties.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
Banks – Current requirement 6/1,000 sf of gross floor area
Recommending 5/1,000 sf of gross floor area
Allows reduced requirement but anticipates need for future reuse
Day Care – Currently no specific requirement in Code
Centers Recommending 1 per employee on the largest work shift plus 1 per
business vehicle plus 1 per every 6 kids the facility is licensed to care for
Addresses a very specific type of use
Gymnasium– Current requirement 5/1,000 sf of gross floor area
Recommending 2.5 stalls per 1,000 sf of gross floor area
Right sizing the parking and reducing nonconformities for
existing gymnasiums
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
•Commercial/Retail- Current requirement 5/1,000 sf gross floor area
•Nursery/ Assisted Living_ Removed the requirement for covered
parking for these uses, as residents don’t typically drive.
Retail G.L.A.Ratio
0-30,000 sq ft Required spaces shall be determined using individual
tenant use as outlined in Section 11.03 Subd. 3. H. 4. E.
Carry out and delivery-based restaurants that do not
offer dine-in seating may be considered general retail as
opposed to restaurant for parking calculations.
30,001 – 200,000 sq ft 4.5/1,000
Shopping
Center
Over 200,000 sq ft 4.25/1,000
QUESTIONS