As has been requested – here is my recap on the Planning and Zoning meeting from June 1, 2010:

1. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the request for a larger sign, an additional 200 sq. ft.) at Savers.  This was actually 150 sq. ft. less than they originally had asked for.  Jeff Sargent (City Planner) admitted that the city’s wall signage ordinance language doesn’t cover large block commercial sites and a 200 square foot limit is not appropriate for that large of a building.  In the end they submitted a 200 square foot variance.  To put this in perspective, the current signage on the building is 97 square feet.  The new signage includes signage telling people where to drop off donations and includes signage on the west side (the side facing Central).  This is especially important because of the larger pedestrian bridge that will be interfering with the ability to see those signs.

Savers will be keeping their pylon sign.  Pylon signs are not allowed along Central Ave. but are grandfathered in.  This is a wise choice on their part since a monument sign would be lost behind the bridge.

2.  Fireworks tent request from Renaissance Fireworks to be located in the parking lot at the Columbia Heights Mall was approved.  This is the same company that has been there in the past.  This is located at 40th and Central.  It was approved to be set up for 90 days.  What that means is this company could potentially set up for 30-days before the July 4th holiday and then set up again another 30 or 60 days at anytime within a year, though they have never done this.  This does not go to the City Council so they can set up at anytime.

3.  The rezoning of property 4555 Washington St. from a duplex to a single family home was approved.  How this property was ever given a license by the city is still beyond me.  This property obviously was not inspected before they were given the license because there were multiple violations.  There were bedrooms with no egress windows and cooking facilities that did not meet code and an infestation of bugs.  The only way the city was able to get in was because of a child endangerment issue.  Several neighbors attended and commented on other properties that had too many people living in a single home in the area.  Mayor Peterson reminded them that the city has no authority to enter a property to check on this unless there is another issue.  If they knock on the door and ask how many people live there they cannot go in and check without the owners permission.  City ordinance limits 2 adults per bedroom but the city cannot go in and check this.  In this case, a child endangerment issue, they had the authority.  The question I was confused about was doesn’t a licensed rental have an inspection? Somehow this property was never inspected in over 5 years.  (After the meeting Jeff said he didn’t want to blame anyone but he was also confused as to how this slipped through.)

4.  Outdoor Seating Ordinance for restaurants was not approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on a vote of 1-yes (Rob Fiorendino) and 2-no(Mike Peterson and I).  This ordinance will now go on to the next City Council meeting on June 14.  The City Council will then determine
if this is appropriate.  There were some changes that were made to what the city staff recommended.  Two changes that were made:  a.  a restaurant that is not licensed to sell alcohol and has outdoor
seating does not have to submit an affidavit to the city stating that no alcohol will be served outdoors.  b.  Temporary outdoor seating can be handled administratively.  This would cover those restaurants that would have an event, such as Mexican Independence Day at Puerto del Sol and Ramadan at Marina’s or events like church picnics in a parking lot or a beer tent at Immaculate or the Jamboree.  (I am not sure if a one day event is going to require permission from the city for an event like a church having a parking lot picnic.  I assume not but maybe should be clarified since that seems unnecessary.)  Comments made from the audience stated that downtown Minneapolis has no
problems with tables right next to the sidewalk serving alcohol, why should we be worried about this?

Then, Mayor Peterson mentioned that he seemed to have problems with this ordinance and gave an example of what the city liquor store has been approved for.  The Boosters will be selling beer and brats in the parking lot of the city liquor store.  The patrons will purchase their beers inside the city liquor store and the brats at the Boosters wagon in the parking lot and will be able to drink their beer and eat their brats in the parking lot.  There will be no barriers, as is required by every restaurant.  There isn’t even a requirement to have a tent with limited access as is required at events like the Jamboree and IC.  Interesting that the city is exempt from their own laws!  I really have no problem with the Boosters selling their food in the liquor store parking lot.  What I would like to see changed is that restaurants are given the chance to serve their patrons the same way that the Boosters are given.

(Since this was written, the liquor store has added a barrier to protect patrons who are sitting at the picnic tables from a car crashing into them.  But the type of barrier that is required by city ordinance to separate a patron from a passerby taking alcohol from the table is not there.  The other item is that the ordinance does not allow tables to be placed on parking lots.  For the liquor store to set up their tables now means they are grandfathered in.)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.