Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda - 08/01/2023 (Joint Workshop)AGENDA JOINT MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP Tuesday, August 1, 2023 — 4:45 p.m. Monticello Community Center 1. Call to Order 2. Concept Stage Planned Unit Development Proposal Submittal for a Multi -Commercial Project in the B-2 Limited Business District at the Intersection of Chelsea Road and Fenning Ave (Applicant: Division 25, LLC.) Northwest Corner of Fenning Ave. NE and Chelsea Rd., PIDs: 155-011-000171, 155-011-000111 3. Adjournment r(7 " �' � it an Consulting Ilc Steve.GrittmanConsulting@gmail.com MEMORANDUM TO: Angela Schumann Mayor Hilgart and Monticello City Council Monticello Planning Commission FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE: July 24, 2023 MEETING DATE: August 1, 2023 (Workshop Meeting) Planning, Zoning, Land Use RE: Monticello — Big River 445 — Concept PUD Review GC FILE NO: 120-01 — 23.05 PLANNING CASE NO: 2023-026 PROPERTY ID: 155011000171; 155011000111 (part) Site Context and Project Description. This memorandum reviews the elements of a proposed Concept Plan Submittal for a commercial Planned Unit Development. The proposed site is located on the parcels bound by 1-94 on the north, Fenning Avenue NE on the east, Chelsea Road on the south, and undeveloped commercial/industrial property on the west. The property is currently zoned "B-2, Limited Business District" on the east portion, and "IBC, Industrial Business Campus" on the west. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan calls for the entire site area to be "Regional Commercial", which would direct the appropriate zoning as"B-4, Regional Business District". In this case, the proposed mix of commercial uses are representative of allowable or conditional uses within the B-4 District. The project will require a PUD as it proposes to include a series of commercial properties that rely on joint access and in some cases, shared parking. In addition, certain aspects of site design will require flexibility from zoning ordinance standards. The proposal consists of the platting and construction of a series of commercial parcels with access from Chelsea Road, and the development of an internal private street to serve the commercial users. The project is divided into two phases, with the first phase comprised of the approximately 10 acres nearest to Fenning. The second westerly phase would potentially include a commercial development of larger shopping center users. As a part of the first phase of development, a boundary private street would be created that could eventually be used to serve the second phase project. The concept narrative identifies the following uses as a part of the initial phase, with a note that the specific users are preliminary and subject to change. For the purposes of a Concept PUD, it is expected that changes may occur between concept review and application for Development Stage PUD — indeed, the purpose of concept review is for both the developer and the City to explore ideas and understand how the Development Stage application will be evaluated. It is also noted that at concept level, only the most preliminary engineering work has been conducted, and will often impact the site and development planning for the next phase of review. Phase I Users: Lot 1: Restaurant -Coffee with full drive thru Lot 2: Restaurant-QSR ("Quick Service") with drive thru Lot 3: Restaurant-QSR with drive thru Lot 4: Auto Service Minor -Oil (quick service) Lot 5: Auto car wash facility -tunnel concept Lot 6: Auto Service Minor -tire Lot 7: Restaurant-QSR with drive thru Lot 8: Restaurant-QSR with drive thru or Banking facility For this phase, building sizes range from 1,500 square feet (the oil change facility on Lot 4) to more than 10,000 square feet (the tire store on Lot 6), resulting in a preliminary total of nearly 35,000 square feet of commercial floor area between the 8 parcels. Although preliminary, the concept plan illustrates the general development intent, and staff has provided comments on the early concept for guidance. For the project to proceed, further approvals would include the following: o Development Stage and Final Stage PUD (including a rezoning to a PUD District); o Preliminary and Final Plat o Rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development o Dependent on the timing of Phase II, these approvals may include that phase, or a similar set of separate approvals would be necessary for Phase II. Concept Stage PUD Submittal The current proposal is for a PUD Concept Plan review, which is not a formal zoning application, but is intended to provide the applicant an opportunity for City feedback on a potential development proposal prior to more formal zoning review and the extensive supporting materials that such reviews require. The Planning Commission and City Council will have the opportunity to review the project, ask questions of the proposer, and provide comment as to the issues and elements raised by the project. Again, the applicant is also looking for specific feedback in the areas of PUD flexibility noted in their narrative. The neighboring property owners have been notified of the meeting, but it is not a formal public hearing. This memorandum provides an overview of the project and will serve as an outline for the discussion. No formal approval or denial is offered for a Concept Review. It is vital that Planning Commission and City Council members engage in a frank and open discussion of the project benefits and potential issues. The Concept Review process is most valuable when the applicants have the opportunity to understand how the City is likely to look at the project and the potential issues it presents. In this way, the subsequent land use and development details can be more finely tuned to address City policy elements. PUD Concept Review Criteria. The first stage consists of an informal Concept Plan review which is separate from the formal PUD application which will follow the Concept Review step. The Ordinance identifies the purpose of Planned Unit Development as follows: (1) Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district is to provide greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and non- residential areas in order to maximize public values and achieve more creative development outcomes while remaining economically viable and marketable. This is achieved by undertaking a process that results in a development outcome exceeding that which is typically achievable through the conventional zoning district. The City reserves the right to deny the PUD rezoning and direct the developer to re -apply under the standard applicable zoning district. PUD Concept reviews are to proceed as follows: (a) PUD Concept Proposal Prior to submitting formal development stage PUD, preliminary plat (as applicable) and rezoning applications for the proposed development, the applicant may, at its option, prepare an informal concept plan and present it to the Planning Commission and City Council at a concurrent work session, as scheduled by the Community Development Department. The purpose of the Concept Proposal is to: 1. Provide preliminary feedback on the concept plan in collaboration between the applicant, general public, Planning Commission, and City Council; 2. Provide a forum for public comment on the PUD prior to a requirement for extensive engineering and other plans. 3. Provide a forum to identify potential issues and benefits of the proposal which can be addressed at succeeding stages of PUD design and review. The intent of Concept Proposal review is to consider the general acceptability of the proposed land use and identify potential issues that may guide the City's later consideration of a full PUD application. The City Council and Planning Commission meet in joint session to provide feedback to the developer and may include an opportunity for informal public comment as they deem appropriate. Staff Preliminary Comments and Issues. For this proposal, the primary considerations evident at this point in the process include the following elements: Land Use. As stated above, the full site is guided "Regional Commercial" by the Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development site is currently zoned "B-2, Limited Business", and "IBC, Industrial Business Campus". While both zoning districts offer the opportunity for variable levels of commercial land use, the Comprehensive Plan designation specifically calls for a full range of commercial business uses, little or no industrial use, and a development pattern consistent with that of the B-4 district. The proposed PUD designation is consistent with a B-4 development pattern, but with accommodations to the site use that require, or benefit from, PUD flexibility and zoning. The proposed development would clearly appear to be within the vision defined by the Comprehensive Plan. As such, the primary considerations in this project are site use and design rather than land use. Parking and Circulation. The overall PUD project gains its access solely from Chelsea Road, although it has frontage on both Fenning (County 18) and 1-94. Those two roadways provide visibility, but no access. The development concept plan proposes three access points from Chelsea Road into the project via private streets. Chelsea Road's intersection with Fenning Avenue is a signal -controlled intersection, and Chelsea itself is designed with a concrete median leading west from Fenning a distance of approximately 480 feet, then a striped median for another 300 feet, before transitioning to a center -left -turn design. The project design anticipates the first of its three access points just at the point where the concrete median changes to painted median. At this point, there would be no left -turn into the project for east -bound Chelsea traffic, nor would there be left -turn opportunities for exiting outbound traffic. The next access point would be approximately 260 feet farther west, (still in the range of the striped median), and then finally, the third access point at the westerly boundary of Phase I, another 300 feet, a total of approximately 1,000 feet west of Fenning. Staff believes that the first location will accommodate right -in, right -out traffic only. The second access point would require modification of the median design on Chelsea Road and would be expected to be subject to a significant amount of U- turn traffic existing the first access drive to head back to the Interstate. To benefit both exiting internal traffic, manage access points, and avoid confusing patterns on Chelsea, staff would recommend that the first two private drive access points be combined and relocated to the boundary between Lots 3 and 4 — approximately 650 feet from the Fenning intersection. This distance — about 1/8 of a mile, is a common spacing distance, and it would additionally create a longer distance to the westerly access drive, increasing the distance from 300 feet to 400 feet. While modifications to the median design would still be necessary, the spacing should increase safety and traffic movement efficiency. Should the project move to formal application for preliminary plat and development stage PUD, the applicant will be required to prepare a traffic study to further analyze traffic demands for City recommendation. The project narrative reports an overall parking supply of approximately 8 spaces per 1,000 square feet — a robust parking supply. The proposed mix of restaurant floor space tends to drive parking ratios over what would be typically expected for commercial shopping centers — a common ratio of about 4-5 spaces per 1,000 square feet. While adequate parking is important for all commercial uses, the applicant is encouraged to consider options for shared parking between compatible uses, and consolidating parking where possible, all with the goal of reducing the amount of space devoted to unoccupied pavement. iii. Building Materials and Architecture. The applicants have not provided details relating to building design at this stage. Building architecture will be an important aspect of PUD consideration. Commercial building materials requirements of the code is expected. In particular for this development, ensuring that building design is attractive to all exposed sides will be a key consideration given the site's frontage along high visibility corridors. While corporate identity is a vital aspect of tenant attraction, the applicant should consider locations for trash handling equipment, utility infrastructure, and generally avoid building "back -sides" in these visible locations. This applies to accessory structures as well, including tire storage, canopy design, car -wash vacuum locations, and similar elements. iv. Connectivity and Open Space. The site plans provide some pedestrian and bicycle access into the site, capitalizing on the existing pathway along Chelsea Road. Internal sidewalk development should be designed to be continuous throughout the project area to avoid unnecessary or unexpected pedestrian crossings due to interruptions in sidewalk continuity. A particular note in this regard is that the plan shows only limited access to the Chelsea pathway — more connections to internal sites is a recommendation for future application site design.. An off-site pedestrian issue to be aware of is the likely access to and from the High School facility south of Chelsea Road. The school has a driveway access point just west of the project's western boundary drive. A sidewalk adjoins that school drive, and a pedestrian crossing location will need to be part of the site planning process for this project with the subsequent phase of development. V. Landscaping and Buffering. It would be expected that the development provide enhanced landscaping features as part of any PUD flexibility. One way of accomplishing this is to take advantage of the various edges and corners of the site that are not required for parking or circulation and enhancing them as planted and usable green space. Because this project includes a variety of uses that will attract freeway traveler traffic, opportunities for outdoor dining, grassy picnic and/or pet areas, and similar amenities would be a valuable addition, justifying the use of PUD flexibility and private street development. It is anticipated that the area will be managed through a private operations agreement given the private drive. That same agreement would provide for the common maintenance of these areas. vi. Signage. The proposer notes that signage would be consistent with the code requirements for individual B-4 District sign allowances, with the exception that one additional freestanding sign identifying the center and tenants is proposed along Fenning Avenue NE, at a height of 35 feet and 300 square feet in area. For comparison purposes, it is noted that the Union Crossings development directly across 1-94 utilized a PUD design to accommodate one overall pylon sign for the project and its major tenants, with an allowance for consolidated monument -style freestanding signs for other pad tenants, rather than full -height freestanding and individual pylon signs for each lot. This project area is in the freeway bonus district, which notwithstanding the proposed separate shopping center sign, would allow sites individual 32 -foot tall pylon signs, plus wall signage. Staff would suggest that following the model used for the Union Crossings PUD would be consistent both with that project and those commercial tenants, as well as with the intent of PUD. In sum, staff would recommend that the PUD flexibility for allowance for the larger shopping center sign be balanced with consolidated monument style signage for the individual tenant sites. PUD consideration requires that departures from the limitations of the zoning requirements are combined with other amenities or changes that result in a project that meets or exceeds the City's baseline land use and development requirements. vii. Grading, Drainage and Utilities. The City Engineer's office has provided a separate review memo on these items. viii. Future Site Planning. The proposer has provided a future site plan showing a larger shopping center design for the westerly portion of the site. Staff comments are limited in that this future phase has a significant level of uncertainty. The developer may proceed directly to development stage PUD for that phase. As such, managing and limited access points to Chelsea Road, along with the site and building comments noted above apply to those future elements as well. Summary. As noted, the Planning Commission and City Council provide comment and feedback to the developer at the Concept Submittal review level. City officials should identify any areas of concern that would require amendment to avoid the potential for eventual denial, as well as any elements of the concept that the City would find essential for eventual approval. Specific comments from the Council and Commission should address the following potential issues. The applicant is looking for specific direction with regard to the Commission and Council's support of PUD flexibility for private drive aisle, parking, and signage. 1. Overall Land Use — The site is guided for commercial use. Rezoning consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan will be a component of a future application. The primary issues relate to site planning, traffic management, and the visual impacts of the proposed development. 2. Site Planning — The applicant is encouraged to review the site planning and work toward an overall reduction of impervious space on the site and improving both internal and external pedestrian connections. Circulation and parking will be subject to required cross -easements. 3. Building Design and Materials — As noted, no information is available relating to building design for this Concept review. City officials should comment on the need for brick or stone exteriors, and staff's recommendation to attend to all visible sides of the building architecture, including accessory uses and buildings that may be proposed. 4. Parking Supply - Overall parking supply would appear to be more than adequate in the space as designed. As noted herein, opportunities to reduce unnecessary parking is encouraged. 5. Landscaping - As noted in the report, staff would recommend a robust effort at adding green space areas on the site, including planting options in any areas not needed for parking or circulation, parking lot islands, and any similar space. Outdoor amenity spaces, given the freeway orientation of some of the uses, would be a valuable asset in furthering the intent of PUD design. 6. Circulation and Access — Access to Chelsea Road will be a subject of significant review and design attention. Reducing access points, consolidating those to improve spacing and safety, and managing the need for turning movements to and from Chelsea Road will be critical. 7. Signage — As noted, the applicants proposed an oversized common sign, along with full allowance for pylon and wall signage for each tenant. Staff recommends the larger common sign be balanced with consolidated monument style signage for the individual tenant sites, consistent with the comparative Union Crossings PUD signage for reference. 8. Engineering - Comments and recommendations as provided separately. The notes listed above acknowledge that a significant amount of detail will be added as the project proceeds to a more advanced stage of review. SUPPORTING DATA A. Aerial Site Image B. Applicant Narrative C. PUD Site Concept Plan D. Future Phasing Concept Plan E. Official Zoning Map F. Monticello 2040 Land Use Map G. City Engineer's Comment Letter June 30, 2023 Angela Schuman -Community Development Director Members of the City Council and Planning Commission City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Monticello, MN 55362 Re: BIG RIVER 445 -Proposed Commercial Development PUD -Concept Submittal Ms. Schuman and Members of the City Council/Planning Commission: Division 25, LLC is pleased to present this request for PUD Concept Review for a proposed eight lot commercial development located in the southwest quadrant of Interstate Highway 94 and Ferning Avenue NE. Overview Land Area: Approximately 9.9 acres Existing Zoning: B-2 Limited Business District Proposed Zoning: PUD based on B-4 Regional Business District Guided Land Use: Regional Commercial Lots: 8 Lots Access: Chelsea Road to private interior common roads/drive lanes Utilities: City utilities Purpose: Project will bring high demand regional and national commercial retail/restaurant/service users to this vibrant commercial corridor with an eye towards future expansion on up to 13 additional acres to the west Request Division 25, LLC is seeking Concept Review of a proposed PUD on an area encompassing approximately 9.9 acres in the southwest quadrant of Interstate Hwy 94 and Ferning Ave NE. The PUD will include 8 Lots and an interior private roadway system accessed from the Chelsea Road public right of way. Project will be served by City utilities. This project is being designed and envisioned with an eye towards possible future expansion to the west on up to 13 additional acres (per conceptual plan below). The PUD would be generally consistent with B-4 Regional Commercial District Development Standards and with the Regional Commercial Land Use Designation. 1 Concept Plan Lot Users (preliminary, subject to change) Lot 1, Block 1: Restaurant -Coffee with full drive thru Lot 2, Block 1: Restaurant-QSR with drive thru Lot 3, Block 1: Restaurant-QSR with drive thru Lot 4, Block 1: Auto Service Minor -Oil (quick service) Lot 5, Block 1: Auto car wash facility -tunnel concept Lot 6, Block 1: Auto Service Minor -tire Lot 7, Block 1: Restaurant-QSR with drive thru Lot 8, Block 1: Restaurant-QSR with drive thru or Banking facility Note that the above users and lot sizes are based on the current roster of users, however changes could be made to the lot sizes, number of lots, etc. if users or user requirements change. I PUD Discussion Access and Roadways Access to the project will be from Chelsea Road public right of way. Individual Lots will be accessed from private interior roadway as illustrated on the Concept Plan. Trailways and Sidewalks There is an existing trailway network that runs along the entire frontage of the subject property, on the west side of Fenning Avenue and on the north side of Chelsea Road. The project proposes two sidewalk connections to the trail along Chelsea Road, one each at the east and west access points to Chelsea Road. A sidewalk is proposed along the interior roadway with connections to each lotibuilding. The proposed concept provides excellent walkability throughout. Densi The project will consist of 8 lots situated on 9.87 acres, for a gross density of 0.81 lots per acre. Lot sizes range from 0.57 acres to 1.82 acres, with an average lot size of 1.23 acres. There are no density requirements in the B-4 zoning district, therefore the proposed project complies. See Concept Plan for individual lot data. Parking and Building Setbacks The B-4 zoning district requires a 6 -foot building and parking setback on all sides of a lot. The proposed concept plan is in general compliance with the building and parking setback, except along common lot lines within a shared parking lot or shared private interior drive. PUD flexibility is requested for the interior common lot line setback due to shared parking lots and shared private interior drives. Parkin The City Code generally requires retail commercial uses to provide parking at a rate of one space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. This equates to 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. The proposed concept plan has an overall parking ratio of 8 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. There are five restaurant lots with parking ratios varying from 9 to 15 spaces per 1,000 square feet. There are three automotive related lots (oil, carwash, tires) with parking ratios varying from 3 to 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet. Parking is provided at a rate that is sufficient to meet the standard requirements of the prospective users. It is not immediately clear if PUD flexibility is required for parking, and we look to the City for guidance. W Signage Building and site signage shall be compliant with requirements and allowances as set forth in Section 153.064(1)(2) of the City Code, as relates to a business zoning district. Building wall signage will be requested to be allowed on all building facades, and compliant with maximum signage area as per 153.064(J)(2)(a). Freestanding signage will be requested as one sign per Lot as allowed by 153.064(J)(2)(b). As a component of this PUD, we are also requesting that a multi-user highway pylon sign be allowed to be installed, with an overall sign structure height of 35' and signage area not to exceed 300 sf per side, similar to the concept design pictured below: tenant sign I 4q Building Materials Building shall be designed and constructed to meet or exceed all business district building material requirements as per Section 153.070 (D). Consistency and cohesive design will be encouraged while maintaining brand integrity for all users. Requested Areas of Flexibility from Standard Zoning Ordinance It is our understanding and intent that all components of this project design are consistent with B-4 Zoning District Standards and all other requirements of City Code, with (2) exceptions as follows: 1. Individual Lots shall be accessed via private interior roadways, as opposed to direct access to a public right of way. 2. Interior parking setback to be zero, as opposed to the 6 -foot requirement. 3. A 35' tall maximum height multi-user pylon sign with maximum signage area not to exceed 300 sf per side will be allowed on one project frontage (assuming east frontage at Ferning Ave NE) 4. Parking Spaces: to be determined tenant sign tenant sign �omRmMP. tenant sign tenant sign tenant sign 6 tenant sign tenant sign tenant sign 9 Building Materials Building shall be designed and constructed to meet or exceed all business district building material requirements as per Section 153.070 (D). Consistency and cohesive design will be encouraged while maintaining brand integrity for all users. Requested Areas of Flexibility from Standard Zoning Ordinance It is our understanding and intent that all components of this project design are consistent with B-4 Zoning District Standards and all other requirements of City Code, with (2) exceptions as follows: 1. Individual Lots shall be accessed via private interior roadways, as opposed to direct access to a public right of way. 2. Interior parking setback to be zero, as opposed to the 6 -foot requirement. 3. A 35' tall maximum height multi-user pylon sign with maximum signage area not to exceed 300 sf per side will be allowed on one project frontage (assuming east frontage at Ferning Ave NE) 4. Parking Spaces: to be determined Schedule Grading is anticipated to commence in the spring of 2024. Street and utility construction would also occur in the Summer 2024. Construction of buildings and improvements for some of the Lots would commence spring/summer of 2024, with some possible completions by fall of 2024. Closing We are excited to partner with the City of Monticello to bring this development and these businesses to the community. Your guidance and feedback are welcomed. If you have any questions or require further information, please contact me at 612-817-2302 or via email at j ohnj ohannsongtranswe stern. corn Respectfully, John Johannson-Transwestern 7601 France Ave, Suite 525 Edina, MN 55435 Attachments: Contact & Parcel Information PUD Concept Plan Future Phasing Concept Plan .n Concept Plan FUTURE LAND USE MAP wsb July 26, 2023 Matt Leonard City Engineer/Public Works Director City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Big River 445 Commercial - Concept Stage PUD Plan Review City Project No. 2023-26 WSB Project No. 023288-000 75 ° Dear Mr. Leonard: z CID We have reviewed the Big River 445 Commercial conceptual stage PUD site plans dated June U) 30, 2023. The applicant proposes to construct an eight (8) lot commercial development on a 9.9 acre parcel located on Chelsea Road adjacent to Fenning Avenue and 1-94. 0 Co The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Monticello's general engineering and stormwater treatment standards. We offer the following comments regarding these matters. co General Ln 1. City staff will provide additional comments under separate cover Ln Z 2. A more detailed review of the development plans will be completed when the applicant 75 submits complete civil plans and a stormwater management report. U) o Site, Street, & Utility Plans a W 3. Streets, parking lots, and utilities shall be designed in accordance with the applicable City z Subdivision Ordinances and the City's General Specifications and Standard Details 2 Plates for Street and Utility Construction. 4. Provide a turning movement exhibit to show that a fire truck can access all building co w structures to accommodate the City's ladder truck and/or as required by the City Fire Marshall. The Fire Marshall will review and provide comments under separate cover. U) 5. Provide a utility showing the existing and proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm U) sewer serving the site. Watermain looping may be required through the site to provide D adequate fire flow supply. Additional utility stubs to adjacent properties may also be � required to accommodate future looping connections. The building department will also a review required fire hydrant location(s) and emergency vehicle access/circulation. z X 6. With future submittals, provide a full civil plan set that includes an existing/removals plan, utility plan, more detailed site/paving plan, grading plan, erosion/sediment control, and standard details plan. If the project will disturb once acre or more, a SWPPP will be required with the plan set consistent with the MPCA CSWGP standards. K:\023288-000\Admin\Docs\2023-07-06 Submittal (Concept PUD Plan)\_2023-07-26 Monticello Commercial Concept PUD - WSB Engineering Comments - Final.docx Big River 445 Commercial Concept Stage PUD — WSB Engineering Plan Review July 26, 2023 Page 2 Stormwater Management Below are General Stormwater Requirements for the Site: a. The applicant will be required to submit a stormwater management plan for the proposed development in accordance with the requirements in the City's Design Manual. b. The new site will need to provide onsite volume control for runoff of 1.1" over the new impervious area, Pre-treatment measures are required prior to discharging to the volume control BMPs. c. The City has an existing regional stormwater ponding system with stubs connected to the site. Confirm proposed hardcover will not exceed the intended hardcover limit and will meet existing discharge rates to all current drainage points for the 2, 10, and 100 -yr storm events. d. Provide erosion control on all down perimeter areas. e. An operation and maintenance plan for all stormwater BMPs is required and should be submitted with the stormwater report for review. 8. Provide a minimum of two feet of vertical separation from a stormwater BMP's HWL to the FIFE of any buildings. In areas where this separation is not or cannot be provided, additional analysis is required showing that the 100 -year back-to-back storm event does not affect adjacent homes. 9. New development projects shall have a no net increase from pre -project conditions of total volume, TSS, and TP. 10. An NPDES/SDS Construction Storm Water General Permit (CSWGP) shall be provided with the grading permit or with the building permit application for review, prior to construction commencing. Traffic & Access 11. The site would likely generate more than 7,000 daily trips, 860 AM peak hour trips and 668 PM peak hour trips. The existing Average Daily Traffic on Chelsea Road is 3,162 and on CSAH 18 is 11,698. The addition of the proposed traffic would likely have an impact on roadway capacity and operations at the intersection. Provide an analysis of the expected intersection operations at CSAH 18 and Chelsea Road. 12. Restriping to extend the two-way left -turn lane on Chelsea Road will be necessary if left - turns will be allowed at all accesses. 13. Show turning movement templates at access locations. Left -turn out of the east access may not work with existing median on Chelsea Road. 14. The applicant is proposing three driveway access points, with spacing less than 300 feet. Street access spacing, grades, and sight lines will be reviewed with future submittals. Wetlands & Environmental 15. A Level 1 (desktop) wetland delineation is required. If the Level 1 indicates the potential for wetlands on site, a Level 2 (field) delineation will be required. This information should be submitted to the Wetland Conservation Act contact for the City of Monticello. Big River 445 Commercial Concept Stage PUD — WSB Engineering Plan Review July 26, 2023 Page 3 Please have the applicant provide a written response addressing the comments above. Feel free to contact me at 612-419-1549 if you have any questions or comments regarding the engineering review. Sincerely, WSB James L. Stremel, P.E. Senior Project Manager BIG RIVERaa CROSSINGS G Ifof Mexico rr New Orleans U76 if 1 ".t, ! MISSISSIPPI RIVER r�. 'HOSPITAL ` r g f� ti �?2�Aa cry E�7th*St•.. w. ` I AN_. r `., �.'-•' -'369 [iP E=: h1h O lip < - p ,� — MONTI HIGH SCHOOL LITTLE MOUNTAIN a 1,27.51STUD,ENT ELEMENTARY 9 SCHOOL 558 STUDENTS — L,•\ ` � 4r•` � 3 O E � •- N f] EASTVI'EW ELEMENTARY Mea 53SCHOOL 5 DENTS i T ; Project Snapshot Multi -phase project with 195,000 SF of total development Phase I: Free standing pad users Tenant names withheld for now (national tenants). Caution: Plan is evolving and subject to change Lot A. 35,000 SF I Retail Box Lot B: 19,000 SF I Retail Box Lot C: 15,000 SIF I Retail Box Lot D: 10,000 SF I Retail Box Lot E: 55,000 SF I Grocery Lot F: 7,200 SF I Salon Lot G: 7,200 SF I Pet Hotel Lot H: 10,638 SF I Tire/Service Lot I: 5,000 SF I QSR w/ drive-thru Lot I: 5,000 SF I QSR w/ drive-thru Lot 3: 4,000 SF I QS R w/ d rive-th ru Lot K: 2,500 SF I Coffee QSR w/ drive-thru Lot L: 2,500 SF I Mexican QSR w/ drive-thru Lot M: 2,500 SF I Burger QSR w/ drive-thru Lot N: 2,000 SF I Oil Change Lot O: 6,000 SF I Car Wash Lot P: 3,000 SF I Bank Lot Q: 2,500 SF J QSR w/ drive-thru Veteran Retail DEVELOPERS PASS PARTNERS L0PryiE N T C 0 M P A M Y DIVSION25 Dave Carland John Johannson Chris Simmons Current Projects i . BLAINE BLAINE SQUARE �SSr551PPi v q�\ Current Projects SARTELL RIVER CROSSING rIt W, e i, a4 �j� �_� � .. '•ae.'#ym SRµ �� may$ �_! 3-Y Last major power center built in metro area Past Projects EAGAN CENTRAL PARK COMMONS Punch Pizza Hawaii Poke ® R Taco ® Orange Theory ® Xfinity Naf Naf Grill ® Cafe Zupas Massage Envy ® European Wax Central Nails Piada Italian Street Food Genisys Credit Union ® Olive Garden ® Available Pad 119 Available Pad 0 Available Pad OViverant I �.,Owi, : .lir _.. \ .\�f - nr,40 -174�� ? — 0 0 Yankee Doodle Road 4 Hy -vee © Hobby Lobby Marshalls/Home-Goods O Petco © M Health Fairview Clinic Q DSW 0 U LTA OFive Below OMen's Wearhouse Ichiddo Ramen Chapter Aesthetic Studio ®Total Wine ® Tile Shop Sierra Trading GBank of America Starbucks mGENT Cuts & Grooming Punch Pizza Hawaii Poke ® R Taco ® Orange Theory ® Xfinity Naf Naf Grill ® Cafe Zupas Massage Envy ® European Wax Central Nails Piada Italian Street Food Genisys Credit Union ® Olive Garden ® Available Pad 119 Available Pad 0 Available Pad OViverant I �.,Owi, : .lir _.. \ .\�f - nr,40 -174�� ? — 0 0 Yankee Doodle Road 'Y - T C!"�tIP mF - AN AV Z 31 r= ti t C >yl - _ e y � i low �v u Development Team Randy Ramerdink I Project Manager CIVIL ENGINEER: Contour Civil Design LLC, Joe Radach PE SURVEYOR: E.G. Rud & Sons, Inc, Kevin McCain RLS, ALTA Survey completed ENVIRONMENTAL: Carlson McCain, John Lichter PE, Phase 1 ESA completed, no REC's GEOTECHNICAL: Haugo Geotechnical Services, Jeff Haydon, field work completed, logs and report pending WETLAND DELINEATION: Kjolhaug Environmental, Mark Kjolhaug, fieldwork is completed, and report has been submitted for Concurrence of No Wetland Determination TRAFFIC STUDY: SSTS, Katie Schmidt PE, fieldwork is progressing for completion by September 5