HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-01-12 CC Packet Enclosure Oak Park Heights
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date January 12th.2016
Time Required: 5 Minutes
Agenda Item Title; Walgreens Variance i. 1,1+ng Setback and Ljindscape Review-6061
Osgood Ave.
Agenda Placement New B • -
Originating Departzn ��� . A . '- :tor
Requester's Signature
Action Requested Discussio• P. ible Action
Background/Justification(P1-: :- •.•'cafe if any previous action has been taken or if other public
bodies have advised):
Please see the attached from City Planner Scott Richards:
1. Planning Report dated Dec 2nd 2015,
2. Planning Commission Resolution-Unsigned
3. Proposed City Council Resolution
Page 67 of 272
Anoka,iMN 55303TPC3001 Thurston AvenueP s: 100
Mom:702.231.5840
Facsimile:783.427.0520
11 Pl:1114iannirteOQ.aom
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Eric Johnson
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: December 2, 2015
RE: Oak Park Heights—Walgreens—Variance for Parting Setback and
Landscape Plan Review— 8061 Osgood Avenue North
TPC FILE: 236.02— 15.10
BACKGROUND
Dennis Russel on behalf of Holmen Office Associates has made application for a
paridng setback variance from Osgood Avenue. The application consists of requests for
a setback variance from Osgood Avenue related to a property taidng from the
Minnesota Department of Transportation and for a landscape plan review.
The Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit approvals for the Walgreens was approved In
March 2002 and amended July 2002. At that time, a 10 foot setback from Osgood
Avenue to the parking area was provided. This summer, thexresota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT) acquired, through condemnation, a strip of land from Holmen
Office Associates on the west side of their property as a result of Improvements to
Highway 36. The acquisition eliminated most of the setback between Osgood Avenue
and the parking area on the west side of the property. Additionally, the Applicant
requests a review of the existing landscaping to determine if it meets City requirements.
The parcel is zoned B-2 General Business District.
EXIIBITS
The review is based upon the following submittals:
Exhbk 1: Project Narrative, October 2Z 2015.
Exhibit 2: Existing Condition»(1 of 2)
Exhibit 3: Existing Landscape(2 of 2)
Page 66 o1272
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Please find en excerpt of the project narrative as follows. The narrative also contains a
review of the variance criteria which can be found In its entirety as Exhibit 1.
We, Holmen Office Associates own the building in the northeast quadrant of Osgood
Avenue and State Trunk Highway (STH) No. 36. The site Is occupied by a Wla/greens
Drug store. As a result of the updating of STH No. 36 the Minnesota Department of
Transportation acquired, in condemnation, a strip of land from out site along Its western
side. That parcel takenIs known as Parcel 93 as shown on the MnDOT Right of Way
Plat No. 82-120. Prior to the taking the site contained 59,251 square feet or 1.36 awes.
After that taking the parcel contains 57,661 square feet or 1.32 aeras. The parcel is
currently zoned 8-2, General Business.
In order to portray the conditions existing on the site after MnDOTs acquisition a Partial
Existing Conditions survey was performed by Loucks dated October 20 & 23, 2016.
This survey shows the existing conditions west and southwest of the existing building.
Loucks has also prepared a Partial Existing Landscape Conditions plan, dated October
20, 2016 showing the existing landscape features along the west and southwest
boundaries.
This request Is being made as a result of Impact on the site of that acquisition of Parcel
93. This request has two parts:
I. Variance Request
The first part of this request is for the granting of a variance farm the requked 10 foot
setback from the west property line for parking curb. As a result of the acquisition by
MnDOT of Parcel 93 the curb along the west boundary of the site does not meet the
10.00 foot setback required by City Ordinance Section 401.16.C(1)(d). The resulting
setbacks to the curb range from one-tenth of a foot to 6.4 feet and are shown on the
Loucks'Partial Existing Conditions"plan submitted with this request.
The resultant effect of this acquisition is that the curb on the west aide of the site does
not meet the requked setback Typically a variance is requested prior to the condition
requking the variance taking place. On this case the variance is being requested after
the fad for the Iblkn fng reason: the Ordinances of the City of Oak Park Heights do not
contain the provision that automatically grandfatherr's-in parcels that become non-
conforming due to the action of a condemnation. For that reason we are asking that the
parcel is a legal non-cmfon ing use subsequent to the impact of the condemnation.
Variance condition review—see Exhibit 1.
IL Landscape Features Request
2
Page 69 of 272
Thesecondpall of �
request the status of the remakgng, existing landscape
features along the west aide of the Me. As a result of the MnDOT acquisition of Parcel
93, the reconstrucOon of Osgood Avenue aajscent to the ase, charges suer* made to
the street, sidewalk and other features an the site and/n Osgood Avenue aloining the
side to the wast We are nrqueatng that the My of Oak Park Heights examine the
"Partial Existing Landscape Condtibns`plan aubn ted with this request and determine
if the remaining landscape features, Mowing the condemnation of Parcel 93, meet the
City's landscape requirements for the site.
ISSUES ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan. The property is designated as Commercial on the Proposed
Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan. The use of the building for a retail
pharmacy is compatible with this land use designation.
Zoning. The property is zoned B-2 General Business District. The Waigreens is a
permitted use in the District. A variance is required b that the City, In Section
401.15.F.4.h.17 of the Zoning Ordinance, requires that the curb barrier of the parking lot
be no closer than ten feet to any int Nne or right of way lithe. Asa result of the MnDOT
acquisition, the resulting setbacks to the curb range from one-tenth of a foot to 6.4 feet.
Some of the landscaping that was previously on the Waigroen's lot is now part of the
right of way.
A review of the variance criteria for the setback Is found as foNows:
Setback Variance. Variance criteria are provided in Section 401.04 of the Oak Park
Heights Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission and the City Council should
review the following criteria and conditions to determine if the variance is justified.
REIVIOW Criteria The Planning Commission and Cly Cormcd should make a finding of act that the
proposed action ante not
a. Impale an adequate supply of light and atr to aliment property.
c.b. Unreesonably Inman Have the to in the pubao street.
allowing any*Mot uses prohteged therein, permit a lesser degree of flood
protection than the flood probation elevstlon for the particular area or permit standards which are
d. Increase the required by State ensu
danger of tiro or endanger the public eddy.
s. Unreasonably diminish or knpak established property values within the neighborhood, or in any
way be contrary to the f. Violate the Went andWentd this Ordtrrnoe.
purpose of the Comprehensive Plan.
g Violate any of the terns or conditions d Item S.below.
Approval.Conditions kr
tlmi» A variance from the terms of this Ordinance shell not be granted unless It can
be demonstrateda. Undue hardship wS result Y the variance is denied due to the existence of special conditions and
circumstances whish we peculiar to the and, structure, or building Waived and which aro not
ossother lands,sues or bwsrgs in the same district
1)
may Include exceptional topographic�s,conditions in the case of an
existing lot or Precord, narrowness, insufficient areanovel of or shape of the
Pronerbt.
3
Page 70 of 272
2) Undue hardship caused by the special conditions and circumstances may not be solely
economic In nature, If a reasonable use ci the property exists under the terms of this Title.
3) Special conditions and circumstances causing undue hardship shall not be a result of lot size
or building location when the lot qualifies as a buildable parcel.
b. Literal
the pInedun � the � or
commonly dyed by other properties the s Ordinance
under the terms of ordinance applicant
deny the applicant the ability to put the property in question to a reasonable use.
c. The special conditions and circumstances causing the undue hardship do not result from the
actions of the applicant.
d. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that Is
denied by this Ordinance to other lands, structure or buildings n the same district under the same
conditions.
e. The request is not a result of non-conforming mss,structures or buildings In the same district
f. The request is nota use variance.
g. The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to accomplish the Intended purpose
of the aPoilcant.
h. The request does not create an inconvenience to neighboring properties end uses.
The Applicants have requested the variance in that the acquisition by MnDOT has
created a nonconforming setback between the right of way line and the parking lot curb.
When installed, the curb was conforming to the required 10 foot setback. The narrow
setback will not have an Impact on neighboring properties; increase the congestion on
the adjacent street, impact public safety, affect property values or conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan. The Applicant did not create this situation; it was by the actions
of MnDOT that the variance is now requested.
Due to the fact that the additional right of way was necessary for the improvements to
Highway 36, and the Applicant did not create the need for the variance, City Staff has
no issues with approving the variance as requested.
Landscaping. The Applicant has provided the existing landscape conditions on the
west and south side of the subject site. Some of the landscape materials on the west
side are now part of the MnDOT right of way. The Applicant is asking If this affects the
conformity with the landscape requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. In that most of
the landscape plantings are still on the Applicants parcel, City Staff does not have an
issue with the current plan. A condition will be added that the Applicant shall be
required to maintain the landscape materials that are currently on the MnDOT right of
way.
Freestanding Sign. The plan indicates that a portion of the existing freestanding sign
is now extending over the right of way line into MnDOT right of way. Section
401.16.G.6.m. requires a five foot setback from the property line for signs. With the
MnDOT acquisition, the sign extends over the line approximately two feet. City Staff
has concluded that the sign can remain as a nonconformity until such time that MnDot
may require It to be removed.
4
Page 71 of 272
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION
Upon review of the request for a setback variance from Osgood Avenue related to a
property taking from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and for a landscape
plan review, City Staff would recommend the project with the conditions as follows:
1. The Planning Commission should discuss the request and determine
whether the request for the setback variance is Justifiable.
2. The Applicant shall be required to maintain the landscape materials that
were previously on the subject site but are currently on the MnDOT right of
way.
3. The freestanding sign can remain as a nonconformity until such time that
MnDOT requires It to be removed. If the sign is replaced, it shall be
constructed to comply with City Zoning standards.
pc: Julie Hultrnan
S
Page 72 of 272
EXHIBIT 1
Holmen Office Associates
6061 Osgood Ave., Oak Park Heights, MN
RID No. 33.030.20.44.0020
Narrative of Request to the City of Oak Park Heights
October 22, 2015
We, Holmen Office Associates own the building in the northeast quadrant of Osgood
Avenue and State Trunk Highway (S.T.H.) No. 36. The site is occupied by a Walgreens
Drug store. As a result of the updating of S.T.H. No. 36 the Minnesota Department of
Transportation acquired, in condemnation, a strip of land from our site along its
western side. That parcel taken is known as Parcel 93 as shown on the MnDOT Right
of Way Plat No. 82-120. Prior to the taking the site contained 59,251 square feet or
1.36 acres.After that taking the parcel contains 57,661 square feet or 1.32 acres. The
parcel is currently zoned B-2, General Business.
In order to portray the conditions existing on the site after MnDOT's acquisition a
Partial Existing Conditions survey was performed by Loucks dated October 20& 23.
2015. This survey shows the existing conditions west and southwest of the existing
building.
Loucks has also prepared a Partial Existing Landscape Conditions plan, dated October
20, 2015 showing the existing landscape features along the west and southwest
boundaries.
This request is being made as a result of impact on the site of that acquisition of Parcel
93.This request has two parts:
1. Variance Request
The first part of this request is for the granting of a variance from the required 10
foot setback from the west property line for parking curb: As a result of the
Page 73 of 272
acquisition by MnDOT of Parcel 93 the curb along the west boundary of the site
does not meet the 10.00 foot setback required by City Ordinance Section
401.15.C(1)(d). The resulting setbacks to the curb range from one-tenth of a foot to
6.4 feet and are shown on the Loucks' "Partial Existing Conditions" plan submitted
with this request.
The resultant effect of this acquisition is that the curb on the west side of the site
does not meet the required setback. Typically a variance is requested prior to the
condition requiring the variance taking place. In this case the variance is being
requested after the fact for the following reason:the ordinances of the City of Oak
Park Heights do not contain the provision that automatically grandfather's-in
parcels that become non-conforming due the action of a condemnation. For that
reason we are asking the City for the grant of a variance to the setback in order to
confirm that the parcel is a legal non-conforming use subsequent to the impact of
the condemnation.
Following are the justifications, as we see them, for the granting of the variance,
listed here in correlation with the variance conditions listed in City Ordinance No.
401.04.A(5). (Italics represent wording from the city ordinance; bold represents our
response):
a. Undue hardship wr//result if the variance is denied due to the existence of
special conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the/and,structure, or
building involved and which are not applicable to other/anal structures or
buildings in the same district.The unique condition here is that Parcel 93 was
taken by MnDOT after approval and development of the property, causing the
non-conforming setbacks.
1)Special conditions may include exceptional topographic or eater conditions
or, in the case of an existing lot or parcel of rec d, narrowness, shallowness,
insufficient area or shape of the property.The special condition here is the
change in the parcel boundary due to the MnDOT taking.
2)Undue hardship caused by the special conditions and circumstances may not
be solely economic in nature, ifa reasonable use of the property eats under
the germs of this Title.The variance is being requested in order to affirm that
the reasonable use of the property will be allowed to continue.
Page 74 of 272
3)Special conditions and circumstances causing undue hardship shall not be a
result of lot size or building location when the lot qualifies as a buildable parcel.
This request is not related to lot size or building location.
b. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the
applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district
under the terms of this Ordinance or deny the applicant the ability to put the
property in question to a reasonable use. Dental of the variance request would
make the parking non-conforming and possibly impede future use or sale of the
Property.
c. The special conditions and circumstances causing the undue hardship do not
result from the actions of the applicant. The cause of the insufficient parking
setbacks was completely out of the control of the applicant and was due solely
to the unavoidable condemnation by MnDOT.
d. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special
privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, structures or buildings in
the same district under the same conditions.This condition is unique to this
parcel due to the condemnation which took place after the site development
was approved and constructed.
e. The request is not a result of non-conforming lands, structures or buildings in the
same district No other lands are involved in this condition. It exists solely
between this parcel and the public right-of-way of Osgood Avenue.
f. The request is not a use variances This request does not involve a use variance.
It is solely a parking setback variance.
g. The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to accomplish the
intended purpose of the applicant. The variance dimensions here represent the
only dimensional request that can be made. The resulting setbacks represent
the condition created by the MnDOT taking which moved the west property
line and its relation to the existing, already constructed parking stalls.
h. The request does not create an inconvenience to neighboring properties and
uses.This variance request will not affect any other properties.The physical
conditions that necessitate this variance are already in existence and are
functioning, in regard to the pedestrian and vehicular traffic in and adjacent to
Osgood Avenue.
Page 75 of 272
IL Landscape Features Request
The second part of the request relates to the status of the remaining, existing
landscape features along the west side of the site. As a result of the Mn DOT
acquisition of Parcel 93, and the reconstruction of Osgood Avenue adjacent to the
site, changes were made to the street, sidewalk and other features on the site and
in Osgood Avenue adjoining the site to the west. We are requesting that the City
of Oak Park Heights examine the "Partial Existing Landscape Conditions" plan
submitted with this request and determine if the remaining landscape Matures,
following the condemnation of Parcel 93, meet the City's landscape requirements
for the site.
Respectfully Submitted,
Holmen Office Associates
Page 76 of 272
`.- C rt 1 1{.,1
lit' 4 I . ',-- r- ,r
t, Tr
�Nill a
1 3 i S[e117Nii
fji1 ihfl >i
M 111 f
ii' ii 1 IEI
11 1111 3 :
1111 1
Iiiillill® i' Ii1i 11111
• nil .it
F R
'
1
1,1 w.~/\j\I'9 0 Si 1 1.011.3 1 III�%•Va. %1�7 0
r�
I Y>R s
a 1 " 14
t;.
L 1 �, I .
.;• I 4 I ....-- ,,, ,.,.._.._ ) ".•
IFop,-' ��..-�.» 14
} .... ,1`_mµ- ...-• ..._..-i-y--•*�-.-`•_�-�..—.--'----c_ & f`-
UMW l„
en i r i fl •1 -.Q 'CAl . 1:-/7:1
i•7, /IVI '.' 11:Cl ui
ellsw •✓ 1 • s r I.r I/ N •I .V /�/
\ i-.
\ t..:
E.
w..nru.�s..vs•....eanr.s,:�c...e.r .n r..,..r,_<,...•..
Page 77 of 272
it ti
,iY2 4, I, '''''' 7 ' ti V !fill
j j' J` ubi N
f°g r' - NAP' ift D gli li 1 I• r
-IN I thu i Elati ri,
Ali
PO
111
111
1,1
,,, . , I -r 1
_ �� r }
1i4 !100 00 . 000 0is
•o
R/.
ii
IF II
` r f y
0
J e
. )2 .
-..-7,-...
.� `•fir .Y
te" S 74
11_ C� � 1 1 i . y ' 1 0,,; is! f.9 o e,
'`"�a c c,-,..i.,..:01,30:010 p;nII l!nr�r ^* h'. ••''..•:'•41--"P'''
•
MI PM 1•al Of r a r..A:-
111.OY1AItlAr®eGie
Sr p
e k
s
•
Page 78 of 272
A RECOMMENDING RESOLUTION
OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
WASHINGTON COUNTY,MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FINDINGS OF FACT AND
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE
REQUEST BY HOLMEN OFFICE ASSOCIATES FOR A PARKING
SETBACK VARIANCE FROM OSGOOD AVENUE AT 6061
OSGOOD AVENUE NORTH (WALGREENS) SHOULD BE
APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
WHEREAS,the City of Oak Park Heights has received a request by Holmen Office
Associates for a parking setback variance from Osgood Avenue at 6061 Osgood Avenue
North(Walgreens); and after having conducted a public hearing relative thereto,the
Planning Commission of Oak Park Heights makes the following findings of fact:
1. The real property affected by said application is legally described as
follows,to wit:
SEE ATTACHMENT A
and
2. The applicant has submitted an application and supporting documentation
to the Community Development Department consisting of the following items:
SEE ATTACHMENT B
and
3. The property is zoned B-2, General Business District. The use of the site
for a retail Walgreens location is a permitted use;and
4. A variance is required in that the City,in Section 401.15.F.41.17 of the
Zoning Ordinance requires that the curb bather of the parking lot be no closer than ten
feet to any lot line or right of way line. This summer the Minnesota Department of
Transportation acquired,through condemnation,a strip of land from Holmen Office
Associates on the west side of their property for improvements to Highway 36. The
acquisition eliminated most of the setback between Osgood Avenue and the parking area
on the west side of the property; and
5. As a result of the Minnesota Department of Transportation acquisition,the
resulting setbacks to the curb range from one-tenth of a foot to 6.4 feet;and
6. Holmen Office Associates also requests a review of the existing
landscaping to determine if it meets City requirements; and
Page 79 of 272
7. City staff prepared a planning report dated December 2,2015 reviewing
the request; and
8. Said report recommended approval of the variance subject to the
fulfillment of conditions;and
9. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at their December 10,
2015 meeting,took comments from the applicants and public, closed the public hearing,
and made the following recommendation:
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS THAT THE
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING:
A. The application for a request by Holmen Office Associates foraPig setback
variance from Osgood Avenue at 6061 Osgood Avenue North(Walgreens) and affecting
the real property as follows:
SEE ATTACHMENT A
The Planning Commission of the City of Oak Park Heights recommends the setback
variance subject to the following findings of fact:
1. The variance criteria in Section 401.04 of the Zoning Ordinance have been
reviewed and it has been determined by the Planning Commission that the
variance is justified.
2. The applicants have requested the variance in that the acquisition by
Minnesota Department of Transportation has created a nonconforming
setback between the right of way line and the parking lot curb. The
applicant did not create this situation;it was by the actions of the
Minnesota Department of Transportation that the variance is now
requested.
3. The resulting narrow setback will not have an impact on neighboring
properties,increase the congestion on the adjacent street,impact public
safety,affect property values or conflict with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Planning Commission recommends the application the subject to the conditions as
follows:
1. The Planning Commission discussed the request and determined that the
request for the setback variance is justifiable.
2
Page 80 of 272
2. The Applicant shall be required to maintain the landscape materials that
were previously on the subject site but are currently on the Minnesota
Department of Transportation right of way.
3. The freestanding sign can remain as a nonconformity until such time that
the Minnesota Department of Transportation requires it to be removed. If
the sign is replaced,it shall be constructed to comply with City Zoning
standards.
Recommended by the Planning Commission of the City of Oak Park Heights this 10th
day of December,2015.
Jim Kremer, Chair
ATTEST:
Eric A. Johnson,City Administrator
3
Page 81 of 272
ATTACHMENT A
Variance—Parking Setback
Holmen Office Associates
For Waigreen's
6061 Osgood Ave.N.
Washington County GEO Code: 34.030.20.44.0020
Physical Address: 6061 Osgood Ave.N.
Page 82 of 272
ATTACHMENT B
Variance—Parking Setback
Holmen Office Associates
for
Walgreen's
6061 Osgood Ave.N.
Application Materials
• Application Form
• Fees
• Written Narrative and Graphic Materials Explaining Proposal
• Mailing List from Washington County(500' from subject property)
• Proof of Ownership or Authorization to Proceed
• Property Tax Statement(s)/Lega1 Descriptions)
Planning Commission Public Hearing&Recommendatfon:December 10,2015
Variance—Lapse of Approval:
Unless the City Council specifically approves a different time when action is officially taken on
the request,the variance shall become null and void twelve(12)months after the date of
approval,unless the property owner or applicant has substantially started the construction of any
building structure,addition or alteration,or use requested as part of this variance. The property
owner shall have the right to submit an application to extend the approval of a variance to the
Zoning Administrator not less than thirty(30)days before the expiration of said approval.
(401.4.0 .1 —401.4.C.2)
Page 83 of 272
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
WASHINGTON COUNTY,MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FINDINGS OF FACT AND
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE REQUEST BY
HOLMEN OFFICE ASSOCIATES FOR A PARKING SETBACK
VARIANCE FROM OSGOOD AVENUE AT 6061 OSGOOD AVENUE
NORTH (WALGREENS)BE APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
WHEREAS,the City of Oak Park Heights has received a request by Holmen Office
Associates for a parking setback variance from Osgood Avenue at 6061 Osgood Avenue
North(Walgreens);and after having conducted a public hearing relative thereto,the
Planning Commission of Oak Park Heights recommended that the application be
approved with conditions. The City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights makes the
following findings of fact and resolution:
1. The real property affected by said application is legally described as
follows,to wit:
SEE ATTACHMENT A
and
2. The applicant has submitted an application and supporting documentation
to the Community Development Department consisting of the following items:
SEE ATTACHMENT B
and
3. The property is zoned B-2, General Business District The use of the site
for a retail Walgreens location is a permitted use; and
4. A variance is required in that the City,in Section 401.15.F.4.h.17 of the
Zoning Ordinance requires that the curb barrier of the parking lot be no closer than ten
feet to any lot line or right of way line. This summer the Minnesota Department of
Transportation acquired,through condemnation,a strip of land from Holmen Office
Associates on the west side of their property for improvements to Highway 36. The
acquisition eliminated most of the setback between Osgood Avenue and the parking area
on the west side of the property; and
5. As a result of the Minnesota Department of Transportation acquisition,the
resulting setbacks to the curb range from one-tenth of a foot to 6.4 feet; and
6. Holmen Office Associates also requests a review of the existing
landscaping to determine if it meets City requirements; and
Page 84 of 272
7. City staff prepared a planning report dated December 2,2015 reviewing
the request; and
8. Said report recommended approval of the variance subject to the
fulfillment of conditions;and
9. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at their December 10,
2015 meeting,took comments from the applicants and public, closed the public hearing,
and recommended the application with conditions.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR
THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES
THE FOLLOWING:
A. The application for a request by Holmen Office Associates for a parking setback
variance from Osgood Avenue at 6061 Osgood Avenue North(Walgreens) and affecting
the real property as follows:
SEE ATTACHMENT A
The City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights approves the setback variance subject
to the following findings of fact:
1. The variance criteria in Section 401.04 of the Zoning Ordinance have been
reviewed and it has been determined by the Planning Commission and
City Council that the variance is justified.
2. The applicants have requested the variance in that the acquisition by
Minnesota Department of Transportation has created a nonconforming
setback between the right of way line and the parking lot curb. The
applicant did not create this situation; it was by the actions of the
Minnesota Department of Transportation that the variance is now
requested.
3. The resulting narrow setback will not have an impact on neighboring
properties,increase the congestion on the adjacent street,impact public
safety,affect property values or conflict with the Comprehensive Plan.
The City Council approves the following subject to the conditions as follows:
1. The City Council has determined that the request for the setback variance
is justifiable.
2. The Applicant shall be required to maintain the landscape materials that
were previously on the subject site but are currently on the Minnesota
Department of Transportation right of way.
2
Page 85 of 272
3. The freestanding sign can remain as a nonconformity until such time that
the Minnesota Department of Transportation requires it to be removed. If
the sign is replaced,it shall be constructed to comply with City Zoning
standards.
Approved by the City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights this 12th day of January,
2016.
Mary McComber,Mayor
ATTEST:
Eric A. Johnson, City Administrator
3
Page 86 of 272
ATTACHMENT A
4.
l
My
4 , s
Variance—Parking Setback
Holmen Office Associates
For Walgreen's
6061 Osgood Ave.N.
Washington County GEO Code: 34.030.20.44.0020
Physical Address: 6061 Osgood Ave.N.
Page 87 of 272
ATTACHMENT B
Variance—Parking Setback
Holmen Office Associates
for
Waigreen's
6061 Osgood Ave.N.
Application Materials
• Application Form
• Fees
• Written Narrative and Graphic Materials Explaining Proposal
• Mailing List from Washington County(500'from subject property)
• Proof of Ownership or Authorization to Proceed
• Property Tax Statemeflt(s)/Legal Description(s)
Planning Commission Public Hearing&Recommendation:December 10,2015
Variance—Lapse of Approval:
Unless the City Council specifically approves a different time when action is officially taken on
the request,the variance shall become null and void twelve(12)months after the date of
approval,unless the property owner or applicant has substantially started the construction of any
building structure, addition or alteration,or use requested as part of this variance. The property
owner shall have the right to submit an application to extend the approval of a variance to the
Zoning Administrator not less than thirty(30)days before the expiration of said approval.
(401.4.0 .1 —401.4.C.2)
Page 88 of 272