North St. Paul City Council — Transcript
Thursday, February 5, 2026
Planning Commission Vacancies and Recruitment
Local Business and Community Engagement
Votes (3)
Variance Request for 2718 16th Avenue East (Fence Height)
Moved by Commissioner Alvarez [0:18:20] · Seconded by Commissioner Weiss [0:18:31]
The Planning Commission considered a variance request from Timothy Taylor to allow a 6-foot tall fence in the front yard, exceeding the 4-foot limit. The property abuts a Dairy Queen, a legal non-conforming commercial lot lacking required screening. Staff recommended approval due to consistency with city plans, noting that if the commercial property were new, screening up to 8 feet would be required. Commissioners discussed the effectiveness of a 6-foot fence for screening headlights and sound from the Dairy Queen's drive-thru, and confirmed the Dairy Queen owner's support for the variance. No vision triangle issues were identified.
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments
Moved by Commissioner Muick [0:30:55] · Seconded by Commissioner Gadboy [0:31:05]
The commission reviewed three sets of zoning ordinance text amendments. Proposed changes included adding definitions (bay, fenestration, limited production/processing), revising Table 3 (use districts) to remove manufactured home parks from R1, clarify manufactured/modular homes, remove hospitals, and broaden 'automobile service station' to 'motor vehicles' including EV charging stations. Key discussion points for the D1 Downtown overlay district involved codifying design manual language, ensuring repair/replacement of architectural details with like kind, and a correction changing the required facade material from 100% to 75% brick/stone veneer. A discussion also occurred on whether the 50% brick rule for renovations might affect historic buildings, with the decision to handle such cases via waiver.
Quick Trip Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site Plan Approval
Moved by Commissioner Alvarez [0:45:00] · Seconded by Commissioner Gadboy [0:45:10]
Quick Trip requested an amendment to their conditional use permit and site plan to add a second car wash bay. The proposal involves minor demolition and landscaping changes. Staff noted general compliance with setbacks but raised concerns about a proposed transformer pad's proximity to an existing tree (recommending relocation or replacement) and the lack of a revised exterior lighting plan after the removal of a light pole. The Watershed District found the project too small for a permit, and the City Engineer noted likely additional sewer access charges. Mindot review was also required due to the property's adjacency to a state right-of-way.
Notable Quotes (11)
However, since the neighboring property owner on a residential lot applied for that same type of permit, the city could not approve it without a variance due to those front yard regulations.
So, my wife and I love the DQ there... I would not harsh this person an 8ft fence if they wanted to being that that's what they maybe would have had with the DQ.
Well, I think the code still code would still be enforced for for anything that regardless of what because it's two separate properties.
Um, and that property owner stated that he is in support of this variance application.
Patrick, for your benefit, most of these bolded additions are current language in the downtown design manual... So, even if the downtown design manual goes away... now they're in the zoning code. So, we have firmer legs to stand on...
It does say the commission agreed to change 100% to 75%
I if I may I what I would recommend is leaving it in if we have to cross that bridge and somebody has to ask for a waiver of that particular condition. Okay. Handle it on a case by case then we address it at the time.
My only concern is that pad looks awful close to that existing tree. I'm not sure if that will work with the root ball of that tree or the future root ball of that tree. So, I'm recommending that they move that tree or replace it someplace else.
I did not see any replacement lighting going in that I could pick up on the plan. So, I'm recommending that they submit a new updated exterior lighting plan for the rear part of the building to show.
Our city engineer reviewed it, the proposal. They pointed out too that there will probably be additional sewer access charges uh with this project because they will be using more water and they'll have to pay those fees accordingly.
I did call them today and require that they send us the plans. Certainly don't anticipate that there will be any problems.
Ordinances & Resolutions (12)
Residential fence regulations relevant to the variance request.
Zoning designation for the property requesting a fence variance.
Zoning designation for the Dairy Queen and Quick Trip properties.
Overall city code governing land use, subject to text amendments.
City planning document referenced for consistency during variance review.
Document providing detailed analysis and recommendations for variance and amendment requests.
Existing guidelines, parts of which were proposed to be codified into the zoning ordinance.
Section of the zoning code detailing use districts, subject to proposed changes.
Original permit for Quick Trip, now subject to an amendment for an addition.
Approval required for development projects, amended for the Quick Trip expansion.
Formal document used to approve or deny planning commission recommendations.
Required document for development projects, revised for the Quick Trip addition.