HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.i. Rosemount Industrial PUD Final Development Plan 05-42-PUDAGENDA ITEM: Case 05 -42 -PUD Rosemount Industrial
PUD Master Plan
AGENDA SECTION:
Consent
PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner
AGEN 1 6
7�
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution, Draft Ordinance, PUD
Agreement, 09/27/05 PC Minutes, Site
Map, Site Plan and Elevation Reductions,
Engineering Comments dated September
22, 2005
APPROVED BY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Motion to recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the PUD
Master Plan for Rosemount Industrial subject to conditions,
2. Motion to adopt an ordinance rezoning the property to BP -1 PUD; and
3. Motion to authorize the execution of the PUD Agreement.
COUNCIL ACTION:
4ROSEMOUN 1
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Meeting: November 1, 2005
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ISSUE
Rosemount Industrial is a proposed 48,000 sq. ft. multiple tenant office warehouse building for a 5 -acre
parcel on County Road 46 between Dakota Fence and the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District. The
building will consist of up to 16 bays of 3,000 sq ft. (27 ft. x 109 ft.) Individual renters may choose one
or several bays for its business operation The PUD master plan apphcanon includes a rezoning to
acknowledge the PUD. Rezoning to Business Park -1 Planned Unit Development is appropriate because
of the anticipated multiple uses in the building The uses proposed for the building include office,
warehouse, athletic (commercial indoor recreation) and manufacturing. These uses are permitted in the
BP -1 district. The PUD also gives the City the ability to negotiate higher performance for architecture,
landscaping and other considerations. The apphcant has constructed similar buildings m Apple Valley near
Pilot Knob and m the Air Lake Industrial area of Lakeville.
PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING
No one other than the applicant attended the pubhc hearing for comment The Commissioners requested
additional explanation of NURP (National Urban Runoff Protecnon) requirements, the recommended
number of additional windows on the south elevation of the building, and lack of a grading plan Staff
briefly explained the NURP standards, the number of additional windows should be 6 and that the revising
of the gtadmg plan would be required prior to Council review The apphcant, Mr Hebert, indicated he
would sausfy some of the additional window requirement with bronze panels instead of glass. The reason
for this is that the portion of the building corresponding to the additional windows is warehouse, not
office space. The Commissioners adopted the recommended conditions after editing the 11
recommendation to state: "...review and approved prior to issuance of a grading permit."
Revised grading plans have subsequently been received and reviewed by the City's consulting engineer,
WSB Associates. Previously identified concerns regarding the storm water volume, rate control, water
quahty treatment and mfiltrauon rates have been resolved A minor concern remains regarding the pond
outlet control structure that can be accommodated as a condition of approval. In addition, revised
landscaping and architectural elevations have been received that respond to other Plannmg Commission
recommended conditions Reductions of the revised plans have been attached to the PUD agreement as
exhibits to the PUD. Therefore, the conditions of approval in the attached resolution have been
simphfied by removing the resolved conditions.
BACKGROUND
Applicant Property Owner:
Location:
Site area:
Proposed Buildmg:
Comp Plan Desig
Current Zoning:
Impervious surface:
Planning Comm Action:
Mark Hebert of Hebert Associates, Inc.
North side of 160 Street West (C.R. 46); 700 feet west of Biscayne Ave.
5 acres (includes 55 foot wide easement for frontage road).
47, 960 sq. ft. multiple tenant office warehouse building
Business Park
BP -1, Business Park
70% Impervious/ 30% Green space (75% maxi. Impervious staff est
Recommendation of approval (4 -0)
The current site is a vacant five acre parcel on the edge of the Business Park District. Surrounding land
uses include:
Side
West
East
North
South
Use
Metropohtan Mosquito Control District
Dakota Fence
Vacant
Vacant (Agriculture green acres)
Acres Zoning Comp Plan
10 IG General Industrial
10 BP -1, Business Park
15 BP -1, Business Park
80 Agriculture Empire Township
The site is almost flat with about five feet of elevation change across the site. The low point is in the south
center and the west and east sides dram towards the middle.
ACCESS CIRCULATION
A frontage road was constructed along 160 Street with the County Road 46 improvements to remove the
conflict points of individual dnveways along the County road. The frontage road extends from the subject
property to the west side of AAA Auto just east of the intersection with Highway 3. Access to the site will
occur on the frontage road with two driveways to separate automobile traffic from deliveries and employee
parking Senn -truck traffic is expected to be minimal according to the applicant.
Staff is in support of the two driveways because of the comparauvely minimal traffic using the frontage
road. The plans have been revised to include a connecting driveway around the north side of the building
as a result of a staff recommendation This northerly connecting road provides an alternative to turn g-
rounds in the dock area as well as better fire access.
BUILDING
The 440 ft x 109 ft. building is oriented perpendicular to 160 Street The height of the building will be
21 feet overall, and organized mto 3,000 sq ft increments or bays. The distribution of uses will be about
20% office space and the balance of 80% available for uses such as assembly, manufacturing or warehouse.
Tenants will have the option of occupying single (3,000 sq. ft.), double (6,000 sq ft or triple (9,000 sq. ft.)
bays. The office entrances will be on the west elevation of the building, oriented to the double- loaded
parking lot. Individual bays will measure 27.5 feet by 109 feet long. There will be one pedestrian entrance
shared between two bays. The east elevation will be the warehouse side with loading docks. Each 27 ft.
wide bay contains an overhead door and a pedestrian service entrance door. All of the loading doors will
be at- grade, enhancing delivery from smaller vehicles, as well as allowmg access for vehicles into the
2
warehouse area.
Setbacks
Building Standard Parking Standard
South (front) 60 ft. 60 ft. 35 ft. 35 ft.
East (office side) 100 ft. 30 ft 22 ft. 15 ft.
West (dock side) 122 ft. 30 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft.
North 101 ft. 30 ft. 101 ft. 15 ft.
Building and parking setbacks meet the Business Park ordinance standards. The southerly setback along
County Road 46 factors m additional depth because of the road classification as a minor arterial highway.
The building is setback much greater than the minimum because of the double loaded parking on both
east and west sides.
Two dumpster enclosures are shown in the northeast and southeast corners of the east side parking and
dock area The enclosures as shown on the plans will be constructed of concrete block to be painted to
match the building. A condition has been recommended requiring the enclosure materials upgraded so as
to be consistent with the principal structure, including an exposed aggregate finish with corduroy texture.
If it is impractical to construct the enclosures with tip -up panels, then a scoured block may be available to
match the corduroy texture.
The application is for Planned Unit Development so there could be some flexibility in setbacks if needed.
For comparison, the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District "MMCD building on the west side is
setback about 237 feet. The MMCD parking lot is setback 165 feet. There was a pond in the front yard of
MMCD, and their property is also twice as large in terms of depth and area. Dakota Fence has a fenced
storage area essentially on the right-of-way line with 160 Street/ County Road 42, with the building
oriented towards Biscayne Ave. Because of the building and site relationships with the neighboring
properties, staff is not suggesting that the building be moved back. However, the aesthetics of the
southwestern portion of the site are important because they are as visible as a front yard to east bound
traffic on County Road 46.
BUILDING MATERIALS
The building will be constructed of pre -cast (tip -up) concrete panels. The color will be buff and texture
will be corduroy exposed aggregate. Horizontal accent bands with a smooth finish will encircle the
building connecting all of the windows and splitting the area of the elevations above the windows. The
lower accent band will be approximately 5 5 ft. wide and the upper accent band will be 18 inches wide
The upper accent band will also contain wall -pack lighting fixtures centered over each of the eight office
entrances. The panel surface between the door and the upper accent band will also be smooth textured.
The accent band will be the same color as the corduroy finish panels and should have the aggregate within
the material, although smooth.
The west elevation facing MMCD has the highest level of aesthetic treatment since this is the location of
the "front doors" to the businesses. Each bay will have two or three windows overlooking the parking lot.
The windows provide more contrast for the elevations than the change in texture. The north and south
elevations each have two windows that align with the office spaces of those respective bays.
Staff is recommending that further architectural embellishment occur on the south elevation of the
building facmg the frontage road. Staff's recommendation is to put at least six additional windows (real or
simulated) on the south elevation. In response to previous discussions, the upper accent band has been
extended around the east elevation, encircling the entire building.
3
PARKING
Parking will be available on both sides of the building, but the majority of the stalls are oriented towards
the office space on the west side. The east side of the building is primarily for deliveries, truck and
employee parking As previously mentioned, significant semi -truck traffic is not anticipated.
The following parking analysis is based upon a parking stall calculation provided by the applicant that
includes office, warehouse, athletic and manufacturing. The requitement for athletic space is actually the
same as office space, unless there is a racquetball or tennis court, requiring six spaces per court The office
space proportion is already high according to the apphcant, it is likely to be less than 20% of the space
distribution. None of the spaces are leased at this time. If the athletic space converts to another use, it
would probably become additional manufacturing or warehouse space. Therefore, a condition is
recommended that changes m use that require additional parking may be denied or a PUD amendment
would be required. All of the indicated uses are permitted in the Business Park BP -1 zoning district.
Square Feet Parking Required
11,990 sq. ft. 60 spaces 1 space per 200 sq. ft.
9,592 sq. ft. 32 spaces 1 space per 300 sq. ft.
7,192 sq. ft. 36 spaces 1 space per 200 sq. ft.
19,184 sq, ft. 10 spaces 1 space er 2,000 sq. ft.
47,870 sq. ft.* 138 spaces required, 142 provided.
*The ordinance allows the exclusion of mechanical and rest rooms from the parking requirement The actual space
needed for these uses will likely exceed the 100 sq ft difference between the overall building size and the uses hsted.
The plan indicates 142 spaces including 43 spaces on the eastern edge of the dock area, four more than
required based upon the analysis The 43 spaces on the east side are labeled "proof -of- parking" on the
plans, but ate being built Initially there was some thought that they could be proof of parking and not be
mstalled unless needed in the future. However, given the tenant mix anticipated for the project, it was
determined by the City and developer that all parking should be installed now Areas for additional parking
may also be available on the eastern and northern edges should they be needed in the future.
Use and percentage of building space
Office 25%
Manufacturing 20%
Athletic 15%
Warehouse 40%
Totals 100%
LANDSCAPING
The ordinance landscape requirements for the Business Park are: 23 boulevard or shade trees (25% can be
evergreen) and 110 shrubs. Irrigation is also required The plan has been revised on the basis of staff
recommendations It now includes 12 boulevard trees, 17 evergreen trees, 6 ornamental trees and 127
shrubs. Indented landscaping areas are provided in the western parking lot for ornamental trees to break
up the expanse of asphalt. The southern edge of the east parking and loading area is screened with
evergreen spruce trees.
The landscaping plan indicates foundation shrubs along the west elevation (office side), alternating shade
trees with ornamental trees on the west parking lot edge and alternating shade trees with evergreens on the
east side. The west entrance is edged with flowering shrubs and a boulevard tree on either side. The
eastern entrance has evergreens planted in groupings on either side of the driveway intended to screen the
large expanse of pavement.
SIGNAGE
There will be wall signage on the west elevation associated with the office entrances above the windows
but below the upper accent band. The apphcant proposes wall signs up to three feet, eight inches m
height, and the allowed length will depend on the amount of space leased. Single bay signage will be
limited to lengths of 8 feet, 2 inches for a maximum area of 30 sq. ft, and double and triple bays will be
limited to lengths of 10 feet, 8 inches for a maximum area of 40 sq ft. The signs will be individual letters
mounted on a bronze rectangular backing board with silver trim The end unit closest to County Road 46
will be allowed a wall sign on the southern elevation. Staff is concerned about the size of the letter heights
4
proposed. The proposal allows for signs almost 4' in height. For comparison purposes, the Rosemount
Crossing project allows a total sign band of 3'. Given that this is an mdustnal site, although multi- tenant,
staff is recommending that the sign band be 3' with the total height (whether stacked or single line) of any
sign no greater than the 3' designated sign band. There will be no mtenor illumination of the signs or
individual letters.
No monument or pylon signs are proposed along the frontage road. Signage for addresses will be required
for the south elevation facing 160` Street
DRAINAGE, GRADING UTILITY COMMENTS
The grading design shows the paved areas draining to the outer edges of the site. There is a shght high
point in the center of the site with the storm water goes either north or south towards the site corners.
The north side has a sedimentation basin and an infiltration pond The south side drams to catch basins in
the frontage road. The ponding area has been redesigned since the Planning Commission review to
address concerns identified by the City- Engineer The revised plans increase the amount of storage
volume and concerns about rate control, water quality treatment and infiltration rates to be consistent with
City standards have been resolved The only remaining item is a required modification to the pond outlet
structure shown m a detail on sheet C -2. This detail revision can be a recommended condition of
approval.
The attached memo from the Engineering Department clarifies anticipated costs, and ensures that the
developer obtains the required permits. The required modifications have generally been resolved.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is comfortable recommending approval of the Rosemount Industnal planned unit development
subject to the recommended conditions. A draft PUD agreement is included that includes specific
recommendations resulting from the review of the most recent plans that were received after the Planning
Commission review. The development provides for starter or incubator space for business park uses, a
unique product for Rosemount that has been successful in Apple Valley and Lakeville.
5
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PUD FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR ROSEMOUNT INDUSTRIAL
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an
application from Hebert Associates, Inc. requesting PUD Final Development Plan approval
concerning property legally described as.
The East 331.94 feet of the West 1975.99 feet of the South 656 14 feet of the South Half of
the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2005, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount
conducted a Public Hearing and reviewed the PUD Final Development Plan, rezoning from BP -1 to
PUD BP -1, and Final Site and Building Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 27. 2005, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
Rezoning, and PUD Final Development Plan, subject to conditions; and
WHEREAS, on November 1, 2005, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the
Planning Commissions recommendations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Council of the City of Rosemount hereby
approves the Rezoning and PUD Master Development Plan for Rosemount Industrial, subject to:
1. Execution of a PUD Agreement.
2. The concrete block dumpster enclosures shall have gates and the exterior materials will be
consistent with the principal structure.
3. Wall signage for the individual tenants will be limited to 3' in height whether single or
double stacked and located within a 3' designated sign band.
4. Changes m uses proposed for the Rosemount Industrial building that increase site parking
demands may be demed if the required additional parking is not available on the site m a
manner consistent with zoning standards, or a PUD amendment would be required.
5. The 43 "proof of parking" stalls shall be constructed and striped in conformance with
zoning standards.
6. Conformance with applicable building and fire codes.
7. All portions of the building shall be within 150 feet of an approved fife hydrant, or as
approved by the City Fire Marshal
8. Modification of the pond outlet control structure as recommended by the City Enginner
and WSB Associates.
9. Estimated fees for the site are as follows:
Trunk Sewer Area Charge 5.00 acres $1,045/ac $5,225 00
Trunk Water Area Charge 5.00 acres $4,210 /ac $21,050.00
Trunk Storm Area Charge 5.00 acres $6,015/ac $30,075 00
Sewer Connection Fees SAC units are calculated by MCES
o MCES Fee $1,450 /SAC
o City Fee $1,160 /SAC
Water Connection (WAC), 1" Meter $6,385.00
ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 2005 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
ATTEST:
Linda Jentink, City Clerk
Storm Connection (STAC) =5.00 acres $2,005 /ac $10,025.00
William H. Droste, Mayor
RESOLUTION 2005-
Motion by: Second by:
Voted in favor:
Voted against:
Member absent:
2
City of Rosemount
Ordinance No. B-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE B
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ZONING ORDINANCE
Rosemount Industrial
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Ordinance B, adopted September 19, 1989, entitled "City of Rosemount Zoning
Ordinance," is hereby amended to rezone the property located north of 160` Street and 700 feet
west of Biscayne Avenue, Rosemount, Minnesota, from BP -1, Business Park, to BP -1 PUD,
Business Park Planned Unit Development, legally described as follows•
The East 331.94 feet of the West 1975.99 feet of the South 656.14 feet of the South Half of
the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota.
Section 2. The Zoning Map of the City of Rosemount, referred to and described in said
Ordinance No B as that certain map entitled "Zoning Map of the City of Rosemount," shall not be
repubhshed to show the aforesaid rezoning, but the Clerk shall appropnately mark the said zoning
map on file in the Clerk's office for the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove provided for
m this Ordinance and all of the notation references and other information shown thereon are hereby
incorporated by reference and made part of this Ordinance.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication
according to law.
ENACTED AND ORDAINED into an Ordinance this 1st day of November, 2005.
ATTEST:
Linda _lentmk, City Clerk
Published in the Rosemount Town Pages this
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
William H Droste, Mayor
day of 2005.
and
CLL-250829v1
RS215 -4
Rosemount Industrial
Hebert Assoc. Inc.
Planned Unit Development
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS
AND RESTRICTIONS
THIS DECLARATION made this day of 2005, by Mark
Hebert, Hebert Associates, Inc., 23300 Grandview Trail, Lakeville, MN 55044 (hereinafter
referred to as the "Declarant
WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of the real property described on Exhibit 1, attached
hereto and hereby made a part hereof (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is subject to certain zoning and land use restrictions
imposed by the City of Rosemount, Minnesota "City in connection with the approval of an
application for a planned unit development for a [residential, commercial, mixed use] development
on the Subject Property; and
WHEREAS, the City has approved such development on the basis of the determination by
the City Council of the City that such development is acceptable only by reason of the details of the
development proposed and the unique land use characteristics of the proposed use of the Subject
Property; and that but for the details of the development proposed and the unique land use
characteristics of such proposed use, the planned unit development would not have been approved;
1
WHEREAS, as a condition of approval of the planned unit development, the City has
required the execution and filing of this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
(hereinafter the "Declaration and
WHEREAS, to secure the benefits and advantages of approval of such planned unit
development, Declarant desires to subject the Subject Property to the terms hereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Declarant declares that the Subject Property is, and shall be, held,
transferred, sold, conveyed and occupied subject to the covenants, conditions, and restrictions,
hereinafter set forth.
1. The use and development of the Subject Property shall conform to the following
documents, plans and drawings:
a. City Resolution No. 2005- Exhibit 2.
b. Site Plan Sheet A -1, Rev. 10- 05 -05, Exhibit 3.
c. Floor Plan Details Sheet A -2, Rev.10- 05 -05, Exhibit 4.
d. Elevations Sheet A -3, Rev. 10- 05 -05, Exhibit 5.
e. Landscape Lighting Plan Details Sheet Ll, Rev. 10- 05 -05, Exhibit 6.
f. Grading, Drainage And Utility Plan Sheet C -2, Rev. 10- 20 -05, Exhibit 7.
g. Topographic Survey Rev. 10- 05 -05, Exhibit 8.
all of which attachments are copies of original documents on file with the City and are made a part
hereof.
2. Development and maintenance of structures and uses on the Subject Property shall
conform to the following standards and requirements:
a. Wall signage for the individual tenants will be limited to 3 feet in height
whether single or double stacked and located within a 3 ft. designated sign band. No ground
CLL- 250829v1
RS215-4
2
3. The Subject Property may only be developed and used in accordance with
Paragraphs I and 2 of these Declarations unless the owner first secures approval by the City Council
of an amendment to the planned unit development plan or a rezoning to a zoning classification that
permits such other development and use.
4. In all respects the use and development of the Subject Property shall conform to the
requirements of the City Code of Ordinances.
5. The obligations and restrictions of this Declaration run with the land of the Subject
Property and shall be enforceable against the Declarant, its successors and assigns, by the City of
Rosemount acting through its City Council. This Declaration may be amended from time to time by
CLL- 250829v1
RS215 -4
or pylon signs will be permitted, other than directional signs as allowed by the sign
ordinance. Address number signs are required for the south building elevation in
conformance with the sign ordinance standards.
b. Changes in uses proposed for the Rosemount Industrial building that
increase site parking demands may be denied if the required additional parking is not
available on the site in a manner consistent with zoning standards, or a PUD amendment
would be required.
c. The 43 "proof -of- parking" stalls shall be constructed and striped in
conformance with zoning standards.
d. The Grading, Drainage Utility Plan Sheet C -2 (Exhibit 7) shall be revised
as follows: The pond outlet control structure shall be modified m accordance with review
comments provided by W. S. B. Associates, the City's consulting engineer.
3
a written amendment executed by the City and the owner or owners of the lot or lots to be affected
by said amendment.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned as duly authorized agents, officers or
representatives of Declarant have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the day and year first
above written.
(SEAL)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2005,
by the and
the for and on behalf of a
by and on behalf of said
THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY:
Kennedy Graven, Chartered (CLL)
470 Pillsbury Center
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402
(612) 337-9300
CLL- 250829v1
RS215-4
ss.
DECLARANT
By
Its
By
4
Its
Notary Public
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The East 331.94 feet of the West 1976.99 feet of the South 656.14 feet
of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115,
Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota.
Exhibit 1
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PUD FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR ROSEMOUNT INDUSTRIAL
Exhibit 2
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an
application from Hebert Associates, Inc. requesting PUD Final Development Plan approval
concerning property legally described as.
The East 331.94 feet of the West 1975.99 feet of the South 656.14 feet of the South Half of
the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2005, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount
conducted a Public Hearing and renewed the PUD Final Development Plan, rezoning from BP -1 to
PUD BP -1, and Final Site and Building Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 27. 2005, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
Rezoning, and PUD Final Development Plan, subject to conditions; and
WHEREAS, on November 1, 2005, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the
Plarming Commissions recommendations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Council of the City of Rosemount hereby
approves the Rezoning and PUD Master Development Plan for Rosemount Industrial, subject to:
1. Execution of a PUD Agreement.
2. The concrete block dumpster enclosures shall have gates and the exterior materials will be
consistent with the principal structure.
3. Wall signage for the individual tenants will be limited to 3' in height whether single or
double stacked and located within a 3' designated sign band
4. Changes m uses proposed for the Rosemount Industrial building that increase site parking
demands may be denied if the required additional parking is not available on the site in a
manner consistent with zoning standards, or a PUD amendment would be required
5. The 43 "proof of parking" stalls shall be constructed and striped m conformance with
zoning standards.
6. Conformance with apphcable building and fire codes.
7. All portions of the building shall be within 150 feet of an approved fire hydrant, or as
approved by the City Fire Marshal.
8. Modification of the pond outlet control structure as recommended by the City Enginner
and WSB Associates
9. Estimated fees for the site are as follows.
Trunk Sewer Area Charge 5.00 acres $1,045/ac $5,225.00
Trunk Water Area Charge 5 00 acres $4,210/ac $21,050.00
Trunk Storm Area Charge 5.00 acres $6,015/ac $30,075.00
Sewer Connection Fees SAC units are calculated by MCES
o MCES Fee $1,450 /SAC
O City Fee $1,160 /SAC
Water Connection (WAC), 1" Meter $6,385.00
ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 2005 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
ATTEST:
Linda Jentink, City Clerk
Storm Connection (STAC) =5.00 acres $2,005 /ac $10,025.00
William H. Droste, Mayor
RESOLUTION 2005-
Motion by: Second by:
Voted in favor.
Voted against
Member absent:
2
�lllilllll
iialimau
1;
r
eloseuum hunowafoa
1VIN1Sf GNI INflO W ]SON
2ulpimg pasodold
Exhibit 3
Q
1
.11'1'11 1..i.1 1111.11A
f
Aar
Ca k f r
r• O
a°
1_
a_
;11''1'1'1'1
a J
B. ran
L_
Mi t
ri
J
r,
1104
f I -11
a
BaF Y a k
I N
I ray tl
i?-'
r n ddddo
..1 111.,
a
L r
s,
0
d
i
b
Th
L
i
I
�r
b 6 b
,■,Ii
-t
4
o
a— i
0:
0
I-
o �J
Elocauum 'hunowaaoa
WIEIS(IGNI 1NflOW 3SON
3wpPmg pasodoad
a
Exhibit 4
Irt
a
Id ea
2
Eel
imma
MIND
NEI
me
el III 1
MEI
re III 1
in idni
a 01-1
�I
a l
rein
.g
El _s
Bn
i
:le
so pm NI
ma n w ma
Supra pas aoid
R
MIME
t
Exhibit 5
0
1'
sl
p l
i
I
l
0
emsauu!w 'lunowasoV
1VIalsnUNI IN IOW3S021
Sulpling pagoda,'
1
1 s
[e
e
Exhibit 8
j
5.1
i
0
N
U
O
Q
5 i
X W
W Z
O g
6X
1 1
to
Excerpt of Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of September
27, 2005.
Public Hearing:
5B. Case 05-42 -PUD Rosemount Industrial PUD Master Plan.
Mr. Pearson reviewed the staff report. Rosemount Industrial is a proposed 48,000 sq. ft.
multiple tenant office warehouse building proposed for a five acre parcel on County Road
46 between Dakota Fence and the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District. The buildmg
will consist of up to 16 bays of 3,000 sq. ft (27 ft. x 109 ft.). Individual renters may choose
one or several bays for their business operation. Rezoning to Planned Unit Development is
appropriate because of the anticipated multiple uses m the building The uses proposed for
the building include office, warehouse, athletic (commercial indoor recreation) and
manufacturing These uses are permitted m the BP -1 district. The PUD also gives the City
the ability to negotiate higher performance for architecture, landscaping and other
considerations. The applicant has constructed similar buildings in Apple Valley near Pilot
Knob and m the Air Lake Industrial area of Lakeville
Acting Chairperson Zurn asked if the Commissioners had any questions for Mr Pearson.
Commissioner Schultz requested more information about the NURP cntena listed in the
Anthony Aderhold's memo of September 22, 2005. Mr. Pearson stated Mr. Aderhold
reviewed the initial grading plan and assembled a set of recommended changes to the
grading plan and among the changes were that the plan be required to conform to the
NURP requirements and standards. Mr. Brotzler added that the statement regarding water
quality has to do with the NURP requirements which have been adopted by the City as part
of the City's storm water treatment requirements and defines the need to provide a
treatment basin or sediment and phosphorus removal of pollutants in storm water prior to
discharging to the proposed infiltration basin.
Commission Powell questioned whether staff recommends four or six windows along the
south elevation. Mr Pearson stated he intended to have a minimum of four but feels it
would look better with six windows along the south side.
Commissioner Powell stated his disappointment in not having the grading plans.
Acting Chairperson Zurn asked if the applicant would like to come forward.
Mark Hebert, Hebert Associates, stated he has enjoyed working with the City of
Rosemount and fully supports all conditions proposed. Mr Hebert stated he would answer
any of the Commission's questions
Acting Chairperson Zurn opened the Public Hearing. There was no public comment.
MOTION by Powell to close the Public Hearing. Second by Schultz. Ayes. All.
Nayes. None. Motion approved.
Mr. Pearson apologized for the discrepancy in the number of windows recommended. The
recommendation clearly states including six additional windows. Mr Hebert stated he will
work with his architect on adding the additional windows.
Commission Powell stated if acceptable to staff, he would prefer Condition 11 to now state
"...review and approved prior to issuance of a grading permit." Staff accepted the change.
MOTION by Zum to recommend that the City Council approve the PUD Master Plan
for Rosemount Industrial subject to:
1. Execution of a PUD Agreement.
2. Provision of an interior driveway connecting the east and west parking lots on the
north side of the building a minimum of 20 feet wide, or as approved by City Staff.
3. Landscape plan revisions including:
Installing boulevard trees at maximum 50 ft. intervals along the south half of
the west side yard and the south front yard west of the Black Hills Spruce
grouping, north of the 55 ft. wide easement boundary.
Replace the spreading yews with an alternative for staff review and approval
and install north of the 55 ft. wide easement area in conformance with sight
triangle criteria to screen the west parking lot
4. Revisions to the south elevation to enhance the architectural aesthetics including 6
more windows.
5. The concrete block dumpster enclosures shall have gates and the exterior materials
will be consistent with the principal structure.
6. Wall signage for the individual tenants will be lnruted to 3' in height whether single
or double stacked and located within a 3' designated sign band.
7. Changes in uses proposed for the Rosemount Industrial building that increase site
parking demands may be denied if the required additional parking is not available on
the site m a manner consistent with zoning standards, or a PUD amendment would
be required.
8. The 43 "proof of parking" stalls shall be constructed and striped in conformance
with zoning standards.
9. Conformance with applicable building and fire codes.
10. All portions of the building shall be within 150 feet of an approved fire hydrant, or
as approved by the City Fire Marshal.
11. The storm water modeling calculations shall be revised and resubmitted for staff
review and approved prior to issuance of a grading permit. NURP volumes and
adjusted accordingly once the calculations have been completed.
12. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided as directed by the City Engineer.
13. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention (SWPP) Plan shall be provided for review prior
to the release of a grading penmt.
14. NPDES permit is the responsibility of the developer /contractor. Documentation
shall be forwarded to the City.
15. The applicant shall revise the grading and drainage plan to comply with comments
listed in the September 22, 2005 memo from the Engineering Department attached.
16. Estimated fees for the site are as follows:
Trunk Sewer Area Charge 5.00 acres $1,045 /ac $5,225 00
Trunk Water Area Charge 5.00 acres $4,210/ac $21,050.00
Trunk Storm Area Charge 5.00 acres $6,015/ac $30,075.00
Sewer Connection Fees SAC units are calculated by MCES
o MCES Fee $1,450 /SAC
o City Fee $1,160/ SAC
Water Connection (WAC), 1" Meter $6,385.00
Storm Connection (STAC) =5.00 acres $2,005 /ac $10,025.00
Second by Schultz. Ayes. All Nayes• None. Motion carried.
Mr. Pearson stated this item is tentatively scheduled to go to the City Council on October
18, 2005, assuming the grading plan issues can be worked out.
PROPERTY ID NUMBER 34-03210-040-85
FEE OWNER
PAYABLE 2005 TAXES
NET TAX
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
TOTAL TAX SA
PAYABLE 2006 ASMNT USAGE AG
SINN*
NOTE Dmrensrons rounded to nearest foot
MANLEY LAND DEVELOPMENT INC
2113 CLIFF DR
EAGAN MN 55122
n i l
Copynght 2005, Dakota County
This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used es ore
This towing is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county and
stale offices and other sources, affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes
only Dakota County is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained If dscrepances are
found, pease contact Dakota County Survey and Land Information Department
Map Date September IS 2005 Parcels Updated 9/1/2005 Aerial Photography 2003
SITE MAP
2005 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 2006)
LAND a LOT SIZE
BUILDING
TOTAL 'Ji
SCHOOL DISTRICT 196
LOCATION SEII4 5E114 SECTION 32- 115-19
PAYABLE 2006 HOMESTEAD STATUS NON HOMESTEAD
WATERSHED DISTRICT VERMILLION RIVER
LAST QUALIFIED SALE
DATE AMOUNT
MM CO.
217,573 TOTAL SO FT
5 00 TOTAL ACRES
16,262 ROAD RAN 50 FT
P2oPosED
(ZOSEK OtdNT
LMt7u s L iu 1k.
OncOTa
FENL•
2005 BUILDING INFORMATION (PAYABLE 2006)
NO DATA AVAILABLE
OA
PLAT NAME SECTION 32 TWN 115 RANGE 19
TAX DESCRIPTION E 331 94 FT OF W 1976 99 FT
OF 5 65614 FT OF 5 1/2 OF
SE 1/4
32 115 19
LJ LJ LJ
LJ L J I .1 L J L.J
7
O
W
0
uiosauu9N lunowasab
TdfIJSfl ONI INflO W 3SO8
8uippng pasodoid
e
jg
r- 1
-a.1
ei. on
1
!'�e
E. 11
ME1
IW 1
-1 c
111
I'll
-I
Eaf 1
bu —I
11 1
r�_1
X111 I
X111
-lii -I
.la
a-1
IHI_
-�1
ni
n1
1
1
M
91111
-.1 -1
NI ®r1
NI MI I
IIf._1
I_1
ild
l ain
-aur.
2
Ifl l
-111
.1
ll�.
�•r.
a1
yR
w. !ri
NI
4
a�osauuryy iunouaso
1VR11SflCNI INf1OIN3SO21
$uip1ng pasodoid
fE
r Y�
MI My
MI a
omi
mg =Mom
Ad
DATE: September 22, 2005
TO: Rick Pearson, City Planner
CC: Jamie Verbrugge, City Administrator
Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director
Andrew Brotzler, City Engineer
Jason Lindahl, Assistant Planner
Dan Schultz, Park Recreation Director
FROM: Anthony Aderhold, Project Engineer
RE: Rosemount Industrial PUD
The Engineering Department offers the following comments for the Rosemount Industrial Park
PUD submittal based on the following documents:
1. Topographic Survey Sheet C -1— dated 8/30/05
2. Grading, Drainage and Utility Plan Sheet C -2 dated 8/30/05
3. Hydro Cad Storm Water Modeling Results dated 8/30/05
4. Soil Permeabihty Estimates -Braun Engmeermg dated 7/29/05
Storm Water Management Comments
Water Quantity
Water Quality
MEMORANDUM
!C ROSEMOUNT
PUBLIC WORKS
1. The storm water modeling calculations for the site should include the 2.2 Acres of offsite
drainage area to the northeast. The existing and proposed drainage area mapping for the site
should be provided to evaluate the storm water modeling analysis The discharge rate control
from the site should be based on 0.5 cfs /acre or use a tnuuinum 6 -inch orifice outlet from
the pond /infiltration area.
2. The proposed pond outlet from the sedimentation basin appears to contain a secondary fl-
inch orifice outlet at an elevation of 948.0 that is not defined in the utility plan. The location
and direction of discharge for the 4 -inch orifice should be shown in the site plans The
proposed pond and infiltration area should include a storm sewer outlet flowing south to the
existing system located on the south end of the site.
1. The water quality volume calculations provided do not to meet the NURP cntena stated in
the City's storm water management plan. The runoff volume from a 2 5 -inch rainfall event
1
G \2005 \Planning Cases \05 -42 -PUD Rosemount Industnal PUD Fatal Development Plan\ IndustnalPad:PUD eng comments doc
was not included in the analysis Water quality calculations shall be provided for a 2.5 -inch
rainfall event consistent with the NURP criteria
2. The dead pool volume for the sediment basin should be verified with the revised NURP
volumes and adjusted accordingly once the calculations have been completed.
Storm Water Infiltration
1. The infiltration calculations for the site appear to meet the 1/12 Acre -Foot per Acre of
drainage area cnterion in the City storm water management plan.
Plan Review Comments
Topographic Survey
1 The topographic survey data should include the pipe invert elevation for the 24 -inch culvert
under the Dakota Fence parcel dnveway.
2. The 18 -inch RC pipe apron invert elevation should be shown on the plan.
3. The storm sewer system pipe diameters from CSAH 46 to the site are shown as 15 -inch RC
pipe in the Dakota County CSAH 46 construction plan, sheets 172 and 191. It is
recommended that the pipe sizes downstream of the site be verified due to the discrepancy
between the construction plans and the survey data.
4. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided as directed by the City Engineer.
Grading, Drainage and Utility Plan
1. The grading plans for the proposed sediment basin and Infiltration basin are incomplete.
The proposed infiltration bottom elevation of 947 with a 4 1 side slope appears to require
grading off -site in the northeast corner of the site. The grading plan shall be submitted for
review that illustrates proposed contours based on the existing contour interval of 1 foot.
2. The emergency overflow elevations on the west and east property boundary should be
shown on the grading plan. The overflow elevation should be a minimum of 1.5' below the
first flow elevation of 951 to ensure 1 foot of freeboard is bemg provided.
3. The proposed 15" CMP storm sewer connection from the sedimentation basin to the
infiltration basin has a proposed outlet elevation of 946, which is 1 foot below the
infiltration basin bottom elevation of 947. The pipe profile should outlet at the infiltration
basin bottom elevation of 947.
2
G. 2005 Planning Cases \05 -42 -PUD Rosemount Industnal PUD Final Development Plan \IndustnalParkPUD eng comments doc
General Comments
1. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention (SWPP) Plan shall be provided for review prior to the
release of a grading permit.
2. NPDES permit is the responsibility of the developer /contractor. Documentation shall be
forwarded to the City.
3. Hydrants shall be installed to meet minimum fire protection per the City's Fire Marshal.
4. Estimated fees for the site are as follows:
Trunk Sewer Area Charge 5.00 acres $1,045/ac $5,225 00
Trunk Water Area Charge 5.00 acres $4,210/ac $21,050.00
Trunk Storm Area Charge 5.00 acres $6,015 /ac $30,075.00
Sewer Connection Fees SAC units are calculated by MCES
o MCES Fee $1,450 /SAC
o City Fee $1,160 /SAC
Water Connection (WAC), 1" Meter $6,385.00
Storm Connection (STAG) =5.00 acres $2,005 /ac $10,025.00
Should you have any questions or comments regarding the item hsted above, please contact me at
651- 322 -2022.
3
G \2005 \Planning Cases \05- 42 -PUD Rosemount Industrial PUD Fetal Development Plan IndustnalParkPIJD eng comments doc
3 .fp,oZ,Op N
7 111_17 I
iwiare zmwIoxeb¢mn
Li
I I
I I
I I I I
f I
I
37,4 NO aT,L4»
H �Bm k ib
as_
AGENDA ITEM: Case 05 -42 -PUD, Rosemount Industrial
PUD Agreement
AGENDA SECTION:
Consent Mier d
PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner
AGENDA NO. #6i
II!/�� L
ATTACHMENTS: Revised PUD Agreement
APPROVED BY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to authorize the execution of the attached PUD Agreement for Rosemount
Industrial revised by the City Attorney.
GSEMOU T
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Meeting: November 1, 2005
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ISSUE
The City Attorney has reviewed the PUD agreement for Rosemount Industrial and recommended several
minor changes:
1. The first paragraph for the Declaration relates to SPOWDOWD, LLC, the entity that owns the
property rather than Mark Hebert the applicant. Mr Hebert will still be expected to sign the
agreement on behalf of SPOWDOWD, LLC.
2. Revised the last sentence of Paragraph 1 which refers to the attachments as exhibits.
3. Revised Paragraph 2b by substituting the words "will not be allowed" for "may be denied" and
ends the paragraph with "consistent with zoning standards." The change eliminates or a
PUD amendment would be required." Paragraph 3 covers the PUD amendment process if it
is ever needed.
4. The Declarant signature section reflects SPOWDOWD, LLC and Mr. Hebert as its Chief
Manager.
5. The Notary Pubhc section refers specifically to Mr. Hebert and SPOWDOWD as a Minnesota
Limited Liability Company.
RECOMMENDATION
With these changes recommended by the City Attorney, staff recommends that the Council can authorize
the execution of the PUD agreement for Rosemount Industrial.
and
CLL- 250829v1
RS215 -4
THIS DECLARATION made this
Rosemount Industrial
Hebert Assoc. Inc.
Planned Unit Development
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS
AND RESTRICTIONS
1
day of 2005, by
SPOWDOWD, LLC., a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, 23300 Grandview Trail, Lakeville,
MN 55044 (hereinafter referred to as the "Declarant
WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of the real property described on Exhibit 1, attached
hereto and hereby made a part hereof (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is subject to certain zoning and land use restrictions
imposed by the City of Rosemount, Minnesota "City") in connection with the approval of an
application for a planned unit development for an multiple tenant industrial development on the
Subject Property; and
WHEREAS, the City has approved such development on the basis of the determination by
the City Council of the City that such development is acceptable only by reason of the details of the
development proposed and the unique land use characteristics of the proposed use of the Subject
Property; and that but for the details of the development proposed and the unique land use
characteristics of such proposed use, the planned unit development would not have been approved;
WHEREAS, as a condition of approval of the planned unit development, the City has
required the execution and filing of this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
(hereinafter the "Declaration and
WHEREAS, to secure the benefits and advantages of approval of such planned unit
development, Declarant desires to subject the Subject Property to the terms hereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Declarant declares that the Subject Property is, and shall be, held,
transferred, sold, conveyed and occupied subject to the covenants, conditions, and restrictions,
hereinafter set forth.
1. The use and development of the Subject Property shall conform to the following
documents, plans and drawings:
a. City Resolution No. 2005- Exhibit 2.
b. Site Plan Sheet A -1, Rev. 10- 05 -05, Exhibit 3.
c. Floor Plan Details Sheet A -2, Rev.10- 05 -05, Exhibit 4.
d. 'Elevations Sheet A -3, Rev. 10- 05 -05, Exhibit 5.
e. Landscape Lighting Plan Details Sheet L 1, Rev. 10- 05 -05, Exhibit 6.
f. Grading, Drainage And Utility Plan Sheet C -2, Rev. 10- 20 -05, Exhibit 7.
g. Topographic Survey Rev. 10- 05 -05, Exhibit 8.
all of which exhibits are attached hereto and made a part hereof and are copies of original
documents on file with the City.
2. Development and maintenance of structures and uses on the Subject Property shall
conform to the following standards and requirements:
a. Wall signage for the individual tenants will be limited to 3 feet in height
whether single or double stacked and located within a 3 ft. designated sign band. No ground
CLL•250829v1
RS215 -4
2
3. The Subject Property may only be developed and used in accordance with
Paragraphs I and 2 of these Declarations unless the owner first secures approval by the City Council
of an amendment to the planned unit development plan or a rezoning to a zoning classification that
permits such other development and use.
4. In all respects the use and development of the Subject Property shall conform to the
requirements of the City Code of Ordinances.
5. The obligations and restrictions of this Declaration run with the land of the Subject
Property and shall be enforceable against the Declarant, its successors and assigns, by the City of
Rosemount acting through its City Council. This Declaration may be amended from time to time by
a written amendment executed by the City and the owner or owners of the lot or Lots to be affected
by said amendment.
CLL- 250829v!
RS215-4
or pylon signs will be permitted, other than directional signs as allowed by the sign
ordinance. Address number signs are required for the south building elevation in
conformance with the sign ordinance standards.
b. Changes in uses proposed for the subject property that increase site parking
demands will not be allowed if the required additional parking is not available on the site in
a manner consistent with zoning standards.
c. The 43 "proof -of- parking" stalls shall be constructed and striped in
conformance with zoning standards.
d. The Grading, Drainage Utility Plan Sheet C -2 (Exhibit 7) shall be revised
as follows: The pond outlet control structure shall be modified in accordance with review
comments provided by W. S. B. Associates, the City's consulting engineer.
3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned as duly authonzed agents, officers or
representatives of Declarant have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the day and year first
above written.
(SEAL)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss.
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2005,
by Mark Hebert, the Chief Manager of SPWDO WD, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company
for and on behalf of the Limited Liability Company.
THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY:
Kennedy Graven, Chartered (CLL)
470 Pillsbury Center
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402
(612) 337-9300
CLL; 250829v1
RS215 -M1
DECLARANT: SPOWDOWD, LLC
By Its Chief Manager
Its
By
Its
4
Notary Public
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The East 331.94 feet of the West 1976.99 feet of the South 656.14 feet
of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115,
Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota.
Exhibit 1
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PUD FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR ROSEMOUNT INDUSTRIAL
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an
apphcation from Hebert Associates, Inc. requesting PUD Final Development Plan approval
concerning property legally descnbed as
The East 331.94 feet of the West 1975.99 feet of the South 656 14 feet of the South Half of
the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota Count;, Minnesota
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2005, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount
conducted a Public Heanng and reviewed the PUD Final Development Plan, rezoning from BP -1 to
PUD BP -1, and Final Site and Building Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 27. 2005, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
Rezoning, and PUD Final Development Plan, subject to conditions; and
WHEREAS, on November 1, 2005, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the
Plannmg Commissions recommendations.
Exhibit 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Council of the City of Rosemount hereby
approves the Rezoning and PUD Master Development Plan for Rosemount Industrial, subject to:
1. Execution of a PUD Agreement
2. The concrete block dumpster enclosures shall have gates and the exterior materials will be
consistent with the principal structure.
3. Wall signage for the Individual tenants will be limited to 3' in height whether single or
double stacked and located widen a 3' designated sign band.
4 Changes m uses proposed for the Rosemount Industrial building that increase site parking
demands may be denied if the required additional parlung is not available on the site in a
manner consistent with zoning standards, or a PUD amendment would be required
5. The 43 "proof of parking" stalls shall be constructed and striped in conformance with
zoning standards.
6. Conformance with applicable building and fire codes.
7. All pornons of the building shall be within 150 feet of an approved fee hydrant, or as
approved by the City Fire Marshal.
8. Modification of the pond outlet control structure as recommended by the City Engmner
and WSB Associates
9 Estunated fees for the site are as follows•
Trunk Sewer Area Charge 5.00 acres $1,045 /ac $5,225.00
Trunk Water Area Charge 5.00 acres $4,210 /ac $21,050.00
Trunk Storm Area Charge 5.00 acres $6,015/ac $30,075.00
Sewer Connection Fees SAC units are calculated by VICES
o MCES Fee $1,450 /SAC
O City Fee $1,160 /SAC
Water Connection (\X'AC), 1" Meter $6,385.00
Storm Connection (STAC) =5.00 acres $2,005,/ac $10,025.00
ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 2005 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
ATTEST:
Linda Jenunk, City Clerk
William H. Droste, Mayor
RESOLUTION 2005-
Monon by Second by:
Voted m favor:
Voted against
Member absent
2
alp paw
IIilllllii
y. ]3 3
t: {i
Di
1
rH
1, j.
11,%
Eiji L
ijlj 1 1
r r
fidt g3
2A S i
e1OSauoryy sionowasnb
l VR11SnaNl 1Nf1O W3S011
EuiP1ing pasodoid
v
r (4 I 1
L .j L L J L L-1 1
c
11
Q
I
i rd- I
1 r a
r.. r
LJ LJ L.J
Exhibit 3
N
u
b Z
A
-i
1
O
r +5 o
d
1
d
j
I
t
r
o
O
I o
r
4
r
.a
o
4
D_
D 1
IA I tl A-1
r I
I 1
O
o
;SU
I
i
1
=1
r +n
eiz
nt-
6 c
I i i a i ;bii*
Wr
1
..1
G
A
s ;osauuM 'sufOWasoa
1VI&LS(laNl INflOW ISOB
Su!pong pasodoJd
0
6
P.6
c rr
5
e"
Exhibit 4
MI
tan
fC
p
on Ern
r
0
6$@
.Iosauuryy '1unowasoy
lVI2llSf1ONl iNflOW3SO
Sulppng pasodoad
Exhibit 5
u 1
Ii
.9
II
3
1
tt
X1
1
I J 1 flHL ,hl ll'll,l,'ll 'fl 11 'I'll II
1}
31
Pat
tlolau wq 'IunowaSOa
WVI?JJS(lONI iNflOW3SO21
Sutpuns pasodoJd
H
I I I
Ic
1 i11
Exhibit 6
Am&
g
N
Qdm§H
3 SO CMG
Exhibit
|ll 1
G
0
z
d
B
Exhibit 8
0
D
s
a
2 r
C 8
w W
Z
Z
z
0
a
6
Excerpt of Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of September
27, 2005.
Public Hearing:
5B. Case 05 -42 -PUD Rosemount Industrial PUD Master Plan.
Mr Pearson reviewed the staff report Rosemount Industrial is a proposed 48,000 sq. ft
multiple tenant office- warehouse building proposed for a five acre parcel on County Road
46 between Dakota Fence and the Metropolitan Mosquito Control Dsmct The building
will consist of up to 16 bays of 3,000 sq ft (27 ft. x 109 ft) Individual renters may choose
one or several bays for their business opetanon. Rezoning to Planned Unit Development is
appropriate because of the anticipated muluple uses in the building. The uses proposed for
the building include office, warehouse, athletic (commercial Indoor recreation) and
manufacturing These uses are permitted in the BP -1 distract The PUD also gives the City
the ability to negotiate higher performance for architecture, landscaping and other
considerations. The applicant has constructed smular buildings in Apple Valley near Pilot
Iinob and in the Air Lake Industrial area of Lakeville.
Acting Chairperson Zurn asked if the Comrnssioners had any questions for Mr. Pearson.
Commissioner Schultz requested more Information about the NURP cnteria listed in the
Anthony Aderhold's memo of September 22, 2005. Mr. Pearson stated Mr. Aderhold
reviewed the initial grading plan and assembled a set of recommended changes to the
grading plan and among the changes were that the plan be required to conform to the
NURP requu-ements and standards. Mr. Brotzler added that the statement regarding water
quality has to do with the NURP requirements which have been adopted by the City as part
of the City's storm water tteatrnent requirements and defines the need to provide a
treatment basin or sediment and phosphorus removal of pollutants m storm water prior to
discharging to the proposed infiltration basin.
Commission Powell questioned whether staff recommends four or six windows along the
south elevation. Mr Pearson stated he intended to have a minimum of four but feels it
would look better with six windows along the south side
Comnussioner Powell stated his disappointment in not having the grading plans.
Acting Chairperson Zum asked if the apphcant would like to come forward.
Mark Hebert, Hebert Associates, stated he has enjoyed working with the City of
Rosemount and fully supports all conditions proposed. Mr. Hebert stated he would answer
any of the Commission's questions.
Acting Chairperson Zurn opened the Pubhc Hearing There was no public comment.
MOTION by Powell to dose the Public Hearing Second by Schultz. Ayes• All
Nayes. None. Motion approved
Mr Pearson apologized for the discrepancy in the number of windows recommended. The
recommendation clearly states mcluding six additional windows. Mr Hebert stated he will
woik with his architect on adding the additional windows.
Commission Powell stated if acceptable to staff, he would prefer Condition 11 to now state
..review and approved prior to issuance of a grading permit Staff accepted the change.
MOTION by Zurn to recommend that the City Council approve the PUD Master Plan
for Rosemount Industrial subject to
1. Execution of a PUD Agreement.
2. Provision of an interior driveway connecting the east and west parking lots on the
north side of the building a minimum of 20 feet wide, or as approved by City Staff.
3. Landscape plan revisions including
Installing boulevard trees at maximum 50 ft. intervals along the south half of
the west side yard and the south front yard west of the Black Hills Spruce
grouping, north of the 55 ft. wide easement boundary
Replace the spreading yews with an alternative for staff review and approval
and install north of the 55 ft. wide easement area in conformance with sight
triangle cnteria to screen the west parking lot.
4. Revisions to the south elevation to enhance the architectural aesthetics including 6
more windows.
5. The concrete block dumpster enclosures shall have gates and the exterior materials
will be consistent with the principal structure.
6. Wall signage for the individual tenants will be limited to 3' in height whether single
or double stacked and located within a 3' designated sign band.
7. Changes in uses proposed for the Rosemount Industnal building that increase site
parking demands may be denied if the required additional parking is not available on
the site in a manner consistent with zoning standards, or a PUD amendment would
be required.
8. The 43 "proof of parking" stalls shall be constructed and striped in conformance
with zoning standards.
9. Conformance with apphcable building and fire codes.
10. All portions of the building shall be within 150 feet of an approved fie hydrant, or
as approved by the City Fire Marshal
11. The storm water modeling calculations shall be revised and resubmitted for staff
review and approved pnor to issuance of a grading permit. NURP volumes and
adjusted accordingly once the calculations have been completed.
12. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided as directed by the City Engineer.
13 A Storm Water Pollution Prevention (SWPP) Plan shall be provided for review prior
to the release of a grading permit.
14. NPDES permit is the responsibility of the developer /contractor. Documentation
shall be forwarded to the City.
15. The apphcant shall revise the grading and drainage plan to comply with comments
hsted in the September 22, 2005 memo from the Engineering Department attached.
16. Estimated fees for the site are as follows:
Trunk Sewer Area Charge 5.00 acres $1,045/ac $5,225.00
Trunk Water Area Charge 5.00 aces $4,210/ac $21,050.00
Trunk Storm Area Charge 5.00 acres $6,015/ac $30,075.00
Sewer Connection Fees SAC units are calculated by MCES
O MCES Fee $1,450 /SAC
o City Fee $1,160 /SAC
Water Connection (WAC), 1" Meter $6,385.00
Storm Connection (STAC) =5.00 acres $2,005 /ac $10,025.00
Second by Schultz Ayes- All Nayes: None. Motion carried.
Mr. Pearson stated this item is tentatively scheduled to go to the City Council on October
18, 2005, assunung the grading plan issues can be worked out.
PROPERTY 10 NUMBER 3403310-040-B5
FEE OWNER
PAYABLE 2005 TAXES
NET TAX
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
TOTAL TAX 5 SA
J112
alb
PAYABLE 2006 ASMNT USAGE AG
MANLEY LAND DEVELOPMENT INC
21' 3 CLIFF C R
EAGAN MN 55122
NOTE Dnrons one rounded to nearest IoaL
Capynghl 2005, Dakota County
This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and Is not Intended to be used as one
this drawing is a comodanon of records, Information and data located in vanous city county and
Gale offices and other sources, affecting he area snows, and Is to be used for relrence pu'ooses
only Dakota Csurty 6 not responsbe for any inaccuracies nerem =Named 11 disaepanaes are
cued please contact Dakota County Survey and Land Information Department
Aa^ nao- Gcmrn.ner 12 2005 Parr dv 1 ndated o• nrvW -pn..a
SITE MAP
2005 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 2005)
LAND -g LOT SIZE
BUILDING
TOTAL 217, 973'C SO FT
50D TOTAL ACPES
SCHOOL DISTRICT 196 16 262 ROAD SN S0 FT
LOCATION SE1145E1/4 SECTION 32- 115.19
PAYABLE 2006 HOMESTEAD STATUS NON HOMESTEAD
WATERSHED DISTRICT VERMILLION Re/ER
LAST QUALIFIED SALE
DATE AMOUNT
km CO.
PR DPOSE-D
{ZOSa1"t OL-uN7
IntPustLI F-
1 2035 BUILDING INFORMATION (PAYABLE 2006)
Crm coTA.
F ar4
NO DATA AVAILABLE
J\ c
I t
PLAT NAME. SECTION 32 TWN 115 RANGE 19
TAX DESCRIPTION E 331 94 FT OF W 1975 99 FT
OF 5 655 14 FT OF 5 1¢ OF
SE 1(4
32 115 19
L_J
IjIIIltlIJ
I.ridrIll"a31
alosauw 'lunowasa
1vitLsnaNI 1NfOW3s021
auippn9 pasodoid
v i I5
.1 1
LI 1 1 -A I�
yy
gym«. a Se J_ 1i1" Ii`
I i
9Ptl
itl
1
`1
1
1TT -W n
h. aw
1, 1 1
1
11
.1 I
1 1
11 1
l h•
1 E
ti
,p
to!
.r
Slimpiall
r
:Irg
::r
WC
a
iwil
am i
Eris
-l.■.
E re
LIMN
LIMN
.I.1
_I�
i
NMI
a =3
-N 1 1
.S
ran
G
a1
_I-
e
12
s
El
elofuup 'lunowaso
1V1fsnaNl INfO1N3s021
2uipprie pasodoJd