Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commercial Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission approves redevelopment of 6001 Penn Avenue S with conditions on screening and lighting
Summary
The commission approved a conditional use permit and site plan review for a new gas station, convenience store and accessory car wash at 6001 Penn Avenue South, subject to conditions including added screening along a residential property line and requirements for a lighting plan.
The Minneapolis Planning Commission on March 24 voted to approve a conditional use permit and site plan review for a proposed redevelopment at 6001 Penn Avenue South that would replace an existing long‑standing gas station with a new station, larger convenience store and an accessory car wash, subject to conditions addressing screening and lighting.
Planning staff recommended approval with multiple conditions after reviewing site changes and public comments. Staff’s amended recommendation added a condition tied to the conditional use permit requiring screening and addressed concerns about visibility and noise to nearby residential properties.
The site is zoned C‑M2 in Corridor 4 built form and totals just over 12,000 square feet. Staff and the applicant said the property has been used as a gas station and minor auto repair for about 70 years. The proposal would remove the existing structures, relocate the convenience store to the corner to improve pedestrian frontage, reduce fuel pumps from eight to six, and add a car wash on the east side of the lot. The applicant also proposed to retain two curb cuts (one on Penn, one on Sixtieth), eliminate a western curb cut on Sixtieth and close vehicle access between the site and the adjacent public alley.
Architect Brett Loftusness of Architectural Consortium said the redesign aims to improve the streetscape and pedestrian access, increase landscaping where possible and place the new building at the corner. He said the car wash on the east side would help screen the alley and that the team intends to add fencing and landscaping.
Neighbors raised concerns during the public hearing. Resident Sherry Sheehan, who lives directly behind the site, cited lighting that currently reaches her family room and asked whether hours of operation and lighting would be controlled; she also asked where car wash traffic would exit and expressed worries about noise and people gathering after hours. Property owner Philip Ruce said his building immediately south of the site runs to the property line and warned that vehicle mirrors and angled parking at pumps could repeatedly damage his wall unless protections—such as stanchions or bollards—were provided.
Staff responded that the project would close access between the property and the alley and that vehicles exiting the car wash would use Sixtieth Street. Staff said they added a recommended condition requiring a six‑foot, 95% opaque fence between the maneuvering area and the alley (with a 15‑foot site triangle exception at the alley/sidewalk intersection) and a fence along the south property line between the rear of the adjacent building and the trash enclosure. Staff also said the final development review (PDR) must include a lighting plan showing illumination in foot‑candles at property lines; the zoning code limits maximum illumination at residential property lines to 0.5 foot‑candle and restricts service‑area canopy fixtures so light is directed downward rather than spilling laterally.
On the question of physical protections for adjacent walls, staff said the zoning code does not require bollards or stanchions and that adding such elements did not clearly meet site‑plan standards as a condition; staff said they would not oppose the owner proposing bollards voluntarily.
Commissioner Campbell moved to adopt staff recommendation, including the two conditional use permit conditions and the 20 site plan review conditions recommended in staff materials. Commissioner Gordon seconded; the motion passed by voice vote and the item was adopted.
The approved action pertains to land‑use approvals (CUP and site plan review) and includes specific requirements that must be satisfied during final PDR, including fencing and a lighting plan. Operational questions such as exact hours of operation, proprietary design choices like bollards if desired, and any required permits beyond the PDR were not decided at the hearing and would be resolved in subsequent review steps.
