The URL can be used to link to this page

85-1580 WHITE - CITV GLERK PINK - FINANCE �ANqRV�• DEPARTMENT CITY OF SAINT PAUL COURCll /�+ 3 BLUE -MAYOR � � Flle NO. �� v ✓ • � . r� in�nce O dinance N 0. ,�7c�� . Presented By Referred To �� v� Committee: Date �'2 � �-�� S Out of Committee By Date An Ordinance Amending Chapter 60-62 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code Pertaining to College, University, and Seminary Uses. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. That section 60.413(6) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to permitted principal uses subject to special conditions in the R-1 through R-4 zoning districts, be and is hereby amended to read as follows: (6) Colleges, universities, seminaries, and other such institutions of higher learning, public and private, offering courses in general , technical , or religious education _and not operated for profit, all subject to the following conditions: (a) Principal access to said site shall be directly from a major thoroughfare as designated on the major thoroughfare plan. (b) No building shall be closer to any property line than a distance equal to the height of the building, or 50 feet, whichever is greater. (c) The boundaries of the institution shall be as defined in the ermit and ma not be ex anded without the rior a roval of the P anning Commission. (d) The institution shall not exceed b more than 10 ercent the student enrollment staff and em lo ee size and or dormitor bed levels identi ie in the ermit un ess re uire o street arkin is rovided and a roved the Commission. continued COUNCILMEN Reques g e ment of: Yeas Nays Fletcher Drew In Favor Masanz Nkosia g scne�be� Against Y Tedesco Wilson Form App e y City Attorney Adopted by Council: Date Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY �y Approved by Mayor: Date Appro Mayor for S i si�n to Council By B WH17E — CITV CLERK 1 PINK — FINANCE COl1I1C11 �./ feANARYdDEPARTMENT GITY OF SAINT PAITL � .( BLUE —MAVOR File NO. �� ~jl-! � , Ordindnce Ordinance N�. /�33� Presented By ✓L� Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date (e) For institutions existing as of the date of adoption of this ordinance amendment b the City Council , the Plannin Commission shall issue specia con ition use�ermits, which 'ermits s all establish the boundaries3 existin of -street�arkin , student enrollment, staff and emp oyee size an ormitory e eve s. In the issuance of speci_al__condition use permits, the Corranission shall follow the procedures set ort in section 64.300 provided that mailed notices o a hearing to owners o recor o�f property within 350 feet of the proposed campus boundaries sha�not be required. Section 2. That section 62.103, subd. 6(2)(1) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, setting forth the off-street parking space requirements for colleges, universities or seminaries, be and is hereby amended to read as follows: (1) College, university or seminary. One for every three employees and members of the staff and either one for every three full time students not residing on campus or one for every three part-time students, whichever is rg eater• (continued) COUNCILMEN Requested Dep tment of: Yeas Nays ' Fletcher Drew [n Favor Masanz Nicosla B scneibei Against Y Tedesco Wilson Adopted by Council: Date Form Approved City Attorney Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY i By Approved by Mayor: Date Appro ayor for Sub is ' to ou�cil By B WMITE - CITV CLERK f PINK - FINANCE COIlI1C11 ��/�r/ C�ANARVRDEPARTMENT GITY OF SAINT PAUL '� d BLVE -MAVOR C! File N 0. Ordin�nce Ordinance N 0. ��`�`30 Presented By , Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date � Section 3. That section 60.552 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to principal uses permitted in a B-4 Central Business District be and is hereby amended so as to add the following new permitted uses and to renumber clause 14 as indicated: . (14) Colleges, universities, seminaries, and other such institutions of hi her learnin , ublic and rivate, offerin courses in eneral technical or re i ious education an not o erated for rp o it. (�4) (15) Accessory buildings, structures, and uses as in section 60.201. COUNCILMEN Yeas �a� Nays Reque d b Department of: .FlotaAsr Drew �Il FBVOI �� '� Nicosia B sche�be� Against Y Tedesco Wilson Adopted by Council: Date �EB 1 � t986 Form Approv y City Attorney Certified Pass b uncil S tar BY BY . Appro e by Mayor: D � FEB 2 �i �986 Appro ayor for Sub sio o Council By B PUBIISHED ��'�_'-�� 1 - 198� PED - Plannina DEPARTMENT ��S�5� No 2663,- I �rr,� Snderhnlm _______ CONTACT `��d ' 749� ext. 325 PHONE �� 11/12/85 DATE e A ER FOR ROUTING ORDER Cli All Locations for Si nature : 2 epartment Director ,�Director of Management/Mayor Finance and Management Services Director 5 City Clerk Budget Director 1 P R i h r City Attorney H T WILL BE ACHIEVED BY TAKING ACTION ON THE ATTACHED MATERIALS? (Purpose/ Rationale) : Attached is a Planning Commission resolution approving the College Zoning Task Force Report and a set of Zoning Code text amendments that would implement the task force's recommendations. A letter from the Mayor to the City Council is included, transmitting the Zoning Code amendments to the Council for their consideration. Copies of the task force report, for the Mayor and Council 's information, are attached. The proposed Zoning Code amendments, typed on a City Council ordinance form, are also attached. - COST/BENEFIT, BUDGETARY AND PERSONNEL IMPACTS ANTICIPATED: r None. �EC��v�� N�v ��,�,�� R��S OfFICE FINANCING SOURCE AND��'UD'GET ACTIVITY NUMBER CHARGED OR CREDITED: (Mayor's signa- ture not re- Total Amount of Transaction: quired if under $10,000) Funding Source: N/A Activity Number: ATTACHMENTS (List and Number Al1 Attachments) : 1 . Planning Commission resolution approving report and Zoning Code amendments. 2. Letter f or Mayor's signature, transmitting amendments to the City Council for their consideration. 3. City Council ordinance form. ' 4. Copies of the College Zoning Task Force report. � 5. Mailing labels for the College Task Force. DEPARTMENT REVIEW CITY ATTORNEY REVIEW �Yes No Council Resolution Required? Resolution Required? Yes No Yes �No Insurance Required? Insurance Sufficient? Yes No Yes X No Insurance Attached: (SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR INSTRUCTIONS) Revised 12/84 i � �� E�� i � r , �� ;; {� . � . I , 1 � , �s� ,AE �I�r�.��,�� t �' �� dk� �' � _ �� ;. �� . a � y � � A�� r. � ,� � I . � � . . � . � . . �; �Y � . �� . �� ` , '� . . ��.� . , . . . � . . .,: . ..' ,, 1 .. . - . . . .. - . . . � '� �;..� .. � � . .. . . . . . . . . . . . , `'� � � .. . . � � . . �i, :� � . � � . . . � 1 . � �. . � � `"< _,�� - � . . . � � � � . . � �' . , . . . . .'f, . � � � - . - _ , � �. ... �; •� �j . . � � � � .. . � . N � ' . _. .. � �� . ; � �. . .. . . . �� . . ' . � .. . � . .. . . . .9E . . . . . . . ...! .0 .. . . � . . . . . . �� . � � ,.�� . . � . � � . . ' (^. � �.�'�, . . . . .. . . I� '.�: , . . < .. YsT�Yr� � { � ` � #�Ef41Y14TN�1T�M�l:Ji1lwIMlO 1411!L�COpt11�CAql�ff � � � S YM'�17 gOi1RTt!�TAEET.aAll�AAUt.MNIl�pO�l�MlMf! � , , P�I�r� : � a � I r� � . `� - � , �r.�� . e,: - .i . � . � ; . . � � � , �.,:�,�. � � �-�� D p D � p i � � COLLEGE ZONING TASK FORCE: � REPORT TO THE SAINT PAUL PLANNING COMMISSION � 1. Why was the College Zoning Task Force created? This special task force of the Planning Commission was created to look at Zoning Code issues related to colleges, universities, and seminaries in St. � Paul . Specifically, the task force was asked to address three areas of concern: 1) on-campus parking requirements and related parking concerns; 2) policies regarding establishment and expansion of campus boundaries; and 3) � regulations affecting off-campus student housing. This report addresses parking and campus boundary issues. The second phase of the task force's study, which will be completed in the fall of 1985, will address off-campus � student housing issues. 2. Wh�o served on the College Zoning Task Force? � Task force members included Planning Commission members, district council representatives, and college, university, and seminary representatives. � 3. What are the task force' s major findings and �ecommendations? Campus Boundaries , - Campus boundaries are recommended for each of the following institutions: College of St. Catherine, College of St. Thomas, Concordia College, Hamline University, Luther Northwestern Theological Seminary, Macalester College, St. � Paul Seminary, St. Paul Technical-Vocational Institute, University of Minnesota-St. Paul Campus, and William Mitchell College of Law. � - The Planning Commission should issue an overall special condition use permit for each of these institutions that includes a description of the recommended boundary. � - Colleges, universities, seminaries, and similar institutions as defined in Chapter 60.413 of the Zoning Code should be added as a permitted use in the � 6-4 Central Business District zone. � � � � . , DIVISION OF PLANNING DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CITY OF SAINT PAUL CIN HALL ANNO( • 25 WEST FOURTH STREET,SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 • � � , � Pa� � - The Zoning Code parking requirement for colleges, universities, and seminaries should be revised to include a requirement for part-time students. � The following requirement is recommended (change is underlined) : "One space for every three employees and members of the staff, and, one space for every three full-time students not residing on campus or one for every three part- � time students, whichever is greater." - This study has established for each school its: a) pre-1975 level of legal nonconformance with the Zoning Code parking requirement; b) actual 1975-1984 � parking requirement; and c) Fall , 1984 enrollment, staff size, and dormitory bed numbers. The establishment of these numbers will make it possible for � City staff to enforce the parking requirement in the future. � - The overall special condition use permit issued by the Planning Commission for each institution should include a third condition requiring that each .� provide parking for any growth or expansion in enrollment, employees, or dormitory beds that occurs after Fall , 1984. Planning Division staff should annually monitor each institution' s compliance with this condition. - The Planniny Commission should continue to monitor parking conditions around � the four schools identified as having an existing deficiency in meeting the Zoning Code parking requirement (College of St. Thomas, Macalester College, Concordia College, and William Mitchell College of Law) . �. 4. What else does the report contain? � Two subcommittees of the task fo� e were established for the Colle e of t � 4 g S . Thomas and Hamline University to discuss, in greater depth, parking and campus boundary issues for these institutions. The subcommittees' reports to the � task force, with recommendations, are included in this report. The report also includes parking manayement strategies used by individual � schools and the minutes for each meeting of the College Zoning Task Force. � � • � � . � ��'S=/.�� 1 � TABLE OF CONTENTS � PAGE � A. INTRODUCTION 3 � - Purpose 3 - Membership 3 � B. CAMPUS BOUNDARIES 5 � - Introduction 5 - Recommendations 5 � C. PARKING REQUIREMENT 15 - Introductions 15 � - Background: Issues and Problems 15 - Considerations in Establishing a Parking Requirement 16 - Analyzing the Current Parking Requirement 17 � - On-Street Parking Problems 19 - Recommendations 19 � D. PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES USED BY INDIVIDUAL SCHOOLS 24 � E. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS 27 - College of St. Thomas 27 - Hamline University 44 � F. APPENDIX 52 � - Minutes for the Meetings of February 14, February 28, March 14, June 27 , July 11 , and July 29, 1985 � � � � 1 ' � LIST OF ATTACHMENTS � PAGE Section B. Campus Boundaries � C1: College of St. Catherine 7 � C2: Concordia College 8 C3: Luther Northwestern Theological Seminary 9 C4: Macalester College 10 C5: St. Paul Technical-Vocational Institute 11 � C6: University of Minnesota-St. Paul Campus 12 C7: William P1itchell College of Law 13 C8: Interpretation of Zoning Code Requirements � for Colleges, Universities, and Seminaries 14 Section C. Parkiny Requirement ,� P1: Parking at St. Paul ' s Colleges, � Universities, and Seminaries 23 Section E. Subcommittee Reports � College of St. Thomas S1: Boundary Map for College of St. Thomas ;' and St. Paul Seminary Campuses 36 S2: Percentage of Available Parking Spaces Occupied - By Block Face, lU:OU-11:00 A.M., lU/14/81 37 � S3: Percentage of Available Parking Spaces Occupied - By Block Face, 11 :00-11 :30A.M., 3/29/82 38 S4: Percentage of Available Parking Spaces Occupied � - By Block Face, 4:45-5:30 P.M., 3/24/82 39 S5: Percentaye of Available Parking Spaces Occupied - By Block Face, 7:30-8:00 P.M., 10/14/81 40 � S6: Parking Spaces on the Colleye of St. Thomas Campus 41 S7: Students Living Within Walking Distance of the St. Thomas Campus 42 � S8: Checklist of Criteria for Evaluating New Prograrns/Projects 43 Hamline University � H1: Hamline University Campus Boundary Map 48 � H2: On-Street Parking Restrictions 49 H3: Alternatives to Reduce On-Street Parkiny 50 H4: Potential Locations for Additional Parking 51 � 2 � C'F �s-i.��° � � A. INTRODUCTION jPurpose � The College Zoning Task Force was created by the St. Paul Planning Commission to look at Zoning Code issues related to colleges, universities, and seminaries in St. Paul . Specifically, the task force was asked to address three areas of concern: 1) on-campus parking � requirements and related parking concerns; 2) policies regarding establishment and expansion of campus boundaries; and 3) regulations affecting off-campus student housing. Study of these issues had been recommended by a number of the City' s district councils and task forces � over the past several years. The task force decided to address the issues in two phases; Phase I has dealt with parking and campus boundary issues. � This report represents the task force's findings and recommendations regardiny the issues in Phase I . Phase II , which will be completed in the fall of 1985, will address off-campus student housiny issues. � The task force met six times on Thursday evenings in February, March, June and July. At its March meeting, the task force identified three schools with parkiny problems that were of concern to the surrounding � neighborhoods. These schools are the College of St. Thomas, Hamline University, and William Mitchell College of Law. The task force felt the parking situations around these campuses would benefit from more in-depth discussion and analysis. As a result, individual subcommittees were � established for St. Thomas and Hamline, consisting of representatives from both the school and the neiyhborhood. In the case of William Mitchell , a College Zoning Task Force-sponsored group was not organized, but the William Mitchell area was addressed by the Grand Avenue Parking Task � Force, a separate Planniny Commission task force that was oryanized to discuss the parking situation around that area of Grand Avenue. � The St. Thomas and Hamline subcommittees, and the Grand Avenue Parking Task Force met in April , May, and June to discuss the parking situations around these schools and made recommendations for improvements. During � this time, the College Zoning Task Force did not meet. The recommendations of the St. Thomas and Namline Subcommittees, reviewed and approved by the task force, are included in this report under Section E. � The Grand Avenue Parking Task Force' s recommendations regarding the William Mitchell area were not ready at the time of final approval of this report. That task force' s recommendations for William Mitchell and the � nearby Grand Avenue area will be submitted separately to the Planning Commission at a later time. Membership � The task force included district council representatives, college, university, and seminary representatives, and Planning Corr�nission members. � Gary Park, who is a Planning Commission member, served as task force chairman. The following people participated as members of the task force: � � 3 � � Gary Park, Chairman Robin Young, Vice-Chairman � St. Paul Planning Commission St. Paul Planning Cor�nission Mitchell Rubinstein Bob Wicker � Summit-University Planning Council District 11 Planning Coalition Larry Alexander John Rutford � Surtnnit-University Planning Council District 12 Community Council Quentin Elliott Bob Nechal � District 12 Community Council Merriam Park Community Council Bill Irwin Ken Jefferson � Lexington-Hamline Community Council Southwest Area District Council Gayle Summers Colleen Hegranes, Director of District 14 Community Council Housing, College of St. Catherine � Leslie Carney The Reverend Thomas Ries Grand Avenue Business Association Vice President of College Relations � Concordia College William Rosser Associate Dean of Students Uick Larson � College of St. Thomas Superintendent of Buildings & Grounds Luther Northwestern Theological Seminary Robert B. Englund Public Relations Department Jim Fennell � Hamline University Director of Development St. Paul Seminary Mark D. Dickinson �. Director of Physical Plant Larry Anderson Macalester College Director of Planning University of Minnesota Linda Thedens � Assistant Director ponna Drummond, Staff St. Paul Technical Vocational St. Paul Planning Division Institute Charles Green Director of Development � William Mitchell Colleye of Law � � � 4 � � � �'�-/�� B. CAMPUS BOUNDARIES � Introduction The St. Paul Planning Commission established the College Zoning Task Force � to address certain issues related to colleges, universities, and seminaries in St. Paul . One of these issues is the definition of existing campus boundaries. Currently, there is no written record or map on file with the � City of St. Paul that describes what the existing campus boundary is for each of the City's post-secondary institutions. A written record or map such as this is needed by the City for two reasons. 1) fraternities, sororities, and dormitories, if located off-campus, must be within 250 feet � of the campus boundary; and 2) campus-related uses located outside of the boundary in a residential zone are considered permitted uses subject to special conditions, and require a special condition use permit issued by � the Planning Commission. Because of these two Zoning Code requirements, the Planning Commission felt it was necessary that the City of St. Paul have a clear understanding with � each institution about what its campus boundary is. For this reason, the College Zoning Task Force is recommendiny a defined campus boundary for each of the institutions represented on the task force. The task force is � also making an additional recommendation allowing college, university, and seminary uses as permitted uses in downtown zoning districts. � Recommendations 1 . Establish the boundaries identified on the attached maps (Attachments C-1 through C-7 as the recoynized campus boundaries for each of the � o owing institutions: College of St.Catherine, Co lege of St. Thomas, Concordia College, Ham ine University, Luther Northwestern Theological Seminary, Maca ester Co ege, St. Paul Seminary, St. Pau Technica - � Vocational Institute, Universit of Minnesota-St. Paul Cam us, and William Mitchell College of Law. The maps for St. Thomas, St. Paul Seminary, and Hamline are included in the St. Thomas and Hamline subcommittee reports . * � The Planniny Commission should issue an overall s ecial condition use P permit for each institution listed above that includes a description of � the recommended boundary. The task force recommends that the boundaries be documented throuyh special condition use permits rather than by incorporating them in the Zoniny Code. Any subsequent change � of a campus boundary would become especially cumbersome to implement if the boundaries were incorporated in the Zoniny Code. By state statute, a 4�-acre study is required before any chanye to the Zoning Code can be � made. Colleges, universities, and seminaries may apply for a chanye in their campus boundaries by applying for a new special condition use permit. As always, notification of surrounding property owners and a public hearing would be required before a decision was reached by the � Planning Commission. *In developing these recommended boundaries, the task force used, as a � reference, the Office of the Zoning Administrator' s interpretation of Zoning Code requirements related to campus boundaries. See Attachment C-8. � 5 � � Of the yroup of institutions mentioned above, only the University of Minnesota-St. Paul campus is not actually within the City' s borders. � The campus is located in Falcon Heights and abuts St. Paul along Cleveland Avenue in the St. Anthony Park neighborhood. It is important to define this boundary since fraternities and sororities can only be located within 250 feet of it. Currently, there are a number of � University of Minnesota-associated fraternities and sororities located alony Cleveland Avenue in St. Paul . 2. Add the followin sentence in Cha ter 6U.413 Sec. (6) of the Zonin � Code after Subd, b : Campus boundaries for the institutions referred to in this section can be found in overall special condition use permits issued for each of the institutions so identified . � By adding this sentence to the Zoning Code, the reader is notified of where defined campus boundaries can be found for each institution. � 3. Colleges, universities9 seminaries, and similar institutions as defined in C apter 60.413 o the Zoniny Code should be added as a perm�tted use � in the B-4 Central Business District zone. Post-secondary educational institutions are currently not allowed as a permitted use or a special condition use in the B-4 zone, which is only � found in the downtown area. Other public and quasi-public uses such as churches, libraries, and museums are currently B-4 permitted uses. Metropolitan State University, which established its location downtown � before the current Zoning Code went into effect in 1975, appears to be an appropriate and successful downtown use. For these reasons, post- secondary educational institutions should be allowed as a B-4 permitted use. It should be noted that all B-4 permitted uses are also permitted � uses in the B-5 Central Business-Service District zone, another zoning category only found in the downtown area. � � � � � � � 6 � � ,i��- . � � � , � � � � :•�� i � i i -i i i � i- ; s i ATTACHMENT C1 ��`�� '� t � ` � n w� i1 AuC . G I � � I O -- ' ' � ! i 1 � � � � O -' � r o � , . o ----� , rn - --� � O _ i � ' G� O ___� � f�1 o __, , � o = � � _J � O 0 � � 11 --� i O ' � --� i � O � � � (I� -i � � O _ � � i � p - � � . � _� /� � p -- , i ( � O - --� � � i � � O ---, � � -; � � � � m � - - -� ' � �1 7� O _� ; � � � i � ° -- -� � a Ir a � , ., o � -°-- -- -' � � � ; � � a-- - --- � z � , r O - - -� i � �� - - -� � ' O - ----� � � . � ' . � II ' - a4 � 4-- �a O ° - - � � � �, I -0-- • � lo o-- � � a_ n _ . . � O � � 9- � H �- � � � 3 O - � O p � � p _ \C O - D-- I � � � i � -o-- o 0 0 o a p �# � o - �' , r--� r�-�r-�� r---� r'r"�� -��' � ATTACHMEtiT C2 � . . .�.�.�. � �o � � � � m rr-� � � � '�" H �"> � � '� +� � �� _I I � � P ( ;� i � I ► � I � ► � , �---- � m o � � ` � f -- a �, � Z ' � j �-I � I � � ..� � r � � I Z • � „► �.A�iG t 0 �� • � . i.. ..� � O � � O � � �� o . � � � v 0 0 a � n "'c -� o ; s � -1 0 0 ` �, a � o 0 o m Z� o o � � � o— ° , co � s�. � a -a- � . � s�. rn o o r- � m � • W o o � 4' A ° �~ 1'� 3 � ,� � ' O_ __O • ^^ ��Y��' �� `�. ��, _'` �Gf � `r� � � � f:� �.� D -f � .¢ —O � � � �n, � E�ti�� <' E:.r � p —� ,. �� I o ' � � �' ..��.��,•. �; � � � O p �'�. � t� ��'�� : � — Q 9► <" �� ' �`�� ' �.' �' f� p 6-- �" ° �'� `'��;,`.�!""� �, , � �] �!�' . c; ...� f- � -—— � � �.,, �,�,�:' �,�, '+v ��,'a F O p � V� �� :� �'�,� ' Q ~ � � f C. rz� � tv��:A L� � Q � � � ��[ 1/ �*'' t .� .`j ' � `�. ._. �aJ . ✓ � l+J i1 �M � �.y �.;�•� :) /�ld ' ;�,'. �; � , j} - � � �''� t '9 '��' �:� `°' �.-�s;� � '� -: , �' r Q, ;,� �� r' �� •.��'� �� , j 5/ e, $) 4'' • � •✓ � •� ��L '•:✓,.�.;� t �✓a.� � 0 � �'"� ^1 A � � �y} j�'�� `�� 1 �' � '.;i� il'! ��j �'� ._) �• e:. � � � �� ' l � ' � � : �. F,;; . �;;r t�, „3 �Y t _ w ��_� J� J r,- J :;, \ �. �� .;,.� ►., � 'V �:. W � �� !��• R•� t�•i�1iiJ��W� ,1 _�� W� ;�..y 1' � u'' � ai/ � v✓ ^ n � �s..3 �) f �� ,✓ r�� .�� . j C `� .'•)r... _ 4,r :� �J ,s 'r `"� � � ._ � — �. _. � � � � � _��- - .. .. `'i,� ,, � Y � �� .�� - � . K , - - - - o - � �O o • �— a � � o o � _ �, � �� o'o �pOO . .a. o �- r- �� :�� —� — �43 �-, �?' �; � � y .. �. � o < m �,,,,, �.:,,''3_ c� �., - � � ATTACHMENT C3 �� S T. � � -1'- � �� I I i �D Ml/RRAY dR H/GH � � ( I � O � � A T H L E T/C f/EL D - ��'� � _ ) O �Q � I I � � f� '0 s-e2e � I � �:� 1� � ST . � Z -a c o 0 0 �, r o � D � � 0 0 O O , L� 7� C � 'i � -0- m O O O I O � � :� _ � � Z O O O � `O � � �O- O O O ' –1 -- Q �' � � � I3 V► _ o- Z O O O �\ , �� o � , �1 � � O m � � p � ` ` C � S a i N � �" � �. , o o .� o m � ^ Z O p A O � �` D E}--- � O O � < 2 C-1 � � p \ p�\ � O O p0 C� � n � O ' p �� "'0" �_ O � � � Z ^ O K o � • o b o � ��. �� ❑ � � ° o , ,, , c� � �, /o , oo � � � � oo;o ¢ o o ¢ ¢ m� � .�� `� , .-U L lt w .. -�.—■—.a.�.t.�sa � � 1 �� } - y,� I � � Q 00 . 0 0 Q � 0 � � � � Q � � V� },�{` � � i O ' T O`� � � - - - - - 3 , ^ ` 'T 1 � � c ! � � i 0 � � � � Z 4 O � �,� � ,, i � A f r1 O p p O O 0 � � � J� n� y-{ �V �Gi�► a� �i � ��-�, Q_.� � lS N d�g I -� ti �i '1S � . o,��+ . N� , � � t�` ^� , � o �, o _� o , � , 0 0 00 0 00 0 � � a Q � � � ; D �, �O; < < � � : � � � i n � Q � � i � � /�, � _['� _❑ ' -O i � � / � LJ i � � /i��i� A � i i � � � i � � ' ,� � 000000� o000 � ;o '000� �� a ¢ ° pD , , o00 � T ' N d a � rn 0 1', b\ \ ls w� Hl ' 0 0 . � o 0 0 000 00 00000 C o o c '� � i ��. A � O i'�------• �-�—�n�� ! C7 � � � 9 ATTACHMFNT C4 � M ACA�-E 57E Co��EGE � R � �j Qpo o � � poob o0000 �o � � I I 1 I I ; ; j � f '" -r i I I � W i i � r--- - � U � � Q I t W I I i I � i i � � o � a oii � b � � o00 0 � o i _� �,_ � - -- _= ` � � ��.��_ � -- - � C --- �T � ' --.— _'"_� C L.._... J - -_- � � / .•s•�, �[coMhEN�f� � � C�rus 8owwcA+tY _ �. o � 0�� o I � � _�____ ,wcus�t� r � CG�l.Ilbif � �� • � �V E. • � � O ' � • • ' v � O � � � 1 ♦ . J m U U � Q � �p a ¢ Q O 00 O V �pp 000 t r � O � � � O L,�] � N � � ---- � --- i 0 � O O �--- ----a =a= �0 0 � o 0 0 o a � � • 9_ oOQo p-- ' . 4 GP� oi ; ; i , o� d � b �. � , 0 O O O � O O O O � MACALESTER � - - o 0 o r 0 0 � �. o O � 0 N � � _Q___ p �' p COLLEGE � � � O O �o "- � O v 2 p O ° 0 -----� � ,O p � W O� O � O O I — Q � p � � � �� Y � � p C"i'; � ATTACHMENT C5 C��`� /`S�d � V V 2 5 2� < (� � � Q � � �� ^ � � - � °� � . . � '�= ( r � O na rGt� =m- r � ; 6 5 5 = .� � � o l� n CO s , -A Z �^ � N �, o — n � 0 � � �; _ .� -- r � ' � G � ►i � - � , , � i -r n . 9 � � _ � o , p, � 2 � � o r _ A i � bN ;�) 0 � � � � � H � �c � Z o N � O � �, � ' -� D � , Z. m O = -I � � s � � � � !� � r � -I < .� � r m rr' °f_O-- y �' . " a � G , -�N �, . � • 1 � �--- � - ro r l � � cn m ' � n � O� O 1' Z � ' _� � tp � A i � � � � �o N (^IOf < A \.J A � Q j I J� � D , , C _�_ O • � � LOUIS� > . � . ; � � � � � � O ON N � � � A O� o . 3 m � . � � � , __._------. ----�-_,� .--- - - � ATTACHMENT C6 � UN I VERS IT�( oF N�i N�+EsoTA — ST. Pqt�1� CA�MPNS � � � _ cnr� u�rirs a�� ' I � .- � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 P � U/V/VERS/TY OF M/NN� �0 0 0 .�o.. � � O O O �M..f.� � O O O o \��-� � O p p ' �o_ �o o _.� I AGR/CULTURAL ° � �.�. 0 0° o -0�-J� � .� Re�o►�nended _ o _ a _4 a____ 1 ��►Pus � o� 0 0 0--- oe : � � � Bo,,�4�r 0 0 0 -- o 0 0 0 4 � o -�o� � _o--- -o- o o�o r --« a --��AV E. � -_- -- o- - — - -D--- -- o o_ -- - Q � - — — o -- o- o o � �.-- o � �, i � _9__ - o, � p ,�. ) , � o� o [CJ J . f' '° U �� a � � `� 0 0 '-� �- -o I _._ _ __- _ �� \ ( � • o 0 0• � �� ° ° � U �a�; o o I � .l'��' � O --4 � n6�B�1 �,.,y � --�- � . 3-��i)� -'\�F. �__ � ' �r�-. '�'.�� 0 ?l, J1 ' l_l? `� . 0 � . � � a � o a,00 00 0= � I � � � � oa o �` W 6 ° r--, > ,, �� o�o 0 0 0 o a --°- �- o_ � CoMMON WEALTH qV�, � . _ � �� Oi � 0 p Q i O i v O �_�� O Q O O �i � � O i �Q O � 4 �' ��o� � � O- Z . Z $T. � � � �� —o � • -- ---Q- W O >- O � Q - --- --Q= , � O--- ---- V � 00 OQ �.�' O p I . T lT�� '-�1 � � • � � . • � . . • � . • • • • • • • • • • a • • � • �� • • � • • • • i , Q � c� �� 0 � �� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • � • • . • • . • . . • • �� . . � � � � '• � • • • • ! • • • • 11 � � • • • • • • • • • • . ! A � � = I� i � � � � i � � �i 1� � � �,.�, �1 • _ IIU � � • • • • • • ��, . • � • • • � • � • • • � • .0 �"� � • • • �� • • • • • • : • . ' � ' � � �� • � • • � • • � �► � � • � . • • • • � • • • • u � � �+ • ' �u� �► � �o ATTACHMEfJT C8 � � May 13, 1985 INTERPRETATION OF ZONING CODE REQUIREMENTS � FOR COLLEGES, UNIVERSITIES, AND SEMINARIES There is very little in the Zoning Code that specifically addresses the location � and expansion of campus boundaries or application of the parking requirement for colleges, universities, and seminaries. When an issue is not specifically addressed in the Zoning Code, the Office of the Zoning Administrator (located in � the Division of Housing and Building Code Enforcement) interprets the Code. If someone is dissatisfied with an interpretation, it can be ultimately appealed to the City Council . Items 1-5 below constitute the Office of the Zoning � Administrator' s current verbal interpretation of the location and expansion of campus boundaries. Item 6 clarifies the Zoning Administrator' s position regarding parking. This written version of these interpretations has been reviewed and � approved by the Office of the Zoning Administrator. Campus Boundaries 1 . A college, university, or seminary campus , for the purposes of the Zoning Code, � is considered to be the traditional , platted area of the campus. 2. Fraternities, sororities , and dormitories outside this traditional , platted ,�' area are not considered to be within the campus boundary, even if the property is located adjacent to the platted area. ,•;,.�•�. � �, 3. Fratern�ties, sororities , and dormitories established since 1975 (when the current Zoning Code was adopted) must be located within 250 feet of the campus , boundary and must have a special condition use permit. The 250 feet is � measured from the property line of the campus boundary. 4. Property near the traditional , platted campus which is purchased for use by the schmol , such as a residential structure or office building, is not considered � to be within the campus boundary. If the uses to which these structures are put are not "permitted uses" but are "permitted uses subject to special � conditions" in the zone they are located in, a special condition use permit must be obtained. For example, a residential structure in a residential ione which is used for office space by a school would require a special condition � use permit. A single family home owned by a school and rented out as a single family home would not require a special condition use permit. 5. A special condition use permit is not needed in cases where the college, � university, or seminary purchases property that was owned and legally used by another college, university, or seminary. Parking Requirements for College, University, and Seminary Use ,�. 6. There are a number of parking requirements in the Zoning Code for uses or � people typically found on campuses: dormitory beds, students and staff, auditoriums, and stadiums. The Office of the Zoning Administrator has determined that colleges , universities, and seminaries must comply only with the parking requirements for dormitory beds, and students and staff. Parking � demand generated by stadiums and auditoriums usually occurs during "off-peak" times, and can usually be accommodated by the parking provided for students, - staff, and other peak-time users. � C� ��b � � C. PARKING REQUIREMENT Introduction � The second major issue, in addition to campus boundaries, that the College Zoning Task Force was asked to address is the current Zoning Code parking � requirements for college, university, and seminary uses. The parking requirements are as follows: College, university or seminary - One space for every three employees � and members of the staff and one for every three full-time students not residing on campus. � Dormitory - One space for every three beds. � Fraternity or sorority - One space for every five active members, or one for every two beds, whichever is greater. � The college, university, and seminary parking requirement was officially revised in July 1981 , to what it currently is now. Between 1975 (when the current zoning code was adopted) and 1981 the parking requirement was: "one � space for every one employee". The dormitory and fraternity/sorority parking requirements have been unchanged since 1975. Prior to 1975 there were no parking requirements for these uses . � Phase I of the task force' s study, which this report addresses, has dealt with parking and campus boundary issues. Phase II , which will be completed in the fall of 1985, will address off-campus student housing issues. For � this reason, the fraternity and sorority parking requirement will not be addressed until Phase II . � Background: Issues and Problems There are two primary problems with the current parking requirements for colleges, universities and seminaries: 1) there is no requirement for part- � time students; and 2) the requirement has been difficult to monitor and enforce. � Part-time students are now a significant percentage of the student population at many of St. Paul ' s campuses. This percentaye will grow as the nature of higher education changes with increasing emphasis on life- � long education. Enforcement of the reyuirement by the City has been difficult in the past because each of the post-secondary institutions covered by the requirement � were in existence before 1975, when the City first established a parkin,g requirement. Therefore, each school has a certain level of legal nonconformance with the parking requirement, and is responsible only for � providing parkiny for any growth or expansion that has occurred since 1975. � 15 j � No study had been done, until now, to establish each school ' s level of � legal nonconformance, nor had a procedure been established to monitor enrollment and staff changes at each school . A further problem has been � that student and staff increases have not necessarily been tied to construction of a new building, when additional parking is normally required for all other types of uses. As a result, the parking requirement has not been adequately enforced by the City since it was first � established. By contrast, the parking requirement for dormitories, which is one space � for every three beds, is relatively clearcut and easy to enforce. When a new dormitory is constructed, off-street parking in the amount required must be provided. A commitment to provide the parking must be shown on an � approved site plan before a building permit is issued. Considerations in Establishing a Parking Requirement A parking reyuirement should: 1) require enough parking to avoid creating � excess on-street parking and traffic congestion around the use in question; but 2) avoid requiriny excessive parkiny to the point where owners or � developers must provide parking spaces that stand empty all but a few times during the year, or where owners and developers are constantly applying for variances to the parking requirement. The best parkiny requirement will find an appropriate balance between these two extremes. � Determining parking demand is the key to finding this balance and establishing a workable parking requirement. Parking demand at a college, � university, or seminary is yenerated by faculty, staff, students, and visitors. Enough parking should be provided to accommodate peak hour parking demand, which occurs when the accumulation of all persons using � classroom space, office space, and university services such as the library, study halls, administrative services, recreational/social facilities, and facilities for special events reaches its peak for the day. Persons transferring or moving between functions at different locations should also � be included. An additional factor that affects parking demand is the mode of arrival , which is the percentage of persons driviny, usiny public transportation, biking, or walking to arrive on campus. � Unfortunately, the time and resources required to determine peak hour parking demand at a particular campus would be significant. And each � campus is different depending upon its mix of resident and commuter students, full and part-time students, on-campus parking policies, proximity to public transportation, the types of services it offers, the number of special events it schedules, and its general hours of operation. � City staff are not in a position to undertake the type of studies necessary to determine peak hour parking demand at each of the City' s post-secondary � schools. However, each school , in its own best interest, should undertake these or similar studies to determine the amount of parking needed to serve its students, staff, and visitors, and make every effort to provide that parking. Many of the city' s schools do perform some type of parking � � 16 � ��/S�'D � � facility analysis already. These efforts should continue. The City' s Zoniny Code parking requirement should ideally function as a guide or standard to aid each school in determining its own parkiny facility needs, _ � although the City will enforce the standard in the Zoning Code as a minimum requirement. � Analyzing the Current Parkiny Requirement An alternative to analyzing the City' s existing parking requirement through a study of peak hour parking demand at each school is to compare St. Paul 's � requirement with those of other cities, and to analyze how the current require►nent would function if applied to the City' s existing colleges, universities, and seminaries as if they were newly constructed. � A 1971 Planniny Advisory Service Study entitled "An Approach to Determininy Parkiny Demand surveyed parkiny requirements in 66 city ordinances. � Thirty-four of the 66 ordinances included a parkiny reyuirement for colleges and universities. Of the 34, 29 appeared to require less parking than St. Paul now requires, 2 required about the same, and 3 required more than St. Paul . These numbers are approximate since direct comparisons are � difficult to make when different units of ineasure are used. (Some cities require spaces by number of classroom seats, auditorium seats, or square feet of floor area) . � A survey by Planniny Division staffi of current Zoniny Code parkiny requirernents for a number of comparable U.S. cities indicated that St. Paul ' s reyuirement, by comparison, is in the mid to upper range on the � scale of colleye parking requirernents. Both of these surveys appear to indicate that St. Paul reyuires more � parking for colleges, universities, and seminaries than most cities across the country. � An analysis of the current Zoning Code requirement as it would apply to the city's existing schools if there were constructed today sheds further light on the adequacy of the requirement. Table 1 (next page) indicates each school ' s surplus or deficiency under the full Zoniny Code requirements � (disreyarding their 1975 level of legal non-conforrnance) . It is apparent that the schools that have experienced some problem with � overflow on-street parkiny are yenerally the ones that are deficient in terms of ineeting the full Zoning Code reyuirement. As evidence of that, the task force, as a part of its work, established individual subcommittees � for three of the five schools identified as having a deficiency to discuss ways of improviny the parkiny situations at those campuses. The numbers listed in the table above generally appear to be an accurate reflection of the parking problems or relative lack of parking problems at each of St. � Paul ' s colleye, university, and seminary campuses. This indicates that overall , the Zoning Code parkiny requirement is an appropriate one, but one in need of some rninor adjustments. � � 17 � ! Table 1 � � Full Zoning Code Requirement:** � Number of Parking Spaces School* Surplus/Deficient, Fall 1984 College of St. Catherine +143 � College of St. Thomas -516 Concordia College -101 � Hamline University -229 Luther Northwestern Seminary +132 � Macalester College -2g7 � St. Paul Seminary +102 St. Paul T.V.I . +199 � William Mitchell College of Law - 34 � � � * The University of Minnesota is absent from this list because the campus � itself is not in St. Paul but in Falcon Heights, therefore the school is not subject to the City' s parking requirement. The School of the Associated Arts, a small specialized professional school of art and design located on � Summit Avenue, was inadvertently omitted from this study. With their Fall 1984 enrollment of 110 full-time students and 30 faculty and staff, their Zoning Code requirement is 47 spaces. The school currently has very limited � off-street parking, but it has changed very little since 1975, when parking requirements for colleges, universities and seminaries first went into effect. � ** The full Zoning Code requirement is 1 space for every 3 employees, 3 full- time students living off-campus, and 3 dormitory beds. � � 18 � ��:�i�� One of the minor adjustrnents needed is the addition of a parking requirement for part-time students. As stated earlier, part-time students � are a growing component of the student body at nearly every campus. One school that particularly highliyhts the need for a part-time student pa�king requirement is William Mitchell , whose enrollment consists primarily of part-time students. � The other adjustment or change that is needed is to develop a workable system for monitoring enrollment and staff changes at the city's post- � secondary schools and subsequently enforcing the Zoning Code parking requirement as appropriate. � On-Street Parking Problems It should be noted that the colleges, universities, and seminaries are not the only uses contributing to the on-street parkiny problem that exists � around many of St. Paul 's campuses. Other uses such as businesses and residences also create demand for on-street parking. Before 1975, when St. Paul adopted its current Zoning Code, there were minimal or non-existent � parking requirements for most types of land use. Also, much of St. Paul developed during the era of the street car, when people didn't rely as heavily on the passenger automobile as they do today. As a result of these � two factors, many businesses and older apartment buildinys have little or no off-street parking. Recommendations: � Based on the discussion above, the College Zoning Task Force makes the following recommendations: � 1. The Zonin Code arkiny re uirement for colle es, universities, and seminaries shou be revised to read: One s ace for ever t ree � emp oyees and mem ers of the sta , and, one space or every 3 full- time students not residiny on cam�us or one for every 3 part-time students, whichever is greater. � This change recognizes that part-time students are now a significant and yrowing proportion of student enrollment at many of the city's post-secondary institutions, and that they generate parking demand just � as full-time students do. Staff size and student enrollment is an appropriate measure upon which to base a parking requirement, rather than square feet of floor area in campus buildinys or number of seats in classrooms and auditoriums, because it best captures the actual � number of people coming to the campus, who are directly responsible for generating demand for parking. � Revisiny the requirement to apply to full or part-time students, depending on which is greater, will address thie problem of schools whose student bodies consist primarily of part-time students. Presently, William Mitchell is the only school that falls into that � cateyory, but there may be others in the future as the nature of higher education changes. This type of parkiny requirement is also appropriate because full-time students attend primarily duriny the day, � while part-time students attend primarily at niyht, therefore it rnakes sense to base the parkiny requirement on whichever group is largest. � 19 � The use of the terms full and part-time in defining student enrollment � should not create a consistency problem. Most schools use a standard definition for full and part-time. A full-time student is one who is � taking 75� or more of the credits that must be taken per quarter or semester in order to graduate in the standard amount of time needed to complete the deyree. For a bachelor's degree, the standard amount of � time needed to complete the degree is four years. A part-time student is one who is taking less than 75% of the needed credits per quarter or semester. These definitions are also used by the state' s Higher Education-Coordinating Board, which collects enrollment statistics for �- all post-secondary institutions in Minnesota. The parking requirement for dormitories, which is one space for every � three beds, is appropriate and should remain unchanged. 2. This stud has established for each college, university, and seminary, the fo lowin : 1 the 1975 evel of legal non-conformance with the � Zoning Code parking requirement; 2 the deficiency in meeting the post- 1975 re uirement, if any, for growth in enro ment and staff size that occurred between 1975-1984; and 3 Fa , 1984 base ine numbers or � enrollment, facu t and staff size, and dormitory beds. See Attachment P1 . City staff shou d use these figures in enforcing the parking requirement in the future. � As stated earlier, a major problem with enforcing the parking requirement in the past has been that no study was ever done to establish for each school its 1975 level of leyal nonconformance, its ,� actual 1975-1984 parking requirement, and its current enrollment, staff size, and number of dormitory beds. This study has established these numbers, which will make it possible for city staff to enforce the � parking requirement in the future. 3. The Fall , 1984 baseline numbers for enrollment, facult and staff size, � dormitory eds, and on-campus parking spaces shou d e inc uded in the overa s ecial condition use ermit that will be issued for each co ege, universit , and seminar as art of this stud . The ermit will also include a description of the recognized campus boundary . In � addition to the two conditions currentl re uired by the Zonin Code C . 6U.413 6 a , a t ird cond�tion o each permit shou d e that said school sha not exceed the student enrollment, staf size, and or � dormitory bed levels identified in the ermit, or, provide arking or any growt or expansion that has occurred in accordance with t e Zoning Code parking requirement. This officially establishes, for both the Cit and the school the � Y , Fall , 1984 numbers on enrollment, faculty and staff size, dormitory beds, and on-campus parking as a baseline from which to calculate � required parkiny for future yrowth and expansion. It also establishes the principle that colleges, universities, and seminaries, like all other land uses in the city, are responsible for providing parking as � required by the Zoning Code. � 20 � � � �5�-/5�� ` In future years, if a school has yrown or expanded and parking has been provided to accommodate that growth (or a variance has been granted waiving some or all of the parking requirement) , the special condition � use permit should be amended administratively to identify the new enrollment, staff size, and dormitory bed figures as the new baseline numbers (replacing the 1984 baseline numbers) from which to calculate � parking required for additional future growth and expansion. 4. Planning Division staff should, on an annual basis, administratively � monitor compliance with the cond tions of each special condition use permit to determine compliance with the Zoning Code parkin� g requirement. Each school should submit to Planning Division staff by January 31 of � every year a report with total enrollment (full-time and part-time) , staff size, and dormitory bed numbers from the preceeding fall quarter or semester. If the total number of any of the following: 1) full-time � students living off-campus; 2) part-time students; 3) faculty and staff; or 4) dormitory beds, has increased cumulatively by more than ten percent from the recognized baseline figures, the school will be required to demonstrate that it has provided the required parking to � accommodate that growth. If the required parking has not yet been provided, the school will be required to submit a plan for the provision of that parkiny. If the parkiny has not been provided by � January 31 of the following year, Planning Division staff shall recommend to the Planning Commission that a public hearing be held to review the special condition use permit. A significant amount of time � is built into this process during which the City and the school can work out a solution that will benefit the school and community. � The special condition use permit procedure recommended above simply creates a mechanism through which the City can monitor and enforce its parking requirement for all colleges, universities, and seminaries in the city. Around some schools, a college/neighborhood-based group has � been formed or may be formed in the future to deal with parking problems around an individual school . Such is the case with the College of St. Thomas, which has agreed to work with the Joint � Committee on Community/College Relations to develop a parking plan for St. Thomas. Efforts such as these should be encouraged by the Planniny Commission. Further, the Planning Commission should strongly consider � and be responsive to the work and recommendations of these groups, and the particular circumstances of each situation, in deciding how and when the Zoning Code parking requirement should be enforced. � As is current procedure, the Housing and Building Code Enforcement Division staff will continue to review all building permit applications for new construction, enlargement, or increased intensity of use of a � building for compliance with Zoning Code parking requirements. Staff will do this for buildiny permit applications from colleges and universities, just as they do for all other types of uses in the city. The establishment, by this study, of each school ' s 1975 level of legal � nonconformance and its Fall , 1984 baseline figures for enrollment, staff size, and dormitory beds will make it easier for City staff to � 21 � � � determine compliance with the requirement. In all cases where a college, university, or seminary is applying for a building permit for new construction, enlargement, or increased intensity of use of a � � building, Housing and Building Code Enforcement staff will consult with Planning Division staff to determine the school ' s most recent enrollment, staff, and dormitory figures and what the overall parking � situation is. 5. Four schools have been identified as having a historic 1975-1984 � arkin de iciency. The P annin� Commission should continue to monitor the par ing situation around each of the four schooTs. If the Planning Commission becomes aware of increasing parking problems � around one or more of these schools, or is dissatisfied with progress being made toward reducing the historic parking deficienty, it may do one of the following: 1) require the school , in conjunction with the � surrounding neighborhood, to develop a parking implementation plan for reducing the historic Zoning Code parking deficiency to zero; or 2) recommend to the Mayor and City Council that no additional building permits be issued for that school and its special condition use permit � be revoked until the historic parking deficiency has been reduced to zero. The legal , historic 1975-1984 parking deficiency for these four schools is as follows: College of St. Thomas (-241); Concordia College � (-24); Macalester College (-127) ; and William Mitchell College of Law (-7) . This process is already in progress for the College of St. Thomas and '� William Mitchell College of Law. The Planning Commission should continue to monitor progress toward resolving parking problems at these � schools. 6. The City should actively explore available creative financing mechanisms to aid colleges, universities, and seminaries in financin the � construction of needed parking faci ities. St. Paul ' s post-secondary institutions are a unique and treasured � resource of the city, contributing much to its quality of life. The City should seriously consider developing alternative financing mechanisms that will aid in parking facility construction to help these institutions and the neighborhoods around them continue to prosper and � thrive. The City has allocated significant resources to promoting downtown parking development; it should now consider directing some of these resources to the neighborhoods of the city. � � � � 22 � - ��'S/.5�U � ATTACHMENT P1 tp (Yf V C1 CT A W N �-' � ~ ~ . . . . . . . • . . > �O'TI V-i n O O N � C')E t�Vf t/�!/� c'9 3 E r C 2 C1 n N f'� t/1 c") �V1 � �+m o o �or. m �+ oa �oc � a oo .*o r*o � c � y �� f'f c1 • 3 • -r t� �n et •3 �� • � �' � � m �o .-• a ? � �+� < -r n o X N t0 N � J �.� 7 � fD N fD N �• N O -1�D f7 N O ,� a � v �c a o, a a � A �s i -s � � i �� o��c N3 �+ �c3 onc -sc �n � � � � mn om c+�n � N 'O� '-+ 1 7 � �C � � Z �• � � � N t0�-+ O 3 N (D N O c't d W O �D O � fl fD V t0 �A�• -' I 'S fD � �G N �A � "h v�i� �p rtrti ... 3•s � a ��n� � J � � � m v °' e�w -s ..., . �c � � r' m � �c� � m n oo� v+�n > > s a�c rt cr � �+O "S �"' F„ V N N F+ W V O �f� C V_-r-� O �-' t0 A O� V� tD N r+ 1 tM � r, U1 N fD j F+�G rt W 1C d � 00 Qe � 7 'S (D p a�� r cT� � �O S �-F n�T � H d �� A N��n N N C 7 f+ � � N �? � O V N N O `'' v �� d . P fD vf fD O� O �+ p � A r+ � W �+O fD fD 7 l0�h 7 N 7 O�fi ei �.�Z C A � �n � �n tc 3 � -A in fD �j �p .. � n� � (1 n fD � ►+ W OD Vt A V 1 -�� 7C N O �tn � O O tT N W � cJ� �--�A � � W O E � � N N O� 01 A W A 07'1 G� � C JA�� .P� n � n ...� � 7 (�D O'�S fl v� �F O� !/� � � J m ... � a --� a �.�o`° a� v � � � � - '° s a z� .r 3�c c n c r � rf 7 j Iwl 1-+ r+ � W (71 A O OD V1 D � � t� �p N V p1 A (T l0 t0 CT O� < V7 fp pr N A O W tT N N O O N 1 j � � n+-+ O � y, ni v a -s ° � i �� o�oc � � .�J.� a-� m a � '� r° m � 1°�n tO � � o ^ a°. � �� o � a� z '� 5 � � � � m .� �. i � . < � a �� c�n �c rn p � �v cn � z v iv m � V p1 W N � lp Q1 v fD d O JO n '•3`C � pp r r+ N O ti+ 01 � � '7 7 � � � 7��. a � � rt � •� � � m �-.�+� f+�ic .. � � � y � � �f�7 � ��O(D �n 0 N�TI � d p J ef N c fD C Z n�m � + + � + i � � + �� v � �• J w � o � w nNi o ,`r-� � �.c -� m � a d� A �O N V N lp O� � (D N fD 3 J 1n 7 \� o n z o> > n � 7 In �+ A � � ,--, N m �� N � O 1/� lJl-♦f � � m w c a � N fD � r+ 1 1 r+ 1 '-. + Q1 1 .C.�.�� 1'� „�y1 � 7 a �--� 1 1 l0 1 N J1 N j Z 7 !-� 'yl ��Q� , tl� 3 l0 � � Q �7 3 rD A � j � rf h � n o ,.. � �-�s� .-�vva s mv �c-san � `" � `° + + + + + + + + cVn< j a 7 ��N V W N ti+ p7 V ►+ O r�a 7 � � O O � 'A v W N V W O �-' � �O�D iC O � J � OD d 7 c E �'� A � � �� 3 - 0 � ? ao'� �c�� ms �iav < F < � � � � � + � iv � n��•�i' � �p p� �p 1 1 N � A N A � �•C � � N V 1 I V I � A 1-� I (� yl (p � � O 7 \� OD � W w n ^ � A na� � o c V+ rr v � o c*-s ro rc m nn n�-- n• � 23 � D � . PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES USED BY INDIVIDUAL SCHOULS Listed below is information on the parking management policies used by each � of the following schools: University of Minnesota, College of St. Catherine, St. Paul Technical-Vocational Institute, Concordia College, Macalester College, and Luther Northwestern Theological Seminary. � Information on the parking at the remaining schools can be found in the individual subcommittee reports in the next section. University of Minnesota � 1. Enhanced bus service to the University of Minnesota through a cooperative effort with the Metropolitan Transit Commission. �, 2. Promotion of commuter ride-share proyrams. 3. Lease of parking space (Minnesota Fairgrounds) . � 4. Remote feeder lots for park and ride program adjacent to intercampus � busways. � 5. Sticker parking for students guaranteeing daytime parking in selected areas. � 6. Contract lony-term parkiny for either students or faculty and staff. 7. Hourly parking lots at varying rates, depending upon proximity to the � campus center. 8. Metered short-term - high turnover parking where dictated. ,� 9. Parking ramps - largely contract and hourly parking. College of St. Catherine � 1. Parking sticker required for all vehicles parking on campus, $5 charge � per year, must be renewed annually. 2. Certain lots designated for faculty/staff, or studentsonly. � 3. Five to ten dollar parking tickets (College, not City-issued tickets) issued for violations of on-campus parking regulations. 4. Vehicles of repeat violators (those with three or more unpaid parking � tickets) are towed off campus and impounded by a private towing company. Vehicles parked in an unsafe or blatantly illegal manner may � be towed immediately. 5. Patrons of special events at the College are charged $1.OU for parking. � During evening special events, patrons are directed away from student parking areas to insure that students will have safe, adequate parking at night. � 24 � � �� fSt. Paul Technical-Vocational Institute � 1. Separate student and staff parking stickers are distributed. 2. Sticker is required to park in TVI lots�but the lack of a sticker is not rigorously enforced. � 3. There is a designated staff lot. 4. Campus security personnel issue parking tickets for on-campus � violations (parking in handicapped, visitor spaces, fire lanes; students parking in staff lot) . � 5. Security: lots are well-lighted. 6. Lots will be redesigned/restriped after current building addition is � completed. Will result in a better system but will not add spaces. Concordia College � 1. Everyone parking a car on campus must register the car and get a parking sticker. � 2. No charge for stickers except for a fenced and locked lot across Hamline Avenue. Students may use the lot and receive a key to get in for $5.OU per yuarter. � 3. Part of one lot is restricted to faculty and staff, but only during regular business hours. � 4. Tickets are issued by campus security personnel . 5. Parking regulations are explained in the student handbook. � 6. Security: campus escorts are available upon request. Al1 lots have hiyh intensity lights. � Macalester College � 1. Parking stickers are required, but are available to anyone who parks a car on campus at no charge. 2. No lots are designated for faculty/staff or students only. � 3. Campus security issues parking tickets, $5-10 fine. Flagrant violations sometimes result in irrrnediate towing. � 4. Parking reyulations are explained in a special parking booklet that is distributed with the parking sticker. � 5. Security: additional lighting and campus escorts are provided. 6. Additional parking spaces were added in one lot by taking out traffic � islands. � 25 � Luther Northwestern Theological Seminary � 1. Parking stickers encouraged for all students driviny to school , even if they plan on parking on-street. No charge for stickers. �, 2. No formal ticketing or follow-up procedure for monitoring on-campus parking. 3. All faculty and staff who drive have assigned stalls with name lates. � P 4. Stalls with heater plugs can be rented by anyone during the cold � weather months. 5. Students liviny within walking distance are encouraged not to bring � their cars on campus. 6. Superintendent of Buildiny and Grounds meets with each class at the � beginning of the year to explain the parking regulations. 7. A pamphlet explaininy campus and city parking regulations will be distributed to students for the first time in Fall , 1985. � 8. Some lots have been restriped to yain more parking stalls. 9. "No Seminary Parking" signs have been erected by the Seminary on � certain adjacent city streets. Although somewhat unusual , the City' s Public Works Department will allow them as long as they seem to be working. � 10. Seminary tries to respond to neighbors' complaints about Seminary students' vehicles by identifying the owner and contacting him/her. � � � � � � � 26 � � � �,�- �'.5/S��' E. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS � REPORT OF THE COLLEGE OF ST. THOMAS SUBCOMMITTEE � TO THE COLLEGE ZONING TASK FORCE May, 1985 � Introduction A group of representatives from the College of St. Thomas and surrounding � neighborhood held a series of ineetings in April and May, 1985, to discuss parking and campus boundary issues around the College. Most of those who were on the subcommittee are also members of the Joint Committee on � Community/College Relations. The subcommittee members are listed below: Joe Clysdale Gary Park Charles Keffer � 2041 Selby Ave. Subcommittee Chair Provost Merriam Park St. Paul Planning College of St. Community Council Commission Thomas � Bill Koentopp Bill Rosser Bob Nechal 1776 Ashland Ave. Assoc. Dean of 2169 Selby Ave. Merriam Park Students Merriam Park � Community Council College of St. Community Council Thomas � Gayle Summers Jim Reid Donna Drummond 2258 Goodrich Ave. Vice President for City Planner District 14 Academic Affairs St. Paul Planning Community Council College of St. Division � Thomas � The subcommittee was asked by the College Zoning Task Force to recommend a campus boundary for St. Thomas and recommend appropriate actions for improving the parking situation in and around the campus. This report contains a map � with a recommended campus boundary (Attachment A) , recommendations regarding potential future expansion, background information on parking, and a set of parking-related recommendations. � Campus Boundary: Background The traditional , platted area of the St. Thomas campus is bounded by Cretin, � Cleveland, Selby, and Sumnit Avenues. Over the last 10-15 years the College has acquired a number of properties east of Cleveland Avenue and south of Summit Avenue (identified on Attachment S1) . � Currently, the College and the St. Paul Seminary are negotiating an agreement that will formally affiliate the two institutions. As a result of the affiliation, St. Thomas will acquire a majority of the Seminary campus. The � preliminary boundary line that will divide the Seminary property from St. Thomas' property is shown on Attachment S1. This line may be adjusted somewhat subject to a final plat plan (which will legally subdivide the property) � approved by the City of St. Paul . � 2� � Campus Boundary: Recommendations � The St. Thomas Subcommittee agreed on a series of recommendations regarding the current campus boundary and areas for potential future expansion of campus- related uses. These recommendations are listed below: � 1. The current campus boundary should be defined as enclosing the area bounded by Summit, Cretin, Selby, and Cleveland Avenues. When the affiliation � between the College of St. Thomas and the St. Paul Seminary is finalized, that portion of the Seminary campus acquired by St. Thomas will become part of the St. Thomas campus as well . 2. The College of St. Thomas has no intention of buying additional properties � and expanding campus uses further east of Cleveland Avenue or south of Grand Avenue. One exception to this would be the possible future � acquisition of the Stewart Apartment building on the northeast corner of Laurel and Cleveland Avenues. It is anticipated that the property will be willed to the College upon the death of the present owner. The College � would accept this gift, maintain the structure as a standard apartment building, and rent units to St. Thomas students. The three properties east of Cleveland currently owned by St. Thomas � include Chiuminatto Music Hall , 44 North Cleveland and 2057 Portland, all used as faculty and administrative offices. The special condition use permits issued by the Planning Commission for the latter two properties � include four additional conditions. Conditions Number 2 and 3 are as follows: "(2) Granting of the permit will not be interpreted as expanding the boundaries of the main campus; and (3) The structure(s) will eventually � be restored to use as single-family housing (2057 Portland) or a duplex (44 N. Cleveland)". The subcommittee supports the spirit of these conditions, and the College � of St. Thomas will consider divesting itself of the properties east of Cleveland, including the Stewart Apartment Building if acquired, and the properties currently owned by the College south of Grand, if facility � planning over the long term indicates that these properties are no longer needed by St. Thomas. 3. The two blocks directly south of the St. Thomas campus bounded by Summit, � Cleveland, Grand, and Cretin Avenues may be appropriate as an area for potential future expansion of college-related uses. Of course, all Zoning Code requirements related to expansion of college uses would continue to � apply. St. Thomas currently owns a number of properties within this area, which � are identified on Attachment S1. If any additional property is purchased by the College, and it wishes to put the property to a use not identified as an allowed use in the zoning district it is located in, a special condition use permit would be required, as is the case for any new colleye, � university, or seminary use in any area of the city. � � 28 � � �� ,.�� L � 4. Recommendations 2 and 3 represent the views of the subcommittee at this time. In the future, a consensus may develop between the neighborhood and the College regarding suitable and unsuitable areas for expansion that � differs from the above stated recommendations. This is entirely appropriate. 5. One of the prope�ties owned by St. Thomas on the north side of Grand Avenue � is the International Education building (2093 Grand Avenue) . This building, which is in an RM-2 (multi-family residential ) zone, is being used for office space by the Colleye. A special condition use permit has � not been issued for this property, although one is required. The use of the building as office space by the College is a long standing use that is in keeping with the other office/business uses along the north side of that � block. Therefore, the subcommittee recommends that the Planning Commission issue a special condition use permit for this property, with the condition that the structure be restored to a residential use when the property is no longer needed by the College. � 6. The inclusion of the Seminary property within the St. Thomas campus, when the affiliation ayreement between the two institutions is finalized, will � somewhat reduce St. Thomas' current legal parking deficiency. However, the subcorr�nittee recognizes that this may not change or address the current parking problems, which are primarily found east of Cleveland and south of � Sumnit. The most significant parking problems are found in these areas because campus activity is currently centered in the main classroom and office buildinys on the southeastern part of the St. Thomas campus. The Joint Committee wi11 continue to discuss and work on recommendations that � address existing and future parking needs. Parking: Background � Parking around the College of St. Thomas , both on-campus and on-street, has become an issue of increasing concern for the College and neighborhood � residents. Enrollment at St. Thomas has increased significantly over the past decade, climbing from 3,200 in 1975 to approximately 6,400 in the fall of 1984. The growth has occurred in both traditional full-time students, who are primarily undergraduates attending weekday classes, and non-traditional part- � time students, primarily graduate students attending evenings and weekend classes. � With the growth in enrollment, and the accompanying growth in faculty and staff, has come an increase in parking demand. Although approximately 400 on- campus parking spaces have been added since 1975, they have not been sufficient in satisfy the increased parking demand, which has resulted in an increase in � overflow on-street parking in the surrounding neighborhood. The bulk of the overflow parking has been borne by the residential neighborhood east of Cleveland Avenue. On-street parking surveys completed by the Department of , Public Works staff in October, 1981 and March, 1982, indicate the percentage of occupied parking spaces on the block faces surrounding the campus. The results of these surveys are shown on Attachments S2 - S5. � � 29 � � Currently, there are approximately 1,050 off-street parking spaces serving the St. Thomas campus, which includes 60 spaces on the Seminary property that are � used by the College. The location and distribution of these parking spaces is shown on Attachment S6. Zonin Code Com liance: A Planning Division staff analysis was completed for � t e Co ege o St. Thomas, and all other colleges, universities, and seminaries ' in the city, to determine current compliance with the Zoning Code parking � requirement. Each institution is legally responsible for providing parking only for any growth or expansion that may have occurred since the time the parking requirements went into effect. Parking requirements first went into effect for colleges, universities, and seminaries in 1975. The requirement was � later modified in 1981 . The Planning Division staff analysis of current Zoning Code compliance has taken both of these factors into account. Listed below are Fall , 1984, totals for faculty and staff, full-time students � living off-campus, and dormitory beds for the St. Thomas campus: Fall , 1984 � Faculty and staff 772 Full-time students living 2,515 * � off-campus Dormitory beds 1,413 � Total 4,700 �. The current Zoning Code parking requirement states that one parking space must be provided for every three of the staff, students, and beds itemized above. If St. Thomas were newly constructed today, 1,566 parking spaces would be � required (4,700 Y. 3) . Approximately 1,050 spaces are currently being provided on campus, leaving a theoretical deficiency of 516 spaces. As explained above, St. Thomas is legally responsible to provide parking only , for its growth and expansion since 1975. Based on that formula, and recognizing that the parking requirement was revised in 1981 , St. Thomas' 1975- � 1984 parking requirement is 642 spaces. Since 1975, the College has added 401 spaces, therefore St. Thomas' legal parking deficiency is 241 spaces. This is illustrated in the formula below: Additional Current Zoning � 1975-1984 Parking Code Parking Provided Parking � Requirement 1975-1984 Deficiency 642 spaces - 401 spaces = 241 spaces * A parking analysis completed by McGuire Courteau Lucke Architects, Inc. � for the College indicates that 522 St. Thomas students who live off-campus live within walking distance of the campus (area identified on Attachment � S1) . � 30 � �' }'�i��d . � The addition of the Seminary property to the St. Thomas campus will reduce this � deficiency somewhat, since the Seminary has more parkiny than is required by the Zoning Code. When the affiliation and transfer of property formally occurs, St. Thomas' legal parking deficiency will be reduced to 139 spaces. In calculating this figure, Planning Division staff simply added together the � parking, staff, students, and dormitory beds for the two schools, since nearly all of the Seminary' s current parking is located on the property that St. Thomas is to acquire, and it is assumed that the Seminary will continue to use � this parking for its current operation. However, if the Seminary undertakes any new construction or building additions in the future, it will be reyuired to provide parkiny for them either on its own property or on the adjoining St. � Thomas campus through an agreement with the College. Currently, St. Thomas is planning on expanding its Summit/Cretin lot by 56 spaces. Construction is expected to begin this summer. With the addition of � these spaces, the existing St. Thomas Zoning Code parking deficiency will decrease to 185 spaces, and the deficiency after affiliation with the Seminary will decrease to 83 spaces. � Parking Management Policies: St. Thomas requires that all cars parked in its lots be registered with the school and display a sticker permit. There is no charge for the permits. Students must renew their permits annually. Day � students, faculty, and staff are allowed as many permits as necessary to reyister all vehicles they might be bringing on campus. Resident students may only receive one permit because of limited resident parking. ` Certain lots are designated for faculty/staff or resident student parking only. Other lots are open to any car displayiny a valid St. Thomas sticker. The � stadium lot is reserved for faculty and staff from 7:OU a,m.-4:00 p.m. weekdays, and is unrestricted at all other times. Campus security personnel will issue tickets to or tow or disable vehicles in � violation of on-campus parking regulations. Parkiny fines are $5-lU. The College also offers an escort service on-campus 24 hours a day. � Parking and the Joint Committee: The Joint Committee on Community/College Re ations is a group made up of representatives from St. Thomas and the surrounding community. The Committee has been in existence for nearly three � years, and meets at least once a month to discuss issues and problems of mutual concern. One of the issues the Joint Committee has dealt with is parking. On February 7, 1984, the Committee approved a thirteen point program of recommended parking actions. A number of the thirteen points have been � accomplished, progress has been made on some, and other points remain to be accomplished. The Joint Committee has made positive progress on the parking issue, and the recommendations of this subcommittee are designed to build on � that proyress. The thirteen recommended parking actions of the Joint Committee are listed � below, followed by a status report on progress-to-date for each : � � � 31 � 1. The College will make every effort to provide as part of its planning of new programs, offerings, or anticipated enrollment increases beyond � September, 1983, levels, sufficient additional parking space to comply with St. Paul zoning requirements. The College will continue efforts to bring the existing parking situation into compliance with the 1975 St. Paul codes. � Status: The College is making efforts to increase parking on the campus. These efforts are measurable and have not been tied to a current building � plan. 2. Have the College of St. Thomas assist the City of St. Paul with sanding and � snow removal on area streets, especially on Selby Avenue between Cretin and Cleveland, and on Laurel , Ashland, and Portland between Cleveland and Wilder. Status: The College has shown a willingness to assist the City with snow � related parking problems around the boundary of the campus. 3. Work to increase lot capacity through designated small car areas of � existing lots and restriping of lots, and search for pockets of space on campus that can be designated for additional parking. Status: Efforts appear to be continuing. � 4. Open lots on campus to open parking from 4:00 p.m, to 7:00 a.m. on weekdays � and on Saturdays and Sundays. Status: Efforts continue but require ongoing administrative direction. � 5. That a parking ramp be an essential element in the construction priorities of the College. Consider alternate sites, appropriate access, and maximum usage of space. � Sta�tus: A parkiny ramp or a plan for some type of ramp continues to elude the committee. � 6. Consider a van pool for employees with pick-up points at key locations, based on an employee survey. Study the car pooling potential of employees � and students and develop necessary incentives. Status: Van pools have not proven to be a viable option. 7. Encourage greater use of MTC routes. Consider providing bus passes to � College of St. Thomas employees. Examine the location of bus stops on the perimeter of the campus to increase the number of parking places. � Status: MTC was encouraged to come to the campus early in the school year with some interest being shown by the students. This effort must be � expanded. Several bus stops on Cleveland Avenue were relocated resulting in an increase in on-street parking spaces. 8. Study snow-related parking problems adjacent to the College of St. Thomas � and work to implement solutions. Status: A better coordinated effort between the City, the College and the � Community must be investigated before the 1985-86 winter. 32 � ��i��,5�-/s�� - 9. Survey the traffic volume capacity of streets surrounding the College of � St. Thomas in District 13 and District 14. Status: A traffic study is to be revisited in the Joint Committee to set � objectives for such a study. 10. Have the College of St. Thomas examine all of its parking rules and � regulations in order to improve the parking situation. Status: Annual review is required and ongoing. � 11. Encourage neighborhood residents to report traffic/parking violations to appropriate city officials. � Status: Neighborhood community issues which need to be reopened with the Community Councils. 12. Encourage the formation of neiyhborhood block clubs to solicit parking � solutions, update residents on progress to resolve parking problems, etc. Status: Community Council issues. � 13. Study ways to improve traffic safety-related issues and work to implement proposed solutions. ` Status: Neighborhood stop sign basektweave has been implemented around the campus . Lony range effects have not been measured yet. Other efforts � continue. Parking: Recommendations � The subcommittee' s parking recommendations are listed below: 1. Residential permit parking should not be implemented on its own but may be � appropriate if used in con�unction with development of a new parking faci ity. Residential permit parking east of Cleveland Avenue could be implemented, on its own, as a solution to the overflow parkiny problem there. However, � residential permit parking does not tend to work well in situations where there is little or no alternative to parking on-street. Permit parking may be appropriate if used in conjunction with the development of a new parkiny � facility as a means of assuring use of the new facility. 2. New parking spaces should be located within 1 and 1/2 blocks of the core use � area if possible. The core area (defined as the destination point for the greatest number of St. Thomas campus users during peak periods) is currently found in the � south-southeastern portion of the St. Thomas campus. New parking spaces should be located within approximately 1 and 1/2 blocks of this area if possible. This will encourage more use of appropriate off-street parking � facilities rather than use of on-street parking. The core area may shift in the future to or a second core area develop on the St. Paul Seminary campus. If this occurs, parkiny facilities that are planned should serve � the new or expanded core area. Generally, parking facilities should be planned to best serve those areas which yenerate peak demand for parking. � 33 � 3. Lony-term facility planning should empnasize chanyiny overall use patterns � and densities to reduce the negative impact of_overflow_par'kiny on the surrounding neiyhborhood and to insure better utilization of existing and planned parking facilities. In planning for the use of existing classroom, office, and dormitory space � or for new facilities that may be required to serve an expanding campus population, St. Thomas should attempt to change overall use patterns to � shift areas of density away from sites that do not have enough parking spaces within close proximity to serve peak demand periods. In particular, the emphasis over the lony-term should be on shifting the core use area � away from the southeastern portion of the St. Thomas campus, which has relatively little off-street parking in close proximity, but where on- street parkiny is both convenient and available. 4. The Joint Committee should develop a parking implementation plan for St. � Thomas Co ege. The plan should: 1) develop a process, with specific steps or projects � identified, that results in demonstrable proyress toward bringing St. Thomas into full compliance with their legal Zoniny Code parking � requirement (an example of demonstrable progress is the planned 56 space addition to the Summit/Cretin lot) ; and 2) create a list of criteria or guidelines to follow in planning for parking that serves to reduce the impact of parkiny on the surroundiny neighborhood and insures the maximum � utilization of the parkiny that is provided. These guidelines or criteria should be used both in planning for parking that reduces the current deficiency and parkiny that may be needed to serve future growth and � expansion. (An exarnple of guidelines or criteria in the forrn of a checklist is included in Attachment S8) . As part of the planniny effort, the Joint Committee will also measure the utilization of all facilities on � campus to determine the effect of such use on parking. The St. Paul Planniny Commission will receive a copy of the parking implementation plan approved by the Joint Committee by April 1, 1986, and � will monitor proyress toward cornpletion of the schedule developed in the plan. The Planniny Corranission may, if it feels that progress is unsatisfactory in either developing the plan or in implementiny it, advise � the City Council that Recommendation 8 of the Grand Avenue West Task Force Parking and Zoning Report be implemented. That recommendation is as follows: � "8. The Zoning Code parking requirement for colleges should be enforced. Building permits for new buildings or the enlargement or increased intensity of use of existing buildings should not be issued � unless this parking reyuirement is met." The Grand Avenue West Task Force Parking and Zoniny Report was approved by � the City Council in 1983 and is considered a leyal element of the City' s Comprehensive Plan. � � 34 � � (;G�Y�/,5 fY� 5. The College of St. Thomas, the Community Councils, neighborhood residents, � and City officials should be open to creative solutions for solving the existing parking problem. � It should be recognized that the parking problem around the St. Thomas campus will not be easily solved. Al1 groups or individuals involved in developing and/or reviewiny potential solutions to the problem should be � open to creative solutions and ideas for solving it. The discussion should not be limited to traditional solutions only. This report of the College of St. Thomas Subcommittee is respectfully submitted � to the Colleye Zoning Task Force for its consideration. � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 35 CoL� oF ST. T o � E G'E N M1�S �f ATTACHMENT S1 -f�� ST. PAa� S Ern�NPIRY � COILEGE OF ST. THOMAS '`-'' �� ,��nras Nap IAI�' 20 2175 Grand ----- - - .—- i --- — � � n•f,.•�n�stral�on Student ApartmenlS ` 2 r.'r,e,�us Maqnus Sc�ence Hall IM�' 21. 217� Grend ---- `� P '�� P L�J. I_� i J O Shavghness�L�brary�SI�° Student Aparlments `- � � O Snauqhnessy Educational 22. The Pres�denl's House � � ' d �' J � CP��er�E)� 23. Alumm House(AH)o � �� '� I lrx ; r.h,«av Nal1�MHI� I 2�. 90 Finn — 121 �II� N„ ` tni�.mairon Cen�er English Deparimen1 �' o P i-• — f Se,r1�M Urnon Learning Cenler , " � i��,n St�dern Res�derxe �25. 72 Finn �� 6 FacuNy Resxfence�FR)�a Admissions � 7 �nap!i�a Public AI►ans L�� , ./.y 1 �` � B Mhn Paul II Ha�i(JP1� 26. 2tt9 Grand '� �;' % �,'. ._, 9 I�Mand Natl fIR►�° Graduale Pr ram5 in Bu5�ne5� �� Sa�rn John vianney Seminary Commun�cauons � •:�?�'` �9 � �Pt��ente�SJV►� 27. 2115 Grand `' � r'''�1 �� . � ii !n;h AmnrKan Cuitu�al Ins��tule(IAC�° 28. 2093 Grand '—� � �2 Camd�c O�qest Bwlding�CDp Intemalional Educatlon � tl �(,� �7 Da��mg IDOI� ,29. 209t Grand � � _ �� •� B��1y r+au�BR�' �JO 208a Grand f i!_. "-- AyN�AMD AV{ �S P�.�s�ral Ptanl Headquarteis�PL) 31 2080 Grand °' I ana Ho�tinq Planl� 32 2076 Grand � � I � � ��- � '�i '!4�auyhnessy Siadwm�^ ;33. MCNeely Hall(MC�° ( —`� (I �� f'hos�ca�Educat�on and Activdies ' Busness Admmistration -- U( -- P n 9!;�:��nq IPEI� 3�. Chiisl Chdd Building(CCI� i I �� . C,��_�^_— jr�wno�M!r Arpna J5. Chwmma110 Hall(MU�° � "JO �� :�v71,1an F�Pid House Music � �9 fqlpy Thpall�(�T)�0 96. <4 Norlh Cleveland(44)0 , ��JQ - � '9 ^5��qhnessy Nam�pS)�" I Graduaie Programs in Managemen� I�' � �_� � r� , 4ir�e��c Ce�,�er �3� 2057 Portia�d(57p o��i�= ' I��O ��vu. __. J , � �, j ��%I�' �� ,�'/ r rain��o�n � I 1 I I f,:i ii / \ � � n�f rt aT �� DO4A�At TC be P � II �`\ r ' � �6. �' �' � - ��- ----- u� -=� ,�a � ref�neQ q-ffet aPp�ovql o� q �'inn� c,� �_ , , � - C --=�:I_ x� � � plq+ b �e , of 5�l. Paal � � � . _ � _ _ _ i l_ J[__-_ �=_��.. . -- -_- � _ C � � � . -- - ------- -- ---� - --,,-, _� -- _� - - z2. M� � f P � _ _ _ � �__ � l � � �_. i �� sa ---sa._ � � �' L�P Ju . — ---�--- ---- - � � -—-- —--�---- � �I--. � 24. -- � . _-�, ; o� �� j z,. � . zs. !, '� ��---_---� 26. i�1 U U U��J I _ _ A �� . PUANO AVl Z7. Z8. •19. � ` ' ' �l � � �� n�� -d• THE SAINT PAUL SEMINARY 30._. �'f� �'• �—+� LJ t Lo�as Han � 32. S1uAenr Fles�dence 31• .. .9' , � IL II 2 Co��e��i St• P4v� Semi�4r � � I�aa 3 Byr�e R?s�dence � /� � � A Tpnn�S COUriS ( �M�� ---�i- � S McC�rlhy Recreal�on Budd�ng �. - . 6 Garaqes p � �t • � I11�� -� � . I � 7 BinZ REIPCIOry 1�� n ecom e �i ,11 9 G�ace Res�dente � � � n� 9 Brady Cenier T omqi C4r��► Rw ''� I 10 Crnlin RnSidente ` � � V7� ar 1�� i tl Heatinq Plant � � 12 Library yn .�f�,yw � � �_� 1� Ad�n�m5lrelion Buddmy ��1 �� q�-I��0/� W IA SI. Mary�s Chapel � � +�e Co��e9e o� St.Tl+o�r►gs � � Olher Symbols _��_�_�� Accessible to handicapped (�� e e�. PQk •Not accesslble to handicapped v � I SeI►fin4ry� f°O°�K~ � '�Parllally accesalble to ha�dlcapped \ / --� �_ • r(��Handicapped Parking 'S �'^q I�Zed�� P•Parking: nole posled restrlctio�r. oblaln a copy � ol parkfng regulallons Irom Dean o1 Students ofllce. ��,s�d � ATTACHMENT S2 � , —� � N _o__ -°- ":., ;, �. � -�--- - ��i✓-- ��. � ---- :.... o ;.�.�:.;, � p 0 -o' N 0 o A '�� _' E t� � EXET a' ° - -- o �.�,r, � .a.__ r ----- j �� o 0 0 0 � ' ; o c:,,:,� o o �o 0 0 o D O_. ,t o Q__ o o � c� o --�t` o 0 0 , � rn _ � 0 0 ° oo q � oo " oo o :QOO. '` CRETIN AVE. �; � _ ---�-- ---- �=- - • o � „ ----a-- .y�,i ; !- --; '---- o `'" _.II._ Q, �'' � _ � I O � � -- i � -- - � � � �-- -� ---- `� � � � I r- -1 �---- - (,N 1 � (0 � r- - -� L- - t�it w� ( � r- - -� �- - e�p ��' O O C�� r- - -� i-- o- o ---�- � � � - --+ �--- o o- o � �-- - -� �-- - o ¢ � ---�- N O I L-- - � �- --- � � L_ � '' I L_�J ;- -- - � � � F�r e - s s _�_ o � i �_- - -i ,---- - s --�� y n � - -� �--- �- �_ _ �- -i r--- -- t�w coc. o r----i �--- � --� �-- -- O � � �-- --� �-- � O O � ' � - - -' �-- -� D c+� _ � n, _ � -� �--R' < � O � � � I ^ o � �--0 m �i O 0 � � � •,' I c� i - --- � � � ,� � -_- - - - --_' o -" i - -- - - - - pppwww � — — i - , --�.- - - , ► � � � O o i ' O � i �.1 � .� - � a„p o e9 ' , �`'/ O�O�O�c A � � , r -�.. � �o *� • - � : •� O .t � �� o �00 00�(a�00�0 'S� G � ¢ �� "� O t�„a o �-- �e - O O -�, °a N OLi-1-p �. D `. ° ---n — 5 � � � fo �'� I oo _ c � o — - ` = o � _o C p �_—ur► w1— � ,.. �• � . � v �� ! '"� J —1 �--- r �y—I �--J � J� L—�' — �_ ^ _ A � c� o _ � — �, DI o _o _ � Z � o � rn � �c, � _„ _ r �� .�_ -�--- o o v o ° o ° � o 0 0?o c�� - o 0 o „ 3�� WILDER _ ST. � '_ ° -a---- °Q o -o- � a < � o 0 0. �; -o- o � . � d � a- r�- I ---� � o �_ o° -o- g _ o o •`�c_o n= j° � — o �' oo --- ° —�. — _ o— � � J � -c, cnl ��. ` �+ j° .�w i � �---� I— w �� I— 8 �--� �---w �—I �_� o— � 'C 7C � _�a � c ---- � — ° � °Q - °° ° � e a_oq � �'— Z V� � TT d- � � � v � �' � O O � O O _ � � D � , --� --- �� ,�-�-a� ¢ o a 6a� o o ° � o �� e � ^ �� ° MOORE � le�.,o o ` S T. � O- � s �- � o c G -d � �/1 -Q- �--- � -r^ D n — Vi O D O O D ^ �` p n � � __ � < �O '�o < — o - e -- J m t� —° — � rn �— �—� < w —a° �. °°— � p t� -=�F- J — w • — m o � � �► � O � —�o � � — o � � ° — fe -�� o _ � --o v — O -� a —O �— p -o. }O H �� I � �p "J �°� O aQ °� O O °� O O � �- l PRIDR AVE. I V � ---�_ J I I I I � I I O �� O I, I O I I O I � D f�i f n-- ATTACHMENT S3 � � —U < n�i _Q__ �' '"..� '' U --"-- - �O�I+y- r �. . 0 � ��.^ O O � -O- '^- �.:� ,, ' � N –°--- ° ;�,, `. EXETER _a-- o m ----- ° ,�•"' � o -o -,e._ o r ° ° �:�?�' o ;o 0 0 ° ° ° r -v_: o � � Q-- ° � � � n a � -o---- ° ° ; a- rn °__ - # ° _ 0 0 ° oo q � oo " oo 000 :Qio : � ---�-- CRETIN AVE. ' c� -- __ Q.. , -- - -=� �-- - o � .,O --�- ` p, , � - - -, i--- o D ---�- � o i � -- - � � -- - � � 2 � � ,-- - -i ---- r Q -+ � � __ � _ _ � r - - -i �- __� o � r - - -+ - a., � �� r- - - � �- - �� Q�Q � !'- - �I I �� a 1 0 Q� � �" - - -� � - -- - Q - --�_ � I � -- - � I __ - � I � - _- _ - � I �- - - -� I-- - - Q � ---�- y O � L-- - � I- -- - � �p � � � - - - - � � � L-� �- -- - � e - s s _�_ �'° � � - - -- ---- - F � , �_ , � - --� ' y � i^__i ;-- - � L�M' COL ,-T�- -� �--- - n r--- -t �--- O n - - -a �-- -- � O �00", � � i- --i �- -,�p � - �n i - --; � - -.a G �, � � � - � 9 � o r*, , � o ` � i ^ " �--_�. � I � j o° �, ' -.- - _ �_. � - -- - L - -� i � �` ' : - _- - - _ _� o I � � � - =�- - 'i o $ $ J Q � °° �9 o.E�' ,' o �;o;; , , -� � , � .,� �. = An ^ , �,�rr - � � �,Y O � O I Q � � � ! � IC)�0 O'QQ��O i�0�� / � - � � � � „ � A D O _'� d O O I �T I (D/� � o . � ��y ' ��v•�..� —��l/- -Q O I _ ---- -, , _ _ D _ � o s c� _ao I -a �o Q � Q —o —� = o°—o c �—' .— w � 1 '�. � v �=T=_� I—�f ��a ---� I—�'i r �i —� t—_.( � c� I I �., � a o Q°� �°�----�—'o D �_�_� D � o m :0— — �, �0= � �' z v v� v r- �-T-v o = � Q ¢ '�'�o-_ -�----� o 0 0_$0 0 0 � o� o o-otco�� o e � � � _ � y � WILDER ST. _ � 3 � D, o � -a---- °o -- ° � �� a < o 0 0 � �- o �' • D �O ---- J O -o- - g � � O O � O O _ p � � —w I w•�---�09—�0 O---°—=� � °� !v .�.—oa �_ - � 4, R �s .�� -°---�-� �---�„ J -� �--F ,�---� F----� �� : `w �c ± � � a-a-- '�--� �_W—� �_ � a a . � o � � 4- � _ ,p � � -0- O O � O O . � =. � � --Q -- d � '°� °� O O C� p �o � O ' q° A ? o MOORE ST. � < � � � _4_ D---�-�o D O _�_O D c� �I �n D ,. �� G ° .6 � W�----e�_W < W—o— �,; < � d:i � < W�=-�—� �— � �O� �i0 �---°Q m °o—, � w�'!� � —� rn — . . —� v�� i o ----4—Q0 . e�9—OG--� e � 09 ' o�'�— �—aD �6 e �e o ov` -�--- .p - ..6 � h N �_ I I � O O � � wQ oQ p � ip O , C - i � PRIDR AVE. -c�- /{y��-� � uni F1VE_ J ��O •� 38 -� ^ O � O 0 �w� i(�--_ ��s�� ATTNI;HMENT S4 � '� ~ -Q-- � �;.?> :,!• U --".- - O J��.�^ O O O ` o ��' �`. � � =�== A 1�!., '' � �./ N 0 0 �,:��, EXETE -°-- ° r� o � $-- r • ----- o ��',-� o o ;o 0 0 0 0 0 ° r- �--- o � � - - 8 0 Q__ � o i n ._,,� �_ _ 0 O � i, rn O O .� 0 0 ° oo q p oo " oo 000 :QO - . � --�- CRETIN AVE. �. � _- - � ' �-- - p � ----a-- � o ' ! - - - � , � --�- 5 � '--- - a! _-- p Z g ° � � � I O j_ v � �, i ,--- -i ---- � i r - - -� �- --- - � � �� r - - -� �---�� ia i r- - -� �- - (� wj � 0 _ Q � r- _ -ii- - -o �� o � - - r- -� i - -� o — I ►- -- - t �---- v 0 ----�y-- �] � � - --� --- - O O � �- - - -� � -- - p - � --- 0_ _ N O I �-- - -� - -- �- ~ � L - � - -- � �- i . � � L-� '- -- - - s s _�_ � - - --- - Fir � -- --- — � � , � _ _—� � s -�- �" � � -� ,--- - � -t�w co� � �- -� �--- - - - r----i �- -- p - � - - - -� �--- -- � O O +- A � �-- --� �- -C�y O � - - �-- - � - �f D p�' �p oo - � - -; �- -�p' < °'o� m �� 0 0 , � � i � ° r-- - J � ' I !�l I 47 I � ��_ � p4 � � � - - - • - - - - �`! i - - ,- �� y .� � � $� o`o -,��- - -- . -� � � � o a a° � o O�O�O�c � � A A '�� - r _ v -� � � p o -_�-� ° o �� ;¢�� v Ooo,�>ooio � _� � o � - .c c� c �. � � cn --- — I -- — � — -- — c?° � � •.o� S "� .. t � . � I O � o �1 — -- = a —o�—�^t D °� a —w �:� ��—° :� • �o �--- -� r��--� I----� r J ---a I— � � ..'�o� r -��c„ c�"'," _ ^- N � .�fj �°- ' o------�—� D o �_v 2 I a,y_� _o t, rn o_— �—o o— .. r _ � � � o-- -�----o o v o �' o ° .o- aa o r o1 o c�� - o 0 �� W p� �. °- W I L D E R ST. �c � -- o ? � 4 � -r>---- J ° �--�n a < � o o cr o -o- 0 ►� � .-o � — ' � I >--�,.o, ° �-0----- � � -o—_o a °' .� O � — �° - �t � ---- d i�. __o � � �-09 �---- ..t=,�� .—o J—� �—_w a �J �— ; �.� 3 � -� i o i �------� �--� � � 7 -- _r--- Sv — aq o — � o. � �—� —Go �— - � � � ----- c� —-- '� � ... - a9 � W � ... �-- , o -O- - � `_D ' --p ---a9 � ,�-�-� ,¢ O b 60� O O aa O O O O O O i � =ro �"° o MOORE ST. , � � -s Q_ �---- �.._._o o- o � o 0 0 � D O o n O o9 � � � �" � >--- � < w— — D tN .p � D �_n r. A t _� -- W o°c—W � c� o < o W t�i— ��--- � °Q !� °° rn ��_- ` � M c o ° > __ a' - .,+� o °Q . �,—�,,,; �' m ,�---� �--– –— e _ - - ..5� -- ` v—O—_'o`� ° � �,' ° —w—.�� o— � O -Q---- O ��,-j � ,�p V .. O_ I O O __ " � "'� ° � O 7�� O - � PRIDR � �' ---�- J _.a---- o � o �_ � . o 0 o D`E. o 0 --�= �—,—� �_..,1 � --�=--- a--0 _" o �e- 3 9 I o �n 1 �� L`_'___ ATTACHMENT S5 � � —U � N _Q__ �' :.•> =1 V _""_ _ \ O �4y� f � ;��.. ...• ..'':�:.' 0 O �i N � �'.. ,:�'•' . � � -0' --°--� ° �.�;� EXETE a- � m ° , � � o � -�- o r� ; -Q o� �;;'�,� o 0 0 ;o 0 0 0 � ° � �_: o .c o i � __ � n O O i � rn � � O -�---- - - O O � 00 q � OOv00 O _QOO ti __,a._ CRETIN AVE. • � „ -- ----a-- � ' ! - - -�� -- - o D ° ---�- "� i '--- - a ! -- - °— d i il O Z � ---- O V c , ,--- -; --- � o � r - - -i �- - ga,o � r- - -� �----- 7 C� r-- -� �- - W Ca � r- - -� �- - -� .p?- O G � �- - - .Si o ) 0 --- - I �- -- - 1 �----p J � � - -- o ----�- �7 � �---- o � o O � �- - - -� o - 0 0 � �-- =-� ir--- o --- - h , c y � I L_� �- -- - _`" i . ' FI - s s _�_ � ; � - - -- ---- - 1 � ! - - -� � 5 . --- --� � h c� �R- -� � -- - T I I--- - � � L Aw COL l� f—- -1 �- -- -0_ r - -� �-- -- r 0 ��. � � �-- --� �-- V� O � o�► I � ' I L_ _� •G) - �' Af � - - � �+J D �� ..o - - - �- -� < � � ' � � o ` -� -� � i ^ " r--- m o I.. .y_ .r i o11 47 � � ' ' _ _ _ ' _ _ _ _ O- � � i '" _',__ _ _ _ . � � � - � o c�o�� w � ..1 Q � O � � ... � .... �o _v _� ,. • r► 'r � I --�-tn, � : Q j¢O0 � 00!�-' �00!O .� cy9 O �O- W � D r,�, o p �� a � D � � r �u � Q S' A C� I �1�----o'v-- � p—'o'�'_` _ _ �'L-ca_'` C O—op---d — � � '�? - `� �,� F---c:., � J—! I— c� r -�--I �--- S � ..Jd— I I_� w � °o =a�° o �o--- � -o .z . '' p � G-- — `'—d�+ D,o —--— � D o ao m -Q— I� O 9' � - � �--_. g O 2 v o ' Z `� o " r- " S�L+T� ° — ° ' � �°__ L�oe o ° o�°' o ° �. � o o?o oa°�;- o 0 � � < � � N 3 �p �, o WILDER ST. � -r�-__. o � �" o n a � — o 0 0Q��; -o- o _ �_ Q- � -o=__ oc -0- c O p _ "i� p �� r � f� -�o �`�--- o—' � _ o�'— � �O e �[ �' °'O 'C` v1 �p O �� O �--�-a f— w � -�-I F-- J G.'---a I—+�► Q --� , .J o — ;f ''� � 'p _ 'a° ! `��----J —o �—oq — ao � � ,o c�—�u—e �— � �--- � _ .,- � � '� -n .� ; __�; o �(� ��' o 0 _�0 0 ^ � � � --Q --- � -a �°�-e8 ¢ o 0 6a° o o �, o i � � — �p� o MOORE ST. � N 4_ �----w---O -o- J, s � � p � o � � D — � O D n � -�� _ � cZ�---�_� m �—�—''� m c � � < ��=-a—� w— A N _� ' °Q�--- --•o o`� � `� � °g m � I � �—� v � � -�--- O O I"_"^-� w O O O � O .�_ I ' v 1 � .o- PRI:OR AVE. �J a V F J I � � � 4 0 -=1 O p O D I O i �-- � �.5 is�� ATTACHMENT S6 lu� 3/S3 Do�vlin 6 Catholic Di est (17) � Irish Am. (47) SJV (112) � � JP II (2) � ' J l_ U � �� p� Brad . - - � p � � n � b Com act 7 �^^� K Pr e D ical Plant 51 i � i I -- D- . � - � � .. e .6 po} � � .�,..� .� C�tin (319) - . � � � � o � �U�/�.K� ' I � �`� � � � � • � ' � Seminar ` �� —� � Grand (;ara e 6 � Alumni House 6 Chri t � �n n [ ,� �Total spaces 10�0 ( incl . Faculty Rarages � and houses) NcN el - --- -- _ ---- � - _ - ��,% ATTACHMENT S7 � � % �---- - �// i . . "'" - . - —�----� � , - � ' � _ � �� - — - —�_ --- �- � � /� �� -- —-— � � �� x � � ' 3 � ;�E _, .� S� � � I - , _ ... �� 1n _ _ o . ., . � ��-� _ ,1 v -C .. 1 .♦ • '� 1 • .�� ' � .30rr� � � I � T��V � � ��. i� �-"=j 0 �� _, n , L— � .� i � /. ,�1 M � ■ b,��a.►��_ S� �. . I i �� : I •� ; ; +• - 'j ,� f � „ �[��..�� j ! � . < < : �a ,y _. ��_ � ,_� ' i �� ;� �ri [u� v � : , � ��`�, _ -�1U��f � � �I r � �I ^ , � I ��" ' li '�, . . �'_ i v� I \ ' . �'�. ..i-� � ILJ m� u � i 1 � .^ 1 -'�` � L�� { `�J � .. L • � �.-��. r^--� '--� -i � ',�1 r '�� '.: , � I � i. r I � I i I I ' i 1. a ; � �., .j i. ',i ��// �: . , � ., _ �. . , r / .� I � � � � ' � � � _ - I ; E� , � �, � , � _� � - � �:_�-!� ,�� - ;�, ,�, � I, , � � ' I � " �J ' ' „ � IiJ L . �`. usr� ^ � ,r , `� � '1f � �-0( 1 ^, �_ ^ 2 1 / � I �' �a I' ".' ( � � I�� I � . t `� I, � I ,'I ' 1� '�i��fi. _ J . I i I I � � a i_� � ; a I I �,' � � ', L J J M ` � L l.� L_ . L4 � � ; y,_ L _ � � � � _ I i //�. rl r 1 � �/ ; ' , ; , , 1'� �'�� _,, . , ; ► , �� : �� , ^ e , ;� � . — � I `� ' � ' � I rr��--��11 � �� 1( l(I � �-��- -`� . �� i , , ; ' „� ; . � I �; �� r ic ,.� ; , , C �_ �I ll 1 ��I )i. lU l :r.�� , :::: �� , � �� r , � , � � .00. _ � , . . �,.. � . �° ►� i ' �� C� .C�I lf ��f�JJ[� � 'I ^� �::° - � JlJ = p / � �: �, � � � , ; J _ .:.o. _ , ;i—, �.�— .—,� �` � � � T � - � � � � ,-,�, � ,�� --, � . � 1 , , � �:�� ; , � . � ' � �;� ! : _I: �1 l.� ��'` � ' - :��'� ,� ,. � , i . , � x � .,,. , ,• �.` � - I lJU ULI 1 ' r- � � I,I � .�� t I ` � � =�'�; � ��. L � I '-1 n L.� � . .. ., ►!,.�.r-:= ,_ � �� I � . � f� � ��.�-�� . ,,.. .,�. _ � � I r� I , I!_.1L.,� S . � � ' .� ► � i �l lJ�,�; ` - . L .��,�._, i � i � �►','� ' — � , �,� . (� ; - �� ( J�'., i . :C�'� , � / �l I �; �_.J�i��r.� i��.t T , �C� � ( I f � �l.J l.J �) � �,: /^/ I ' � �� . i. j L! .l .a�■i J _l_! �� -/: J' i � �L y. �r � I � . �• I r � �' 'I—' I ( �� r •�• .� �_ ` ! . I � �� `- � �� U❑ aU �L� !.�� _ _ I , •[��MOM 1 l J�� I I f- ' a •� I i I II . —3L � �� ' I (� 1 �.J� L � ,�_ - � �� nr1f � i 7 Ij n � � ' ► �': L-- �_ -,. C L� � II 'I `�i� ��. '�.� - „JU UL.� ; J�L J� n , , .,��_ - -. . �---- I n �rrr- ( _ _q I �� '�`J�•�- r - ,• I ! � t II � C ��1' I ' I I Q� ��,� .J.�__ •_ • � �j� I � �7 � �� f Q — � � LJU l�---- - - --� I � —_ :1_21 - ' — •�_. .— � •.[ s.[�.�rc �T ' . . �1 r-—� r- ', . .�[�� II {I �� ; i��, � `� �� 'i �)�'-r �-�I i � ',� y ( � e , —, i� � , ' I� � ' ' � �' I. '� � ��' ,: �� II � �i l iE_ �_.J� � _ : .JiJ I..5, . . ._Ji (_I��t_�I ' � o �.f � � •- ----- r , ; � , � ' -,�, r-� —' '�� l : ,�..,. . , �I u �,r � . _I , i� � �-^ � ; I I ,.,, , � : =----�__ I; � ' a ' � � i� I 'I I i.� � ,' �� .I �' ��' '' ' � - �. � ; ,� , � , I , � � � �� :J �_ ._ ` . , � lJ._.: � ., J:._.��- - - ..n �--, _ _� . . � �. � _ _,L � ... _ _ _ _— - ��'-is�d � ATTACHMENT S8 � � CHECK LIST/PROPOSAL/INFORMATION � Program/Project: � Purpose: � Time Frame: Beginning to Completion � Hours Active: � � Students: � Faculty: � Staff: � Support Resources: � Facility Personnel Location � Space (sq.ft.) Traffic Parking � Liqhting Security Noise � r � � 43 � REPORT OF THE HAMLINE UNIVERSITY SUBCUMM � ITTEE April , 1985 � Introduction A group of representatives from Hamline University and the surrounding � neighborhood held two meetings in April 1985 to discuss parking and campus boundary issues around the University. The following people attended one or � both meetings: Robert Englund Clarence Mattson Public Relations Department Physical Plant Director � Hamline University Hamline University Robert Hampton John Vinton � 744 Simpson Street Dean of Students Hamline University Elizabeth Hynson Resident Student Robert Wicker � Manor House Residence District 11 Planning Coalition 1538 Enylewood The Reverend Richard Ireland � Hamline United Methodist Church Robin Youny Subcommittee Chair Don Lawrence St. Paul Planning Commission � Director of Security Hamline University Donna Drummond City Planner � St. Paul Planning Division The subcommittee was asked to recommend an appropriate campus boundary for Hamline University and to consider alternatives for improving the parking � situation in and around the campus. This report contains a map with a recommended campus boundary (Attachment H1) , background information on parking, and a set of parking-related recommendations. � Background There are currently 492 off-street parkiny spaces available on campus. � Approximately 173 of these spaces have been added since 1975. A Planning Division staff analysis indicates that Hamline is in full com liance wit the current Zoning Code parking requirement. Park�ny requirements for co eges, � universities, and seminaries first went into effect in 1975. Each school is legally required to provide off-street parking only for any growth or expansion that may have occurred since 1975 to be in full compliance with the Zoning Code � requirement. If Hamline University were newly constructed today, it would be required to provide 721 off-street parking spaces, 229 more spaces than it now provides. � � 44 � ■ ��5 is�� ! � Report of the Hamline University Subcommittee Page Two � Current Hamline parking manayement policies require that all cars parked in � campus lots must display a school-issued permit: Permits are free and all lots are open to any car displaying a permit. For example, there are no lots reserved for faculty members exclusively. Both University representatives and � residents serving on the task force felt this policy has worked well and would not be in favor of changing it. Campus security is charged with enforcing on- campus parkiny requirements and can issue warnings and tickets for violations. � Cars in violation of regulations are also subject to towing. One subcomm�ttee member from the neighborhood felt strongly that all Hamline students should be reyuired to register their cars with the school , even if � they don't plan on parking the vehicle in school lots but will be parking on- street near the campus. This would apply in particular to fraternity and sorority members. Such registration would better enable neighbors to report � parking problems to the campus security office, which could then contact the student to discuss the problem. On city streets around the campus there are a number of parking restrictions in � force that regulate on-street parking. Many of these restrictions were put in place as a result of agreements between Hamline and its neighbors over the past few years and have served to increase safety and reduce traffic conyestion on � surrounding streets. These restrictions are shown on Attachment H2. Parkiny Alternatives � The subcommittee began its discussion of potential recommendations to further improve the parking situation by reviewing a list of fourteen alternatives to reduce on-street parkiny put toyether by Planning Division staff (Attachment � H3) . Many of the alternatives on the list have been successfully used by other institutions around the country. � Each of the alternatives was discussed by the subcommittee. Several are already in use around the campus, while a number of the other alternatives were determined by the subcommittee to be inappropriate for the Hamline situation. � Parking Recommendations Most of the subcommittee members, including both the neighborhood and � University representatives, have worked successfully in the past to address parking issues around Hamline. With this background and experience, the subcommittee was able to decide, after two meetings, on a series of ' recommendations that would further improve the parking situation around the campus. The recommendations are listed below: � � 45 � � Report of the Hamline University Subcommittee � Page Three 1. Increase Student Awareness of Parking Regulations. � Hamline University should increase student awareness of parking � regulations, both University regulations yoverning on-campus parking and City of St. Paul ordinances regulating on-street parking. This could be accomplished by placing informational notices or announcements periodically in the University newspaper, and/or including an information sheet with � registration materials. Also, a parking regulation booklet, which is currently given out when a parking permit is applied for, should be reviewed to determine if it can be updated and/or expanded. � 2. Modify Parking Lot Site Plan Requirements. The City of St. Paul should modify its site plan requirements for surface � parking lots built by colleges, universities, or seminaries. The proposed modification would allow these institutions 3-5 years to complete approved � site plans for parking lots. During this 3-5 year period, an institution would be allowed to initially construct a lot with a cheaper gravel surface and beyin using it for parking prior to completion of all site plan reyuired improvements (such as permanent paviny, striping, and installation � of wheel stops) . This change would enable colleges, universities, and seminaries, many of which have limited resources for capital improvements, to add additional off-street parking and reduce overflow on-street parking � faster than they miyht be able to under current regulations. The 3-5 year timetable for completion would allow these institutions sufficient time to yather the necessary financial resources to finish the lot to required � standards. 3. Expand On-Campus Parking Spaces. Hamline University should expand the number of on-campus parkiny spaces as � it becomes financially feasible to do so. Attachment H4 shows potential locations for additional parking identified by Hamline's Physical Plant � director. All sites identified are on property currently owned by the University. 4. Allow Campus Security Personnel and/or Neighborhood Assistance Officers to � Issue Parking Citations. The City of St. Paul should seriously consider allowing campus security � personnel and/or Neiyhborhood Assistance Officers to issue City citations for parkiny ordinance violations on St. Paul streets. This would greatly increase parking enforcement, an understandably low priority for the City's � uniformed police officers with many other duties and responsibilities to perform. The subcommittee feels that the current on-street parking regulations around Hamline University would be adequate if they were properly enforced. � 46 � � C,��`s'is�� 1 � Report of the Hamline University Subcommittee Page Four , If campus security personnel or Neighborhood Assistance Officers cannot be yiven the authority to issue citations, the City should consider hiring � more meter monitors to patrol around Hamline and all of the other college, university, and seminary campuses in the city. Hiring additional meter monitors to increase parking enforcement would obviously be more cost effective than hiring more police officers. � 5. Expand the Car Pool-Matching Service. � Hamline University should expand the car pool-matchiny service that now operates informally on-campus. An expanded, better publicized service could encouraye the formation of more car pools, thereby reducing the � number of cars cominy to campus. 6. Add Bus Shelters on Snelling Avenue at Hewitt and Englewood Avenues. � The City of St. Paul is currently reviewiny a proposal from a private firm to install 100 bus shelters with advertising throuyhout the city. The subcommittee recommends that bus shelters be located on both sides of ' Snelliny Avenue at Hewitt Avenue (first priority) , and at Englewood Avenue (second priority) . � This report of the Hamline University subcommittee is respectfully submitted to the College Zoning Task Force for its consideration. � � � � � � � � � 47 ATTACHMENT H1 r NAML.INE UN�vERs �TY �� .� � ..:::::.::::::::_: .._.s:� ....... ....:..�^�'.,:g.,._ c_. ...s:tctilr5�� , ir.r .... ...:...�.v:�7.'..s::�::•� :.., , _ ...3:::..r'::.;:.�A . .ICC.A�Y} �..a+�.-� j�•�,F . -..:...... ) 1V. :...�. •..:C:.n. i�(J�;�ii.{:� �7�i�;,�� . ... .:::�,-x. ... '.(Y. ;..�..�T�. i:.��:��l:Z"•.� .��... ;::1�:!?�I'�t-�fii: �.4f::'i'Pr;:iii .:.Y;:...f%.:...R?RS�.�,� "'."•/.?!�i::.:..�... '�":.:.'. �v:%)l'�y�`?*G:u:.<:�'�: �`•4::'.`.1::�:� ��:{:•F-a::�..f�VrvtiY.� . '�F;ii::;:� �i�:t:Fai.'•,�:�.7�:e::'�� .,vi:;:::::(::Y�.�.,f:.•'q:w " .�.1�:_��Al�'....:ti '^::: :.. , .�• '.'e;:::�'^;...,. • �►yJ.....::. •��:•:i::.::'.�.','.,'�:�..:.tic,:. :'`�rC�}y}it4<' .... i:::;�:Y...:::.::.. y .. .�:l.:•:t�:.1'i;:..��:••�i:'f� ` ..;a: ...5.,..::: `'+r,...,:ti::;_�"'�i":5:` ��:,�:.',.. ��1 �.i.�4i�Y,'.ru:a . . "�.... j�:��e� (y: ii::�� ::•N:7.. ;'•' �� :'!#:.'t'•�;�j%S��!..�::ei.:::;::':�:n"::::'4: I IE RCE `'''::'':�;,:'�,.��;::,.�C� �.�,yr�'�lyy,`�._+l�.�Yr�� v`o'ii�;�. ...!u}•..: � eur�E �: .��::,:,;,�:_1__ �;:,. . R ' - =�� i ♦ ' �- -- -----� � __ i _ M. � ----- ------� � � ' N O R T O N F /E L D ___NAMI.pNE� uN�v. O � � V -- __—_.__I � O ` � � � - _ � � J I 1 � STAOIUM , Q O O OC � .i i ' �OO -rAY 1.0� - ��'�'�'�'. � � o ¢ o _ _. _ ;o .��o.o � :o 0 0 ! �o � _� o 0 0 0 0 � , ; .. , � � i � ` j � p �.o ---�-- . i i o _ o � o .�p ` �--; ;-- - - - � � � 3 GiG � * � � �� Q � � , 0 GO00'DO � �� N Ew�TT ------- i ¢ p � � HAML/N£ I Ipl ' � O O O O O O C � � un+iv£ASirr � � �--4---t--� � . .,� . , I------ 1 .��.. � MAMLINE � � . � � � j�_—_�_' , Q 0 � ____� � f TENNIS O O i �'�}----1------ � O � � COURTS. ' .o- O . � O O O � 1 ——��1_��..� ' 'Q' � L � � � o -o� � D � r--�—�--�-- ' O . O . � � � � • O O I I------�—�--+�---- , , I I -0— ' a ��. � O — i--r---�-- — - . � i--- - , .¢ ' o 0 � --- � � � --—�--- . o { //� �J3� � � —t—;r---- t � � --� `�`--- ' O O O C � O � � � �,{��si.a��u�� ' ENb�..�wop(� R - � • 1 . I � � t �V Q � 0� � ' � 0 ¢ .a. � � � __.`� ' �GI � i,. � � I • � �� „_ � � o .-o---- o � � �� •F � F� F- s"�,� '�` ;I ;� O ¢ � �1 O O O�¢ O N ¢ O O O O N O O O O O O ,....._. .. .. m o .1 � MtNNE�/kMa �► � E � �N � �'�'�'�' R ecohn►�+^end ed � I FRArER�ItTY •� CRn� Pus ao�e�oflRy soaoR�T1f t�a.sE � �Q (�-�5-�s�a rATTACHMENT H2 ON - S�'REET �qRKIN6 ^ESTR�cT�o�/S — Hqn�yNE UNivERs�-rY � .�.� ��,�;.,.. . . _ . ...;:��.;::,�:...:..�.,.. �: ::,,,< - . .:..::., _ <:{y�{'i '.%:.` C::R;:�t�kt;,e�y;jrg.�!!�;.^.a:;.�,,r„�Tr. _ �f e::4�:Ji.Y:'�':....� ,A'� , . .. . 1 � : y� �� ,; f ��.,_.,,:.'. . 'o ?`!C �� 0f r j';. �J;li�,,;. . �. , . . ��'�� . r , ... , . „`vs� ��„�.:Y� ,�. :.� 'v�nl. �r,�?'i:s'=,s,r:.. "%��., . ..: � . +w^�:;y�,.,: q;d`.;j�,.:.r:.�::�:.,-... ='ktS�:J,I.•'•�.'.<y.?sf'Gii.. c.:;r:':;:::��;p;�.. ..�t:(�{'��".'Y,.iOk;;:?''..i, . 1�:'i,,g I I E R C E � "`"�.:�:,;'{�;. �:;.ra��... �,�,f>.. ...,...:..:.:� ...:�s<3,:;� -:.fi#,�;:y�,::;-:,;.,;;, � _ , . , _ . : ::. , BUr�ER �"`` ==w n....:::;,�< I � ___•_ _____; ; ____ � _ „_, . ----- ------, , > ; ' � N O R T O N F /E L D __ __NAMLpN!i uN�v p � , 1 - . � �_;;_; � f � o _ _ o , , , � sTaownt , O O O O Q � . i � ' ¢O O � TA��oR � o Q o . _. . 'o •��o:o � �o 0 0 ! I--°- ;� -3� ° o 0 0 0 � � ` '� ! � � ' o - ' A � ` ' p ' ' � '0 ! I O � � ! i ` : I . I" � i , , �;g --� . �--' i-- - - � , � � � D � 000090 � ' HEw�TT , ¢, O � �� ' HAML/N£ � I_�___Ipl � O O O O O O C UN/VERS/Jy � � � �� I------ � I MAM�tNE � }L��'��.'.�J' �� TENNIS � O _—� L.J � I �-o-----L----� O O _- Q � � COURTS, -0. O � � 0 0 Q ( �---^- a� �.�� O � O � 'I � � r---�a-_-- � O � � � � O O i i � I I-----�—�--+--- -0- � " ' O O I I _ 1 � �_ . � �-- -- -1•--- -¢ � Q G i ( ---�-_- Q � i/� �a3 p � I -----t-;r---- { � t' `� � O O O C � O � ' �' � q � EN6LE�.loc� � , � � • I . � F '� t O �O L2 O .� O O¢ ¢ O Q ¢ .p.. , � � ' •^ � '►c� — j I — — . i j0 O O � , ��- , o -a---- o �. c ,'� �F � , , 10t.... . . ._ .� � �, � O � � �0 T � � � � � � � 0 0 0 0 � 0 � 0 As BuRY � S�MPSON PAS�ALr ' �� I�o PqRKi�1C,- I////� ►�o PqRKING �Z A.�n. - bA.M. S�cr.� Sv►w. , •'�'� a HR• PqRK��JIr ..�. No PARK�n16 �A�►. - 6a.M. � ■�w�' � f�o PARKING E�ccEPt SA.r1. — I P.P'1. SkN, ATTACHMENT H3 � � Alternatives�to�Reduce«On�Street Parkin� ' ___ ________ __ y��w __ �_�_�_..__�___ Build surface lots or ram s on cam us. � 1. p P 2. Acquire additional property in surrounding neighborhood and build surface � lots. 3. Offer and promote ride share system to organize car pools, offer preferred � parking to car pools. � 4. Publicize available bus routes, offer reduced price bus passes, provide attractive bus�waiting areas. , 5. Analyze student and staff commuting patterns, establish exclusive bus routes or organize van pools based on areas of concentration. � 6. Institute residential permit parking. � 7. Establish other on-street parking restrictions- no parking, limit on hours or times of day. � 8. Uevelop alternative parking management policies � charye for parking, no fee permit parking, allowing lots restricted during day to be opened for ' evening use, etc. � 9. Register all student and staff vehicles to allow better monitoring of parking problems. � 10. Provide convenient and secure areas for motorcycle and bicycle parking. 11. Provide bicycle route maps showing best routes to school . � 12. Adjust class schedules to reduce peak demand periods. 13. Allow campus security to tag cars off-campus, improve enforcement overall . � 14. Make students more aware of parking problems, encourage use of transit, � motorcycles, bicycles, car pools, and encourage use of on�campus parking when available. , 50 � / � � / �• . . . � � / ' � 1 . � - '� � � � �� ' , � / • � 11 / ► � __ � ' � ' �:.�� I.�JL>YR � , �� : , ��or . . ��i�i � �� ._��;��01 , � . , _--- _ ` C.y'lfwi` aes� �;_'�'� � �1 .�I� � •:— �:, � �� M:31�� ..�, � i�� , 1,__ ', • ' � j ..- . 1 _ ' � •� � � �� / i . , . � � � j� .'■��"��"" ' � �� %� L, '/. ,r �� ` _ ,,.�..,;xp., — `� �..<:�� 4•1� '= . r: � �,i= �S� - � ' .� /� � t„ � . - �� '� � � • • � . '' �� ' '' • G1 � ��!'i . . � �� i/: � r w r/'��Yn��,�� .. ii��i � � �� . �a,,� .� ..� �, , t , . ■��■ • • r� ��!!� � .. t� ��--t :��,w� �� . � . 3�. `/ �� . I �►1,� _ �� /�1 � � �� . �� ,� x ��: � :s3� ' s� e r::, �y'tx'. �� ,, � 'I�� h � '�`� ��: � .. .. �r71, r �� ■■ � 1 �LL� •• � t ��_ �.,. ' � —. �1 �. �r ,�� ;. �� %� � 1 �1 '��I��I�r �� _�� '�� ':�. : - '� � � � � y"'''t;:::::—:��'`::'s::: S��,�h.w�%-�%w�� '��x�,yr� �Yi�'��. ' _ v J;.': , � � ::_�:i>:i�ti;�;,;3: / ��s::::;u�: � � • � "`� • , � , _ _ ,_ ' F. APPENDIX MEETING MINUTES ' COLLEGE ZONING TASK FORCE OF THE ST. PAUL PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 14, 1985 � MEMBERS PRESENT Gary Park, Bob Nechal , Colleen Hegranes , Bob Wicker, Bob ��^�'��r�^ Englund, Bill Rosser, Mark Dickinson, Quentin Elliott, Ken , Jefferson, Leslie Carney. STAFF_PRESENT Donna Drummond , The meeting was called to order at 7 :10 P.M. by Chairman Gary Park. The task force members present introduced themselves and explained something � about the organizations they represent. Gary Park, in introductory comments, emphasized that both St. Paul 's colleges and its neighborhoods are tremendous assets to the city, and this task force must find solutions that work to � preserve both assets. Donna Drummond of the Planning Division staff presented background information on the role of the task force and the issues it has been asked to address. The ' task force was established at the direction of the Planning Commission to study the following issues as they relate to the St. Paul Zoning Code: 1) on-campus parking requirements ; 2) policies regarding establishment and expansion of ' institutional boundaries ; and 3) requirements affecting off-campus student housing. The task force will present a report, with recommendations, to the Planning Commission for its consideration. Ms. Drummond also explained the , following materials, which had been distributed before the start of the meeting: meeting agenda ; task force membership list; Planning Commission resolution establishing the task force ; proposed study schedule for the task force; and an � information sheet on St. Paul Zoning Code provisions related to colleges, universities, and seminaries. A group discussion of issues related to parking followed. The group identified � issues or "forces" (listed below) that affect college-related parking. Staff grouped the issues under the following general categories : Economic � -�property values - parking fee structures � - affect of parking facility costs on tuition ; school ' s competitiveness - cost of enforcement of parking regulations - construction costs : institutional priorities for capital improvements - liability - protection/safety of students at outlying parking facilities � - more students need cars because more have jobs to help pay for school - City's role in providing parking facilities/services - need for campuses to grow, economies of scale (what is the most efficient ' size?) - lack of public transportation - lack of close-by parking for neighboring businesses � - loss of students in dorms due to lack of convenient on-campus parking - taxes pay for roads - residents pay property taxes, colleges do not , 52 , � C��'S-i5�a � Page Two � Function/Convenience -^time�'scFieau�es=. convenience of parking close to destination for both students and residents - many students/faculty live off-campus, need to drive to the campus ' - increase in part-time students, most of which are commuters - traffic/safety issues - overflow on-street parking causes interruption of city services : plowing, � street cleaning - lack of enforcement: City and colleges, whose job? - need to minimize disruption of private lives - taxpayers have a right to park in front of their property, colleges not ' taxpaying Aesthetic , -^crowded streets - air/noise pollution - damage to trees and curbs, increase in litter and vandalism - loss of open spaces on campuses when additional parking facilities built , - misuse of buildings, residential structures used for college uses Sociabilit�/Civility , =-intrusion on~home life due to increased noise, rowdy behavior - decline/breakdown in trust between neighborhoods and institutions - actions inconsiderate of others, conflicting lifestyles � - benefit of colleges to broader community: education, cultural , open spaces Alternatives � -~buses�:^public and inter-campus - car pools - better scheduling - parking restrictions , - subsidies - metered parking , After the discussion, Donna Drummond emphasized that any parking solutions recommended by the task force should attempt to find a balance between the many issues or "forces" affecting college-related parking. , A brief discussion of the proposed study schedule for the task force followed. There was general agreement that the schedule seemed appropriate. Gary Park emphasized that the task force could change the schedule at any point in the ' process. The final item discussed was the meeting time for the next meeting on February , 28. A majority of task force members agreed that 6 :00 P.M. - 7 :30 P.M. would be a more appropriate meeting time. ' The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, �cn.�,c� 4�ix�:•.�,�e.,� , � Donna Drummond ' 53 , MEETING MINUTES , COLLEGE ZOP�ING TASK FORCE OF THE ST. PAUL PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 28, 1985 ' Members^Present: John Rutford, Gayle Summers, Larry Anderson, Robin ' ~~~�� ^�—r Young, Rich Tenneson, Ken Jefferson, Colleen Hegranes, Quentin Elliott, Bill Rosser, Bob Nechal , Gary Park, Larry Alexander Guests Present: Kiki Sonnen � _..____________ Staff�Present: Donna Drummond � The meeting was called to order at 6:05 P.M. by Vice�-Chairman Robin Young. , Task force members again introduced themselves, as many were attending for the first time. The minutes of the February 14, 1985, meeting were approved as written. , Ken Jefferson and John Rutford questioned the extent to which off—campus student housing would be dealt with by the task force. Donna Drummond of the ' Planning Division staff explained that the task force was beginning its work by studying the parking and campus boundary issues, which is Phase I of the college zoning study. Off—campus student housing issues will be dealt with extensively in Phase II of the study, which will begin in late spring. � Ms. Drummond presented background information on the current parking requirement for colleges, universities, seminaries , and other related Zoning � Code provisions. The current parking requirement is based largely on the number of students and staff at each institution. A chart showing college parking requirements for other cities in the U.S. was also distributed. Ms , Drummond pointed out that many other cities also have problems with overflow parking from colleges and other large, traffic--generating institutions. Ms. Drummond noted two overall problems with the City' s current parking , requirement: 1) it is difficult to enforce; and 2) it does not deal adequately with part�time students. Enforcement is a problem because it is difficult to accurately monitor fluctuations in student and staff levels. Further, there is ' no mechanism or decision point (like the issuing of a building permit or special condition use permit) at which the City has the active means to require additional parking. The requirement also makes no reference to part�time students, which is a problem for schools with high part—time enrollments. ' The group then began discussion of the parking situation at the individual schools. A table was distributed that showed the current number of parking , spaces provided on each campus, the amount of parking the Zoning Code would require if the campus was newly constructed, and the amount of parking each campus should legally have provided since 1975, when the current Zoning Code , was adopted. The table was put together by staff with information provided by each institution. , 54 ' 1 ��..s�d � P age Two � Vice-Chairman Young asked for comments regarding each school . Colleen Hegranes, Director of Housing at the College of St. Catherine, said that there is an enormous parking lot near 0'Shaughnessy Auditorium that is usually only , half full . She noted that the lot is not convenient to classroom buildings and many students don't want to walk that far. She also said that overflow parking does not seem to be a problem now. ' Bill Rosser, Associate Dean of Students at the College of St. Thomas, announced that the college's largest lot at Summit and Cretin would be enlarged by 68 spaces this spring. He also stated that there are approximately 240 curbside � parking spaces which abut campus property, and that these spaces provide parking in addition to on-campus lots. Mr. Rosser acknowledged that the parking problem at St. Thomas is real , but that the college is making gradual � progress toward resolving the situation. Quentin Elliott, who is a member of a church near the Hamline University campus, felt that there is a parking congestion problem for 3-4 blocks beyond , Snelling, and that there are real problems with getting adequate snowplowing because of the constant parking overflow. � Richard Tenneson, Business Manager for Luther Northwestern Theological Seminary, said that the seminary generally has adequate parking, but there has been a problem with students parking on-street near classroom buildings. He � said the erection of "No Seminary Parking" signs on streets around the campus has helped. The seminary will respond to neighbors' calls about parking problems and attempt to resolve problems with individual students. ' Gayle Summers, District 14 representative, stated that Macalester College doesn't have a significant overflow parking problem, although there is some conflict on Grand Avenue between businesses and school-related parkers. Ms. ' Summers felt that many of Macalester's students live on campus, and most do not have cars. She also noted that the district council does not hear complaints about Macalester parking. ' Gayle Summers also spoke regarding the St. P aul Seminary, stating that there was no parking problem until St. Thomas began holding classes there a year ago. She said there is not a big problem now, but the potential is there for the � problem to get worse. Bill Rosser from St. Thomas noted that the college conducts 12 classes on the seminary campus, and that the college is also leasing Loras Residence Hall for its students. � Gary Park, St. P aul Planning Commission member and School District employee, stated that the St. P aul Technical-Vocational Institute' s building addition, which is under construction, will not increase enrollment but will allow the ' elimination of ten portable classrooms currently in use. Mr. Park felt there is some overflow parking that occurs on Marshall Avenue, due largely to its close proximity to the main entrance, rather than a lack of on-campus parking. , ' 55 � � P age Three ' Larry Anderson, Director of Planning at the University of Minnesota, stated , that there is a large amount of parking available on the state fairgrounds, but there is still overflow parking in the neighborhood because it is more convenient to park there. Mr. Anderson also said that the University is ' currently working with the St. Anthony Park neighborhood to plan for an exclusive busway between the Minneapolis and St. Paul campuses. Quentin Elliott, District 12 representative, stated that parking at outlying feeder lots for the busway should be free, and a charge required for the bus ride ! rather than the reverse, as is now planned. He feels that a free parking policy would help reduce on-street parking to a greater extent. Larry Alexander, Summit-University Planning Council representative, noted that � the Council is opposed to the parking lot proposed by the Assembly of God Church for joint use with William Mitchell Colle e of Law because it would detract from the Sumnit Avenue view and not appreciab y help the situation. He , felt the lot would be used by Grand Avenue customers. Mr. Alexander also stated that permit parking around the school seems to be working f airly well . Concordia Colleqe was not discussed because there was no one present f amiliar � with the situation. Vice-Chairman Young, noting the time, suggested moving the rest of the agenda , to the next meeting. It was agreed that the next meeting would be at 6:00 P.M. on Thursday, March 14, 1985, at the Hamline Library meeting room. � The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, � Donna Drumnond ' ' ' ' � , , 56 , ' ��5�is�d � MEETING MINUTES COLLEGE ZONING TASK FORCE OF THE ST. PAUL PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 14, 1985 ' Members Present : Gary Park, Tom Ries, Larry Anderson, Quentin Elliot, �� ~�� Charles Green, Bob Nechal , Bill Rosser, Bob Wicker, ' Bob Englund, Mark Dickinson, Larry Alexander Staff Present: Donna Drummond , The meeting was called to order at 6 :05 P.M. by Chairman Gary Park. The minutes of the February 28, 1985, meeting were approved as written. � The first agenda item was the issue of campus boundaries, which had been carried over from the previous meeting's agenda. Donna Drummond of the ' Planning Division staff explained that there is currently no written definition or description of the recognized boundaries of each college, university, or seminary on file with the City. A written record of what the boundaries are is important for two reasons: 1) fraternity and sorority houses and dormitories ' can only be located within 250 feet of the nearest property line of the school ; and 2) colleges, universities, and seminaries are "special condition uses" in residential zoning districts, and when a school use expands into a residential ' area not previously considered part of its campus, a special condition use permit is required from the St. Paul Planning Commission. Because of these Zoning Code requirernents, it is important for the City and each school to have � a clear understanding of what the boundaries are. To address this issue, Ms. Drummond suggested that she work with each school representative and the appropriate district council representative to reach ' agreement on what the boundaries are. These boundaries would then be discussed and approved by the overall task force, and recommended to the Planning Commission for inclusion in the Zoning Code. � Several task force members suggested that the issues of whether expansion should be contiguous and whether a special condition use permit constituted an , expansion of the boundary needed to be addressed further. The task force briefly continued the discussion of the parking situation at each school that was begun at the last meeting. The Reverend Thomas Ries from ' Concordia Colle�e stated that in 1983, an analysis of Concordia College parking ...r..__.... was�' one �n con�unction with a request for a parking variance for construction of additional student housing. The variance was approved partially because an � architectural firm' s analysis indicated that the present parking supply was adequate to meet demand. The Rev. Ries also stated that the Lexington-Hamline Community Council ' s offices are located on campus, and the college hasn't heard ' any complaints froin them about parking. Charles Green, representing William Mitchell Colle�e of Law, acknowledged that s. wr�. there is a parking problem aroun t e sc oo , not�ng t at the times of heaviest ' parking demand are 6:30 - 8:30 p.m. , Mondays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays. Demand is somewhat lighter on Wednesdays and Fridays. Mr. Green also pointed out that the current parking requirement isn't adequate for William Mitchell , since most ' of the school ' s students are part-time. 57 � , Pa ge Two ' The next agenda item was the establishment of subcommittees for schools � identified as having parking problems. Ms. Drummond recommended that subcommittees be established for the College of St. Thomas and Hamline University. She suggested that a separate subcommittee not be established for ' William Mitchell since parking issues there will be dealt with by the Grand Avenue Parking Task Force, which will begin meeting within a month. That task force will make its recommendations available to the College Zoning Task Force. � Ms. Drummond explained that she recommended these schools for more in�depth discussion based on a history of neighborhood concern about parking, the analysis of existing parking based on Zoning Code standards, and a mapped survey of the off-campus parking situation at each school completed on Tuesday, � March 12th between 10:00 a.m. and 12 :00 p.m. Ms. Drummond suggested that membership on the subcommittees not be restricted � to current task force members, and that the subcommittees meet approximately four times over the next 2 months to analyze the parking situation and recommend ways to improve it. The full task force would not meet during this � two month period, but resume meeting in late May or early June to consider the subcommittee recommendations, and approve recomrnendations regarding a new Zoning Code parking requirement and campus boundaries. She also suggested that the task force take a summer break and start meeting again in September to � look at student housing issues. The task force discussed the concept of establishing subcommittees. Bob Nechal � from the Merriam Park Community Council suggested that the St. Paul Seminary and District 14 representatives be involved in a St. Thomas subcommittee. Bill Rosser from St. Thomas expressed concern that a new committee might duplicate much of the work already done by the Joint Committee on Community/College , Relations. Mr. Nechal stated that the Joint Committee seems to be primarily informational , and has dealt well with new issues and problems but has not dealt well with long�standing, existing problems. Mr. Rosser felt that any ' group set up for St. Thomas should work closely with the Joint Committee to avoid duplication of effort. Bob Englund from Hamline objected to their school being singled out for a , subcommittee when the parking situation was not really any worse than at many of the other schools. Bob Wicker from the District 11 Planning Coalition felt that Hamline has had a good relationship with the community in the past and ' there have been successeS in dealing with certain problems, but that there were additional issues that could benefit from more intensive analysis and discussion. � Several college representatives questioned whether the subcorr�nittee approach was appropriate. Mr. Rosser fielt that setting up subcommittees to deal with � individual school situations was diverting the task force from its main objectives, recommendations regard9ng a revised parking standard and campus boundaries. Ms. Drummond stated that the charge from the Planning Commission regarding parking was two-fold : to recommend a better parking requirement to , deal with future development and to recommend ways to alleviate parking problems where they currently exist. 1 58 � � ��Y.�-i�� , P age Three � Several members felt that if subcommittees were set up for some schools, they should be set up for all schools. There was also a general feeling that the task force would benefit from the experience and information of , the other schools regarding parking, and there should be some effort to bring this forward. Chairman Park stated that it might not be the best use of task force or staff time to set up subcomnittees where there was no ' history of neighborhood concern about a parking problem. He did acknowledge that the task force should bring the experience and information of all the schools regarding parking forward for the task force to � consider. Bill Rosser (St. Thomas), Charles Green (William Mitchell ), and Bob Englund (Hamline) agreed to meet and work with subcommittees that would be formed ' to address the parking and campus boundary issues for those schools. In the case of William Mitchell, the group will be the Grand Avenue P arking Task Force which will be a separate Planning Commission task force. ' Chairman Park stated that he would serve as chair for the St. Thomas group, and Robin Young would chair the Hamline group. The full task force will reconvene in late May or early June to hear the recommendations of the , groups. The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. � Respectfully submitted, c� 1 Donna Drummond , ' ' ' � , � � 59 r�t*T �� R. ;, CITY OF SAINT PAUL � �� DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT � �� 1O1 �� a DIVISION OF PLANNING ,,,. 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota,55102 �GEORGE LATIMER 872-292-1577 � MAYOR MEETING MINUTES ' COLLEGE ZONING TASK FORCE OF THE ST. PAUL PLANNING COMMISSION � June 27, 1985 � Members Present: Robin Young, Gayle Summers, Mitchell Rubinstein, Bill , Rosser, Robert Harri (attending for Colleen Heyranes) , Ken Jefferson, Charles Green, Bob Englund, Mark Dickinson, Quentin Elliott, Bob Nechal , Staff Present: Donna Drummond The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. , by Vice Chairman Robin Young. ' Donna Drummond of the Planning Division staff updated the task force members on � what had occurred since the last meeting on March 14th. She exp]ained that individual subcommittees for Hamline and St. Thomas had been established and met during this period. The subcommittees, consisting of both college and ' neighborhood representatives, discussed and made recommendations regarding parking and campus boundary issues around each of these schools. The recommendations are included in reports that have been presented to the task force for its' consideration. , During this period the Grand Avenue Parking Task Force also began meeting and discussing the parking situation around William Mitchell College of Law. This ' task force is a separate task force of the Planning Commission and will report its findings and recommendations directly to that body. The Grand Avenue Parkiny Task Force's recommendations regarding William Mitchell were originally ' to be included in the College Zoning Task Force report, but it now appears they will not be ready in time. Charles Green, representative from William Mitchell , expressed concern about ' the make-up of the Grand Avenue Parking Task Force, stating that there is only one representative from William Mitchell and several from the surrounding district councils, in addition to representatives from some of the neighborhood � churches. Mr. Green felt that membership in the Hamline and St. Thomas subcommittees was more evenly distributed between colleye and neighborhood representatives. Ms. Drummond explained that one reason for the composition of ' the Grand Avenue Parking Task force is that it is looking at a broader area than just around William Mitchell . 1 � 60 ' ��S /S �'d , Page Two ' Vice Chairman Young announced that the agenda for the meeting would be to review and discuss each section of the draft task force report, which had been mailed out ahead of time for review by the task force. Each section was ' introduced and explained by Donna Drummond, and then discussed by the task force members. Ms. Drurrunond also explained that everything in the draft report, except for the St. Thomas and Hamline subcommittee reports, represents , her staff recommendation to the task force. Comments and discussion regarding each section of the report are surrunarized below. ' Campus Boundaries Charles Green asked whether issuing a special condition use permit for each � school to identify its campus boundaries would somehow require the school to imnediately eliminate its historical Zoning Code parking deficiency if it had one. Ms. Drummond felt it would not. ' Mitchell Rubinstein from the Summit-University Planning Council asked whether colleges, universities, and seminaries, if allowed downtown as permitted uses (as proposed in Recommendation 3) , would be required to provide parking. Gayle ' Summers from the District 14 Community Council (and a member of the Planning Comnission) explained that the Zoning Code did not require parking downtown, on the theory that private market forces would provide adequate parking. The task , force generally agreed that allowing colleges, universities, and seminaries as permitted uses downtown made sense. ' Mark Dickinson from Macalester College pointed out that the boundary line for the college should include an additional parcel in the block bounded by Sumnit Avenue, Macalester Street, Grand Avenue, and Cambridye Avenue. The parcel contains college housing and a parking lot. There were no other comments , regarding the campus boundary maps. Parkin9 ' The task force got as far as Recommendation 1 of the parking section. There was a general discussion about having a parking requirement based on peak hour ' parking demand, because it would be the most accurate reflection of parking need. Ms. Drummond acknowledged this, but stated that such a requirement would be very difficult to enforce, and would require significant city staff time and resources to administer since detailed studies would be needed to determine ' peak hour demand at each school . Such studies would also have to be repeated periodically as conditions changed. � Gayle Summers pointed out that a parking requirement must apply to all situations, both new and existing uses, and if the requirement is not appropriate for a particular situation, then the institution can apply for a � variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals. ' � 61 ' Page Three ' Charles Green stated that the number of on-campus parking spaces at William , Mitchell (see Attachment P-1) was 124 instead of 80, as reported earlier to Planning Division staff. Robin Young announced that discussion of the rest of the report would continue ' at the next task force meeting on Thursday, July 11, at 6:00 P.M. The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 P.M. ' Respectfully submitted, ��Ci , Donna Drummond , , ' ' � , ' 1 ' � � , 62 , , � �'S- �S�d , MEETING MINUTES ' COLLEGE ZONING TASK FORCE OF THE ST. PAUL PIANNING COMMISSION July 11 , 1985 , , Members Present: Gary Park, Mitchell Rubinstein, John Rutford, Bill Rosser, Bob Nechal , Charles Green, Ken Jefferson, Quentin Elliott, Robert Englund, Bill Irwin ' Guests Present: Councilmember Kiki Sonnen Staff Present: Donna Drummond � The meeting was called to order at 6:10 P.M. , by Chairman Gary Park. ' Chairman Park noted that the task force ended its last meeting with a discussion of the first parking recommendation, which recommends a new parking requirement for colleges, universities, and seminaries. He asked if there was , any further discussion on that point. Bill Rosser stated that the College of St. Thomas agrees that a requirement , needs to be added for part-time students, but that the net effect of a revised standard shouldn't be to raise the requirement from what it currently is now. He noted that St. Paul ' s requirement, compared with other cities in the � country, is on the upper end of the scale in terms of parking required. Mr. Rosser suggested two alternative requirements for the task force' s consideration. Both alternatives would require one space for every three ' employees and dormitory beds, which is the same as the current requirement. The staff recommended parking requirement would also keep that part of the requirement the same. However, Mr. Rosser disagreed with the staff , recommendation for calculatiny parking required for students, and presented the following two alternatives: , 1 . One space for every 3 full-time students living off-campus, or, 1 space for every (no number suggested) part-time students, whichever is greater. 2. One space for every 3 students attending classes during the peak hour of ' classroom use, minus the number of resident students (dormitory beds) . Mr. Rosser stated that both alternatives would address the problem of requiring , parking for part-time students, but would not necessarily increase the overall parking requirement. He noted that St. Thomas' peak hour of classroom use occurs between 9 A.M, and 10 A.M. , when approximately 4000 students are ' attending classes. Under the current Zoning Code parking requirement, St. Thomas, if it were newly constructed today, would be required to provide 1,566 parkiny spaces. Under the second alternative above, St. Thomas' total requirement would be 1 ,564, or nearly the same. ' � 63 � Page Two ' Charles Green, William Mitchell College of Law, also spoke in favor of a � formula based on peak hour use of classroom facilities. He stated that William Mitchell 's peak hour of use occurs from 6:30-7:30 P.M. , on Monday , Tuesday, and Thursday, when approximately 6U0 students are attending class. ' Donna Drummond of the Planniny Division staff stated that the concept of basing required parking on peak hour demand is a yood one, but that there are many ' problems with administering a requirement like that. For example, it would be very difficult to consistently and fairly measure peak demand for all of the colleges, universities, and seminaries in the city, and to insure that all were , using the same method of gathering data, and were reporting it accurately. Such data would have to be collected and updated at least annually, to accurately monitor compliance with the requirement. Further, there is no outside source that the City could use to double-check the numbers supplied by ' each school . Such is not the case with a requirement based on the total number of full and part-time students, because these numbers would also be available from the Higher Education Coordinating Board. , Ms. Drummond also referred to the discussion of peak hour parking demand in the report, which states that peak hour parking demand is generated by more than just students in class and staff, but includes all other students and visitors ' using university services such as the library, study halls, administrative services, recreational/social facilities, and facilities for special events. Another factor is the percentage of these people that are actually driving to ' campus as opposed to arriving by other means. This percentage would vary from school to school and would require lengthy surveys and studies to determine accurately. � Discussion then shifted to the first alternative suggested by Bill Rosser, which would require parking for full-time students or part-time students, whichever is greater. Both Bill Rosser and Charles Green felt that the full- , time and part-time students at their schools yenerally attend at different times of the day, and that it makes sense to require parking based on whichever group is the largest. � Donna Drummond suggested that the focus of the argument didn't seem to be what formula should be used, but whether or not the overall requirement should be , raised. Referring to a handout which showed the theoretical effect of the staff recommended parkiny requirement on each school , she noted that the net effect would be to raise the reyuirement somewhat for schools with a large part-time student component. For schools with a more traditional student body, ' the net effect of the staff recommended requirement would be about the same as the current requirement. She felt this was justified because a higher percentage of part-time students tend to drive to campus than full-time ' students, and the staff recommended requirement recognizesthat fact. Ms. Drummond also reminded the task force that any new parking requirement would apply only to future growth in student enrollment, staff size, and number of ' dormitory beds that occurred after the new reyuirement was adopted. ' 64 � ' �,/��'S�/��d , Page Three � There was some discussion of changing the staff recommended requirement from one space for every six part-time students to one for every seven. The task force agreed that it would like to see various alternative formulas and the net , effect of those before deciding on a recommendation. The final three parking recommendations dealing with monitoring and enforcement , of the parking requirement were briefly discussed. Bill Rosser had some concern that the suggested procedure would not recognize the type of process that St. Thomas had agreed to in working with the Joint Committee to come up , with a parking plan for St. Thomas. Gary Park suggested that staff draft lanyuage to be included in Recommendation 4 that would recognize the work of college/neighborhood groups in dealing with parking problems at individual campuses. ' Ken Jefferson, Southwest Area District Council , suggested that further language be added to the parking section of the report that recognizes the role other ' uses have in contributing to the on-street parking problem. Gary Park then suggested that a paragraph be adding urging the City to actively explore available creative financing mechanisms to aid institutions in � financing the construction of needed parking facilities. It was decided that another meeting of the task force was needed. The meeting , was set for Monday, July 29, 6:00 P.M. , Hamline University, Law School Building, Room 4 (directions and a meeting notice will be sent out later) . , The meetiny was adjourned at 7 :30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, � �� '`'c��,,��,�d? �r`�2,� �r / ' �'°� � t ' �,s`.:..-, Donna Orummond � , , , ' ' , 65 GiT7 pr , ,�,��6 ; CITY OF SAINT PAUL � �� ro DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT +mt°� �� a DIVISION OF PLANNING ' +ae. 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota,55101 612-292-1577 � GEORGE LATIMER MAYOR MEETING MINUTES COLLEGE ZONING TASK FOItCE OF ' THE ST. PAUL PLANNING COMMISSI()N July 29, 1985 � , Members Present: Bob Nechal , Larry Anderson, Bill Rosser, Gayle Summers, Charles Green, Mitchell Rubinstein, Bob Englund, Mark , Dickinson, Gary Park. Staff Present: Donna Drummond ' The meeting was called to order at 6:10 P.M. , by Chairman Gary Park. ' Chairman Park suygested that the task force begin its meeting by reviewing , changes to the parkiny chapter that had been mailed out previously. The first change added a paragraph regarding the source of on-street parking problems. The paragraph noted that other uses such as businesses and ' residences also create demand for on-street parkiny around campuses in addition to colleyes and universities. There were no objections to this paragraph. Discussion then �roceecied to Parking Recommendation 4, where a paragraph was � added recommendiny that the Planniny Commission recognize the work of college/ neighborhood based yroups that may be working on the parkiny problems around an ' individual campus in decidiny how the conditions of the special condition use permit should be met. Several college representatives were concerned that the City could ' theoretically try to pull a school ' s permit and shut it down if it was not in compliance with the parking requirement. Donna Drummond of the Planniny Division staff stated that this was highly unlikely, and that the special ' condition use permit process simply would provide City staff with a mechanism to monitor annual enrollment and staff chanyes at each school . A school would not be out of compliance with its permit unless its enrollment, staff size, or ' number of dormitory beds exceeded by more than 10 percent the baseline numbers identified in the permit and it had not provided any additional parking. Under the current recommendation there is a significant amount of time built into the process duriny which the City and an individual school can work out a solution , that will benefit the school and community. ' 66 ' � �� —�J��/�5�� ' Paye Two � Charles Green from William Mitchell was concerned about th lan f e guage o Recommendation 5, which refers to the historic (legal ) 1975-1984 parking ' deficiency that exists for four of the schools (St. Thomas, Concordia, Macalester, and William Mitchell ) . The point of the recommendation is that the Planning Commission should monitor the parking situation around these campuses, ' and recommend to the Mayor and City Council that the deficiency be made up only if the parking situation seems bad and no progress is beiny made to resolve it. Efforts to address the parking deficiency are already under way for St. Thomas. ' Donna Drummond explained that this recommendation, if implemented, would have little direct effect on William Mitchell since its historic deficiency is only seven spaces. This would be reduced to zero if leased spaces were calculated i nto the forrnul a. ' Discussion then centered around the second parayraph of Recommendation 4, which refers to the authority of the Division of Housing and Building Code ' Enforcement to deny a building permit for construction of a new building, or expansion or increased intensity of use of an existing building if the Zoning Code parking requirement is not met. There was some confusion as to whether , this was recornmending a new power or area of authority for the City. Donna Drummond explained that this is the way the City has always enforced its parking requi�ements for all types of uses throughout the city. It was put into this recommendation primarily as a point of information. The task force , asked that new language be drafted to clarify this point. A sixth recommendation had been added at the last meeting asking that the City , explore available creative financing mechanisms to aid schools in building parking facilities. There was no objection to the language drafted. The final point that the task force needed to resolve was the parking ' requirement formula. Donna Drummond distributed a work sheet showing how various formulas would actually be applied for individual schools assuming a five percent annual rate of yrowth. Bill Rosser from St. Thomas said he , favored a student enrollment requirement of one space for every 3 full-time students liviny off-carnpus or one space for every 3 part-time students, whichever is yreater. He fel-t this formula was easier to understand than the ' staff recommended formula, it didn't increase the overall effect of the parking requirement yet added a component for part-time students, and it maintained the same 1 to 3 ratio used for employees and dormitory beds. , Gayle Summers moved that the task force approve the staff recommended formula of one space for every 4 full-time students liviny off-campus and one space for every six part-time students, or the reverse, whichever is greater. She felt ' there should be a requirement for both full and part-time students. The motion was not seconded, ' Bill Rosser moved that his recommended formula be approved. Bob Nechal from the Merriam Park Community Council spoke in favor of the formula because he felt most of St. Thomas' growth in the future would be in part-time students, and he would rather see a 1 for 3 than a 1 for 4 reyuirement. The motion was , approved with one dissenting vote. ' 67 , Page Three , n es in the re ort discussed � The task force agreed that staff would make the cha g p at this meetiny and mail a final copy of the report to all members. Everyone would have an opportunity for a final review of the report. If anyone had , serious objections remaining, another meeting of the task force could be called to resolve areas of dispute. The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 P.M. � Respectfully submitted, , �o� Donna Drummond ' ' ' ' ' � ' ' ' ' ' ' 68 1 � C��/�d � j i��3� city of saint paul planning commission resolution f ile number 85-90 . �te November 8. 198= WHEREAS, the Planning Comnission initiated a 40-acre study, as authorized under Minnesota Statutes Section 462.347 (5) and St. Paul Zoning Code Section 64.400, for the purpose of considering amendments to the text of the Zoning Code as it pertains to colleges, universities, and seminaries; and WHEREAS, the College Zoning Task Force, created by the Planning Commission to study Zoning Code issues related to colleges, universites, and seminaries; has issued its report with recommendations regarding: 1. on-campus parking requirements and related parking concerns; and 2. establishment and expansion of campus boundaries; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on October 25, 1985, regarding proposed Zoning Code text amendments that would implement the recommendations of the College Zoning Task Force; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission approves the report of the College Zoning Task Force, but wishes to express reservations regarding Recommendation 2 of the Hamline University Subcommittee, which calls for a modification of parking lot site plan requirements for colleges, � universities, and seminaries; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission approves the Zoning Code text amendments as presented at the public hearing on October 25, 1985, and directs the Planning Administrator to forward these amendments to the Mayor and City Council for their consideration and action; and BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission thanks the members of the College Zoning Task Force, and the members of the St. Thomas and Hamline Subcommittees, for the time and effort they contributed in studying these issues. � ,� moved by Zieman ��d � VanHoef in fav�or Unanimous voice vote against- _ _ . . ��is�d ��.��d � ��T'�. CITY OF SAINT PAUL e~� 'a OFFICE OF THE MAYOR ° niii°i � . vo ^c ,... 347 CITY HALL SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 GEORGE LATIMER (612) 298-4323 MAYOR November 12, 1985 City Council President Victor Tedesco and Members of the City Council 719 City Hall Saint Paul , Minnesota 55102 RE: PROPOSEU ZONING CODE CHANGES FOR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES Dear President Tedesco and Members of the City Council : On November 8, 1985, the Planning Commission approved the report of the College Zoning Task Force and a set of Zoning Code text amendments that would implement the recommendations of the task force. The proposed Zoning Code amendments (attached) are presented for your consideration. I support their adoption. The College Zoning Task Foc�ce was created by the Planning Commission to look at Zoning Code issues related to colleges, universities, and seminaries in Saint Paul . The report issued by the task force (also attached) contains recommendations regarding two specific problem areas: 1) on-campus parkiny requirements and related parking concerns; and 2) establishment and expansion of campus boundaries. The task force will resume work early next year to consider problems related to off-campus housing. The task force includes representatives from each of the major colleyes, universities, and seminaries in Saint Paul , and from each of the district councils containiny one of these institutions. I believe that the recommendations from this representative task force, along with the proposed Zoniny Code changes, will help resolve some long-standing neighborhood issues in our city. I urge the Council to adopt the proposed Zoning Code amendments. I would also like to thank the members of the Colleye Zoning Task Force and the Saint Paul Planning Commission for the time and effort they contributed in studying these issues. Very truly o rs, � o g Latimer Mayo GL/bq cc: College Zoning Task Force Members David Lanegran, Saint Paul Plannirag Commission Chairman Larry Soderholm, Planning Division �46 � � - ��`.�'-%s 7l'� �, � _ /7��4 � � CITX OF S3INT PgUL -:...:. o�zc� o� z•s� czz*Y covrrczL ' YM��NI �� . � .=`Q�� ' OCt2 ; . , �anuary. l3, i986 ' COMM (TTEE REPORT TO = Saint PQUI Cit'y CoUncit F� � M = C O 171[�3 i�'t�o p("� ��ty Deve 1 opment and TransAOrtat i on CHLLIR . Wiliiam L. Wilson � i , Orcr�:�e amend i ng Gt�aAters 60-62 of �� .Leg i s.�a�c a ve Co+de Ae'rta i n i ng ta Co 1°�#-�ge; 11n i vers i ty ancl Sem i nary `' t��es • ��'��c�mmends apArovai ) 2. Resolution adopting Oowntown St. Naul , Framework for Development, 1985-1990 as an amendment to the Comprehensive � Pian for the City ot= St. Paul (Committee recommends approva'i ) ' � c � � cn-� -"" -:� � - .:z: �...• 'T� ' � f- _,;y � .._� � � ^� � ``� �- _-n � . n � � � n � 'C��I'L' SEVIIH'rH FLOOR SAII�1T FAUL.yLIIVNESOTA SSIOZ ��• ' a�. { .� �. ; Y ' �U fi.� J Y ��.Y °�,t .w.�r Y�k) � ' �S 1 .` 5 � � t . n r �� I d�i��. ,.+ t �"` � +- x�' � „�y� ��-�' n : . '�. _ . . : 4 ` � �.t e . ��A�4 i t s f�� j# x /�J.'4./� ' .. . ., . P.�� . .,� � _�� .�� .. � ... . ..:. .... . :. .-" - _ '' " .,..� �. ...-:. _ :� - . .,. ._ . ..:- �- .__ .. � .., . ' � - . . �...<. . � �.�5 � 4x s� }.�(. S � p N �� r.i.. } ��r .. } � � . . . � � v.,^.c�t r ✓a�t � � ..,,xa.��; ,y. '�.r'�" �:t--'C �. ite !t� - f-� r � Y'-z.�-' �z �`r''�;' � . .. � t: -.14 ,� �.� , . -" � :'.. . � ,�,< :� � 4 ,..: :.�'- `s�a� ��'ae*- " c � �, "NOTICE OF�- PUBLIC HEARING. �, r.` s n�� 'r '^�� .v .t k .'K�r �#'.� r y �3 G '- _ r ,_.r � a�� .. �C . . '�� ' ., .� ,�� .:`� •` ..�.:. . `.• � �_ . :� .-•.` .C`• �<""�,'-}'�x��s�� -. = ;' .Notice is `hereby.given-that�' a public hearing will be heid before the :� �.-� ,z„� City Counci� on;the - _, , 1986 at 10:00 A.M.' in the � = F �,�-�.�;;� � 3t. �Paul. City �ouncil :Chambers, 'City;Hall and �Court House, St. Paul; _ �� F- � , „ Minnesata,�to consider, ro sed amendments to`the St. Faul Zonin Ordihance, •� ��`� P Po . .. 9 � Y-� ' _,. . . , �. - '�;;�'�`;Ehapters 60-62�of. .the;3t ,:.Faul Legisla�ive Code as they:�rela�e to College, .�"w�',e,-� � �.-�,�University ;and Seminarg uses , �--�`F;�- f-� � - , ��. ��'''�� 4!� ) ...H »+ k, � �°$�s�`Cz� -S t 9''�. '� �, '�-*�-'Lti1� �_Y ""�,e Y �. �'^�»"l+�.. ,��.,` "'�y�whY��?�\' .P 1�M*3�S' y.- 1 -[ -f+S�'>. � .L �� 8 at td"t7[ � �''',�s-r'y�� '.x' ,} �� . �5:� 4 h { F,a,r ��.�,,. � ..� � . .� -�,.i' �s -s;3*a;�,s ,..n �1 a 5 lht 1 '��..��F' �,�` '? :„�r. 'S '�t` '�"'rl �A s�,s�nr.'�%F r.'� ,.G _. ��, � D3t2C� L''�LL]3� 3/. 198�' ,��"`a�'*�C+i: sn"' +Ay & 9� ,..5." � s ��, ' i s�_�s�,� �_,+L k"!- . �j � At...a t^31�s�' �'�,i�-�,� �� .+td ��'t s.�.r'a�yi s6` �.�� •r; x: .�� '�'�,x 4�-' .,�,�. � ."� : ..- .��' ',� �La'{��t-+..va I y n" �a�,y # 4'�' �fi �. � F'�- ,�„ ;L r. �.'�y '�:` `r��w�°�' k. . 7�,y�,,,,,,,y. �S i. 'i t+�wC ��lw �� Tr � .G.'U .. A.�d �J�S�Y '� ��53 ,� t� ...t �*:�@ ti ` � n �� k -�. .,a �. � SL�� ' � � !'113.7cL` �.84 ��SQ+i ��'�w '�'� ,�'� . 'v �i - '�ti ,.,.z -3�+.�,.Ss ,� ,F „ 7�i> ' ,�+�r e � :4`�City Clerl'c��; � " �;��'�#� � r. �,,�y_�'��t.�� '�.c �.�� ;��. x',.fi"'��:��'i. � --�n'.�r.' - �i,A��.+ a,S''��y.c Y��r'' �r ��£} � r �� 'Ct '-i� ~ �'f;,�7'` ��-s n•`�.l'.fa��3*�A^�.�. ' nk 2 ttm w r � sr ��3C,)'. s+Fd�'.'{�='4 �:. c'": t$' .� _ A : "`�-e � � �, h .� S ,�.- -. �7 '" . 72��",-. r- .xy �'4' �''� c' t.� 'a��t-.�e`^.,.a � Y II �'1.ta�``�,�?`n.a :u' - � '� � �t '".� '� ��. �' .q.r�p�,��`February 8; 1986) � � ,s d��w�ti A 'a�'�•� "�� '�''' ,� . # 'a..ti � s t - `�' : `v �.g�x �'n .. " "`,,•s, ��a a' a r t- �._ r 4,,, �.j.st5a"j�' x ��"r��!-'"ti'� ,��":Rds'��P .f . s ,� ! r�a '� �.v$ �S _�",�'�:� Y �'��F'� �'+.-n, z �i ,.,T'��Sd:i a- ;x ��-cs.�..^�r . 1:. n � . a. �T�" �. . -. � � � � 1� t .- � . � A � ,t ., .,�� .. 3� ^s� .: s t'v �rn �,lk'" .+'�,.i'd. �'�"�-- `�a f ��'i q . s '��'' � '°'q�. � 5.r�' � -.-1. 7-at � �. � � �". A �`�S � �l�w r �� . �*��`�` y. ,Ce. st �,.tc'�` 'i'� <5. � i*.> L'�'� r.�'� X.. .r 'i .:r s. .es °.g- � �'2� � .L�`.� s'�,�,� �t'�';; ��"�`�` .� ` . .�b;k`� � �,r�"'�;�g � 1r �rt�� r " R .� "�� +. .?i.�t� {£e'� ?`v[ °4` .�-� a h J y � �''�' { 's'�'� ' Y}aid'.�.'3 .+�`,.6.�4ii��'C.,,�a +xr . -� 4µ! - Sp . �s ^4! �` . •✓ . F'#13F X v� '� ,, �+ ..j-"� t��' �'� ��' � „�'�`�'b"'q}Z : . �j r�3' � r �r` t � �k'1' °�''Q $� �,�x��'vn �s�� °y.�r�„��i �h � Yt-�-�yz "'°'T*� .+ �t �e.w ^ �Ca "ah�a�iz` ` ��r« 3af 1 a' _ n ,t�.-k n� Y =f y ,� ��'��'� ++ .v.+� e..a � '� 7.w•' '�"�A a> ; - �:.r � ., /. x �. ' ytY� � s .s � �.s s, �- 'SR..� r : �T ,n r.�.s'� ,�t �7'��. � .u�t,�--v$�k y..a„c.;:i--3:,i ' .�°�t' - r '� y ��:.a . x�. �- k� <�r'@� Ww� �: ��{"�s'� ? � c.t� _� +�`r"'^> `�r �,. c.. ��.-K . 1 4. �. y a. "'�S' � ! ��'� _ r a YJ a s-� .r �r # ..r ^�, F cs�. _ ��f.itr •3 -„-x <� ��sy� �r i ?� Y "C.,� � j-. ,-s sT' �.�,f'�r�'a ,.�.�. �K�°`i' �.ly ��k��,.� . ��Y'�isp''i'?�1 da � '�•,�q�� T �� k.� J v.l'4�' � �; r `,�.a4r .!i �� :z . � : x � 4y�� 'ft' ,y.�.61.{',�' '„£.� � ��:��,,.,�� F �+,.�.•,,,,��.x�"� i't �.'� ..' �,k� ;' H,,;� '" � �'? r � `` -. ,,,... s� m-,.c. +��ia '�x��k*-,:sF�4 °�t�'` r .^ y,� ,,.� "�'� �- s . ,�,�y� i�r�aft�.��•r��`" '�'''4 r€ As4 '� y�s.�:�'X � � . �'.., "1 a 4 : x .r- -�aa � .� +� .� r�'"�1r� b v :,'§�° ,t�; ._ 'r a �r -Ji.�. .ewr�"fitf`�i��i��`ak�� _� uwy-v'S'� F- t'� r wY x �: � - � ti 'i t✓t.7 �,.s -,,.+��s�'a .'""M� 7'^�..7 � a.,�^�"-.�'�'-�-'^' 6� .3.-�. -rs� . � n .. ; .�� ...:.� ��, �^+s. � }+'.':� .". Y.�.3. ,. .. 4 �� 't � �,<-.1'a.i ��'r�' '�„y. 3 . � ;,� :. . ' r . { �i -� � t"yC �-:;`'� - °`�.2� �_n` �,�&�+.1�.i. ii Jaa °n K nr S .. t Y � � .� �,� -. �, . t ,�,�.. .s �. . �u.; ��c `'"3' .g .�,� y :u �. L . �. �"-.� .. j a -1 -�7�5 . t,L< t � .�rS}� .w- +L 4y - . Y�$ �"C � 5y.,��'�'.e '�°�i'��"�t "'l �w� � `�,�� -'} '"*M�"'�j t Y - $ s '��'b�i..°�� ': '�r'�'"a'�''r �,�.3'". [��7�"�. . ar. ti a-,f��_ � � "�t�C°"L ,t';a, -, � -, 4 °�qks :. .y„p, .t.Y o ._r .w�2"""#ja �.4['� . >s�`'' "' k � �,�t-v�'�+ a �' ; �� irr4 .�� iik S ..;r-i s.h�},�c�'�s�r �' . ' 'G�-' f:"`�r's'f��'it�d `3f 7 '. t9x � i M ' �. .a� .N i }. ' F 5'��^.•_1` t r.y �'�e� T �, '.•4 .« �A ,�,Y � �,.�.-5.+�,s .r*'s � nx.a.-=c.e �.�. '�r . +. r� E- '�+,7'�s' ',1.� ^�, a�v*-r x��`� �� ,�S�a x,,. .�'c� a ' '��?� - �e. .:'�.3�5?'{�� T a "Y�e .M J•y u't � s'Y`~ il �."e n a L�.t� . 'ak--``edF3.�E ' t � � .. s ec:fii�. '�� T .� .: ,� s4t. ++'F'r�,y�r❑�� f �` � , .� y ! r j,. +-:''�f��.,"`�'�,: '�„t- .; � '°'y ... �"'f y��": ��,„ y"�'r r '�^S a,.y.�, o�. L�} S ��Y, h �` Y'!„'+, - x� � .�+ t ,��+k t L-. � �.�:�t�''h:rr:.v{ .,�n 's+..�<r��t�,,, '�'Fa �.��'' �..sr ..��"!"a'�..� a,� 3,."� d 2�a s�_.'9°'.Z r_i��''� .:�L''' -e x.,.p.`C�..t; b*'.*�+'' ,X, ,�y .. ; r,ry+.lf ^3 � �, .y �!,,t�'�s �r,.. t..rr•.. ' 3«'Y'�y..- �rt �u„7" - e-�e��j�� ^�"�5� Ay.`��'�� u•'��x�.t M,�i��3`.y.�o t� �{CtyvS'4i .;�� ,��,v�� <-s-.'A." '`"_ ,y�,�" -,��r��,�y�i! 's ",yr .y -� �; �.yt".��. �..�rr �,,,,,,�..55: � ' rj � ',.t'-`K'�s^7,,y'- S"ta cc''F ,a' ai,5.. k� f.,. �'s�' ,,,�.�k' ��t.� �,.. '�'r�.: .��g^1,��x'. ,K ��...�.a� .a .,a T. .� �{� � �t � '�a�N �3. �� .� ��.r � ��,� '�` � � �. '' 'v3-,,r�h�. � '�} .,� e£�'4'°��+��i-.�- -k�"n�"�;qx�r' '�,-..��L ��,��,�".�,�'e...rz,�.,y,. �*-- ,�a,�t*�x.1s.a s.9 :�'Z� � a?'�t�. +:t. F _; e� .t*A';x/�' .`�rp- �rt- '�' .;' ,.,, . �,� :� '. 1�t-?+t 3.:,"'.`' _`as .a��..� � � *. . � '�3y *�" l�,?,.. x� . ' r�- ; <� 4 +;�::i,i+".�s, .ry'`' `�'.«��`�ra � �,.-v.''��%�'��''�`4�.��'} '��s� �: 'T 1',� .. r T.� _ �; 1 �� ,�5.,�� , _ w.�. DL F ��NM� -ys'.' K'T�u S�F FxWr -�l� J�?�`.-.. � 5 .�41A' .-,d . S.Y' ." "'p'^ 3 �"kti �'SL .��. + e 3'...� s -ia i` *"�'*' vl a � .�.,C+ ..,a7`�`,re�'L r.,k s'y 4 n -'' b'i`-v ` � �` k,,,�r'�'4'"azy -�x` �"�+�a*- �t4� �.��,�"�'��t *:"�F's.,,a� �xs-+�,.'�r_ �:� � ,�r �� .:Jr. � e �� »y�;.. ,.zfi '��Y3'd F r r'. � �t 'yt : "` -��`'�. �-�'p,.�r � 3� -;�'_ " ,��. '7�� g� G .�.� �,.�s.+'w; 8 ��r,,"��s-. ri�a.� +# �e�.x� 's�;�sy � s.�� F, A � w,� r`�,�,i +r. ��i�aJ`�L+7F� +�.� �.�4.'y � g,�,�'��'}r li• �i.w� ��.,C��s��t�..t �q:,+a. �.k. '�'s .k i .�. �,,;+'� � "4�...s .:. �, T -+�. _ r r� � ..,a +!�, ��.PS�*�s �?y✓ 4; f �r� ,s"+� � �S. �' .� : ..� 3^k � �° - _ -`fs C,�°"`�` ��:y `8��dwi''I� � ��"�T v..t �«G- � k `'� r � ��S` �'. .,.,,` ��}_,. �h-�: �� ;: hf .�.y�..�y t4 y�.�?'k.�. � ':' "3 �^�%a - �_�r^"1a i.f� a � � �i��:, �:t r.:'k 4,��"�`'%'�.�� •..�s ° l y ��. x .�a f� :.�.a,+�' .�:,'�, �.. .� - _�§'? ,. 'F��%� :� ` .�'`l' rs ?�.`��S"�'"" �o��t�'�� .+. 7 e.�, i �..!-lms.wR`�' T t.'`'�,�rii�r'3� . i.. � � -�,-�a4s+4fY'� �;�^ a'�UT� J' � `'��'Y4:..2'�. � � Eiii�":"�i'�� .a-�� r�l � � t.a' � �'l��,R'F�'.i-v'°��'°`�!", . �`M: � - o-�'Ar� s- ' �7'''�l�. .�.�r � �c,'� yJ�.�'' � . A S'S -P z., "�'�`,a� .:;* ,��Y:--�� se 3 t'„ ¢ . ✓ ,::'�c3 ��i;, G 1 : a� 'y ..�n* .. ��d.�,.. av7 � ,�.t.c. �r�< , � .,�r x a., a �ft�+.�. a`� � ' .d. .�9 ,�a� : ' _ � . a �' .�, . i' .. �' 1- d b' �+h� ^ �:' rs ?d' .W.��'yt�."Si•.. .r`c �y -�- 4$��'3� S, �..,�. »r ^»�'ti �� '1��s�.- ��9 ° �„'��' `�w.a i� � ,, 3 _< �'�T�;�K ,p�•• 8:"- �. � 'f-'y'� r� r- . t- � .�C` Z?' tti � p`t'�'*�` � � ..�,,,.��r,� Z py... 7 r r:��^ y,,.�4-�,"� "'°��"-ra��y -�• r ,rr-� ,�, .0 x:.• � �',a ; ..�p'rc�.r - '',.�y"�`�+. fi�'�.; f-°�'y`aZ��:'`k`��'S+_. ? s -.i s'! �. : � S�.+*,� � i � nF Y.. a„ �� S 4�" ,�.c +'c a-a -. y t i . � �"*'� ,.t�?>�r.�' �"`' . ..,.+4'��,1„5 � �i,�'�i ��'` -+ ' 2 r y �,� � s. ^.#t �� F .�...4-< d ,y,,, =�",Rtr . -i;�y-s�' r'�f�'"ri�a � ,�� .}.� r �1�_ s � � n.�.e-�.�, w r�, w��e1 ,.r'� "c� YX .. .��p �� ,�� . s ..��d r�,.,.� 4 Y�3 4'�,�f � y � y:?aR�s�'�-.� tty>;. � c r:.w.x r t1. Y"'fi ��' ; . `1. �s.. �,y, .i e�`t�`k-u.w... :r: ,y, +^ ;�ke y,t',�}?} 7 .�,n��'�,�j:, . �"k S *� 'f.[' a- 'o -s +C-c :-,�-` 'Y ., �.,.� '�d3� r� _ i � r ' e�..r:.rp� i�l� �'� �`S�'` ��.r� *t!' '"''`yR"� . �C' ' at i :-+s d r- +� .t�.: '�' ,f.�_e� t �- � t�c�''a�� ` �; .. r� �ar `��-°��,?V�y��'`�c-'1�.h�. t � �t a ,. �et � �ti a` t �y r ��. � r i 3J s o� � ��i ... .a.�f�jSi�'^rcy'� er� 6 t �a } JC xy_r t � 1J 'a . �y , .;S . � _' L� -e� � * .m`y.,�� ` �� p t ¢rtti �" � r�3 ,��:. »..�..� �-a. -,, x. ,r s � k,x"� *;� � ,� �+,n�� ,•.��f� ��r�-, ��w :��ss ��. '� �y��a. '" � -r'„ra�'. x �. �r�' 3�'�r '�"��w 3k-' �� ,a r� i 2s �� 2a.a.0 +� � -� f -� � � z , h w. 5 � '��.-z x�a�"R� r"f r�t"�'�7� �'T`•u te'�'Y�',"s�. �xt��:X,na,..s ."a'.fi . rt . h :� '��,�'� i4�7 ,` 7S� . $' H'- �l� �'"d„ :^. a�h 3�*�1'.�. ts'L � el.re i'? s .s-.- `7 s 7 a f �Sq , ie. ��`I.�,y.� � r '" � .: �1 �.r,�rw,�y,2�F:`m` a .�'_�9�'1,?'�y'"«"�°�''»r�`�� a .,'+'�^'F t : ,�•.+t"�},��` �`` ,.s�� .:., s s '``z,. �'�.� i�T t� ra.�a'-�'r;, u ,+�'s,Y�� +gr= - � m�..� -i 4 s � r: �Et "� r � 1. -a ,. .� "� � y a?�. +... ... F �'t.�yyea�`ri*.S-� �+.,w "'r� .�s�,}x'' � � �t "?-.i 1'«t?� �' -�?�S� e tw'�"�0.y,,J�a tS� r�� j �_ ?x� ��.�� ;.i'��r �,�,t�{�f°4�� '�� 6 } ti2:. r�s�.� `��..Y x 4 �t �<'�':N'��;'4"�''�i�y. tr z�..c • F��, -�'"a� ry �� ... � x ��}�-' ��4 .� bt"'r+ ,y.* z�• ' * � c-�" t�, s ;r s ~1'^i .* �.�-�� g xj� °� � is 3�� "' '� r ;+r`z � <.y ,, ��. ,� �z �, .. �,- � �, a, w ��+.�r �'c�� 's- s�€ �.`�f�'� � �s v # e a:,. � �.�'�F F,��..� y � ,� a, �'t .,� "'�e a��a� S.s'. . �: a�.� . ' �u z4,`te'�i" 4;, F � Y ' t`-� ?y=iy� -. Y�,s ?'3.d r�,ug�H�tY`� �.'� ,-•^+'. ��1 t'��;✓�^ r'.�- ,� ,dre�t,ia.��'x�.`'.,�,a 4 ��`y.:.: s.:. ,�?�+-�„',� -�'�-S��'��t,-��,��F� �'c.� �� ,� a�„�:� � F`�� .�-. .-„. _s�r�� >xn '� ��,��,. '� ` 'a�b i+"r�<'.:x'1' ...'e�z.�� t �s �.td ,��r�'$'v1� �. �-n�'+- 'tCe��Ae-r�s�x '� �w.' K ;as ,y e ".;: r ^�i.?'; � e . A�'k.,�,..3-u'�'�"'�a��,�'�g�% = a z 4 a^�r'v� ��. .t-* ��' � i:' � .,�',�?�r��r y��.t 4 �. .� � �t .r. � ,> xi a � t-- �0: ,a�� _,�h" ,� �. �-�. +°�. .t 1 s. .Ag .,y�'�.". �-� � - �- r�� 7 � -t � �.. �.'� .L +��i�t �� q . �.s 'e .'°y �S;+�s `��,�.� ,�x+ '�t �tnr- ��-�...`��a-3 � .� I,� ;. .��„*�b� .��. �'� a � � 6� :�srr��+ "�,� y�r3{ES 'f' �., y1" .'u.s�i ..C�"5a3��Ca' i � � -� °� v � f` �Ts.3�� .r�a 'x1 Y.�_ :. 4'�.F; ,. .`.�.: ..��sp,i j �� z ix •. -P�-.+„�" }K fi ,�r.�' .,;�'�,e"'�� G �;�� [ �! 'J c. �- '�b 4... 3`� "'�'Y..: '�i' l, . k�'�.,.. -� x 94' x a a��',,.�R � ,�.n.' � r � � ,3-�>' �..k Pi.�..r,K-�'�2�'? . sy�.� }: .e��.t�" '� g'? �#i'�4^y �4� �,1-^ �' y� [,� �, ' 3T.. s'S• �L ;..+e .. +.��.� z .� i . s i ��}'�- .�.n §, i�(e �.J�r _ �s`�+�'��'��'�`� ,�^4 +.:. :� ��=� �.,�.-i +T� �;j�..�t4 ��t*p v.[s�,�+��•�,#: . . ,� .�:.: i,��K .:� � k+sr`y.,.. > � S �� i�ft.,�g-"`i a'f+�t S�.,y,4 a�r.s�33 "yb f"e�-a'�.c� 3�k`'['+�'�:.. , $� .. t a, �F;':� '�t,s r% �N��'Y t*�'4s � a x�� t t � $i'x..sP�7� '.+'+�� sa?`�� = � g�i;��y' ,�t�, t ' r ��wt �. 3;;�.`�` '�3,y,;. w.� sh ,a,£T K v°.�, c x„3�t<tir i � u .r� � � ;4N � x �. fi� .. �'s '� ,�.'?��.'i�..�s '..n� :�'�-:..:L.y�ji "8�� x .. „r� 4� � i.S n yf:�.�'.,r ��.t�i , �.F �,.�,. .<+f�x�, y�v.��.y' �tY'.. :.Y'�c.,�.i�r. �./t x.`�h�;7`�r °y ��-t� �.s+ E F y�a`+ F �.y� ' �°" 4' n, +-� �- .- ef+.3s:2p�$ A+s y e- e t c��`e .r a ��y r� ,��2 3` :Sr.�'Y :. . . .c �y�r,.�� f�^ `.�°„��y-�'��c,+�� `4^?-�. )*X ,' t af�:K9P�j ��,,�a�9t �1� ,� v.,:y �y�''� `I�*.`"`�.8'A�'��°5� '�`"�b`�. ..` . 2t s . � s�.�� +�� -:i'" ,�� 7 J f3- � w. -f- � ss j "r. "'i-.ro .�'�`;:!'�'4' ��,4 .i�. Y� 8*�"++. '�x . Z'��. ,��+.,:e�'�i..,�..i�:�' � '�a .5_t .�'�....... vi`...,_� ��•l.l: x[i.x?4�.e�'�.aa..ti:_. , .�.- r r,.a.:-,.�_..,.,. ..S._. ��'�.� .. r ._'r �a+'A_acv�F � .r.w...�':�.�. . z"� . r'"-�-- :f''� - 1�`;,Y� .,� � tit �� /,,_,-, NOTICE OF PUBT.IC H�AR�NG ` :� ,, y No�ice is hereby given that a public hearing will be hel�beiore t� C,�tj► -on,�3@,�B��9�5 p'ehmm^_ t� s+ �n•nn n u e St. Pau1 �Yty ' bers,Citq Ha12 atnd Court House,St.Paul,BI[i�ota,to con.sic�,er F� a�endments to the St.Paul Zo�Yng Drdina�e,Chapters 60-62 of theSt. Legialative Code as they relate to College,University snd Seminary uses. Dated February 3, 1986. ALBERT B.OLSON,City Clerk. (February 8, 1�6)