St. Paul Park City Council — Transcript
Monday, September 14, 2026
Subdivision Ordinance Technical Standards Update
Upcoming River Property Concept Plan Review
Votes (1)
Subdivision Ordinance Technical Standards Review
Dissent: None. The commission reached a general consensus on the direction for each topic discussed, providing clear guidance for staff to draft specific ordinance language for subsequent review.
The Planning Commission engaged in an extensive review of the subdivision ordinance's technical standards, following up on procedural changes adopted by the council last year. The staff report highlighted several areas where the ordinance's language or requirements no longer align with current city practices, engineering standards, or ADA compliance. Specific topics included: 1. **Street Widths**: Proposals to update road classifications (arterial, collector, local, cul-de-sac) to match the comprehensive plan and current engineering standards, and to specify widths for new roads (e.g., 80ft right-of-way for collector, 60ft for local). Emphasis was placed on applying these to new streets and using PUDs for deviations rather than variances. 2. **Alleys**: Discussion centered on eliminating the mandatory requirement for alleys in commercial/industrial areas due to city maintenance burdens and the preference for private access solutions. The commission debated whether to retain any language for optional alleys via PUD with city engineer approval, or simply remove the mandatory requirement entirely. 3. **Sidewalks**: The need for ADA-compliant (minimum 5ft wide) sidewalks was stressed. The commission explored requiring sidewalks on one side of new residential streets, with potential exceptions for cul-de-sacs or non-connecting paths. The current ordinance lacks clear triggers for sidewalk installation. 4. **Easements**: A proposal to standardize drainage and utility easements from the outdated 6ft/12ft standard to the common 5ft/10ft, reflecting modern surveying and previous requirements for developments like Geneva Meadows. 5. **Street Trees**: Addressing city liability and maintenance costs, the discussion focused on moving tree requirements from the public right-of-way to within the private property (e.g., within 3ft of the front lot line), with standards to be integrated into the landscaping ordinance. The current 'one tree per 50ft' or 'two per lot' standard was deemed excessive and outdated for modern subdivision design.
Notable Quotes (7)
what we need to do is kind of make those match because what you're doing is some guy who's designing a subdivision is going to look at these standards and make his roads that width and then when we say no we want you to do this instead you know he's going to be a little rightfully disappointed in us at that point.
So all you're doing is making them have to get a PUD to get out of a standard that was never really intended to apply to them anyway.
the way your ordinance reads now, it doesn't say when a sidewalk would be required. It just has when a sidewalk is put in, it's going to be this width. And the width that's in there doesn't meet ADA requirements. It says it's 4 feet. You got to be minimum five.
we currently say like you know when you create a new lot you're supposed to put a drainage and utility easement around it that's 5t wide... but we use six and 12, which is very uncommon these days. It's like an old standard... now most people use five and 10.
what's somewhat common in kind of the practice of the city now is to have the trees placed like inside the lot line in a new subdivision instead of in the right of way. So it would be like 2 feet into the property.
If you're building a street as a part of your subdivision, we want you to meet the new requirements. But if you're not building a street, we still want you to create your subdivision such that you can meet these new minimum requirements.
I think it would be beneficial to have the assumption that a sidewalk should be a part of your subdivision
Ordinances & Resolutions (5)
The primary city ordinance undergoing a comprehensive review and proposed technical standards update.
City standards, adopted around 2007-2008, that currently conflict with the subdivision ordinance's technical provisions and need to be harmonized.
References to road classifications and pedestrian routes within the city's long-term planning document, which the ordinance updates aim to align with.
The suggested location for integrating updated street tree requirements and standards.
Discussed as a more appropriate tool than variances for approving deviations from standard requirements, particularly for street widths and alleys, due to its discretionary nature and focus on public benefit.