Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-06-11 CPC Packetti • il Iwater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF STILLWATER NOTICE OF MEETING The Stillwater Planning Commission will meet on Monday, June 11, 2001 at 7 p m in the Council Chambers of Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street Approval of Minutes of May 14, 2001 AGENDA Public Hearings - 7 p m 1 Case No V/DR/01-21 A variance to the sign ordinance for an intenor illuminated sign located in the front yard setback (15 feet required, 0 feet requested) at 210 North Main Street in the CBD, Central Business Distnct Mark Balay, representing Let There Be Light, Steve Gnan, applicant 2 Case No V/DR/01-22 A vanance to the sign ordinance for the number of signs permitted per business and a vanance to the front yard setback (15 feet required, 0 requested) at 220 East Mulberry in the CBD, Central Business Distnct Tony Lodge and Emmett Carolan, St Croix Lighting, applicants 3 Case No SUP/DR/01-23 A special use permit for the addition of six rental units in the existing Joseph Wolf Complex located at 402 South Main Street in the CBD, Central Business Distnct Steve Bremer, applicant 4 Case No V/01-24 A variance to the side yard setback (10 feet required, 9 feet requested) for the construction of a second story to an existing residence at 113 Bnck Street South in the RA, Single Family Residential District John and Jessica Pack, applicants 5 Case No V/01-25 A variance of the front yard setback (30 feet required, 13 feet requested) for the construction of a deck at 424 South Seeley Street in the RA, Single Family Residential Distract Justin and Traci O'Bnen, applicants 6 Case No SUP/DR/01-26 A special use permit for the construction of a building housing 29 to 32 condominiums at 501 North Main Street (Domino's Pizza site) in the CBD, Central Business Distnct and the FP, Flood Plain Jeff Wallis, applicant 7 Case No CPA/01-01 A Comprehensive Plan Amendment changing land use designation of 15 acres of land located south of Boutwell Road and west of Boutwell Cemetery from Single Family to Public Facility City of Stillwater, applicant CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 651-430-8800 1 8 Case ZAT/01-01 Zoning Text Amendment establishing a new Public Facility Zomng Distnct City of Stillwater, applicant 9 Case ZAM/01-02 A Zoning Map Amendment designating 15 acres of land located south of Boutwell Road and west of Boutwell Cemetery Public Facility City of Stillwater, applicant 10 Case PUD/01-27 A Planned Unit Development approval for development of portions of a 15 acre site into a 40,000 square foot public works facility with outdoor storage City of Stillwater, applicant Pubhc Hearing 8 p m Discussion of Minnesota Department of Transportation TH 36 Corndor Management Plan The Plan would effect the future of TH 36 intersection design and traffic conditions on Washington Avenue, Greeley Street and Osgood Avenue Other Items Discussion of church related use at 1151 Parkwood Lane • • • • • City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 14, 2001 Present Jerry Fontaine, chairperson Glenna Bealka, Robert Gag, Russ Hultman, Karl Ranum, Paul Teske and Terry Zoller Absent Dave Middleton and Darwin Wald Others Planner Sue Fitzgerald Mr Fontaine called the meeting to order at 7 p m Approval of minutes Mr Ranum, seconded by Mrs Bealka, moved approval of the minutes of Apnl 9, 2001, motion passed unanimously Case No SUP/01-14 A special use permit application for transfer of ownership of the Lady Goodwood Bed and Breakfast at 704 S First St in the RB, Two Family Residential District Nick and Susan Chaves, applicants The applicants were present Mr Fontaine noted the Chaveses have been managing the facility since the Special Use Permit was ongmally issued Mr Chaves said there have been no negative comments from neighbors Mr Gag, seconded by Mr Zoller, moved approval as conditioned, motion passed unanimously Case No V/01-16 A variance to the front yard setback (20 feet required, 17 feet requested) at 715 W Churchill St m the RB, Two Family Residential Distnct Diane Vantress and Jim Granger, applicants The apphcants were present Mr Granger explained the existing house is very small (640 square feet), and they would like more area They plan to use an existing porch for the additional space, he said, and would not be expanding the dimensions of the house The applicants also requested approval to enclose an existing carport and add a garage door A variance is required for both the house and garage Mr Fontaine asked the applicants if they knew where the property line is Mr Granger said the structures are 17 feet from the front property line Mr Fontaine stated he had a problem when setbacks can't accommodate cars parking m the driveway and vehicles end up parking on the sidewalks Mr Ranum said a condition of approval could be added that vehicles not parked in the garage must not block the sidewalk, and he noted that parkmg on sidewalks is really an enforcement issue Mr Hultman also pomted out that several nearby residences are closer to the property line than the applicants Mr Zoller, seconded by Mrs Bealka, moved approval of the vanance for the house as conditioned, motion passed unanimously 1 City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 14, 2001 Mr Ranum, seconded by Mr Hultman, moved approval of the garage variance as conditioned Mr Zoller said he shared Mr Fontame's concern and asked if the applicants could move the garage back three feet Mr Granger said that would create a problem because of existing footmgs and an existing shed in the rear Motion for approval passed 6-1, with Mr Fontame voting no Case No SUP/01-17 A special use permit for outside sales at 1662 Market Dnve in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District Bnan Dommeyer, representing Ace Hardware, applicant Mr Dommeyer was present He questioned the staff recommended conditions of approval which would limit his outside spring sales to May 1-June 15 and sale of Christmas trees from Thanksgiving to Chnstmas, as recommended no other matenals could be displayed outdoors Mr Dommeyer presented a color coded diagram outlining his request, indicating the location, time frame and products to be displayed m each area He said he needs the outdoor sales m order to be competitive with Cub/Target, he also noted that most convenience stores have outdoor displays of many of the same products he is requested to have Ms Fitzgerald noted that Cub/Target's outdoor sprang sales are part of the ongmal PUD, and she stated she had already received a complaint regarding the Ace outdoor displays/sales Members were generally receptive to Mr Dommeyer's request with the exception of the area m the front parking lot closest to Market Dnve According to Mr Dommeyer's request that location would be used Apnl 15-July 15 for mulch and top soils displays, as well as power tool and gull demonstrations During the discussion, members indicated they were not concemed with demonstrations being conducted at that site but were concerned with the display of the mulch and top soils Mr Hultman suggested the display could be moved to south side of the building, immediately adjacent to the handicapped parking stalls Mrs Bealka moved approval of the request incorporating Mr Hultman's suggested location for the mulch and top soil display Mr Ranum suggested amending the motion to indicate that the mulch/top soil display not exceed the length of the handicapped parking stall, that the time frames/locations/matenals mdicated m the body of Mr Dommeyer's request are acceptable, and that the permit is subject to review after one year Mrs Bealka accepted the suggested amendments to her motion Mr Hultman seconded the motion, motion passed unammously Case No V/01-18 A variance to the rear yard setback (25 feet required, 9'6" requested) and to the impervious surface (30 percent allowed) at 202 N Martha St in the RB, Two Family Residential District Kyle F Weed, apphcant Mr and Mrs Weed were present Mr Weed explained the request is to construct a master bedroom and bath, a two-story bump out at the back of the house The intent is to make the addition look like a carnage house Mr Weed said the addition will probably result in less • r • • • impervious surface than there currently is on the property, as they will have to remove a large City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 14, 2001 patio for the addition The addition will follow the existmg back lot hne, and Mr Weed said they have signatures from neighbors indicating neighbors are supportive of the plans There was some discussion regarding the condition that drainage must be retained on site, as Mr Weed said drainage currently is piped to the street, which is not allowed Mr Ranum moved approval as conditioned, with the applicants to work with the city engineer regarding suggestions for on -site drainage Mr Gag seconded the motion, motion passed unanimously Case No V/01-19 A vanance to the front yard setback (20 feet required, 1 foot requested) for construction of a porch at 731 Seventh St S m the RB, Two Family Residential Distnct Karl Strack, applicant Mr Strack was present He explained the request is to replace a detenorating, existmg front stoop with a porch Most of the discussion centered on the property lme and the required 10 foot setback from the nght-of-way Mr Ranum noted that if a structure is built within the nght-of- way and the city later decides to do some infrastructure work that would affect the structure, the property owner is liable Mr Fontaine questioned whether a legal opimon was necessary Mr Strack said the structure is 10'6" from the sidewalk, so the structure would meet the nght-of- way setback requirement Mr and Mrs Richard Colemeir were present to speak on behalf of the request The Colemeiers noted the sidewalk is a pnvate walk, not a city -built sidewalk, and they pointed out that other houses in the neighborhood are at least as close to the street as Mr Strack is proposing Mr Zoller said considenng Mr Strack meets the nght-of-way setback, the only problem might be if a step is built off the porch, the step might be on city property and the city might be liable Mr Hultman moved approval as conditioned, notmg the request meets the 10 foot nght-of-way setback, with the additional condition that any step not intrude onto the existing sidewalk Mr Ranum seconded the motion Mr Zoller said lus understanding from the discussion was that the porch/step will be on Mr Strack's property It was suggested that condition of approval No 1 could be eliminated Mr Hultman and Mr Ranum accepted that amendment to the motion, motion passed unanimously Case ZAM/01-01 Zoning Map Amendment to rezone Lot 5, Block 5, Bud Kern Addition, 1180 Frontage Road from BP-1 to BP-C, Business Park Commercial, Anthony K Magnotta, apphcant Case No SUP/01-20 A special use permit to operate a used car lot at 1180 Frontage Road m the BP-C, Business Park Commercial Distnct Anthony Magnotta, apphcant 3 • • City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 14, 2001 Present for the discussion were Mr Magnotta, Ed Page and Dick Johnson Mr Zoller, seconded by Mr Hultman, moved approval of the Zoning Map Amendment Motion passed unanimously Mr Fontaine noted there were 18 conditions of approval for the special use permit The applicant said he was aware of all the conditions and had no problem with the conditions Mr Ranum, seconded by Mrs Bealka, moved approval of the special use permit as conditioned Motion passed unanimously Other items Mr Fontaine asked about the signs from The Roofing Guys that have been placed on telephone poles throughout town Ms Fitzgerald indicated the pohce have been notified of the illegal signs Mr Gag asked about the boat that is for sale m the front of the St Croix Printing Co building on Greeley Street across from the Home Decorating store Ms Fitzgerald said a letter will be going out to the property owner Mr Hultman, seconded by Mrs Bealka, moved to adjourn at 8 20 p m Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary • • • MEMO To Planning Commission Fr Sue Fitzgerald, Planner Date June 11, 2001 -Re Case V/DR/01-21 The apphcant, Steve Gnan, owner of "Let There Be Light" and Mark Balay, architect appeared at the June 4, 2001 HPC meeting for design approval It was determined at that meeting that a variance would not be needed if they changed their concept The apphcant has acquired a 1919 exterior freestandmg internally lit clock It has the name of a bank on the upper half of it (see attached photo) The apphcant wanted to put the name of his business on it This is against the sign ordinance since interior ht signs are prohibited in the Downtown district What was worked out was that the Downtown area could use a working clock and the applicant could put words pertaining to his business like "antique hghtmg" or have a stained glass lamp crafted on it • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM CASE NO V/DR/01-22 Planning Commission Date June 11, 2001 Project Locatio 220 Mulberry Street Comprehensive Plan District Central Business Distnct Zoning District CBD Applicants Name Tony Lodge and Emmett Carolan Type of Application A Vanance to the sign ordinance for the number of signs permitted per business and a Variance to the front yard setback (15 feet required, 0 feet requested) Project Description Discussion St Croix Lighting is requesting two variances One to increase the number of permitted signs for one business The ordinance allows for one wall, monument, awning and canopy or three- dimensional sign per business It also states that when a budding or business abuts two or more public streets, an additional sign located on each street budding face is allowed The above business does abut two streets, on the south is Mulberry and to the west is North Second Street Trees and a hill screen the North Second Street side It is also a residential area The front of the budding has three sign bands were signs could be installed One band is for the address number, the other two are for business names The applicant stated that the building would not look right if both sign "brackets" were empty and not used It was staffs suggestion that genenc words could be used in these "brackets" such as lighting, and/or lamps A second vanance is requested to the front setback for a freestanding sign Again, freestanding signs are permitted in the Central Business Distnct The ordinance states a monument sign may be located in any required yard but must have a setback of 15 feet from any joint of vehicular access, public roadway or property line The applicant sites that it is a hardship not being visible from Main Street, due to neighboring buildings on the east -side which are 8 feet closer to the street If the permitted setback of 15 feet were used to construct the sign, it would not be visible from Main Street due to the neighboring buildings The freestanding sign is six square feet and it would be attached to a lantern lamppost and illuminated by the lantern The building signs would not be lit All of the requested signs have blue lettenng with a green and blue line logo on a white background Conditions of Approval • • 1 No additional signage 2 All changes to the approved plan will be reviewed by the Community Development Director Recommendation Approval of projecting sign Denial of building sign Findings 1 That a hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists In this context, personnel financial difficulties, Toss of prospective profits and neighbonng violations are not hardships justifying a variance 2 That a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property nghts possessed by other properties in the same distnct and in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special pnvdege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors 3 That the authorizing of the vanance will not be of substantial detnment to adjacent property and not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title or the public interest nor adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan Attachments Application Form/Elevation Drawing/Photos HPC Action 6/4/01 — Recommended the Commission consider a variance due to the unique situation of the building location Recommended the owner put signs on the budding that pertain to the lighting business Approved +6-0 J • • • Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ACTION REQUESTED Fees _Special/Conditional Use Permit $50/20 iC Variance ._. Resubdivision Subdivision* $70/20 $100 $100+50/Ic _Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500 Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development * _Certificate of Compliance Design Review $300 $500 $70 $25 *An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached) The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (0 e, photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater A site plan is required with applications PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project�l Cvoii(r 1114 Assessor's Parcel No Ur) GEO Co eZoning District Description of Project. t .e e t "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submiffed herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct 1 further certify 1 will comply with file permit if it is granted and used " Representative �"` `'"'` +'�'�'"--- Mailing Address aav 54 „,,, -74 ll ��IVlailing Addres City - State - Zip Sfe 11i� Kat , MA./ S So Ems-- City - State - Zip Telephone N • S" rfi% // g 3 Telephone Signature ♦ C !NM _ Signature , i SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Property Owner �t,cIs Lot Size (dimensions) /°v Land Area Height of Buildings Stories Feet Principal 1 02.o Accessory — x is o Total Building floor area ‘ °° a square feE Existing 60.0 square feet Proposed ""14- square feet Paved Impervious Area /goo square feet No of off-street parking spaces (4, + r • • • St. Cioix lighting TO: Heritage Preservation Commission Members FROM: Tony Lodge, Emmett Carolan / St. Croix Lighting RE: Sign Permit / Variances DATE: 5-25-01 St. Croix Lighting at 220 E. Mulberry St. is requesting the approval of attached sign proposal. In order to do so, it would be necessary for the Commission to approve variances to two sections of the Stillwater Code pertaining to signs. Specifically the variances requested are to: 8,a,1: "One wall, monument, awning and canopy or three dimensional sign is allowed per business." 8,c,1: "A monument sign may be located in any required yard but must have a setback of 15ft from any point of vehicular access, public roadway or property line." Reasons for this request are as follows: 1) Current elevation of Second St. prevents the use of allowed signage on building's west side to gain exposure to adjacent street. 2) The existence of neighboring buildings within 8 ft of Mulberry St. would render a sign placed 15 ft off of street hidden from view to both pedestrian and automobile traffic on Main St. and Second St.. 3) Signage only allowed on front of building or only allowed as freestanding would limit exposure to one street or the other depending upon placement. Current signage on building has no visibility from Main St and only a limited view from Mulberry St.. A freestanding sign far enough away from the building to be noticeable would be ineffective in identifying building itself. With the streetlight located within 2 ft. of curb and telephone box within 5 ft., the design of this structure would allow for protection to both of these from traffic both on Mulberry St. and those using driveway along side 220 E. Mulberry. At the same time, it would afford St. Croix Lighting visibility to traffic flows on all important streets surrounding the business. We appreciate your careful consideration to this very important issue concerning the success of St. Croix Lighting as a contributing member to Stillwater's economy. 220 E. Mulberry Street, Suite 1 • Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone: (651) 439-1193 • Fax: (651) 439-1346 • PROPOSED SIGN St Cam lichtInQ • Vee+ • 1 • • • Buildings next door to the east on Mulberry St.. They are positioned 8 ft. off street. St. Croix Lighting is 28 ft off street or 20 ft behind direct line from Main St. • • • • R21W R_0W R19W T32N DIN T30N T29N T28N T't7N R2 W R_tW R-OW Vicinity Map 50 100 Scale Feet This drawing is the result of a comp lat on and reproduction of land records as they appear in various Washington County offices The drawing should be used for reference purposes only Washington County is not responsible for any inaccuracies Source Wash ngton County Surveyor's Office Phone (651) 430-6875 Parcel data based on AS400 information current through January 31 2000 Map pnnted March 31 2000 • r t11 0 77 Nl P 4P(1', MMIN-a... ,. t4s-[--,sysFi9+woe. Tsnwar..eftw q r NORTHERN • 7 0 • • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM CASE NO SUP/DR/01-23 Planning Commission Date June 11, 2001 Project Location 402 South Main Street Comprehensive Plan District Central Business District Zoning District CBD Applicants Name Steve Bremer Type of Application Special Use Permit Project Description A Special Use Permit for the addition of six rental units in the existing Joseph Wolf Complex Discussion The request is for a Special Use Permit to construct six additional residential rental units in the Joseph Wolf Complex This would increase the number of residential units to 12 The existing units will be renovated All the units will be located on the second and third floors of the vanous buildings Parking for the residents will be on -site, behind the buildings Parking and pedestnan circulation will stay as existing The addition of the units is one segment in the renewal and renovation of the entire Joseph Wolf Complex Along with the housing units, the proposed renovation will consist of a gourmet coffee shop, a full service restaurant, a tour company — touring the adjoining caves, two retail outlets and two office spaces Conditions of Approval 1 All utilities shall be completely screened from public view 2 The trash enclosure shall be made of a sturdy solid masonry material, with trash receptacles screened from view and compatible with the color and materials of the project 3 No roof equipment shall be visible to the general public 4 All gutters, downspouts, flashings, etc shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent surface 5 All secunty lights on building shall be downlit 6 All changes to the approved Special Use Permit will be reviewed by the Community Development Director 7 Parking shall be assigned and marked for residential units Recommendation Approval as conditioned Findings Special Use Permit The proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the zoning ordinance Attachments Application Form/Letter/Elevation Drawings/Photos/Floor Plans HPC Action 6/4/01 Recommended approval +6-0 with additional conditions of approval 8 Awnings to be considered and approved next time project is reviewed by HPC Half circle awnings are not approved at this time • • • Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No -44'$ O89- PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ACTION REQUESTED Fee �pecial/Conditional Use Permit $501 anance $70/2( _Resubdivision $100 _Subdivision* $100+50/1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500 Zoning Amendment* __.Planning Unit Development * _Certificate of Compliance $300 $500 $70 _Design Review $25 *An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached) The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (i e, photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater A site plan is required with applications Address of Project LAJc) Zoning District 3 �� C pa 64 "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submiffed herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct I further certify 1 will comply with file permit if it is granted and used " PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Description of Project L Assessor's Parcel No 0 S O 3 G D 1 rr '11 (GEO Code) n�V C l Property Owner 1 vt n ►' Pi) Mailing Address LIC) City - State - Zip : � k-\\\ r ' '\• - - ,' Telephone No I - `-119 - 4 6 f3 Slgnaturq Representative.5\-t �e `vc e.e.c Mailing Address)t-)c b&)..s St - City - State - Zip 5r ►M A Telephone No Signature ��- SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) x Land Area Height of Buildings Stories Feet Principal Accessory Total Building floor area P.5-) 3 square feE Existing a5 -13a square feet Proposed -)5-1S square feet Paved Impervious Area square feet No of off-street parking spaces BREMER CONSTRUCTION INC To Stillwater Planning Commission/City Council From Stephen C Bremer - President Bremer Construction, Inc Subject Joseph Wolf Building Restoration and Renewal Date May 25, 2001 The Joseph Wolf Brewery The renovation and renewal of the Joseph Wolf Complex will be the cooperative effort of The Wabasha Street Caves, Down In History Tours and Bremer Construction, Inc All will combine their unique talents and experience to facilitate a major renovation and subsequent management of this complex Nature of Use The Joseph Wolf Building anticipates a unique collaboration of service retail and residential operations The service and retail aspects of the complex will consist of a gourmet coffee shop a full service restaurant, a tour company two retail outlets and two office spaces available for professional services The residential outlook will involve the construction of six new rental units and a total revamp of the six existing rental units Type Of Operation (Business) Operation type pertaining to each venture will be as follows Gourmet Coffee Shop Quality production and friendly service of gourmet coffees and Full Service Restaurant A unique establishment offering premium food and beverage exceptional services associated products choices together with Tour Company A tour company dedicated to the adjoined cave structure and their significant association to the history of the Stillwater community 215 WABASHA STREET SOUTH • ST PAUL MN 55107 1805 • (651) 224 8319 • FAX (651) 224 0059 • • • Retail Outlets The two retail units available within the Joseph Wolf Complex shall operate under one of the quality options currently available which include a Wine and Cheese Store, Specialty Eyewear Store Bakery and/or Flower Shop Professional Service Offices Two offices will be available for professional services allowing for effective assistance to the Stillwater Community Residential Rental Units All existing rental units will be professionally reconstructed to coincide with the construction of new rental units, collectively designed to be architecturally interesting The entire rental facility will compliment the new and appealing facade of the Joseph Wolf Complex Potential Traffic Generation • In general, traffic flow of the related Stillwater region is not expected to be greatly affected However restoration and renewal of the Joseph Wolf Building may potentially increase the Destination Specific Traffic/Travel to the downtown district and its many attractions Parking Locations • Parking locations for the residential units shall be located and contained with in the property limits • Parking for the retail and service sectors will have limited on -site availability However ample Municipal parking is available to patrons two blocks East and West of the Joseph Wolf Complex Benefits of Project g An impressive reconstruction of the building facade shall restore a valuable piece of Stillwater's abundant history The professional attitude towards the project will ensure a product that will enhance the beauty and economic potential for the downtown region • An increase in Destination Specific Traffic/Travel The objective is to provide an attraction to the community and visitors which is also appealing outside of peak tounst times • An increased business core for the downtown economic sector K The Joseph Wolf Complex and its vanous components shall generate many new employment opportunities for the community • Addition of appropriate residential spaces to the downtown area • Increased Sales Tax Revenue for the City of Stillwater BEFORE ; s ph WoI B ever ro ., ,4 402,,Sout Main Street ,j ��- ��Sfillwater �Vlmnesota 550$2' THE BREMERS St Paul, Minnesota Developer May 25 2001 POD WCL ASSOCIATES INC Architecture Interior PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATION - SOUTH MAIN STREET AFTER • • • .07 BEFORE aos Wolf-Brewery J^ 5 r r �w� 402,Sotth`lNMain $,treet , Stillwater, Ivlmnesota155052 �.yw THE BREMERS St Paul, Minnesota Developer May 25 2001 PSI WCL ASSOCIATES INC Architecture Interior PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATION AFTER General Notes 1 The entire architectural modification puts emphasis on the restoration of the design and materials of the original building facades It will remove the present inconsistent elements 2 The exterior building size, height or dimension will not be changed 3 Exterior trash area or mechanical equipments will not be visible from the street 4 Outdoor food service activities (approximately forty seats) will only be available before it gets dark Therefore, no new lighting will be added 5 Landscape will not be changed Potting flowers will be arranged outdoor as needed to complement the outdoor activities in the summer 6 Parking or pedestrian circulations will stay as existing No change will be made 7 All storefront windows are transparent 8 Door and window frames will be wood or bronze -tone aluminum r Jos»r� :wolf-Brever� st�> s,`t v �� 5� -402 SoytnN�ain S,treet� ter; �1lmnesota�5508 `L THE BREMERS St Paul, Minnesota Developer May 25 ?001 dJ WCL ASSOCIATES INC Architecture Interior Proposed awnings will successfully complement the architectural arch shape They will also add shade and color to the building Metal arch railing Stone trim and railing column will match existing stone material Storefront restoration will return the facade to its original character by uncovering existing stonework Red brick will match existing brick on building to south This facade will be restored to its original stone character —Simulated clay tile will be used as cap material for the parapets —Individual signage will be complementary to the overall design No signage will be internally illuminated General Notes 1 The entire architectural modification puts emphasis on the restoration of the design and materials of the original building facades It will remove the present inconsistent elements 2 The exterior building size, height or dimension will not be changed 3 Exterior trash area or mechanical equipments will not be visible from the street 4 Outdoor food service activities (approximately forty seats) will only be available before it gets dark Therefore, no new lighting will be added 5 Landscape will not be changed Potting flowers will be arranged outdoor as needed to complement the outdoor activities in the summer 6 Parking or pedestrian circulations will stay as existing No change will be made 7 All storefront windows are transparent 8 Door and window frames will be wood or bronze -tone aluminum 'Jose ?VolBrewe jp402,Soyth Main Streeter 4 'Sf Iwafer Minnesota55082 THE BREMERS St Paul, Minnesota Developer May 25 2001 r� `J WCL ASSOCIATES INC Architecture Interior Partial existing deteriorating stone wall will be removed New metal arch railing and stone railing column will match those on the South Main Street facade Stone looking stucco will be used on the majority of this facade Stone arch entrance will match those on the South Main Street facade Pedestrian -friendly pavement will serve as the walkway between the apartment entrances and the parking lot Metal arch railing and stone — railing column will match those on the South Main Street facade Awnings will match those on the South Main Street facade Proposed patio will serve for the — private apartment Planters near the apartments will enhance the living quality PICTURES OF • JOSEPH WOLF BREWERY SITE • • Breve „ 02 Soutt Main Street . r —Stillwater; Mmnesotr55082= y THE BREMERS St Paul, Minnesota Developer May 25 2001 r� LJ CL ASSOCIATES INC Architecture Interior PICTURES OF • JOSEPH WOLF BREWERY SITE • • kJ se� hrWolf Brew i' ' 02 South' Main Street�� W, r' ,, , �, .-;4 , . ,---Stillweter, Minnesota 550§2 THE BREMERS St Paul, Minnesota Developer May 25 2001 WCL ASSOCIATES INC Architecture Interior PICTURES OF • SURROUNDING BUILDINGS CL. rt r e7 x ., s f oseerk . ,�o1f Br,. ewer It-;402�SoutJi y1ain Streets '� -Stillwater; JVlmnesota 55082—`'V THE BREMERS St Paul, Minnesota Developer May 25 2001 WCL ASSOCIATES INC Architecture Interior • 'Joseph Wolf Brewery RENOVATION DESCRIPTION AREA 1 RETAIL 1 332 SF 2 RESTAURANT 5 244 SF 3 WINE AND CHEESE SPIRIT 1 244 SF 4 GRUMPY STEVE S COFFEE 1 196 SF 5 CAVES AND RELATED SPACES 6 000 SF 6 OFFICE 2nd Floor 600 SF 7 OFFICE 2nd Floor 1 190 SF 8 APARTMENTS (2) 1 281 SF 9 STUDIO APARTMENT (1) 480 SF 10 ONE BEDROOM APARTMENTS k3) 1 728 SF 11 TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS (3) 2 592 SF 12 LOFT APARTMENT (2) 1 480 SF 13 TWO LEVEL APARTMENT ‘1) 1 365 SF PROJECT TOTAL AREA 25 732 SF First Floor Plan Scale None Mezzanine Area THE BREMERS St Paul Minnesota Joseph Wolf Brewery WCL ASSOCIATES INC Developer Stillwater Minnesota A chttect;,r3 tntenor Joseph Wolf Brewery RENOVATION DESCRIPTION AREA 1 RETAIL 1 332 SF 2 RESTAURANT 5 244 SF 3 WINE AND CHEESE SPIRIT 1 244 SF 4 GRUMPY STEVE S COFFEE 1 196 SF 5 CAVES AND RELATE© SPACES 6 000 SF 6 OFFICE 2nd Floor 600 SF 7 OFFICE 2nd Floor 1 190 SF 8 APARTMENTS (2) 1 281 SF 9 STUDIO APARTMENT (1) 480 SF 10 ONE BEDROOM APARTMENTS (3) 1 728 SF 11 TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS (3) 2 592 SF 12 LOFT APARTMENT (2) 1 480 SF 13 TWO LEVEL APARTMENT (1) 1 365 SF PROJECT TOTAL AREA 25 732 SF THE BREMERS s+ Poul M.nnesota De, J oae 9 First Floor Roof Below Second Floor Plan Scale None Joseph \ \. olf Brewery WCL Assoc ATES iNC Stillwater Minnesota t r,rs Josep Wolf olf Brewery T wt RENOVATION DESCRIPTION AREA 1 RETAIL 1 332 SF 2 RESTAURANT 5 244 SF 3 WINE AND CHEESE SPIRIT 1 244 SF 4 GRUMPY STEVE S COFFEE 1 196 SF 5 CAVES AND RELATED SPACES 6 000 SF 6 OFFICE 2nd Floor 600 SF 7 OFFICE 2nd Floor 1 190 SF 8 APARTMENTS (2) 1 281 SF 9 STUDIO APARTMENT (it 480 SF 10 ONE BEDROOM APARTMENTS (3) 1 728 SF 11 TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS (3) 2 592 SF 12 LOFT APARTMENT (2) 1 480 SF 13 TWO LEVEL APARTMENT (1) 1 365 SF PROJECT TOTAL AREA 25 732 SF First Floor Roof Below Second Floor -Roof Below Third Floor Plan Scale None THE BREMERS St Paul Minnesota Developer Joseph Wolf Brewery WC L ASSOCIATES INC Stillwater, Minnesota Architecture Interiors • • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM CASE NO V/01-24 Planning Commission Date June 11, 2001 Project Location 113 Bnck Street South Comprehensive Plan District Single Family Residential Zoning District RA Applicants Name Jessica and John Pack Type of Application Variance Project Description A Vanance to the side yard setback (10 feet required, 9 feet requested) for the construction of a second story to an existing residence Discussion The request is for a variance to the side yard setback to construct a second floor addition to their existing 1 1/2 story home The existing house is 9 feet from the property line The proposed addition will not alter the existing foundation The 1/2 story will be removed and a full 2nd floor will be added, creating two bedrooms and a bathroom Most of the houses in the neighborhood are 1 to 11/2 story, but the house directly to the south is two full stories Recommendation Approval as conditioned 1 The addition shall be similar in style, color and matenals as the existing residence 2 Drainage shall remain on site 3 All plans shall be approved by the City Engineer and Building Official Conditions of Approval 1 All changes to the approved plan be reviewed by the Community Development Director 2 The architectural style, materials and colors match the existing structure Findings 1 That a hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists In this context, personnel financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance 2 That a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property nghts possessed by other properties in the same distnct and in the same vicinity, and that a vanance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors 3 That the authonzing of the vanance will not be of substantial detnment to adjacent property and not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title or the public interest nor adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan Attachments Application Form/Letter/Photos/Site Plan/Elevation Drawings/Floor Plan/Details • • • Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ACTION REQUESTED Fees Special/Conditional Use Permit 50/20 anance- 0 Resubdivision $100 _Subdivision* $100+50/Ic _Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500 _Zoning Amendment* $300 Planning Unit Development * $500 _Certificate of Compliance $70 ._Design Review $25 *An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached) The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any appl►cat►on All supporting material (► e, photos, sketches, etc) submitted with apphcat►on becomes the property of the City of Stillwater A site plan is required with applications Leoi\ . - LOT O\O D2- act N 1g F c LOT 14 S11�Cl.1i11 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Pc 4? kD R2q 030 , Lo 4 ► L Address of Project \ �`C Assessor's Parcel No (GEO Code) \ �I Zoning District Description of Project C_c z os- a -v %\ .), "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence subm►ffed herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct I further certify 1 will comply with file permit if it is granted and used " Property Owne oh— Mailing Address \\' City - State - Zip A\1\)4 SU$Z Telephone No (obi Signature, lC___—SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) (0C1 x ! 5y Land Area lO, Cc to �{- Height of Buildings Stories Principal Z. Accessory ') f)an Representative Mailing Address City - State - Zip Telephone No Signature Total Building floor area 2C.o60 square fee Existing 1cl 3-2— square feet Feet Proposed —1 \ v square feet \(\ Cu''`"-''`-� Paved Impervious Area WO square feet i" 8 No of off-street parking spaces 2-- • • • Planning Commission City of Stillwater RE request for variance Property 113 Brick Street South, Stillwater Our current home is a 1 ''A story house built in 1950 and moved to Stillwater in 1963 We purchased the home 4 years ago as a HUD home after it had been vacant for 4 years We have been extensively remodeling and restoring the existing interior We are now at the next stage and would like to continue our remodeling by building an addition As we have a growing family we have found the need for more space We love the neighborhood, are committed to the community and enjoy the benefits of living within Stillwater There have been numerous extensive remodeling projects done to many houses in the area and we feel that this neighborhood is appreciating We believe this addition will add to the value of our home as well as further enhancing the neighborhood The plans consist of two parts The first is the removal of the current 'A story and addition of a full 2nd story with attic This addition would be over the original house, not altering the footprint of the foundation This would create 2 bedrooms and a bathroom The second part is an addition of a single level family room at the rear of the home As our backyard is quite large, we maintain ample yard space This will allow our family more space as the existing living room is small This alteration to the rear of the home will also greatly improve the appearance of the house This side is clearly visible from Mrytle as motorists travel west out of town We are seeking a vanance for the 2nd story addition due to the original placement of the home close to the property line on the south side of the property We will not be altering the foundation in any way on that side of the house However, due to our plan to alter the roof line on that side we understand we will need a variance The home to the south of our home is an existing 2 story house The neighbors on both sides of the home have encouraged us in pursuing this remodeling project and have no objections They have been pleased with our efforts to restore the home and are glad to have it occupied after its long period of dereliction Prior to our purchase the home was an eyesore in the neighborhood We hope to make it the jewel We believe the plans we have submitted are keeping in the feel of historic Stillwater and will blend nicely with the nearby homes Thank you for your consideration! John and Jessica Pack /F Yahoo, Maps and Driving Directions Page 1 of 1 • • • Y»IOO! Maps Yi Domains Just 35 bucks! Welcome, Guest User Yahoo! Maps * 113 Bnck Street South, Stillwater, MN 55082 5505 r--- Lookout St Sunny Sbps Ln 0 z ose W Oliv 02000 MapQuestoom Inc 02000 Navgaton Technologies St) 'trig Way ni 0 0 r Yahoo, - Yellow Pages - Hel Powered by Mapquest com (tin Create My Locations - Sign In Save This Address room Gott W M lberry S W M rtleS c 0 0 to vAt yipp- 1114 Zoom In 1 [.._2 ] L3 1 1_41 LU w [j_3 LU Zoom Out Email Map Interactive Map Powered by Mapquest coin (tin) Terris of Use Copynght C2001 NavTech Copynght® 2001 Yahoo! Inc All nghts reserved Pnvacy Policy Terms of Service Help http //maps yahoo com/py/pmap py9Pyt=Tmap&addr=113+Brick+Street+South&csz=Stillwa 5/25/01 mk-)t_Q-D,s ,,-.\o_g c \--A-)‘Asca_ 0---e5vQ•00\ 0 • - C .)( r cr o, co , “11 0) cA0 (3 CP CA 0 A" (22 p r< 206 _,, cid r(c) 'HI 111111111111111111111 0 • 1, • -2 V:SS $44-''o�c�\\ s °S iS !a%. lei q b - lS2. - ISQ) v,\off DODO DODO DODO ❑❑❑❑ DODO ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ CI00 'OCI0 moor meg r • }fs s 11 1 NOLWA313 1i31 0 It NOIlb'A313 11-19IZl IMO I� i • • rnOwaavAMU .0 OL *Zci 6t\`` 0 • ?ji Al 3 .0 VC rwow00/ naN1 .0 OL .0 C u .;IL II 0 n+Owaav faro �� . Al 9 9 If10 0 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 LL J li L 3 i J • • • • NEW WALLS CEMBEIREMINEM RNtl611146 WALLS 1 1 RB1OVE WALL* C 1 14311 DECK RAILING TO MATCH HEW PORCH W NEW 6 TAPPEIRED COLUMNS • 16 0 _ 14 0 KITCHEN 0 trX16TlNG) 21 FAMILY ROOM (NEW ADDITION) VERIFY BEAM ABOVE EXI6TING KITCHEN ENTRANCE LIVING ROOM (EJCI5TING) FY BRG BELOW PO6T TRY TO KEEP IX16TNN6 CEJND A6I6 16 O' 16 TAPPER® COIJAIN6 MAT1ENCE FREE RAIN0 (A) bCIO OF NM. (NEW ADDITIOW FIRST FLOOIR PLAN WALL N ro' (280 8G. FT NEW ADDITION 2 • 0" • • / 12' 194" 2' II&' 9'5' 514" 2' 2" / 1' 2 O"X4'O" SITTING AREA s lb II' 1114" co ELOPE FLOOR IN LINEN. HEADROOM ABOVE STAIR 16 MIN. 6 1/2 WALL 1 I I 1 EXISTING STAIR 11 I 6' 0" SLIDING BEDROOM 11' 9" 4 O"X4'O" STORAGE TRUSSES 24" O G 11' 1114" 18' 09ri" 1ST FLOOR LINE BELOW 3'0"X5'0" 3'O"X5'O" 6' 51s" 30' 0" 4' 21i" 1 1' 1" 11' 9" SECOND FLOOR FLAN / 2 X 3 OVAL WINDOW IN GABLE. (163 SQ FT ) BGAI v 1/A 1-Pf • 11 li _!I R� 310 ��OL-31VTd 4 9'I VKLIR1X3 /m )411113A 9111,9 9 9A 1,9 144 iii lfs o i4g b it 1 8� • f�titttititititiiit�titliititi2iiJlr 'ratsrara*arararsra*a*ara*ara*s*ara*i - WALL SECTION • • 01,1114111 � r • .11 L9 igi j titititititititititititititititit1:� f `41 10=y • • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM CASE NO V/01-25 Planning Commission Date June 11, 2001 Project Location 424 South Seeley Street Comprehensive Plan District Single Family Residential Zoning District RA Applicants Name Traci and Justin O'Brien Type of Application Vanance Project Description A Vanance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 13 feet requested) for the construction of a deck Discussion The applicant is proposing to construct a 13 foot x 21 foot deck located in the back of their home Their home is on a comer lot requiring a setback of 30 feet from both streets The existing house is 17 feet from the street The deck is located off the kitchen Constructing the deck in other locations would create access issues Recommendation Approval as conditioned Conditions of Approval 1 Plans must be approved by Building Official Findings 1 That a hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists In this context, personnel financial difficulties, Toss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance 2 That a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same distnct and in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors 3 That the authorizing of the vanance will not be of substantial detnment to adjacent property and not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title or the public interest nor adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan Attachments Application Form/Site Plan • • • Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ACTION REQUESTED Fees ._Special/Conditional Use Permit $50/20 X Variance 720 _Resubdivision $100 _Subdivision* $100+50/1( _Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500 _Zoning Amendment* Planning Unit Development * _Certificate of Compliance ._Design Review $300 $500 $70 $25 *An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached) The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (► e, photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater A site plan is required with applications PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project (4( S.J2J 5 i- Assessor's Parcel No Zoning District Description of Project (X(!d q (lL k 1 (GEO Code) "1 hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence subm►ffed herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct I further certify I will comply with file permit if it is granted and used " Property Owner 6h11 A -Traci () Bit-exi Representative Mailing Address ciau ¶, S..P�1 St Mailing Address City - State - Zip SA) 11 W Ci l M ��eiZ D City - State - Zip Telephone No � C -1 tO) (atoU 133P Telephone No Signature 0 .r 41- Signature SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) q 0 x I.6O Land Area Height of Buildings Stories Feet Principal Accessory Total Budding floor area square feE Existing square feet Proposed square feet Paved Impervious Area square feet No of off-street parking spaces lei 0 il I's us de arr.' u J 3 g it co 4 5/4 /1 / / -4V�cleic+rc icl O VoJiaic WQe4 1 gECLC• S'r taL4 -1 n d Trac, Q 18n -(4-) (ga u_ E S-eSi., 611111,0M-ex' JjOry 41 1434-50a3 tactWork # Q& U--)3 6 4 Oeck diunemsick5 al f+ long 13 -E'+ cu,d'-e ArvX 02-FF 0M orauid 4' (j • lt Llj 14 42d 2 • 017) q. 60,8> 150 JOHN STREET CONVEYED BOOK 11 MI SC, PG 4 47 10 1 AREA NOT GEOCODED _ 1 O Location Map 2 3 40022) 0 10 10 R_IW T V r1• T .U\ r9' T 8v r-V R.'OW R19W R_ W R_IW R_UW Vuclnity Map C 0 39 Scale in Feet TIM M., ie.. con* and .waves,wIona wow 4nsea as••10.1 Can. eft. Warn ft..,b ONc SON eNmwr Wnn Ca9..Fw Offere 0040 Er. Gas IN.wASCO ..awpw 4 f a • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM CASE NO SUP/DR/91-26 Planning Commission Date June 11, 2001 Project Location 501 North Main Street Comprehensive Plan District Central Business Distnct Zoning District CBD Applicants Name Jeff Wallis Type of Application Special Use Permit Project Description A Special Use Permit for the construction of 29 — 32 condominiums Discussion Residences of all classifications are permitted in the Central Business Zoning Distnct with a Special Use Permit Maximum allowed height of buildings in this area is 4 stories or 50 feet New buildings are required to have a 15 foot front yard setback, 20 foot rear setback and 20 total for two sides (10 feet —10 feet or zero — 20 feet) The site for the proposed condominium is situated in the floodplain district and will need to build within the floodplain regulations They will have to work with the City Engineer to determine the best way to build the structure and accommodate flood protection The applicant is requesting approval of a Special Use Permit for a 29 — 32, 4 story loft condominium project with 5800 sq ft of retail space on the first level The proposed building site is a former gas and service station currently housing a Domino's Pizza The site is 1 44 acres Intenor parking for the residential units is on the main level, behind the retail space City code requires that for 29 units 58 parking spaces be provided Twenty-four outside spaces are provided for the retail use Lighting of the outside parking lot will consist of 30 foot high poles with "shoebox" fixtures "Shoebox' fixtures are specified for wall mounted lights for the building Bulbs will be metal halide Building materials will be face brick in brown and tan colors (primarily brown), with tan (EFIS) trim The entryway will have a 3-foot overhanging canopy The facade of the building concept is designed with vertical columns approximately every 20 feet, with decorative square man made stone caps topping them off The windows are aluminum clad in "Hartford" green with horizontal muttons with clear glass * A sign package for the entire retail space will be required before the spaces are leased out All mechanical equipment will be inside the building, except for the air conditioner generator, which will be installed at the back of the building The Heritage Preservation reviewed the application at their June 4, 2001 meeting and approved it with the conditions below Recommendation Approval as conditioned Conditions of Approval — — — -- 1 Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City Engineer before building permits are issued 2 Work with City Engineer to ensure maximum flood protection 3 All utilities shall be completely screened from public view 4 All landscaping shall be installed before utility release or final project inspection No project shall be phased unless approval is granted by the Planning Commission 5 Continuous concrete curbing shall be installed to separate parking areas from landscape areas 6 Handicapped parking spaces and signage, in compliance with State requirements, shall be shown on building permit plans and installed before final inspection of the project 7 The street address of the building shall be displayed in a location conspicuous from the public street 8 The trash enclosure shall be made of a sturdy solid masonry material, with trash receptacles screened from view and compatible with the color and materials of the project and a detail provided to the Planning Department 9 Fencing, as indicated on the plans, shall protect all trees required to remain on site, or other necessary measures shall be taken to prevent damage during construction activity 10 No roof equipment shall be visible to the general public 11 All gutters, downspouts, flashings, etc shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent surface 12 Construction projects shall conform to the City's Noise ordinance Construction during the dry season shall mitigate excess dust problems 13 A sign permit shall be required for all project signs 14 Sign package to be approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission, including directional signs 15 All security lights on building shall be downlit and a plan submitted to the Planning Department 16 A sign permit is required for signage 17 All exterior modifications to the approved plan are to be reviewed by Community Development Director Findings Special Use Permit • • f The proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detnmental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the zoning ordinance Attachments Application Form/Memo/Elevation Drawings/Photos/Site Plan/Landscape Plan/Lighting Plan HPC Action 6/4/01 Approval +6-0 with following conditions of approval" 18 Lighting plan be reviewed and approved by the HPC 19 Lighting source be sodium not metal halide 20 Consider space in front of building for pedestnans, i e Benches/landscaping 21 Landscape plan should compliment landscaping of neighbors to the north a'rid south • • 4 / 8039?' • Fee; as_Special/Conditional Use Permit $50/2( Vanance $70/2C Resubdlvislon $100 ._Subdivision` _ _ $100+50/I( Comprehensive Plan Amendment' $500 _Zoning Amendment` $300 _Planning Unit Development* $500 Certificate of Compliance $70 .Design Review $25 *An escrow fee Is also required to the costs of attorney and engineering fees (see attached) The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (i e, photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater A site plan is required with applications PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM ACTION REQUESTED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 Address of ProJec D D 2 O 3III ) Assessors Parcel No 7�v„X / 4)7U Zoning Distnc Description of ProJecLij - 3 2 v..1 —aCrE cone) � J P..-,c1 "1 hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submlffed herewith in all respects, to file best oftny knowledge and belief, !rue end correct l further certify I will comply with file per gilt!flt Is granted and used " Property Owner. Mailing Address City - State - Zip Telephone Now Signature Lot Size (dimensions) Land Area rc s Height of Buildins Stories Feet Principal , / - /= Accessory Representative ,1 Malting Address..2! C) �'- a / t- City - State - Zip 54 Y.,_ i i M N Telephone No. / - 67 Signature , SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTI • N Total Building floor area 10 3 a y square fee Existing Mn 65 6 1 square feet Proposed f 7 9 1:1 square feet Paved Impervious /(rea 1 177 square feet No of off-street parking si6aces $ 1 • • R_IW R_OW RI9N R_ W ILIW R_I,W Vicinity Map 0 213 I I Scale In Feet T. T ee^wa ewees aw wwroa raver Saute w..e.a.. rout. Sv...a o... ew, ICI tl^Oa ea. ...swo.r.e a, .ate Wu MOI�. vn me • • • 501 North Main, LLC Luxury Loft Living in Historic Downtown Stillwater 501 North Main, LLC is proposing a 29 — 32 unit luxury loft project in downtown Stillwater The proposed building site is a former gas and service station currently housing Domino's Pizza and automotive service garage The site contains 1 44 acre adjacent to the Stillwater Yacht Club to the East, The Train Depot to the North and Professional Building to the South With views of the St Croix River possible on all three levels, our project hopes to enhance Main Street with a landmark building Our design takes into consideration the histonc nature of downtown Stillwater as well as the dramatic design elements of some of the existing buildings We will also be including approximately 5800 sq ft of specialty retail shops on the street level Despite several environmental and design challenges, our development team is very excited and eager to break ground on this project We look forward to working with the Planning and Economic Development Commission, Heritage Preservation Commission and Stillwater City Council to ensure a successful project tg■fa■ V3p ■ i A•°il!K au. , . Mlle HYllit517T11111.ia ry. ii ! 1lii11J 1111111111I1111111J%D1 . y 11 ittflit/7ii1 i •ir r- — llllltitillt111f111111111n • a ` .....- ,..... . ,,„- i Ile ii!ii mIiI Ililit !4iiE1Ii l .. MN fC I .. _ 'EP ;� 1)DI�IiLiiiilt`' ' r ., lifui11f11Jtlltiti111i1Ji1 :e t 911111111Ut: --.-.. , 3/11Tt iL`tmval r1iY y.PY`D ["1 �Ur � lllf ,� 1Tr••• Air 4 Itr`i1■�■7. 45L1111Bi rile Jim ,lG_ ::in V iir,....1 . ;..,)rluur_,n, p,... - ____.—= :-._ :_____ / ______ . r . rm. . TIP . NM AMMO 9111 l!itir1.1,3 NMI IDYIT1U111111ln[1e19ni uli9llll�1�`Y%�rYruu...S. .inlilmnii'l❑r�•+'�r�"'L.wtm[lI1pJ1111111111' .6 ilil!_Il1i-nitt ifilHri'".. v. r.•..1...i. ' ,1+*e+. 1111t11•91••s7li7)ivi)1,! - .Adair ollF.11lCl.l)111 arv,ell. :ilrsl)=s,l; win s-selnsre�+y"�i- • • ard 0 T D r 0 R fiC 5 tl we LO [TO 36-111 MINN HWY #95 MAIN STREET w w F /WU PURL DEWAL.i4 3 6 36 OS mom M u rn IL ON TER TS ME01.1 Ma. lip Alf VE IJI N ' I UT 41TY EpSEME ND 323 0 /— SITE PLAN - MAIN LEVEL Seal r 20' 0 ROOO S TE DATA t-o ▪ TV Li 0 N w n n 5 S TE AREA — 63 369 S F (1 45 AC ) REOUIRED S TE GREEN AREA — 255i TOTAL S TE GREEN AREA SHOWN — 23 902 S F — 3731 BU D NG FOOT PR NT — 30 324 S F TOTAL CONDOM NIUM UN TS — 29 UN TS TOTAL PARK NG REOU RED 2 5TA 5 PER UN T — 56 STA LS TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED — 59 STALLS MECHAN CAL TO NSTALL FIRE SPR NKLING SYSTEM AVA LABLE RETA L SPACE FOR LEASE — 5106 5 F REQUIRED PARKING FOR RETA L — 5 STALLS / 000 5 F — 25 STALLS PARK NG SHOWN FOR RETAIL — 24 S ALLS NOTE A NEW SURVEY MUST BE DONE TO VERIFY ALL PROPERTY LINES & D MENSIONS NFORMAT ON USED N TH S PROPOSAL ARE FROM A 99 SURVEY AND INFORMAT ON PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF STILLWATER NORTH VICINITY MAP NORTH NORTH MAIN LLC O 501 NORTH MAIN STREET STILLWATEi2 MINNESOTA IN PROGRES& Date BY MAY 26 2001 W4 Date laaued as Contract Document Date REVISIONS Date BY CITY SUBMITTAL SMUCKLER ARCHITECTS ARCHTECTS MD DESIGtERS 7509 WASNGTON AVENE SOUTH EDNA. A4+ESOTA 55439 VOICE (9521.528 1908 FAX W52)820-6007 P1 • • • FtlerAf.1.2,2/ oar ci%LJ BS Alq WEST - FRONT ELEVATION Sc le I/IL 1 0 Ara 1.2tr. lelae . 1111 �I� nn.... u1 I Tri uu.uni�.i�'iiii nu ° "" I....I:::C.i I I'• nLe . I 1 a;...... ..rii tin. 11; ClL1%e.Wa'... a.`YJ - 'TX OK. >O ROC. .o.nv a� err .11-OrDO mw TOP Or .ne. 1.1-000 YV G. .. .. i11 ■■ uu' Ithamalltltl luau _Igawagamrtan,”17M 111111 111 111 Win In Itiw t t .. .. .. ii r .. .. .. :: .. NE :: .. .. .. NE .. :: .. :: TEE .. .. ° 717 .. EAST - REAR ELEVATION S al I/IL 1 0 EXTERIOR MATERIAL SPEC GAP. T SC elW41291.114, 1- LIJ U(Y io zz d 4 • _ I— I— CY t O 0 Z z 0 0 II) L) STILLWATER MINNESOTA IN PROGRESSI Date BY MAY 25 2001 W9 Date lea ed a Co t act Document Date REVISIONS Date BY CITY SUBMITTAL pl SMUCKLER ARCHITECTS ARCHTECTS APD DESIGNERS 7509 WA9AGTON AVENE SOUTH ®e1A 141.1ESOTA 55459 VOICE 16Q) 825-19OA FA7( 16t2) 828-6007 P2 • • • NORTH - SIDE ELEVATION Scale I/IL I 0 TOP OW COOP MO. PI-CMOI IN-OlV IOW OM. ROOD aa.av MCI SOUTH - SIDE ELEVATION Scale I/IL I 0 611 .. .. .. .. BEM MN MN MI MI arwa�ca� eff.V-APRA":-. InNlineI I i1 a Inil Inn 11ni111 .-... � �111/ CON Blinn NIP .I id ... IumlLwu .... IN II NS SI 0=1==== 47=1=ES C 0 I'Y EXTERIOR MATERIAL SPEC AJJ. SC OC co lOcu. o-ort. Cc DO OCK• MOCK ARC OCCA• IMO co TOW doe CO Coo MOO PICO Oa VILA CO co pm ior mu pug Co cacao 14. RA 50I NORTH MAIN LLC 50I NORTH MAIN STREET STILLWATER MINNESOTA IN PROGRESS Date BY MAY 25 2001 WP Date Issued as Co tract Doc ment Date REVISIONS Date BY CITY SUBMITTAL SMUCKLER ARCHTECTS ARCHMDDE9G1ITECTS �HtS 7509 WA91NGTCN /WINE SOl1TH ®NA. n9AFSDTA 55439 VOICE 160 826-1908 FAX 16p1826-6007 P3 • • • o r 2 RS MINN HWY #95 MAIN STREET B 0 38 08 W 323 0 /- 2 BC LANDSCAPE PLAN - MAIN LEVEL S ale I 20 0 NORTH 2 BC \✓ I BB t _ I 1 BM GENERAL NOTES SHO LD A PLANT BE UN*VAI AB E AT THE T M0 OP N8TA LATION AL 5 BST TUT ONS ARE SUBJECT TO THB APPROVAL OP THE LANDSCAPE ARCH TECT AND THE CTY ANY EXISTING VEGHTAT ON TO BB REMOVED ROM THE 8T0 SHAL BH DISPOSED 0 N A MANNER THAT IS APPLICABLE W TH LOCAL CTY AND STATE REOU REMBNTS A L TRHOS SHALL ROCRIVE BAUC0R8 AND MULCH W TH SHREDDED HARDWOOD ND V DUA Y AS PHR P ANT NO DETA AL SHRUB GROUPS SHAL RHCHIVE A CONTINUOUS BBDL NB A MIN 8 PROM TH0 ROOTBALL OP THE PROPOSED PERIMHT L PLANTS O THAT GROUPING PINAL SHAPE OP THE BE DLINBRS ARE TO BE P MAL APPROVED Q BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCH TOOT P ANTE 8HA BE MULCHED AS A CONTINUOUS MASS ALL H DG NG ORDAPPPIA ROVED BE ED WITH A HEAVY DUTY BLACK DAMOND W m 8 3 LC. I MN ROCK OVER AN0BCAPE PARR C SHALL BE APPL ED TO ALL P ANT NG BEDS AND GROUNDCOVER AREAS TO A 2 DEPTH NBTALL 4 5 WOE STRIP OP ROCK 2 DEEP OVER ABRC AROUND THE PRIMETHR OP THE BU LD G N LANDSCAPE AREAS WITHOUT PLANTING BEDS EDGE BTRP AND BEDS COST NUOUS Y WITH HEAVY D TY B ACK DAMOND HDGH OR APPROV BD EQUAL OR BUPP ICK N COLLOR PROV DM CRUSHED OWNER WITOHN ROCK 84MWN P ESLOR POR THEIR APPROVALL R CK ON RIOR BUILD CONSTRUCTOR SPR NG EXCAVATOR AND P ANT NG PRE ERRED ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS INCLUDING ALL P ANTING BEDS AND SODDED AREAS BH4 L HAVE AN IRR GAT ON eYBTEM PBR CTY RHO UIR HMBNTB AND SHALL BE PROV DED BY OTHERS ENT RE 8 TE TO BE SODDED UNLESS CTY APPROVES OTHERW BE AL MATERIA TO COMPLY WITH ANS AMBRCAN STANDARD NURSERY STOCK PROVIDE DUB STANDARD O CARE IN HANDL NO AND INSTALLATION AND PROVIDE ALL NBCfi884RY BRTILI2:HR B ACK DRT AND RB ATHD MATBRA 8 POR A COMP HTB NBTA LAT ON A TRESS TO BH WIRE IE AND STAKE A8 REOU RED OR PROPER SUPPORT LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AND WATER ALL PLANT MATERIALS UNT L ACCEPTED BY OWNER CONTRACTOR SHALL PROV DE A WARRANTY POR MATERIAL REPLACEMENT AND NSTALLATION POR A ONE PUL GROW NG SEASON SYM CITY SIZE COMMON NAME LATIN NAME AP I L B B A STR AN PINE P NUS N GRA RS L 5 B B RED SPLENDOR CRAB MA U8 X HYBRIDS C8 3 B 5 COLORADO SLUE SPRUCE PCEA PUNGENS GLAUCA 88 a 1/2 5 5 / POTTED 8PR NG SNOW CRAB MALUS SPRING SNOW JY 5 IS POTTED JAPANESE SPREADING YEW TAXUS CUBPIDAT4 8 5 8 POTTED BCAND A JUNIPER JU PERUS SCANDA SM 2 2 /2 0 1 B / POTTED B GAR MAPLE ACER SACCHARUM GTD 3 POTTED GOLDEN TWGGED DOGWOOD COR S BTOLON ERA PLAV RAMEA MN 2 1 1/2 0 5 / POTTED NORWAY MAPLE ACER PLAT*NOIDES BB 12 30 POTTED 5 VBR B P ALOBERRY SHEPHERD ARGENTEA LG 3 2 1/2 5 B / POTTED 005055PIRE LINDEN TILIA CORDATA CDH 5 8 POTTED CLAVEY 5 DWARF HONEY SUCKLE ONICERA C AVEY S DWARP F GDP 10 8 POTTED GOLD DROP POTENT A POTENTIL A PRUT COSA NORTH MAIN O Un LU W 501 NORTH MAIN STILLWATER MINNESOTA IN PROGRESS Date BY MAY 25, 2001 WP Date Issued as Cont ct Document Date REVISIONS Date BY CITY SUBMITTAL SMUCKLER ARCHITECTS ARCFfTECTS A5D DEOGN8S 7509 WASMVGTON AVENE SOUTH ®INA. l.VAESOTA 55439 VOICE 1952/828 1908 FAX 19518215-6007 Ll • • MINN HWY #95 MAIN STREET SITE LIGHTING PLAN 5 ale I 20 0 � NORTH GENERAL NOTES A GHT POLE BABES SHALL BE A MNM M 0 30 H GH AND 30 PROM C RB ACB ALL S TB LIGHTING CIRCU TS SHALL BE a AWG A IGHTING SHA BE DESGN BUILD BY B BCTRCAL CONTRACTOR B BCTR CA TRANS ORMER SHA L BE OCATED NBIDE THE GARAGE A D MOUNTED OP THE GROUND TO MEET FLOOD PLAIN INSTALLAT ON REQUIREMENTS LIGHTING LEGEND PCX TYPE A O TYPE AA fl TYPE Al TYPE B a TYPE B 0DO TYPE B X X OOT CANDLE (WAL MOUNTED 2 ABOVE GRADE 15 WATT METAL HA IDE W DE PATTERN TYPE III DST WAL MOUNTED) 2 ABOVE GRADE 00 WATT METAL HAL DE ORWARD TROW TYPE V 015T WAL MOUNTED) a ABOVE GRADE 60 WATT META HAL DE FORWARD TROW TYPE IV DST (ONE HEAD) 5 ABOVE GRADE 115 WATT METAL HALIDE FORWARD TROW TYPE IV DIST (TWO HEAD 6 ABOVE GRADE 2 5 WATT META HALDE FORWARD TROW TYPE IV DIST (ONE HEAD) 4D 15 WATTT BMETTA D MAL DE WIDE PATTERN TYPE III DST POLE L GHT WA L MOUNTED IGHT NORTH MAIN LLC 0 501 NORTH MAIN STREET STILLWATER MINNESOTA IN PROGRESS Date BY MAY 2S 2001 WP Date Issued as Contract Document Date REVISIONS Date BY CITY SUBMITTAL SMUCKLER ARCHITECTS ARCHTECTS AND DESK-,NH25 7509 WASHN3TON AVB4E SOUTH EDINA MMESDTA 55439 VOICE 1952) 828-1906 FA% 1952) 628-6007 SL1 • • • Memorandum To Plannmg Comrmssion From Steve Russell, Commumty Development Director Date 6-7-01 p/ Subject Zomng Text Amendment Establishing PWF, Public Works Facihty District (ZAT/01-01) Discussion This zoning text amendment establishes a new Public Works Facility Zomng Distnct, PWF, specifically for the Public Works Facility Site The district is similar to the Campus Research and Development District, CRD, established for the TH36 Frontage Area Performance standards and a master plan, planned umt development process are required as a part of development review Besides the PWF Distnct regulations, the existing City zoning ordinance regulation for wetland drainage, grading/erosion control would apply to any development Recommendation Approval for new Public Works Facility Zomng District Attachments Public Works Facility Zoning Regulations • • • Memorandum To Planning Commission From Steve Russell, Community Development Director i Date 6-7-01 Subject Comprehensive Plan Amendment Changing Land Use Designation of 15-acre site from Single Family Attached to Public Works Facility Discussion The Comprehensive Plan designates the site located South of Boutwell Road and East of Manning Avenue Attached Single Family Residential (see map) Based on that designation, the site could accommodate 50-75 townhouse units The proposal is to change the proposed land use to Public Works Facility to allow the development of the City of Stillwater Public Works Facility (The Planning Commission, Joint Board and City Council held a senes of public meetings in 2000 to determine the sites appropnateness for such a facility A concept plan resulted from that study along with City Council direction to purchase the 15-acre site ) The proposed land use can be accommodated on the site Public services are being provided to the area with Phase II, Settlers Glen Development Boutwell Road can accommodate the traffic but will need improvement with Phase II expansion area development The City of Stillwater has annexed entire road and plans to make future improvements The 15-acre proposed public facility site is surrounded by existing residences to the South and West and Phase II Settlers Glen to the North Special facility design, buffenng development and landscaping can mitigate the public facility visual impact from the adjacent use (See Performance Standards in Public Works Facility Ordinance, ZAT/01-01) Recommendation Approval (Resolution) Finally, The proposed use is consistent with the Planning pnnciples and the Goal and Objective of the Comprehensive Plan Attachments Proposed Land Use Map • .)7_12 -7,1.3711 aS viAb'.3st. Inkb Location Map wne t 4 an. Bou • uoavI One t VA 3Sada0 0/-Vd-7 ��9y� ,213 dwc39 R2IW R20W Rt9W R22W 9.2IW R20W Vicinity Map 0 462 Scale in Feet 1M OnMObnblaa .paon nl a, a11ndnembaa tM2 ao.an—WM�ACl. rase ni. a^eieWMtl bn is OWaa Col` wate�en ComtYb not Iapamlb M M moinwo Reno (I 1ICWISSW �.a dab on. Inmant.. W 2� Zoning Ordinance Public Works Facility District, PWFD The PWFD, Public Works Facility District shall be regulated as follows 1 Purpose The purpose of the PWFD is to allow Public Works Facility uses consist with quality design and environmental standards 2 Planned Umt Development Permit required No building, structure, land or premises in the PWFD may be used and no buildmg or structure may be constructed except those allowed with a Planned Umt Development, PUD, permit a Public Work Facility including office and meetmg space b Any other use or service estabhshment determined by the planning commission to be of the same general character as the above use and will not impair the present or future character of the adjacent properties 3 Height and Area Regulations The maximum height of buildings or structures and minimum dimensions of lots and yard setbacks in the PWFD are as follows a Maximum height of all structures 45 feet b Minimum setbacks i All building or structures must be set back a minimum of 50 feet from any public nght-of-way ii All buildings must be set back a mimmum of 30 feet from any property line other than the street nght-of-ways in All buildings or structures must be set back a minimum of 75 feet from the property line of any residential zoned or designated property iv All parking must be set back to a minimum of 20 feet from any of the property lines v Parking, dnveways or outside storage areas shall be set back a minimum of 30 feet from the property line of any residentially zoned property 4 Parking and Loading a Adequate parking shall be provided for employees and visitors The number of spaces shall be determined for current and future possible expanded use at time of PUD review b No portion of parking or loading space, including maneuvenng area except for necessary drives may be 30 feet from public nght-of-way c Parking lots and drives may be shared with adjacent park areas 5 Developmental Performance Standards a Mimmum parcel size shall be 5 acres b Operations to a maximum extent shall be conducted within a fully enclosed building c Any matenal stored outside shall be buffered and visually screened from adjacent residential properties Using fencing, landscaping or earthen berms Outside storage areas and screening shall be specifically shown in PUD Master Plan d No use may produce or emit from a vent, stack, chimney or combustion process any smoke darker than Rmglemann No 1, except that smoke darker than Rmglemann No 2 is permissible for a duration of not more than four minutes dunng any eight -hour penod if the source of the emission is not located witlun 250 feet of residentially zoned property f e Noise levels may not exceed 80dB(A) at repeated intervals or for a sustained length of time measured at any point along the property line f No activity is permitted that creates any electrical disturbance that adversely affects any operations or equipment other than those of the creator of the disturbance or which otherwise causes, creates or contributes to the interference with electronic signals (including television and radio broadcasting transmissions) to the extent that the operation of any equipment not owned by the creator of the disturbance is adversely affected g The muumum landscaped open space ratio for the PWFD distnct will be 30 percent landscape, 60 percent land coverage h No loading dock may face any street unless a screening plan therefore is approved as part of final plan approval i A lighting plan showing fixture type location, height and intensity of hghtmg shall be submitted for review as part of the PUD application The light source shall not be seen from adjacent properties and the intensity of lighting shall be the minimum for the intended purpose 6 Design Permit A design review permit is required for all PWF District uses according to the design review standards of this section (Ord No 828, 9-13-96) • • • • • Memorandum To Planning Commission From Steve Russell, Community Development Director V Date 6-7-01 Subject Zoning Map Amendment Rezomng 15-acres of land located South of Boutwell and East of Manning Avenue Public Works Facility, PWF, from Agncultural Preserve, AP (ZAM/01-01) Discussion The Amendment is to change the designation of the 15-acre site from Agricultural Preservation to Public Works Facility The site has recently been annexed into the City and is currently zoned Agricultural Preservation as a holding zone The amendment to Public Work Facility is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as amended (CPP/01-01) Recommendation Approval Attachments Zoning Amendment Map 4-14/1 5c( Rtnitrtiv& p/49fitzia=-Aibficipopti • h WSW LIW L'OW Vdndy Map 0 462 Scale in Feet TM steno a Me roue Of wnVeeben me r.peeOlmm dime reveal es Mee Mn m anew wwoven Csfl, me.. The *amp dame be teed bnbrwo odpa...m+p w..a.gm Comely ad ...on* bern ..m,..... eatee. wgancadplsd.o .0me. par 1. 71•70ai10 pdol and mend Pewee 3 lap /1 r • • • • Memorandum To Planning Commission From Steve Russell, Community Development Director Date 6-7-01 Subject Planned Unit Development Review for 40,000 sq/ft Public Works Facility and Park with Shared Parking PUD/01-29 Discussion The application is a PUD permit for the development of a 15-acre site, into a public works facility and park A tributary to Brown's Creek runs along the southern boundary of the site Approximately 1/3 of the 15-acres is wetland and not developed Residential uses in Spnng Creek Subdivision to the south and a residence directly to the west, boarder the site A parcel owned by Stillwater Township dedicated for park use, is located along Boutwell Road directly east of the development site Boutwell Road provides site access off of Manning Avenue, a primary artenal road (See attached site map) Dunng summer/fall 2000, a site study was conducted by the City to evaluate the feasibility of the site for a public works facility Neighborhood meetings were held The Planmng Commission, Joint Board and City Council participated in the feasibility study The site analysis map provides a visual review of site and surrounding area conditions and a context for site development After a detailed site analysis including a wetland delineation and natural resource inventory, a site plan was developed for the Public Works Facility/neighborhood park (See site plan map) Table 1 lists the various components to the site plan with square footage With minor adjustments for public comments and space needs, the proposal before the Planning Commission is the same as the one resulting from the 2000 study Areas of special concern are site access, parking, outside storage buffer/screening and relationship to park use (The site and building design is reminiscent of a rural farmstead ) Dnveway access to the site is provided in two locations off of Boutwell Shared facility/park use is shown to the east while the west access is for service only The Public Works building is positioned to the front of the lot to block views of the work area and take advantage of the southern exposure The garage doors open to the mtenor of the site An outside storage area is positioned to the South of the main building area The storage area is screened by landscaping, a nursery and fencing A salt storage building is shown m the courtyard area of the main public works building A ball field is located east of the Public Works site, shared parking is provided A possible community meeting room in the Public Works Facility uses the shared parking lots Storm water infiltration areas separate the development site from the Spnng Creek wetland area A review of the project with the new Public Works Facility ordinances indicate lot area, setback, lot coverage and height limits are met The master plan does not include detail on storm water management, site lighting, mechanical equipment location, landscape plan detail and park improvements To accomplish the park improvements, cooperation with Stillwater Township may be necessary The areas not covered by the plan can be addressed by condition of approval and additional review by the Planning Commission when the details are available In addition to Planning Commission review, the project requires separate design review Recommendation Approval Funding The development is consistent with the revised comprehensive plan and PWFD zomng requirements Conditions of Approval 1 A lighting plan shall be submitted showing fixture design, locations, and illummation No light source shall be visible from an off site location 2 A grading/drainage/erosion control plan shall be submitted for review by the City Engineer and Brown's Creek Watershed Distnct 3 Any site or park signage shall be low profile and consistent with the rural character of the area 4 A detailed landscape plan showing plant type, size and planting spacing shall be provided for City approval before a building permit is issued All landscaping shall be installed as soon as possible but in no case more the 6 months after building occupancy 5 A design review permit shall be obtained from the City Design Review Committee 6 Park improvements shall be made with project construction 7 The performance standards of the PWF Distract regarding noise and electrical disturbance shall be met • a >_ >0. S.41<<"s 7"asc-s- SPPGCREEK lt Ii 1 f sPREx �� e i sPRI4 2 - TM VIM= MOM Location Map OVA von amoe STS11atu BourviELL 4 1 BOtnyiEll VA CON VAU .0= 1 R2IW RIOW !ROW Rl27p R:IW R2OW Vanity Map 0 462 Scale in Feet TbMbbbpb pa nue01 wmOLOm m10roomexamo WV ma. es "my iWln vn Wa5mpme County M. The mmmW tlmjd 01 ma b m5MH woe.. oNy Wwmgtm Cwtlyb not o..paoAN b wry emm..m.. 80i.00 Ws04V0mlC01.4raae.WyaO5O. Pnmmp 7) 3040 PacMab word 0.0411 Maya 2001 Archl Inc www SALAarc com MINNEAPOLIS MN 43 Main Street SE Suite 410 55414 Tel (612) 379 3037 Fax (612) 379 0001 Principals Timothy Fuller Joseph G Metzler Eric Odor Associate Marcelo Valdes la htic. / SQUARE FOOTAGE BREAKDOWN Stillwater Public Works Facility 8 Jun 01 1995 Study 5/30/01 DEPT FUNCTION EXISTING SQ FT DESIGN PARKS Equip Repair/Storage 0 3,000 3 044 PUBUC WORKS Mechanics Office 0 120 96 Machine Shop 144 700-1,000 1,428 Parts/Tool Storage 144 200 120 Sign Shop 240 400 456 Vehicle Maintenance 1,100 2,400 2,580 Vehicle Garage 5,130 14,400 22,446 Wash Bay* 600 800 Oil Storage 1 98 Hazardous Material 308 Misc Storage/Mezzanine 1500 1296 MISC./SUPPORT Offices 0 320 310 File/Map/Reception 0 140 562 Conference 0 336 Foremen/Comp /Time 352 LUNCH/KIT Lunch/kit /conference 240 440 600 LOCKER ROOMS Male 0 500 504 Female 0 300 332 TOTALS 6,998 24,320 35,768 EXCELSIOR, MN GROSS MAIN LEVEL SQUARE FOOTAGE 31,616 38,015 440 2nd Street 55331 Tel (952) 380 4817 2nd level Mechanical 1 100 Fax (952) 380 4818 Principal FUTURE Second Level Unfinished 4 214 DaleMulfinger Third Level Unfinished 704 Associate Paul Hannan SITE AREAS Salt/Sand Facility Bldg 2 500 4,000 Parking 30 cars plus 10 000 15 000 STILLWATER, MN Impound Lot 24 cars* 7000 7700 904 South 4th Street Material Storage Yard 43 560 50 800 55082 Salt Sand Mixing Area 10 000 18 200 Tel (651) 351 0961 Fax (651) 351 7327 * Indicates adjustment to 1995 program in 2000 Principals Wayne Branum Kelly R Davis Katherine A Hillbrand Michaela Mahady es • • • • • • 1 r A /it IAVf rn l) 10.4(R ( oh or TO _ 0_ TW XISTING WINDROW , _ , WET MEADOW Iwater Fn1,ru,cr rrr. 1) prrrlruun / • FARM FIELDS `_, LQ' VIEWS &P /5/4c, h%t9 it T 14. 8/ �, .A_^ .- 1 , Ay 1 , Tsr ® -� 11 1 \ --' - ----4 --r WEST MEADOW 1_ 1. — t--e, /• 411:r. .....L=---;1; ifs ^�- -- ,,„- =- --�_ _� � �1, = -- — '_ i r P2 N^ C1t(FK • t _ , _ - ,.. _ .._ . . . . . . ,� =--- --6- , / - - • VIEWS , - - 0 .0* i, rG/, (r r rt pjr \\ Ch7Y rlrin STILLWATER PUBLIC WORKS & BOUTWELL PARK SITE ANALYSIS "tT Fr+F rfi � a r Vrtrw-PINT Rrslnrnrr E 8urrEu_uNAk o a EXISTING WINDROW; : 1 ECIJ I, 11 s• TOR v,l / 0KFR coen + stumpf T o s s o c 1 0 1 e s nc J op u 1 I ct E c q p o n g 00 st o c c oil- s Ie / 10 anal m nosota 55 01 t 1612 341 8070 10:x612 339 5407 • BOUTWELL R C. I of '► q/A' 4 ( iI% of • NORTH d 0 SERVICE ENTRANCE IMPOUND LOT PARK ENTRANCE RESTOREDYEADOW Qs3� STILLWATER PUBUC WORKS -' - FFE 895,0 BITUMINOUS SANDISALT F E BONEYARD eir u) r Ain* d Of; ' _ +r 4�yNURSERL'k �w. fvivttl; y►uikea • t71Y•s A.rlitvPwr7/ ttlra C:' PARKING C 1 VE���� GEETATIVE BUFFET{ .re�R� J 0. e e Q rc"1% 4 OVERFLOW PARKING PICNIC AREA JE 11403.61i'SDI►2 PLAYFIELD �"` ti. „� ' C troy.„ / GETATIWEBUFFER 5. �� +++... .......-.1,.,„„..1� ^ - ^ _ r/ 1 j''VVt tt y a+7.♦ t 1 1 y PROPERTY BOUNDARY w�LAND▪ `_ AAANAGEDWET PRAIRIE / / A'DARy _ 4i ec. de ff� WINDROW ✓ i INFILTRATION WINDROW RESTORED MEADOW Asn VEGETATIVE INFILTRATION BUFFER El MOWN AREA etc. MOWN PATH 4 3 it.. a. -` c — '_ E k - r a o^ STILLWATER PUBLIC WORKS & BOUTWELL PARK PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ¢ 2-0I I 0 0 0 A4�h E BOARDWALK 47PROPERTY BOUNDARY i a: �p0 ?..er3 / - AAANAZbED LOW GRASS PRAIRIE ♦ CET `ETERY i Vicif -- PICNIC AREA coen + stumpf c s; o O f P I n I lI C q I0, I 7 0 .1 11) +8617311 E070 4m6123,95907 t+% �j T t✓ L- V A T I o • eauvri E wma: �N�IN� mnNll-l�� N o r- -I- t r i= V v ec -r I , N • 5 31 oI SELO IMULFINGER SUSANKA.I MA11ADV PARTNERS .2 A hll t 1 MINNEAPOLIS 43 Mam Street SE /410 MNnneap0ll& MN 55414 TEL (612) 379 3037 FAX. (612) 379-0001 STILLWATER 904 South Fourth Street Saltwater MN 55082 TEL (651) 351-0961 FAX. (651) 351 7327 WwwSALAarc corn nom*carom toWummawan leelo toeeamnti news MAWS.. ea LW aFdei mqW abn we:mi k , BALAAntiada.Eo Project Number Project Architect Drawn By Date of Issue 8-01 Sheet No Alh S,flLfl 1 Lt Nit 11; I1I r 111111.;) Ilwe. 1:1t w h r f✓ r, v u y o 14 T 14 V. L. V r I v IV 1 I 1„7„Ir I l 1 'gill, II _a1Jl j. 11.111ee1111 11 .(, ), I Ili LA- e )I DA� I 1' 9ij3)/o r MU/FINGER SUSANKA MAFIADY PARTNE A hl , MINNEAPOLIS 43 Main Sheet SE 1410 Minneapolis, MN 55414 • TEL (612) 379-3037 FAX (612) 379-0001 STILLWATER 904 South Fourth Street St llwater MN 55052 TEL (651) 351-0961 FAX. (651) 351 7327 www SALAarc com C LLB • Cr) Tr mnmob w I nuedna d,a,c. W n n th IAA* Ire PI VAV at 9NAAMYelA to u mQpecan rowans allan sweet tel wANwwn nr Project Number Project Architect Drawn By Date of Issue 6- $ 01 Sheet No • • • • 3 r r i I T z O 0 �� o QO N 0 w < 'a O a f1 D 'a o a C Ococr 7. 3 Eft! ail 3 01 I I I ' I 1 F \ro Ic •A\ \ V�- L — • it STILLWATER PUBLIC WORKS BOUTWELL ROAD, STILLWATER -r44II-p ILi:V PL/4cN JELEtNAILIGAL. - Mfr/2-2 k1.LI Ng sra►-t.� 1'�� F{p�111e ti gc*AN1 aMO, pi 11t1 rE (NNPINISHCP) r PIMPS 5 v 0 u ' V E. V 1< 1_, P t. A 14 4 Imo 3v 6 s o I �1i.RTa• SOLO MULFINGER, SUSANRA, MAHADY PARTNERS nc h1 1 MINNEAPOLIS 43 Mal Street SE 1410 Minn po5s, MN 55414 TEL (612) 379 3037 FAX. (612) 379-0001 STILLWATER 904 South Fourth Street Sullwate; MN 55082 TEL (651) 351-0961 FAX. (651) 351 7327 www SALAarc com Thrsedoesrenha ISOaeAHa MVO atlas am tenth M Papery a SIW M.02hIre apaGAas remewun sword km Project Number Project Architect Drawn By Date of Issue C-8-OI Sheet No • • • Memorandum To Plannmg Commission From Steve Russell, Community Development Director Date 6-7-01 Subject TH36 Comdor Management Plan Discussion The TH36 Comdor Management plan is presented for planning commission review, comment and recommendation to the City Council Consideration of the plan is a pubic hearmg so Stillwater residents, mterested in the plan, may make comments (See letter from Jeanne Anderson) The City Council is being asked by MnDot to pass a resolution adopting the plan The City Council is scheduled to consider the plan and any Planning Commission comments or recommendations at their meeting of 7-17-01 City planning staff has represented the City on the TEC, Technical Evaluation Committee A draft plan was previously presented to the City Council on 2-6-01 resulting in the attached letter of comment, which was submitted to MnDot's consultant The comdor plan has changed significantly since the February City review In February, Greeley was identified as the interchange location for the ultimate interchange improvement to TH36 Now Osgood and Washington are identified as the interchange locations if a new St Croix nver Bndge is constructed If a new bndge is not constructed, the three intersections Washington, Greeley and Osgood will remain To further define and look more closely at the impacts of the TH36 comdor plans, a follow-up Interregional Comdor Partnerslup Planning Study has been proposed by MnDot A letter descnbing the scope of the study is attached In that study, the specific Stillwater traffic impacts would be more specifically identified and considered The proposed outcome of that study would be to amend the City Comprehensive Plan to accommodate the plan For background, enclosed is Chapter IV, Transportation, from the City Comprehensive Plan The road clanfication map shows the major road/streets and traffic count for 1992 An updated 2000 traffic count map is enclosed As you will note County Road 5, Greeley and Osgood are all collector streets providing for through traffic movement A new bridge is the only improvement that could significantly reduce cut through traffic on those streets Without additional information on the impacts of the comdor plan and hybred alternatives on the City of Stillwater it is difficult to recommend for or against the comdor plan Additional information resulting from the IRC Partnership Study will assist m consideration of the plan or plan alternatives (Maybe by then a bndge decision will have been made ) Action Recommended Receive presentation, hear public comments and make recommendation regarding plan approval to the City Council Attachments TH 36 Comdor Plan Transportation Section, City of Stillwater Comprehensive Plan • • • • • City of Stillwater Comprehensive Plan December 12 1995 Transportation Planning The existing transportation system is closely linked to historical development patterns of the city Land use planning and transportation planning should be carried out at the same time so that the road systems are designed to accommodate the number and type of trips generated from development This was not done when the original city was laid out Problems arise when the road system can not handle the travel demands being placed on them Stillwater has an existing road network that carries a varying numbers of vehicles for different reasons A purpose of this plan is to recognize and correct, to the extent possible, conflicts between land use and traffic and plan for future needs based on local and regional demand Transportation Goals Goal 1 Make it easy and convenient to travel in and around Stillwater, tie allowable new development to the capacity of roadways, prevent intrusion of non-residential traffic in neighborhoods when possible and develop a comprehensive sidewalk, trail and bikeway system Goals 2 Develop a coordinated transportation system that provides for local as well as area -wide traffic Goal 3 Provide efficient and environmentally sound transportation facilities consisting of roads, bikeways, transit lines and pedestrian paths Goal 4 Support construction of the new interstate bridge and TH 36 corridor improvements to provide for regional traffic demands and to relieve cut through traffic on residential areas Goal 5 Develop and locate new roads sensitive to historic structures and sites and natural features Goal 6 Protect residential areas from non- residential traffic Street Functional Classification The Stillwater road system can be defined in terms of a functional hierarchy that takes into account the type of trip being made and the roadways relationship to the adjacent land uses The functional classification for Stillwater roads are mapped and described below Principal arterials are major roadways such as Interstate 94 or TH 36 The primary function of these roads is to provide through movement of regional traffic Minor Arterials connect cities and towns to rural areas and other cities and towns TH 95 and 96 fit this category Collectors are streets that connect neighborhoods or a neighborhood to a business district Many of the business streets in Stillwater are collectors Collector streets include South Third and Fourth Streets, Chestnut, Myrtle (County 12), Greeley, Owens Olive (County 5) Pine, Olive and McKusick (CR 64) According to resident opinion surveys, traffic on residential collector streets is a primary neighborhood concern because the traffic is in conflict with neighborhood residential qualities The Metropolitan Council has classifications of principal arterials and "A" minor arterials, based on metropolitan -wide review "A" Minor arterials are further classified as augmenter, reliever, expander and connector In the Stillwater area, the following roadways are classified 4-1 t1iw.ater COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP J JLWIWJIUII (/�.1111p IJJLW 4200 N uxs —1 MCKUSICK RD mumpammagausg 1250 _1 —1 Ems II - =I IMMR - _ - _ -ME▪ I MEM - G N OR — o _ 9 00•11 or SW005BAAJ 5 Insight Mapping 6c Demographics, Inc, llr�l`e11+2 400 ill Eli elloelee 1 e►111111111111 ;R'I'gg __�llllj v 630 !Alei 11111144E al LI1. liilii tt'rmi ii■riintA� Ala (.7I�1 i . swxr 0,500 ill • r 1 v 1 0 )8000° 11/9195 N 2 25,500 HWY 36 15,000 6,5007 N (,000 moo: - i sh o o o vilw 21,500 • ROAD CLASSIFICATIONS - DAILY TRIP TRAFFIC COUNTS Est 1992 ADT (Est DAILY TRIPS) o PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 1111111111 MINOR ARTERIAL ('A' MINOR ARTERIAL - CONNECTOR) COLLECTORS (LOCAL DEFINITIONS) ACCESS FUNCTION Unres/nuad 43 a° v� 0 a%.3 VI hVI qi V O 0 \ C)OT- Comp/elej access control No Through traffic / NN increasing propor/ion of hrough traffic Increasing speed MOVEMENT FUNCTION FxP No %co/ lroffic • • • Principal Arterial Truck Highway 36 "A" Minor Arterial County Road 15 Truck Highway 95 Truck Highway 96 "A" Minor Arterial - Expander County Road 12 (Myrtle Street ) from Owens Street west County Road 5 (Owens Street, Olive Street, Stillwater Road) County Road 23 (Third Street, Orleans Street, Fourth Avenue, Beach Road) County Road 67 (Fourth Street, Orleans Street) County Road 66 (Greeley Street from Lily Lake south) Local streets primarily provide access to residences Local streets connect to collector and minor arterials for movement through an area The graph on the following page shows the relations between traffic movement, function and access to property for each classification of street Access will be restricted on higher classifications consistent with Washington County and Metropolitan Council guidelines Each street classification also has different physical characteristics (i e , right of way width, speed limit and carrying capacity) The table below descnbes those capacities and characters Street Characteristics Row Principal Arterial 300 ft Minor Arterial 100-300 ft Collector 60-150 ft Speed Vehicles Camed 1,000s 45-55 15-100 ADT' 40-50 5-30 ADT 30-45 1-15 ADT Local Streets 50-80 ft 30 max <2 ADT 'Average Daily Traffic • Existing 1992 traffic volumes measured in Average Daily Traffic on major Stillwater streets are shown on the Traffic Volume Map Examples of the street classifications in Stillwater and 1992 traffic volumes include Principal Arterial - Highway 36 at Washington Ave - 25,000 ADT - Highway 36 bridge at St Croix River -15,000 ADT - Main Street south of Nelson Street -16,500 ADT Minor Arterial - Chestnut Street west of Main Street - 5100 ADT - Fourth Street south of Orleans Street - 7500 ADT - Third Street south of Chestnut Street - 6400 ADT - Osgood Avenue north of Highway 36- 10,006 ADT - Greeley Street north of Highway 36 - 9500 ADT - Olive Street west of Owens Street - 7100 ADT - Owens Street north of Myrtle Street - 9800 ADT - Myrtle Street west of Owens Street - 5600 ADT - County Road 5 north of Orleans Street - 10,000 ADT - McKusick Road at Oak Glen - 1300 ADT Collector - Pine Street - 3500 ADT The traffic volumes currently fall within the ADT range for classifications in the above table However, congestion does occur, due to daily and seasonal traffic volume fluctuation Much of the congestion within Stillwater is directly related to the St Croix River bridge location in the downtown The construction of the new river bridge will significantly change traffic patterns and reduce congestion levels Much of this Ark documented in MnDOT studies and analyses 4-2 • • • Stillwater's Roadway System The City of Stillwater has a number of major roads and streets that make up the backbone road system These roads are under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), Washington County or the City of Stillwater Coordination of transportation planning between MnDOT, Washington County and the City of Stillwater is critical to the successful operation of the road system A number of traffic studies have affected the Stillwater Transportation Plan MnDOT has provided detailed traffic analyses and forecasts (year 2017) in conjunction with the new nver crossing Stillwater, Oak Park Heights, Washington County and MnDOT cooperated on a sturdy and forecast of traffic along TH 36 and the frontage roads Washington County is currently completing a comprehensive plan and has forecasted traffic as part of the plan The City of Stillwater has forecasted traffic from several developments as part of the analysis of the development plan The traffic volume forecasts in this plan are based on the several sources and reconciled with each other Highway 36 serves as a metropolitan area principal artenal carrying traffic into and through the metropolitan area It provides a St Croix River crossing and is one of only three connections to Wisconsin from the metropolitan area (others are at Prescott and Hudson) For Stillwater planning purposes TH 36 can be divided into three segments the St Croix River crossing and the TH 95 interchange, the section from TH 95 to TH 5, and the section from TH 5 west to CR 15 and Interstate 694 beyond The need for a new river crossing has been clearly identified in many planning documents and studies The TH 36 bridge has the third highest rating for new bridge construction in the Metropolitan Council River Crossing Study This transportation plan is based on the assumption that the bridge will be constructed in the planning period Bndge plans are now being prepared and the bridge is currently scheduled to begin construction in 1997 and be completed by 2000 The new bridge will replace the existing route through the downtown The existing route experiences major congestion because of conflicts with local traffic, pedestrians and narrow streets It is anticipated by MnDOT that a new river crossing bndge would carry a volume of 28,000 ADT by the year 2017 This is compared to a 1992 volume of 15,000 ADT on the existing bridge Even with the new bridge, the existing lift bridge is projected to carry 12,000 ADTs by the year 2017 These volumes show the significant amount of projected future interstate traffic in the Stillwater area TH 36 from the TH 95 interchange to TH 5 is currently relatively congested in peak hours and carries a heavy volume of both local and through traffic Current traffic volume is 25,500 ADT west of Washington Avenue Mn/DOT forecasts a volume of over 62,000 ADT by 2017 Mn/DOT anticipates that the three existing signalized intersections at Osgood Avenue, Greeley Street and Washington Avenue will remain in place for the foreseeable future There is concern that with the high traffic volume, TH 36 will eventually become congested resulting in traffic again using residential collector and local streets TH 36 from TH 5 to CR 15 and beyond the planning area was recently studied by Mn/DOT, Washington County and communities in a TH 36 access study The goal was to identify major highway access points from Stillwater to Maplewood Based on the study, MnDOT is committed to future full interchanges on TH 36 at TH 5 and at CR 15 In the interim, Mn/DOT and Washington County have installed a traffic signal at the CR 15 intersection County Road 15 (Manning Avenue), a minor arterial, is the second major roadway serving the Stillwater area The road is shown as a new 4-3 Washington Parkway in the Washington County Comprehensive Plan A new CR 15 road segment between TH 36 and TH 5 is planned to be constructed to provide a major north -south through route from Forest Lake to TH 61 just north of Hastings CR 15 also collects local traffic and distributes it to major east -west routes As an example, traffic may enter CR 15 at TH 96 and travel only a few miles south until exiting to go west or east on TH 36 Other traffic might utilize CR 15 between TH 5 or Interstate 94 It is likely that in the future there will be more north -south regional traffic using CR 15 as compared to existing routes closer to the metropolitan area Because of the volumes and the nature of traffic, access to CR 15 will be limited It is anticipated that there will be traffic signals at CR 15 at County Road 12 and at Highway 96 Another signalized access points may be McKusick Road depending on need according to the Washington County transportation plan Highway 95 is also classified minor arterial It is a north -south route following the St Croix River It serves primarily as a route for local or area traffic and some through traffic, primarily of recreational nature Future volumes range from 8,500 ADT north of TH 96 to 17,000 ADT north of Myrtle Street and 35,000 ADT north of the new bridge Primary restraints to traffic exist in the downtown and in the future at the new TH 36 bridge interchange County Road 5 (Stillwater Avenue) is classified a minor artenal It is a continuation of TH 5 south of Highway 36 TH 5 provides connections to Lake Elmo, CR 15 to the south, and Interstate 694 CR 5 serves local major attractions such as the Stillwater Marketplace and the Croixwood residential neighborhood The major problem with the CR 5 route is the lack of a direct connection through Stillwater to areas north of Stillwater Currently, CR 5 becomes a city street using Olive Street and Owens Street to connect to areas north of Stillwater Estimated future traffic volumes are 9,000 ADT's on the Olive Street segment, 12,000 north of Croixwood and 17,000 south of Curve Crest Boulevard • County Road 12 (Myrtle Street) is classified as a collector street running from the downtown west through Stillwater to the URTPA and Grant Township CR 12 is a main east -west connection from Stillwater serving as an alternate to TH 36 It also serves to provide access from CR 15 to Stillwater The use of and flow of traffic on the roadway is hampered by the lack of a good north - south connection to CR 12 in Stillwater Other collectors of importance are Greeley Street from TH 36 north to Myrtle Street, Owens Street from Olive Street north to TH 96 and McKusick Road from Owens Street to CR 15 These three routes serve varying volumes of traffic Greeley Street serves a high volume in the TH 36 area as a major connection between the Stillwater residential areas and the West Stillwater Business Park Owens Street serves as a major outlet from the central Stillwater area to the north McKusic� Road is more of a local collector street but is one of the few connections to the Oak Glen development and the developing URTPA System Restraints A major traffic restraint in the west Stillwater residential area of Croixwood and Oak Glen, is the lack of north -south through access Planning for the Croixwood neighborhood deliberately omitted a north -south collector street, instead focusing on connections to CR 5 The two connections to CR 12 provide indirect connections through residential neighborhoods back to CR 5 Brick Street served as the main connection between CR 12 and CR 5 The subsequent development of the Deerpath residential area resulted in Deerpath being used as a cut -through route North of CR 12, there is a lack of north-sout7'r 4-4 street continuity because of McKusick Lake, Browns Creek, and the existing development patterns The new Neal Avenue bridge over Browns Creek provides continuity for a portion of the area between Highway 96 and Boutwell Road but that continuity ends there Boutwell Road and CR 12 is a difficult intersection because of intersection design and location East -west routes are primarily CR 12 and McKusick Road Both of these roads connect to Owens Street Traffic using McKusick Road will probably use Owens Street to CR 12 (Myrtle Street) which will experience additional congestion in the future as the area develops The URTPA growth area analysis addresses these system restraints Overview of Traffic Problems In the past ten years, Stillwater has experienced an increase in traffic not only on major arterial streets but on residential collector and local distreets as well This increase in traffic is a result of a number of factors Passenger car registration in Washington County increased from 60,500 in 1980 to 95,150 in 1993, a 57 percent increase New development has occurred in Stillwater and surrounding areas adding trips to the street network The existing river crossing and access to that crossing is congested at times An increasing number of vehicles are using Stillwater's collector street system to provide a faster way to get through Stillwater to the bridge or to bypass the downtown area The existing streets in the older sections of Stillwater (Greeley Street, Myrtle Street, Pine Street, Fourth Street and Third Street) were built prior to the 1950's Many of the streets were not designed to carry the traffic they are now carrying but do because of location or lack of alternative The following is list of transportation system Iproblems identified during the comprehensive planning process Problem Areas include Road capacity, congested intersections, offset streets, intersection design, cut through traffic, road alignment and safety concerns Road Capacity - Greeley Street from TH 36 to Myrtle Street - Myrtle Street from Main Street to Eagle Ridge Trail - Osgood Avenue/Fourth Street from TH 36 to Churchill Street - Owens Street from Olive Street to Stone Badge Trail - Main Street - Pine Street from Third Street to County Road 5 Congested Intersections - Olive Street and Owens Street Olive Street and Greeley Street Owens Street and Myrtle Street Greeley Street and Myrtle Street Greeley Street and Churchill Street Chestnut Street and Main Street - Pine Street and Greeley Street - Orleans Street and Fourth Street Offset Street Segments - Northbound Fourth Avenue to Burlington to Third Street - Greeley Street to Myrtle Street to Owens Street 4-5 - Greeley Street to Olive Street to Owens Street Intersection Design Greeley Street and Churchill Street Greeley Street and Pine Street Greeley Street and Myrtle Street Myrtle Street and Owens Street Owens Street and McKusick Road Residential Area Cut -through Traffic - Northland Avenue - Brick Street - Deerpath - Maryknoll Drive - Parkwood Lane - 72nd Street North - 62nd Street North Road Alignment Stonebridge Trail and Highway 96 CR 5 and TH 36 overpass TH 36 Frontage Road (no east/west continuity from CR 15 to TH 95 ) Boutwell Road and County Road 12 Safety Concerns - Highway 5 and TH 36 (1997 MnDOT Project) - Boutwell and CR 12 - Main Street and Chestnut Street - 72nd Street North and CR 15 URTPA Growth and Traffic Impacts • The land use plan contains three development concepts The land use plan has been reviewed for its impact on the existing street system and need for new streets Palmer property (a part of Twin Lake Special Plan Area, see Section 13) - The northern -most concept plan, just south of TH 96, has limited access to the east and south because of South Twin Lake and Brown's Creek and the existing development The proposal shows a new collector street to connect Neal Avenue to CR 15 approximately 700 feet south of TH 96 The only other access shown is to Neal Avenue or a loop back to TH 96 west of South Twin Lake A major concern is the close spacing between the proposed east -west collector and the intersection of CR 15/TH 96 Abromovich property (a part of Boutwell Special. Plan Area, see Section 13) - The second concept plan area is located just south of McKusick Road and north Boutwell Road Access is provided to Boutwell Road and across the Minnesota Transportation Museum railroad tracks to McKusick Road Utilizing these connections, all development traffic can be centered on two existing intersections on CR 15 Kroening - Staloch properties (a part of Long Lake Special Plan Area, see Section 13) - The third concept plan area is located south of CR 12 and north of 62nd Street North The concept plan shows limited access to CR 15 The existing 72nd Street connection is closed and traffic re-routed to a new intersections along CR 12 and CR 15 With proper design and location, the single CR 12 access should be adequate Major access to CR 15 is almost 1/2 mile south of CR 12 With the exception of existing driveways to private hom and the proposed commercial corner, CR 1 4-6 would have controlled access along its east side through this development area Large lot development on the Grant Township side of CR AL 15 would limit the number of driveways and potentially permit combining driveways to a single access point The lower portion of area three is on the west side of Long Lake north of 62nd Street North Again, options exists to restnct direct access by providing an internal circulation system with access to perimeter roads only at one or two locations The proposed development shows connections to 62nd Street North and to CR 15 and a second connection near the north end of the development area An overall circulation plan should be prepared for area three to coordinate the overall street system and control access to CR 15 and 12 Access at the south end of the development area is dictated by the adjacent research and development use proposed for the area immediately north of TH 36 Access to this R and D office park should not be through an existing or proposed residential area The extension of Curve Crest Boulevard west from CR 5 continuing along CR 5 and TH 36 as a frontage road would best serve the research and development area However, the west connection could create a problem unless it is utilized as a frontage road and tied into the TH 36-CR 15 interchange signal system Three options exist for road access to CR 15 Existing 62nd Street North could be connected directly to the proposed residential development on the west side of Long Lake Either a cul-de- sac or some type of circuitous routing in an east - west direction could provide access to the existing homes but restrict through traffic An access from both residential areas to the frontage road and research and development area could be made if it were circuitous and unlikely to attract cut - through traffic This could occur if the existing 62nd Street North location were utilized, and a Wfrontage road developed to curve to the south and along TH 36 A connection back north to existing 62nd Street and into the residential area could provide an indirect route for through- traffic and yet be convenient for the residential traffic A second access into the area could be provided approximately halfway between the frontage road connection and the new connection into the development area three This connection should provide access to the Apple Orchard area The alternative road alignments and access points for the URTPA are shown on the following map With the forecasted traffic volumes, it is anticipated that CR 15 will become a four -lane divided facility with a median and limited median cross-overs By spacing the development access, cross-overs can be established at the proper locations to serve development areas Access to the east toward Stillwater from the developments is a concern The northerly developments will utilize either McKusick Road, Boutwell Road or Neal Avenue These routes will provide access to CR 12 or Owens Street A major concern is the lack of direct access to the Market Place and West Business Park area A secondary concern is the potential congestion at the intersections of Owens Street, Greeley Street, Myrtle Street and Olive Street Two separate studies are being conducted to address these issues The Deerpath connection study is underway It is attempting to identify alternates to reduce Deerpath traffic volume and still provide some movement between the area north of CR 12 and the West Business Park area The second proposed study will review traffic operations, traffic controls and street design at the four intersections in the Greeley/Owens/Myrtle/Olive corridor This study would be a cooperative effort between the City and Washington County The extension of Neal Avenue from Boutwell to CR 12 is an option but raises concerns The extension of Neal Avenue from TH 96 to CR 12 would provide an alternate access and a better intersection location than the existing Boutwell 4-7 1wa..r COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP COUNTY ROAD 15 TH 36 FRONTAGE ROAD ACCESS PLAN Road location It could also reduce traffic along McKusick Road A major concern is the immediate access from Neal Avenue into the Ai Croixwood development via Northland Avenue Options are to offset Neal Avenue east from Northland Avenue, provide a different connection between Boutwell Road and CR 12, or continue to terminate Neal Avenue at Boutwell Road and use Boutwell Road for access to the south Traffic volumes using generalized development densities, trip generation and distribution was calculated for each of the three concept plan areas Based on this analysis, none of the intersections onto CR 15 or the local streets receive a significantly high volume of traffic The additional residential growth adds approximately 1,200 vehicles per day to McKusick Road east of CR 15 with most traffic going to or from the south Volume increases on Boutwell Road east of CR 15 was approximately 2,150 vehicles per day with over 1,800 travelling to and from the south The first major access point south of CR 12 had a volume of approximately 2,500 with over 80% Ak travelling to and from the south The second lir access point had a volume of approximately 1,800 with approximately 1,600 travelling to and from the south Even the research and development area adds only approximately 2,400 trips per day to the TH 36 frontage road at the CR 15 intersection Traffic to the east included approximately 160 on McKusick Road, 1,150 on Boutwell Road and 1,800 on the TH 36 frontage road Total additional traffic volume on CR 15 north of CR 12 was less than 2,900 vehicles per day and the additional traffic volume on CR 15 north of TH 36 was approximately 6,500 vehicles per day With planned improvements to CR 15 and TH 36 and sound development road design additional traffic resulting from the development concept areas can be accommodated in the existing and planned road system • Washington County Road Improvements Washington County's transportation plan is part of the document Based on Washington County proposed land use, a traffic generation model was developed that forecasts traffic demand on major state and county roads to 2015 The preliminary results of the forecasts and analysis of existing and future road network as they effect the Stillwater area are listed below Road Improvements - Extend CR 15 ( Manning Avenue) from TH 36 to TH 5 - Widen CR 15 to 4-lanes between TH 36 and TH 96 (high priority) - Add traffic signals along CR 15 from TH 36 to TH 96 as needed - Improve operation of Osgood Avenue between TH 36 and Orleans Street (5-year CIP) Mn DOT Highway Improvements MnDOT has scheduled improvements to the TH 36/CR 5 intersection for 1997 This improvement will widen CR 5 to four lanes plus turn lanes through the TH 36 interchange and will extend the city bicycle/pedestrian trail south to the high school Construction of the new TH36 bridge is scheduled to begin in 1997 and be completed by 2000 according to the most recent MnDOT schedule This major project along with the recent traffic signal installation at TH 36 and CR 15 will significantly reduce traffic levels on Stillwater streets Objectives, Policies and Programs The following objectives, policies and programs comprise the transportation plan element of the comprehensive plan Objectives Maintain the carrying capacity of through streets 4-8 while minimizing the negative impact on adjacent residential areas through landscape treatment and street design Maintain the areas next to Greeley, Owen, Olive Myrtle Chestnut, Third, Fourth and Pine Streets in residential use and not allow the areas to convert to commercial land use Through road design and traffic management, limit through traffic in residential areas Work with MnDOT and Washington County to study and improve state highways and county roads where needed Plan new development areas to coordinate with planning for the roads that provide access to the development sites, i e , CR 15, CR 12, CR 64, TH 96, TH 36 Policy 1 Create a unified continuous system of artenals and collectors Policy 2 Segment local residential streets so that all traffic flows onto collectors or arterials Policy 3 Support new TH 36 bridge and related TH 36 improvements Policy 4 Work with Washington County and MnDOT on TH 36/CR 15 improvements and the planning and construction of a Frontage Road between CR 15 and CR 5 Policy 5 Consider modifications to residential street design in order to discourage through traffic Policy 6 Improve traffic and parking in and around commercial areas Pobcy 7 The city shall continue to make every effort to assure that adequate enforcement is available to assure traffic safety in residential areas Policy 8 The city shall make every effort feasible to assure that through traffic is diverted from residential streets to artenals Program (1) Develop an area -wide coordinated road improvement program with MnDOT and Washington County Program (2) Prepare a Greeley/Owens comdor study and Third/Fourth Street traffic study with Washington County Program (3) Prepare Deerpath traffic study to reduce or eliminate cut through traffic and not significantly impact other residential areas Program (4) Prepare and keep up to date a parking plan an. parking management program for the downtown Program (5) Improve the Second Street/Mulberry Street parking lot and Second and Olive Streets lot as convenient attractive public parking lots Program (6) Implement downtown parking district to pay for maintenance of downtown parking lots Non -Auto Travel The following sections discuss non -auto ways to better accommodate travel demand Ways discussed include traffic demand management, bicycle paths, pedestrian ways and transit Policies and programs are described for each mode of travel Travel Demand Management Travel demand management (TDM) refers to strategies that improve the operation of th transportation system by limiting demands on the system in contrast to strategies that improve the system itself or increase the supply of roads It includes techniques to reduce peak penod vehicle trips by shifting travelers from driving alone into shared ride arrangements, such as ride sharing or transit or into alternative work arrangements, such as flextime and telecommuting, that remove trips from the peak travel times The concept of management demand on the transportation system is fairly new in suburban settings, although it has been successfully used by some individual companies such as Andersen Windows and 3M Company for many years The goal of a TDM program is to meet specific travel objectives such as increased auto occupancy rates, decreased peak hour travel and increased transit use Benefits may include - Reduced travel demand and traffi. congestion 4-9 Reduced demand for new or expanded roadways Preservation of limited dollars for transportation improvements Energy conservation and improved air quality A TDM program involves specific steps to improve the efficiency of the roadway network by focusing actions on vehicle -carrying efficiencies Basic elements of TDM program may include the following techniques Ride sharing programs including car pool and van pool Employer incentives such as subsidizing van pools, preferential parking for car pools and van pools, subsidized transit passes, flextime, telecommuting, staggered work hours Reserved lanes for high -occupancy vehicles, highways or arterials Park and ride lots Bypasses on freeway ramp meters for buses and car pools Guaranteed ride home programs for car poolers and bus riders Road and parking pricing as a peak hour congestion management tool Public transit service, both local and with regional linkage Bicycle facilities and incentives All of the TDM techniques should be implemented through a partnership of the state, the region, cities, employers and the county The common goal is to encourage travelers to change their behavior through incentives, enhanced services and provision of special high occupancy facilities AKThe greatest motivations for behavior change are perceived opportunities for the individual travelers to save time or money In the private sector, companies like Andersen Windows have effectively employed TDM techniques for many years Similar programs could be successful in high employment areas of the St Croix Valley The coordination of transportation demand management operation among major employers in the Stillwater area is recommended The role of the City of Stillwater should principally be one of support, encouragement and cooperation with employers and units of government working to carry out TDM strategies This might include cooperating with Washington County to establish park and ride Tots, with MCTO to provide improved public transit, with the state in establishing HOV lanes on TH 36 and with private employers in coordinating their individual efforts Pathways and Sidewalks Beside vehicular movement, there are other ways to move around the neighborhood and throughout the Stillwater community This non -auto movement may be for travel purposes, to get a loaf of bread or visit a neighbor, or for recreation Based on the resident opinion survey there is significant community interest in improving the walkway/pathway system in and around Stillwater Pathways add to the "quality of life" and "sense of community" of an area and to the relationship of one neighborhood to another Trails and pathways can also Zink recreational facilities, natural areas or schools to residential areas The city has the opportunity with this comprehensive plan to provide a design for future pathway improvements The plan should tie in with county trails, (CR 12, Stonebridge Trail) and provide new links between state and county recreational areas such as a recreational trial along the St Croix between Afton State Park and William O'Bnen State Park or Lake Elmo Park Reserve 4-10 A pedestrian trail system should be an element of the circulation/open space system of newly developing residential areas Trails would be open to the public, provide access to neighborhoods park facilities and beyond the development to community attractions The Minnesota Zephyr Railroad right of way provides a unique opportunity for a pedestrian or bicycle connection between the downtown and the URTPA Railroad safety consideration would have to be addressed with the development of a railroad pathway City ravines and open space areas represent a potential location for trails Trails and paths locations are described and mapped in the parks, trails and open space section of the plan Bicycles Bicycles are used for recreation as well as transportation purposes The two most basic needs for providing and improving bicycles facilities for all purposes are (1) to provide continuous facilities, including the removal of physical barriers and the provision of system continuity across political boundaries, and (2) to provide increased safety for the bike user Recreational bicycle facilities are addressed in the parks, trails and open space plan section The key challenge for Stillwater in encouraging bicycle ways as a transportation mode will be to focus bicycle facility construction along existing streets and in developing areas where right of way is still available and to use county and state roadway reconstruction projects as opportunities to construct needed pathways and trails Specific route selection criteria and design facility treatment are available in the AASHTO guide to bicycle trial planning and design MnDOT will soon be publishing a bikeway design book which sets forth guidelines on facility type, location, traffic, geometric design, accident risk and traffic operations factors Both of these documents, especially the MnDOT design book, should be used in designing Stillwater bicycle facilities Pedestrian Ways Pedestrian ways (sidewalks, paths and trails) are an important element in the intermodal transportation system, especially when coordinated with neighborhood design and transit Neighborhood design can effectively integrate pedestrian facilities and create more efficient and aesthetically pleasing connected living environments Pedestrian trips can be encouraged in developing areas through mixea land use patterns which place homes closer to stores, schools and services Good pedestrian access to bus stops enhances the use of public transit In Stillwater, the emphasis should be on maintaining exiting sidewalks and adding new facilities in residential areas where demand dictates The parks and open space section proposes a comprehensive pedestrian trail system comprised of sidewalks and pathways for the existing city and developing URTPA Transit Stillwater is currently served by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission commuter route service to St Paul and a local circulation system (Valley Transit) Valley Transit users are primarily senior citizens dependent on local transit services for shopping and for medical and recreation services The commuter service is scheduled primarily for home to work trips Recommendations in the regional transportation plan urge increasing capacity for rush hour routes and coordinated local circulation transfers with commuter route service There are no plans to provide Tight rail transit to Washington County or the Stillwater area At one time such services were planned for the Interstate 94 corridor but that location has been eliminated from the Washington County and regional transportation plans Objectives 4-11 • • • Develop pedestnan pathway and bikeway plan to provide for recreational and commuter tnps Provide safe pedestrian access to all schools Maintain existing public stairways throughout the community, particularly in the downtown Work with the Washington County and the state in developing park and ride Tots, trailway systems and other programs to reduce auto use Coordinate city bikeway and pathway plans with Oak Park Heights, Stillwater Township and Washington County Encourage the development of shuttle bus service in the downtown and other areas of the community Link neighborhoods and other destinations by developing ravine trails and greenways as appropriate for pedestrian paths Study the use of the Minnesota Zephyr railroad right of way for potential use as a walkway and/or bikeway connecting downtown to the city areas to the west Increase transit ridership and support transit service for transit dependent residents, particularly senior citizens, provide adequate transit facilities (bus stops, transfer station) to support transit use, and cooperate with the regional transit authority and Washington County to provide conveniently located park and ride facilities at major transit stops Policy 9 Ensure safe travel for pedestnan and especially school aged children going to and from school Policy 10 Encourage transit use through subdivision design land use planning and education Policy 11 Use TDM to make most efficient use of existing road systems and minimize impact on adjacent areas Policy 12 Plan and construct a city-wide bikeway system throughout the city to connect major activity centers and scenic open space area Policy 13 New and upgraded bndges, crossings and overpasses and TH 36 Frontage Road shall include bicycle lanes Program (7) Develop and implement a bikeway system facilities plan and implementation program Program (8) Expand and improve bicycle routes and connect them to each other and other major destinations Program (9) Amend subdivision ordinance to require bicycle facilities according to bikeways facility plans Program (10) Provide bicycle parking locations and attractive racks at key locations including parks, downtown and commercial center Program (11) Work with school distnct to provide convenient, safe access for students with to school Program (12) Develop and promote traffic safety and education programs Program (13) Connect Stillwater's bikeways to county bikeway routes Program (14) Develop and implement a sidewalk/pathways improvement program for the existing city and new developing areas Program (15) Improve appearance of bus stops and better integrate into neighborhood or area design Program (16) Encourage MnDOT to provide continuous bicycle paths along the Frontage Road from CR 15 to TH 95 and along 95 from Oak Park Heights to TH 95 through downtown 4-12 17:7 sr N. 00 O DELLWOOD sioo 96 244 - BEAR LAKE 27 MAHTO if 245 00 ROUND LAKE 590 00 D'ILivooD LON 4800 3985 00 0 485 MOD 00 4 01 3 SE g 00 0011645 1000 CO 1600100 4480 525 00 PAT RD LAKE MASTERAfAl1 GRANT T DI 17215 00 oo., 21J00 9750 00 ® U 17596j00 Q 3545100 4800 O WOODPILE LAKE 00 1800 98 665 00 00[5035 98 4500 -,T TY FFIC #054, 5170 560 00 305 00 120TH ST • 00 1 650 545100 00 rn 001 725 ISE 7L E t^ 1100192 1600194 m 00 UTTLE CARNELIAN 9901 00 STILLWA ' R TWP N TWIN LAKE ® 11 6900199 00'2225 96 5000 99 9500 O 9819900 McKUSICK 981146001 98 2800198 /. H,arNS LAKE 305 E00 00 )63001 98 110360l00 00 4165 15 LONG LAKE 00,163501 LAKE McKUSICK 114651 00\ 11000 ov 0016715 • 96 I10000198 0 11635100 00 5905 5430 00 LILY LAKE 99110200 250100 315100 30TH sT N 28000 95 9200 00 6095 760100 95 00 ,® •445 00 s> ®8 /12220 fi 11470 •0 69001 OAK PARK HEIG I TS 5620 0011240 ®0� • 12605 16000199 C9 0 F- Q 1035 00 s10 00 IrtEr 36 00 7400 00 11425100 BAYTOWN TWP LEGI 201H 5T N. HORSESHO 13455100 LAKt:v::::, 00J4500 8040 00 WEST 3495 00 307H ST N 405 00 AKELAND J1675I 00 860100 00 4161 950100 Ze5a10 00L2230 785 00 610 395100 B sy FRolo 176 9 00 951260 • :° Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division OF TO Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville MN 55113 November 28, 2000 Mr Steve Russell City of Stillwater 216 N 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082-4898 Dear Steve Enclosed is a copy of the IRC Partnership Planrung Studies Application This study is intended to further define the ultimate freeway section and the interim hybrid alternative of TH 36 between TH 5 and Osgood Avenue as recommended in the TH 36 Subarea Study Issues such as land -use, access, effects on local traffic patterns, design of hybrid and freeway alternatives, and cost estimates will be included in the study As part of the IRC Partnership Application, the local municipalities and county will be asked to contnbute financially Since the deadline for the application was November 27, 2000, I was not given the opportunity to discuss the application and funding with the local agencies The total cost of the study is estimated at $145,000 of which Mn/DOT Metro District funds will be contnbuting $35,000 in combined cash and soft match As an estimate, it was deemed that the local share would be $25,000 in cash p jicipation and $10,00riiiroli match such as labor, facilities and mailings The total contnbution of $35,000 wouldbeshared by the cities of Oak Park Heights and Stillwater, and Washington County The Program Delivery Group will be selecting those IRC Partnership Planrung Studies that meet their criteria for funding on December 12, 2000 at which time I will be contacting you as to the status of this application If this study is selected, I will be requesting that the City of Stillwater support this study financially Please call me at (651) 582-1310 if you have any questions or concerns regarding the IRC Partnership Application Sincerely, ��. 74 '7.-/tezit Linda M Heath Project Manager An equal opportunity employer IRC PARTNERSHIP PLANNING STUDIES APPLICATION The purpose of the IRC Partnership Planning Studies grant program is to encourage state and local cooperation in ensunng the long-term performance of the IRC system The grant program is intended to address local or spot problems along the IRC system, even if the comdor segment is currently performing at or abov ance targets A Partnership Planning Study must demonstrate a partnership with the local unit ip performance government, such as cost participation commitment to land use planning, proper zoning, or access management Name of Study TH 36 District Contact Linda M Heath Partnership Contacts (List Participating Partners) Washington County City of Oak Park Heights City of Stillwater IRC-Corridor`: Information:: • IRC Corridor TH 36 (east of I-694) -IRC System Priority`:(Check One).=: From (Termini and Reference Point) TH 5 No of Miles Signal Risk (Check One) 2 Miles High Medium Low If future performance is projected to be below target, when will this occur'? (Contact Enc Schmid, Office of Investment Management, 651-296-0220) 0 - 5 yrs X 6 - 10 yrs X Descriptiori_of_Studyc `. ;`= To (Termini and Reference Point) Osgood Avenue Existing Perf (Check Future Perf (Check One) One) Above Target At Target Below Target X Above Target At Target Below Target X 10+ yrs • • OIM 10/00 • • (Purpose, Scope, Outcome) The purpose of the study is to define the TH 36 Intenm Hybnd Alternative and the Future Freeway design that have been identified in the IRC Management Plan that is neanng completion This study will determine a future freeway section that will, in turn, identify the Intenm Hybrid Alternative needed to meet the IRC Performance Cntena The Future Freeway would elummate signals at the TH 36 intersections of Norel/Washington, Osgood Avenue, and Oakgreen/Greeley This study will be conducted as a partnership between the cities of Oak Park Heights and Stillwater, Washington County, and the Minnesota Department of Transportation Upon completion of the $140 million St Croix River Crossmg, there is potential for conflict m this section of the corridor This area will become a sub - regional attraction for Wisconsin commuters and businesses, and existing land uses will be removed in favor of larger retail/commercial complexes The comprehensive plans for the cities of Grant and Lake Elmo will not allow major commercial developments within their communities along TH 36 Development pressures will be placed on the cities of Oak Park Heights and Stillwater Given the complexities and constraints on projects in Oak Park Heights, it has been determined that an ultimate freeway improvement for this segment would take more detailed study to resolve This study would identify the land -use and future nght-of-way needs for a freeway section in the comdor, and would determine a transportation system that could accommodate the needs of businesses and residents while maintaining community cohesion between those areas north and south of TH 36 Included in the study will be the identification of internal traffic patterns associated with a business district separated by an IRC The outcome of this study would be to minimize the investment by an efficient design that would meet the IRC Performance Cntena, determine future land uses and nght-of-way, and determine preliminary designs and cost estimates for the Interim Hybnd Alternative and the Future Freeway design The desired outcome of the study would be for the communities to adopt the planned comdor improvements as part of their comprehensive plans at county and municipal levels OIM 10/00 • • • THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA February 12, 2001 Mr Scott McBnde, P E Project Manager 3535 Vadnais Center St Paul MN 55110-5196 Re Comments on TH 36 Subarea Study Dear Mr McBnde First and foremost, the report assumption about a new TH 36 bridge being constructed should be reconsidered and a no -build option developed All regional studies, MnDOT, Met Council and Washington County, to date have assumed a new bndge Without a new bndge, the regional traffic planning situation will change significantly and must be reevaluated The study identifies as an issue the lack of north -south highway system continuity However, the study does not suggest any method of recognizing or calling for a connection such as a north -south CR 15 connection between TH 97 and Freeway 94 or TH 61 to the south A way of connecting CR 15 to TH 5 on the west side of Stillwater should be a part of the study Without this connection, the City of Stillwater will be further impacted by regional traffic trying to travel through Stillwater from CR 15, north of TH 36, to TH 5 or Freeway 94 south of TH 36 The land use impact of an intersection at CR 15 and TH 36 needs further evaluation The northeast quadrant of that intersection is planned for an office business park in the City of Stillwater's Comprehensive Plan The economic impact of such an intersection could be significant on that future land use Land in other quadrants of the intersection do not have urban services and should be considered if the intersection is to be constructed The specifics of actual improvements in the CR 15 to Osgood section of the TH 36 comdor are of concern to the City of Stillwater We will continue to work with Washington County, MN DOT and Oak Park Heights on solutions to the increasing traffic and congestion Again, a no-bndge decision significantly effects work Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft plan licerely, Steve Russel Community Development Director City of Stillwater cc Marc Hagunin, Met Council Sandy Cullen, Washington County Deb Sorenson, MnDOT CITY HALL 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE 612 439 6121 May 21, 2001 MAY 2 3 ZOO The Stillwater City Council City Hall City of Stillwater 216 N 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Council Members I am writing to urge you to reject MNDOT's plans to eliminate Greeley Street as an access pomt for Highway 36, and to hmit the access points only to Osgood and Washington Avenues The elimination of Greeley as an access pomt will unnecessarily increase the through traffic on South 4th Street and South 3`d Street and will make access to the Stillwater Hospital difficult South 3rd Street and South 4th Street are hued with residences for a preponderance of their length and are m front of schools Greeley, m contrast, is more commercial in nature and has a more direct access to Myrtle street Your comprehensive plan specifically addresses the issues of preserving residential neighborhoods Therefore you must adopt a position for the City which is in congruence with that plan What 1 am asking is that you support no changes to the Highway 36 access points and that you ask MNDOT to make Highway 36 between Stillwater and Oak Park Heights a 45 mph parkway (like what is found in St Paul) 1 further ask that you be participating with MNDOT in the planning of the Highway 36 corridor If you do not participate then decisions for the corridor will be made without the representation for the citizens of Stillwater 1 am also concerned that our Ward 1 representative is an employee of MNDOT and I have to question whether we are being adequately represented in this particular matter If you have any questions you may reach me at my office at WR Medical in Stillwater (430-8463 direct line) Best Regards, I,7 Patnck J Anderson 1120 South Third Street Stillwater MN • • • • June 4, 2001 Plannmg Commission City of Stillwater City Hall 216N 4th St Stillwater, MN 55082 RE MN DOT Highway 36 Proposal - June 11 Planning Commission Meetmg Dear Planning Commission Members I have been informed that MN DOT is presentmg its Highway 36 Proposal at the next Planning Commission Meetmg, Monday, June 11 at 7 00 P M Please consider the followmg pomts when you review the MN DOT Highway 36 Proposal 1 The current plan calls for closmg off Greeley Street access to Highway 36 I believe this will result m a dramatic mcrease m traffic on South 4th Street and South 3`d Street South 4th and South 3rd are m a residential neighborhood, with 3 elementary schools and a Junior high school on or near those streets 2 The Comprehensive Plan calls for reduction of traffic m residential areas in 3 of it 6 goals for Transportation Goal 1 Make it easy and convenient to travel m and around Stillwater, tie allowable new development to the capacity of roadways, prevent intrusion of non-residential traffic in neighborhoods when possible and develop a comprehensive sidewalk, trail and bikeway system Goal 4 Support construct of the new mterstate bndge and TH 36 comdor improvements to provide for regional traffic demands and to relieve cut through traffic on residential areas Goal 6 Protect residential areas from non-residential traffic The MN DOT Highway 36 plan to close Greeley while leaving Osgood open to 36 is not consistent with the City's comprehensive Plan and does not conform to 3 of the 6 Goals set by the City for Transportation 3 In addition, the basic premise that the roadway between 5 and 95 cuttmg through Oak Park Heights and Stillwater should be questioned This area should be designated a "parkway" with a Page 1 of 2 speed of 45 m p h and should be landscaped Trucks should be required to stay on 36 and not travel on residential streets mcludmg South 4th and South 3`d By adopting a Resolution supportmg the current MN DOT Highway 36 Plan, the Council would be foregoing an opportunity for this area to be a parkway with a 45 m p h speed 4 MN DOT employees have stated in various pnor meetings that they have fundmg for a second study to determine the impact on local streets, mcludmg traffic counts on South 4th and South 3rd Streets - current and projected under the Highway 36 Plan (none have been done so far on these two streets) However, the second study is not yet underway and it may indeed not occur The Planning Commission and Council should not rely on the mere possibility of a promised second study as changmg the outcome of the plan Instead, it should reserve judgment until a second study is done, and then, a decision should be based upon the facts determined by the second study Therefore the Planning Commission should not recommend the City Council adopt any Resolution approving the current MN DOT Highway 36 Plan Anderson er Resident 4th St water, MN 55082 (W) (651) 430-8457 (call this number if you wish to speak with me) (H) (651) 439-8093 copies Stillwater City Council Page 2 of 2 • • • • • • TRANSMITTAL 3535 Vadnais Center Drive St Paul MN 55110 5196 651 490 2000 800 325 2055 651 490 2150 FAX TO Mr Steve Russell May 18 2001 Date Community Development Director amndot0103 00 14 City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE TH 36 Comdor Management Plan File Number and Location Client Number We are ® Enclosing ❑ Sending Under Separate Cover ❑ As Requested Enclosed are 10 sets of the TH 36 Comdor Management Plan and a resolution for adoption of the Comdor Management Plan to be discussed at the upcoming meeting in Stillwater For your ❑ Information/Records ❑ Action REMARKS BY Brent Rusco c ® Review ❑ D►stnbuhon ❑ Approval ❑ Revision and resubm►ttal n.\2stafN tr planlulmer1t136\transmtenisselldoc ypl Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc Your Trusted Resource Equal Opportunity Employer Trunk Highway 36 Corridor Management Plan Resolution for the City of Stillwater, Minnesota WHEREAS, Minnesota's State Transportation Plan recognizes the significance of interregional highway corridors in providing citizens and businesses throughout the State of Minnesota with high quality access to recreational, educational, employment and health care opportunities, and to the transport of products and services produced by our local economy to regional, national and global markets, and, WHEREAS, Trunk Highway 36 has been identified by the Minnesota Department of Transportation as a Medium Priority Interregional Corridor that enhances the economic vitality of the state and providing essential access for the Twin Cities metropolitan area counties and cities to major economic markets and cultural centers including the Stillwater area and Western Wisconsin, and, WHEREAS, the continued growth of the region is leading to increasing travel demand in the corridor and development pressure adjacent to the corridor which, if unmanaged, can negatively affect the level of performance safety and congestion experienced by users of the corridor, and, WHEREAS, community leaders, motorists and road authorities have identified this growing travel demand and development pressure as a concern with potential negative consequences for mobility and safety in the corridor with the potential to degrade the performance level now provided by the corridor, and the resulting implications for the economy and quality of life of the region, and, WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation recognizing the potential impact of continued growth pressure on the corridor has completed an Interregional Corridor Plan in partnership with its partners along the corridor to look at the long-term role that Trunk Highway 36 will play in meeting the transportation needs of Stillwater Minnesota, and, WHEREAS, it is imperative at this critical time, with continued growth occurring in the region that a long-term vision for the type of service that the Trunk Highway 36 corridor needs to provide be established and that the steps are identified and initiated to 1 Preserve the function of the corridor through advance planning, not only for the Trunk Highway 36 corridor but local supporting street systems and land use and development patterns, and, TH 36 Corridor Management Plan — Resolution Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 1 2 Secure the needed funding to pursue the vision established for the corridor, and, 3 Establish a plan of action for the development of planning and programnung activities that will proactively address the needs identified NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City of Stillwater of Washington County endorses the vision and corridor management plan for Trunk Highway 36 FURTHERMORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Stillwater of Washington County endorses the concept that an adequate network of supporting roads is necessary to attain the Trunk Highway 36 vision and that the roadway networks identified in the Trunk Highway 36 Corridor Management Plan will be considered as interim guides until such time as refinements to these improvements are identified FURTHERMORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Stillwater of Washington County recognizes the regional significance of the corridor in supporting the regional economy and intends to reflect the Trunk Highway 36 Corridor Management Plan vision strategies and policies through updates to the City's land use and transportation plans as well as subdivision ordinances FURTHERMORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Stillwater of Washington County is comnutted to working in partnership with Mn/DOT and the other partners along the corridor as a member of the Trunk Highway 36 Corridor Management Team in order to achieve the vision and implement the recommendations of the Trunk Highway 36 Corridor Management Plan TH 36 Corridor Management Plan — Resolution Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Stillwater of Washington County intends to bring forward the following issues for resolution and discussion with the Trunk Highway 36 Corridor Management Team List issues here TH 36 Corridor Management Plan — Resolution Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 3 Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date TH 36 Corridor Management Plan — Resolution Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 4 TH 36 Corridor Management Plan April 2001 Muvin9 Minhesvta Interregional Corridors TH 36 Corridor Management Plan T 7 Table of Contents Page Executive Summary ES-1 Advisory Committee Participant List Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) Participant List 1 0 Introduction/Report Purpose 1 2 0 Background 1 2 1 TH 36 Subarea/IRC Study Evolution 1 3 0 Study Participation 4 3 1 Study Committees 4 3 2 Public Involvement 4 3 3 Participant Identified Issues 4 4 0 Planned Improvements/Studies 5 4 1 Planned Improvements 5 4 2 IRC Partnership Study in Oak Park Heights 5 5 0 Purpose and Need/Vision 6 5 1 Purpose and Need 6 5 2 Corridor Vision 7 6 0 Relevant Factors 7 6 1 TH 36 Corridor Related 7 6 2 Subarea System Analysis 8 6 3 Recreational and Environmental Assets 11 7 0 Alternatives Development 14 7 1 Key Assumptions 14 7 2 Concept Development Approach 15 7 3 Levels of Improvement 15 8 0 Assessment of Alternatives 16 8 1 Assessment with the New SCRC Being Built 16 8 2 Assessment without the New SCRC Being Built Analysis Scenario 17 8 3 SCRC Scenario Volume Companson 19 9 0 Recommended Corridor Management Plan 19 SEH is a registered trademark of Short Elliott Hendnckson Inc TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 1 t Table of Contents (Continued) 10 0 Implementation/Shared Strategies 10 1 Implementation Plan 10 2 Shared Strategies 10 3 Strategy Responsibility 10 4 Implementation Plan Elements 10 5 Subarea Issues 11 0 Funding Sources/Categories 12 0 Sample Resolution List of Tables Table 1 Trunk Highway 36 Mainline Performance Crossing Being Built Scenario Table 2 Trunk Highway 36 Mainline Performance Crossing No -Build Scenario New St Croix River St Croix River List of Figures Figure 1 - Shared Strategies Summary Figure 2 - TH 36 Hybrid Implementation Plan Figure 3 - Study Area Map Figure 4A - Relevant TH 36 Issues and Deficiencies Map Figure 4B - Relevant TH 36 Issues and Deficiencies Map Figure 5 - TH Subarea Study Recreational and Environmental Assets Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C List of Appendices Hybrid "A" Improvement Concept Plan Hybrid "B" Improvement Concept Plan Example Resolution 21 21 21 22 22 24 24 25 18 20 ES-4 ES-5 3 9 10 12 TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page o J f I Executive Summary The purpose of this TH 36 Corridor Management Plan is to document the study process and key outcomes of the combined TH 36 Subarea/Interregional Corridor (IRC) Study This executive summary focuses on key elements of the study process including the TH 36 Corridor vision, the recommended TH 36 Comdor Management Plan, and the Implementation Plan and Shared Strategies that are needed TH 36 Corridor Vision The corridor vision has been developed based on study participant input and relevant factors identified during the course of the study TH 36 provides an essential connection within the Twin Cities seven county metropolitan area TH 36 is a medium pnonty interregional corridor 8 5 miles long and is located entirely within the metropolitan area The rationale for the designation of TH 36 from I-694 to TH 95 as a medium pnonty interregional corridor include its connection with the Stillwater area and its service as one of the major routes connecting with western Wisconsin TH 36 also serves the adjacent communities of Stillwater, Oak Park Heights, Grant, Lake Elmo, Mahtomedi, Willernie, Pine Springs, and Oakdale This facility carries high volumes of commuter traffic and recreational/tounst traffic Traffic volumes are expected to increase due to the level of continued growth in Stillwater and Oak Park Heights, which serve as the commercial activity center for the St Croix Valley, and continued growth in Western Wisconsin The Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) has established a vision for TH 36 as a corridor that attains IRC performance goals and provides safe, efficient travel between I-694 and TH 95 in Stillwater The corridor currently operates in the range of 45 to 48 mph during the peak periods, well below the 55 mph average peak hour operating speed goal The vision will be achieved by mininuzing the need for additional signals and implementing appropriate access control strategies along the corridor Investments should be staged according to demands on the corridor Recommended Corridor Management Plan A range of alternatives have been identified and assessed based on a group of relevant factors identified dunng this study A selected alternative that has been termed "Hybrid" is the selected alternative for the TH 36 Comdor Management Plan because it adequately meets the IRC performance goals in addition to the other relevant factors The future of the St Croix River Crossing project (SCRC) has implications on study area traffic volumes and corridor performance characteristics For these reasons, two variations of the Hybnd Alternative have been identified that correlate with the two SCRC scenarios Hybrid "A" Assumes the new SCRC is built Charactenstics include interchanges at Hilton Trail and Manning Avenue, overpasses at DeMontreville Trail, Lake Elmo Avenue and Oakgreen/Greeley, maintenance of two existing signals at Norel/Washington and Osgood in Oak Park Heights and reorientation of all direct property access to TH 36 via support roadways TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Page ES 1 Minnesota Department of Transportation t s Hybrid "B" Assumes the new SCRC is not built Major characteristics are similar to Hybnd "A" with the exception of the Oakgreen/Greeley crossing The existing signal at this intersection would be maintained resulting in three total signals in the Oak Park Heights area Concept Plans for Hybrid "A" and Hybrid "B" are shown in Appendices A and B Shared Strategies/Implementation Elements Commitment, participation, cooperation, and continued action by a Corridor Management Team, representing Mn/DOT, Washington County and the affected study area municipalities, can ensure the successful implementation of the TH 36 Corridor Management Plan over the 20-year planning horizon To aid in achieving this goal, an implementation plan including shared strategies has been structured Strategies to be shared by the Corridor Management Team have been identified in correlation with improvement plan elements These elements are described below The shared strategies and implementation plan elements identified in the Corridor Management Plan are based on the analysis of current data and forecast information Actual pnonty for implementation will be affected by actual congestion, crash expenence, right-of-way acquisition, local support, physical/institutional constraints, and funding availability Initial efforts of the Comdor Management Team will focus on low cost/no cost strategies and elements followed by the more substantial/higher cost improvement plan elements as needs arise Shared Strategies 1 Under the direction of Mn/DOT, form a TH 36 Comdor Management Team to ensure continual communications between project partners and momentum in the pursuit and implementation of TH 36 Comdor Management Plan projects 2 Officially map the comdor 3 Incorporate the major concepts and strategies of the TH 36 Comdor Management Plan in updates of Comprehensive Plans at the county and municipal levels 4 Consider Mn/DOT Access Management Guidelines for all study area roadways at state, county, and local levels in review of access to new developments or redevelopments 5 Do not allow any new direct access on to TH 36 (pnvate property or public streets) 6 Locate funding for implementation plan elements 7 Conduct appropnate pre -design efforts/environmental documentation to implement plan elements 8 Program, design, and construct short-term implementation plan elements Level of Comrrutment Mn/DOT • Take a lead role in maintaining a TH 36 Corridor Management Team • Coordinate TH 36 Corridor Management Plan with other study/design efforts in the corridor TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Page ES 2 Minnesota Department of Transportation • Locate funding for the TH 36 Corridor Management Plan projects • Assist in officially mapping the corridor Washington County/Subarea Municipalities • Adopt a resolution endorsing the TH 36 Corridor Management Plan and a continued commitment to a working partnership with other involved agencies and municipalities • Participate on a TH 36 Comdor Management Team r• Locate funding for TH 36 Corridor Management Plan projects UOfficially map the corridor A graphic representation that summanzes the importance of cooperative participation by key study participants is shown in Figure 1 Implementation Plan Elements The implementation plan elements are shown graphically in Figure 2, as concept sketches on aerial base maps in Appendices A and B, and are listed below Officially map the comdor according to the Hybrid Alternative 2 Develop an agreement/design for a 3/a access intersection operation for the TH 36/CSAH 17(Lake Elmo Avenue) intersection 3 Ensure that new development plans adjacent to TH 36 will include supporting roadways that provide access to TH 36 via a public street identified with TH 36 access under the Hybrid Alternative 4 Extend frontage road north of TH 36 westerly across the Gateway Trail to connect with CSAH 36 (Hilton Trail) 5 Close the Highlands Trail access to TH 36 6 Close frontage road accesses north of TH 36 at Highlands Trail east of the Gateway Trail crossing 7 Limit CR 13 (DeMontreville Trail) full access to TH 36 to nght-in/nght-out or 3/ movements (no left out) 8 Construct supporting roadway segments adjacent to the south side of TH 36 to consolidate existing property access to TH 36 One roadway should either extend westerly from Keats Avenue or include a 3/ movement consolidated access near the Lauseng Stone commercial property The second roadway should consolidate existing dnveway access on the south side of TH 36 compatible with the construction of a supporting roadway between the CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) overpass and CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) interchange 9 Reconstruct frontage road connections north of TH 36 with CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) to provide better separation with the signalized intersection TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Page ES 3 Minnesota Department of Transportation x g. Washiii Cotm r'r Mn/DOT Lead TH 36 Corridor Management Team and Coordinate the TH 36 Corridor Management Plan with Other Studies/Design Efforts Participate in rN Participate in TH 36 CorridorTH 36 Corridor Management / \ Management - l g g / Plan Plan Projects / TH 36 Projects / l l Corridor n = , Management Plan � - N and Access pacingc�..BYr � i r . ulc ebnes s ar �a r.F ; afathe as `" to135'," ;: ? C. . a Management Team /Subarea Participate in TH 36 Corridor / Management Plan / Pr ojects ects ,/ Municipalities • Adopt a Resolution Endorsing the TH 36 Corridor Management Plan • Include TH 36 Vision in Comprehensive Plan Figure 1 fMovLn5 Minnesota TH 36 Corridor Management Plan I«> TH 36 Shared Strategy Responsibilities l Long ?. Lake\ 36 Mud ' Lake J tti CO _ e Improvements Include • Viking Dnve Closure and Fioittage Road • Hilton Trail Interchange • Hilton Trail Frontage Road Connection • Highlands Trail Closure • DeMontreville Trail Overpass • Access Management Cost $9 5 Million B/C= 3 04 with New SCRC B/C=1 97 without New SCRC Recommended Regardless of SCRC Treatment Lake Elmo take \; I-' t F r— bane , — /---I ----,--_.f-i t Grant Improvements Include • Keats Avenue RI/RO • Access Management Cost $1 5 Million B/C analysis is not relevant at this level of study due to minor nature of improvements Recommended Regardless of SCRC Treatment Sunfish Lake _—r Improvements Include' • Lake Elmo Avenue Overpass • Maruvnn Avenue Supporting Roadway Connections • Manning Avenue Interchange • Access Management Cost $10 5 Milhon B/C= 2.55 with New SCRC B/C= 2 23 without New SCRC Recommended Regardless of SCRC Treatment Lake -McKusrck - McD nald Lake Stillwater Improvements Include • Intersection Capaaty Improvements • Supporting Roadway Improvements/ Connections • Oakgreen/Greeley Overpass for Hybnd A • Maintain Existing 3 Signals for Hybnd B • Access Management Cost $10 4 Milhon B/C= 2 84 with New SCRC B/C analysis without SCRC not valid due to minor nature of improvements (3 signals remain) Improvements Vary Dependent Upon SCRC Treatment 95 Lid f zI Oak Park - Heights Note Implementation plan elements based on analysts of available data/forecasts Actual pnonty will )e deterrmned by TH 36 corridor management team based upon actual congestion, crash expenence, R/W acquisition, local support, physical/ institutional constraints, and funding availability I �I k a Muviny McNhesata TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Figure 2 TH 36 Hybrid Implementation Plan ( Maintain signalized full access intersections at CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue), Norel/Washington Avenue and CSAH 24 (Osgood Avenue) and possibly Oakgreen/Greeley dependent on the SCRC scenario 11 Construct interchange at CSAH 36 (Hilton Trail) 12 Construct CR 13 (DeMontreville Trail) grade separation in conjunction with CSAH 36 (Hilton Trail) interchange improvement 13 Close Viking Dnve access to TH 36 Reorient access via CSAH 36 (Hilton Trail) interchange (if feasible) 14 Construct improvements through Oak Park Heights (based on IRC Partnership Study results) 1�5 Construct interchange at CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) 16 Construct grade separation at CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) 17 Limit Keats Avenue full access to TH 36 to right-in/right-out or 3Aa movements (no left out) This should not occur until item 16 is in place 18 Continue to build support roadways in conjunction with land development and to support the interchange at CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue), as well as the grade separation at CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) 19 Recently the portion of TH 36 in Oak Park Heights has received a grant under the IRC Partnership Study Program This study will be a joint effort between Mn/DOT, Washington County, Stillwater, and Oak Park Heights to analyze in greater detail the local connections onto TH 36 The study will consider local land uses (existing and planned), safety, traffic flow patterns, and access issues The study will use the Hybrid "A" and Hybrid "B" conceptual improvements as a starting point and will evaluate the need for interchange and signalized access treatments along TH 36 The study is expected to start in May 2001 and be concluded by April 2002 Subarea Issues As the improvement concepts evolved, it became apparent that emphasis should be placed on two areas with respect to the overall study area 1 Consideration of Mn/DOT Access Management Guidelines by all responsible agencies Access Management Guidelines should be considered for all new land development/redevelopment and in all roadway construction/reconstruction projects in the subarea 2 Consider reclassifications of access categories for subarea system roadways that will change function with implementation of the preferred TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Funding Sources/Categories The designation of TH 36 as a medium priority interregional corridor may have implications on potential IRC funding Mn/DOT is currently undertaking studies to develop Corridor Management Plans for six high pnonty interregional corridors These studies are expected to be completed by January 2002 In the Transportation System Plan (TSP), the study area segment of TH 36 is designated a management corridor This means that the corridor will be managed to increase the safety and TH 36 Corndor Management Plan Page ES 6 Minnesota Department of Transportation efficiency of the overall transportation system Eligible types of improvements under the management designation include hazard elimination and safety, ITS strategies, advantages for transit, access management, and isolated interchange improvements These types of improvement fit very well with the improvement plan elements identified in this Corridor Management Plan Outside of IRC funding, other potential funding sources include the Management Allocation, the Cooperative Agreement Program, and the Transportation Revolving Loan Fund (TRLF) through Mn/DOT along with TEA-21 funding and the Right -of -Way Acquisition Loan Fund (RALF) through Metropolitan Council Sample Resolution The TH 36 Corridor Management Plan is expected to obtain endorsements from all partners An example resolution will be sent to all participating agencies A sample of this resolution is shown in Appendix C TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Page ES 7 Minnesota Department of Transportation Advisory Committee Participant List Name Representing Susan Moe Federal Highway Admuustration Marc Hugunin Metropolitan Council Suzann Willhite Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Lynne Kolze Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Kate Drewry Rice Creek Watershed District John P Hanson Valley Branch Watershed District Rick Vanzwol City of Grant Page Weed City of Grant Ken Lohr City of Mahtomedi Lee Hunt City of Lake Elmo Dave Kotilinek City of North St Paul Bob Bruton City of North St Paul David Beaudet City of Oak Park Heights Ted Bearth City of Oakdale Frank Bastyr City of Pine Spnngs David Johnson Stillwater Township Mary Hauser Resident Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) Participant List Name Representing Todd Clarkowski Linda Heath Otto Schmid Peggy Reichert Sandy Cullen Doug Fischer Carl Ohm Jay Kennedy Chuck Dillerud Jon Hohenstein Tom Melena Bnan Bachmeier Bill Feely Steve Russell Consultant Team Minnesota Department of Transportation Minnesota Department of Transportation Minnesota Department of Transportation Minnesota Department of Transportation Washington County Washington County Metropolitan Council City of Grant City of Lake Elmo City of Mahtomedi City of Oak Park Heights City of Oakdale City of Pine Spnngs City of Stillwater Scott McBnde SEH Brent Rusco SEH Heather Kiemtz SEH Matt Engstrom SEH Jennifer Ulmer SEH John Crawford URS/BRW April 2001 TH 36 Corridor Management Plan 1 0 Introduction/Report Purpose The purpose of this TH 36 Comdor Management Plan is to document the study process and key outcomes of the combined TH 36 Subarea/Interregional Corridor (IRC) Study Key elements of the study process include the identification of a study area purpose and need and a comdor vision based on study participant input and relevant factors that led to the identification of a recommended TH 36 improvement alternatives This study provides a blueprint/vision for responsible agencies to utilize in addressing safety and mobility needs of the study area over time It is only through the commitment of all responsible agencies that the recommendations of this study can be realized 2 0 Background TH 36 is a principal artenal roadway facility that provides an essential connection between the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area and the St Croix River Valley, including the City of Stillwater and Western Wisconsin The roadway serves adjacent communities of Oak Park Heights, Stillwater Grant, Lake Elmo, Mahtomedi, Willernie, Pine Spnngs, and Oakdale TH 36 carries a high volume of commuter traffic, as well as recreational/tourist traffic destined for the St Croix Valley The corridor also serves as a linkage for the movement of goods and services between the Stillwater area and the remainder of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area 21 TH 36 Subarea/IRC Study Evolution Washington County initiated the TH 36 Subarea Study in the spring of 1999 based on Mn/DOT's management investment strategy for the TH 36 Comdor and recognized roadway system deficiencies in the TH 36 travel shed through Washington County Recognized deficiencies included the lack of north -south roadway connectivity, the potential Page 1 for additional signalization along TH 36, and concerns with east -west roadway system capacity/traffic intensity The TH 36 Subarea Study area is bounded by TH 96 (Dellwood Road) to the north, TH 5 (Stillwater Boulevard) on the east, TH 5 (Stillwater Boulevard) to the south, and I-694 on the west The Interregional Corridor (IRC) designation for TH 36 occurred during the TH 36 Subarea Study process The TH 36 Subarea Study process was amended to correlate with the TH 36 IRC Study The Statewide IRC Technical Report' designates TH 36 as a Medium Priority Interregional Corridor with a lugh nsk of future signal proliferation that is at risk for mobility degradation by the year 2020 The technical report states the importance of TH 36 as a primary connection to the Stillwater area trade center and as a major route connecting with Wisconsin as the key rationale in designating this facility as an medium pnonty interregional corndor Mn/DOT identified an IRC work scope in correlation with the TH 36 Subarea Study The TH 36 study area was then expanded beyond TH 5 (Stillwater Boulevard) on the east to include TH 36 from I-694 to TH 95 The original scope of the TH 36 Subarea Study was found to be very compatible with the intent of the IRC guidance2 making it straight forward to merge the Subarea and the IRC guidance into a single scope of work The resulting TH 36 study scope compares closely with the mid -level planning effort identified in the IRC Guide for Plan Development assuming the entire study area segment of TH 36 is a risk/growth area A key graphic used during the course of the study that shows the TH 36 study area is shown in Figure 3 ' Statewide Interregional Corridor Study Mn/DOT January 2000 2 Interregional Corridors A Guide for Plan Development and Corridor Management, Minnesota Department of Transportation, September 2000 TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 2 1120 General Rural (4 per 40) Semi -Rural (8 per 40) Rural Residential (16 per 40) Suburban Housing Commercial/ Industrial Major Parks and Natural Areas Other Public/Quasi- Pubhc and Government Lakes/Rivers II I I I— , I 1 J k`z/o 44, z Figure 3 Moviny Minnesota TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Year 2020 Generalized Land Use 3 0 Study Participation 31 Study Committees Two committees were formed to assist in the TH 36 study process and to serve as a conduit for public outreach The TH 36 Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) is a working comrruttee composed of engineers, planners, city clerks, and administrators from Mn/DOT, Washington County, cities and townships, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and the Metropolitan Council The TEC has met monthly to identify issues, review information, and develop and evaluate alternatives to address future roadway needs The second committee is the TH 36 Advisory Comnuttee The members of this committee are policymakers, businesses, and residents from affected and neighboring communities along the TH 36 Comdor (school distracts, metropolitan and state agencies, and the Federal Highway Administration) The Advisory Committee functions remotely and operates largely from correspondence and common sources of information and data provided by the TEC Members serve as advisors to the local, regional, and state governing agencies 3 2 Public Involvement Two open houses were included as part of the study process The first open house was held on Wednesday, January 26, 2000 The open house provided the public with an opportunity to provide comments and learn about the study process, preliminary issues, draft traffic forecasts, and access management guidelines/pnnciples The second open house will be held near the conclusion of the study to gain additional public input, present the alternatives, implementation process, and next steps This open house is currently planned for late April 2001 More detail on public outreach can be reviewed in Technical Memorandum No 1 3 3 Participant Identified Issues A number of issues were identified by the TEC, the Advisory Committee, and public input These issues are documented in Technical Memorandum No 2 and consist of local/regional transportation issues and land use/development related issues Identification of the issues resulted in an initial list of study goals that are as follows TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 4 1 • Document a future vision for TH 36, including preservation and protection of future right-of-way • Identify access management strategies to implement future improvements • Identify transportation system alternatives, traffic management strategies, and a recommended plan to safely accommodate forecasted traffic growth • Use TH 36 Corridor Management Plan recommendations to provide support for implementing the official map process • Develop implementation strategies for the proposed recommendations 4 0 Planned Improvements/Studies 41 Planned Improvements There are two planned improvement projects that are critical base assumptions for conducting the TH 36 study The first project is the improvement of CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) to a four -lane divided facility between TH 96 (Dellwood Road) and TH 36 The improvement of CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) is planned to be done in two phases, with the first phase improvement for the segment from CSAH 12 (Stillwater Road/75`h Street N) to TH 36 This first phase improvement is currently in Washington County's Capital Improvement Program (CIP), but is subject to funding availability The second project is the replacement of the existing St Croix River Crossing (SCRC) During the course of this study, the timing and approval of the new SCRC has become less certain In response to the uncertainty over the future SCRC plan, this study has been supplemented to include an analysis scenario that assumes a new SCRC is not built within the 20-year planning horizon 4 2 IRC Partnership Study in Oak Park Heights Recently, the portion of TH 36 in Oak Park Heights has received a grant under the IRC Partnership Study Program This study will be a joint effort between Mn/DOT, Washington County, Stillwater, and Oak Park Heights to analyze in greater detail the local connections onto TH 36 The study will consider local land uses (existing and planned), safety, traffic flow patterns, and access issues The study will use the Hybrid "A" and Hybrid "B" conceptual improvements as a starting point and will evaluate the need for interchange and signalized access treatments along TH 36 at these locations The study is expected to start in May 2001 and be concluded by April 2002 TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 5 5 0 Purpose and NeedNision 5 1 Purpose and Need Historically, as growth has occurred in the TH 36 study area, traffic volumes have increased along with congestion and safety concerns The existing and planned character of Grant and Lake Elmo includes large lot low -density residential development with a minimal roadway network This has resulted in a minimum number of continuous roadways and new roadways characterized by subdivision streets with a cul-de-sac at one end It is expected that this trend will continue to support the rural nature of these communities in the future The existing and planned character of Stillwater and Oak Park Heights along TH 36 includes higher density mixed commercial and residential development Although obstructions exist, efforts have been made to improve local roadway system continuity The remaining study area communities of Oakdale, Pine Springs, Mahtomedi, and Willemie are nearly fully developed and depend on TH 36 as a major element for access and mobility Washington County and Mn/DOT have recognized the need to improve north -south roadway continuity and east -west capacity through the study area for some time Many of these opportunities have been prevented by land use development patterns The above characteristics have resulted in a limited number of artenal roadway facilities serving multiple functions including the accommodation of through trips and direct property access The above issues have contributed to the existing TH 36 facility characterized as a principal arterial four -lane divided expressway type facility that includes direct property access, frequent intersections with public roadways, and increasing signalization of high volume cross streets There are currently five signalized intersections along the corridor with a sixth signal previously considered for installation at CR 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) This intersection is now being considered for 3/ access in conformance with the improvement plan vision of this study The intent of the TH 36 Corridor Management Plan is to ensure that a unified vision is identified for the TH 36 study area that can optimize the utility of the transportation system with minimal new support roadways The TH 36 Corridor Management Plan will also ensure that TH 36 can attain its intended function as a principal arterial facility that attains performance targets and operates in a safe and efficient TH 36 Corndor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 6 manner and that corridor improvements can be implemented over time as needs continue to arise 5 2 Corridor Vision The above purpose and need was used to develop a corridor vision in conformance with IRC guidance TH 36 provides an essential connection within the Twin Cities seven county metropolitan area TH 36 from I-694 to TH 95 is a medium pnonty interregional corridor, 8 5 miles long, and is located entirely within the metropolitan area The rationale for the designation of TH 36 as a medium pnonty interregional corridor include its connection with the Stillwater area and its service as one of the major routes connecting with western Wisconsin TH 36 also serves the adjacent communities of Stillwater, Oak Park Heights, Grant, Lake Elmo, Mahtomedi, Willerrue, Pine Springs, and Oakdale This facility carries high volumes of commuter traffic and recreational/tounst traffic Traffic volumes are expected to increase due to the level of continued growth in Stillwater and Oak Park Heights, which serve as the commercial activity center for the St Croix Valley, and continued growth in Western Wisconsin The TEC has established a vision for TH 36 as a corridor that attains IRC performance goals and provides safe, efficient travel between I- 694 and TH 95 in Stillwater The comdor currently operates in the range of 45 to 48 mph during the peak periods, well below the 55 mph average peak hour IRC operating speed performance goal The vision will be achieved by minimizing the need for additional signals and implementing appropriate access control strategies through allowing or discouraging capital investments along the comdor Investments should be staged according to demands on the comdor 6 0 Relevant Factors There are a number of relevant factors identified as part of the study process that must be taken into account in the consideration of transportation improvements in the study area 6 1 TH 36 Corridor Related A number of relevant factors have been identified that are the basis for development of the TH 36 Comdor improvement concepts These relevant factors have been organized into the seven categones listed and defined below 1 IRC Performance Evaluation 2 Access Evaluation 3 Forecast Traffic Volumes/Operational Analysis TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 7 4 Observed Operational and Geometric Deficiencies 5 Safety 6 Land Use Development Patterns 7 Transit Planning These factors are fully documented in Technical Memorandums No 4, 5, 6, and 7B A key exhibit was used during the study process that illustrates many of these relevant factors and other corridor issues and constraints on large scale aerial and parcel base mapping Information from this exhibit is summanzed graphically in Figures 4A and 4B 6 2 Subarea System Analysis The TH 36 Corridor Improvement Plan impacts the subarea The level of improvement on TH 36 has implications on the magnitude of east - west through traffic that can be accommodated on TH 36 and the magnitude of east -west through traffic that may orient on parallel routes such as CSAH 12 (Stillwater Road/75th Street N), TH 5, and CSAH 14 (40th Street N) The location of access points on TH 36 will also have implications on the level of traffic that will be onented on north -south facilities and, to a lesser degree, east -west routes See Technical Memorandum No 4, Traffic Forecasting The subarea study looked at a number of issues and the key findings include • The improvement of CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) between TH 96 and TH 36 to a four -lane divided roadway with turn lanes increases the road capacity, which helps to reduce traffic volumes on CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) between CSAH 12 and TH 36 and on CSAH 36 (Hilton Trail) Washington County has CSAH 15 reconstruction from a two-lane to a four -lane facility from just north of CSAH 12 to TH 36 in their current Capital Improvement Program subject to funding availability • The connection of CSAH 9 (Jamaca Avenue) between CSAH 12 and TH 36 was found not to be a cost-effective project It has been a candidate for improvement based on Washington County's Comprehensive Transportation Plan for many years The analysis showed that the cost of the improvement would be too high based on the amount of traffic it would attract The traffic forecasts also showed that based on the currently forecast level of development in the area, the existing road system could accommodate the forecast traffic with some improvements TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 8 Long Lake Mud Lake t ~, Gateway 1 J� / Trail Public Intersection Spacing Deficiencies 8 1 Pine Pine Springs g a ',Lake/ I4 De Montreville , Lake�= Olson i s 1 1 1 �a 1 Willernie i _ i '„ $ J I Sunnybrook + ' Lake ItMinimal Pronta :e Road Intersection Spacing Private Driveway Spacing Deficiencies Lake Elmo -Lake Jane, _,Clear), Lake 7 ii A i J .14 Figure 4A ifq ttt Movcny Minnesota TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Relevant TH 36 Issues and Deficiencies Map Sunnybrook + Lake 1 J i IS Minimal Fronts ,e Road Intersection Spacing Private Driveway Spacing eficie cies .Imo 1 Lake') i .1J , d J i i J 41 Figure 4A 44 • Relevant TH 36 Issues and Deficiencies Map • CSAH 36 is functioning as more than a collector road (its current functional classification) It is functioning as a minor artenal Collector roadways are designed to serve shorter trips They collect and distnbute traffic from neighborhoods and commercial and industrial areas to the artenal system They emphasize equally mobility and access Minor arterial roadways connect important locations within Washington County with access points on the Metropolitan Highway System and with other important locations within the County The emphasis on minor arterials is mobility CSAH 36 does connect downtown Mahtomedi/Willerme with TH 36 CSAH 36 also connects with CSAH 12, which provides connections from other locations north and east of CSAH 36 to TH 36 The emphasis of CSAH 36 is more on mobility than access, but it does have a number of access points on it Washington County plans to change the functional classification of CSAH 36 to a nunor arterial The realignment of the TH 5/Manning Avenue intersection in Lake Elmo to make Manning Avenue and TH 5 to the northeast the through movement was not found to redistribute enough traffic away from downtown Lake Elmo to make a significant difference The City of Lake Elmo completed an origin -destination study in 2000 that helped validate these results Technical Memorandum 7B, Subarea System Alternatives, discusses these issues in more detail 6 3 Recreational and Environmental Assets Existing and proposed recreational and environmental assets in the TH 36 study area were inventoried as a major relevant factor category This information will be used to identify opportunities for recreational and environmental improvements associated with improvement alternatives on TH 36 Figure 5 illustrates the existing and proposed assets in the TH 36 Subarea These assets are fully descnbed m Technical Memorandum No 9 The TH 36 Subarea contains numerous recreational and environmental assets including parks and open space, trails, scenic areas, lakes, rivers, wetlands, and histoncal sites These assets are summanzed below TH 36 Corndor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 11 PA -with t 'Iv waJ 8-plichig, Den ei 13r- Long Lake -' Oak -Park Heights Planned Central Business District McDohald Cake; Stillwater Lily, - Lake Minim Frontage Road Intersection Spacing - r, J a L - Oak Park Heights Signal Spacing Deficiencies Ihrdirgif Oak Palk Heights Figure 4B Moving Minnesota • TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Relevant TH 36 Issues and Deficiencies Map i t Parks and Open Space • Kathenne Abbott Nature Center in Mahtomedi • Lake Elmo Park Reserve • Sunfish Lake Park and West Sunfish Lake Park in Lake Elmo • Brown's Creek Park and Nature Preserve in Stillwater • Numerous neighborhood and commumty parks throughout the study area Trails • Willard Munger State Trail/Gateway Trail • County View Bike Trail in Grant (along CR 12) • Burlington, East River, Mahtomedi • Norell Trail in Stillwater • Numerous local trails Scenic Areas and Roads • Two scenic overlooks Lowell Park) • TH 96 • TH 95 • CSAH 15 East Avenue, and Hilton Trails in in Stillwater (South Broadway Street, Lakes and Rivers • Wlute Bear Lake • Long Lake and Echo Lake in Mahtomedi • Lake Masterman and Sunnybrook Lake in Grant • Lake DeMontreville, Lake Olson, Lake Jane, Clear Lake, and Sunfish Lake in Lake Elmo • South Twin Lake, Lake McKusick, Long Lake and Lily Lake in Stillwater • McDonald Lake in Oak Park Heights • Numerous small lakes scattered throughout the study area • St Croix River Wetlands • There are numerous wetlands throughout the study area including many DNR protected waters • Lake Elmo conducted a detailed study identifying its wetlands in 1982 entitled Lake Elmo Water Resources Inventory Historical Sites • Historic lift bndge in Stillwater • Downtown Stillwater's commercial distracts and landscape TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 13 • Historic streetcar line in Grant, Stillwater, and Mahtomedi Proposed Recreational and Environmental Assets • The Green Comdor Project • Several proposed parks in the TH 36 study area including large ones in Oak Park Heights, Stillwater, and Lake Elmo • Several proposed local and regional trails in the study area including the Lake Links Trail around White Bear Lake, East Avenue Trail Link and Streetcar Trails in Mahtomedi, Norell Trail in Oak Park Heights, and the Highway 95 Trail 7 0 Alternatives Development 71 Key Assumptions Development of preliminary TH 36 mainline alternatives has been based on the review of relevant factors and input from the public, the TEC and the Advisory Comnuttee Performance evaluations of baseline no improvement conditions indicate the study comdor does not meet IRC performance cntena (described in more detail in Section 7 0) This has been a key factor in developing an initial range of alternatives An analysis scenario that assumes the SCRC is not built within the 20- year planning horizon was added late in the study process This report presents the improvement scenarios assuming the new SCRC is built first followed by a discussion of the implications of the No -Build SCRC scenario Existing and planned land use development patterns in adjacent communities has also been a key factor in identifying full access locations under each of the alternatives The alternatives attempt to minimize TH 36 access related impacts through the low growth communities of Grant and Lake Elmo, while providing a higher level of access through Mahtomedi, Oak Park Heights, and Stillwater Key support roadways were anticipated for each of the alternatives The timing and extent of some support roadway construction will be dependent on a number of factors including land use development patterns, physical constraints, and local support The charactenstics of each alternative are fully described in Technical Memorandum No 7B (the Hybnd Alternatives are shown graphically in the Appendices A and B) The identification of alternatives process is fully documented in Techmcal Memorandum No 7B Key elements of this memorandum are repeated below TH 36 mainline improvements and subarea system improvements are addressed separately TH 36 Corndor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 14 7 2 Concept Development Approach The TH 36 Corridor improvement alternatives have been developed as representative conceptual sketches on an aerial base map to provide the following • An indication of relative social, economic, and environmental impacts • An indication of likely support roadway improvement needs • An understanding of TH 36 accessibility for adjacent communities • A basis to evaluate TH 36 performance characteristics • An understanding of potential safety/operating issues Representative concepts were developed using 1997 aerial base mapping supplemented by each study area communities Comprehensive Plan information, a field inventory of recent land use development, new roadways, other sensitive features (e g parks, new trails), and an inventory of existing and proposed recreational and environmental assets As the TH 36 study evolved, it became apparent that improvement alternatives would be limited to access control/intersection capacity improvements on the existing TH 36 alignment A number of support roadway connection improvements are proposed in conjunction with access control improvements 7 3 Levels of Improvement As the alternatives development and performance evaluation evolved, three levels of improvement were studied including an Expressway Alternative, a Hybrid Alternative, and a Freeway Alternative Through development and assessment of preliminary improvement concepts, it became apparent that a maximum of two signalized intersections along TH 36 would be necessary to meet IRC performance goals These alternatives are characterized as follows Expressway Alternative This alternative is charactenzed by minimal operational and safety improvements that are low cost and low impact (pnmanly within the existing nght-of-way) These improvements include access control and movement restriction improvements at unsignalized intersections Hybnd Alternative The Hybrid Alternative has evolved dunng this study based on input from the TEC and iterative performance evaluations of various treatments along the corndor This alternative is charactenzed by controlled access including interchanges at Hilton Trail and Manning Avenue, overpasses at DeMontreville Trail and Lake Elmo Avenue, and Oakgreen/Greeley, maintaining signalized TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 15 control at Norel/Washington and Osgood, right-in/right out access at Keats Avenue and reorientation of all existing direct property access Freeway Alternative This alternative is a fully access controlled facility with interchange access at selected crossing roadways A pnmary goal of the development of improvement alternatives has been to ensure that the various improvement scenarios are compatible such that the TH 36 Comdor could efficiently evolve with little or no wasted infrastructure from expressway through hybrid to freeway The freeway scenario is unlikely unless the TH 36 IRC classification and associated performance goals were to change 8 0 Assessment of Alternatives The IRC performance guidelines, operational analysis, and Mn/DOT's access guidelines provide the most quantitative/technical basis for assessing the alternatives The remaining relevant factors (land use development patterns, observed operating and geometric deficiencies, and crash analysis) are less quantitative at this level of study, but no less important in the assessment of alternatives The IRC performance criteria are based upon a 55 mph average speed over an average one -hour trip The TEC decided to use the 55 mph cntena for the study segment of TH 36 even though the average trip length is less than the one -hour guideline A detailed description of performance analysis methodology is included in Technical Memorandum No 7B Currently, the comdor is performing below target (45 to 48 mph during the peak periods) It is anticipated that future performance (year 2020) will be well below target (in the range of 35 to 42 mph during the peak penods) if no improvements are made and a signal is installed at Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) The land use development factor is the same under the three alternatives, and therefore, it is addressed here before discussion of each individual alternative Generally, all three alternatives support each community's existing and proposed land use development patterns Each alternative limits access through Grant and Lake Elmo, which supports these communities limited growth policies Pine Springs, Mahtomedi, Oak Park Heights, and Stillwater have higher density development patterns (existing and proposed) that correlates with the level of access proposed through these communities 8 1 Assessment with the New SCRC Being Built The findings of the comparative assessment summary are presented below with respect to the key IRC performance cntena IRC TH 36 Corndor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 16 performance results are summarize in Table 1 and discussed briefly below Expressway Alternative Does not meet the 55 mph peak hour IRC performance guidelines Essentially, the Expressway Alternative has mainline operational benefits of limiting some full access locations to right-in/right-out movements However, this alternative assumes the addition of a signalized intersection at CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) The impact of the additional signal is illustrated in Table 1 by the 26 to 28 percent increases in the number of stops along the comdor during the peak hours over the 2020 No -Build Alternative This intersection is now being considered for 3/4 access in conformance with the improvement plan vision for this Comdor Management Plan Hybrid Alternative Represents the level of improvement that would be needed to attain IRC performance levels Table 1 shows that the number of stops decreases by 65 percent and 67 percent from the 2020 No -Build Alternative Limiting the corridor to two signals in this alternative increases the mainline average speed to attain the IRC performance target and decreases the number of stops Freeway Alternative Exceeds the IRC performance guidelines The Freeway Alternative eliminates all direct access to TH 36 and represents the optimal performance alternative for TH 36 mainline traffic operations 8 2 Assessment without the New SCRC Being Built Analysis Scenario This scenario has been analyzed using the same tools/methodology as the scenano that includes the new SCRC being built including development of traffic volume forecasts and performance analysis methodology The alternatives development process focused on the preferred Hybrid Alternative given that this is the level of improvement that meets IRC performance goals Several iterations of performance analysis indicate that the Hybrid Alternative without the new SCRC being built (Hybrid "B") is similar to the original Hybrid (Hybnd "A") with access consolidation, overpasses at DeMontreville Trail and Lake Elmo Avenue and interchanges at Hilton Trail and Manning Avenue The performance analysis indicates the difference is that the number of signals allowable in the corridor increases from two to three TH 36 Comdor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 17 AM Peak Hour Table 1 Trunk Highway 36 Mainline Performance New St Croix River Crossing Being Built Scenario 2 SIonaist3i Performance IRC Guideline Performance Target 2000 Existing 2020 No Build 2020 Expressway(1) 2020 Freeway 2020 Hybrid A TH 36 Eastbound Average Speed (mph) 55 49 45 46 65 59 TH 36 Westbound Average Speed (mph) 55 47 40 38 63 59 TH 36 Average Speed 55 48 42 41 64 59 Performance Category' Below Below Below Above At Number of Stops 5 804 12 289 15 435 0 4 297 Change In Number of Stops from 2020 No -Build (% + or ) +26% 100% 65% PM Peak Hour 2 Sianalst3i Performance IRC Guideline Performance Target 2000 Existing 2020 No Build 2020 Expresswaytll 2020 Freeway 2020 Hybnd °A Eastbound Average Speed (mph) 55 47 33 30 65 y Westbound Average Speed (mph) 55 42 38 36 63 58 TH 36 Average Speed 55 45 35 32 64 57 Performance Categoryr`i Below Below Below Above At Number of Stops 8 690 21 058 26 985 0 6 968 Change In Number of Stops from 2020 No -Build (% + or ) +28% 100% 67% Notes, r'r Reduced performance between the 2020 No Build and 2020 Expressway alternatives Is due to an assumed additional traffic signal at Lake Elmo Avenue under the Expressway scenario (2) IRC Performance Category Below S 55 mph At 56-60 mph Above 2 61 mph Source Interregional Corridors A Guide for Plan Development and Corridor Management Mn/DOT September 2000 m Assumes two of the existing signals In Oak Park Heights are maintained at Osgood and Norel/Washington TH 36 Corridor Management Pien 4/18/01 This additional signal should be the existing signal at the Oakgreen/Greeley intersection given this intersection's location with respect to the two other remaining signals in the comdor resulting in the lowest impact on corridor performance A signal at this location would be coordinated with the other two signals and have less impact on performance than an isolated signal on a higher speed segment of the corridor The analysis results are summanzed in Table 2 8 3 SCRC Scenario Volume Comparison The overall traffic forecasts indicate the study area would experience less traffic volume growth without the new SCRC being built Year 2020 traffic forecasts indicate that a demand of 23,900 VPD would desire to cross the existing lift bridge while 34,400 VPD would be expected to cross the new SCRC However, because of the location of the existing lift bridge relative to TH 36 and the subarea roadway network, several east -west routes would experience increases in traffic These routes include TH 96 and CR 12 Traffic volume forecast details can be obtained from Technical Memorandum No 4 9 0 Recommended Corridor Management Plan The Hybrid Alternative is the selected alternative for the TH 36 Corridor Management Plan because it adequately meets the IRC performance goals in addition to the other relevant factors previously descnbed As described earlier, the future of the SCRC has implications on the study area traffic volumes and corridor performance characteristics For these reasons, Hybnds "A" and `B" have been identified that correlate with the SCRC Build and No -Build scenarios Hybrid "A" Assumes the new SCRC is built Characteristics include interchanges at Hilton Trail and Manning Avenue, overpasses at DeMontreville Trail, Lake Elmo Avenue and Oakgreen/Greeley, maintenance of two existing signals at Washington/ Norel and Osgood in Oak Park Heights and reorientation of all direct property access to TH 36 via support roadways Hybnd `B" Assumes the new SCRC is not built Major characteristics are similar to Hybrid "A" with the exception of the Oakgreen/Greeley crossing The existing signal at this intersection would be maintained resulting in three total signals in the study area TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 19 Table 2 Trunk Highway 36 Mainline Performance St Croix River Crossing No -Build Scenario AM Peak Hour 2 SigneIse2t 2020 Hybnd Al (4) 3 Signals(3) 2020 Hybrid B Performance IRC Guideline Performance Target 2000 Existing TH 36 Eastbound Average Speed (mph) 55 49 59 58 TH 36 Westbound Average Speed (mph) 55 47 60 58 TH 36 Average Speed 55 48 59 58 Performance Category Below At At Number of Stops 5 804 2 768 5 217 PM Peak Hour 2 Signals(2) 3 Signals(3) 2020 Hybrid B Performance IRC Guideline Performance Target 2000 Existing 2020 Hybrid "Al (4) Eastbound Average Speed (mph) 55 47 61 55 Westbound Average Speed (mph) 55 42 59 55 TH 36 Average Speed 55 45 60 55 Performance Category") Below At At/Below Number of Stops 8 690 3 613 7 562 Notes, nl IRC Performance Category. Below S 55 mph At 5660mph Above > 61 mph Source lntemeglonal Corridors A Guide for Plan Development and Corridor Management Mn/DOT September2000 tpr Assumes two of the existing signals In Oak Park Heights are maintained at Osgood and Nord/Washington of Assumes three existing signals along TH 36 in Oak Park Heights are maintained at Osgood Oakgreen/Greeley and Noret/Washington rn Assumes Hybrid A improvements and traffic volume conditions without SCRC being built TH 36 Corridor Management Plan 4/18/01 Concept Plans for Hybnd "A" and Hybrid "B" are shown in Appendices A and B 10 0 Implementation/Shared Strategies The purpose of this section is to document shared implementation strategies for the hybrid altemative(s) along with an implementation plan that lists potential individual project elements within the overall plan The implementation plan does not address the potential for funding of project elements Therefore, the recommended timing of improvements over a 20-year horizon has not been identified Funding strategies/cost participation issues will be addressed by the ongoing Corridor Management Team Implementation and staging is fully documented in Technical Memorandum No 8 101 Implementation Plan Commitment, participation, cooperation, and action by the Comdor Management Team can ensure the successful implementation of the TH 36 Corridor Management Plan over the 20-year design horizon To aid in achieving this goal, an implementation plan including shared strategies has been structured The implementation plan elements are shown graphically in Figure 2 of the Executive Summary Shared strategies have been identified in correlation with improvement plan elements These elements are described below The shared strategies and implementation plan elements identified in the Corridor Management Plan are based on the analysis of current data and forecast information Actual pnonty for implementation will be affected by actual congestion, crash expenence, right-of-way acquisition, local support, physical/institutional constraints, and funding availability Initial efforts of the Comdor Management Team will focus on low cost/no cost strategies and elements followed by the more substantial higher cost improvement plan elements as needs arise 10 2 Shared Strategies 1 Under the direction of Mn/DOT, form a TH 36 Comdor Management Team to ensure continual communications between project partners and momentum in the pursuit and implementation of TH 36 Corridor Management Plan projects TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 21 2 Officially map the comdor 3 Incorporate the major concepts and strategies of the TH 36 Corndor Management Plan in updates of Comprehensive Plans at the county and municipal levels 4 Consider Mn/DOT Access Management Guidehnes for all study area roadways at state, county, and local levels m review of access to new developments or redevelopments (refer to Technical Memorandums No 5 and No 6 5 Do not allow any new direct access on to TH 36 (private property or public streets) 6 Locate funding for implementation plan elements 7 Conduct appropriate pre -design efforts/environmental documentation to implement implementation plan elements 8 Program, design, and construct implementation plan elements 10 3 Strategy Responsibility The shared and subarea access strategies have been distributed to each of the participating agencies to clearly identify responsibilities and to provide an indication of the level of commitment required for successful implementation of the TH 36 Corndor Management Plan Mn/DOT • Take a lead role in maintaining a TH 36 Corridor Management Team • Coordinate TH 36 Corridor Management Plan with other study/design efforts in the corridor • Locate funding for the TH 36 Comdor Management Plan projects • Assist officially mapping the corridor Washington County/Subarea Municipahties • Adopt the TH 36 Corndor Management Plan • Participate on a TH 36 Corridor Management Team • Assist in officially mapping the corridor • Locate funding for TH 36 Comdor Management Plan projects 10 4 Implementation Plan Elements 1 Officially map the comdor according to the Hybnd Alternative TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 22 2 Develop an agreement/design for a 3/ access intersection operation for the TH 36/ CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) intersection 3 Ensure that new development plans adjacent to TH 36 will include supporting roadways that provide access to TH 36 via a public street identified by TH 36 access under the Hybrid Alternative 4 Extend frontage road north of TH 36 westerly across the Gateway Trail to connect with CSAH 36 (Hilton Trail) 5 Close the Highlands Trail access to TH 36 6 Close frontage road accesses north of TH 36 at Highlands Trail east of the Gateway Trail crossing 7 Limit CR 13 (DeMontreville Trail) full access to TH 36 to nght- in/nght-out or 3/a movements (no left out) 8 Construct supporting roadway segments adjacent to the south side of TH 36 to consolidate existing property access to TH 36 One roadway should either extend westerly from Keats Avenue or include a 3/ movement consolidated access near the Lauseng Stone commercial property The second roadway should consolidate existing dnveway access on the south side of TH 36 compatible with the construction of a supporting roadway between the CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) overpass and CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) interchange 9 Reconstruct frontage road connections north of TH 36 with CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) to provide better separation with the signalized intersection 10 Maintain signalized full access intersections at Norel/Washington Avenue and CSAH 24 (Osgood Avenue) and possibly Oakgreen/Greeley dependent on the SCRC scenario 11 Construct interchange at CSAH 36 (Hilton Trail) 12 Construct CR 13 (DeMontreville Trail) grade separation in conjunction with CSAH 36 (Hilton Trail) interchange improvement 13 Close Viking Drive access to TH 36 Reorient access via CSAH 36 (Hilton Trail) interchange (if feasible) 14 Construct improvements through Oak Park Heights (based on IRC Partnership Study results) 15 Construct interchange at CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) 16 Construct grade separation at CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) 17 Limit Keats Avenue full access to TH 36 to nght-in/right-out or 3/ movements (no left out) This should not occur until item 16 is in place TH 36 Corridor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 23 18 Construct grade separation at CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) 19 Limit Keats Avenue full access to TH 36 to nght-in/right-out or 3/ movements (no left out) 20 Continue to build support roadways in conjunction with land development and to support the interchange at CSAH 15 (Mamung Avenue), as well as the grade separation at CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) 21 Recently the portion of TH 36 in Oak Park Heights has received a grant under the IRC Partnership Study Program This study will be a joint effort between Mn/DOT, Washington County, Stillwater, and Oak Park Heights to analyze in greater detail the local connections onto TH 36 The study will consider local land uses (existing and planned), safety, traffic flow patterns, and access issues The study will use the Hybrid "A" and Hybrid "B" conceptual improvements as a starting point and will evaluate the need for interchange and signalized access treatments along TH 36 at these locations The study is expected to start in April 2001 and be concluded by April 2002 10 5 Subarea Issues As the improvement concepts evolved, it became apparent that emphasis should be placed on two areas for subarea roadways 1 Consideration of Mn/DOT Access Management Guidelines by all responsible agencies Access Management Guidelines should be considered for all new land development/redevelopment and in all roadway construction/reconstruction projects in the subarea 2 Consider reclassifications of access categories for subarea system roadways that will change function with implementation of the preferred TH 36 Comdor Management Plan 11 0 Funding Sources/Categories The designation of TH 36 as a medium pnonty interregional comdor comdor may have implications on potential IRC funding Mn/DOT is currently undertaking studies to develop Comdor Management Plans for six high pnonty interregional corridors These studies are expected to be completed by January 2002 In the Transportation System Plan (TSP), the study area segment of TH 36 is designated a management comdor This means that the corridor will be managed to increase the safety and efficiency of the overall transportation system Eligible types of improvements under the management designation include hazard elimination and safety, ITS strategies, advantages for transit, access management, and isolated interchange improvements These types of improvement fit very well TH 36 Corndor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 24 with the improvement plan elements identified in this Corridor Management Plan Outside of IRC funding, other potential funding sources include Management Allocation, the Cooperative Agreement Program, and the Transportation Revolving Loan Fund (TRLF) through Mn/DOT along with TEA-21 funding and the Right -of -Way Acquisition Loan Fund (RALF) through Metropolitan Council 12 0 Sample Resolution The TH 36 Corridor Management Plan is expected to obtain endorsements from all partners An example resolution will be sent to all participating agencies A sample of this resolution from Mn/DOT's IRC guidance is shown in Appendix C \hprilesZcorpdodwpkpfojectainnUnndntWIOR 1manageplan.doc TH 36 Corndor Management Plan Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 25 Appendix A Hybrid "A" Improvement Concept Plan LEG ENO Ems 4 LANE ROADWAY ® p p 44 POO1 2 LANE ROADWAY DODO 32 POO1 PRON1A66 ROADWAY e® t6 POO1 INIRRGNAN66 RAMP ROADWAY XREAM ex Ig11N6 1116111 IN/RI&N1 Alf AGGRO ® 616NALIM IN16R66G11ON TH 36 SUSAK-A STUiY HYSRI0 A GONGEP1 SGAI,g I I NIGH = 800 FEEL e` 1 03/22/01 ,r rn FIGURE I OF 5 14 Far 2 tAwe ROADWAY 32 FOOf ORON1A66, ROADWAY 16 FOOf INfeRGMAN6e RAMP MAMMY HYSK I A CONCEPT SGA1,: 1 I NGH = BOO IJKE 2 OP 5 DEE 119E1103 moon L-E4ENO 4 LANE ROADWAY 44 FOOT 2 1..AN6 ROAOWAY 32 FOOT DRONTA66 ROADWAY 16 FOOT 1N1'CKG1IAN66 RAW ROADWAY R6MOVC 6711611CW R16171 IN/C16142 OUT ACC666 di) 616NAL1260 11,126C9CGTION TH 36 SUbAKA STUOY GrA •I 03/22/01 '1/41tri HYSIL A GONGPT SCALE,: I I NIGH = BOO PE.1 P I &UKE 3 OP 5 ®®® MEM simnel r - -•nr•rrr•r 7 6 GENfE[ i¢1(. 1?' `iaL. • 4 .� Tw. l i c �+r — h� SF�VIG 5 6LLG. � � � -1r - '� � r �� Lei/ I, � ' *traltler!ACOE4 I+-_��IF�dI�_�'_ :f") ��� fir, a 1 A [_ C; iJ.xT9` 1~y, `� �'7 ,•r77�7r'� '�1tl�� = 1[7�, VV ilt tL} I i r{dye d' J "rks�Ia �jk=i��'c�11 '1 1��l�:L�r[R7�� ^ w r ! e Yea+" „i 1 " !ei[ � t a:? �� .. �T/ �` � � �� I�,�i ?fA'"'.,ig 1t r srx f� ,1141*. }�� �� 7 `!j ! 1 ��[1 1 '' �' � �`�YI Ili 1a� �.}Q� x ++� '1Y � F inj J": � ` _� i - I t `���'�f" � 5�� I1C�1 � �!t ;+y . �' "C'�ti�dl L7 L i._.-� rof �1. ar"{�?#� ��j =r�������� �'" � � �r � � 1&'�.�if!'lSI�� `f �'�_��� � � � �' .+�. •v �I°�"� �.. f % . ,:1 �I�. ►alga L.E4ENO 4 LANE ROADWAY 44 000f 2 LANE MAMMY 32 000f PRONfA66 ROADWAY 16 FOOT INf6RGNAN66 RAMP ROADWAY x REMOVE EXIOf IN6 ROOMY IN/RI6M1 0U1 AGG666 616NALIS60 INi6R06011ON TN 36 SUSAK-A STUOY IHYSKIO A CONCEPT SGALE: I INGH = 600 FEET 03/22/0I (0) ern FIGUKE 5 OP 5 zIu ,p APP.h4Maltit 1-545-NO 4 LANG ROADWAY Wall 44 FOOT 2 1.046 ROAOWAY C113013 32 POOf ORONVA64 ROADWAY somas 16 1.001 INIDOCMANSI RAMP ROADWAY texon 04191.1116 RIANY 1N/1116Mf OUI AGG666 616NAL1Z60 INfIRDWG1I0N r,1,3*-^ 4$4.- ``ttebn. • 7 w44711 ix—M it: wesillto lien ,f.-..'b: . Vilifip 4111 f :,111 7 ..,14, - PI & 1W le , glIvir, z ...0 . • ., " , ,'. 111-1 36 SUSAKA STUOY MYH7 A CONCEPT SGAl,E: I I NGH = BOO 101 03/22/01 „no, I &UKE 4 OI 5 Appendix B Hybrid "B" Improvement Concept Plan 1 a ,,.„et.,-.!, Oh + 4 c caNrte�:.„ v ---,i--..*..... � leal EnapP,11:16 i if/ 311 w - ..r... _ .4111#141:AA6HENgragE1-2'414"311-Nefil.'"-PF 'i .- .a „. ", .' i1f V v��Rl� r � �.yj �f�`o ;q—Li4(j�1 '' .'&'ill.t,:r.si: .:.} - i "I .....". ,.. -..,.. PIM y� �'rt4,AAriip16:fiilkfi�jhjl14' *.l.t '6‘4141111:4 17:114WIE I Crir14/4447"..le'Zint-tOr4g ' 414411r; lInt.VirlirielZ_C$ 'IT 4 -• 0 51- < ti4i W t itifete-6.• - I:1,4MM , Na't 2 14 i' , 4; ' - , i h:"It-;4.4141eIrt2' go flog -wooer -A 1 IF ' '''. %SOL-- -1-iiiii--*512 1::— ji ®®® 4 LANE ROADWAY ®m® 44 POOP 2 LANE ROADWAY DDDD 32 FOOT PRONVA6E ROAOOAY 16 FOOT 1NfERGMAN6E KAYO ROAOIIAY LEGEND x REMOVE E%16fIN6 R16Mf IN/R16MT OUT AGGE66 616NALI ZEO INfER2EGI1ON TH 36 SUI5AK -A STUDY HYSRIO e) CONCEPT' SGAI,: I INCH = 600 FEEL 03/22/01.�P+`' n FIGURE 1 OF I Appendix C Example Resolution EXAMPLE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Minnesota's State Transportation Plan recognizes the sigmficance of mterregional highway corridors in providmg citizens and businesses throughout the State of Minnesota with high quality access to recreational, educational, employment and health care opportunities, and to the transport of products and services produced by our local economy to regional, national and global markets, and, WHEREAS. (insert road corridor) has been identified by the Minnesota Department of Transportation as a (insert comdor pnonty level — High or Medium) Pnonty Interregional Comdor that enhances the economic vitality of the state and providing essential access for (identify region of the state) Minnesota counties and cities to major economic markets and cultural centers including the (insert name of metropolitan area) metropohtan area, and, WHEREAS, the continued growth of the region is leadmg to increasing travel demand in the comdor and development pressure adjacent to the corridor which, if unmanaged, can negatively affect the level of performance, safety and congestion experienced by users of the comdor, and, WHEREAS, community leaders, motonsts and road authonties have identified this growing travel demand and development pressure as a concern with potential negative consequences for mobility and safety in the comdor, with the potential to degrade the performance level now provided by the comdor, and the resulting implications for the economy and quality of hfe of the region, and, WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, recognizing the potential impact of continued growth pressure on the comdor, has completed an Interregional Comdor Plan in partnership with its partners along the comdor to look at the long-term role that (msert road comdor) will play in meeting the transportation needs of (msert region of the state) Minnesota, and, WHEREAS, it is imperative at this critical time, with continued growth occumng m the region, that a long-term vision for the type of service that the (insert road comdor) comdor needs to provide be established and that the steps are identified and initiated to 1 Preserve the function of the comdor through advance planning, not only for the (insert road comdor) corridor but local supporting street systems and land use and development patterns, and, A Guide for Plan Development and Comdor Management H 7 September 2000 2 Secure the needed funding to pursue the vision established for the comdor, and, 3 Establish a plan of action for the development of planning and programming activities that will proactively address the needs identified NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the (insert City, County, Township, etc) of (insert name of city, county, township, etc ) endorses the vision and comdor management plan for (msert road comdor) FURTHERMORE BE IT RESOLVED, the (insert City, County, Township, etc) of (msert name of city, county, township, etc ) endorses the concept that an adequate network of supportmg roads is necessary to attain the (insert road comdor) vision and that the roadway networks identified m the (insert road comdor) Corridor Management Plan will be considered as intenm guides until such time as refinements to these improvements are identified FURTHERMORE BE IT RESOLVED, the (msert City, County, Township, etc) of (msert name of city, county, township, etc ) recognizes the regional significance of the comdor in supporting the regional economy and intends to reflect the (insert road corridor) Corridor Management Plan vision, strategies and policies through updates to the (msert City's, County's, Township's, etc) land use and transportation plans as well as subdivision ordinances FURTHERMORE BE IT RESOLVED, the (msert City, County, Township, etc) of (msert name of city, county, township, etc) is committed to working m partnership with Mn/DOT and the other partners along the corridor as a member of the (insert road comdor) Corridor Management Team in order to achieve the vision and implement the recommendations of the (insert road comdor) Comdor Management Plan BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the (msert City, County, Township, etc) of (insert name of city, county, township, etc) mtends to bang forward the followmg issues for resolution and discussion with the (insert roadway) Comdor Management Team List issues here Signature Block A Guide for Plan Development and Comdor Management H 8 September 2000 •1 1 f/ ',� •egh!� ti,S •k ' d h likAk{k. ti ti ti "ter 1. 7 ! _ 9r•.. :S.Ly s • 4P fir �'kkkkkkkkk kKk kk ik_akk + k ��+�k�k�ktk{k�'�k�k�k�k�a k k{kfk�i�'kfik�k d�k�k�k kt'a�k�k�k�k N�k�k{+ �k� k ti ti ti� rtif►��k rtirti+ C:PS. 1, I kfi `tikkaaaaa'a++ r r fifit• s 4 Xt~ta et' rtirtirti�k{k{•{%t"�kl'k�k9: '{ktn�'k{` tir kkkk ?ym kt ks ti kt kAkk akkk kk kkkkkk a�ktk k� • r''' k k k�kf5��ktkrkrk�k kkkkkkkkkk ...: rHF�` .. __ 'r ., .. • �k�kt��fik� r" y C � � . t:+tktklr: ti Sk f Svrr{ •ti c-- F 4 r Vcstg `-tktk{ kakti4 `C. ,.ii kk tfif 1{� ids,o, k kaVb �` ktk nG ♦ TH 36 Subarea Study Recreational and '\/ City Streets / Township Road y County Road N}ghway v' Scenic Roads Lakes ' Streams EZZ Wetlands \\\ Flood Zone ® Protected Land ® Existing Parks Proposed Parks (i State Parks P Green Comdor ♦ Fiistonc Sites ©Stillwater Commercial Ilistonc Distract © Stillwater Cultural Landscape Distnct O4 9 _r Environmental Assets DNR Protected Waters Protected (Pubhc) Waters Protected (Pubhc Waters) Wetland Metro Area Trails NExistmg FUnded (1999-2002) Proposed *on GIA Snowmobile Trails Metropolitan Council Growth Management Policy Areas Permanent Rural a.arca Maga= coma.netemor MVO, aComp Bed SEEL 1 54000 1"=4500' Figure 5 Moving Minnesota TH 36 Corridor Management Plan I Recreational and Environmental Assets Memorandum To Planning Commission From Steve Russell, Community Development Director V Date 6-7-01 Subject Review of Existing and New Use of Residence at 1151 Parkwood Lane Discussion The City has received a request for use determination of an existing building located at 1151 Parkwood Lane Currently the structure is owned and used by Bethany Evangelical Covenant Church Youth and administration activities take place in this converted residence according to the attached letter The request is made by Young Life, a Christian Youth Association, to make sure their proposed use of the building is consistent with the current use and zoning regulations before purchase From the description contained in the letter, the existing church use and proposed Young Life use are similar In addition to use of the existing residence, Young Life's plans show a 15' x 15' addition to the existing building Some parking is shown on site although Youth events use of the Church parking lot is indicated for Youth events Planning Status — This site was annexed by the City from the township in 1996 The site is currently zoned townhome residential The auxiliary church use is not a permanent use into TH Distnct It's status is "legal non -conforming " Planning Commission could consider rezoning the property and church from Townhouse and to Single Family Residential, RA In that district churches are allowed with a use permit This would allow review and possibly require connection to City services with the expansion of use Recommendation Determination or proposal future use as described in Young Life letter of 5-25-01 and decision on rezoning to Single Family Residential Attachments Young Life Letter and Master Plan 5-25-01 • Case No Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt No PLANNING ADMINISTRATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ACTION REQUESTED _Special/Conditional Use Permit Variance _Resubdivision Subdivision* Fees $50/200 $70/200 $100 $1 00+50/lot _Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500 _Zoning Amendment* $300 Planning Unit Development * $500 `Certificate of Compliance $70 ._Design Review $25 *An escrow fee is also required to the costs of attorney and engineenng fees (see attached) The appl►cant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any apphcation All supporting material (0 e, photos, sketches, etc) submitted with apphcation becomes the property of the City of Stillwater A site plan is required with appl►cat►ons • PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project 1 1 5 1 P74 FL e. W000 LA/ Assessor's Parcel No (GPO Code) Zoning District Description of Project '/O4-rf-i Bu ibL. l i0G "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, ►nformat►on and evidence submiffed herewith in all respects, to file best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct 1 further certify 1 will comply with file permit if it is granted and used " pPPProert Owner t5 Ll k- lo3 F! OS Goo O -A-kiE I) Mailing Address City - State - Zip 5 T 1 Gu til+4 fie., viA, 0 i v Telephone No (a51 Li-3o —1 $ 3 Signature nM Representative Mailing Address City - State - Zip Telephone No Signature SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) 113 x S ZD Land Area ' 8 AcvC- Height of Buildings Stories Feet Principal I Accessory ,.,..i.51.-.,7v.A.F1.0.r&ii- ....--- II reo 11°- Total Building floor area Sieve square ft Existing 3i 00c) square feet Proposed 31 `t8r) square feet Paved Impervious Area square feet No of off-street parking spaces 5 TES ON _ �0. it f per' % - i /:J �- -" - - j -r_1 - _ LONG IAA"E ESTATES SECOND ADDMON / ADDfn 4 •� ` a t��tOIXV.'OQD / Location Map 416 SUN o' J / 1r s / f w 2 i► } .~` ads - fi� 31� ` 7 r .. v �,- .�/ 7 - ` r - \F • r J STILLWATER THE C CORO ORLEANS ADDITION — 1 — ea STILLWATER MARIaTPLAC MARKETPLACE! 1 (y STILLWATE OuLE I KERN TVA 6(1 " R2IW R20W R19W NEB ■11 111 YOU ARE HER' I .t R22W R2IW R2OW Vicinity Map pAl.'sf/ Ci 0 462 nrwEa DINS Scale in Feet .�/ $2-C 4 t m/ %TP LINA ..ea a.e noo m � 7n.nn a9 m res. coma eon o n re Daman w� ncam es nay .. N ..noon Cowin Vas m am.wa Nam a uS ro.o 0 p 1 aar tly wrvro Cowin no con n am [waxen. Sowc. wlmayt Coney Sun pro w vn la 2) 39Ea a2 an anon an.. 200 • f �o pos Imo` t,4„u c4, 1lS( `F il_2KwavD Llj 1 - Room rim 4 Lan Larl a KW u`tIA, J , 'r ic. FI LD TOtxzoi , • 1' / c owecJ 1,122Att4i.a. 1.17ci / • JAL • • • May 25, 2001 Steve Russell and Planning Commission City of Stillwater Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Steve, rijuf Ak1241-wvvi'r Vern Hill Area Director Adam Timberlake Realife/WyldLife Ministry Tera Ross Student Staff Darla Goble Administrative Assistant This letter is to request a usage determination and is possibly an application for special/conditional use permit Please address these items at the June 11 th meeting Young Life, a not for profit youth -serving religious organization which has been serving youth in Stillwater for more than 35 years, is considenng the purchase of a building at 1151 Parkwood Lane The purchase would be contingent on approval of usage by the planning and zoning commission This request is to determine, should Young Life purchase the building, that the building would 1) fall under the same conditions of its current use 2) Please determine also if Young Life could make renovations and an addition to the building to better serve youth in our community A simple master plan and elevations of improvements are attached Currently the building is used for youth activities by the owner, Bethany Evangelical Covenant Church, and by Teens For Chnst, a not for profit youth group The building is used for youth meetings on Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and occasional week ends Also the building is used for limited administrative purposes Often youth park on Parkwood Lane Should Young Life purchase the property, the building would be used for the same purposes, administration and program The building would house the admimstrative offices of Young Life and would be used for youth programs Monday — Thursday evenings Under a purchase agreement with the current owner, Bethany Evangelical Covalent Church, students attending the Young Life programs would be directed to park in the adjacent church parking lot Usage would change only in the amount of administrative office space that would be developed within the building Numbers of youth served by the building would be increased Impact on the neighborhood would be minimized The agreement with the church for use of their parking lot would reduce the amount of traffic on Parkwood Lane As indicated by the attached elevations, the building would maintain a residential character if projected improvements are made This plan has been shared with four of the adjacent neighbors on Parkwood Lane All have expressed support of Young Life's programs and intention to purchase the property Young Life St Croix Valley 6381 Osgood Avenue North Stillwater MN 55082 Phone/Fax (651) 430 1873 E mail ylscvmn@aol com fi ' All would welcome students using the church parking lot instead of Parkwood Lane for parlung durmg youth events Please contact me if you need any further information before the June 11th meeting I will attend the meeting to answer any questions concerning this request Thank you for your attention to tlus matter Sincerely, Vem Hill Area Director Attached Site / Master plan and projected evelvations • • • F12o ; eV \ttEr 150 NeA) ,boor rioN t^ Nt—W 4 L-On __--- / WIALIG f-CLQ1M OW, tar S7�Gc-S lend Hay Pspori Nortra 3 prrtc o WEU_ Sty PLAN („_so, :1\ C c-KJEc 4 ),/1tka LOt 20I V r r Nam,' mom or+ ), L Ez-L \/, ti 6 " IFiz.o 9 03 --D SITE/ 441A S tL- QLf4N 7410 S +or(- 1 II P4121CVJ - h [.n) 4 • • terry Fontaine CC lsf0 1618 West Willard St Stillwater MN 55802 Home Phone 651/439-6519 • Nile Knesel City Adnumstrator 216 N 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 May 18 2001 Dear Mr Knesel, This letter is to inform you of my decision to resign from the Stillwater Planning Commission as of July, 1, 2001 As you know, I have worked withthe city for a very long tune I wish to express my appreciation to you, Steve Russell and the many City Councils for allowing me to participate Sincerely 7 Jerry Fontaine • cc Step a Russell Community Development Director •