Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-09-07 NAC Planning MemorandumMEMORANDUM TO: Kim Kamper FROM: Cynthia Putz -Yang 1 Scott Richards DATE: September 7, 2001 RE: FILE NO: BACKGROUND Semper Development, Ltd. is proposing to construct a 15,035 square foot Walgreens at the northeast corner of the intersection of Osgood Avenue and 60 Street, which is a frontage street north of Highway 36. The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow a reduction in parking stalls. The applicant is also requesting a variance from the ten -foot parking setback along the north property line. Our original planning report reviewed plans that were dated April 20, 2001. Revised plans have been submitted for review and are attached. A funeral home currently exists on the site and is planned to be demolished. The subject site is zoned B -2, General Business District. Retail sales are a permitted use in the B -2 District. Attached for reference: Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit 1 Exhibit J Exhibit K Exhibit L Exhibit M Exhibit N NORTHWEST ATE D CONSULTANTS, INC. 5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St Louis Park., MN 55416 Telephone: 952,595 9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com Oak Park Heights — Walgreens; CUP, Variance, and Site Plan Review 798.02 — 01.04 Site Location Existing Conditions Plan Demolition Plan Site Plan Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Plan Utility Plan Lighting Plan Landscape Plan Building Elevations Letter from Washington County Letter from Washington Soil and Water Conservation District City Engineer comments City Forester comments Parking Study ISSUES ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is within Planning District 4 as described in the Development Framework section of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan states that redevelopment of the subject property is anticipated, and the Proposed Land Use Plan indicates reuse of the property for retail commercial or service business uses. The proposed retail commercial use of the property by Walgreens is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Adjacent Zoning and Land Uses. The property north of the subject site is zoned R -3, Multiple Family Residential and is occupied by a house structure that contains a dentist's office and residence. North of that structure is a residential duplex. The property east of the subject property is zoned R -B, Residential /Business Transitional and contains the Oak Ridge Place apartment complex. State Highway 36 is located south of the subject property. The land west of the subject property is zoned B -2, General Business and is occupied by a gas station and single family homes. Lot Performance Standards. The following table contains the required and proposed dimensions and setbacks for the subject site in the B -2 District. All of the proposed dimensions and setbacks listed below are compliant except the curb setback, which is discussed later in this report. Access. The applicant is proposing two access points. One proposed access is onto 60 Street North and the other is onto Osgood Avenue North (C.S.A.H. No. 24). A 30- foot -wide access easement exists at the northwest corner of the site to allow shared access from Osgood Avenue to the subject property and the property to the north. The County has approved the access onto Osgood Avenue with the condition that if the road is ever reconstructed with a median, the County has the right to restrict the access to right-in/right-out operation. If the County ever needs a wider right-of-way, the County plans to acquire it from the west side of the road. An access permit from the County is required. MNDOT has approved an access onto 60 #h Street North, which is a frontage road for Highway 36, provided Walgreens closes the portion of the frontage road west of the approved access. The frontage road would no longer connect to Osgood Avenue. Sidewalk. Staff recommends requiring Walgreens to provide a trail easement along Osgood Avenue and install a five-foot-wide sidewalk. Walgreens should work with 2 Lot Width south} Setbacks Front (south) Side interior /corner (east/west) Rear (north) Parking/ Curb Required 15,000 sq. ft. 100 ft. 40 ft. 10 ft.interior/20 ft. corner 20 ft. 10 ft. Proposed 1.46 acres or 63,395 sq. ft. 190 ft. 122 ft 34 ft. interior /60 ft. corner 31 ft oft. (north side) ISSUES ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is within Planning District 4 as described in the Development Framework section of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan states that redevelopment of the subject property is anticipated, and the Proposed Land Use Plan indicates reuse of the property for retail commercial or service business uses. The proposed retail commercial use of the property by Walgreens is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Adjacent Zoning and Land Uses. The property north of the subject site is zoned R -3, Multiple Family Residential and is occupied by a house structure that contains a dentist's office and residence. North of that structure is a residential duplex. The property east of the subject property is zoned R -B, Residential /Business Transitional and contains the Oak Ridge Place apartment complex. State Highway 36 is located south of the subject property. The land west of the subject property is zoned B -2, General Business and is occupied by a gas station and single family homes. Lot Performance Standards. The following table contains the required and proposed dimensions and setbacks for the subject site in the B -2 District. All of the proposed dimensions and setbacks listed below are compliant except the curb setback, which is discussed later in this report. Access. The applicant is proposing two access points. One proposed access is onto 60 Street North and the other is onto Osgood Avenue North (C.S.A.H. No. 24). A 30- foot -wide access easement exists at the northwest corner of the site to allow shared access from Osgood Avenue to the subject property and the property to the north. The County has approved the access onto Osgood Avenue with the condition that if the road is ever reconstructed with a median, the County has the right to restrict the access to right-in/right-out operation. If the County ever needs a wider right-of-way, the County plans to acquire it from the west side of the road. An access permit from the County is required. MNDOT has approved an access onto 60 #h Street North, which is a frontage road for Highway 36, provided Walgreens closes the portion of the frontage road west of the approved access. The frontage road would no longer connect to Osgood Avenue. Sidewalk. Staff recommends requiring Walgreens to provide a trail easement along Osgood Avenue and install a five-foot-wide sidewalk. Walgreens should work with 2 Washington County on this project because part of the sidewalk may need to be within the right -of -way. The applicant is responsible for installing the sidewalk all the way south to 00 Street. The landscaping along the west property line should be adjusted slightly to the east to allow space for the sidewalk. Variance. The applicant has requested a variance from the requirement that curbing and parking be set back 10 feet from the north lot line. Zoning Ordinance Section 401.04.A.5 states that a variance from the terms of this Ordinance shall not be granted unless it can be demonstrated that: 7. Undue hardship will result if the variance is denied due to the existence of special conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. a. Special conditions may include exceptional topographic or water conditions or, in the case of an existing lot or parcel of record, narrowness, shallowness, insufficient area or shape of the property. b. Undue hardship cause by the special conditions and circumstances may not be solely economic in nature, if a reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of this Title. c. 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. 2. 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. 3. The special conditions and circumstances causing the undue hardship do not result from the actions of the applicant. 4. 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. 5. The request is not a result of non - conforming lands, structures or buildings in the same district. 6. The request is not a use variance. 7. The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to accomplish the intended purpose of the applicant. 8. The request does not create an inconvenience to neighboring properties and uses. Comment: A pre - existing access easement is located across the northern property line and is necessary to provide access to the adjacent property to the north. This situation 3 was not created by Walgreens, nor is it in Walgreens' control to revise. Due to this existing situation, staff believes a variance is warranted. Grading, Drainage, and Utility. The Washington Soil and Water Conservation District reviewed the Walgreen plans dated April 20, 2001, on behalf of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization. The review letter is attached in Exhibit K. In- line stormwater treatment facilities will be used to treat the stormwater. Grading, drainage, and utility plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Significant filling of the site is proposed to raise the grade of the building pad. A six to ten - foot -tall modular block retaining wall is proposed along the east property line and along the eastern end of the north property. The retaining wall is subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Loading. The proposed loading area is on the north side of the building. Landscaping in the northeast corner of the property provides some screening between this area and the residential use to the north. Additional screening is required as discussed in the landscaping and screening section of this report. Landscaping and Screening. Section 401.15.E.8 of the Zoning Ordinance requires screening on a property with a business use that abuts a property zoned for residential use. The property located to the east is zoned R -B, Residential /Business Transitional and the property to the north is zoned R -3, Multiple Family Residential; therefore, screening is required along the north and east property lines. The landscape plan illustrates that a variety of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs are proposed along the east property line and northeast corner of the property. Walgreens is required to maintain the landscaping along the east property line even though it is at the base of the retaining wall and at a lower elevation than the rest of the property. The applicant and adjacent property owner to the north have agreed that Walgreens will plant some trees on the neighboring property for screening. A revised landscape plan showing this screening must be submitted and is subject to City Arborist review and approval. Section 401.15.F.h.18 of the Zoning Ordinance requires ail open off - street parking areas of five or more spaces to be screened and landscaped from residential districts and uses and the public right -of -way. The landscape plan illustrates the use of trees and shrubs to screen the parking and drive lanes. No landscaping is proposed next to the building. Because space for landscaping is limited next to the building, staff recommends that planters be installed at the building entrance to provide some color and greenery. Staff also recommends that two curbed and landscaped islands be created in the south parking lot to replace the striped areas. Tree Replacement. A tree replacement plan has been submitted and is subject to City Arborist review and approval. Parking. Retail stores are required to provide at least one parking space for each 200 square feet of floor area. Floor area is determined by subtracting ten percent from the footprint of the one -story building. The building is 15,0035 square feet in size. After 4 subtracting ten percent, the floor area is 13,531.5 square feet in size. The floor area divided by 200 is 67.7. Therefore, 68 parking spaces are required. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow the parking to be reduced to 59 spaces. Section 401.15.F.9 of the Zoning Ordinance states that the City may issue a conditional use permit to reduce the number of required off - street parking spaces when the use can demonstrate in documented form a need which is Tess than required. In such situations, the City may require land to be reserved for parking development should use or needs change. A parking study attached as Exhibit N concluded that the typical number of cars in the Walgreens parking lot in Roseville at any one time is between 25 and 35. This store is considered typical for the number of customers visiting a Walgreens store. In addition to this, five to seven employee vehicles would be expected. Based on this study, the proposed 59 parking stalls should be sufficient for the Walgreens use. The reduction in parking spaces appears to be adequate for the Walgreens use at the; however, a subsequent retailer or office use of the building could increase the parking demand on the site and the adjacent area. To resolve this issue, a deed restriction should be required stating that a change in use of the property requires City review and approval and the use must comply with the City parking standards in place at the time the use changes. Snow Removal. Snow must either be stored within the green space of the site or be removed from the property. Snow must not occupy required parking or drive aisles. Building Height and Design Guidelines. The proposed one -story building is 30 feet tall, which does not exceed the maximum height of 35 feet. The primary exterior building material is brick. Some stucco is also used. These types of materials, in addition to glass windows, are allowed for a commercial building. The Oak Park Heights Design Guidelines require commercial buildings to contain at least 20 percent glass on its facades. Both the south and west facades are compliant with approximately 21.5 percent glass. All sides of the building are articulated with brick pilasters and a horizontal band of brick or stucco above the pilasters. Lighting Plan. The demolition plan shows that the existing light poles on the property will be removed. A lighting plan has been submitted that includes new pole lighting. The maximum height of the Tight fixtures is 25 feet. The fixtures must be a bronze, shoebox, full - cut -off style. Section 401.15.B.7.d of the Zoning Ordinance (outdoor lighting) states that light shall not exceed one foot candle measured from the centerline of a public street, nor shall light exceed four - tenths of a foot candle at any property line adjoining an adjacent property. Many locations along the north and east property lines exceed the maximum light level allowed and approach levels of up to 4 foot candies. Therefore, an unacceptable amount of light is failing on the properties to the north and east and the 5 lighting plan must be revised. The lighting plan must be revised to comply with the City's foot- candle requirements. Sigriage. The Zoning Ordinance allows a pylon sign that is up to 30 feet tall and 150 square feet in size or 15 percent of the front building facade, whichever of the two is Tess. In this situation, 150 square feet is less than 15 percent of the front building facade. A 25 foot -tall pylon sign is proposed at the corner of 60 Street North and Osgood Avenue North. Due to the higher elevation of the site in relation to Highway 36 the applicant is willing to reduce the sign height to 20 feet. The signage on the pylon is in two pieces. The top sign is approximately 89 square feet in size. The bottom sign is an electronic reader board and is 42.5 feet in size. The electronic reader board is not allowed to have flashing or intermittent lights or animation, and the message must not change more often than every six hours. The total freestanding signage area is 131.5 square feet in size and, therefore, complies with the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance allows 150 square feet of wall signage or 15% of the front building facade whichever is Tess. Because this is a corner lot, two walls signs are allowed. The total of the two signs may be a maximum of 150 square feet in size. The two proposed wall signs must be reviewed for compliance with the City's sign regulations. Trash. The site plan illustrates a trash enclosure and recyclables area on the north side of the building. Details of the enclosures must be submitted. The enclosure materials must be consistent with the principal building materials. Approval Period. Normally project approval would be become null and void after 12 months unless the property owner or applicant has substantially started construction. In this case, Bradshaw Funeral Home, the current occupant, needs some time to relocate. Therefore, the approval period will be 18 months rather than 12 months. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Semper Development is proposing to construct a Walgreens Pharmacy at 6061 Osgood Avenue North and has requested approval of a CUP for reduced parking and a variance from the parking setback requirement. The applicant has worked out access issues with Washington County and MNDOT and has received comments from the Washington Soil and Water Conservation District on behalf of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization. The proposed project is generally consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Design Guidelines. Therefore, our office recommends approval of the site plan, CUP to allow reduced parking, and variance from the parking setback along the north property line subject to the following conditions: 1. An access permit from Washington County is required for the access onto Osgood Avenue. 6 2. Access onto 60th Street is subject to the conditions imposed by MNDOT including the applicant closing 60th Street west of the access to their property as shown on the submitted plans. 3. The applicant must provide a trail easement along Osgood Avenue and install a five - foot -wide sidewalk. The applicant should work with Washington County in that part of the sidewalk may need to be within the right -of -way. 4. Grading, drainage, and utility plans are subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 5. The proposed retaining wall must be designed by an engineer and is subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 6. The landscaping at the base of the retaining wall must be maintained by Walgreens even though it is at a lower elevation than the rest of the property. T The landscape plan must include the following revisions: vegetative screening on the adjacent property to the north, a slight adjustment of landscaping along the west property line to allow space for a sidewalk, planters at the building entrance, and two curbed and landscaped islands in the south parking lot. The applicant is responsible for all proposed landscaping. The landscape plan is subject to City Arborist review and approval. 8. The submitted tree replacement plan is subject to City Arborist review and approval. 9. A deed restriction must be put in place stating that a change in use of the property requires City review and approval and the use must comply with the City parking standards in place at the time the use changes. 10. Snow must either be stored within the green space of the site or be removed from the property. 11. The lighting plan must be revised to comply with the City's foot - candle requirements. The maximum height of the light fixtures is 25 feet. The fixtures must be a bronze, shoebox, full- cut -off style. 12. The electronic reader board is not allowed to have flashing or intermittent lights or animation, and the message must not change more often than every six hours. 13. The proposed pylon sign must not exceed 20 feet in height, and the two proposed wall signs must be reviewed for compliance with the City's sign regulations. 14. Details of the trash enclosures must be submitted. The enclosure materials must be consistent with the principal building materials. 7 VI M 1 taw- 1 ‘0 111 1M; IIfHIU .401111 .7E.. Amin mom ‚ID" 111111MIII 111E11111 111M111111 111111fill111111111 111111111111 111111111111 111111 111111111111 111111111111 111111111111 011111161 111 111411I1111 11111H11111 Rim pi 111111111w 111111111111 111111111111 111111111n Min UMILO 1111i111ffli 111111111111 ID It 1 MI 111111111111 111.11111111 111 11(11111 111111111111 111111111111 111111111111 11 11 11 11 11 11 minim minim 111111111111 M11111110 111111111111 1111 111I11 111111111111 111111111111 111111111111 11111111101 1111111011 iilllliliI 0) 0) c 0) 0 E ( z co uJ P 0) 0) x a.. 4... EXHIBIT A 111H03aN'y I A I 4"4 wernmoo saxnaan Divi MEEILID7f1A 0 Ena.t. dAl. .L.ORPCkld thaiontwam Jamadrw E45013ori uatomwoo occucrsvm 0 . 40•“114.0 sorry. 1.1-nntlaNCO 771, 0 T13143 0 ONIC111(10 X70000( 43.LYGI X.XXXX NOU,Rati.4C, eNimc^rioa CCaitt CihU. 4 S P HEIGHTS Ve4p- 11111M 111111 NO11..41.1.30 No.m. AGLAM N.~1 J.01r0.1 'SJJ-IDEF4 NINd .43.M1V 0000SO 4Y HD. .1338.12 MI.Of TrILZ EXI$TING 047110,TIONIS PLAN IIIHME I 1111191' nal IMF. Mill 1 .,134.2 1V rel .1. 1,7..1 12.44•024 r rn idAued W.21.3 nril OIC .J1V1.2 12.111.. L12 .31,1z —7155". 1 1 1 " I 21000 dh 1 11E11 IN! 1011 0 0 mim - _ , ---'!. --- ::: - .___----- - „----'1,----- ....-----:_,---.1..._.•":„...--->-:::,...::,____-_:=___ !'''' q:4-- -- >" - :„--- --'. :< -----,-.--. ..-."":„..,'>,;■ - --- "-------.---::-1-2:---::-- ----;-------_-_-•-:-_,-.,' ,-,-'_..-----:__ , _ ' ----- ---- -0-1.--- --- __ - _ f \ ' \ \ \ \--- )-- ----- ,,,,. ____------,- ----..- ,, ..„_____.........,....._ ...,,„:,,___,- , •• , .---- , / ,,,------"ir 3o, I \ \ N \ '‘.----------_------: — ._ - .../.., _ .--• , --•:::_--3•:.:::::/://;:,--..^:>- -------:::::::::',- -:„------ ,,,,. __,------ - .Z.,---- --_,-----"--------- \\\\\\ ------- -----..--'-- .-- -----------.--------•----.=:---:—...-- ---------':,..'--- 1--) ,-- ..., ..-•,-, _.- ---- -------- --------- -- '..- / --- • _____ ,-,, __,-----_:., _ ,. •.....,... _ cz\ ...7 :1 , ... J__ , .,,,,u 43 3,111 ___ —---- 51 \ ) )) \ \ \•-•.,, .- 3 6 0 . 8 3 ; ,L. ''' .-- ,- '',- - 1. ---- .:--:::_ - : -.------1-.--- t ----.---- / / ---::-- .,_....._ --4 , _ , j ._ --,7 , ,,----.1-• .4.7,.., co 1 / 17/ :',, ) , _______Z 01 dOk --, • 7:7-7 . 014 . •Cti riOnie lined M, r_ : ". 1.11.11" 4"T • / -- sodixv M17.14 . 115 C6N ,k91 Y 1.73,11:15 •ny kulso N \\\ ,, •, . 1, w o e a 111 V4 g ij 1iht 6,91 El 0 0 0 0 • •••• - - • ,C,`P •— \\'‘\\,\ \\\1\\ = = ■ — • " • .1 f ° i 1 bt "s. • ........ Io 1 k i OT3 00-9SO-- ••■•"` / if WM_ ci i 1 7 \\ \ 6 • cL pa w h o 1 011 11111 .11P 5 11 0 0 h 000 0000 ' g anallalitid gtoowvinc 'd5-2 tr8 5 t5 :''v;::rllaatgkatMtaEfSgllgaf 131110ftteIlingli • . - - 15,0,27 bb A IPFS:9)-4111101 7 .!1 1 g 0 ID SOS ST,44-01 NOD § § 2000 g . 1 1 41' 1 12 Up 1 1N h-5 'g 0,-, 11„ teg,1 gi g 8 P 1' 1 6 ktg, . vl 1p e i54 5'4 i 4 r A gg 1 kN it 13 0 — i -----—..--, --- 17,; : ---- — r. -- — ------ — — -------- — ----------___ _______= ,, r.,7:,,T, --- '----„, ----— -- (Wei INT 014-aaN 0008-0-- , A1 v e = I _..._ ...,, .......■' _.----- ..,- - _______--- - - - ---„---:_--_-_-.-:::_-------:.----.--<----„-> --_----- - 1-- -- -- , - - - ----- ------- ---- --- - _,--- - 1 -::- -- `. - ._--- --- ----:- _ ----- --- A „ \\\ , -____ ,-__._.--,--..„-... - . -- \\:„.\:\ N: , _________--- _________________•_. _ __ __ _________________ > - 2 ,./...,-.---_- , _____-_-_-_-__ .,._,..„—, „_________ ..___ --.:-/ / ----- -- _____ ---J=L e , 0 , \ \\ .- //,/,'.-. ■' " , 1. ------ " ---- --- --- ---4- ' '.° \ ' \\ 1\ '.--- ------- ---- — ---.— ... \ 1 \ .,,\ \ ..,....,...--- ---- .--- - - __-- -----------— . . .--.' ,.., Z _------- \ \ 1 \ .•.-......., 7 ''"".:-.--::::----- , g t I 6 '1 P „4 R II 0 ! M ,, t iNN i ig H h qi h ohl 1 ,h 11 0 g- ; i 1 .1 1 11 .4.: r 1 _, II 4 hli i •-- 0; 14 2 e'r ,1111 11111 - - .............. ........................................ ,-- ti . ..,■.,:,,......, .....C.;•.=..,,,..- —C3---- -- \ i l E, E; s: ,,,\\,\s7.,zimm, — — --------,----- ,F, B ,-,,. a IA ...,:_,, \ \ I \ , _ § WI m WI is at , vs § gm mina GEE-ai 1 1 1,1 atar,r4 D El tato t uo g 101 t'.! ' ti 0 Ht 'Pli4i H h qth EX .1 — FiN gi 4324A 013, d.1 0 0 ai 4 g (f) L 0 4 T o 0 11 1 1 11 11 11 Jif !), - 0, a Ao 2 (PH 1 a ©® 1 ry u 6 a a tl 1 1 ®©© 107 Vti7�Vd o o —% U �A �+ �+ �+ + ate + + �►1p' � o zio 910 0 oizo c o o zto"a�o� 5o a4 V gt9tIMAPh�e FF ll �� V T �N) 1 m 9 r•\ M+ lam �_' ['7 6 C1 � CU � ,,w,'4,1 / � ' [, F1 t - `, s c0 a + + n o+ E+ + r-+ w Un e b a+ [rl + Cv { 1� '' u'y tEl EE n e [ [Y6 }3 ■ Q7 + �y rr + 1!4 d + 6 T - : ksi `P:_, to i k 14 ti CEP .y a 1 r !-n AEA tl 0 I .kp I 0 0 A 1 El o DD 2 1 W•radie t .1 ig fl 2fr iTylk 1 4.2 11 1V I lia Vt0.4, ■011 (Kt ON Ti'V'S*D) H111014 af11 COODSO ri A e, A g ij I h 51 h 0 o0 DC* 8 erm A A A 4 h *00 t t t t tatairr. DA' 7 r . 11 11 P1 Pi gt r. ;0. SNOI.LVtLT7R 2IOI2IR.LXa aoo�so iv 9cavnu��ni GOODS° IV 9£ A A HJIH SMITDIVM 7y -- % MAY-10 -2001 May 7, 2001 10 :52 Dear Ms. Danielson: CITY OF OPH Ms. Kris Danielson Community Development Director City of Oak Park Heights 14168 oak Park Blvd. N. P. O. Box 2007 Oak Park Heights, MN 55082-2007 VAASHINGTON COUNr DE1RTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION & PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT 11660 MYERON ROAD NORTH • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082-9573 651 - 430.4300 Facsimile Machine 651 -430 -4350 Donald C. W1sniew°ski, P.E. DirectorfCounty Engineer Dougies W. Fischer. P.E. Deputy D1roctor. Transportation Division James ❑, Luger, S A Parks Director M1AY 1 0 2001 Larry S. Nybeck, PLS•Counry Surveyor Deputy Director, Land MortigemanU Land Survey Divlslon i PROPOSED WALLGREEN'S STORE, NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY 24 (CSAH 24; OSGOOD AVENUE NORTH) AND 60 STREET NORTH (TH 36 NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD) We have reviewed the drawings that you sent of the Wallgreen's store that is proposed for the northeast quadrant of Osgood Avenue and TH 36. We have the following comments: • The southerly access point that is shown on Osgood Avenue is unacceptable. The right -in driveway that is shown approximately 90 feet north of the centerline of 60 Street North is too close to that intersection and too close to TH 36 for safe operation. Many drivers entering the site would likely come from either eastbound TH 36 or northbound Osgood Avenue. These drivers would, in most cases, be accelerating from the traffic signal at the Osgood Avenue/TH 36 intersection. To allow commercial access and the associated deceleration so close to the major intersection creates an unacceptably high risk of rear -end crashes. As discussed below, the frontage road east of Osgood may be closed because its location is too close to TH 36 for safe or efficient operation. We cannot allow this access to compound those problems. • Because of its close proximity to TH 36, both the Trunk Highway 36 Subarea Study and the design for TH 36 associated with the new river crossing recommend closing the frontage road east of Osgood Avenue and relocating the west leg to a more northerly location. If the frontage road is closed there is no option for access from the south end of this property. • The northerly access point on Osgood Avenue is acceptable to the County. An access permit is required. If a permit is approved we will include in the permit provisions the right to restrict access to right -in /right -out operation if the road is ever reconstructed with a median. This location corresponds very closely with the planned location of the west frontage road, as indicated on the most recent drawings that we have received from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. 1 have enclosed a copy of the portion of the layout that shows the ro osed configuration p p of Osgood Avenue, TH 36, and the frontage road. • The utility connections within County right of way indicated on sheetC4.1 of the drawings will require a County right of way permit. Utility work and restoration must conform to Minnesota Public Utilities Commission standards and the Washington County Right of Way Ordinance, P.03/04 EXHIBIT J NAY-1 0-2001 10:52 CITY OF QPH Page 2 Letter to Ms. Kris Danielson May 7, 2001 This use is representative of commercial uses that increase traffic flow on Osgood Avenue. To help accommodate future expansion of Osgood Avenue, we request dedication of additional right of way totaling 50 feet from the centerline of Osgood Avenue. If the City wishes to have sidewalk on the east side of Osgood Avenue included in any reconstruction, 60 feet would be needed. (Centerline could be determined based on the actual center of the road, as built.) Please call me at 551 -430 -4312 if you have comments or questions. Sincerely, / 13( ph Lux Senior Engineering Technician c: Sharon Anderson, MN /DOT Transportation Planning John Kohler, Semper Development Janelle Taveggia, Landforrn Mike Welling, Assistant County Surveyor P.04/04 TOTAL P.04 Condition. 1 year Storm 2.3" Rain/24 hrs 10 Year Storm 42" Rain/24 hrs 100 Year Storm 5.9" Rain/24 hrs Pre Development Dischar e (Cubic Ft/Sec) 0.82 2.30 3.80 Post Development (Cubic Ft/Sec) 1.50 3.30 4.90 Difference (Increase) (Cubic Ft/Sec & %) 0.68 cfs, 8310 1.00 cfs. 43% 1.10 cfs. 29% MAY-16-2001 2001 14: 43 CITY OF UPH Dear Ken: 1) Stormwater Management MINNESOTA SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS May‘ 1 0, 2001 Mr. KetikIartung, City Administrator City of B4port 294 North TAird Street Bayport, NIN'''$5903 RE: Proposed Walgreens project — City of Oak Park Heights Walgreens Oak Park Hei hts Pre and Post Development t Discharge Summa AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER P.02/03 HINGTON SOU. AND WATER .]NSERVATION DISTRICT 1 925 Curve Crest Blvd., Room 101 Stillwater, MN 55002 (651) 430 -.6820 Fax: (651) 430 -6819 FAXED AND MAILED FAX # 439-7188 Our office has received and reviewed the construction plans and specifications dated April 20, 2001, for the proposed Walgreens project site, located at the existing Bradshaw Funeral Home in Section 34, Town 30 North, Range 20 West, City of Oak Park Heights. This project is the redevelopment of an existing property. As part of our review we visited the site and discussed the plans with poject representative, Janele Taveggia of Landform Engineering. Since our agency has no direct approval authority over the project, our review is being made on behalf of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization. Based upon the site conditions observed and the proposed plans we would offer the following comments: There appears to be an increase of 036 acres of impervious area for the proposed site. The site is 1.45 acres of which currently 0.85 acres (59 %) is impervious. The proposed project would have 1.21 acres (83 %) of impervious surfaces. No water quantity or quality ponding is currently used or proposed for this site. We would recommend that the applicant provide water qualityiquanity ponding on -site or document why on -site pondin, is infeasible. If on -site p.ndin is not feasible then the a Hunt should implement stormwater best mana: ement a ractices such as ass swales infiltration trenches and in -line structural stormwater treatment (pade names Based on my observation of the site and the proposed plan, grass swales, infiltration trenches and ire -line structural stonnwater treatment systems would very likely address the incremental increases in stormwater runoff from this site The following table summarizes the incremetnal changes in runoff from the pre and post development condition. EXHIBIT K Mr. Ken Hartung May 10, 2001 Page Two 2) Grading and Erosion Control Since much of the site work is located adjacent to impervious areas, steep slopes and or fragile soils erosion control requirements will need to be closely followed to minimize soil erosion. a straw mulch is used for tem ora roteGtion it rnusf be weed 4nd seed free. It has been our experience that straw or hay bales are not effective in reducing sediment from leaving construction sites. Due to the slopes and sandy soil conditions prevalent on this site, Nve reeornrner d substxrutin heav du eotextile silt fence in place of the str 'fir or hay "bale checks ". We believe that the location of these practices is appropriate, just simply replace bale checks with silt fence and keep the other existing silt fence as shown. In` the event of concentrated flow leaving the site, we would recommend that the contractor be • re • aced to . lace an additional row of silt fence in low areas to minjp.Jzesedimentfrom Silt fence along the project perimeter should remain in place until the site is restored and stabilized. The specifications should require the mechanical anchoring of straw mulch on the contour, however, most equipment can not operate safely on slopes steeper that 4 :1. Therefore, we recommend that all slo • es stee • er that 4:1 be covered with erosion contro attin such a wood fiber bjanket, instead of straw mulch. hope that these comments will assist you with the review and comment on this project. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 430-6826. MAY -16 -2001 14 :43 1;) Mark .. Doneux, C?ESC Water Resource Coordinator • Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control E:\wp\wp \WSD\MSCWMo1Wa1greens 5 1O -01 Comment 1ktter,DOC CITY OF OPH P.03/03 cc: David Beaudet, Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization T9mMg City of Oak Park Heights Janele Taveggia, Landform Engineering, 650 Butler North Building, 510 First Avenue North, Minneapolis, MN 55043 TOTAL P.03 NAC "Postler, Dennis M" <dpostler bonestroo.com> "Kris Danielson (E- mail)" <kdanielson @cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Scott Richards (E- mail)" < srichards Cam? nacplanning.com> Cc: "Jay Johnson (E- mail)" <jjohnson @cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Jim Butler (E- mail)" < jbutler© cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Judy Hoist (E- mail)" <jholst cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Kimberly Kamper (E- mail)" <kkamper@ cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Mark Vierling (E- mail)" <mvierling @ eckberglammers.com >; "Thomas M. Melena (E- mail)" <tmelena @ cityofoakparkheights.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 9:15 AM Subject: Walgreens Site Review Kris/Scott: Here are a few comments /questions regarding the Walgreen's Site Plan, From: To: Traffic Access /Right -of -way: * Driveway accesses are, in general, acceptable. Is the northerly driveway to be shared with the adjacent property owner (don't see a curb return on the north side of the driveway)? If not, the driveway should be a minimum of 24' wide and contained on Walgreen's site. * The developer /engineer should contact the County for their opinion /approval of the right -in only driveway (and its proximity to the intersection of Osgood /60th Street N.), and any potential widening of Osgood Avenue. In addition, MnDOT may need to be contacted regarding changing driveway access locations along 60th Street North? Sanitary Sewer & Water Services: * It appears new sewer and water services are proposed to the new building. This will involve connecting to an existing sanitary sewer manhole and, as shown, to an existing water main with a new tee (requiring the water main to be shut down during connection). We recommend the existing funeral hone sewer and water services be utilized, if possible (plans don't show where these are). If not possible, the existing services need to be properly abandoned. Also, the water main should be via a wet tap unless shutting down the existing mainline will not impose on adjacent businesses /residents. Storm Sewer & Drainage Calculations: We have very little existing storm sewer and drainage information in this area. 1 believe Landforrn's analysis of existing store sewer and drainage patterns is accurate, in that all of this site eventually end up drainage to MnDOT property, then southerly under Hwy. 36. * From a runoff perspective, the additional impervious are being proposed should have a negligible effect on the existing downstream storm sewer. The appropriate Watershed District(s) should be contacted for their review. Specific comments about the drainage calculations and storm sewer layout: Typo for drainage area tributary to CBMH 2? (Table shows 0.60 acres, Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT L 5/3/2001 Map shows 0.25 acres - it appears (125 acres is the correct number). This would result in 1.66 less cfs in the entire proposed system, since this is on the upstream end. This could result in smaller pipe sizes/slopes required. * Also, we don't see a need for CB 1 since the tributary area is so small and it appears to be located on a high point (very little or no runoff will actually enter it). This would alleviate the need for CB 1 and also 120 of storm sewer to CBMH 2. Dennis M. Post ler Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates 2335 West Highway 36, St. Paul, MN 55113 Direct: (651) 604-4815 Office: (651) 636-4600, x4815 Fax: (651) 636-1311 Cellular: (612) 865-9187 E-mail: Apostler@bonestroocon Page 2 of 2 5/3/2001 NAC From: "K.D. Widin" <kwidin@mrnmpec.org› To: <srichards@nacplanning.corn› Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:54 AM Subject: Walgreen's Landscape Plan Revision Scott - I have reviewed the revised landscape plan for the Walgreen's project and have the following comments: 2. The landscape plan is much improved in design over the first one submitted. 1 think that it will be an asset to the project. Kathy Widin Arborist, City of Oak Park Heights 1. Tree Replacement - It appears that there are a couple healthy elms (average size 10 in. dbh) in a natural area on the northeast side of the property which will be removed during the construction process; however, I have credited the project for the mugho pine which are being planted (est. stem diarn. 1.25 in.) and there is no additional tree replacement required for this project. 3. The species used are improved and will have fewer problems on site than the ones originally specified. Note: the no. of Black Hills spruce in the plant schedule does not match the no. shown on the plan. 4. The plan still specifies fairly large shade trees going into relatively narrow median areas. In future years there may be some health impacts or curb issues from restricted root area, but no plan changes are required. The 4 in diameter trees specified for planting may suffer more transplant stress than smaller material, but do satisfy the tree replacement required. 5. The mugho pine, juniper and Korean lilacs may not tolerate the dense shade of Am. linden as the planting matures. The linden may need to have the lower limbs removed in the future to allow more light to reach the understory plants. 6. Planting Detail - I recommend tree wrap only for 'Autumn Spire maple and this should be on from Nov. - Mar. Please include language regarding removal of twine and top of burlap covering root ball, as well as first rungs of any wire basket encasing the root ball.