Oakdale Planning Commission reviews draft zoning and subdivision code overhaul

City of Oakdale planning staff presented a near-final draft of a comprehensive update to the city's zoning and subdivision code at the Planning Commission meeting, outlining proposed changes to residential districts, exterior building-material standards, parking requirements and a public outreach summary.

The presentation, given by Luke, a planning staff member for the City of Oakdale, said the city has worked with planning consultant HKGI since March of the previous year and that the code has not had a comprehensive update in more than 15 years. "We've been drafting the code sections since June," Luke said, and staff hopes to complete drafting in the next few weeks before city attorney review and review by the Planning Commission and City Council in April, with adoption tentatively scheduled for May.

Commissioners were shown results from a public online questionnaire (202 responses) that indicated modest public support for housing types beyond single-family—two-unit dwellings, detached townhomes, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and courtyard cottages—as well as some preference for larger accessory structures and longer temporary-sign allowances (current limit cited as 20 days). The questionnaire responses also showed a mild public preference for reducing the number of required parking spaces and for loosening certain exterior design standards.

Key proposed regulatory changes highlighted in the presentation include consolidating the existing R2 and R3 districts into a proposed R2, converting the existing R4 to a proposed R3, and converting the existing R5 to a proposed R4. Staff noted the proposed R3 would allow smaller lots (proposed minimum lot width of 50 feet versus the current 80 feet) and reduced setbacks. For nonresidential and multifamily development, staff described a three-tiered material classification used in the draft: class 1 (e.g., brick, natural stone, glass), class 2 (architectural precast, EIFS/exterior insulation finish systems, specialty concrete block) and class 3 (opaque panels, some concrete blocks, wood). Under the draft, office and commercial buildings would be required to use at least 70% class 1 material (composed of at least three different materials); industrial/warehouse uses would require at least 60% class 1 or 2 materials (with a minimum of two different materials).

Commissioners pressed staff on how to treat facades that are not directly visible from a major street. One commissioner said that rear and side elevations can still be highly visible from local streets or neighboring properties and recommended case-by-case consideration rather than a blanket reduction in material requirements. "It should be looking maybe more at every project separately based upon whether it can be seen from the streets," the commissioner said.

The commission discussed a council recommendation to maintain separate supplemental lists of acceptable and prohibited exterior materials outside the ordinance text so the lists can be updated routinely. Commissioners generally supported keeping supplemental lists but urged more frequent updates than every two to three years, citing rapid changes in materials technology. Corrugated metal drew particular attention: council members had suggested it be prohibited in some contexts, but commissioners noted some uses (for example, car washes or specific service buildings) may practically require corrugated metal.

Parking standards also drew extended discussion. Staff said the code update team has identified opportunities to adjust minimum parking requirements; commissioners gave examples of underutilized lots in commercial corridors (mentions included areas near Taco Bell and parts of the Stillwater Boulevard corridor) and suggested applying more context-specific measures rather than strictly tying parking to building square footage. Staff explained why square footage is commonly used—because it is broadly applicable across changing uses—and noted the code already references occupancy-based methods where appropriate.

Commissioners also raised Fire Department concerns about proposed increases to allowable building heights in mixed-use districts and how ladder reach and building setbacks would affect emergency access. Staff said the city had discussed ladder reach with the fire chief and noted the department's newer apparatus can extend over 100 feet, but that adequate setback and building geometry remain important for safe operations.

Next steps described by staff: finish drafting in the coming weeks, city attorney review, Planning Commission and City Council ordinance review in April, required public hearing, and tentative adoption in May. The commission did not take any formal vote on the draft during the meeting; staff was directed to continue refining the draft and return with ordinance text and graphics that include clearer legends and project-specific visuals.