Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.c. Rosemount Crossing Final PUD Development Plan & Preliminary Plat, 04-59-FP, 04-60-04-PPCITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Meeting Date: October 5, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: Rosemount Crossing Final PUD. Development Plan & Preliminary Plat, Planning Cases 04- AGENDA SECTION: 59 -FP & 04 -60-04 PP. New Business PREPARE_ D BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Dir., Rick Pearson, City Planner, AGENDA NO. Andy Brotzler, City Engineer i 1 TEM # 1,- 1 ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution, Correspondence from Steiner Development and their Attorneys, Sept. 7 revised plans including Survey, Preliminary Plat, Grading & Drainage, Utilities, Landscaping, Lighting, Tree Preservation and APPROVED BY: Architectural Elevation Reductions, PC. Minutes from Sept. 14, 2004 and Report, Concept Resolution 2004 -94, Aug. 2, 2004 Council minutes. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the.preliminary plat and PUD final development plan for Rosemount Crossing subject to the conditions listed in the resolution. if the applicant does not agree with the conditions in the resolution because they do not support dedication and payment for construction of the loop road, as indicated in their letter, the Council should table the item to pennit the applicant time to address the local traffic issues in the area. This will require a modification to the current site plan. ACTION: ISSUE Steiner Development has requested Preliminary Plat, PUD Final Development Plan approval for the 7.2 -acre site on the northwest comer, of County Road 42 and State Highway 3. The materials provided include site design for the four buildings, but the identity of the 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant has not been disclosed. Therefore, its design is "generic." This review is intended to cover the detailed design and engineering of the project. It also includes the platting of the parcel into four lots, one for each building. BACKGROUND Applicant & Property Owner(s): Todd Johnson of Steiner Construction Services Location: Northwest corner of CSAH 42 and STH 3. Area in Acres: 7.19 Development data: Building Size Lot area Grocery 15,000 sq. ft. 1 1.948 Restaurant 4,200 sq. ft. 2 0.576 Restaurant 6,500 sq. ft. 3 1.163 Retail 22,400 sq. ft. 4 2.8 Total 48,100 sq. ft. 4 6.487 Additional right -of -way: County Road 42 (acres) 0.391 Camero Lane & Cambrian Ave. Connection: 0.311 Overall site total (acres): 7.189 Comp. Guide Plan Desig: Commercial Current Zoning: C -4, General Commercial Previous City Council Action: Approved Concept 8 -2 -2004. Planning Commission Action: Recommendation of Approval (4 -0) 9 -14 -04 The property was previously platted as Marion Terrace with two east -west streets, a north - south street and 22 lots. Marion Terrace was never developed, and the streets were vacated in 1955. The reason this is important, is that (vacated) Third Street connected Camero Lane with Cambrian Avenue and would have provided access to the rest of the plat area if developed. Two previous development scenarios for the property were for commercial uses, the most recent having been approved in 1988. Without development, Camero Lane has remained stubbed to the northern edge of the property. The entire property is designated for commercial land use, and is zoned C -4, General Commercial. SUMMARY On August 2, 2004, the Concept was approved with a series of conditions. This review will compare the preliminary plat with the conditionally approved concept as well as typical ordinance standards. The concept approval supported variances to building and parking / driveway setbacks along Highway 3, County Road 42 and the Cambrian Avenue entrance. Exterior building material requirements have also been relaxed, dependant on aesthetic integration of alternative building materials. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING On September 14, 2004, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing. No one from the audience participated other than the developer or consultants. The Commissioners had questions regarding viability of the semi - turn - around area, number of handicapped parking stalls, and potential improvements to Highway 3. Additional information was provided by the developer's consultant regarding the Storm Tech underground vaulted ponding system. The 2 Commissioners requested additional clarification regarding the design, location and maintenance of the system. The developer also confirmed that Starbucks had signed a letter of intent to lease a portion of the 4,200 sq. ft. building. The Chairman asked the developer if he had any concerns about the recommended conditions of approval. The developer expressed concern over the condition requiring the restaurant in the first phase of construction. The developer did not want to be held to a date and time. The current recommendation has been reworded to be consistent with the condition addressing restaurant timing approval and the City Council at concept plan approval. Since that time, the developer has provided some additional information and made requests since Planning Commission review: 1. The number of seats in the restaurant is projected to be about 200, requiring additional parking spaces beyond the number allotted by ordinance. 2. The architectural elevations include additional wall sign detail. 3. The developer has requested that the entrance monument originally proposed for the Cambrian Avenue connection to Hwy 3 be removed. 4. The developer is objecting to the recommendation that it fund the cost of the street connecting Camero Lane with Cambrian Avenue. 5. A letter from the developer was forwarded to the City Council listing a variety of concerns. The letter and staff response is attached. Although not entered in the formal public hearing, staff did receive a letter from a neighbor on September 26, 2004. The resident is requesting a fence be constructed to deter cut - through foot traffic. Staff has generally not supported use of a fence for screening due to aesthetics and long -term maintenance concerns. The landscaping along the perimeter of the site provides reasonable screening and should also deter some cut- through traffic. The letter and location map are attached for Council's use. REMAINING ISSUES There were two primary issues from the staff perspective that needed to be addressed by the applicant prior to City Council action. The two items were related to storm water and parking. The following discussion brings the Council up to date on these two issues. DRAINAGE, GRADING & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Engineering staff had identified several points that needed attention relating to the previous grading plan and storm water information. The two main areas were the storm water calculations submitted with the project and the Emergency Overflow (EOF) in the western portion of the site. The previous calculations did not adequately distribute the storm water into the system; the new calculations do that. Staff is now comfortable that the underground storm water system as proposed can fully address the City storm water standards. The other issue was the need for an overland EOF in the west. Special care has been taken when reviewing these plans because of the tendency for ponding in the west, adjoining several residences. Staff review, and requested changes has focused on the desire to improve upon the current condition if possible and certainly not make it any worse. A new 3 t si 31 - sajea pue spiepuels paidaooe asn pinonn Apnjs 6ul�aed a ul uollewaojul 'AlleoldAl }oefoad siyl aol pasodoid jey} jo azis pue uolleool ul jualslsuoo si juellnsuoo ayj Aq paloolloo e}ep ayj aay}aynn 6ulssasse jol aouejejea jo awed ou sey : 4e }s 'Alaeilwls - Z •uollewjojul 6ul�aed jol aoinos pa}daooe Alleaauab ayj si jeyj se Allualslsuoo pasn aq uol}ewaojul alnlllsul pue uegan ayl jey} paajajaid aney'pinonn pue uoljeiaen ayl suollsanb }}e }S - }uellnsuoo ayj Aq paiay }e6 jeyj woaj si uollewjojul ayj sawllawos pue 'pasn si Apnjs uol}epodsueal aol uollepuno ON3 ayl sawlawos 'pasn aae sjagwnu alnlllsul pue uegan 941 sawllawoS - elep }o asn ,s }l ul salaen Apnls ayl :Apnls ayj Aq pasrei suollsenb awos aae ajay} pue 8SAA of Apnjs ogeil ayj papiemiol sey _}elS - ueld ails juasaid ayj aapun „pa�jed Alajenbape„ si alp ayj leyl salpnpoddo bul�jed pajeys y6noue apinoid ll!m lepawwoo bululewai ayj pue sluemelsaa unnop Jls Jano -wnj y6ly onn} 'dogs labeq a 's�pngjejS 's,lajy palsll sasn ayj jeyj saleolpul Apnjs ayl - Apnjs ayj 10 SlInsai pue suolldwnsse ayj ssasse Allnj of . 4els aol jInoi}}lp 1! salew yolynn 10 bulwl} ay} 'bulwow Aeppj uo paniaoaa seen ApnjS ayl 'lenoidde uolsslwwoo 6uluueld papuawwooaj ay} toped se Ally ayj Aq palsenbaa se Apnjs bul�jed pajeys a pa11lwgns sey jueblldde ayl JNI>INVd a}ls ay} aoj jlwjad 6ulpllnq Aue }o aouenssi of jolad wa}sAs punoa6aapun ayj uo juawaai6e aoueua}uiew a o}ul 6upolue bulpnloui 'a6eulejp bulpiebei }uawliedaa 6ulaaaui6u�j ayj 10 sjuawwoo auj jo Auew pienuo} anulluoo lenoidde jo suol}ipuoo papuawwooa�j - aadolanap ay} JOI anlI09}49 Isoo aq Isnw aseo slyl uI gbnoylle '6ulpuod leoldAl ueyj uollnlos Allsoo aaow a si slyl - a }Is ayj uo juawdolanap leuol�ippe �lw�ad o� wa�sAs puna6aapun ayj azign of uasoyo sey aadolanap ayj leyl si aldwexe aup - A:padoid ayj uo eoepns paey jo junowe ayj pue ails ayl jo InoAel ayj jo swial ul jadolanap ayj Aq apew suolsloap ay} jo }lnsai lowip a aae sanssl a6euleap ayj jo awos '}oel ul - lesodoid juawdolanap Aue le palanal aae leyl spiepue ls u6lsop awes ayj aje joefoid slyl uo pasodwi sluawaiinbaa a6euleap ayl - sseooid anti ayj g6noayl pajeijo69u „sej xa„ Alleai aae spiepuels A}!0 ayj leyl paleolpul pue `91ls ayj uo luewdolanap 10 isoo ay} poseajoul Al}ueolllu61s aney s1sanbaa jo sadAl asay} jeyj aouepuodsaaaoo snoljen gbnoay} pa}eolpul sey }ueolidde ayl - walsAs leuol6ai s,Alio ayj joedwl AIanI}e69u pinonn ji 'aoueuajuiew jualognsui of onp sliel ainjonals ayl 11 "aanjonals ayj 10 aoueua}ulew ajn}nj ay} 6ulpie6ai A}!0 ayj ql!m juaweeibe ue olui aajue Isnw jueolidde ayi - Al!I!oel ay} jo eoueua}ulew ayj si saslej jI anssl ayl - uolleaado sll pue walsAs punoa6aapun ay} ql!m algepolwoo sl }}e }S - 91ls ayj jo eaae �oeq }as walsann ayj pue jol bul�aed ayj .iepun Alljewlad paleool si 11 - s}uewailnbai }uewabeuew aa}enn wio }s pue 6ulpuod ayj sseippe 01 walsAs abeaols aalenn w.iols punoa6japun ue sezign }uewdolanap ayl - seouapisai juaoefpe pue ells ayj o} uolloalo.id algenlen apinoad pue Alalenbape uoijounj of Apadoid ay} aol Aaessaoau J03 Jaylo ayj apinoad o} alp sly} jo apls Isom ayj uo pallipow uaaq sey 6ulpejE) - uol}euilsep leyl wOJJ -�03 ue apinoad of jol buwNaed ayj toped uaaylnos ay} ul peoeld uaaq sey adld unclear how Mr. Benshoof's information compares to the "industry standard ". 3. The restaurant parking is based upon gross square footage of the building rather than seats. The city's current ordinance regulates parking on number of seats and it would have been preferable to have a similar computation. Staff believes number of seats is a better indicator of trips and parking demand. 4. The study allows for a 15% adjustment in recognition that some trips to the site will be shared trips, taking up only one parking space. The adjustment also takes into consideration that some trips to the site will be pedestrians rather than by vehicle. Chuck Richart of WSB indicated that the 15% adjustment would seem high given the suburban location of the property. He recognizes that there will be shared trips to the various entities at the Center, however, believes there will be less pedestrian trips than in an urban setting. He would reduce the adjustment factor. The Study shows that there is enough parking on the site to satisfy the parking mix proposed by the applicant. The study indicates that during the lunch time period, the parking lot would be almost 90% full. Staff's main concern with the parking is to ensure there is adequate on -site parking for the various uses. The problem is there are no other parking opportunities in the immediate area, where additional shared parking could occur. If parking becomes scarce on the site, patrons may choose to park on the adjoining residential streets. This would not be acceptable. If the Council is comfortable with the results of the applicants parking study, staff is recommending additional conditions of approval that would allow the city to regulate the future tenant mix should parking become limited on the site. If off -site parking occurs, the applicant will be required to install no parking signs within the residential area. Preliminary Plat Parking Analysis The Preliminary Plat provides six more parking spaces than the concept, with improved distribution. However, there still may be a parking shortage in the vicinity of the 22,400 sq.-ft. retail building and the restaurants. The number of seats in the restaurants is unknown, which determines the amount of required parking for those uses. The developer maintains that the entire site should be considered a shopping center. The definition of a shopping center is "A group of unified commercial establishments located on a single land parcel and consisting of not less than four (4) distinct business entities which share or jointly use parking facilities." Building / Use Spaces provided Requirement Comments Grocery store 86 (some shared) 75 Shared with 4,200 sq. ft. Rest. Retail 22,400 sq. ft. 103 101* Includes spaces behind building Rest. 6,500 sq. ft. 39 (some shared) 1/3 seats Number of seats unknown Rest. 4,200 sq. ft. 21 1/3 seats Number of seats unknown — can share additional spaces with grocery and larger restaurants with shared parking easement. * Based upon 10% of the building floor space being excluded for mechanical and restrooms. 5 R] aqj legl s1 uoseaa auO - !enoidde jo uoll!puoo a!geuoseaa a si uo!}!puoo slgl jeq} papuodsaa AauaolIy Al!o aql - „a!gejdaooeun si juawdo!anap ano of }!jauaq ao 'jo }!nsaa a IOU aae jeq} S}uawanoadw! a }!s }}o aol Aed o}„ paleolpu! Aeql - „uo!joealxa aadoidwi ue„ si pasod dool aqj jo juawAed jegj paleolpu! "ou! '}uawdo!anaa aaulaIS 'I!ounoo Al!o pue aoAeW aqj o} owaw a u! •Isoo s,aadOlanap aqj eq p!nonn peon aqj jo lsoo aqj }eqj aea!o uaaq sAenn!e seq }}els pue 'i!ounoo pue uo!ss!wwoo aqj of peonpoalu! }sig Senn ue!d Ideouoo eqj souls papuawwooaa uaaq seq uolln!os ssaboe slgl - oaaweo pue ue!agweo uaann}aq 'al!s aqj jo q:pou aqj of 'peoi doo! aqj 10 uo!}e!!ejsuj pue uoljeo!pap aq} s! !enoidde papuawwooai uolss!wwoo 6uluue!d aqj jal}e lueo!!dde eqj Aq paslea A!lueow anss! uy S1N3W3AOMdW1 3nN3” N` INSWVO •l!nsai e se 6ul�aed !euo!l!ppe pue Aoua!oga paseaaoui alowoid of u6!sep aj!S aqj OSIAa�j 'L •6ul�jed pap!Aoid eqj uodn paseq slueinelsai aqj ui sleas jo aagwnu aqj ao} suo!jej!wq aqj ApoadS . 9 •bu!laed paa!nbai aol aoeds aaow aleaao ol. s6ulp!!nq aqj jo azls eqj �oeq -a!eoS 'S . pap!Aoid 6uiNaed alenbape seq aps aqj a}ea}sn!!! of x!w }ueual aqj uodn paseq s!sAjeue 6u!�aed paJegs e ap!Aad ..v •sinoq 6u!}eaado bu!dde!Jano -uou uodn paseq puewep 6u!�aed Aie}uawa!dwoo a qj alei}suowep ao bu!�aed jol sluawai!nbaa jau aqj aonpaa o} sbu!p!!nq eq} jo (swooalsai pue !eo!uegoew) InoAei u6!sop pue asn pepualu! aqj Inoge s!!ejap o!lloeds ap!AOad E •aanlnj eqj ui papeau se (goegjas o }u! 6u!goeoaoue IOU) uo!suedxa 6ui�aed jol aoeds apse Sias }eq} „Iuewaaj6y 6uNed 10 }Oad„ a olu! JeIU3 Z •seaie �oeq }as olu! goeojoue }ou soop legl aoeds uaaj6 a!ge!!eAe ul saoeds aaow ap!AOJ 'anoge passnoslp si golgnn slsA!eue buiNjed paaegs a A!ddns of asogo Aaql •abe:pogs bu!�aed aqj o} puodsai of JadO!anap aql 01 saA!}euJa }!e !eaanas pap!Aoid peq }}elS •(paiinbaJ 69) seas gL L ao} saoeds 6L sap!Aoid al!s }ueme}sai s,aaga!ddy aa!!ews eqj 'uoslaedwoo ao j - saoeds bu!�jed L9 Inoge aol peau a u! 6ull!nsai `sleas OOZ Inoge aneq A!gegoad !!!nn juemelsai aqj leq} A!lueow paleolpui seq aadO!anap aql - sleas eaagl jad aoeds auo jo junowe paalnbai aqj 1e S L L L :poddns p!noM lueme}sa.i •}} •bs 00g'g aqj a ol saoeds bui�jed a!gel!eAe 6E 9 q - L •ajegs of a!ge!!ene buiNied jo sn!d.ins a aAeq }ou Aew }eqj SeWe buiNied aaglo olui de!JaAO !!!nn spolaad � ead buljnp bu!�jed lualo!}}nsui legl si uaaouoo aqj *anss! aqj OA!osaJ of !!elap }uap Sep!Aoid Inq 'spuewap buiNied ije}uawa!dwoo aql az!!euollei of sldwal }e t 'L aagwa}daS pole eouapuodsaaaoo aado!anap pagoe}}e aql - 6uiNjed pa.i!nbe i jo p!aiA jag6lq a u! sl!nsai A!!ensn slueine}sai aol juawaiinbaa bul�aed eqj legl pauiaouoo s! }}e }S •}} •bs 000'L aad g'L le a!gei!ene saoeds jo uorpodoad aagbiq a seq jueinelsai aa!!ews aqj _:4 *bs 000'L aad saoeds xis q }!nn !!ejai of :Panuoo 01 WOM J! J! saoeds gbnoue seq lueinelsai •}} •bs 005 eqj 'pa}ou A!sno!Aaad sy -sleas lueinelsai jo aagwnu alewll!n aql uo 6ulpuadep 'sa6e:pogs eq Aew aiagj Inq '}uawdO!anap eqj aol g6noua aq.Aew saoeds !e}ol 6t aqj 'IleaaAO 'Ig6!I aq Aew 6uiNjed aql 'nna!Aaa }daouoo aq} g }!nn possnos!p A!sno!Aaad sy L •C AeMg61H pue anuany ueiJgweo J01 sIuauJanoJdwi ss000y }ueJnelsaJ •}} •bs 005`g aqj }o buiwil aqj 6uiuilaQ •aa}}iwwoo juawd019n9pa�j uMOJuMOa 941 JO suoijepuawwooaJ aqj qj!m }ualsisuoo Jo spiepuels gum }ualsisuoo slepajew Iejnjoajigoay •saaJI pJenaInoq pue 6uiueaJos Jol aoueuipJo Aq paJinbaJ se buideospuel jo uoisinOJd • •ILIOJawwOO Mau of leiluepisaJ 6uilsixe woJj uoijisueJj aqj ale6iliw of senbiugoal 6uiJa}}nq aleiJdoJddy •SaOUelJ �oegjas JOl uoissaouoo a se saipawe app jo UOISIAOJd • •seaJe hoop 6uipeol 10 buivaaJos :buipnioui sanssi u6isap 6uiplinq pue aIis IeJanas paleuiwnlli sued Ideouoo ayl •spoogJoggbiau leiluapisaJ pegsilgelsa buipunoJJns aqj woJj juawdoIanap IeIOJawwoO 94110 s10949 aqj 6uivaaJOS •anuany ueiJgweo ql!m auel oJaweo 6u1j3auuoO pue oi}}eJ} leioJawwoo w0ij s1aaJls leguepisaJ aqj }}0 6uisolo •suiaouoo buipooll oipoiJad o} puodsaJ of juawabeuew JajeM wJo }S :poogJogqbiau eqj Aq suJaouoo �JewiJd aaJgj pasieJ MainaJ Ideouoo aqj Jol pa}onpuoo sbuiJeaq oilgnd ayl lVld ANVNIWI7132Id Him a3AlOS31H 38 Ol S3f1SSl 1d33NO3 - ueld aIis aqJ asinaJ 01 awiJ JeuoiIippe jueoildde aqj jpjad of wali aqj angel pinogs Iiounoo aqj `uie6y •sleob ollgnd aqj ssaJppe Alpo}oelsiles osle ll!m jegj uoijnlos eAlIewalle ue ajeipi Aew JadOIanap aqj `pasodoJd wajsAs door aqj ql!m Addequn si Jadolanap aqj 11 •91is s1g110 luawdolanap g6noJgl passaippe aq jsnw }eqj anssi uoi}elnoin leool a seq Al!o aql - spew AlsnoinaJd 1egj of Jelpis si asuodsaJ siq `AeuJo}4y Ajio eqj ql!m suoissnosip ui `JanaMOH •Ja:al aqj of asuodsw a apinoJd AauJO}}y Ajio aqj 1egj passe seq }}elS - wa}sAs peoJ dool aqj Jol juawAed pue uoijorulsuoo aqj qj!m anssi 6ui�ej AIIewJOj J9491 a p9J9ni19p A9uJO:4e speoildde aqj tOOZ `6Z JagwajdaS uo 'WGISAs peoJ IeOOI aniJew91le ue apiAoJd pue ueld alp aqj euiwexaaJ of Jadolanap aqj Jol Al!un:poddo ue apiAoid of wali aqj algej pInogs Iiounoo aqj `uoijeJn6ijuoo juaJJno sji ui peoJ dool eqj jo uoijorulsuoo pue uoi}eoipap:poddns IOU saop jueoildde eqj 11 U51sapaj alp g6noJgl speau oiMeJj leool asegj ssaJppe o} jueoildde eqj buiMolle si aJoldxe o} gsiM Aew Iiounoo aqj uoi }do uy •suoijoaJip oMq wOjj ss000e Ajajes oilgnd se slam se Al!wJojuoo -uou aqj ssaJppe o} walsAs dool a popuawwooaJ }}ejS •punoJe -uJn} ajenbape ue aneq IOU saop Ji se buiwJojuoo - uou AlluesaJd si auel oJaweo •wajsAs peoJ oilgnd buipunoJJns pue axis juauno eqj jo swJal ui uoijenjis sigl le fool osle Aew Iiounoo aql (b0 /tbZ /6 aJana jal aiIJeg0 Iiew3) „•algeldaooe 1! aNew of ijessaoau suoilipuoo algeuoseei asodwi pue `ueld elgeldaooe ue si jegM buippop ui uoijaJosip algeuoseei asioJaxa ueo Iiounoo eqj `suoijeInbaJ uoisinipgns pue opoo buiuoz Jeln6aJ of swJojuoo 1egj juawdolanap e O} aNjeuJajIe ue se ueld a Bons 6uinoJdde ui `JanaMOH •lesodoJd aqj of pajejaJun Jo snoioudeo Jo i(JeJligJe aJe 1egj suoilipuoo asodwi jouueo Iiounoo eql •suoi}elnbaJ uoisinipgns pue 6uiuoz Ile 01 uuOjUOO asiMJaq }o }ou saop j! 1eq} joej aql ajidsap Iseialui oilgnd aqj joajoJd 01 alenbape aJe ueld oipoads aqj jo sliejap eqj }eqj (s)apioap„ o} pounoo Aj!o aqj sMolle eqj jegj 10016 algixalj a si sigl •ssaooJd afld eql Japun paMainaJ 6uieq si ApadoJd M •6u!leas aoopino joj eaae pasoloua `flews a sapnloui uo!Jenala uaaylnos ayl •6u!pl!nq ay} o} saouealue aauaoo ayj le paleool seaae oiled / ezeld sey 6u!pl!nq I!e}aj •11 •bs oot`ZZ ayl •auel y6noayl -an!Jp ay} Aq pa}eaedas s! }nq 1 91!s ayj jo aawoo Iseaylnos ay} �oolaano of lueew s! 11 •I!eal :pago�I y}noS pue Zb peo�I Aluno:D spiennol pajua!ao 1.1011enale bulpl!nq uaaylnos ayl }e eaae aelnbueljl ayl ui eaae oiled pasoloue ue sey }ueanelsaa •}} •bs ooZ`b ayl 'I!eal pago� ylnoS pue anuany uelagweo jo aaujoo ayj spiewl pa}ua!jo jueme}sai •}} •bs 605`9 ayj Jo uo!}enala Isee ayj o} pajoauuoo si oiled jelnoalo - !was y •sbulpl!nq tiaooa6 -uou ayj yl!nn uo!loauuoo ui sasn aayjo ao 6ullees joj peulJap aae seaae oiled S3DVdS uooaino - sueld ay} o }ui paleaodaooui uaaq sey yolynn )iced plallweo of � u!I � Iennap!s / I!eal a palsanbaa ao}oaalQ uo!}Moa�I pue SWd ayl •alamoo alebeibbe pasodxa yj!nn sbulssoao ueljlseped ay} a }en}uaooe of pualu! Aayj leyl paleolpui sey aadolanap ayl •alamoo (pajoloo pue) pedwels ao snned joljq jayl!e g }!nn swelled euog6uijaay �olaq Isa66ns leyl sI!ejap }uawaned yl!nn pajenjuaooe sueld ay} uo unnoys aae sAennan!ap jo sbulssoao •Zt, peo�j Alunoo pue I!wi pago�j ylnoS `aoueilue anuany ue!agweo ayl of quit sey uayl walsAs uelalsepad ayl •walsAs i lennap!s ayl of pa�u!I saoeds ue!jlseped paluaooe aney sbu!pl!nq ayl Ile jo sluoil ayl •Zt, peon Alunoo pue E AemgBIH 6uole eoeld u! walsAs >ilennap!s ayl yl!nn pue slot bu!�aed ayl ss000e s6ulpl!nq inol lie qull leyl walsAs ueulsaped ayl si juawdolanap ayl10 aanleaj lue:podw! uy SIIVNI T SM71VM3UIS •sl!ejl ao pue glennap!s bulls!xe of al!s ayl jo sa6pa jalno ayl of sNu!I sap!noid pue sbulpl!nq ayl jo lie sloauuoo osle walsAs ueulsaped pau!lap y `6ulpl!nq I!elaj •:4 •bs oot`ZZ 91 -11 pulyaq pap!noid si s>Ional -!was col coeds punoie -ujnl •s6ulpl!nq jabjel onq ayl uaannlaq Gaols i(aaoa6 ayl of apew aq II!nn salJanliap !waS •sbu!pl!nq ayl jo luoaj ui seaae buiNied ayl sdool o!}}eil Aenn -onnl •6uipl!nq yoea ioj ap!s jayl!a uo bul�aed of do suado yo!ynn `el!s ayl sl!lds ssaooe Aaewud ayl •al!s ayl jo sa6pa aalno ayl pue sped 6u!pl!nq ayl bulloauuoo unnoys aje glennssao uelalsapad suelpaw Alq!ssod pue 6uldljls apnloui sluawanoidwi pajinbaa jaylan= - gels 6ulaaeuibue ay} Aq papuawwooai se sauel aaayl of pauep!nn ag II!nn ssaooe anuany ue!jgweo ayl Nouvif1oum v SS3oov •u!ewaa leyl Ienoidde jo suoll!puoo aae away} ao sanssi asayl passaappe aney 96e�oed ueld luawdolanap leu!} ayl to }red se pall!wgns sueld •spiepuels o!laylsee algeolldde buloaolulaj pue `saa} uolleo!pep �aed jo juawAed `sluawaalnbaa sseooid 6uipnloui suoileloadxe luawdolanap aullnoi col 6u!p!noid papnloui 9.19nn suo!l!puoo Ieaanas `uo!l!ppe uI - loefoid ayl ulyl!nn luawnuow Ailue unnolunnop a jo uollejodaooul piepuels ay} ueyl 6u!�aed ssal jo uo!leog!lsnf ao buiNjed lualogns jo uolslnoad •welsAs luawebeuew jalenn waols puna6japun ue jo Al!I!q!seal ayl ENTRY MONUMENTS The plan indicates two entry monuments located at the two corners of Highway 3 and County Road 42 and the Cambrian Avenue entrance. The developer has requested that the Cambrian Avenue monument be deleted. The masonry monument still expected at highway 3 and County Road 42 is four feet high, convex semi- circular with "ROSEMOUNT CROSSING" centered on a brick face. This monument is proposed by the developer to satisfy Condition #13 of the Concept approval resolution (2004 -94): "Provision of space available for a downtown entry monument on the northwest corner adjacent to the intersection of rights -of -way for CSAH 42 and STH 3 that does not conflict with sight - triangle criteria." The Council should be satisfied that the entry monument as proposed will accomplish the objective of the condition. BUILDING ARCHITECTURE All buildings are single -story constructed with vertical piers and raised parapets at building entrances. In the case of multiple tenant buildings, the raised parapets relate to about half of the maximum available tenant spaces. They function to break -up what would otherwise be a long monotonous building roof -line. The vertical piers also break -up the horizontal lines of the buildings and add relief to the rear of the buildings. The majority of building materials are brick and rock -face block concrete masonry units (CMU). E.I.F.I.S. stucco will be applied in the sign band areas above windows and doors and the raised parapets. It should be noted that the Concept PUD as conditionally approved relieved the applicant of 100% brick or equivalent construction. Awnings are shown above all windows on most buildings. The grocery store has two awnings above windows on either side of the southeast corner entry area. The colors of the awnings are a potential concern. The architectural elevations show some colors that might be excessively bright. Council may prefer to influence actual performance based upon the design standards discussions of the Downtown Redevelopment Committee. The Downtown Committee was seeking a more traditional look that would be "timeless ". Staff is concerned that the four colors chosen are too trendy and will ultimately date the building. A recommended condition of approval is that the awning be only two colors and be in muted tones. BRICK PERCENTAGE Calculation does not include door and window areas. Building Elevation exposure Brick percentage Grocery 15,000 sq. ft. East - parking lot 53.5% South - County Road 42 43% West - residential None North - retail (loading docks) 59% 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant East — parking lot 45% South — County Rd 42 / Hwy 3 26.7% West — parking lot 58.8% 9 N scald ay} 10 gtpinn agt bulpuatx3 scald Ajuosew apinn •ul 9 •t} Z uo paoeld 6uieq pue eaae aoel u6ls •t4 •bs 09 `ty6laq wnwlxew Ileaano 74 OZ to sp.iepuels aoueulpao u6ls olseq taaw subis ayl queinetsoi goes jot. auo `papuatul aie E Aenng6lq 6uole onq pue `Aaaooi6 IQ aqt col sl Zt HVSO 6uole auo tegt sawnsaad }}etS •ueld agt uo unnogs ace subis punoa6 jo uolAd amyl •stueuat leuoltlppe ajntnl ayt JOI suoitenala agt uo seaae u6ls popuedxe eonpoitul of awlt atepdoidde eqt aq pinonn ssaooid tuawpuawe and aqt tegt slam gels `stueuat eldltlnw jol paalnbaa aq pinonn tuawpuawe rind a aoulS •stueuat eldltinw col papinlpgns warn 6 uipllnq ayt A papaau aq Aluo pinonn pue seoueatue of atelaj tou op sooeds a6eu6ls tueuat Ieuoltlppe asogl aouejlua 6uipllnq agt to u6ls IIQy ayt jol patoedxe Aisnolnaad eaae ayt puoAaq a6eu6ls tueuat col pateubisop seaae apnloul of pasinaa uaaq aneq suoltenala 6uipllnq iJaooj6 aql •spaapuets aoueulpao gtlM tuatslsuoo seaae nnopulnn pue salatua anoge spueq u6ls apinoid s6ulpllnq aql •a6eu6ls tueuat col pateu6lsep seaae apnloul suoltenala 6uipllnq eql NVId NOIS •ainsoloue agt ul tdo� aq tsnw 6uipllnq slyt buuuas siatsdwnp IIy •sateb ytln^ unnogs sl ainton.its ledlouiad aqt ytlM tuatslsuoo ainsoloue Ajuosew y •sasn Ieltueplsaj aqt woaj 6uldeospuel Aq pauaaaos si golgnn `aeaJ agt ul eaae aolnaas 6ulpeol a seq 6uipllnq Iletaa eldltlnw - 4 •bs OOt agl 'llann se eaae slq} ul pateooi aq pinonn siatsdwnp patelaj tiaooaO •}sane ayt of sasn Iel}ueplsa.i ayt woal poop 6ulpeol agt suaaios Ilene „ 9 ,9� x ,59 y •6ulpilnq e qt jo jauaoo tsannytaou ayt ul sloop 6ulpeol e seq tiaooaO aql SV311V N3lSdwna aNV Nooa JNIadO •esn njgt -anlap agt gtlnn tollJuoo ou sl maul os ells agt of patlwll aq salaanllap aqt teyt tu9w99J6e afld eqt jo aped se 6ulpuawwooaa sl getS •uol}elnojlo aelnolgan g6nagt -8nlJp aqt gtlnn stoli}uoo ou aae ajagt tegt os uolteaado Jo sinoq gtlnn ateulpa000 tsnw coop agt to uoltejado eql •salaanliap Alglssod pue `aoimes aatsdwnp aol aigellene aq of sieedde joop eql •auel gbnagt -anljp eqt otul AItowip do 6uluado `tseegtnos aqt saoel tegJ poop peaqJano ue apnloul suoltenala Ieintoatlgoae tueanetsaj •t} •bs OOZ`t aql •abewl atejodjoo uodn peseq abueyo Aew ti •pallltuepl uaaq tai( tou seq tueanetsaa aql , %5'95 1e11uaplsab — WON %tl'9E tol 6uiNjed — tsoM %L9 I!etai •t} -bs OOZ`t — gtnoS %Z5 £ Aenng6lH — tse3 tueanetsaa - 4 •bs 005`9 %09 1e — WON % 9'9Z jol 6uiAjed — tse3 %Z leltuaplsa�i — tsaM % leltuaplsa�l — tsannq ON %09 ti9o0a6 — gtnoS %L'9Z toi 6ul�aed — tseagtnoS sdogs Iletaa •:4 •bs OOt %9't tue.inetsaj •t} •bs 005`9 — WON to 6 ft. 5 in., consistent with the sign face width will be a recommended aesthetic enhancement. SETBACK ISSUES As discussed extensively in the concept review, several of the buildings and driveway/ parking areas have been granted setback concessions with the PUD. The Planning Commission and Council will have to be satisfied that site amenities and the restaurant development in the first phase are acceptable accommodations for the variances. Building Setbacks Standard PUD / deviation Elevation Grocery 30 feet 23 ft. / 7 ft. South 22,400 sq. ft. retail 30 feet 20 ft. / 10 ft. North* 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant 30 feet 10 ft. / 20 ft. North 30 feet 25 ft. / 5 ft. East * created by dedicating right -of -way for Camero Lane & Cambrian Avenue connection. Parking / Driveway Setbacks Standard PUD / deviation Location Grocery 20 feet 12 ft. / 8 ft. South edge 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant 20 feet 8.5 ft. / 11.5 ft. East edge LANDSCAPING The revised landscaping plan provides quantities of trees and shrubs to satisfy the City ordinance requirements. The plan also provides outdoor site amenities, primarily patios connected to the restaurants and the retail building. The patios include pavement patterns, sidewalk plantings and enclosed areas for outside seating connected with restaurants. Significant plantings include: Landscape Plan Planting requirement/ Comments 53 Boulevard / Shade trees; One tree per 3,000 sq. ft. of land area including boulevard 38 Ornamental trees; trees at 50 ft. spacing = 105 trees + 53 evergreen trees; tree preservation replacement requirement = 26 trees for a 144 total 131 total minimum tree requirement. 271 shrubs One shrub per ten linear feet of building perimeter = 202 254 perennial flowers No requirement. Landscape screening is required along the residential "edges" of the development to a near opaque level. This is especially critical in the loading dock areas. The landscape plan generally exhibits expected landscaping performance with three concerns: • _ The drive - through at the 4,200 sq. ft. building needs additional screening to shield headlight glare from south bound highway 3 traffic. Recent plan revisions provide a row of evergreen junipers. However, staff is concerned that the plants will not effectively screen the headlight glare until they are mature. Therefore, they should be 11 Z� •u6lsap 911s ay} ul p9nios9a eq of paalnbaa aae leyl sanssl io `Ienoidde ldeouoo rind ayl Aq p9nlenn lou 9a9nn leyl spaepuels yllnn lualslsuooul 9ie leyl nn9ln9J 9y}.ul palllluapl uaaq aney silelap to aagwnu y •p9noidde seen 11 se weld ldeouoo ayl l0 9oueaeadde 9yl sloollaa Aliea9uab ueld luawdolanap Ieull ayl •suolllpuoo papuawwooaa 10 s9Uas a y1l lenoidde ueld luawdolanap afld leUll pue leld tieulwllaad ayl 10 lenoidde puawwoow of (pew sl llels NoismONO0 •slgbl9y Ilea9no 1001 OZ o} pajannoi aq of aney Illm 6 uipl!nq ilel9a •11 •bs OOt ay} pulyaq eaae aolmas / 6ulpeol 941 96pa aalno 9yl 6ulull saanlxll inol 9yl `llnsaj a sy •asn / lolalslp lellueplsai a to leaf 00 � ulyllnn 19a1 OZ of slgbieq alod ty6ll sllwll eoueulpio ayl T AMH uo sNepuels 6uily6ll ay} of tieluawaidwoo aq 6 uilg 6 ii Ilene 6ulpnioul `6ully6ll ails Ile le bulpuawwoo9a sl llels `Ienoidde to uolllpuoo a sy - sly6lay loot t,� le 6ulpllnq Ilelai }} bs 00t,`ZZ ayl pulyaq unnoys aae saxogaoys yllnn sajnlxll palunow IleM •loulslp Ielluapisai ay} of lueoefpe `6uipllnq Ilelaa •11 •bs OOt,`ZZ ay} pulyaq saxogaoys yllnn osle salod 100 -CZ ay} aae 1xaN • builied ay} to jolaalul ay} pue aoueilue ayl to paleool slgbieq loot gZ le aae saanlxll xogaoys yllnn selod lsallel ayl •piennunnop ty6ll snool osle leyl saanlxg anlleaooap 1001 - � � aney lol 6ul�aed ayl ssoaoe dull uelalseped ayl pue 9oueilue anuany uelagwe0 ayl •spiennunnop ty6ll spool leyl sajntxg alAis „xogaoys„ aae 6ulpllnq Ilelaa ayl pulyaq eaae aolna9s pue slol Burled ayl aol builgbil eaay - ueld bullgbil 9yl uo paleolpul aie saanlxll 6uIty6ll luaaalllp inoj •91ls ayl to aalawped jalno 9yl le spiepuels my }Inn Mann sl Allsualul ayl leyl seleolpul ueld 9y1 •sa6pa jalno 9yl le pue ells ayl ssoaoe uolleulwnlll to Allsualul pue sad Al ejnlx11 snnoys ueld 6ulty6li ayl NV ONIIH91 •ueid 6uldeospuel 9yl olul palejodjooul uaaq aney ollea 9uo- aol -onnl a uo AIlsow `s9aal luaweoeid9a lueioiMns •6uldeospuel buiu99aos luaw6ne of panes eq Illnn sesn Ielluaplsai of lu9oefpe 96pa ua9lsann 9416uole S99 ayl to lsoW •panowaa aq Illnn s l uudlool lol bul�aed pue 6ulpllnq pasodoid 9yl ul peleool aae leyl asoyl •ails ayl to aalawpad ayl uo paleool aae Aayl `AIiea9uaO •ails ayl uo s9aal 6ullslx9 X510 Ielol a snnoys tioluanul ayl N0IIVAN3S3Md 33HI •sueld 6ulpea6 p9slnaa 9y1 yllnn paalnbaa We suolslnaJ ueld 9de3spuei `9aolaaayl •u6lsap 6ullueld ayl loedwl ApAllebau Aew ueld 6ulpea6 ayl of suolslnaa 9yl •1911no pue ulseg a6eaols nnolla9no aalenn waols A3ua6aawa paalnbai ayl eleen of ells 9yl to aauaoo lsomglnos 9yl ul suolsln9a 6ulpea6 lueolllu6is aq Aew aaayl •6ulpea6 9yl yl!M paleulpa000 9q lsnw ueld 6ulde3spuel 9y1 • %5Z ueyl aaow ou of yse to salllluenb IieJano 9yl 93npaa of apew eq suollnlllsgns leyl puawwoaa phone 11e1S •saagwnu aaal 9peys Ilea9no ayl 1 %05 ueyl aaow of slunowe slyl •peulgwoo s9aa1 yse 6Z saleolpul ueld 6ullueld 9yl •(Aenn- to -ly61a E HiS weal 1991 OZ) ease joeglas Iewaou aiilue ayl ssedwo3u9 pinoys sbullueld ayl pue `s6ullueid leuolllppe ylinn paluaw6ne S� - sasn Iielaj piepuels ueyj oijea 6uiMjed aay6iy a aney Ajjeaaua6 leyl s}uawysilgelse ads(}- luemelsai uie:peo apnloaad Aew pue `aalueo ayl ui s}ueual jo ads l ay} joedwi pinom siyi Aiaiewiiin - puewep builaed aseaaoap o} alis ayj uo slueua} ayj a}einbei `ssooad Aouedn000 jo a}eoilrpeo pue I!waad 6uiplinq ay} y6noayl Apo ayj `siseq aeInbei a uo sin000 6ui�aed aano -Aids 11 - swelgoad buiNied }uasaid `uoise000 uo pinoo `91is ayj leyl aieme aq pinoys Iiounoo ayl `Ienoidde 10 suoi}ipuoo popuauwwooai ayj s}daooe aadoIanap ayj 11 - ueld ayj of suoileoilipow Ajessaoau ayj @� ew of jadoIanap ayj JOI awiJ JeuoiIippe apinoad of wali ayj alge} pinoys Iiounoo ayl - a1is aiijua eqj y6nayl 6uidool pea oilgnd a ueyj aaylea wa}sAs peoa aIenijd a uasoyo seq jueoildde ayj ley} ssaooad (ind ayl y6noayl si 1! pue oaaweo jo pue -peop ayj anui}uoo pea oilgnd a aney pinom joefoid leoidAl a `aapal siy ui alels Aeuio:4y 40 ayl sy - }oafoad leioaawwoo a se alp ayj dolanap 01 wayl 6uinnoIle 91!gM spaau ssaooe leool s,AIio ayj sessa.ippe jey} ueld 91is a apinoid pinoys jueoildde ayl `[enoidde jo uoilipuoo e se jeyj Ideooe jou ;ueoildde ayl pinoyg 'Jenoidde joefoid ay} toped se pea door ay} jol Aed jadolanap ay} 6uipuawwooai elge:polwoo alinb aae Aeuio:4y A}io ay} pue 1jejg - 6uilied alis -uo ay} pue peoa dool ay} jo juawAed pue uoi}onilsuoo ayl aae awil siyl le senssi Aiewiad ayl CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2004 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PREMILINARY PLAT AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) FINAL PLAN FOR ROSEMOUNT CROSSING WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application from Steiner Development, Incorporated, requesting a Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) Final Development for the Rosemount Crossing, legally described as: Marian Terrace excepting therefrom that part now platted as Marian Terrace Replat and also excepting therefrom that part now platted as Marian Terrace Replat 2 "d Addition, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County of Dakota and State of Minnesota. Together that portion of public lands vacated in Document No. 11942 filed June 21, 1955, which accrue to subject premises. WHEREAS, on June 21, 2004, the applicant submitted a revised site plan that responded to some staff identified concerns, where upon the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount continued the public hearing for the Planned Unit Development Concept Plan to July 14, 2004 to provide sufficient time to review the revised plans; and WHEREAS, on July 2, 2004 the applicant submitted another revised PUD Concept Plan for the project renamed Rosemount Crossing addressing additional concerns. WHEREAS, on July 14, 2004, the Planning Commission reviewed the revised concept PUD for Rosemount Crossing and received comments at the continued public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend that the City Council approve the Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for Rosemount Crossing, subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, August 2 2004, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation, the Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for Rosemount Crossing. WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Rosemount approved the Plan Unit Development Concept Plan for Rosemount Crossings, subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, on September 14, 2004, the Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend that the City Council approved the Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development Final Plan for Rosemount Crossing, subject to conditions; and RESOULTION 2004- WHEREAS, on October 5, 2004, the Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development Final Plan for Rosemount Crossing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development Final Plan for Rosemount Crossing, subject to: 1. Execution and recording of a PUD agreement. 2. The development shall include a 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant, the phasing for which shall be addressed with the PUD agreement. 3. Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer regarding drainage, erosion control, grading, street, storm water and utility design including the following specifics: a. A maintenance agreement shall be required for the underground storm water storage system prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. b. The sanitary sewer shall be reconfigured to utilize the two stubs already present on -site. c. The plans shall conform to all City of Rosemount Engineering Standards and guidelines and address comments specifically listed in the following report. d. Dedication of right -of -way for the street connection between Camero Lane and Cambrian Avenue and provision of funds necessary to construct the street to City standards. e. Obtain a MnDot access permit. 4. Reconstruction of Cambrian Avenue for exclusive access into the Rosemount Crossing site and provision of landscaping for screening adjacent residential uses. In consideration that site access is located within the public right -of -way, the City may at its own discretion take over the driveway within Cambrian Avenue for public access purposes. 5. Plan revisions to eliminate setback and sight - triangle encroachments of the monument signs along Highway 3 at the corners with County Road 42 and Cambrian Avenue, and setback encroachments along Highway 3 and County Road 42 for ground signs. 6. Ground signs shall have monument bases consistent in width with the sign face, and consistent with building architecture and materials. Three ground signs are permitted within the entire PUD consistent with the approved site plan: All freestanding signs may not exceed the height width and sign tenant into and logo than the plan dated 9/2/04 and received by the City on 9/23/04. 7. Implementation of the revised landscaping plan received on September 7, 2004, and further refinements to the plan: a. Provide additional plantings within the normal parking setback area along Highway 3 to immediately and effectively screen the drive - through from south -bound traffic year round achieving 90 % opacity to a height of three feet. b. Reduce the overall percentage of Ash trees (currently more than 50% of all boulevard trees). 2 c. To coordinate with grading revisions associated with the emergency storm water overflow. 8. All landscape areas including parking lot islands shall be irrigated. 9. Pedestrian or service doors entering into the drive - through lane shall not be permitted in the 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant, or delivery times will be restricted to periods exclusive of drive - through service availability. 10. Provision of a sign plan for consistency of design of wall signs. The sign plan should designate a sign band for sign placement on each building, the type of signs acceptable on the site, and the sign area for each tenant space. This sign plan or covenant serve as the sign regulations for the entire property and will supersede City adopted ordinance regulations. 11. The grocery building shall not have additional tenant signs located outside of the E.I.F.S. sign locations near the entrances and windows. A PUD amendment shall be required if the building is proposed to be altered for multiple uses or tenants. 12. Construction of the sidewalk / trail connection to Camfield Park consistent with specifications of the Parks and Recreation Director. 13. Approval of the Dakota County Plat Commission including provision of additional right -of -way for County Road 42 14. Sidewalks intersecting with driveways shall emphasize the pedestrian crossings with pavement detail including either textured concrete or brick pavers. 15. Incorporation of Recommendations from the Parks and Recreation Commission for Park Dedication in the amount of $64,710 based upon current fee resolution. 16. The four light fixtures lining the outer edge of the retail building service area shall be reduced to 20 maximum heights. Parking lot lighting and wall lighting must be complementary to the light standards along Hwy 3. 17. The light fixture "E -26" shall be moved out of the pedestrian ramp / curb cut adjacent to the 22,400 sq. ft. retail building. 18. Building awnings shall be in muted tones with up to two colors. 19. The applicant shall obtain necessary permits for work within right -of -way from MnDOT and Dakota County and necessary permits from the State such as the NPDES permit. 20. The applicant shall install masonry trash enclosures consistent with the materials of the principal structures. 21. The applicant shall provide the three public plaza spaces shown on the final development plan accessory to the freestanding restaurant, south of the coffee shop, and on the southern end of the multiple tenant retail space. 22. Payment of all required development feeds including park dedication fees. 23. Should the property experience a parking shortage which creates negative off -site impacts, as determined by the City, the City may restrict the type of uses within the project to obtain a lower demand for on -site parking. The restriction will be based upon typical industry standards or, if found acceptable, information generated specifically for the end user. 24. The applicant must pay for no parking signs in adjoining residential neighborhoods if they experience on- street parking associated with the project. 25. The tenant mix is restricted to that portrayed in the October 1, 2004 parking study submitted by the applicant. The introduction of non - retail uses aside from an RESOULTION 2004- 15,000 sq ft ALDI grocery store, a 1,800 sq ft Starbucks, a 1,200 sq ft bagel shop, a 6,500 sq ft full- service freestanding restaurant, and a 3,000 sq. ft casual dining/high turnover site -down restaurant will not be allowed without a parking study showing that the site has adequate parking, to be reviewed and approved by the City. ADOPTED this Fifth day of October, 2004 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. William H. Droste, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Second by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Member absent: $ep -30 -04 13:21 From- Kennedy & Graven +6123379310 T-593 P.002 /003 F -570 470 U.S, Rar 4 P6 7n 200 Souch Sink Sirccc Wnntnpulls, PAN 55402 (612) 337 -9300 it [ephone (612) 337 -9310 fax C H A R T L• R E D [yap: //-,vww.kennoly- gravcn.com CIW,L ES L. LE)CIEVERE Attorney at La W Direct Dial (612) 337 -9215 Email: clelcvcrc glcennedy -a ivcn.cum September 30, 2004 Kim .hindquist Community Development Director City of Rosemount 2875 145 St. W_ Rosemount, MN 55068 Re: .Rosemount Crossing Dear Kim: You have asked for my comment on an objection to a draft condition of approval for the planned unit development of Rosemount Crossings. In a letter to you from Jeremy Steiner, legal counsel for the developer, dated September 29, 2004, Mr_ Steiner argues that requiring payment for the loop road is unlawful and unacceptable. The proposed development requires approval of a planned unit development (PUD). A PUD is a flexible zoning tool that allows a development to proceed because the City Council decides that the details of the specific plan are adequate to protect the public interest despite the fact that it does not otherwise conform to all zoning and subdivision regulations. The COUnCil may not impose conditions that are arbitrary car capricious or unrelated to the proposal. IIowever, in approving such a plan as an altemative to a development that couForms to regular zoning code quid subdivision regulations, the Council can exercise reasonable discretion in deciding what is an acceptable plan, and impose rca: onable conditions necessary to make it acceptable. The proposed condition is that a loop road be constructed on and adjacent to the northwest part of the subject property and that this be paid for by the developer, At the current time, Catnero Lane ends at the north side of the .:)rol)erty_ Ordinarily it would be expected that Camero Lane would be continued through the subjccl property at the time it was divided into lots and blocks to provide for normal and reasonable traffic circulation through this property. Because the subject property is to be developed as a PUD without internal public streets, there will be no outlet for Camero Lane to the south. As an,zItetnative, staff is recommending that a traffic connection for Camero Lane be provided by a loop connection to a reconstructed Cambrian Avenue. CLL- 253879vl RS220 -181 Sep -30 -04 13:2 1 From - Kennedy & Graven King Lindquist Ltr September 30, 2004 Page 2 of 2 +6123379310 T -593 P.003/003 F -570 The construction of such a loop connection allows more of the subject property to be developed since it will not be occupied by a public road connection from Camero Lane through the lots and blocks of a traditional subdivision. )f a public street were constructed through the subdivision, it would ordinarily be expected thz.t the developer would pay for such a connection. The connection in this case, which serves the same purpose and is constructed primarily on the subject property, seems a reasonable alternative for a PUD. It may be that the developer is objecting to paying for this loop connection because it will not directly serve the subject property. However, the developer is not required to develop this property with a PUD. It can divide the property up into a traditional subdivision with internal public streets that will provide traffic circulation through this area. Tlie developer's properties would, of coarse, have access to such a street. If the developer wishes riot to develop its property in this way, it seems reasonable for the City to require that the publ: c traffic circulation that otherwise would have been provided and paid for by a developer in a norrrtal subdivision, be provided and paid for by the developer in this alternative form of development as well. Additionally, T understand that the loop road system was part of the reason that the staff has supported reduced setbacks which bencft the project and the developer. The loop road functions as a buffer providing separation typically looked for when commercial property adjoins residential. Without the loop road configuration, the site plan would need to be reconfigured and reduced setbacks may not be supported. Therefore, in my opinion, the Couacil could reasonably detemiine that the condition is related both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development and that there is at least a "rough proportionality" between the loop road connection and the need for that connection caused by the proposed development. If the proposed condition is found by the Council to be reasonable and necessary to make the PUD acceptable but the condition 'Ai ll not be agreed to by developer as part of the subdivision agreement, the alternatives are. 1) [he COLMC11 may disapprove the PUD on grounds that could include findings that the proposal (without the loop road) does not adequately address traffic circulation needs in this area and Joes not provide adequate separation between the proposed commercial and adjacent residential use; or 2) the developer may suggest one or more alternate pleas to address these issues in another way, either through a different PUD or a traditional plat that does not require a PUD. Vcry i my yours, c Charles L. LeFcvere CLL:peb CLL.253879vI R 81 JEREMY S. STEINER* WYNN CURTISS JASON T. HUTCHISON *Real Property Law Specialist, certified by the Minnesota State Bar Association MILLER, STEINER & CURTISS, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 400 WELLS FARGO BANK BUILDING 1011 FIRST STREET SOUTH HOPKINS, MN 55343 JERRE A. MILLER (RETIRED) (952)938 -7635 FAX (952) 938 -7670 Writer's Direct Dial No. 952- 938 -6219 September 29, 2004 Ms. Kim Lindquist Development Director City of Rosemount 2875 - 145` Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 Re: Rosemount Crossing Development Dear Ms. Lindquist: Delivered by Messenger I represent Steiner Development, Inc. ( "SDI "), and have been asked to write this letter detailing my client's objections to one of the proposed conditions for approval of the plat of Rosemount Crossing (the "Plat "). The specific condition my client objects to is that it dedicate to the City .311 acres of right of way for a public street connecting Camero Lane with Cambrian Avenue and pay all costs associated with constructing this new public street. For the reasons stated in this letter, we believe this condition to be unreasonable. Moreover, in my opinion, the exaction of this property transfer to the City and the requirement that -my client pay for construction of a public street that in no way benefits the Rosemount Crossing development exceed the limits on the City's regulatory authority established by the United States and Minnesota Supreme Courts. It is my understanding Cambrian Avenue is now a through street with direct access to State Highway No. 3. The 60 foot wide public right of way for Camero Lane dead ends at the north property line of the land being platted as Rosemount Crossing with no cul de sac or outlet to Cambrian Avenue. The "dead end" at the end of Camero Lane was created by the previous action of the City of Rosemount in vacating Third Street, which, in the original plat of Marian Terrace, was an east -west street connecting Camero Lane and Cambrian Avenue. It is proposed that Cambrian Avenue will provide the sole means of access to a public street for the Rosemount Crossing development. My client is prepared to accept approval of the development with this sole public access point. However, as a condition of approval of the Plat, the City is seeking to further curtail access to the subject property by requiring that Cambrian Avenue be closed to through traffic entering or exiting the Rosemount Crossing development. While SDI is prepared to accept the imposition of this new restriction on public street access to the property, it does not believe it is reasonable or legally permissible for the City to then exact the transfer of the .311 acres of public right of Ms. Kim Lindquist -2- September 29, 2004 way and require SDI to construct the new public street simply to remedy problems resulting from actions of the City of Rosemount in requiring that the existing access to Cambrian Avenue be limited and vacating Third Street. The City's desire to establish the new public street connection does not result from and is not sufficiently related to the Rosemount Crossing development to enable the City to require this exaction from my client._ It is a well established rule of law that municipalities such as the City of Rosemount have only a limited ability to require exactions of property rights as a condition of a zoning approval. In the 1994 case of Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994), the United States Supreme Court held that there must be a "rough proportionality" between the exaction required by the municipality and the need for that exaction caused by the proposed development. The Supreme Court stated that a "city must make some sort of individualized determination that the required dedication is related both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development." In the case of the Rosemount Crossing development, we believe there is no relationship whatsoever between correcting the Camero Lane "dead end" and the proposed development. In addition, we do not believe the City's requirement that access to Cambrian Avenue north of the development be eliminated is reasonably related to this development. We are not aware of any facts that would support an "individualized determination" by the City that the Rosemount Crossing development necessitates this requirement, and the City has not considered alternatives, such as traffic control measures preventing traffic exiting the development from turning left onto northbound Cambrian, that would address this perceived problem while being better related "both in nature and extent to the impact of the (Rosemount Crossing) development." In short, the requirement that SDI transfer .311 acres of right of way to the City of Rosemount and pay for the newly constructed loop street does not meet the "rough proportionality" test of the Dolan case because this exaction is not "related both in nature and extent to the impact" of the Rosemount Crossing development. In our opinion, this exaction is being imposed to remedy a traffic circulation problem resulting from actions of the City of Rosemount that are not adequately related to the proposed development. While SDI believes the exaction of public street right of way connecting Camero Lane with Cambrian Avenue ,is impermissible, it is prepared to accept that condition of approval and proceed with the development if the City will waive the requirement that SDI also construct and pay for the public street improvements for the connecting road. Construction of this new public street will add an estimated $80,000 to the project's costs, making the development financially unfeasible. SDI believes it has been extremely reasonable in agreeing to accept numerous conditions requested by City staff, which impose significant financial burdens on this development. My client is also prepared to agree to the exaction of .311 acres of right of way for the connecting street even though we believe this exaction to be impermissible. However, SDI simply cannot accept the additional financial imposition of the estimated $80,000 cost for constructing the connecting street. We would, therefore, request that the City waive this requirement and accept responsibility for the costs of constructing the connecting street. SDI has invested significant time and resources in the Rosemount Crossing development and has sought to work cooperatively with the City of Rosemount and its staff in negotiating the conditions for approval of the development. My client feels it has been more than reasonable in agreeing to the numerous Ms. Kim Lindquist -3- September 29, 2004 exactions and conditions imposed on it for approval of this development. However, it simply cannot agree to accept the condition that it dedicate .311 acres of right of way for the connecting street and construct that public street at a cost of approximately $80,000, because we believe that requirement exceeds the City's authority and because it will result in the development being financially unfeasible. We trust the City of Rosemount will demonstrate the same willingness to work in a cooperative manner with SDI to resolve this issue. I would ask that you include this letter in the materials to be distributed to all City Council Members before the October 5 City Council meeting. Very truly yours Jeremy S. Steiner JSS /drs cc: Mr. Todd Johnson, Steiner Development, Inc. via fax Mr. David Kordonowy, Steiner Development, Inc. via fax Mr. Rick Pearson via messenger c:SDnLindquist.ltr 1W BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 10417 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, SUITE TWO / HOPKINS, MN 55343 / (952) 238 -1667 / FAX (952) 238 -1671 October 1, 2004 Refer to File: 04 -71 MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Johnson, Steiner Development, Inc. FROM: James A. Benshoof and David C. May RE: Review of Parking Demand /Supply Relationships for Rosemount Crossing Development This memorandum is to present the results of the study we have completed concerning parking at the proposed Rosemount Crossing development. The purpose of this study has been to address the following questions: • What are the parking demand requirements for each of the uses occupying the development? • Is the amount of parking provided by the development suitable to fulfill the demand requirements? As we understand, the Rosemount Crossing development consists of four buildings and the following uses: Southwest corner (15, 000 square foot building) • ALDI grocery store Southeast corner (4,200 square foot building • Starbucks coffee store with drive - through (1,800 square feet) • Bagel shop • Small retail store (to be determined) Northeast corner (6,500 square foot building • Full- service restaurant (high - turnover, e.g. Perkins' or Axel's/Bonfire) Northwest corner (22,400 square foot building • "Quick casual" restaurant (high- turnover) (3,000 square feet) • Fantastic Sam's hair salon Mr. Todd Johnson -2- October 1, 2004 • Nail salon • Ebay auction assistance store • Remainder to be determined Based on a review of the current development plans, a total of 256 spaces are supplied for all four buildings. We have projected parking demand for the proposed development using parking generation information previously collected by Benshoof & Associates for other similar land uses, and from the following two sources: • Shared Parking Urban Land Institute, 1983. • Parking, Robert A. Weant and Herbert S. Levinson, ENO Foundation for Transportation, 1990. A 15% reduction factor has been applied to all land uses to account for walking and multi - purpose trips. Parking demands vary throughout the day for different land uses. To account for this variation, the net parking demand was determined for each land use during five periods throughout the day. The net parking demand for each land use was then added together to obtain the gross total parking demand for each period throughout the day. The gross, total parking demand was then was multiplied by a factor or 1.1 to obtain the total number of parking spaces needed for each period of the day. The 1.1 factor is to account for items that limit the efficiency of a parking facility, such as snow storage, motorists taking two spaces, and the time lag between when a motorist leaves a space and another motorist arrives to occupy the space. Drivers perceive that parking lots are "full" when approximately 90% of the spaces are occupied. Table 1 presents the demand /supply relationships for each land use in the Rosemount Crossing development during a typical weekday, and Table 2 presents the same relationships during a typical Saturday. As indicated in the two tables, the proposed development provides sufficient number of parking spaces to meet the total expected parking demand during all time periods on a typical weekday and a typical Saturday. Mr. Todd Johnson -3- October 1, 2004 Z p 2 m p d v Z u 0 P 64 ; W t> ,Q ,g 0 = o rn rn ro a 0 gr �! 9 c , CU lb �:�w -p - 0 �� m' G22WWW SSOi 7r 0 0o 0 O in ri N' m O [l l � �' O O to O - N �: O N 't0" Ol O R vg la �mm� y o m O 0 T: ,rt o n 3 o d r— a ) o ' a 6T a _ s a• a s ° 'A a° OR a M � CD ns. ` ro - ..lE U & 7C +D W W {�I1 0 C 1pp d OJ V1 (D (n iC Er 00 OOp o o �O \Zfo Ca Ti S r•r v m y (D C w Cob Y 80 8 ? a�En 4, 0000:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �p X pQ rr �. 7 0 j G S = m m �' n � N - 3 d O_ rb sn SQ. d 'pNN� -r p..W of v M O V r 10 > 0 p::0 0 O= 7 O p 0 O rf o N A < n 3 @ a N la �o�o�'oa,�goo a T. 3 L t SD p1 O n :o c d �� ' ' � 3.— O •C 00 r ',D� 2 O O 01 iD 0 3 3 Sn al Lq o J ( tj-S -S - 00 00 o "' A N A ro -: 7r 0 0o 0 O in O i1 n rnr O o O of �: O 0 3 C 9 1'•'' 0 T: K 3 0 47 2 = n o°icO1ii�oC, w� d r a 'A a° OR ns. ` ro - ..lE U & 7C +D W W 1O V7 .A. OJ V1 (D (n iC A 00 OOp o o �O \Zfo Ca v O W M CD W V r 10 > a N la �o�o�'oa,�goo N 33 d R' p1 � 00 r ',D� 2 01 iD 0 3 3 al Lq o v0, •o 0 3 3 m 0 w Nn�opo p(n 33 Mr. Todd Johnson -4- October 1, 2004 .tip OD ?.+U ...o 4 'O z ', m Nw O '�0 Ai Cl [ #Q CL -' a, t� m cr m Q • y _ cn r» w w' a Y N 1 � �'• 1 Cr 0 f ^O^N r� � w aj ... dL o ro gg C6 Cr ID K CL rl "•�. 4i O O C7 SN9 lu Na y Lt a tea � I" 3 !q ? Vf �U¢7 Zn En tl!�,n In 1L Cl..g :p ti`.1 $�,ti„$ N .{S Ln �— �O 11 F a = " � a o o as X , a 9 E E m a Q .tip OD f m of n n 4 'O Nw O '�0 Ai E E m a Q f m of n n 4 'O • y Z E Y N 1 � 1 Cr f ^O^N w aj • 1 wLL wu i 5 iOd IYNOEIC a�ix Nnl� 'C� = u'w• j o:•cf6 - j '" N• u • M ib 90.6 8£'B z / „o y irrJls rv— r13nL1,-t - z'a WEI lid / � ` +'o. zd� r :1• •• / ty6 .' tl �1 , .ceo. �.� 1 . �lizH 1 � =2 � � w w � '� ,°�• °.' I O ar . y / zro is .I K 99 Lro•3a+ rszce. c a"098 r eD 'ql.S iuoZI a} 61's k5� • rr,w. �/ 1Waetl roaso. AM. / - co A?' . _ OLroS s - INOZ , b n / }}\ I 0-3 I +•ss6dnw ,,� •. � Lt s ue. \ •1 °w �� ��s N'xe. HHJ 3 t ,•,..Cl at Jv/7•� .rya. a�u. \ sxa.� fema. I`. t r+f/. __ /, t� � � /6 .�.•�4'� zt r .+,d... s o.o.e. V sr se - Y .c c.M 1531 'Ips °• \ <vet ;<7.61b % / - w'atuB 1s3t los - I • zvc. at Y• /. �9ue• �,r/ / craw. - I nyw. / c e- - �'LYt.HJr021�nG @5 ate' C . s -. DNU!D3 tL' [ TM m a��Me l ^ � � ; • ��c. or,w. a kr• �;.'>�• tlaa< ' "t r// ./ wvx.l uc �'' m'j sem.I A6� 1531 • I 1 I � FYJ 1 WVO :� Kxy. a'Ke. \ : 6•�"T. ONNI I ilm c'°a •�• s • `sC K ']`• 1 WM. • soar ,� I. � 3,k3.r 11 /{v'Ty/ uen, 1N?K�YC2r7F1 -= I �!! z ya /J fla 1 ll3sw nun I r 8r�y tr Ll/� zwkr •�: .� LN311HJvo r rk:.ral 1 wla• e, .lL. I Etr .G• uyr.. 09 ::3i.�. }L� :!S .LC' I'.. I v.... Z9 w cl a�• �� F' lh3\ \ K � ilr t m ese � r'r^'h t t2,9 nn p6p�\ 1s �� � r � �• n'xe.l z T a n5y` ":b Af��n . • K.. /' I o I D"0 .. i ng � c � I ^C5S6 � •_� c mute. N341-40V9N � xyKa aot Pas S d i e / lLYSIa 'GN 700 k3ri 1 ' OZlna caes � t /' M .Q£.S£.£Z S �. ✓ }?'v1N;N3SY3 V_! A3S 8015. r.'ew. -- nw• IrZ ZO'bZ I g b i.LL ' fro °TIM � NOI1d30X3 l�u4aurd v"WF / s �'rl�(sa3N�o ts) ,.y ! % S 'J,,,,r^.,^, 1N_3HHorU °t' scs,I. tdn N7 a � • ' ` o �•�. '�+�ld — _ xvm. 9 .L?m1i IN 021118 12 1 :• W / - �• 57 =aN �Tb'OS6�ANI i6'lG6!A I n'aw I CK. LL'SSb -n tINY fro �b'SG6 -YNtl LS'eS9- N -�0 Y3d I°tme. -ANI / 0 / / a. 'Ci5-AM S. I, N1C:S Nn,g, OI'YS6 -lIN .1M P ?oss -RW 30N3! 3MNf S6 \ \ \\ ! Y3 umm nL01 �. OZ'lie -ANI .l.vl '. S6 -NW NylS - — — '-�1Yb C^• — i�" . iT__ 'S.+4,� l ds6 - at wNl a �� � 4£.6Z.6BtJ T w aK, •., O£ � K,�A� -- .m.. i ££'££ / � � ■riL •c. ^NIO'kfta9 '1! •0 1 i F ND 3d 1 i M .L£,D4.D0 S / a 11 ut K90^ _" 5 -A $' 0N10'llligy 1 0l'Nt6 -nS/ �, �c'NS SfAli w I N2IVHHON3B �NU4.0 z nn 0,6r2 °• 008 p fi:e-T' i� 9D pNlcs'tt3 - ° �3 I a 1 t miw. NOI1d3DX3 1I'Ka.. N 3 erlNnOreyroz ` >I� — earo N011d30X3 ......... I I 3 3lD > �, m .: .:::.•:.•::: .•:.: _. 1'O��;ZII�.�, a,s ?IBY1NnONNl1S .....,, w. � Se... - 3UYJMa17 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF: ROSEMOUNT CROSSII 3 WIZa � EXCEPTION a�� I EXCEPTION BLO CK _ EXCEPTION l M *n trNc E'="'NG z � = S 00'40'37" W � ter I Q5 WG its 33.33 IiLDac 11 STING 1 303.20 E� _ N89'29'34'E ❑ anw / V I " :e' " ' 1 _. 7 / J / I yy i .A$jaU y .a MARIAN �� ii =' PEA D om TERRACE A TERRARA CE REPUT 2ND - ♦ Aow oN— PUB (Br OTHRREET v, ~ j _ 24.D2 35 EXCEPTION / cau E7tr w�Ar r S 23'' 38' W 217 (VA . 4;ean '`" 1 i�a m Y OF N AN TERRACE \ R ER .a A" C) F RE RING Ce 4Ie DJILDfNG ' Lai' 4.5 J_ N N a. f1:NCC 1 EA,siwc SU9DING ryr. EI4.1NC a,'C'AI q 'f 3WD4v' : ie a FIRE PMG W } T 3 u M7 -LI.16 w Z y .T ,_ OTc�r en>rRJc - I e 1, GUC•1kNG. 80 ACRES ., 154.19 Ad VIZ -13 ,,y 30.82 (VACATED) e 7 m 4. k� 4' i$3 ° I �m all C ' "• Y 2 Q. wa 1 I � 1 I I 1.948 ACRES r I u ao f 1 uz (M I f +° ' a e � ' 378.28 v PUBLIC R/W �A e4 SENENT rtR •' ... _......_ ,1 O. 91 RE ' � C l"1' - _ C h THE. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL PUBLI Mam 6E-A OBc � - *io - i. C •� C C �, FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRE: 7 CONDUMS, PIPES. MANHOLES, VALVES, OR OTI H 3 58.38 S 89 06 44' W STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. HE SHALL F S 11NE !)�NARIN TERR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED D' �.,",�.�.,�::..- .- ..•�..a - ® — _ � � ������ i�� /� CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO OWN. C.S.A.H. NO. 42 G = - - - - - -- I i a1'lnfi -n0i SO'W -AM +U� -. aS 1 I K'0 %. ti Is I Witl I B. ! ' 16'05 lad h `> " $''ON 'H "V'S'O .' nnrs Gc Xn I w !• K ' / /s _:= � MO O �� 1. � I Cows rile 19 a4ou' I y b \ or'LS u6 a! { IN pL'95?6 N! 00 � \ ss ooTss\ { I 1 ! d zx6 0 ' r 6 L � 898.3' ,� I \l sr' ie or / b'b / . •.[; 00756 \ 01 16 �oyu7�9Q la�aMCya� y �' G "�J98 O)4S6 PunoL6r+P�n 4 I 2 . ' \ s vase::" 04296 79 ���y \,�^ ��'�. � T�• ^ r, � � � ors �;Kre / t I I �jNINIydY ' y° F^ ` ✓lids7 I I F I t r l co < v i4' { C �•" •`� .6t 2'848.33'3 � � 'a 13 �\ � � I r I a !/ 41AYd d y k?b�.a✓ / // / i / r Qr6 � �6 01 . �. i II - —.- \ ze'95srn,x 01" 09'296 \ ? / L 'Lr6 y 0 6 S6� OS7S8 09'256 B S Ia �- . re 4 as `''; � % •� ! .:• IjE os7s ,ps7ss oo-QSq, lv�® 1 � y• a � I I �_ - I LC'6rN�nW q' ' ass os'a 02756 696 7 a �\ / \ ins \ I ! ! I ZVI ( rL7ca- / J• ; [`^' 02 s � oa ss �� �I�I`� o- I rnX R t: s (// a %/ fise / \ 's 0: xass� ��, ` \ r ' 9a� \� I I \ I 9 sa oL f II-- of L Ol'656 6; \ ' l ,) J 'c2l '4 0N45IX3 L - Dv 096 :: \ 89 s Vass �. ! X$•%M.q sksu:{y -"�_ ONE I \ 2ras6 ,,��� Ir�tr 4 II 3003N. `. .. _ +f•�ti (/ 975 r 7s6 6 / I.. 1N3YIF19N "'are .� OC8S6 / I I.1 9 f t9• . R~ �. \� 1 \ &s,� • s6 9'098.33'3 r! -ter OL -656 I u I 00'699 — �q b"a, u ��B � L ��,� ( Io Af �S � � 9 \��! Go DY096 /.• r CT7 - .YeIl: 3 ; �1 I /�`'- n•i.�!'(!0 n015 — ® - - - - -- H) \ ` N3N — ` I i0.: •' rxs _ UBAd �_ H^YD 1 .a . _ / I u�W - •' 6J 'V%.`, j w.e v:..s: \NI �{ x7`13 \� V - bfi'�4 / l�$�,C^ .F'• :... 9a 156 -hfN.. a �p IN 196- k..tlti '! 1 t9 tribwrtyl -�. :IM -y /( (n \ X \ Y4 .. -.. IfSY : e o ' oz PL 4.St I I J j 0'14- r7ti19 I '.. I i lC • n14`1.;:+i �' l .: 9 {$a M9i -. N _( �' Q,'9 n!.ti C - '4'l� II AeVY1H3N38 a (� -so- . og 2w-F�3 } so " 7� 4 r I cXrvn6 ee6 I � rro SID 6 RKING LAYOUT {E Z g E ` VERIFY ALL NRN:IUNT -1 3 WI `ewt CONCIO I OT SHOWN. ANY 2IQ ..JRYCUnineLE ::::: •. 1ALL BE i QIJ _CURB AND ELEVATIONS I I RELOC II J, oo E�nuC BENCHMARK SERVICE I Et05nN0 EXISTI �{ �� a�InlN� w I ',SG PoY 950.34 I Yin w Y.Y 415 S V- 951.71 Ern WG M7 91:{.DING I 1 _ TH THE CITY , FENCE CH LM, FT 6 fT. SID+C ` I = QUIREMENTS.. r ` FY. HE � ce - yS =. N ='- -- - - -- 'aN @EE4C�❑ I EE R�p�,$�., �C new • 1 I 1 OF ANSI�AWWA O Dl C ASLR 36 '- V'4C4fMS+l5AF0 THE Rwe95gAl ,y Y � i - �' ' � \� �L awu 9580 � 111 Cs ' MV-951m w c3 , �., " ,'."� 1 .� \ �Nt.eZ 21.4. FITTINGS FITTINGS NOt 00C. N0. 4 4 I 'S ' RIM .UY m ANG n Y 53 a =a ' - T pjv , - 9 C M[DCFS N� PJM HALL BE THE 4 ?i APID ' - ' - ' - Ce - P s � _ NY.3 RI � ..��CROACHMENi ��vr�. _ 5 �� I C -11 1 AND CB " (ByC 0rHER '$j' �'/ 4 •� / (Ogti ciLtE7 RI M - 957.80 VED EQUAL I �cx.E Yvr (BY S) 1 I INV. =955.00 INp�491.40 `�` ALVES SHALL BE 14, -. V. =954.74 � SiCWM�L'w5c' � ..J � 43LF 75' RCP ]UIREMENTS OF I O 711LF IL R� 15° . g94H I O 0.507. OR MEGA LUG. - y I 7 O 0.507. � 13OLF IS' RC �� .�, CONNECT O O 0.505 9 o TO EXIST! 7.5 COVER AND I C3 CB o `a. ° WATERMA VISIONS �N�CROA'' I ENT 97LF 15 RCP RIM959.50 Y? �� ny y � INV. =954.18 ° 7 LF 6 PV C PLACED IN l y O 0.505 O G .36 �OS ,y4 /'i(T` Cq \ 'TED AND RIM= �''- K eR1 7UIREMENTS OF - Alsnuc i C7 958.00, \ / N N4. °• ewLOlrr I 13 INV.-955.22 8 ° -45' BEND t \ a 4p �r ESS NOTED 'L 4pq/ Fe SST REINFORCED ("L7 �• o � ;HALL BE _L7 - I � _ • _L HAVE A w RANT & INV.�952:10 ,, RINGS. ALL PIPE ' VALVE C8 ° KQR -N- I w RIM- 957.80 OR BRICK j w INV.-954.79 + - . rC3 17 'E SIZE. GROUT I M. E TO att _ °: I s. [3 w �n CONNECTION Y� NCR- T - IY REQUIRED CITY , . •''S Gas 8 iC� U - ± 'L VALE N / HEDS 1 C7 PL-c APPROVED CONCRETE. 1 , Q NCR T R APPROVED • I'• eJ E �G ril ` RIM =958.50 8' -45- / ST REINFORCED 1 }',.' w - G HALL BE 1 ! S D EN ME T END J 1 T 3 z AND A o r I C93 7 'D PROCTOR i CB / /✓y FROM THE PIPE .a'. 1 O RIM-959.00 _ e INV.-951.10 YD 1005 '° rnNG (, SUMP =949.10 � - _ ME)rT ti � w INV.9i5 ar:nlGt I CB 2 REQUIRES I © 95 RCP 5 RIM>� _ INV.- 946.00 I EN ME T 78 92LF 21 I� P O 0.805 141LF 2 4 (THIN TWO I 0 9 6 I UTILITY I C7 - / ,�✓�, �? TOLL-FREE: I RIM- 60 JURS IN ADVANCE IS' INV. =948.35 - - - 6 958.10 MUST 9 LF 8 PVC S � 1 21 3 J'3 5 O 4.067. ICLUDING P INV.-949.50 / �A 4 OF TRENCHES, 42LF 18 I - SAN MH "3 s ty i CONNECTIONS RCP O 2.2 - RIM-957.3 1 / 1 NOUS T INV. =948.1 39LF 18' INV. =953.08 - / 94 1 NMrg5g.41 RCP MENT I /E THE ONTROL I , D Un IT �TMH INV. =948.50 35' 1 d INCLUDING �i - J Fns RIMs956.00 ■ // INV.-949.19 r fOUTS, JANUARY Rg4 -89250 ai J. E �i5 2ECTION W N-949.100. w H ' 18 ° FES ° VA INV 5 -94]AS wv E -w6.J0 I � INV.-950.05 iNV M°9ad_75 ILDING TE j ' L OT 1 20 R 35 O 0. 5 B °X6• ILOINC jjj I / nun p - 21 B ° X6 7 .TEE co S(� V 45 BEN RIM 956 7 I ' "ads Q' 6 I 1 , O 4 N P 952 C� NEA' c O SAN MM �/ 4q T EXdTING HYDRANT O N 946. . _h / 22 WATERAAIN 57 I p I E � ROAaiMJiT 25rr gI1C�YA MIN. SIGHT (( _PUBLIC HL16f EA • ETAL TN�cIE L-- . - . - . - . -- ?.'359. ILJJ y TCBESs- -- -NB C t r 446 C2E54 / RIM.9e1.1T I wY =94897 I u 'I .• Si' . -- ST----- _ -.('�. '- 7t -- wv�se ?'ia C.S.A.H. NO. 42 1?W -9na H '• CT .4L Frx- STM / I Wu- 356.9a IRV- 049.05 r0u -9f" .^ • � INV -g. i . INV.-946.09 V .`0 ■ ��J� `ir� t� .� ��� o� • ens �' ��.� !� s Orm YA �} ■ .� u 1777 In 1 ��° !1!' '�"•► tea• 1�:1� ���, 1.. : y .. , I IL of BMW ". G.M. . �i� =��� %% �� Ii i !��; '♦ � � IA 3 a� •ic�r V `'�j � �o kilt °�► u � oaf . i 50 ho y aD ao aA`" - " - an � hd I A o 0 03 aA o.p oo ho I �i ;;.m �a as :. •. � a.a . ^. bn ° 'tr ,'bn h0�'; .° �A i b.a n�� oo�bAs � f vA ba_ oo ��'�fr'' a.o -z ,a' r bA b O ° ..5u"" - - _v a.° o.0 -e ` �; . .�,� �q �,a Win . . ,may P �� aA b.a a.o "nA .,, o bAB Wan bA b.v bA ❑ I .a Br o'S � I \ 'am b A an b2 5.1 r :aa ba a.z o.v @ b.n 01 -Ira EL.- b.o �nA ho r'a � as ao.v o am b.0 ha b.o •' 0.p a � -0! '2 1.1 a.]i I r a2 s1 �35� ,j s a hl a]I a2 b.3 3b.6 i.6l 0 ' b2• ]'$A O.o b.o am b.oi am 9w.p am a. ❑% 39 '2.7 a. p.3 b.7 0.I 2b' 2b' Y pa y k o�B "an � a.p 1 ay an Ez2 `\ \\ / 'QA, QnR' stu �, ❑a.l 3 ..• L7 1.4 a. '3 •" bs s.6 / i. k - ,-. Jn� 7 ID i �,- :..;.� Sr. 4 'p. " o 1 .p q ° 3A/' p.p - ' : � a.p:' / gy p. a.I Q \ C,A J o ° .....vs ' am 0 b2 c5 07 ` a a.t 0 .is / & r 29 9 - ]A 2] 1.4 LI .e- _ "Q9 5.2\ ''A.i. ,Oey a a - a.p a.p aD � 2 bA b. C 1. I.t aY a.1 I {b.6 X (, a.9 X 1.1 3A 1 2.4 1 1 � � f� a.9� a.3 j 62\ y� aA a.q .. I ` 1.7 K&'T i as -, ..� ❑ � b.7 i.o I '= Z �- .'N1 ,'F .6 < ❑ I{ I F2 >I I d/ Y 19 1 6 E F.F.E.•SM-6, �1 ❑ , J J \l.0 a. 0.1 ____D aA ❑ � b ❑ b � 1 bs I I . ' a6 �� \ll - Y - � ® 0.9 i ' .9 h6 ,1 0.1 ro / a ®� � 7l , 'a � 128 OA 4A 1. IA 0.9 - lA l.p a. h7/ .: -v5i7 an a ❑ p2 BE 12.2 L `2'.0 22 -�' - 8• {, ... _ [ ti.. � o 1 t 1 2 b.pl `U o. '� # '1 a. '• i. 1 I is Its /. .7 3.7 l k7 1, a 1 ss a.v � 7 i - $'6 "'a • - ..� - �1 z67 i.6 l.a i.z t7 , i.e i3 a.7 / g� t L 0 O > / .• I I a t z. Y b p 47 A bA f ❑ \ .: , 3� 4. ,. . _ i �- . r" 1. Y5 � l i ...� - •t � i.I SGR j ' PD 0.4 9A p rte .. N 3J y ; . y#. am 7h' 'EL7 1 rnr, 1.9 0 - a \ PO I hp b ;, M. 1.0 I � • OA =aA =am pA 01 ' C.S.A.H. N0. WARNING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL PUBUC UTIUTIES FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES, OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. HE SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO OWNER. fir i.1 20 6 It 2] /. +[�I 1.9 12 L8 V. i i6 l AI 2A 1.3 .s ._ 1.3 1.7 t F.F.E.•959.5 z o A ­ '0' ° l ' 6 2 0 J \ 20 1 O I r`' ,i 2 .Y 3 1 / d 0. 0 a � 0 P y l' w aar 6n 2 EE/ � LD 0 r l p 2 x 8 �.p 0. � � : li'iF� u0 a.0 l 'I %I 0 40 BD 720 Y SCALE IN FEET Rosemount Crossing - Steiner Development Maintained light levels using Metal Halide lamps. f` fi Parking Jot poles ore straight square aluminum. Decorative poles ore aluminum. ' 7 X LIGHT A,-' E LIGHT T � LIGHT TYPES: A,AA,I�c � �� C 1 r a ` � o .' uuaunnaunauuna � �- , � a cat innunaniunccn • ions11�11 9 milli! �9r: . oil nn�nn!nnnnnnnennn �� ° un � nua►an fit, 1 nmm�n nnuunuuu „ �i? IN loll 981 an soo ME lot aiuu un�nuraanm:cc =gg =IIIIII�� a�s =��� ��� ;fig ° e h 00000 0 0000000 ' nu:can a cur ° I� I Knell „� n nn FANNIN i s m � mean t - iuu u — .,... mill' Ivan WOR .n..0 - a X9. o a 1 6 Q 'a 2 a �m fg 3 O 6 N a so -�W- o Z F r { � G a W m E 0 N U �C eke e m �e I��iW / � Z 4 u Y� O � o 5e m -�W- o Z F r { � G a W m E 0 N U �C eke e m �e I��iW ITINA am NT a'-p ALOI MONUMENT / TENANT SIGN ELEVATION ( NORTH ELEVATION i 3/]2 I' p' (—,"\ WEST ELEVATON 3/32' - V -p sounl ELEVAnoN J ��ROJECTENTRANCE MONUMENT 4,zoc�ib�i e�ao Window and door placement ��IJSTELEVAnON is conceptual only a ®rte, (—,"\ WEST ELEVATON 3/32' - V -p sounl ELEVAnoN J ��ROJECTENTRANCE MONUMENT 4,zoc�ib�i e�ao Window and door placement ��IJSTELEVAnON is conceptual only 40 71F Design element theme only, building is conceptual �� EAST ELEVATION A3.4 ARCHITECTUR n. 11e 1.0: COPX ELF S. C.op CONSORTIUM L [urvAS 901 Na TAlfd SRWWI, SO4 220 612 -A Mh ... Pdh, MN55401 F.K 612-6 -- n110 R ' BR1CN vcRS �'Y Steiner- if p- Development, Inc. AOCFACE BRICK &SE CMV RASC >a�vM'ti�lw..<a0 R�p{mWKACOgmKa �� NORTH ELEVATION [ e,500 SE RCS[. E.Lf.S. � CANVAS _ WNING AIV1 C.I.F.i CORwCF d. IIO -0 gum. WMIpOW [MICN PIERS _ _ 6 ROCKfACF Cuu flASE ORICN BASE WEST ELEVATION � 6500 SF REST. J /]2' � 1' -0 I I.r.N <MN IMt 1N< pl ap.alN<aYm. a <q " �, .PPq by m ny DKSCI Apmnnl Dm.. Llc.m. [i. lie -R CORNICE I L 10 -0 - EA.F.S ROSEMOUNT GNKAS —� 'AVR1V - CROSSING R 11B — gum. ­00w — STEINER EIRCK PIERS DEVELOPMEN fL 100 -0' ROCK BASE BRK% SASE ROSEMOUNT, MN ��SOIJT}I ELEVATION ` 6.500 Sf ACSI. EXTERIOR ELEVATIOi E.LFS. SCALE: 3/32"= P -0" — � MN PROJ MI—R, d-I< 1551.1: L+ARE� Lb /ID/ El. 110 -N BFM:N BfiCN RERS a _ ALUN. WINDOW pRNH DY. 55 LMDCKP:D BY, KA EL 100-0 pOCKfACC CNV BASE BRKK SAM 40 71F Design element theme only, building is conceptual �� EAST ELEVATION A3.4 ID cnRNld L 119 i *11 , n0 -0 RUCNGP CRS f G. L 1W -d` ARCHI CONSC DOCK Wµl 901 Nat01 7hktl Ste MhneepW. MN 554 6 -d Steiner Develc \Ibgl`Iq.9 Ir BgOr.N EAST TATION 1 Rnat SHOPS 1/]1' - ,' -0' I S ��N !TH ELEVATION r RnaL sNaPS J pa' . 1• -D' = El 1 fi -8 POCNFACT CMU ROCKFACE CUU G.G. . �1 WEST ELEVATION b..awsma orw ROCNGACC CW RERB [,.GS _ K ROSI BU 9 W CMU BA RUCNGACE BR CK E.I EYON0 NDS CORNKf 0 ORNIC _ _/ 10 CtlMIQ CRI "�— EICNIS PSG», -S7 N,l AWWNC [L i10' -B� tU -' DEVE / µUM. WINDOW \ ROCKGACE CW RUCKGPCE BRICK UP CUu BRKN BASC PIERS — (f.[. BASE ll JGiI nOSB ELEVAON TI EX 1 MOF vOCNGACE CW ' -- 7 ERS SCALF Ti I L � ROCKGACE 9NICN E.I.G.S. CNU FNNDS COPNICC I SCREW 6 y�' Fl I t pppyy NUn B C R. - _ 155LED DATC EAST TATION 1 Rnat SHOPS 1/]1' - ,' -0' I S ��N !TH ELEVATION r RnaL sNaPS J pa' . 1• -D' EXCERPT OF MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2004. Public Hearing: 7A. CASES O4 -59 -FP & 04 -60 -04 PP Rosemount Crossing Final PUD Development Plan and Preliminary Plat; CASE 04 -58 -04 FP Rosemount Crossing Final Plat City Planner Pearson stated that he would be making two recommendations concerning the Steiner Development Proposal for Rosemount Crossing. The property consists of about 7.19 acres of land on the northwest corner of State Highway 3 on the east side north of County Road 42. He stated there were 16 recommended conditions of approval for the development plan. Mr. Pearson indicated staff would also be making a separate recommendation for the plat which will subdivide the property into 4 parcels. While staff will be prepared to make a recommendation with those conditions, there are a number of items important to resolve to go through the process and go forward this project to the City Council. Mr. Pearson reviewed the site showing access as well as proposed lots. There will be cross access easements required for property owners since the streets will be private so that access can be shared in and out and maintenance of private driveway and parking lot. The Concept for this development was approved on August 2, 2004. The most important issue earlier was storm water management concerns for the neighborhood and developments in dealing with the residential street system and screening the effects of concerning the effects of the commercial development for area residential properties. Mr. Pearson indicated that any questions regarding the storm water system should be directed to Engineer Aderhold. Mr. Pearson states that issues to resolve prior to City Council meeting are some final technical details with the storm water management system. Planning concerns include parking. When dividing the parking into lot lines there is enough parking for grocery and restaurant but restaurant parking is factored on number of seats and as of right now that is unknown. A concern that is unresolved is the parking dedicated to the large multiple retail building. There is an expectation for a more detailed explanation for the design detail to net out the floor space that translates to the parking requirements calculation. Important features of development include the sidewalk and trail system and outdoor amenities. The landscaping plan shows the outer perimeter of the site is heavily landscaped especially along the residential perimeters. There are three outdoor plaza areas that are site amenities important to the PUD including a small enclosed area on the southern edge of the multiple tenant building which is outdoor seating for a small restaurant occupying one of the bays, there is a slightly larger plaza on the southern edge of the smaller building to overlook the southeast corner amenities — a pond, amenities landscaping, and a semi - circular patio on the restaurant surrounded by amenities. Staff is seeking the inclusion of the 6,500 square foot restaurant in the first phase of construction that shall require site plan review for conformance with this Planned Unit Development. Mr. Pearson reinforced the need for guaranteeing site amenities. Mr. Pearson reviewed architecture and elevations for the site and noted that not all franchises have been identified so there might be variation but it does set the stage for PUD expectations with brick. The 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant architectural elevations include an overhead door that faces the southeast, opening up directly into the drive - through lane. Staff is recommending as part of the PUD agreement that the deliveries be limited to the site so there is no conflict with the drive -thru use. Mr. Pearson indicated that the Landscaping Plan meets minimum standards for the commercial district and tree preservation with two concerns. The first concern is that the plants will not effectively screen the headlight glare until they are mature. Staff recommends plants should be augmented with additional plantings that encompass the entire normal setback area (20 feet from STH 3 right -of -way). Mr. Pearson said it is a lesson from other developments along County Road 42. The second concern is the amount of shade trees should be changed to 25% ash trees and substitute the other 25% with linden or maple since with ash there could be problems or concerns with monoculture. Mr. Pearson pointed out concerns with the lighting plan and staff suggests lowering the height of light standards in the back of the multiple tenant retail area from 23ft to 20ft. The City does have a lighting requirement that lighting standards with in 100 feet of residential areas should be limited to 20 feet over all heights. Mr. Pearson indicated that staff is ready to recommend approval with the 16 conditions to the Plat and recommend a separate motion for final plat to be subdivided into 4 parcels with recommended seven conditions. Chairperson Messner asked for any questions for Mr. Pearson. Mr. Messner questioned if the dock at the ALDI's Grocery Store had room for semis to turn around. Mr. Pearson expected that ALDI's would have only one semi at a time at the dock. He further explained the backing in and turning radius for the dock and that the area is designed for a turning radius large enough for semis. Commissioner Schultz asked what the ration of handicapped parking stalls was compared to regular parking stalls. Mr. Pearson stated that the number of handicap stalls in regulated by the Americans with Disabilities Act and he believed it was one space per 25 stalls. Ms. Schultz also commented that she noticed only one handicap spot in front of ALDI's. Mr. Pearson indicated there is more than sufficient parking in front of ALDI so it could be restricted if warranted. Commissioner Powell wanted to verify with staff that expected traffic generation has been evaluated and no alteration to Highway 3 will be the result. Project Engineer Aderhold indicated that Highway 3 does not need to be altered since there is already a turn lane into Cameron Avenue and a sufficient storage lane to the south. Mr. Aderhold stated that because of the taper for the right turn lane going to County Road 42 that there is sufficient storage on Highway 3 as a result. Commissioner Powell questioned if Condition 3B means the developer will be required to execute an agreement and pay for any maintenance. Mr. Pearson stated that was correct. Chairperson Messner asked if the applicant would like to come forward and address the Planning Commission. Todd Johnson, VP of Development for Steiner Development. Mr. Johnson stated that Steiner Development has revised and updated plans that integrate all of the information and comments that they have received and agreed upon by a ding landscaping, defined public areas, decorative lighting by entrances, a water fountain in the pond, expressed detail of the architecture. Mr. Johnson feels they have worked with all interested parties along the way. He indicated that StormTech Systems engineers would be available for brief explanation of their system and would do a maintenance agreement with the City and the owners of the lots. He further mentioned that the system does need to be monitored to be sure it is cleaned out during intervals. The list of conditions they have worked out with staff and are approaching solutions and will suggest solutions for those they are still working on. Kathy Anderson, President of Architectural Consortium, presented plans for showing extensive amounts of landscaping and plans for development and pedestrian sidewalks. Ms. Anderson indicated they are looking for a main street type of feel. Todd Johnson informed the Commission and staff the coffee tenant with a signed letter of intent for the 4200 sq. foot building is Starbucks. Mark Sholey, Regional Engineer, for Advanced Draining Systems (ADS) explained the StormTech System. Mr. Sholey presented a brief explanation of what the system is, how it works underground, and what it looks like. Chairperson Messner asked if anyone had questions for Mr. Sholey. Commissioner Zurn asked if the system actually will be under where the main traffic drive or just the parking stalls area. Mr. Zurn's concern was the heavy trucks that go over the area and any weight limitations. Mr. Sholey responded that the system will be under the drive lanes within the parking area. They system is designed to take on maximum vehicular loads allowed on roads and highways and traffic is not a concern. Mr. Messner questioned how thick the rock basin would be and Mr. Sholey stated that this system has 18 inches and based on averages, 18 inches in more than enough. Commissioner Powell asked if any there will be any infiltration as part of the system into the ground. Jerry Backlin, of Schoell & Manson, Inc., stated there would be no infiltration into the ground and also spoke about the emergency overflow unit. Project Engineer Aderhold clarified this going more in depth on the infiltration stating that it was Type A soil infiltration and it did meet the required rate of 1 /12 of an inch/acre /day. Mr. Powell assumed the ground level water is not an issue and it was confirmed by Mr. Aderhold. Mr. Powell asked Mr. Backlin about the manholes included as part of pretreatment and will it be part of the maintenance agreement that some manholes are vacuumed out and Mr. Backlin indicated he was correct. Todd Johnson asked the Commission if they had any further questions and Chairperson Messner asked what conditions he thought they have worked out and what conditions are still at issue. Mr. Johnson stated that at the City Council meeting there were some issues about the timing of the restaurant. Mr. Johnson said that Steiner Development is committed to a full service restaurant that is well run and therefore they take issue at being put in a strict definition of building a restaurant and they do not want to be tied to a date and time. Mr. Johnson indicated that if Phase 1 fits into their definition of Phase 1 it will work out. Chairperson Messner asked since there are four lots does Steiner Development interpret that as four phases. Mr. Johnson said no and that all buildings have full cross easement parking and everyone is in agreement. The continuing phases and construction will be going on a year from now. Mr. Johnson indicated that they have worked with staff to implement some of the items still in this report and working to satisfy staff on issues so the project can move forward. Chairperson Messner asked if anyone else had any comments. Chairperson Messner opened the public hearing. Chairperson asked for public comments. There were no public comments. MOTION by Powell to close the Public Hearing. Second by Schultz. Ayes: Schultz, Zurn, Messner and Powell. Nays: None. Motion carried. Mr. Messner asked for any follow up questions. MOTION by Powell to recommend that the City Council approve the preliminary plat and PUD final development plan for Rosemount Crossing subject to: L. Execution and recording of a PUD agreement. 2. Inclusion of the 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant in the first phase of construction that shall require site plan review for conformance with this Planned Unit Development. 3. Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer regarding drainage, erosion control, grading, street, storm water and utility design including the following specifics: a. An overland storm water emergency overflow (EOF) shall be provided from the north through the site. Revised grading plans with the EOF are required prior to Council review. b. A maintenance agreement shall be required for the underground storm water storage system. C. The sanitary sewer shall be reconfigured to utilize the two stubs already present on -site. d. Storm water calculations shall be submitted prior to council review verifying that the site meets city storm water standards. If the property cannot meet the standards an off -site ponding fee shall be charged. e. The plans shall conform to all City of Rosemount Engineering Standards and guidelines and address comments specifically listed in the following report. f. Dedication of right -of -way for the street connection between Camero Lane and Cambrian Avenue and provision of funds necessary to construct the street to City standards. 4. Reconstruction of Cambrian Avenue for exclusive access into the Rosemount Crossing site and provision of landscaping for screening adjacent residential uses. 5. Plan revisions to eliminate setback and sight - triangle encroachments of the monument signs along Highway 3 at the corners with County Road 42 and Cambrian Avenue, and setback encroachments along Highway 3 and County Road 42 for ground signs. 6. Implementation of the revised landscaping plan received on September 7, 2004, and further refine the plan: a. To provide additional plantings within the normal parking setback area along Highway 3 to immediately and effectively screen the drive - through from south -bound traffic year round achieving 90% opacity to a height of three feet. b. To reduce the overall percentage of Ash trees (currently more than 50% of all boulevard trees). 7. Provision of a shared parking study or provide additional information regarding building square foot allocations to assess if parking is met on the gross floor area of the buildings. This information is required prior to final review by the City Council. Failure to meet the ordinance standard will require a reduction in building square footage bring the site into compliance with ordinance criteria. 8. Pedestrian or service doors entering into the drive - through lane shall not be permitted in the 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant, or delivery times will be restricted to periods exclusive of drive - through service availability. 9. Provision of a sign plan for consistency of design of wall signs. The sign plan should designate a sign band for sign placement on each building, the type of signs acceptable on the site, and the sign area for each tenant space. 10. Construction of the sidewalk / trail connection to Camfield Park consistent with specifications of the Parks and Recreation Director. 11. Conformance with the conditions specified in Resolution 2004 -94, the Concept approval for Rosemount Crossing. 12. The four light fixtures lining the outer edge of the retail building service area shall be reduced to 20 maximum heights. Parking lot lighting and wall lighting must be complementary to the light standards along Hwy 3. 13. The light fixture "E -26" shall be moved out of the pedestrian ramp / curb cut adjacent to the 22,400 sq. ft. retail building. 14. The applicant obtain necessary permits for work within right -of -way from MnDOT and Dakota County and necessary permits from the State such as the NPDES permit. 15. The applicant install masonry trash enclosures consistent with the materials of the principal structures. 16. The applicant provide the three public spaces shown on the final development plan accessory to the freestanding restaurant, south of the coffee shop, and on the southern end of the multiple tenant retail space. Second by Zurn. Ayes: Schutlz, Zum, Messner and Powell. Nayes: None. Motion carried. Chairperson Messner asked for any follow up questions. MOTION by Messner to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Rosemount Crossing subject to: 1. Approval of the Dakota County Plat Commission and Minnesota Department of Transportation as needed. 2. Recording of cross - access easements for all lots associated with the plat to have ingress and egress to the Cambrian Avenue access. 3. Execution of a maintenance agreement to maintain and replace as needed private parking lot, driveway and landscaping improvements. 4. Payment of all development fees specified in the current fee schedule associated with the development and subdivision including G.I.S, SAC, STAC, WAC and Park Dedication. 5. Provision of an easement for the park access trail connecting Cambrian Avenue to Camfield Park. 6. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure and private improvements to serve the plat including landscaping. 7. The applicant provide all necessary easements for public utilities, including the public drainage system which includes the EOF from the north and south. Second by Powell. Ayes: Schutlz, Zurn, Messner and Powell. Nayes: None. Motion carried. Chairperson Messner asked for any follow -up action for Applicant. City Planner Pearson stated that Steiner Development is set to go before City Council on October 5th pointing out outstanding issues for the detailed design of the emergency overflow and parking issues. Mr. Pearson indicated the issues are expected to be resolved before it goes to City Council. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION Planning Commission Meeting Date: September 14, 2004 Projected City Council Meeting Date: October 5, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: Rosemount Crossing Final PUD Development Plan & Preliminary Plat Planning Cases 04- AGENDA SECTION: 59 -FP & 04 -60 -04 PP; Rosemount Crossing public Hearing Final Plat Planning Case 04 -58 -04 FP. PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner AGENDA NO. ATTACHMENTS: Survey, Preliminary Plat, Grading & Drainage, Utilities, Landscaping, Lighting, Tree Preservation and Architectural Elevation Reductions, Rosemount Crossing Final Plat; APPROVED BY: Concept Resolution 2004 -94, Aug. 2, 2004 Council minutes, Correspondence from (/ Steiner Development. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to recommend that the City Council approve the preliminary plat and PUD final development plan for Rosemount Crossing subject to: 1. Execution and recording of a PUD agreement. 2. Inclusion of the 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant in the first phase of construction that shall require site plan review for conformance with this Planned Unit Development. 3. Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer regarding drainage, erosion control, grading, street, storm water and utility design including the following specifics: a. An overland storm water emergency overflow (EOF) shall be provided from the north through the site. Revised grading plans with the EOF are required prior to Council review. b. A maintenance agreement shall be required for the underground storm water storage system. c. The sanitary sewer shall be reconfigured to utilize the two stubs already present on- site. d. Storm water calculations shall be submitted prior to council review verifying that the site meets city stormwater standards. If the property cannot meet the standards an off -site ponding fee shall be charged. e_ The plans shall conform to all City of Rosemount Engineering Standards and guidelines and address comments specifically listed in the following report. f. Dedication of right -of -way for the street connection between Cam ero Lane and Cambrian Avenue and provision of funds. necessary to construct the street to City standards. 4, _Reconstruction of Cambrian Avenue for exclusive access into the Rosemount Crossing site and provision of landscaping for screening adjacent residential uses. 5. Plan revisions to eliminate setback and sight-triangle encroachments of the monument signs along Highway 3 at the corners with County Road 42 and Cambrian Avenue, and setback encroachments along Highway 3 and County Road 42 for ground signs. 6. Implementation of the revised landscaping plan received on September 7, 2004, and further refine the plan: a. To provide additional plantings within the normal parking setback area along Highway 3 to immediately and effectively screen the drive - through from south -bound traffic year round achieving 90% opacity to a height of three feet. b. To reduce the overall percentage of Ash trees (currently more than 50% of all boulevard trees). 7. Provision of a shared parking study or provide additional information regarding building square foot allocations to assess if parking is met on the gross floor area of the buildings. This information is required prior to final review by the City Council. Failure to meet the ordinance standard will require a reduction in building square footage bring the site into compliance with ordinance criteria. 8. Pedestrian or service doors entering into the drive - through lane shall not be permitted in the 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant, or delivery times will be restricted to periods exclusive of drive- through service availability. 9. Provision of a sign plan for consistency of design of wall signs. The sign plan should designate a sign band for sign placement on each building, the type of signs acceptable on the site, and the sign area for each tenant space. 10. Construction of the sidewalk / trail connection to Camfield Park consistent with specifications of the Parks and Recreation Director. 11. Conformance with the conditions specified in Resolution 2004 -94, the Concept approval for Rosemount Crossing. 12. The four light fixtures lining the outer edge of the retail building service area shall be reduced to 20 maximum heights. Parking lot lighting and wall lighting must be complementary to the light standards along Hwy 3. 13. The light fixture "E -26" shall be moved out of the pedestrian ramp / curb cut adjacent to the 22,400 sq. ft. retail building. 14. The applicant obtain necessary permits for work within right -of -way from MnDOT and Dakota County and necessary permits from the State such as the NPDES permit. 15. The applicant install masonry trash enclosures consistent with the materials of the principal structures. 16. The applicant provide the three public spaces shown on the final development plan accessory to the freestanding restaurant, south of the coffee shop, and on the southern end of the multiple tenant retail space. - and - Motion to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Rosemount Crossing subject to: 1. Approval of the Dakota County Plat Commission and Minnesota Department of Transportation as needed. 2. Recording of cross- access easements for all lots associated with the plat to have ingress and egress to the Cambrian Avenu access. 2 3. Execution of a maintenance agreement to maintain and replace as needed private parking lot, driveway and landscaping improvements. 4. Payment of all development fees specified in the current fee schedule associated with the development and subdivision including G.I.S, SAC, STAC, WAC and Park Dedication. 5. Provision of an easement for the park access trail connecting Cambrian Avenue to Camfield Park. 6. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure and private improvements to serve the plat including landscaping. 7. The applicant provide all necessary easements for public utilities, including the public drainage system which includes the EOF from the north and south. COUNCIL DATE ACTION: (ESTIMATED): October 5, 2004. ISSUE Steiner Development has requested Preliminary Plat, PUD Final Development Plan and Final Plat approval for the 7.2 -acre site on the northwest corner of County Road 42 and State Highway 3. The materials provided include site design for the four buildings, but the identity of the 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant has not been disclosed. Therefore, its design is "generic." This review is intended to cover the detailed design and engineering of the project. It also includes the platting of the parcel into four lots, one for each building. BACKGROUND Applicant & Property Owner(s): Todd Johnson of Steiner Construction Services Location: Northwest corner of CSAH 42 and STH 3. Area in Acres: 7.19 Development data: Building Size Lot area Grocery 15,000 sq. ft. 1 1.948 Restaurant 4,200 sq. ft. 2 0.576 Restaurant 6,500 sq. ft. 3 1.163 Retail 22,400 sq. ft. 4 2.8 Total 48,100 sq. ft. 4 6.487 Additional right -of -way: County Road 42 (acres) 0.391 Camero Lane & Cambrian Ave. Connection: 0.311 Overall site total (acres): 7.189 Comp. Guide Plan Desig: Current Zoning: Previous City Council Action Commercial C-4, General Commercial Approved Concept 8 -2 -2004. 3 The property was previously platted as Marion Terrace with two east -west streets, a north- south street and 22 lots. Marion Terrace was never developed, and the streets were vacated in 1955. The reason this is important, is that (vacated) Third Street connected Cameo Lane with Cambrian Avenue and provided access to the rest of the plat area. Two previous development scenarios for the property were for commercial uses, the most recent having been approved in 1988. Without development, Camero Lane has remained stubbed to the northern edge of the property. The entire property is designated for commercial land use, and is zoned C -4, General Commercial. SUMMARY On August 2, 2004, the Concept was approved with a series of conditions. This review will compare the preliminary plat with the conditionally approved concept as well as normal ordinance standards. The concept approval supported variances to building and parking / driveway setbacks along Highway 3, County Road 42 and the Cambrian Avenue entrance. Building materials requirements have also been relaxed, dependant on aesthetic integration of alternative building materials. CONCEPT ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED WITH PRELIMINARY PLAT. The public hearings conducted for the concept review identified three primary concerns to the neighborhood: • Stormwater management to respond to periodic flooding concerns. • Closing off the residential streets from commercial traffic and connecting Camero Lane with Cambrian Avenue. • Screenung the effects of the commercial development from the surrounding established residential neighborhoods. The concept plans illuminated several site and building design issues including: • Screening of loading dock areas especially, and mitigating the transition of land use. • Provision of site amenities as a concession for setback variances. • Provision of landscaping as required by ordinance for screening and boulevard trees. • Architectural materials consistent with standards, or the recommendations of the downtown redevelopment committee integrated through acceptable design. • Defining the timing of the 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant. • Access improvements for Cambrian Avenue and Highway 3. • The feasibility of an underground stormwater management system. • Provision of sufficient parking, or justification of parking less than the standard. • Provision of space for a downtown entry monument. In addition, several conditions were included providing for routine development expectations including process requirements, payment of park dedication fees, and reinforcing sign ordinance standards. 2 DRAINAGE, GRADING & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT The development utilizes an underground storm water storage system to address the ponding and storm water management requirements. It is located primarily under the parking lot and the western setback area of the site. Staff is comfortable with the underground system and its operation. The issue it raises is the maintenance of the facility. The applicant must enter into an agreement with the City regarding the future maintenance of the structure. If the structure fails, due to insufficient maintenance, it would negatively impact the city's regional system. There are a variety of issues remaining relating to the proposed drainage system. Of primary concern was the impact of site development on the adjoining western residential neighborhood. The site is designed to take on drainage from the residential area and treat the water prior to discharge. A low area in the southwest has been modified which should reduce ponding in that area as compared to the existing condition. However, there are items that need to be modified to ensure that the ponding system performs correctly. The current plan does not define an emergency overflow (EOF) from the north. One currently exists over land and with development of the site it has been removed. The applicant must revise their grading plans to provide for this EOF. This change would impact site grading, particularly in the west, adjacent to the residents. Additional clarification regarding the elevations surrounding the southern EOF is also required. The applicant needs to modify the size of the extended pipe within Cambrian Avenue. This should be increase to a 27" pipe from the proposed 15 ". Finally, the applicant needs to rerun their drainage calculations so that the subwatersheds are appropriately allocated to the right underground system. Staff is requesting the information about the EOF and the rerun of the drainage calculations prior to review by the City Council to assure the site drainage can meet city standards. ACCESS & CIRCULATION The Cambrian Avenue access will be widened to three lanes as recommended by the engineering staff. Further required improvements include striping and possibly medians. Pedestrian cross - walks are shown connecting the building pads and the outer edges of the site. The primary access splits the site, which opens up to parking on either side for each building. Two -way traffic loops the parking areas in front of the buildings. Semi deliveries will be made to the grocery store between the two larger buildings. Turn - around space for semi - trucks is provided behind the 22,400 sq. ft. retail building. A pedestrian system also connects all of the buildings and provides links to the outer edges of the site to existing sidewalks and or trails. PARKING The Preliminary Plat provides six more parking spaces than the concept, with improved 5 distribution. However, there still seems to be a shortage in the vicinity of the 22,400 sq. ft. retail building. Building / Use Spaces provided Requirement Comments Grocery store 86 (some shared) 75 Shared with 4,200 sq. ft. Rest. Retail 22,400 sq. ft. 103 112 Includes spaces behind building Rest. 6,500 sq. ft. 39 (some shared) 1/3 seats Number of seats unknown Rest. 4,200 sq. ft. 21 1/3 seats Number of seats unknown - can share additional spaces with grocery and larger rest. As previously discussed with the concept review, the parking may be light. Overall, the 249 total spaces may be enough for the development, but there may be shortages, depending on the ultimate number of restaurant seats. As previously noted, the 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant has enough spaces if it were to convert to retail with six spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. The smaller restaurant has a higher proportion of spaces available at 7.6 per 1,000 sq. ft. The highest level of concern still involves the 22,400 sq. ft. retail building. Nine additional spaces are needed based upon the area of the building. No additional detail for the retail has been provided, that would give staff the ability to factor into the calculation such as mechanical and rest rooms. The attached faxed letter from the developer dated September 7, 2004 attempts to rationalize the complementary parking demands, but provides insufficient detail to resolve the issue. Alternatives to respond to parking shortage are: 1. Provide more spaces in available green space that does not encroach into setback areas. 2. Enter into a "Proof of Parking Agreement" that sets aside space for parking expansion (not encroaching into setbacks) as needed in the future. 3. Provide specific details about the intended use and design layout (mechanical and restrooms) of the buildings to reduce the net requirements for parking or demonstrate the complementary parking demand based upon non - overlapping operating hours. 4. Provide a shared parking analysis based upon the tenant mix to illustrate the site has adequate parking provided. 5. Scale -back the size of the buildings to create more space for required parking. The Concept resolution item 16 identified provision of a parking study requirement and consideration of complementary uses as indicated in the third alternative. SIDEWALKS & TRAILS An important feature of the development is the pedestrian system that links all four buildings across the parking lots and with the sidewalk system in place along Highway 3 and County Road 42. The sidewalks in front of all the buildings are linked across the parking lot / driveways. The pedestrian system then has links to the Cambrian Avenue entrance, South C. Robert Trail and County Road 42. Crossings of driveways are shown on the plans accentuated with pavement details that suggest brick herringbone patterns with either brick pavers or stamped (and colored) concrete. The Parks and Recreation Director requested a trail / sidewalk link to Camfield Park which has been incorporated into the plans. Outdoor spaces Patio areas are defined for seating or other uses in connection with the non - grocery buildings. A semi - circular patio is connected to the east elevation of the 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant oriented towards the corner of Cambrian Avenue and South Robert Trail. The 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant has a triangular patio between the building front and the parking lot. There is also an enclosed patio area along the southern edge of the building oriented towards County Road 42 and S. Robert Trail. It is meant to overlook the southeast corner of the site, but is separated by the drive- through lane.. The 22,400 sq. ft. retail building has patio areas located at the corner entrances to the building. The southern elevation includes a small enclosed area for outdoor seating. BUILDING ARCHITECTURE All buildings are single -story constructed with vertical piers and raised parapets at building entrances. In the case of multiple tenant buildings, the raised parapets relate to about half of the maximum available tenant spaces. They function to break -up what would otherwise be a long monotonous building roof -line. The vertical piers also break -up the horizontal lines of the buildings and add relief to the rear of the buildings. The majority of building materials are brick and rock -face block concrete masonry units (CMU). E.I.F.I.S. stucco will be applied in the sign band areas above windows and doors and the raised parapets. Awnings are shown above all windows on every building except the grocery store. It should be noted that the Concept PUD as conditionally approved relieved the applicant of 100% brick or equivalent construction. Brick percentage Calculation does not include door and window areas. Building Elevation exposure Brick percentage Grocery 15,000 sq. ft. East -parking lot 53.5% South - County Road 42 43% West residential None North - retail (loading docks) 59% 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant East — parking lot 45% South — County Rd 42 / Hwy 3 26.7% West — parking lot 58.8% North — 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant 34.8% 7 22,400 sq. ft. retail shops Southeast — parking lot 26.7% South — grocery 60% Northwest — Residential 1 % West — Residential 2% East — parking lot 26.8% North — Residential 60% 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant* East — Highway 3 52% South — 4,200 sq. ft. retail 57% West — parking lot 36.4% North — Residential 56.5% The restaurant has not yet been identified. It may change based upon corporate image. The 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant architectural elevations includes an overhead door that faces the southeast, opening up directly into the drive - through lane. The door appears to be available for dumpster service, and possibly deliveries. The operation of the door must coordinated so that there are no conflicts with the drive - through vehicular circulation. Staff is recommending as part of the PUD agreement that the deliveries be limited to the site so there is no conflict with the drive -thru use. Loading dock and dumpster areas The Grocery has a loading dock in the northwest corner of the building. A 65' x 16'8 " wall screens the loading dock from the residential uses to the west. Grocery related dumpsters would be located in this area as well. The 22,400 sq. ft. multiple retail building has loading in the rear which is screened by landscaping from the residential uses. All exterior dumpsters must be enclosed in a masonry enclosure consistent with the principal structure. SETBACK ISSUES As discussed extensively in the concept review, several of the buildings and-driveway/ parking areas have been granted setback concessions with the PUD. The Planning Commission and Council will have to be satisfied that site amenities and the restaurant development in the first phase are acceptable. Building Setbacks Standard PUD / deviation Elevation Grocery 30 feet 23 ft. / 7 ft. South 22,400 sq. ft. retail 30 feet 20 ft. / 10 ft. North* 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant 30 feet 10 ft. / 20 ft. North 30 feet 25 ft. / 5 ft. East • created by dedicating right -of -way for Camero Lane & Cambrian Avenue connection Parking / Driveway Setbacks Standard PUD / deviation Location Grocery 20 feet 12 ft. / 8 ft. South edge 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant 20 feet 8.5 ft. / 11.5 ft. East edge LANDSCAPING The revised landscaping plan provides quantities of trees and shrubs to satisfy the requirements. The plan also provides outdoor site amenities, primarily patios connected to the restaurants and the retail building. The patios include pavement patterns, sidewalk plantings and enclosed areas for outside seating connected with restaurants. Significant plantings include: Landscape Plan Planting requirement/ Comments 53 Boulevard / Shade trees; One tree per 3,000 sq. ft. of land area including boulevard 38 Ornamental trees; trees at 50 ft. spacing = 105 trees + 53 evergreen trees; tree preservation replacement requirement = 26 trees for a 144 total 131 total minimum tree requirement. 271 shrubs One shrub per ten linear feet of building perimeter = 202 254 perennial flowers No requirement. Landscape screening is required along the residential "edges" of the development to a near opaque level. This is especially critical in the loading dock areas. The landscape plan generally exhibits expected landscaping performance with two concerns. • The drive - through at the 4,200 sq. ft. building needs additional screening to shield headlight glare from south -bound highway 3 traffic. Recent plan revisions provide a row of evergreen junipers. However, staff is concerned that the plants will not effectively screen the headlight glare until they are mature. Therefore, they should be augmented with additional plantings, and that the plantings should encompass the entire normal setback area (20 feet from STH 3 right -of =way). • The planting plan indicates 29 ash trees combined. This amounts to more than 50% of the overall shade tree numbers. Staff would recommend that substitutions be made to reduce the overall quantities of ash to no more than 25 %. The landscaping plan must be coordinated with the grading. There may be significant grading revisions in the southwest corner of the site to create an emergency storm water overflow storage basin and outlet. The revisions to the grading plan may negatively impact the planting design. Therefore, landscape plan revisions are required with the revised grading plans. Tree Preservation The inventory shows a total of 51 existing trees on the site. Generally, they are located on the perimeter of the site. Those that are located in the proposed building and parking lot footprints will be removed. Most of the trees along the western edge adjacent to residential uses will be saved to augment screening landscaping. Sufficient replacement trees, mostly on a two for one ratio have been incorporated into the landscaping plan. LIGHTING PLAN The lighting plan shows fixture types and intensity of illumination across the site and at the outer edges. The plan indicates that the intensity is well within standards at the outer perimeter of the site. Four different lighting fixtures are indicated on the lighting plan. Area lighting for the parking lots and service area behind the retail building are "shoebox" style fixtures that focus light downwards. The Cambrian Avenue entrance and the pedestrian link across the parking lot have 11 -foot decorative fixtures that also focus light downward. The tallest poles with shoebox fixtures are at 28 feet heights located at the entrance and the interior of the parking lot. Next are the 23 -foot poles also with shoeboxes behind the 22,400 sq. ft. retail building, adjacent to the residential district. Wall mounted fixtures with shoeboxes are shown behind the 22,400 sq. ft. retail building at 14 foot heights. As a condition of approval staff is recommending at all site lighting, including wall lighting be complementary to the lighting standards on Hwy 3. The ordinance limits light pole heights to 20 feet within 100 feet of a residential district / use. As a result, the four fixtures lining the outer edge of the loading / service area behind the 22,400 sq. ft. retail building will have to be lowered to 20 feet overall heights. FINAL PLAT Subdivision The property will be subdivided into four lots, one for each building and its associated parking. As detailed in the concept review, exclusive access to the site will occur at the Cambrian Avenue link to State Highway 3, with the residential uses disconnected. Camero Lane and Cambrian Avenue with be connected via a new public street along the northern edge of the development property. The preliminary plat includes the lot configuration. The developer is asking approval of final plats at the same time to facilitate fall construction. With the exception of this northerly public street that connects Camero Lane with Cambrian Avenue, no new streets will be dedicated. Instead, a central driveway straddling the common lot lines will provide access. Cross - access easements and a maintenance agreement will be required. Right -of -way will be dedicated for the street connecting Camero Lane with Cambrian Avenue. Subdivisions along state and county roads provide opportunities to the applicable agency to acquire additional land as needed for roadway improvements. State Highway 3 has been previously expanded, with no additional needs identified at this time. Comments received from Dakota County during the concept review stage outlined the need for an additional 46 feet of right -of -way for County Road 42, amounting to 0.391 acres. The developer has indicated that they intend to own and lease lots 1, 2 and 4 for the Grocery, 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant and 22,400 sq. ft. retail building. Lot 3 containing the 6,500 sq. ft. restaurant will be sold to the restaurant party. Therefore, the restaurant site plan has been 10 the disclaimer of being conceptual. CONCLUSION Staff is ready to recommend approval of the preliminary plat and final PUD development plan approval and approval of the final plat for the four lots with a series of recommended conditions. The final development plan generally reflects the appearance of the concept plan as it was approved. A number of details have been identified in the review that are inconsistent with standards that were not waived by the PUD concept approval, or issues that are required to be resolved in the site design. Most importantly, the proposed storm water management system is not acceptable in its current design. This will require additional work by the applicant to address the emergency overflow system, appropriate pipe sizing, and appropriate allocation of site subwatershed drainage. Because drainage was such an important issue with development of this site, staff is requiring that these issue be fully resolved prior to the item being brought to the Council for action. Similarly, staff is also recommending that the parking issue be satisfied prior to final approval by the City Council. To address parking, the applicant can conduct a shared parking analysis, provide square footage for exempt spaces within the various buildings, or reduce the overall square footage of the project. 11 Steiner r� Development, Inc. 3610 County Rd 101 Wayzata, MN 55391 952- 473 -5650 September 7, 2004 Mr. Rick Pearson City Planner City of Rosemount 145` Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 RE: Rosemount Crossing Steiner Development, Inc. - Parking Cross Use Plan Dear Rick; Per your request, I am relaying to the City of Rosemount our tenant placement plan for your use in determining the suitability of the parking facilities for Rosemount Crossing. The tenant placement within Rosemount Crossing is being carefully planned to efficiently utilize the parking lot. Retailers and`restaurants have different customer visit timing and patterns. Restaurants have lunch hour and evening peak demand, and coffee shops have morning peak demand. These uses effectively share the same parking without significantly interfering with each other's business. Some retailers share the same customer, and therefore grouping them together allows multiple visits with one parking stall used. The restaurant has been placed next to the coffee shop and sandwich shop building. The grocery store entrance is on the far Southwest comer of the property, far from the entrance to any other retailer, leaving ample parking for the other uses. The large multi tenant retail building will have a restaurant on the Southern endcap, in the middle of the largest mass of parking. The middle of the multi tenant building will house the personal services retailers such as a hair salon, nail salon, tanning salon, etc. so that these customers can make multiple stops while only parking once. The Northern end of the multi tenant retail building will house soft goods and services retailers that see fewer customers for a shorter period of time. This is where the parking is lighter, but the demand is lighter as well. In addition to the above tenant placement plan, not all of the space will be retail floor space. Both the restaurants and retailers will have an average of 10% of their total area as storage and mechanical space. For the entire development, this equates to a reduction of retail area of 4,810 square feet. When this is considered, Rosemount Crossing enjoys a 5.7/1000 parking ratio, well above the requirement of 511000 for shopping centers. Best re a T A. JO Vice President - Development CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2004 - 9 4 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) CONCEPT PLAN FOR ROSEMOUNT CROSSING WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application from Steiner Development, Incorporated, requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan for the Rosemount Crossing, legally described as: Marian Terrace excepting therefrom that part now platted as Marian Terrace Replat and also excepting therefrom that part now platted as Marian Terrace Rep lat 2 ° Addition, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County of Dakota and State of Minnesota. Together that portion of public lands vacated in Document No. 11942 filed June 21, 1955, which accrue to subject premises. WHEREAS, on June 21, 2004, the applicant submitted a revised site plan that responded to some staff identified concerns, where upon the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount continued the public hearing for the Planned Unit Development Concept Plan to July 14, 2004 to provide sufficient time to review the revised plans; and WHEREAS, on July 2, 2004 the applicant submitted another revised PUD Concept Plan for the project renamed Rosemount Crossing addressing additional concerns. WHEREAS, on July 14, 2004, the Planning Commission reviewed the revised concept PUD for Rosemount Crossing and received comments at the continued public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend that the City Council approve the Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for Rosemount Crossing, subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, August 2 "d , 2004, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation, the Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for Rosemount Crossing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for Rosemount Crossing, subject to: Approval of the Dakota County Plat Commission including provision of RESOLUTION 2004 - 9 4 additional right -of -way for County Road 42. 2. Approval of the Minnesota Department of Transportation relative to access to State Trunk Highway 3. 3. Provision of landscape buffering consistent with applicable zoning standards in all setback areas separating buildings, parking or loading areas from adjacent residential uses. Loading docks not screened by buildings shall be enclosed by a masonry wall consistent with building materials to screen semi truck parking and maneuvering space consistent with Standards specified in Section 8 of the Zoning Ordinance subject to Staff review and approval. 4. The 8 ft. wide bituminous trail linking Camfield Park at the northwest corner of the site through to the State Trunk Highway 3 right -of -way is subject to approval by the Parks and Recreation Director. 5. Setback variances will be considered for the restaurants only with the inclusion of site amenities supporting outdoor seating and service. Amenities shall include (but not be limited to) paved terraces with textured concrete or brick pavers, wrought iron fencing with masonry piers, and landscaping including significant boulevard trees for shaded seating. 6. Setback variances will be considered for the driveway / parking areas only if required landscaping and drainage is accommodated on the perimeter of the site including boulevard trees spaced at a maximum of 50 feet. Specifically, the zero- lot -lined parking lot setback on the future County Road 42 right -of -way line is not supported under any circumstances. This area shall be redesigned with parking shifted to the north to maintain a green space wide enough for required green space and plantings including boulevard trees. 7. Sidewalks intersecting with driveways shall emphasize the pedestrian crossings with pavement detail including either textured concrete or brick pavers. 8. In any case were the attached Architectural Guidelines conflict with zoning standards for lighting and signs, the zoning standards shall apply. The Planning Commission may support integration of alternative materials such as rock -faced block and variances to building material standards for wall surfaces not facing rights -of -way, or public parking areas if screened in accordance with buffer yard expectations, consistent with the design guidelines for the Downtown developed by the Downtown Redevelopment subcommittee, and the Applicant can demonstrate acceptable alternatives that provide consistency with color, texture and pattern. A majority of all wall surfaces facing public rights -of -way and public parking shall be constructed of brick or equivalent. 9. The development shall include a 6,500 sq. ft. full- service restaurant, the phasing for which shall be addressed with the PUD agreement. 10. Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer relative to circulation, driveways, drainage, grading, infrastructure, easements, storm water facilities, utilities and specifically the following: A. Cambrian Avenue at the intersection of TH 3 shall be widened to 2 RESOLUTION 2004 - 9 4 provide a 3 -lane section to accommodate a left turn lane to northbound TH 3. B. The developer/ property owner shall enter into an agreement with the City for use of public right -of -way for a private drainage system. All maintenance of the drainage system will be the responsibility of the developer / property owner. D. The developer has indicated a desire to utilize an underground stormwater management system. To date, no specific details for the system have been provided. In concept, this proposal could be feasible with the following conditions: a. City of Rosemount Stormwater Management requirements are met. b. Maintenance, repair and replacement agreements with securities will be required. 11. Conformance with the ordinance requirements for Preliminary Plat / PUD Final Development Plan and Platting. 12. Incorporation of Recommendations from the Parks and Recreation Commission for Park Dedication in the amount of $64,710 based upon the current fee resolution. 13. Provision of space available for a downtown entry monument on the northwest corner adjacent to the intersection of rights -of -way for CASH 42 and STH 3 that does not conflict with sight - triangle criteria. 14. A sign plan shall be required for consistency of wall signs and placement of ground /pylon and monument signs. No variances from applicable sign ordinances have been identified. 15. Approval of the Concept Plan does not guarantee the total number of buildings or sizes of buildings provided on the plan. 16. Compliance with the minimum number of off - street parking as specified in Section 8. LH Off - Street Parking Requirements, or plan revisions with reductions in building size to achieve the standard. The applicant may prepare a shared parking study to assess whether the City will accept a reduction in the amount of parking provided below the standard. Complementary uses may be considered only on the basis of non - overlapping parking demand. ADOPTED this second day of August, 2004 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. William H. Droste, Mayor RESOLUTION 2004 -9 4 ATTEST: Linda Jentink, Ciiytlerk Motion by: Shoe - Corrigan Second by: Strayton Voted in favor: Riley, Strayton, DeBettignies , Shoe- Corrigan, Droste Voted against: None Member absent: None 4 EXCERPT OF MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 2, 2004 Rosemount Crossing Concept Commercial Planned Unit Development, Steiner Development and ALDI Grocery Community Development Director Lindquist presented the Planned Unit Development for the site on the northwest corner of County Road 42 and Highway 3. This development would include the ALDI's grocery, a mall with several retail stores, a freestanding restaurant, and a drive through coffee shop. Dakota County claimed additional right -of- way on CR 42. The stormwater surface plan was changed to an underground storage system to allow more buildable space. This underground storage system will require routine maintenance with an agreement. Sidewalks and trails will encourage pedestrian traffic. A small pond will be placed on the corner with attractive landscaping. Staff is looking for a classic design to compliment the downtown plan. Lindquist noted discussion for conditions 10 and 17 and requested that conditions 7 and 11 c be deleted. Discussion was held explaining the underground stormwater system with the developer giving examples of properties using this system. ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 2, 2004 Todd Johnson, Vice - President of Steiner Developer, 255 Kentucky Avenue South, Golden Valley and Kathy Anderson, Architectural Consortium gave a detailed presentation of Rosemount Crossing, a Commercial Planned Unit Development. The plan has evolved from the first draft to a very attractive and functional design. There will be a 65 -foot truck screen -wall behind ALDI and trees and shrubs behind the mall's truck turn- around. ALDI only has six truck deliveries per week. Council Member Shoe - Corrigan said the pond area will be an entryway to the City and asked about the landscaping. Todd Johnson noted that trees are not allowed in county easement because of sight lines, but flowers and shrubbery will be used to create a sense of place. Mr. Johnson could not disclose yet what other businesses are interested. Discussion was held regarding condition 10 which might limit negotiations because of timing. Two wording changes were negotiated for condition 10 removing the "first phase of and adding the words "full service" before restaurant, which would allow the building to be custom designed. Council Member DeBettignies asked for the location and size of waste dumpsters. Acting City Attorney Vose advised that condition 10 read as follows; "The inclusion of a 6500 square foot restaurant, the phasing for which shall be addressed with the PUD agreement." Council was satisfied with that wording. MOTION by Shoe - Corrigan to adopt A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CONCEPT COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR ROSEMOUNT CROSSING with conditions 7 and 1 l c stricken from the conditions; amending condition 9 to include language from the Downtown Architectural Guidelines; adjusting condition 10 to move phasing to the PUD agreement. Council Member DeBettignies requested a friendly amendment to condition 9, correcting the fourth word from were to where; and in condition 10 add "fullservice" before restaurant. Shoe- Corrigan agreed to the friendly amendment. Second by Strayton. Ayes; Riley, Strayton, DeBettignies, Shoe - Corrigan, Droste. Nays: None. Motion carried. 1 : <s C s_ 3 -BHS —. E XISTlnw _HP.UBS TO REMAIN (TYP;) . 1 -2 .i[+G9W • ss, 4 -CLS -�� . sn.+ 5 - EXISTING SHADE TREE ";, REM AIN (TYP.) 4- BHS . L r TN,._ vso 4 -CLS- ..x.- 5 -BHS— ,.,.. 5 -TNA- 1 -ABM -- 3 -CLS xn 1- SMA - -- 3 -E S� TRUCK s S6`REEF} as ns WALL 61 ;u . W . y EXIS'iNG SHADE TREE TO n REMAIN (TYP.) 2 i 1y, —4—nw5 i 4 -AWS —2 -SMA C, gi - -4 -AWS r.;z �? -36 -SVJ . r n' — SIDEWALK Pb417IN0S 1 -SSC 2. 9 -SVJ Q 4 78 -SDD r - PYLON SIGN i -3 -SMA ? r -5 -AWS h� 2 —2 —PFC ENTRANCE MONUMENT 0 4C 80 120 L5 -AWS PYLON '--5 -AWS SCALE IN FEET :3. 42 SIGN 8 -AWS =SUGGESTED PLANT SCHEDULE CODE CITY commr.N NAMF /I ATIN NAME ­1 -.1- ABM 1 16 AUTUMN BLAZE MAPLE 2.5" 8& B_ STRAIGH LEADER • SOD AND IRRIGATE ALL DISTURBED AREAS. Acer x freemon9 'Jeifersred' CAL. - AND FULL CROWN LLL 8 LITTLE LEAF LINDEN 2.5" B &B STRA "GHT LEADER IRRIGATION NOTES, PLANTING DETA:'LS. Tike cordate CAL. • REFER TO GRAD.NG PLAN FOR GRACES AND EROSION CONTROL AND FULL CROWN FGA 4 _ FALLGOLD ASH 2.5" B &B STRA'GHT LEADER s.' IRRIGATION PLAN TO 'HE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. Froxinus 'i ra 'Fall o!d' CAL. AND FULL CROWN SMA 25 SUMMIT ASH 2.5" B &S STRA.GHT LEADER LANDSCAPE FABRIC. Froxinus ennsl anica 'Summa' CAL. AND FULL CROWN PFC 13 PRAIRIEFIRE CRAB APPLE 2" B &B STRA ;GHT LEADER • TREE PRESERVATION REPLACEMENTS: ` Malus x Prairefire CAL. PEDESTRIAN \ - CROSSWALK (TYP ) -' AND FULL CROWN SSC 6 SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE 2" B &B STRAIGHT LEADER TOTAL TREES PROVIDED 144 z=.. t �. y J a'r :� - - M'lus x 'Spring Snow' CAL. AND FULL CROWN HGC 19 1 HARVEST GOLD CRABAPPLE 2" 1 B &B I STRAIGHT LEADER 820 LF \10= 82 SHRUBS -- - - - -VNY. EDGE. Mclus x 'Yarvest Gold' CAL. I - -' -�.; AND FULL CROWN BHS 32 LACK HI S SPRUC 6' B &B FULL FORM TO GRADE • BUILDING 3: Pice❑ I ! 'densata" HT -_'• ! ALL PLANTINGS SHALL RECEIVE FERTILIZER AS FOLLOWS: CLS 28 OJLOR SPRUCE ______ 6' B&B FULL FORM TO GRADE TOTAL SHRUBS REQUIRED: 199 pi"' un ens HT S. 78 SAVIN JUNIPER 24' CON PLANT 3' -0" O.C. Jun. wus s'bina 'Savin' SPRD. STAGGERED , NA 66 TECHNY ARBORVITAE 36' #7 CONI _ PLANT 5' -0" O.C. Thu' accldentolis 'Techn ' HT. STAGGERED CAM 15 COMPACT AMUR MAPLE 36' 07 CON PLANT 5' -0" O.C. ACER GINNALA 'COMPACTA' HL I I STAGGERED ACV - I AMERICAN CRANBERRYBUSH 36" Iif7 CONTI PLANT 5-0" D.C. VIbemum trilobum 'BailCY Com act' HT. I SPACE EVENLY AWS 80 1 ANTHONY WATERER SPIREA 18' #5 CON11 P NT 3' -0 O.C. 5 traeo bumclda 'Antnon Waterer' HT- SPACE EVENLY WS 65 GOLD MOUND SPIREA 18" #5 CON PLANT S -0" O.C. - S 'roes 'o onico 'Goldmoind' HT SPACE EVENLY SDD 54 STELLA D' ORO DAYULY 2-YR #1 CON PLANT 1' -5" O.C. Hemerocanis 'Stella d' oro' SPA EVENL OUANn OLS SHUWN IN THE PLANTING SCHEDULE ARE FOR THE CONTRACTOR'S CONVENIENCE CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY QUANTITIES SHOWN ON THE PLAN. E By M PLANT LEGEND OVERSTORY DECIDUDCUS TREE (D AVG. 2.5" DIA. ORNAMENTAL TREES AVG. 2" DIA. CONIFER TREES SHRUBS \GRCUNDCOVER BENCHMARK Tap nut of hydrant along Cambrian Ave. as shown. Elevation = 960.93 feet (City of Rosemount Datum) AVG. HT 6' 4�- '• • AVG. HT 18" WARNING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES. COKDJITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES, OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. HE SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO OWNER /d'Nrl 9 I Ki o F� 5 m Q <wd i I =w � U Z z�s �3 °w OZSJO s U W � Z Z S O^ o D•� MryV N z n c Q � > E 'd N z- --gyp .-L oW - J 1� z3 des w C , m 2 z ° w U u y ^ as N �ry V z P U Z W W � J D U W Z 0� aE REVISIONS 8 -18 -04 LANDB E REV. & LABELS. 9 -7 -04 CTY COMMENTS :iIJA'NN HY L1 = LANDSCAPE NOTES a REQUIREMENTS • ALL SEED AND SOD AREAS STALL BE IRRIGATED. 1. 1 TP.EE \3COCSF OF LAND AREA • SOD AND IRRIGATE ALL DISTURBED AREAS. 2. 1 FCUNDATICN PANTING \ 10 LF OF FRONTAGE • ALL LANDSCAPE ISLANDS WITH PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE IRRIGATED. 3. 1 BO'JLEVARC TREE \ 50 LF OF FRONTAGE • REFER TO LANDSCAPE DETAIL SHEET FOR GENERAL PLANTING NOTES. IRRIGATION NOTES, PLANTING DETA:'LS. • REFER TO GRAD.NG PLAN FOR GRACES AND EROSION CONTROL REQUIRED TREES: • SITE AREA: 296,245 SF. • LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A SHOP DRAWING OF 296,245 SF \3000= 98 TREES s.' IRRIGATION PLAN TO 'HE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. ALL SHRUB BEDS TO RECEIVE 3" ROCK MULCH AND PROVIDED SITE AREA TREES 98 TREES TO RECE:VE 4" DEPTH OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MUCLH. •BOULEVARD TREES: LANDSCAPE FABRIC. 1000 F \50= 20 TREES t� / '� -- •ALL PARKING LOT ISLANDS TO RECIEVE 3' OF ROCK MULCH OVER PROVIDED BOULEVARD TREES: 20 y o S °D \ LANDSCAPE FABRIC. • TREE PRESERVATION REPLACEMENTS: ` •REMOVE WIRING. TWINE OR ROPES AND BURLAP FROM THE TOP AND SIDES SEE TREE PRESERVATION PLAN = 26 PEDESTRIAN \ - CROSSWALK (TYP ) -' OF THE ROOT BALL FOR BALLED AND BURLAPPED PLANTS REMOVE PROVIDED REPLACEMENT TREES: 25 a •�/h� VVV( CONTAINERS AND CUT CIRCLING ROOTS IF PLANTS ARE CONTA GROWN. TOTAL TREES REQUIRED: 144 < o,�'arJ /'(�R. • HEAVY COMMERCIAL GRADE EDGING SHALL BE USED AROUND THE PERIMETER TOTAL TREES PROVIDED 144 z=.. t �. y J a'r :� - - OF ALL SHRUB AND GROUNDCO'VER MASSINGS ALL TREES NOT IN PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE MULCH RINGS 3' IN D.A. REQUIRED FOUNDATION PLAN?NGS ^ 32 -GMS IF PLANTS ARE TO BE PRUNED, BRANCHES SHALL BE PRUNED AT THE BRANCH BARK • BUILDING 1: ENTRANCE MONT, RIDGE, NOT FLUSH WITH THE BARK. 820 LF \10= 82 SHRUBS -- - - - -VNY. EDGE. MULCH DEPTH SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF FOUR INCHES, AND SHALL BE KEPT AT • BUILDING 2: I - -' -�.; LEAST TNO INCHES AWAY FROM THE STEM OF 'HE TREES. 560 LF \iD= 56 SHRUBS THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR ALL DAMAGE TO THE SITE CAUSED • BUILDING 3: BY THE PLANTING OPERATION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. 270 LF \10= 27 SHRUBS -_'• ! ALL PLANTINGS SHALL RECEIVE FERTILIZER AS FOLLOWS: BUILDING 4: _EXISTING '1C -0 -20 GRANULAR FERTILIZER APPLIED AT THE TIME OF PLANTING AT A RATE 340 LF \10= 34 SHRUBS EVERGREEN T 32 -S" "`� TD REMAIN (- OF 12 OZ PER 2.5 CALIPER INCHES OF TREE AND 6 OZ PER SHRUB. •10 -0-10 FERTILIZER APPLIED THE FOLLOWING SPRING AT SAME RATE. TOTAL SHRUBS REQUIRED: 199 TOTAL SHRUBS PROVIDED: 271 SHRUBS TOTAL PERENNIALS PROVIDED: 254 SHRUBS TENANT TENANT TENANT 4-- �SM30TH FACE C1AU �- ROCKFACE Ce1ll -ASE , ALDI MONUMENT/ TENANT SIGN ELEVATION J 174' = 1'-0� ta. c_!a TENANT I I -, 7 _II ARCHITECTURAL CONSORTIUM L.L.C. E.J.S. CORN CE TENANT I BASE WEST ELEVATION c 3/32' signet re: Date: License f KEY PLAN Alz uz N A— .L -.'1._ - ..1..__I B� Ce' ,, ,�PROJECT ENTRANCE MONUMENT CMU - AlE ;I r-- - E-IF.S. E...' S. __ EL 11 —0� CORNICE r,. CARPI CE a•hi o � _ _ _ CAY'�AS TENANT - - AWNING BRICK PIERS— I i eL 'CO 0' ROC +FACE .- -- CMU BASF �1 SOUTH ELEVATION J 3/32' = 1' -C' i.C. 7 - El ro -o CA,IAAS � - -_ >W:LC TENANT TENANT TENANT I.a 6ilf I EL. uG-0 — ALAI. NI.CCN _ I ERSCK PERS -- RCCK.A" E SPK;K t �' 1 — t ..ASc RICK — l `—UP � GAP.SGE \ '—BRICK CMU BASE MI—CW CCCR EAST ELEVATION 3/32' _ '.' -0' 901 North Third Street Suite 220 612- 436 -4030 Minneapolis. MN 55401 Fax 612 - 692 -9960 Steiner Development, Inc. I hereby certify that this plan, pec';OCalion, or report acs ammed by me or 4.der my di rect supervi . sion, d Oat I di a duly Licensed ArcHtect der the lane of the Stale of Mirnesota. Printed Name: ROSEMOUNT CROSSING - STEINER DEVELOPMENT ROSEMOUNT, MN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SCALE: 3/32" = 1' -0" 'ROJECT NUMBER. 04- 1013 -0' :SSUED DATE: 09 /02/04 ORAWIJ BY: SS CHECKED BY: KA A3.2 XX I I I 1 cut— vUl I,1VI LIL,11 1 I, L_. L. Li. LVU`. TENANT ALCM AIND011__ BRICK PIERS TZ: �1. -A -0 -- ?CCKFACE --' I _al -K 5•LSE C J FAS_ l NORTH ELEVATION � 1 TENANT I I -, 7 _II ARCHITECTURAL CONSORTIUM L.L.C. E.J.S. CORN CE TENANT I BASE WEST ELEVATION c 3/32' signet re: Date: License f KEY PLAN Alz uz N A— .L -.'1._ - ..1..__I B� Ce' ,, ,�PROJECT ENTRANCE MONUMENT CMU - AlE ;I r-- - E-IF.S. E...' S. __ EL 11 —0� CORNICE r,. CARPI CE a•hi o � _ _ _ CAY'�AS TENANT - - AWNING BRICK PIERS— I i eL 'CO 0' ROC +FACE .- -- CMU BASF �1 SOUTH ELEVATION J 3/32' = 1' -C' i.C. 7 - El ro -o CA,IAAS � - -_ >W:LC TENANT TENANT TENANT I.a 6ilf I EL. uG-0 — ALAI. NI.CCN _ I ERSCK PERS -- RCCK.A" E SPK;K t �' 1 — t ..ASc RICK — l `—UP � GAP.SGE \ '—BRICK CMU BASE MI—CW CCCR EAST ELEVATION 3/32' _ '.' -0' 901 North Third Street Suite 220 612- 436 -4030 Minneapolis. MN 55401 Fax 612 - 692 -9960 Steiner Development, Inc. I hereby certify that this plan, pec';OCalion, or report acs ammed by me or 4.der my di rect supervi . sion, d Oat I di a duly Licensed ArcHtect der the lane of the Stale of Mirnesota. Printed Name: ROSEMOUNT CROSSING - STEINER DEVELOPMENT ROSEMOUNT, MN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SCALE: 3/32" = 1' -0" 'ROJECT NUMBER. 04- 1013 -0' :SSUED DATE: 09 /02/04 ORAWIJ BY: SS CHECKED BY: KA A3.2 XX I I I 1 cut— vUl I,1VI LIL,11 1 I, L_. L. Li. LVU`. — E-1V-4' E ;S ROCK A': Chill P 13- CK TP. _K DOCK WEST ELEVATION Ej .F.S. y� _0_ c;'�� I hereby ce&.Tfy that IN. ,an, sp�i - flcafic,, or mpon P red by duty Licensed -Y di­t Pervii,., ..d !hot I a`n A­hft,t ..dIir the I— of the Stale Ninnesota. 1`6m!.d N.— Sigrmt e: cefe: L:oo— J: ROSEMOUNT —4— C. CR%:,E CROSSING 16 L! 75 PREF N. —STEINER Y'7 DEVELOPMENT W - A RO^KFACL CM! P EPS BRICK .ASE ROSEMOUNT, MN SOUTH ELEVATION RO_KFACi - -E.-F S CMU "_RS I CORN CE ARCHITECTURAL CONSORTIUM L.L.C. RLCK JOCK I:FEEN WAL 90 North Third Street, Suite 220 612436-4030 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Fax 612692-9960 _1'._q - �" p- Steiner. Development, Inc. k�—"L EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SCALE: 3/32" =1'4' I KEY PLAN N ._ _ L 'L_ 1. FRFIN -- ----- VFL AWN NG ALJY. IV hDow r CWAC: ML PIERS ?x EL ' ICO' Cr BR CK BASE M A - - CMU QCCKACE--,,,, BRICK sk6s PROJECT NUMBER: G4 ISSUED DATE: DRAWN BY: SS -7 Ae CHECKED BY. KA L UP Z RX-FACE — 5PCK, BAS cvu SAS; 4 T EAS ELEVATION ST *EIIIL S..ZA 3/32 - 1'-0- A3.1 x nl 1 .1 1L.1 L i,i I LJI uv7 1JLJI LIU] 11, L.L .L. /_ Ij u - t NORTH ELEVATION 3/32• = 1'-0* . LIE BRI CK c RIUCE PIERS BENDNG PON• N � BGI:ChYC 1-' TENA TENANT � TEN-ANT TEN rD -o I A_UV NNLCN_ ( 1 BRCK EP ROCKFACE ERIC{ EAR_-- - CA AS 1 CMU +ANi "'NiNG EAST ELEVATION `� RETAIL SHOPS 3!32" = i' -0' � T.O. C0RR.CE FL. 'ferJ RO(:Kr AC. C @U B-IND RCC'KFACE Cy'U LL 1;0' 8 ROCK= ACE ----J oCCKFACE — CMU BeSE :M': B...>_ 132Q.N'G'PDNT 114 8L'I'_De13' KEY PLAN 1 AJ.J 2 U.3 s 0.1' 3 N' B u.3 BUI_C:NG T TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT f — TENANT TENA B_hC1Na,P01N1 w B,1 D'NG 1 `-- 1 :NCLCSURE. R024 AfF r.Mll W "1 L P,ETAIL NORTHWEST ELEVATION SHOPS 1/1� = 7' -0" CCFN EE ARCHITECTURAL - '- E EL. IIB 0 I BRICK PIERS � CDRNCE • - - CONSORTIUM L.L.C. I n arc . RSCKFACE - ML BAND — omMinresote- .. -- - - -- . .i— RCCKFACE CNiI P Pnnted Nome: - S Slgeature: ROSEMOUNT, MN Dote: ucese P' 'OC 901 No th Third Street, Suite 220 612 - 4364030 1r - — ROCKFACE — D RH -C� 1. PLC C SVID klmeap0lis, MN 55401 Fax 612 - 6929960 �ii ve -o ROSEMOUNT WEST ELEVATION C ' ` ALJM. XNL'OW € - - _ e - - - -^ f - - — 3R CK E•R CK PiE RS C ORN BRCS PIERS 'S _...___ - -_ t y S(. ELJ7,A -0 �� - MCI PIPS __ ^ � - - emel - Development Inc. CANVAS- L —BP. CK WS_ —P CKF..CE AwN.x : cuL asst NORTH ELEVATION M=S n `-L r I CM_' BASE " "'' "`G RETAIL SHOPS 3j32 1' -0' EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS B_hC1Na,P01N1 w B,1 D'NG 1 `-- 1 :NCLCSURE. R024 AfF r.Mll W "1 L P,ETAIL NORTHWEST ELEVATION SHOPS 1/1� = 7' -0" CCFN EE - -- ' - - '- E EL. IIB 0 I -9i • - - -- p arc . RSCKFACE - ML BAND — omMinresote- .. -- - - -- . .i— RCCKFACE CNiI P Pnnted Nome: - S Slgeature: ROSEMOUNT, MN Dote: ucese P' 1r - — ROCKFACE — D RH -C� 1. PLC C CMJ BABE C C.'AU BASE R ROSEMOUNT WEST ELEVATION C ' CROSSING BRICK -- —.� - '— - ti _. ,_ - - i } —A_UV NNC014 C ORN BRCS PIERS 'S _...___ - -_ �� - MCI PIPS - RCCKFACE L— BRI r PATE �— M=S `-L r CM_' BASE " "'' "`G EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SOUTH ELEVATION Y l RETAR SHOPS s/32° = 7' -D• SCALE: 3/32" =1' -0" B_hC1Na,P01N1 w B,1 D'NG 1 `-- 1 :NCLCSURE. R024 AfF r.Mll W "1 L P,ETAIL NORTHWEST ELEVATION SHOPS 1/1� = 7' -0" 1. DEVELOPMENT cOR cwxf E.I ES. -- COR ICE PROJECT NU4BER: 04- 1013 -01 I I P.O. CCRhICE ISSUED DATE: 08,/18/04 -'... - - -- - :11N -0`L ORAWN BY: SS TENANT TENAA7 TENAhIT j TENANT CHECKED 6Y: Kq • = .. gym .. _ . _ . _ _ __ : .._ °..' { t - -� - 0 SCFF - E'_ 110 -O' e ' F . ` % — 3R�K PIERS I EP'fK g - _W,yS - - � kO'KFA:F II ICS 0'v ANN SASE A3.3 �5 SOUTHEAST ELEVATION RETAIL SHDPS 3/32 _ '' -0' x HI CI IILCULUIUI L_Uf15UFUUfTp, -.L.L. L'`JV4 CCFN EE - -- ' - - '- E EL. IIB 0 I I hereb y cercy mat ;his P' spec &otloo, or repod • - - -- p arc . Chi- .Lti o omMinresote- .. -- - - -- . .i— RCCKFACE CNiI P Pnnted Nome: - S Slgeature: BRICK D Dote: ucese P' 1r - — ROCKFACE — — ROCK -WE 1 1. PLC C CMJ BABE C C.'AU BASE R ROSEMOUNT WEST ELEVATION C CROSSING J RETAIL SHO ?S � �.'3< - 1' -0" - STEINER C ORN BRCS PIERS 'S _...___ - -_ E.I ES. -- COR ICE PROJECT NU4BER: 04- 1013 -01 I I P.O. CCRhICE ISSUED DATE: 08,/18/04 -'... - - -- - :11N -0`L ORAWN BY: SS TENANT TENAA7 TENAhIT j TENANT CHECKED 6Y: Kq • = .. gym .. _ . _ . _ _ __ : .._ °..' { t - -� - 0 SCFF - E'_ 110 -O' e ' F . ` % — 3R�K PIERS I EP'fK g - _W,yS - - � kO'KFA:F II ICS 0'v ANN SASE A3.3 �5 SOUTHEAST ELEVATION RETAIL SHDPS 3/32 _ '' -0' x HI CI IILCULUIUI L_Uf15UFUUfTp, -.L.L. L'`JV4 " �67`F CANVAS AffN NG E.LF S. TENWNT A-W. V.N B-CK —R KACz 13Rr.K -ASj o � mu B'ii �,NORTELEVATION ��500 SF �R— �311r ZPPAS AWN 1 1G I' 'OR-1 - kum- 91\rcri-- 3R.'CK -!ERS ROC MAU MY (—,') WEST ELEVATION '_�tT6.500 SF RE- 3/32* = 1' -0' ARCHITECTURAL CONSORTIUM L.L.C. 901 North Third Street, Suite 220 6124364030 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Steiner -:- - - Development, Inc. I hereby —rdy th. ' W. plan, p.,*f-ti. , a, p.,t ecs prepared by � u nder my direct superviv.w, and Pat I ly . d. L;-- A,&R-t undo the -- of the Stt. of Kies N. Prim! d N—. S.q -t.- Garr Lc— 1: ROSEMOUNT CROSSING -STEINER DEVELOPMENT ROSEMOUNT, MN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SCALE: 3/32" = V-0" 1 PR NUMBER: 04- 1013 -Gt I SSUED SUED DATE. 08/15/04 DFZKNN BY. SS KA A3.4 X 40 E.I.F.S, EIFS k t L * w.. 1 CORNICE CATAS TEMMXT 77W *E -�1-7! - - -_ ALLY. '41NDDN BRICK PIERS ' BASE KFACE SOUTH ELEVATION �.500 SF �RE- �311V 7 F KEY P LAN i T. - 'z F NAT\ - T ALUM- BRCK- 8 IERS PCCKFACE F I f BASE Ckl� BASE EAST ELEVATION hj SF �11ST 1�-1 ARCHITECTURAL CONSORTIUM L.L.C. 901 North Third Street, Suite 220 6124364030 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Steiner -:- - - Development, Inc. I hereby —rdy th. ' W. plan, p.,*f-ti. , a, p.,t ecs prepared by � u nder my direct superviv.w, and Pat I ly . d. L;-- A,&R-t undo the -- of the Stt. of Kies N. Prim! d N—. S.q -t.- Garr Lc— 1: ROSEMOUNT CROSSING -STEINER DEVELOPMENT ROSEMOUNT, MN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SCALE: 3/32" = V-0" 1 PR NUMBER: 04- 1013 -Gt I SSUED SUED DATE. 08/15/04 DFZKNN BY. SS KA A3.4 X