HomeMy WebLinkAbout5. Eastbridge Townhomes Planned Unit Development - Final Development Plan, Preliminary Plat and Rezoning - City of Rosemount
' Executive Summary for Action
City Council Meeting Date: December 19 1995
Agenda Items Eastbridge Townhomes Planned Unit Agenda Section:
Development: Final Development Plan, PUBI.IC F�G
Preliminary Plat and Rezoning
Prepared By: Richard Pearson, Assistant Planner Agenda No: :.�
�T�M # '�
Attachments: Resolution, PC Reviews, Correspondence, Approved By:
Blueprints
G���
Mr. en Sexton representwg CMC H Partners I, is requestuig approv o a PUD
development plan preliminary plat and rezoning for the 72 townhouses that will be constructed
west of the proposed Bridgewater Parkway. The remainder of the PUD consisting of
commercial uses will ultimately be processed as an amendment to the PUD when market
conditions support development of the commercial uses.
The concept for the mi.xed use PUD was approved on October 3, 1995.
Discussions with the Developer and his consultants throughout the process resulted in very few
modifications needed for the townhouse element of the PUD. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the preliminary plat and final development plan on November 14,
1995. A separate motion was also passed to indefinitely table action regardi.ng the rezoning
from IP Planned Industrial to R-2 Single Family Attached Residential because of the desire to
rezone at the time of final plat approval which will depend upon relocation of the rail spur.
Recommended Action: A MOTTON to adopt A RESOLUTION APPROVING 1�
EASTBRIDGE TOWNHOME.S FINAL NII�D USE PL,�►NNED UNiT DEVELOPMENT
AND EASTBRIDGE TOWNHOMFS PFFT iMiN,�RY pLAT AND SETTING OUT THE
CONDITIONS OR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL.
- and-
A MOTION to indefinitely table the rezoning from IP Industrial Park to R-2 Single Family
Attached Residential and C-4 General Commercial with approval of final pla.t, subject to
submission of a written request from the developers.
Council Action:
l
CITY OF ROSF�VIOUNT
DAKOTA COU1vTY, l�IINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 1995-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING EASTBRIDGE TOWNHOMFS
Fnvai.M�UsE P�xx�n Urvrr D�LOrn�rrr
AND EASTBRIDGE TOWNHOMES PRELIlVIINARY PLAT
AND SETTING OUT THE CONDITIONS FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount has received a final concept mixed use planned unit development and
preliminary plat for residential and commercial uses for the following legally described property:
Outlots B, C, D, and E, Eastbridge Preliminary Plat, all located within Lot 65 of Auditor's
Subdivision No. 1, except therefrom the following: All that part of Lot 65 of Auditor's Subdivision
No. 1, Rosemount, according to the plat thereof now on file and of record in the office of the
Register of Deeds for said County and State; (the same being all that part of the Southeast Quarter
(SE�/a) of Section 29, Township 115, Range 19, lying East of the railroad right-of-way: which lies
North of the North line of that certain Easement dated December 15, 1943 and recorded in Book S 1
of Miscellaneous Records at page 552, in the office of the Register of Deeds of Dakota County, and
West of a line parallel to and 920 feet West of the East line of the Southeast Quarter (SE1/a) of said
Section 29, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, on November 14, 1995 the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount recommended
approval of the Eastbridge Townhomes Mixed Use Final Planned Unit Development and preliminary plat
subject to conditions; and
WHEREAS, on December 5, 1995 the City Council held a public hearing to hear testimony regarding the
Eastbridge Townhomes MiYed Use Final Planned Unit Development, Eastbridge Townhomes Preliminary
Plat, and Rezoning from IP Industrial Park to R-2 Single Family Attached and C-4 General Commercial,
in accordance with the City of Rosemount Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and State Statutes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves
the Eastbridge Townhomes Mixed Use F'vnal Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat subject to:
l. incorporation of Engineering and Park Department recommendations relative to grading, public and
private improvements, utilities, and park dedication as outlined in their department memos;
2. approval by the Dakota County Plat Commission;
3. relocation of the rail spur consistent with the design of the site plan dated 10/27/95 prior to approval
of a final plat;
4. execution of a Eastbridge Townhomes PUD Agreement which secures public and private
improvements, as well as a Eastbridge Townhomes Homeowners' Association which has the
perpetual maintenance responsibilities of all outlots and o�n space;
5. dedication of an easement at the northwest corner of County State Aid Highway 42 and proposed
Bridgewater Parkway to the City far construction of a commercial center entryway monument sign
prior to approval of a site plan for commercial development;
6. provision of a cross-access circulation easement with Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision No. 1 (quonset
hut site) prior to approval of a site plan for commercial development;
7. conformance with the subdivision and zoning ordinances for final plat approvaT and rezoning; and
8. confromance with all building and fire codes including provision of temporary cul-de-sacs for any
dead-end street.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council tables rezoning of subject property from IP
Industrial Park to R-2 Single Family Attached Residential and C-4 General Commercial until approval of
the final plat, subject to submission of a written request from the developers.
ADOPTED this 19.day of December, 1995.
E.B. McMenomy, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk
Motion by: Seconded by:
Voted in favor:
Voted against:
' City of Rosemount
Executive Summary for Action
Planning Commission Meeting-Date: November 14. 1995
Agenda Item: CMC Heartland Partners: Eastbridge Agenda Section:
Townhouse/Commercial Development Pt�Br.�c 1r�ox�TTON.�t.
FoRVM
Prepared By: Rick Pearson Agenda No.:
Assistant Planner I�vt No.7B.
Attachments: Blueprints, Site Plan Preliminary Plat,Utilities, Approved By:
Grading, Landscaping Plans. �,(
/ l
� 7s. CMC HEaitTr.arm Paxzx�its I-
EASTBRIDGE TOWNHOMES AND CONIlViERCIAL PLANNED UNTT DEVELOPMENT:
Final Development Plan
Preliminary Plat
Rezonings
PROPOSAL:
Mr. Glen Se�cton of CMC Heartland Partners I is requesting approval of the final development plan
for the Eastbridge Townhome PUD. The PUD also contains approximately 7.8 acres for
commercial development qualifying the PUD as a mixed use in conformance with the
Comprehensive Guide Plan. The 72 townhouse component is the primary motivation for this
review sequence.
The continuing process will include:
1. PUD final development plan and preliminary plat;
2. Rezoning and final plat approval for the first phase.
-SEEATTACHED MEMO FOR FURTHERDETAIIS-
Recommended Action: A MOTION to recommend approval of the Eastbridge Townhomes PUD
final development plan and preliminary plat as revised to the City Council subject to:
1. incorporation of Engineering and Park Department recommendations relative to grading,public
and private improvements,utilities and pazk dedication as outlined in their attached memos;
2. approval of the Dakota.County Plat Commission;
3. relocation of the rail spur consistent with the design of the site plan dated 10l27/95 prior to
approval of final plat;
4. execution of a planned unit development agreement which secures public and private
improvements as well a homeowners association which has the perpetual maintenance
responsibilities of all outlots and open space;
S. dedication of an easement at the northwest corner of CSAH 42 and proposed Bridgewater
Pazkway to the City for construction of a commercial center entryway monument sign;
6. execution of a cross-access circulation and pazking easement with Lot 15,Auditor's Subdivision
No. 1 (quonset hut site)prior to approval of a site plan for commercial development
7. conformance with the subdivision and zoning ordinances for final plat approval and rezoning; and
8. conformance with all building and fire codes including provision of a temporary cul-de-sac for
any dead-end street
-AND-
A MOTION to recommend to the City Council an indefinite tabling of the rezoning from IP
Industrial Pazk to R-2 Single Family Attached Residential and C-4 General Commercial until
a roval of final lat, sub'ect to submission of a written re uest b the develo er.
Planning Commission Action:
11-1495.005
CITY OF ROSEMOU NT z8�5°TMths`��W�t
P.O.Box 510
Rosemount,MN
Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55oes-os�o
Phone:612-423-4411
Fax:612-423-5203
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Richard Pearson,Assistant Planner
DATE: November 86, 1995
SUBJ: November 14, 1995 Regular Planning Commission Reviews:
I�1v17B. CMC Heartland Partners
ATTACHN�NTS: Blueprints, Site Plan Preliminary Plat,Utilities,Grading,Landscaping Plans.
7s. CMC HE�tTT.�P�tTT��ts I-
EASTBRIDGE TOWNHOME5 AND COIVIlVIERCIAL PLANNED UNTT DEVELOPMENT:
Final Development Plan
Preliminary Plat
Rezonings
PROPOSAL:
Mr. Glen Sexton of CMC Heartland Partners I is requesting approval of the final development plan for
the Eastbridge Townhome PUD. The PUD also contains approximately 7.8 acres for commercial
development qualifying the PUD as a mixed use in conformance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan.
The 72 townhouse component is the primary motivation for this review sequence.
The continuing process will include:
1. PUD final development plan and preliminary plat;
2. Rezoning and final plat approval for the first phase.
BACKGROUND:
On October 3, 1995,the City Council approved the concept for the mixed use PUD with conditions. The
Developer responded to the Staff concerns regazding a pedestrian trail crossing of the rail spur and has
deleted the trail.
. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN:
The townhouse element of the PUD has been modified in response to issues identified during the concept
review. The 72 townhouses aze ananged in 17 four unit clusters and two twin clusters. The units are all
oriented to two connected loops with two private street connections to Bridgewater Pazkway.
The private streets aze 25 feet wide and will have to have curb and gutter. The units will be setback a
minimum of 20 feet from the streets,thus providing sufficient pazking space in front of the gazages.
Thirty eight common parking spaces have been dispersed through out the developmen�
The driveway for units 22 and 23 has been redesigned to remove it from the intersection of the private
streets in response to previous concerns.
T'he northemmost third street connection has been eliminated because of alignment issues. The
southernmost street connection has been moved north to increase the sepazation from the commercial
entrance which has also been moved south.
� �;�������
conraining 30'"�
. .. .pnFconsumrr rrurt�r�..,�
' November 14, 1995 Regular Planning Commission Reviews:
ITEM 7B. Eastbridge II Addition
Page 2 .
Sidewalks will be installed in accordance with the Pazk and Recreation Committee recommendation An
additional pedestrian connection is proposed to connect the northeastem loop with Bridgewater pazkway
in the location of the eiiminated third private street connection. The Pazk and Recreation Director has
endorsed this addition. There will be no land dedicated for pazk use with this proposal.
PRELIlVIINARY PLAT:
Each of the townhouse units will have a lot defined for owner occupancy. Two blocks wiil be defined
which Staffpresumes to relate to the phasing plan. Block l would be constructed in 1996 with Block 2
being built when market conditions warrant A temporary cul-de-sac will be required for emergency and
other service vehicles if block one only is buil�
The remainder of the pazcels will be defined as outlots until conditions support development. Final plats
will be required of a11 pazcels that aze to be developed The Developer and or the townhouse association
will be expected to maintain all private streets,open space and landscaping.
REZONING:
With the approval of final plats,the townhouses will be rezoned from IP Planned Industrial to R-2, Single
Family Attached Residential.
O�R IssuEs:
Similaz to the single family element of Eastbridge PUD,the development and platting of the townhouses
depend upon relocation of the rail spur. At least nine of the units aze planned for the e�sting location of
I' the spur and five more units are close enough to the spur to suggest that no amount of mitigation would
;
� make those units desirable.
RECOMMENDATION:
MOTION to recommend approval of the Eastbridge Townhomes PUD final development plan and
preliminary plat as revised to the City Council subject ta
1. incorporation of Engineering and Pazk Department recommenda.tions relative to grading,public and
private improvements,utilities and pazk dedication as outlined in their attached memos;
2. approval of the Dakota County Plat Commission;
3. relocation of the rail spur consistent with the design of the site plan dated 10/27/95 prior to approval
. of final plat;
4. execution of a planned unit development agreement whieh secures public and private improvements
� as well a homeowners association which has the perpetual maintenance responsibilities of all outlots
; and open space;
5. dedication of an easement at the northwest corner of CSAH 42 and proposed Bridgewater Pazkway to
the City for construction of a commercial center entryway monument sign� r�' � R�°/RoJetl 0�a s�+e �1...�
P ,�.� �,Hx�c�.�
• P,���S�a� 6. ��rof a cross-access circulation and-g�easement with Lot 15,Auditor's Subdivision No. oE'�'�""�''
1 (quonset hut site)prior to approval of a site plan for commercial development;
� 7. conformance with the subdivision and zoning ordinances for final plat approval and rezoning; and
8. conformance with all building and fire codes including provision of a temporary cul-de-sac for any
� dead-end stree�
-AND-
w A MOTTON to recommend to the City Council an indefinite tabling of the rezoning from Il'Industrial
. Pazk to R-2 Single Family Attached Residential and C-4 General Commercial until approval of final
plat, subject to submission of a written request by the developer.
� � � � I� 'j_.-- � .� �,
� ��� ��� ��� � a � �
� � � � . �
� ��� � �� � _ _ ;' - -� - - - - - - i � '�
� � � r•j ` ;: -� ~•., f ; Qp,..
- ° ,1 V d '�:� ! �I' �� ���
' � 4
,.\ �,��- ; ^� j� . �� ;,� _ � � 3J //
Y Y Y � _ �'J c> \ � /
, �� � �. '�. . /
`���'� ! � 1 �
a s s � '•:\ .�S ��_�. -_ .� . � j/ : ` /� '' J�
'�\ :' fl;' � 't' . �� �
� �,. ;-',g� r�� i � � � •
� �, �•� :`��"� I ''os� /� / .;`.,�,;� • ,
-� �.� � r��.�q ;(>" ; r" �r'� � � S'�
` ,_ . ��. . . � �• : i ,� .�� . .
i '.�.�� -� �—..,/-� `
/ �:: ;, " . •��� j� - �/Y \\ ' `
� ' p V � �.y`� �i n � � , ,�fy� \
� a v•n � A j'l. u�� --' ' t i�y 'M �/
�%I 'r ., -� .'r . '�'� .f
% / �ZY � -D anpvo�?�I .:- -" �,
, �' i r_�'..P�=E�SCM�Nijj._�"'r_.,. r � � � e� .
yQ� ! !
G'/ \ v�,/ / � t �J I � y ? � �v � � :
-8'��� �*'� -- . . • :�� �.'
,
' !���� •�����} q „ „- .0 `�" -'a �s ��%a
� `� �/ .„y'\ . -�o_.„ :: j: �--••— - .._S'�•.�
. ., < � 1,;el�.,r 1��'�.�.�- i � ."� .
� � �SJ :.i � .�( .' � - _ ° . � .
\ / ���� �,��� /��� - � •
� . ,y , ;. . , t_, _' ,. ..
�:� �,
� `/ z � �s�' ��
�y�+�° � /`. \'.,�� Y .� � ' . ��• �•. i . !
l /� �__ � `', /:'� //-y� ,+ t \�.(��g\,'O I 'J •.\'��i'''• .. - . . . �
� � I �� h "�r:CY M1M1 � UJ'- ��'y ~ , :� �� . .
� � \ V�% !��� • _ i� _ � �.. p � F�-� ! � / �/ \� .
� \ � / /�` . _ ` ', `j ` . � 's i \ .
` � _. � o _ 'sr. �l" �. \
/ `/ .Rr i / _ y 4' \� o=�� /i ;''�'' ��
�" �o •e f��
J,N W!%�• ,�!/; .a �' ' J'. ` � , �:T 2� . . .
P
� . : .�i . s - '` //� S9 �
. �� �� .;%I ,�. ` jl �� �:`L;' .�{ }� .
' �. �� .i � \ �.✓ py :/ ,S1 .
.. '� i� ���� � - �'- �. \ W - � \ �
/� ' �'n ���, J �\'i ' ' .
�/ � � �a �I� �' eco����- - ' f
`��q.��' _ �.�� �;
%;'N a c" +� �;S -; � ' � l ���
� j � � : ' „ � i ' �- � �-., � .
j .I}t- tyM , O , - p \� `� ' ``.
_ /�� `t,�i�'!' �J� � ,\� a �`� - _-.. _` ` ' � .
,-�N c� �' . _`
j� -.$•� � a°c_`s ,
� � _ � `: �� �Sl �4� �- \ � � ` `_
/t�� .'1!A ,� ` __. � • ,�� ���� � q _•��T .� ��
;«-
� °• 1 u� ,. `Y � , i O �p"\ Cl :
: '�t\1 i Y o �'.�}�a�� ' .t�-,. �M.o� �Y �y 35 3� vn�
�- g�, � � �
`,'' ' ����,��" •.� '•�` ��•.I a 7"M�, a'ono-3" � �'.� $i
��p`.;f.. . ,� ��•�� �1 �! � `�I
�' �� �'� � � s \ - - - �,
'�� �.:�6( � lR� -" ` �, V� -1 �
7,� �.� � � � .�
. S�� '^ \���,3�g' ..� j0 a. � . t __ . . . . .
,` a , '-- . � -. . " ��' \
_ % (�~_` \ � b 'e �. ,`�a�_` �� � �.`'- . . . . � � � . .
...-- 1:�)` �l
\�, \ j4 .a - t� ,tl, �.�\.�\,\ .�1 � d . . . . .
� � .
- � _ _ � \� e � •v� , Z '� `,�y � ,
� a ti♦ ' ` 9 . � � .
�' v ...._..... _ � , . ' c \ � � r a � � ,.n !�� ' � . .
SP
. � n 'x / --�-ti-
I i�� �"��}��� ..... �.. _ ` ' a .\-:� 1 _ P� . . . � ..
.: ' � � A� ' . �" , ,�:
. JT �.� . � ���� �\\
? � �5 v� _��' „� -- . �9 .� _ __... _ \\ \ �� ;o ,
�
-� �v'�o� - -� y. '.. "�,_ _ ' \ �,•:
� n o�T� . -'s... -�y��y-�� � ��' � �'
.. � � . �,y�� �rd
��
1 _ —J
`,� ' - �
.. ... ._
. _.. ..._. . e , r :�:o:- . . \C �
.
. , �. C+a.�! � � �y
.
' _ . . • .. .
"'........ +
: � -� . -�'�....:.-- . '. .: ' .."" �
� . ..; _- • F � RE COMNERC I AL ..:' �..
� .
. � �-. - - � AREA . . . ' ` '` , •oo rrt . .
�' l� .. _.. �� -;..: -- . . \� �t
.: •�� .. �+.
. ... •
- ..:. . . '_ � „ :.. •�._ . . . . _ { 9a6 .
_ :
`. �. ":' .:i._. :' ' .•.. . •. . : . _ :_.... . . . _ . . � � vEN� � .
,.
. .: . e
; . :: _
. . . �... .. .. .. �.:._ .... ... ... � /•r• � .. 'i .OP�
� .
. ... . �OX"/ ' ,••
. '"_'`._-. l
_. ....
,� .. .. _.: 1 . . -��-
. :
, ; �,'
- .. � ' `' _
� : ,�., . :��� . � , .: : - ,�=
.o- . . , ..
, -
_ . _
: . .
.. . _ . ..
. _�
_, A _. . . . _ -
--- � - -- �_-=- - -
. . .__ . _ _ .._ ..
. .
. -_.� - o _ --- - --- _ _ .�
_ _ —�— --.-.._ _ _ _ : — v+.- � — . _ _ _ —�_ _.r_•,�—�= .. . .
���.
CITY OF ROSEMOU NT z8�5`;TMths�tW�t
P.O.Box 510
Everything's Coming Up Rosemouni!! Rosemoo�c,nnN
55068-0510
Phone:612-4Z3-441 i
Fax:6 i 2-423-5203
Planning Commission �
Regular Meeting Minutes - November 14, 1995
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof the Regular meeting of the Planning Commission was duly
held on Tuesday, November 14, 1995 at 6;00 p.m. Chairperson McDermott called the meeting to
order with members DeBettignies, Tentinger, Ingram, and Droste present. Also in attendance
were Senior Planner Andrew Mack, Assistant Planner Rick Pearson, and Civil Engineer poug
Litterer.
The agenda was amended to include item 8A2c -Rezoning of Mickelson properry from
Agricultural to Rural Residential.
MOTION by McDermott to approve the October 10, 1995 RegularPlanning Commission
� Meeting Minutes as presented. Second by Tentinger. Ayes: DeBettignies, Tentinger,
McDermott, Ingram, Droste. Nays: 0. .
� Wensmann Sixth Addition: Lot Line Adjustment
Assistant Planner Pearson advised the Commission that a request had been made from Mr. Terry
Wensmann to relocate the boundary lines between lot 5 and 6 in the Wensmann Sixth Addition.
MOTION by Droste to recornmend to the City Council approval of the common lot line
relocation between Lot 5 and 6, Block 1 Wensmann Si�h Addition subject to: l. the lots be
replatted consistent with the relocated boundary line; and, 2. the resulting lot width of lot 6 shall .
be no less than 80 feet wide at the front yard setback line. Second by Ingram. Ayes: Tentinger,
McDermott, Ingram, Droste, DeBettignies. Nays: 0.
Zoning & Subdivision Ordinance Tezt Amendment
Assistant Planner Pearson apprised the Commission of the intent to shift public hearings from the
City Council forum to the Planning Commission for PUDs and ordinance amendments which
include rezonings. Discussion ensued by the Commission regarding the starting time and time
restraints for the regular Planning Commission meeting and for public hearings.
MOTION by DeBettignies to recommend adoption of amendments to the Zoning and
Subdivision-0rdinances to the City Council. Second by Tentinger. Ayes:McDermott, Ingram,
Droste, DeBettignies, Tentinger. Nays: 0.
� �,��,m.�,�,,�,
c«�m;M,�ao9;
a�#<onmme.nwraiaB.
,^ Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
� November 14, 1995
Page 2
International Develooment II• Shannon Meadows Addition
Mr. Jack Gassner of International Development II was present to request approval of a single
family residential development for 28 lots west of Shannon Parkway and north of 145th Street.
,
Also present was Mr. Fran Hagen from RLK Associates to answer questions regarding tlus
development.
John Hawkins, 4173 145th Street West, hoped that the development would stop the children's
foot traffic from the ponds to Shannon Parkway.
Concerns of the Commission was the access and egress of the foot traffic to, from, and through
the development. Senior Planner Andrew Mack informed the Commission that Parks and Civil
Engineering determined that a walkway wouldn't be feasible because of drainage, traffic and
pedestrian safety. The grade would preclude the construction of a trail system.
� MOTION by Droste to recommend approval of the Shannon Meadows Addition Final Planned
Unit Development and Shannon Meadows Addition Preliminary Plat subject to: 1. incorporation
of Engineering and Park Department recommendations relative to grading, utilities and park
dedication as outlined in their reviews for the Shannon Meadows Addition; 2. execution of a
Shannon Meadows Planned Unit Development and Subdivision Development Agreement to
secure public improvements, infrastructure, Geographic Information Systems(GIS) fees, and park
dedications, as well as guarantee variances; 3. rezoning of the property to R-1 Sing Family
Residential; and 4. conformance with the subdivision and zoning ordinances for PUD final
development plan review, plattings and rezoning requirements. Second by Ingram. Ayes:
Ingram, Droste, DeBettignies, Tentinger, McDermott. Nays: 0.
MOTION by Droste to recommend to City Council the rezoning of the property for the Shannon
Meadows Addition plat frorn AG Agriculture to R-1 Single Family Residential (detached).
Second by Ingram. Ayes: Droste, DeBettignies, Tentinger, McDermott, Ingram. Nays: 0.
Chairperson McDermott recessed the Regular Planning Commission Meeting and opened the
Boaxd of Appeals and Adjustment to hold a public hearing scheduled at this time.
Public Hearing• Mike Mickelson - Variance Petition
Chair McDermott opened the public hearing at 7:09 p.m. to hear public testimony regazding a
request for a variance to lot frontage on a public street requirement. The recording secretary has
�.
Regutar Planning Commission Meetiag Minutes
�; � November 14, 1995
Page 3
placed the Affidavit of Publication and Affidavits for mailing and Posting of Public Hearing
Notice on file with the City.
Assistant Planner Pearson apprised the Commission of Mr. Mickelson's request for a variance to
the requirement for lot frontage on a public street. Mr. 1l�ickelson owns approximately 16.9 acres
in numerous parcels in an Agriculture District north of the Valleywood Golf Course. Mr.
Mickelson will combine all contiguous pareels eliminating the need for variances for setback
encroachments and reduce additional needs for cross access easements. The combination of the
parcels still does not fulfill the requirement for lot frontage on a public street.
Mr. Mike M'ickelson informed the Board that he has had discussions with Valleywood Golf
Courses regarding the acquisition of land needed for a right of way but that no agreement has
been reached at this time.
7ohn Slizer, 4090 120th Street West, expressed concern over potential development to the east of
� the parcel under discussion.
Planner Peaxson advised that no development is being planned at this time.
Chairperson McDermott closed this public hearing at 7:30 p.m. and opened discussions for the
Commission.
MOTION by Ingram to grant the variance to Section 4.2 Lot Provisions of Ordinance B for the
property owned by Mike Mickelson for residential development subject : 1. combination of the
contiguous parcels currently owned Mr. Mickelson that are not currently occupied by dwellings
units; 2. provision of cross access easements or evidence of existing easements that provide access
to dwelling units dependant upon access across the property affected by the variance; 3. provision
of easements for public street purposes in accordance with current City Engineering standards up
to the property affected by the variance; and 4. rezoning the combined 19.452 acres and any
additional land to be acquired to Rural Residential. Second by Droste. Ayes; DeBettignies,
Tentinger, McDermott, Ingram, Droste. Nays: 0.
Planner Pearson advised that this motion can be appealed to City Council if so desired.
Chair McDermott closed the Board of Appeals and Adjustments and reconvened the November
14, 1995 Regulax Planning Commission Meeting at 7:42 p.m.
4 `�� MOTION by DeBettignies to recommend to City Couneil the rezoning of the Mike Mickelson's
�.
,
� Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
- ' November 14, 1995
Page 4
property from Agriculture to Rura1 Residential consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan.
Second by Tentinger. Ayes: Tentinger, McDermott, Ingram, Droste, DeBettignies. Nays: 0.
Chair McDermott recessed the Regular Planning Commission Meeting and opened the Board of
Appeals and Adjustment to hold a public hearing scheduled at this time.
Public Hearing• Adrian Zorn/Mahowald -Variance Petition
Chair McDermott opened a public hearing at 7:45 p.m. to hear public testimony regarding a
request for a variance to the setback requirement for the septic system location. The recording
secretary has place the Affidavit of Publication and Affidavits for mailing and Posting of Public
Hearing Notice on file with the City.
Planner Pearson advised the Board of the request from Zorn/Mahowald for a variance to allow
the construction of a septic system and altemative location that does not me�t the City's
�� setback criteria.for septic systems from DNR regulated lakes. The proposal exceeds the DNR
��: standard by 25 feet, but is 50 feet deficient by City standards.
Mr. Zorn was present to discuss his request for a variance to the setback requirement for a septic
system. He indicated that he intended to combine Lot 5, Hlock 1, Lan-O-Ken with the meets and
bound property he owns directly to the north. Access to the parcel would be from 132nd Court
via the current Lot 5. He indicated that there is a possible easement on this lot for the gas line to
the old Brockway Glass site.
Bernie Mahowald, builder for Mr. Zorn indicated the gas line to lie on the easterly lot line and
then into the water.
Lori Anderson, 2650 W 140th Street, expressed concern withthis septic system and the possible
effects if could have on her property.
Jerry Anderson, 2295 Bonaire Path, raised concern with the septic system and the water level of
the lake.
Chairperson McDermott closed the public hearing and opened up the floor to Board discussion.
Discussion ensued by the Board regarding the establishment of the high water levels, the
.-.
placement of the septic system, and the possibility of an easement for a gas line.
�''
_ Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
�� =� November 14, 1995
.. Page 5
MOTION by DeBettignies to table any action. Motion withdrawn.
MOTION by DeBettignies to continue public hearing to next Planning Commission meeting on
November 28, 1995 with variance petition relative to gas line easement and establishment of high
water mark. Second by Tentinger.
MOTION AMENDED to include the establishment of a high water maxk by DNR validation.
Vote on amended motion. Ayes: McDermott, Ingram, Droste, DeBettignies, Tentinger. Nays:
0.
Chair McDermott closed the Board of Appeals and Adjustments at 8:45 p.m.
Chair McDermott reconvened the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of Navember 14, 1995
at 8:50 p.m.
� CMC Heartland Partners: Eastbridge Townhouse/Commercial Develo�ment
Mr. Glen Sexton of CMC Heartland Partners I, and NIr. Reed Hansoq legal council for CMC
Heartland were in attendance to request approval of the final development plan for the Eastbridge
Townhome PUD.
Assistant Planner Peazson apprised the Commission of the request from CMC Heartland to
approve the final development plan for the Eastbridge Townhome PUD. Pearson indicated there
would be a cash payment in lieu of land for park dedication, the cul-de-sac would be required to
have a temporary turn-axound if it would not be built as a through street in the initial phase.
Maxk Mooney, Plant Manager for Grief Bros, has numerous concems-the increase traffic across
the railroad tracks with children going to school, safety concerns for Griefl s loading area, the
increase of train traffic as indicated by the Zoo Line, some kind of fencing as a deterrent to site,
financing of the moving of the railroad spur, railroad tracks dangerous to housing, the railroad
track is the life line to Crreif Bros., and felt that a bridge would be a good idea for pedestrian
traffic.
Commissioner Tentinger voiced concern with faot traffic over the railroad tracks. Tentinger
commented on an overhead walkway. Discussion by the Commissioners ensued regarding the
relocation of the rail spur. .
Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
� . November 14, 1995
� Page 6
MOTION by Tentinger to recommend approval of the Eastbridge Townhomes PUD final
development plan an d preliminary plat as revised to the City Council subject to: 1. incorporation
of Engineering and Park Department recommendations relative to grading, public and private
improvements, utilities and park dedication as outlined in their attached memos; 2. approval of the
Dakota County Plat Commission; 3. relocation of the rail spur consistent with the design of the
site plan dated 10/27/95 prior to approval of final plat; 4. execution of a planned unit development
agreement which secures public and private improvements as well a homeowners association
which has the perpetual maintenance responsibilities of all outlots and open space; 5. dedication of
an easement at the northwest corner of CSAH 42 and proposed Bridgewater Parkway to the City
for construction of a commercial center entryway monument sign prior to approval of a site plan
for commercial development; 6, provision of a cross-access circulation easement with Lot 15,
Auditor's Subdivision No. 1 (quonset hut site)prior to approval of a site plan for commercial
development; 7. conformance with the subdivision and zoning ordinances for final plat approval
and rezoning; and 8. conformance with all building and fire codes including provision of
temporary cul-de-sac for any dead-end street. Second by Droste. Ayes: Ingram, Droste,
�` , DeBettignies, Tentinger, McDermott. Nays: 0.
� ,
.�.;�
..:�
MOTION by Tentinger to recommend to the City Council an indefinite tabling of the rezoning
from IP Industrial Paxk to R-2 Single Family Attached Residential and C-4 General Commercial
until approval of final plat, subject to submission of a written request by the developers. Second
by Droste. Ayes: Droste, DeBettignies, Tentinger, McDermott, Ingram. Nays: 0.
MOTION by McDermott to adjourn. Second by Droste. There being no further business to
come before this Commission and upon unanimous decision this meeting was adjourned at 10:15
p.m.
Respecctfully submitted,
Maryann Stoffel
Recording Secretary
��
i
HANSEN,MCCANN & O'CONNOR,P.A.
A PROFFSSIONAL ASSOC(ATION
ATTORNEYS AT LA W
DAKOTA CENTRAL OFFICES
, 11450 SOtJ[H ROBERT 7'RAIL
ROSEMOUNT.MINNESOTA 55063
REID J.NANSEN 7'ELEPHONE:(612y 423.1155
MICHAEL C.MeCANN FAXc(612)423-113T
RICHARD L.O'CONNOR
December 1, 1995
E.B. McMenomy. Mayor Cathy Busho
15872 Chipendale Avenue W. 12605 S. Robert Trail
Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 Rosemount, Minnesota 55068
Joan M. Ar.derson James "Red" Staats
2295 Bonaire Path 2685 128th Street W.
Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 Rosemount, Minnesota 55068
Dennis Wipperman
12538 Danbury Way
Rosemount, Minnesota 55068
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
I write as attorney for CMC Heartland Partners and with
respect to the Eastbridge Townhome Planned Unit Development. As
perhaps you are aware, the final approval for the Eastbridge
Townhome Planned Unit Development is scheduled for your
consideration on Tuesday, December 5, 1995. On November 4, 1995
the Rosemount Planning Commission gave its final approval to the
Eastbridge Townhome Planned Unit Development subject to several
conditions. I write to address two of the conditions which CMC
Heartland Partners believes merit further consideration and
revision.
First, condition (3) of the Planning Commission approval
, requires "relocation of the rail spur consistent with the design of
the site plan dated 10/27/95 prior to approval of the final plat". �
As perhaps you may recall, similar language was considered at the
Rosemount City Council meeting on June 21, 1994 when the Eastbridge
(single family) Planned Unit Development was approved. At that
time the Rosemount City Council did not believe it necessary to
delay commencement of the Eastbridge housing project for the time
period ensuing between the execution of an agreement for the spur
line relocation and the actual, physical spur line relocation.
Now, as then, we believe that it makes eminent sense to allow
construction to commence on the Eastbridge Townhome Planned Unit
Development as well as the Eastbridge (single family) Planned Unit
Development once an enforceable agreement for the relocation of the
spur line is reached with CP Rail. Accordingly, we recommend that
condition (3) be revised to provide as follows: "prior to approval
of final plat, execution of agreement with CP Rail (Soo Line)
providing for the relocation of the rail spur consistent with the
design of the site plan dated 10/27/95".
i
,
December 1, 1995
Page Two
Second, condition (6) of the Rosemount Planning Commission
action requires "provision of a cross-access circulation easement
with Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision No. l (quonset hut site) prior
to approval of a site plan for commercial development". We find
this condition objectionable and unreasonable for the reasons
hereinafter discussed.
Initially, we have reservations about the constitutionality of
exaction of an easement for the private benefit of the owner of the
quonset hut site. The quonset hut site is currently owned by the
railroad and has the benefit not only of railroad access, but
access to both State Highway 3 and Dakota County FIighway 42. It is
the understanding of CMC (and I believe that of the Rosemount City
Staff also) that the quonset hut site presently has legal access on
both State Highway 3 and Dakota County Highway 42 . Neither the
State of Minnesota nor Dakota County have seen fit to condemn the
quonset hut site's access to the roads under their jurisdiction.
To require CMC to provide an access easement over its coinmercial �
lot bears no reasonable relation to CMC's development and does not
meet either the constitutional analyses of the Minnesota� Supreme
Court in Co11is v. City of Bloomington, 246 N.W. 2d 19 (1976) nor
the United States Supreme Court in Nollan v. California Coastal
Commission 483 V.S. 825, 107 S. Ct. 341, (1987) and Dolan v. Tictard
114 Sup. Ct. 2309 (1994) .
Also, as you may recall, CMC has reservations about the
viability of the development of Outlot C commercially. If the land
were to ultimately develop residentially, the access easement would
be devastating to the neighborhood. If the land does develop
, commercially, CMC knows, as one would only expect, that it will be
very difficult to find any tenants of desirable quality to occupy
a commercial center if an access easement provides for the
continual and constant traversing of the commercial center by a
trucking operation such as presently exists on the quonset hut '
site.
Frankly, it would be most appropriate to revisit the issue of
providing access at the time that CMC would develop its lot
commercially. There is absolutely no benefit to requiring the
access easement for the site with its current structures and use.
If, in the opinion of Rosemount's legal counsel, the city has more
leverage in connection with the granting of a PUD to exaet an
easement of this nature, CMC has no objection to agreeing to
proceed with the commercial development of Outlot C through a PUD
procedure. Accordingly, we request that condition (6) be amended
to read as follows: "If requested by the City of Rosemount,
developer will proceed with the development of the commercial
outlot utilizing Rosemount's Planned Unit Development process".
December 1, 1995
Page Three
Glen Sexton or I would enjoy meeting with you prior to the
City Council meeting to discuss issues raised by this letter (or
any other issues you may have with respect to the Eastbridge
Townhome Planned Unit Development) . If you have any questions or
concerns, please do not hesitate to contact either Glen Sexton
(312-294-0440) or myself at (423-1155) at your convenience. Thank ,
you for your time and consideration of our request.
Very truly urs,
FOR T FIRM �
. �---��-
Reid . �Ha en
RJH:czp
Enclosure