#09 - Oak Land Middle School Minor Subdvision & CUP

Home Browse Search

7 Buffer: The middle school building was initially constructed in a location that is within the required buffer, and which is surrounded by parking areas and the track facility. Due to a need for additional parking, expansion to the north is infeasible without significant redesign of the site. Expansion to the west would also necessitate significant site improvements and is less desirable with the design of the building. 2) Unique Circumstances. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Parcel Size: The Applicant is not proposing to expand the school’s building or site improvements beyond the existing boundaries of the Oak Land Middle School property. Buffer: The Applicant is proposing to add on to a public-school facility that was already located in the required buffer. If reconstructing the site, a different orientation could be provided. 3) Character of Locality. The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is located. Parcel Size/Buffer: The variances will not impact the essential character of the area; the use of the facilities is to remain the same. The request meets the overall design intent of this area. 4) Adjacent Properties and Traffic. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to properties adjacent to the property in question or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Parcel Size/Buffer: The variance should not impair adjacent properties. Washington County and City engineering staff have suggested conditions of approval that would mitigate impacts expected to county roadways. AGENCY REVIEW: This request was distributed to several departments and agencies for review on Wednesday, August 7th, 2024. The following review comments are noted: • Fire Department Memo (8/26/2024) Provided comments regarding drive lanes, fire detection and suppression, building addressing, and gates/locks/access. • City Engineer Memo (8/26/2024) Provided comments regarding impervious surface, water connection, grading, and stormwater. Engineering requested more detailed plans. • City Landscape Architect Memo (8/27/2024) Provided comments on revisions need to the tree mitigation and landscaping plans. • Washington County DOT Email (8/28/2024) Provided comments regarding future intersection improvements and City cost share. • Valley Branch Watershed District – Did not provide comments. • MN DNR – Did not provide comments. • West Lakeland Township – Did not provide comments. Conditions of approval have been included to address agency review comments where applicable.