The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1978-03-31 Planner Memorandum Mi Planning S • Re earch, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑�❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑uuuuuu urban planning - design - market research ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ML �❑❑❑ 2101 hennepin avenue south minneapolis ❑ ❑ooDEDE1 ° ❑ ° ❑ ° ❑ ° ❑ ° aa ° ❑ ❑ ° ° ❑ ° ❑oo❑ ° ❑ ° ❑ ° ❑ ❑ 0000 ❑000 minnesota 55405 (612) 871- 2661 MEMORANDUM TO: Oak Park Heights Mayor and City Council FROM: David Licht /Gordon Anderson DATE: 31 March 1978 RE: St. Croix Mall Expansion: Traffic- Parking Layout and Environmental Barrier Review FILE NO: Oak Park Heights (798.02) BACKGROUND Swager Brothers are proposing to expand the St. Croix Mall and adjacent parking lots. They will also be constructing an environmental barrier in the form of fencing and plant materials to buffer the residential area to the south. ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION Parking and Traffic Layout In reviewing traffic generation and parking space supply and demand, there is a question as to whether ordinance requirements will be met. If parking stalls are spaced at 9' intervals, 1,415+ spaces can be provided to meet the requirement of approximately 1,300 -1,445 spaces. The 50' parking bay width is too narrow. With 60 angle parking a 55' bay is minimum. It would be benficial in viewing the plans to know the traffic movements between the west expansion area of the mall and Omaha Avenue, as well as how much additional parking will occur west of the NSP Tower. There is no indication of open space treatment on Omaha Avenue (walkways, planting areas, etc.) St. Croix Mall Parking Inventory Parking Spaces Required Existing Gross Retail Area (89,260 x .9) = 80,334 = 150 536 Existing Theatre Area (5,000 sq.ft.) Seats Approx. 400: 3 133 joint use Proposed Gross Retail Area (113,827 x .9) = 102,444 = 150 683 Proposed Warehousing and Storage - -- - -- Kentucky Fried Chicken (2,450 x .50 -.66) _ (1,225 -1,600 sq . ft .) ; 30 41 -53 Best Steak House 1,800 sq . ft . Seats 120 L. 3 40 1 -1,312 (133) Parking Provided at 9' Stall Spacing - 1,415 Oak Park Heights Ner . and City Council March 31, 1978 Page Two Environmental Barrier In reviewing the screening plans, questions arise which can not be fully resolved based upon the information supplied. There is a discrepancy on the south property l i n e as to actual length of property to be screened and exact limits of parking area. The screening plan submitted indicates a 1,360' length to be fenced, buffering lots 4 -17 on the north side of Fahlstrom Road. The St.Croix Mall Expansion Plan shows a possible 1,075' length to be buffered. It is assumed the expansion plan does not show additional parking west of the NSP Tower. However, we question whether screening be provided east of lot 4 to Osgood Avenue? Detail elevations of lots 13 -17 are also not shown. Another question occurs regarding the existence of an access drive adjacent to the proposed sidewalk /screening, or will spaces be head -in parking along this area? If cars are parked head -in to the sidewalk, it will have to be widened or concrete bumper curbs placed ahead of the sidewalk to allow for vehicle overhang. The assumption was made that the access drive will run adjacent to the sidewalk screening. The height of the fencing (6') is in compliance with the City Ordinance, and overall appearance of the fence is good. Because of its construction, the fencing will not allow air to circulate through it. For home owners on the opposite side, this consideration may need to be reviewed. Plans submitted do not indicate construction details, or special design considerations such as proper and adequate post footings to insure stability for the extensive length of fencing involved. Plant material type, size and spacing are not indicated. From all indications, spacing would be sparse if shrubs were planted. Spacing as shown might be adequate if trees were intended, however, the dimension between the fence and sidewalk would then conflict. For installation of shrubs, closer spacing and occasional clustering to add interest is recommended. Spacing would depend on type and size of materials used. The number of different plant material types should be limited to achieve a sense of continuity. Consideration should also be given to the type of mulch or ground cover to be used in the planting bed. This would aid in maintenance, weed control and maintain soil moisture levels. Since all planting will be on the north side of the fence, plant materials will have to be shade tolerant. Oak Park Heights N*r and City Council March 31, 1978 Page Three RECOMMENDATIONS In consideration of the proposed approximately 91,000 square foot commercial expansion, it does not seem unreasonable to request that the site plan be prepared at a scale of 1 " -50' and that the area 100' beyond the property lines be shown to illustrate how the development relates to adjacent circulation, land uses, etc. The site plan should also show all property lines and easements, etc. To accurately review the parking and circulation, more detailed plans must be prepared. The concept proposal appears basically acceptable, however, before a permit is issued, the following issues still need clarification: 1 . Parking lot design including dimensions of parking bays and stalls. The issue of loading and service areas need to be addressed. These cannot conflict with pedestrian and vehicular circulation. Parking lot lighting should be studied, making sure lighting reflects away from adjoining property. A parking lot drainage plan should be made, showing locations, size, number of catch basins to insure proper and efficient surface runoff. 2. Details of the screening need to be refined, the environmental barrier should show on the site plans. The true adequacy of the plan depends on plant choice and fencing detail . When selecting plant materials, consideration should be given to plant height, hardiness (shade tolerance, resistance to road salts, general abuse). Construction drawings of the entire fence length should be made, paying close attention to elevation, drainage patterns. More consideration should be given to the residential property owners, as to special design considerations for existing buildings, plant materials, other development constraints. 3. The overall plan should show peripheral treatment, especially along Omaha Avenue, Osgood Avenue and the south property boundary. cc: Ken Heuer Otto Bonestroo Lyle Eckberg Swager Brothers, Inc. �D o a . ��2�Enl ASH I ' 6 .�`tAl dS1F t 1 � i Sr CROIx MALL -5CR6EA11Ar SCAM Aledi VIMC PROPERrivES AILL CA5U SLOPP # Sr CKOIX MA41- PAOPSArl Wlil. AS 7bWARAS ph R,<jivc— Akg,+ /0 'Pkeev?ri. LIME 10 A ��"`�� 1 3 1 w ��P kw�� I t"7 � N I uC, � �„�"^ ("�pOM oJ�" '�,/ ��, � �P� � ��