8/13/2025 - Planning Commission - Regular - Agendas
CITY OF SPRING PARK
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
AUGUST 13, 2025 – 6:00 PM
SPRING PARK CITY HALL
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVL OF AGENDA
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. Planning Commission Minutes – May 14, 2025
4. ADU DISCUSSION
5. PARKING REQUIREMENTS
6. COMISSIONER VACANCY DISCUSSION
7. MISCELLANEOUS
8. ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF SPRING PARK
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MAY 14, 2025 – 6:00 PM
SPRING PARK CITY HALL
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 6:00p.m.
Commissioner’s Present: Chair Hoffman, Commissioners Avalos, Stafford and Terryl were present.
Commissioner Homan was absent.
Staff Present: City Planner Lori Johnson
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Terryl motioned, being seconded by Commissioner Avalos, to approve the agenda as presented. On vote being
taken, the motion was unanimously approved.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. Planning Commission Minutes – April 9, 2025
Commissioner Terryl motioned, being seconded by Commissioner Stafford, to approve the meeting minutes from April 9, 2025.
On vote being taken, the motion was unanimously approved.
4. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
Lori Johnson from WSB reviewed her comments and notes in her review of the Subdivision Ordinance
draft. Discussion was had. The Planning Commissioners made updates and changes to the verbiage as
needed. Chair Hoffman determined we need to create a Tree Preservation Ordinance. All agreed. Johnson
recommended that the Planning Commission contact the LMC to come out to do a presentation on Park
Dedication. She also recommended that the City Engineer and Administrator review comments 31 and 32
regarding improvements to streets to include financial guarantees as part of the development requirements
with a recommendation of a 10% cash escrow. She will bring these suggestions to Administrator Anderson.
5. MISCELLANEOUS:
Commissioner Stafford shared that they purchased a home in Edina and so she will be resigning as Planning
Commissioner.
6. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further discussion, Commissioner Terryl motioned, being seconded by Commissioner Stafford, to adjourn the
meeting at 7:06p.m. On vote being taken, the motion was unanimously approved.
Respectfully submitted,
Jamie Hoffman, City Clerk
7
0
1
X
E
N
I
A
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
|
S
U
I
T
E
3
0
0
|
M
I
N
N
E
A
P
O
L
I
S
,
M
N
|
55
4
1
6
|
7
6
3
.
5
4
1
.
4
8
0
0
|
W
S
B
E
N
G
.
C
O
M
City of Spring Park Memorandum
To: Mike Anderson, City Administrator
From: Lori Johnson, City Planner
Date: July 24, 2025
Regarding: ADU Ordinance
The city’s current zoning ordinance allows for single and two-family dwelling units in the
R-1 and R-2 residential zoning districts. The R-3 zoning district only allows townhouses,
quads and apartments.
Scenario: If someone in the R-1 or R-2 district owns a lot with an existing single-family
home on the property, they could construct a second attached unit on that home if the
addition meets all standards in the governing zoning district.
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s) are typically defined as a secondary dwelling unit
located on the same lot as a single-family dwelling unit, either physically attached to,
within, or detached from the single-family dwelling unit. Many cities have adopted
specific ADU ordinances due to the growing demand for such units.
According to the scenario above, Spring Park allows two attached units on one lot in the
R-1 and R-2 zoning districts. There is no provision, however, in the current ordinance
that allows for two separate dwelling units on one lot in these zoning districts.
Some cities have chosen to only allow attached ADU’s while some cities allow both
attached and detached ADU’s. If the City wishes to continue allowing attached ADU’s,
you would not have to change your ordinance, but you could add standards that ensure
that both units architecturally fit together and by all appearances, look like a single-family
home (versus two separate units). Here is an example of an ADU ordinance that allows
for attached units only:
1207.01 Standards for accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Standards for
attached ADUs are as follows:
A. Allowed as a permitted use in the R-1 and R-2 district when accessory to a
single-family home.
B. Must meet living space setbacks.
C. No more than one (1) door may be located on the front façade of the home
unless designed in a manner to minimize the visibility from the street of the
second door, subject to city approval.
ADU Memo
July 24, 2025
Page 2
D. Maximum size of 50% of the finished square footage of the primary
residence or 1,200 square feet, whichever is less.
E. The home and ADU are considered a two -family home for the purpose of
application of the Minnesota Residential Code unless the home and the
ADU are connected by a passageway at least forty inches (40”) in width
without a door.
By amending the ordinance to permit this type of ADU, the allowable uses within
the R-1 district could be revised to permit only single-family homes, thereby
removing two-family dwellings from the permitted use list. The use of two -family
homes would continue to be allowed in the R-2 district.
It should be noted that there is no specific size requirement for ADU’s in the
current ordinance. If the attached second unit can meet setback requirements it
is allowed.
If you wish to allow attached AND detached ADU’s, you could explore that option.
Here is an example of a detached ADU ordinance:
Accessory Dwelling Units.
Subd. 1. Accessory dwelling units may be allowed on residential lots with a
detached, single-family home within the R-1 zoning district. Accessory
dwelling units are not allowed on properties with apartment buildings or
attached townhomes.
Subd. 2. An accessory dwelling unit may be allowed provided all of the following
conditions are met:
(a) An accessory dwelling unit may be located above a detached garage
that is accessory to a single-family detached home; internal to a single-
family home; attached to a single-family home; above a detached
garage; or detached as a standalone structure.
(b) An administrative permit for the accessory dwelling unit shall be applied
for concurrently with the application for a building permit.
(c) Not more than one accessory dwelling unit shall be allowed per single -
family detached lot.
(d) Any accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the same minimum
building setback requirements as required for the living portion of the
principal dwelling unit.
(e) Except as noted in (c) above or as otherwise specified in this
subdivision, a detached accessory dwelling unit shall be subject to the
same regulations as provided for under REFERENCE R-1 Chapter.
ADU Memo
July 24, 2025
Page 3
(f) An accessory dwelling unit shall be a clearly incidental and subordinate
use. The allowed area for a detached dwelling unit shall be 30 percent
of the area of the rear yard, to a maximum size of 700 square feet. If
attached, the allowed size of an accessory dwelling unit shall be 30
percent the gross floor area of the home, to a maximum size of 1000
square feet. Any accessory dwelling unit shall be a minimum of 200
square feet.
(g) The exterior design of an accessory dwelling unit shall incorporate a
similar architectural style, roof pitch, colors, and materials as the
principal building on the lot, and shall be compatible with the character
of the surrounding residential buildings, subject to approval by the
Zoning Administrator.
(h) The owner of the property shall reside in the principal dwelling unit or in
the accessory dwelling unit.
(i) Detached accessory dwelling units shall not be rented.
(j) There shall be no separate ownership of the accessory dwelling unit.
(k) One off-street parking space shall be provided for an accessory dwelling
unit. Adequate parking shall be shown on the permit application and
shall comply with the requirements of this Chapter.
(l) The accessory dwelling unit shall be addressed as a separate unit with
the same numerical address as the principal structure pursuant to
Chapter IV (Building Code) of the City Code.
(m) The principal dwelling unit and accessory dwelling unit shall be
connected to municipal sewer and water and shall not have separate
utilities from the principal structure.
(n) The accessory dwelling unit shall have a foundation and shall be a
permanent structure.
(o) Any exterior entrance for the accessory dwelling unit shall be on the
side or rear of the home.
(p) The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed new construction or
modifications to existing construction comply with the building code.
(q) Accessory dwelling units must meet any applicable shoreland or
structural coverage regulations.
(r) The maximum height for accessory dwelling units shall be as prescribed
in the applicable district, provided that in no case shall the height of a
detached accessory dwelling unit exceed the height of the principal
building. In the case of an accessory dwelling unit above a detached
garage, the maximum height shall be 21 feet, or the height of the
principal building, whichever is less.
ADU Memo
July 24, 2025
Page 4
Type of Accessory Dwelling Unit Maximum Height
Internal to a single-family home 35 feet, or the height of the principal
building, whichever is less Attached to a single-family home
Detached as a standalone structure 15 feet
Above a detached garage 21 feet, or the height of the principal
building, whichever is less
In summary, the City could amend its current ordinance to provide additional
architectural and size requirements in the R-1 district, or it could adopt a new
ordinance allowing either attached, detached, or both types of accessory dwelling
units.
7
0
1
X
E
N
I
A
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
|
S
U
I
T
E
3
0
0
|
M
I
N
N
E
A
P
O
L
I
S
,
M
N
|
55
4
1
6
|
7
6
3
.
5
4
1
.
4
8
0
0
|
W
S
B
E
N
G
.
C
O
M
City of Spring Park Memorandum
To: Mike Anderson, City Administrator
From: Lori Johnson, City Planner
Date: July 24, 2025
Regarding: Current Parking Requirements in the City
This memo is being used to provide an assessment of the City’s current off-street
parking requirements. Without knowing specific questions being proposed, I offer an
analysis and a few recommendations below. The ordinance that is in place now was
adopted in 1993 with ordinance amendments adopted in 2006 and 2007.
The current parking ordinance covers the following issues:
• Stall, aisle and driveway design
• Maintenance
• Location
• Number of spaces required
• Off-site parking
The following types of uses have parking calculations attached to them in the ordinance:
• Single-family, two-family, townhouse and quadrominium units
• Boarding house
• Townhomes and multiple family dwellings
• Community centers, health or exercise clubs, libraries, private clubs, lodges,
museums, art galleries
• Convalescent home, rest home, nursing home, or day nurseries
• Elderly (senior citizen housing)
• Office buildings, medical and dental clinics, veterinary clinics and hospitals, and
professional offices
• Retail store and service establishments
• Retail sales and service business with fifty (50) percent or more of gross floor
area devoted to storage and/or warehouses.
• Restaurants, cafés, private clubs serving food and/or drinks, bars, taverns,
nightclubs
• Shopping centers
• Motor fuel station or auto repair
• Manufacturing, fabricating or processing of a product or material
• Warehousing, storage or handling bulk goods
• Other uses
Parking Memo
July 24, 2025
Page 2
Although this list is detailed, newer city ordinances more clearly define permitted uses in
communities. Most include parking requirements for facilities like churches, schools,
hotels, motels, and recreational venues. Some ordinances specify unique parking needs
for certain retail uses such as movie theaters, furniture stores, and vehicle dealerships.
The zoning ordinance could expand to cover more specific uses.
You will see that townhomes and multiple family dwellings are listed twice in the
ordinance, and this is redundant and should be cleaned up.
Most ordinances separate office buildings from medical/dental and veterinary services
because they have different parking needs.
“Shopping Centers” is likely a term no longer needed as parking would be calculated for
these types of uses based on what is going in the building. For instance, a shopping
center could include restaurants, retail stores, furniture stores, offices, etc., so each
individual use would be calculated separately for parking needs.
Typically bars or nightclubs will have different parking requirements than restaurants, not
including bar areas. For these types of establishments, the ordinance should take into
account standing room as well as seats and tables.
Motor fuel station and auto repair likely should be separated because there may be more
of a parking concern with auto repair given that automobiles could be on site for a long
period of time waiting for repair.
Parking Stall—Number Required
Without doing a full review of the off-street parking ordinance, the following items are
what stand out as questionable or needing revision:
• Community centers, health or exercise clubs, libraries, private clubs, lodges,
museums, and art galleries—require ten spaces plus one for each 150 square
feet over 2,000 square feet. These uses may have varied parking requirements,
and there is limited evidence to indicate that a single parking standard is suitable
for all of them. Researching the parking needs of these facilities in line with
ordinances from other municipalities could provide more accurate requirements,
potentially using smaller square footage thresholds or seating capacities as
criteria.
• Restaurants, cafés, private clubs serving food and/or drinks, bars, taverns, and
nightclubs: At least one parking space is generally required for every three seats
in the establishment. For restaurants, most cities determine parking requirements
based on square footage, typically mandating 1 space per 100 square feet, while
bar areas may require as much as 1 space per 40 square feet of bar area. It is
recommended to assess current restaurant capacities and parking provisions to
determine if existing arrangements are suitable.
Off Site Parking
Parking Memo
July 24, 2025
Page 3
The current ordinance permits off-site parking to be counted toward meeting
parking stall requirements. Approval for such arrangements must be granted by
the City Council, subject to certain conditions. However, the ordinance does not
specify the approval process, leaving the type of application, fee, or escrow
required unclear. It is also not designated as either conditional or administrative;
the ordinance simply states that City Council approval is necessary, without
clarification on whether a public hearing is needed or if involvement from the
Planning Commission is required. Including additional details about this approval
process in the ordinance could help clarify these procedures.
The site to be used for off-site parking must have reasonable public street access
and the site used for the off-site parking must be owned by the same individual
who is proposing to utilize these off-site allowances for the principal site.
If the off-site parking is used for multi-family residential uses, the off-site parking
can’t be more than 100 feet from the entrance to the principal use. If the off-site
parking is for nonresidential uses, the off-site parking can’t be more than 300 feet
from the entrance of the principal use.
Considering the city's configuration of primarily small commercial and residential
lots, it is beneficial that an ordinance exists to address this type of issue.
Nonetheless, as noted above, I recommend a thorough review of the current
parking stall requirements for restaurant and bar areas, given their status as high-
traffic generators, to determine whether permitting off-site parking remains an
appropriate policy.