The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About5.a. Request by John Green Partnership EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Planning Commission Meeting: January 22, 2018 Tentative City Council Meeting: February 19, 2018 AGENDA ITEM: 19-3-CUP & 19-4-SP: Request by John Green Partnership, LLC. for a Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit to Construct a Multi-Tenant Commercial Building with a Drive Through Facility. AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing PREPARED BY: Anthony Nemcek, Planning AGENDA NO. 5.a. ATTACHMENTS: Site Location Map, Site Plan, Traffic Circulation, Landscape Plan, Building Elevations, Engineer’s Memo dated January 22, 2019. APPROVED BY: KL RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the Site Plan, with variance for south parking setback, for John Green Partnership, LLC., subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall install rooftop mechanical equipment so that the parapet wall shields the equipment from public view consistent with ordinance standards. 2. The applicant shall provide site photometrics prior to building permit issuance. 3. The applicant shall provide light fixture cut sheets to ensure that are a cut-off style of lighting prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. Non-essential lighting shall be turned off after business hours. 5. Final approval of building elevations that are consistent with Section 11-4-14-G-1 of the zoning ordinance relating to architectural appearance prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. Compliance with all conditions within the Engineer’s Memo dated January 22, 2019 prior to issuance of a building permit. Motion to recommend that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit for the Drive-Through Facility for John Green Partnership, LLC., subject to the following conditions: 1. Public address systems and ordering speakers shall not be audible at the property lines. 2. The text on the menu board shall not be so large as to be visible from the public right-of-way or to serve as off-site advertising. 3. Size and design of menu boards shall conform to condition seven (7) of the drive- through facility conditional use permit standards. 2 SUMMARY John Green Partnership has submitted a request for a site plan review and conditional use permit for the former site of Hong Kong Bistro. A site plan and conditional use permit were approved in 2017 to construct a commercial building for three tenants and a drive-through facility. Because the conditional use was not established within one year, the CUP is null and void and a new request must be made. The site plan is similar to that which was previously approved, however there are some minor modifications. Changes to the traffic circulation are perhaps the most obvious difference from the previous plan. Additionally, the applicant is proposing two restaurant uses and one retail/service use while the previous plan showed a single restaurant and two retail/service tenants. Site plan reviews are required for all developments in the Commercial and Industrial zoning districts and drive-through facilities are conditional uses in the C4-General Commercial zoning district. Staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit (CUP) and site plan with conditions. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant/Property Owner: John Green Partnership, LLC. Property Location: 15065 Canada Avenue Size of Property: 0.93 Acres Comprehensive Plan Designation: CC Community Commercial Zoning: C4-General Commercial Current Neighboring Land Uses: North – Low Density Residential; East, South, and West – Community Commercial Planned Neighboring Land Uses: North – Low Density Residential; East, South, and West – Community Commercial Following the approval of a Site Plan and CUP in 2017 the site was cleared and prepared for redevelopment. The developer is proposing construction of a 5,872 square foot structure on the vacant lot. The new building will contain three tenant bays situated east to west with entrances along the south elevation. The outer bays may contain fast casual restaurants while the middle bay will contain space for a retail service tenant. Currently the site has two driveway accesses to the internal private roadway within the larger shopping center area. The previous plan reduced that to a single access. With this request, the applicant is proposing that the current number of accesses be maintained. SITE PLAN REVIEW Setbacks Frontage Required Setback Provided Setback Building Parking Building Parking North (CSAH 42) 30 feet 20 feet 40 feet 20 feet East (McDonald’s) 10 feet 10 Feet 23 feet 10 feet South (Private Dr) 10 feet 10 feet 178 feet 4 feet West (Arby’s) 10 feet 10 feet 23 feet 10 feet The proposed development meets the east and west setback requirements. The site is currently nonconforming with regard to the northern parking setback, and City Code allows for nonconformities to be continued through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance or improvement but not through expansion. With that understanding, the site can maintain the existing setback from County Road 42 under the new project. The proposed parking lot is only four feet from the southern property line, which is a change from the pre-existing condition and the previously approved project. Because there is an actual 3 setback of between sixteen and twenty-two feet from the private road along the south and this setback is much greater than elsewhere within the shopping center, staff feels the site plan meets the intention of the zoning ordinance. Visually, there will be a greater island than what is occurring in the main mall parking lot. Additionally, the area functions more like a PUD where access is through a separate private drive rather than public right of way, and internal property lines are to facilitate individual ownership, even though the area functions as one retail Center. With this understanding, that the reason for a setback is separation and ability to landscape, and the site plan allows that to occur in a less conventional way, staff is supporting a south parking setback variance. Traffic Circulation The configuration of the site features a separate entrance and exit. The two accesses will remain, with the western access shifted slightly east to align with the driveway to the south. The accesses will function as both entrances and exits, and access to the site will continue to be reached via a private internal driveway within the shopping center. Parking The City Code requires 51 parking spaces. Specifically, the Code requires one stall per 3 seats for restaurants and 6 spaces per 1,000 square feet for retail sales and services. The retail bay is 1,922 square feet, which means that space requires 12 parking stalls. The larger of the two restaurants is expected to have 55 seats internally and 24 seats on the patio. This equates to a need of 27 parking stalls. The smaller restaurant on the eastern side of the building is expected to have 35 seats and require 11 parking stalls. The site plan meets the parking requirements of the zoning ordinance. Establishment Seats/Area Parking Ratio Requirement Restaurant (west) 79 seats 1 stall per 3 seats 27 stalls Retail Sales/Service 1,922 square feet 6 stalls per 1,000 sf 12 stalls Restaurant (east) 35 seats 1 stall per 3 seats 12 stalls Total 51 stalls Parking Stalls Provided: 51 parking stalls Exterior Building Materials and Massing Plans provided by the applicant depict exterior surfaces of 60% brick and 30% decorative metal siding. No stucco or EIFS is proposed. Metal banding will be used to separate the lower brick from the upper metal and also as a cornice atop the walls. The brick portion of the elevation is capped by a corbel of bricks in a basket weave patterns. Due to the relatively smaller size of the building, no additional articulation of the exterior walls is required. The exterior treatment extends 360 degrees around the entire building. Staff wants to understand the materials better and has recommended a condition of approval requiring consistency with ordinance exterior materials standards. Trash Enclosure A trash enclosure six feet in height will be constructed at the east side of the parking lot near the entrance to the drive-through. The enclosure will be constructed of materials that match the façade, and it will feature a wooden gate. Landscaping The proposed project is a redevelopment of an existing site. Most of the existing trees located along the perimeter will be preserved. Two trees have been removed from the area between the existing access points during site preparation, and the applicant is proposing removal of one additional tree in the southeast corner of the site. Five trees will be planted in and around the new parking lot resulting in a net gain of 2 trees. Foundation plantings are required at a rate of one planting per ten (10) feet of the perimeter of the 4 building. It is not unusual to have the perimeter plantings placed on the edge of the developed areas to have it more visible to patrons and the passing public. The McDonald’s next door to the site is an example. The total perimeter of the building is 298 feet, which amounts to a requirement of 30 foundation plantings. Thirty-nine shrubs and foundation plants are indicated on the landscape plan along the northern property line, an additional six plants will be located along the western property line where the drive-through window will be located, and three shrubs are shown next to the trash enclosure to offer some screening from the property to the east. The landscape goals are twofold. One is to provide a pleasing front to County Road 42 which has high traffic visibility and the second is to screen the drive aisle associated with the drive through. Lighting Wall mounted lights are shown on the building elevations, but the applicant has not shown how the parking lot lighting will be addressed. Staff has recommended that the applicant submit a lighting plan that complies with the City Code and that all non-essential lighting is turned off after business hours. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Legal Authority Conditional use permits (CUP) are considered quasi-judicial actions. In such cases, the City is acting as a judge to determine if the regulations within the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance are being followed. Generally, if the application meets these requirements it must be approved. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. Finding: The Drive-Through will not change any traffic patterns exterior to the site. Screening will be provided to minimize impacts to traffic on 42 from headlights. Will be harmonious with the objectives of the c omprehensive plan and city code provisions. Finding: The use and location are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies. The applicant is not seeking any variances or deviations from the City Code provisions to accommodate the drive-through. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible or similar in an architectural and landscape appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Finding: The area is guided for Community Commercial uses. The site itself is surrounded by restaurants, a number of which feature drive through facilities, and retail. The proposed redevelopment is consistent with existing and planned uses. Will be served adequately by existing (or those proposed in the project) essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage, structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools. Finding: The site will continue to be served by the existing services including storm water removal. The project will not require any new public services or utilities. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, material equipment, and conditions of operation that will be hazardous or detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. 5 Finding: The proposed redevelopment will likely be less detrimental compared to the previous use due to the fact that updated mechanical equipment will be installed with this project. Will have vehicular ingress and egress to the property which does not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic on surrounding public streets. Finding: Access to the site will remain in roughly the same location, except both of the access points will allow ingress and egress where they were previously an entrance and an exit. Traffic patterns should remain similar to what they are currently. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance and will comply with all local, state, and federal environmental quality standards. Finding: The proposed project is a redevelopment of an existing commercial use. The project will have little to no environmental impact, nor will it result in the destruction, loss, or damage of any natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance. T hese standards apply in addition to specific conditions as may be applied throughout this code. Finding: According to Section 11-4-14: D, drive through facilities must meet the following conditions: 1. The site and building(s) shall be designed to limit the effects of the drive -through on adjacent properties and public rights of way. No use with a drive-through window shall be located abutting any residential use or district. Finding: The drive-through lanes turn cars west toward Arby’s/Chipotle when ordering and the pickup window faces west and is not visible from any public right-of-way. 2. Drive -through facilities shall have a minimum six (6) stacking spaces per drive-through window. Fast food uses operating more than one window per individual drive aisle shall meet the stacking requirements for a single drive-through facility. Each space shall be a minimum of nine feet (9') wide by eighteen feet (18') long. Finding: The plans provided by the applicant indicate at least seven stacking spaces that are 20’ long and 14’ wide, which exceeds the dimensional requirements of the City Code. 3. The principal building shall be the primary source for screening the drive-through facility and stacking and exiting areas from adjacent properties and/or rights of way. Landscaping and berming shall be a secondary source for screening drive-through, stacking or exiting areas. Should landscaping and berming be found ineffective by the city, the city may approve screening walls and/or decorative fencing as an alternative. Screening walls shall be constructed of the same materials as the principal building and shall not extend more than twenty five feet (25') without a change in architecture to reduce their mass and appearance. Stacking areas shall have a minimum ninety percent (90%) opacity screen to a height of six feet (6') while exiting areas shall have a minimum fifty percent (50%) opacity screen to a height of at least four feet (4'). Finding: The building itself screens the drive-through window from public right of ways. Additional screening is provided by landscaping along the north and west property lines. 4. Stacking lanes, order board intercom, and service window shall be designed and located to minimize noises, emissions, and headlight glare upon adjacent properties and public rights of way. 6 Finding: The stacking lanes, order board intercom, and drive-through windows are configured to limit their impact on adjacent properties and public rights-of-way. 5. Stacking lanes shall not interfere with circulation through any required parking, loading, maneuvering or pedestrian area. Finding: The stacking lanes of the drive through are located along the eastern side of the building. Parking for the site is located south of the building, and therefore there is no interference between drive through stacking and the parking area. 6. No public address system shall be audible from a noncommercial or nonindustrial use or district. Finding: Staff has prepared a condition stating that public address or ordering speakers shall not be audible from the property lines. 7. In addition to the freestanding sign allowed by the sign ordinance, fast food uses may display menu signs related to drive-through facilities, provided that: a. Not more than one menu sign per defined drive-through aisle is allowed. b. Individual menu signs shall be single sided with an area not to exceed thirty -two (32) square feet including both menu information and sign cabinet. c. The height of the menu sign(s) shall not exceed eight feet (8') including its base or pole measured from grade to the top of the structure. d. The menu sign(s) shall not encroach into any parking setback and shall be located directly adjacent to the drive-through aisle and oriented in such a manner that the sign provides information to the drive-through patrons only and does not provide supplemental advertising to pass-by traffic and does not impair visibility or obstruct circulation. Finding: The actual design of the menu boards has not been provided. Staff has prepared a condition that requires conformance with the above menu board standards. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Site Plan Review with the prepared conditions. Additionally, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit for the drive-through facility. MEMORANDUM To: Anthony Nemcek, Planner CC: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director Stacy Bodsberg, Planning & Personnel Secretary Brian Erickson, Director of Public Works/City Engineer From: Stephanie Smith, Assistant City Engineer Date: January 22, 2019 Subject: 15065 Canada Ave Site Plan - Engineering Review SUBMITTAL: The plans for 15065 Canada Ave Site Plan have been prepared by Cedar Corporation dated December, 2018. Engineering review comments were generated from the following documents included in the submittal: ▫ Existing Conditions ▫ Site Plan ▫ Erosion Control Plan ▫ Grading and Drainage Plan ▫ Utility Plan ▫ Stormwater Management Plan Sheets ▫ Auto-Turn Figures ▫ Notes, Details and Specifications GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. The applicant shall submit civil plans signed by a licensed engineer in the state of Minnesota. RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENTS: 2. The survey shall be updated to include all easements on the property based on a recent title commitment. If a trail easement has not been granted over the public trail on the northeast corner of the property, the applicant shall grant an easement. 3. An approximately 62.5-foot long, three-foot high retaining wall is proposed on the north of the property between the drive-thru and the CSAH 42 trail. This retaining wall shall be moved outside the Drainage and Utility Easement. GRADING AND DRAINAGE 4. The plans shall be revised to use the City’s standard detail plates for erosion control Best Management Practices. STREETS AND PARKING LOTS The property currently has two accesses off a private driveway shared by the surrounding retail properties to provide circulation. The western access will be shifted to align with the driveway to the property on the south side of the private drive. A drive-thru circles the building to provide service from the eastern restaurant. 5. As there is no escape lane from the drive-thru, signage or pavement markings is required to clearly indicate that the back of the lot is a drive-thru lane. 6. The applicant shall submit a plan sheet confirming adequate stacking capacity. UTILITIES This project proposal does not include public infrastructure improvements. The privately-owned watermain, sanitary sewer and storm sewer will tie into public systems. 7. All connections to public utilities shall be inspected by City staff and shall be performed in accordance with the current edition of the Rosemount Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. WSB Engineering reviewed the stormwater submittal on behalf of the City. The full memorandum, dated January 16, 2019, is included as an attachment. The recommendations are summarized below: Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Comments: Water quality and stormwater management was not reviewed for part of this submittal as the site is less than 1 acre. A. Sheet C3 indicates that the site area to be 40,608 square feet or 0.93 acres. The runoff maps show only 0.87 acres, please revise or provide where the additional 0.05 acres is draining to. B. Provide detail plates for connection to existing storm sewer, watermain, and sanitary. C. A note about street sweeping must be included on the erosion control plan. D. Inlet protection icons need to be adjusted for the southern two CBs on the erosion control plan. Include legend or labels for SWPPP BMPs on erosion control plan. Stormwater Management Plan: The runoff map indicates total flow from the site using the rational method. Calculations show matching the rates between the existing and proposed conditions; however, change in impervious was not reflected in pre/post runoff coefficient. No SCS method calculations were provided to show pervious, impervious, and time in concentration changes between existing and proposed conditions. Given the small increase in impervious, additional hydraulic analysis has not been requested for this project. E. Two inlets are labeled as #4. Please revise. F. The plan calls for 12-inch PVC storm sewer. Per engineering guidelines minimum pipe size is 15-inch. All storm within public ROW shall be RCP. G. Indicate method of connection into existing structures. Any connections to existing manholes or catch basins shall be core drilled or the opening cut out with a concrete saw. No jack hammering or breaking the structure with a sledge hammer or mallet is permitted. H. No storm sewer sizing calculations were provided. Only annotative capacities were shown on the runoff plans. Our preliminary analysis shows that 15-inch storm sewer will meet the design capacity requirements. Should you have any questions or comments regarding the items listed above, please contact me at 651-322-2015. ATTACHMENTS: 1. WSB Memorandum K:\011547-000\Admin\Docs\15065 Canada Ave\MEMO - Plan Review Comment.docx 701 XENIA AVENUE S | SUITE 300 | MINNEAPOLIS, MN | 55416 | 763.541.4800 | WSBENG.COM Memorandum To: Stephanie Smith, City of Rosemount From: Bill Alms, PE Laura Cummings Date: January 16, 2019 Re: Proposed Restaurant and Retail Development Construction Plan Review WSB Project No. 011547-000 I have reviewed the documents provided by Cedar Corporation, on December 19, 2018 for Proposed Restaurant and Retail Development. Documents reviewed include: • Proposed Restaurant and Retail Development Construction Plans (12/19/2018) • Pre-Development Runoff Map (12/19/2018) • Post Development Runoff Map (12/19/2018) Based on my review of the plan I offer the following comments for your consideration. Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Comments: 1. General a. Water quality and stormwater management was not reviewed for part of this submittal as the site is less than 1 acre. b. Sheet C3 indicates that the site area to be 40,608 square feet or 0.93 acres. The runoff maps show only 0.87 acres, please revise or provide where the additional 0.05 acres is draining to. c. Provide detail plates for connection to existing storm sewer, watermain, and sanitary. d. Submit signed plans. 2. Ponds and Wetlands a. N/A 3. Emergency Overflow Routes: a. N/A 4. Retaining Walls: a. N/A 5. Erosion Control: a. A note about street sweeping must be included on the erosion control plan. b. Inlet protection icons need to be adjusted for the southern two CBs on the erosion control plan. Include legend or labels for SWPPP BMPs on erosion control plan. Stephanie Smith 01/16/2019 Page 2 K:\011547-000\Admin\Docs\15065 Canada Ave\MEMO - Plan Review Comment.docx Stormwater Management Plan: 1. General Storm Sewer Design a. Two inlets are labeled as #4. Please revise. b. The plan calls for 12-inch PVC storm sewer. Per engineering guidelines minimum pipe size is 15-inch. All storm within public ROW shall be RCP. c. Indicate method of connection into existing structures. Any connections to existing manholes or catch basins shall be core drilled or the opening cut out with a concrete saw. No jack hammering or breaking the structure with a sledge hammer or mallet is permitted. d. No storm sewer sizing calculations were provided. Only annotative capacities were shown on the runoff plans. Our preliminary analysis shows that 15-inch storm sewer will meet the design capacity requirements. 2. Water Quantity a. N/A 3. Rate/Volume Control a. The runoff map indicates total flow from the site using the rational method. Calculations show matching the rates between the existing and proposed conditions; however, change in impervious was not reflected in pre/post runoff coefficient. b. No SCS method calculations were provided to show pervious, impervious, and time in concentration changes between existing and proposed conditions. Given the small increase in impervious, additional hydraulic analysis has not been requested for this project. 4. Freeboard a. N/A 5. Water Quality a. N/A 6. Easements a. N/A