HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.a. Request by CNC Development IV, LLC., for Planned Unit Development Master Development Plan with Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Approval to develop 151 single-family lots - Atta
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council Regular Meeting: May 19, 2020
AGENDA ITEM: Request by CNC Development IV, LLC.,
for Planned Unit Development Master
Development Plan with Rezoning,
Preliminary Plat, and Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment Approval to
develop 151 single-family lots
AGENDA SECTION:
New Business
PREPARED BY: Anthony Nemcek, Planner AGENDA NO. 9.a.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolutions; Ordinance; Emerald Isle
Planned Unit Development Agreement;
Excerpt from the February 26, 2020,
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes;
Site Location; Existing Conditions; Site
Plan; Comprehensive Plan Amendment;
Preliminary Plat; Phasing Plan; Erosion
Control Plan; Grading and Drainage Plan;
Utility Plan; Landscape Plan; Tree
Preservation Plan; Engineer’s Memo
dated February 26, 2020; Parks and
Recreation Memo Dated February 18,
2020
APPROVED BY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION: There are five actions the City Council must take to approve
the project.
1. Motion to Adopt a Resolution approving a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment
to reguide 20 acres of the development site from MDR-Medium Density Residential
to LDR-Low Density Residential and the southeast 10 acres of the site from CC-
Community Commercial to HDR-High Density Residential.
2. Motion to Adopt a Resolution approving the Preliminary Plat for Emerald Isle,
subject to conditions.
3. Motion to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance B City of Rosemount Zoning
Ordinance for Emerald Isle to rezone the site from AG-Agriculture to R1 PUD-Low
Density Residential Planned Unit Development and R4 PUD-High Density
Residential Planned Unit Development
4. Motion to Adopt a Resolution approving the Planned Unit Development Master
Development Plan for Emerald Isle, subject to conditions.
5. Motion to Approve the Planned Unit Development Master Development Plan
Agreement for Emerald Isle and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the
agreement.
SUMMARY
The City received a request from CNC Development for approval of a Planned Unit Development Master
Development Plan with Rezoning to develop 151 single-family lots. Because the southern half of the site
2
is guided for Medium Density Residential and Community Commercial, the applicant is also requesting an
amendment to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan to reguide the northern sixty acres of the site to LDR
Low Density Residential and the 10 acres in the southeastern corner of the site to HDR-High Density
Residential to accommodate the future development of an approximate 120-unit apartment building. The
dividing line between the two residential uses is the Connemara Trail road alignment. Finally, the applicant
is requesting preliminary plat approval for the 151 single-family lots and an outlot over the future
apartment building site. A concept plan for that portion of the development is included, but formal site
and building plan approval is required prior to construction on the outlot. Staff and the Planning
Commission recommend approval of the requests.
Owners: Margaret Eustice
Residential Developers: CNC Development IV, LLC.
Preliminary Plat Acres: 70.07
Met Council Net Acres: 70.07
Residential Lots Created: 151 lots
Gross Density: 2.52 Units/Acre (single family 151/60 acres)
Net Density: 2.52 Units/Acre
Comprehensive Plan Guiding: LDR-Low Density Residential, MDR-Medium Density Residential, CC-
Community Commercial
Requested Guiding: LDR-Low Density Residential and HDR-High Density Residential
Current Zoning: AG-Agriculture
Requested Zoning: R1 PUD-Low Density Residential Planned Unit Development and R4
PUD- High Density Residential Planned Unit Development
Surrounding Land Uses
North: Low Density Residential
East: Agriculture
South: Public/Institutional
West: Medium Density Residential
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Planning Commission reviewed the request at its regular meeting on February 26, 2020. The
Commission held a public hearing to receive comments, and no residents spoke regarding the proposal.
The Planning Commission expressed concern about reducing the amount of land that is designated as
commercial, but acknowledged that the site is not ideal and unlikely to develop as a commercial use. One
reason is that Flint Hills Resources has purchased the right of first refusal for the parcel east of the site.
Additionally, the Planning Commission discussed traffic on Connemara and asked about pedestrian
connections to the commercial area designated at Akron Avenue. It was noted the property immediately to
the west of the site, currently owned by DCTC, could be reguided to commercial in the future to expand
the Akron east commercial area. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of
the development.
BACKGROUND
The subject parcel is currently used for agricultural purposes. The 70-acre parcel has been guided for a
combination of Community Commercial in the southeastern ten acres, Low Density Residential in the
northern forty acres and Medium Density Residential between the two (20 acres). The applicant is
requesting that the site be reguided for Low Density Residential in the northern sixty acres and High
Density Residential in the southeast ten acres. The proposed reguiding removes the commercial land use
designation from the site. Staff is supportive of the reguiding since the city’s primary focus for commercial
activity has been at the intersection of Akron and County Road 42. Additional land for commercial has
been identified at several locations in the UMore area which are located at higher volume traffic
intersections. The presence of the DCTC site between the commercial property and the current site also
makes development as commercial more difficult. As the Commission is aware, Flint Hills Refinery owns
3
much of the land immediately east of the subject property meaning that the ability to develop at urban
densities is questionable. The potential ownership by FHR for buffer space also makes development as
commercial more difficult. The Commission during their discussions felt there were better sites in the
community for future commercial development than the 10-acres which is part of the project. The newly
adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates approximately 940 acres of commercial land with about
20% currently developed. The addition of a High Density Residential use within the site also fits the policy
goal in the Comprehensive Plan to allow for greater diversity in housing types within Rosemount. The
concept of high density residential in the vicinity of Dakota County Technical College has been discussed
for quite some time.
The proposed amendment wasn’t included in the 2040 update to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan
because it was unknown what the timing of the proposed submission would be. Because staff had spoken
with the applicant about the site, staff made the Council aware of the potential for a request to reguide the
property. Staff also discussed amending the Comprehensive Plan with the Planning Commission at one of
its work sessions. While the Planning Commission was hesitant to support a reduction in land guided for
commercial uses, there was an acknowledgment that ultimately development is driven by the market and
that there is still more favorable undeveloped commercial land nearby at Akron and 42.
The high density development in the southern portion of the site is shown in concept form on the plans
submitted by the applicant. A full review of any development on that site will come before the Planning
Commission at a public hearing and City Council for final approval. The owner of the pipeline running
through the property is in the process of abandoning the line. If the easement is also abandoned or shifted
closer to the parcel boundaries, the ultimate layout of the apartment building site will likely change.
ISSUE ANALYSIS
Legal Authority . Amendments to the City Comprehensive Plan and approval of Planned Unit
Development Master Development Plans are legislative decisions because the City is formulating public
policy. The City may amend the Comprehensive Plan after a public hearing before the Planning
Commission and a two-thirds majority vote by the City Council. These applications also require
notification to the surrounding communities and approval by the Metropolitan Council.
Preliminary plat approvals, as well as rezonings, are quasi-judicial decisions for the City meaning that 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 these applications meet the City’s established
requirements they must be approved. Staff review of each application is provided below.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
The 70-acre site is currently guided for three different uses. The northern forty acres of the site is
currently guided LDR-Low Density Residential, and the twenty acres south of that portion of the site is
currently guided MDR-Medium Density Residential. The applicant is proposing to amend the
comprehensive land use plan to reguide the Medium Density Residential portion of the site to LDR-Low
Density Residential. The overall development site also includes a 10-acre section along County Road 42,
east of DCTC landholdings (former city hall site), that is currently guided for CC-Community Commercial.
The applicant is proposing that this portion of the site be reguided to HDR-High Density Residential.
The proposed reguiding results in an increase in the overall maximum density for the development site.
As it is currently guided, the 70-acre site can accommodate a density of 6.86 dwelling units per acre. The
reguiding would result in a maximum density of 9.43 dwelling units per acre. Staff is supportive of
reguiding the Community Commercial portion of the site for several reasons. The first reason being that
the market has been slow to develop commercial east of Highway 3, and the other existing commercial
areas at Akron and 42 will remain available for commercial development. Additional land is being
allocated for commercial use with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan update, in higher quality locations like the
southwest quadrant of Akron Avenue and County Road 42 and the corner of 145th and County Road 42.
4
These locations are more visible, have higher adjacent traffic counts and are sited near traffic signals,
which are all more desirable to future commercial users. The second reason staff support the request is
that Flint Hills has purchased the right of first refusal on the land immediately east of the subject property.
Although there have been discussions about swapping development of that property with another site
further to the east, there is still very little residential development opportunities east of the site and west of
Hwy 52. With little development likely east of the site, the subject parcel is even less likely to develop as a
commercial use in the foreseeable future. The presence of the DCTC site makes a continuous commercial
corridor less likely and less desirable. It is staff’s belief that additional residential development on the
subject property will spur development of commercial uses at the intersection of Akron Avenue and 42.
The figure below shows the proposed changes.
When evaluating a Comprehensive Plan amendment request, the Council should consider whether or not
there are existing goals and policies in place that support the request. Below, staff has highlighted a
number of Comprehensive Plan goals and policies that support guiding the southern ten acres of the site
to High Density Residential and removing the Medium Density Residential guidance from the northern
portion of the site.
Executive Summary: Ten Guiding Principles
2. Preserve existing rural residential areas designated in the Comprehensive Plan and increase housing
opportunities in the community to attain a balance of life cycle housing options, with special attention to
changing community demographics and demands of increasing senior and millennium populations.
Staff response: Apartment units provide a housing choice that is appealing to residents not needing large larger housing
units (or prefer a smaller amount of space) or may find it difficult to take care of a single-family home and associated yard.
Apartments provide options to family units that do not want to invest long-term into their home or may not be able to afford
purchase of a single-family home at this time. While there have been recent apartment buildings approved, the pace of multi-
family construction in the City has not kept pace with single-family construction over the past decade and more.
3. Promote commercial renewal and rehabilitation in Downtown and along Highway 42 while attracting
new commercial development along County Highway 42 at key intersections: Highway 3, Akron Avenue,
and US Highway 52.
Staff Response: The land currently guided Community Commercial is located approximately 2,000 feet east of Akron
Avenue. Reguiding that land from commercial to high density residential will consolidate commercial development at Akron
5
Avenue and County Road 42, especially when considering that land in the southwest quadrant of that intersection has been
guided for commercial uses with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan update. Construction of additional residential and future high
density residential will continue to add rooftops drawing more commercial interest at Akron Avenue and the community at
large.
Housing: Goals and Policies
4. Provide a mixture of rental and home ownership opportunities to provide life cycle housing.
Staff Response: The proposed amendment would allow for a mix of for sale and rental units that will help meet the needs of
Rosemount residents at various ages, from recent college graduates, to young families, to seniors.
5. Locate different housing styles within the appropriate areas.
B. Disperse high density residential in appropriate areas throughout the community to avoid entire
neighborhoods of high density residential.
Staff Response: There are currently no other high density residential developments in this part of the City, and the
presence of DCTC will create demand for rental apartments.
C. Locate high density residential with access to the collector and arterial street network.
Staff Response: The site of the apartment building will be accessed from Connemara Trail along the north site boundary,
a collector street identified in the City’s transportation plan, and presumably pedestrian access will be made to County Road
42 in the future.
D. Locate high density residential in conjunction with Downtown and the commercial areas along
County Road 42 to create mixed-use neighborhoods and transit-oriented districts. This site is located in
close proximity to land guided for commercial uses as well as Dakota County Technical College.
Staff acknowledges the desire of the City Council to allow for more commercial development within
Rosemount, and therefore would not, and has not in the past, supported a comprehensive plan
amendment that would remove the commercial land use designation at the intersection of Akron and
County 42. Given the changes occurring in the commercial market place, strategic placement of
commercial nodes is desired to maximize business attraction.
General Subdivision Design
The overall development is approximately 70 acres, with the single family lots comprising 60 of the acres.
The 151-lot subdivision will be bound on the south by an extension of Connemara Trail, from which two
streets will provide access into the subdivision. Additional access will be provided via Addison Avenue
near the northwest corner of the site. The street system contains only a single cul-de-sac in the northeast
portion of the site, although a stub will provide access to future development east of the site if it occurs at
the end of Street C. Signage indicating this is a future public road extension will be installed by the
developer.
The majority of the stormwater management will take place in ponds located along the northern site
boundary. The ponds will be contained within outlots, which will alleviate some of the encroachment
issues staff has observed in other subdivisions with regard to stormwater infrastructure. A Metropolitan
Council sanitary line runs through the middle of the site, which the developer has accommodated with
increased rear and side setbacks as requested. The existing topography is rolling, and the developer plans
to provide a combination of walkout, lookout, and full basement sites.
Planned Unit Development Master Development Plan with Rezoning
The subject property is currently zoned AG-Agriculture. The subdivision proposal for the single family
residential portion of the site is inconsistent with the standard R-1 zoning district standards but is
consistent with recent small lot single family neighborhoods in the Akron Avenue area. To facilitate the
project, the applicant is requesting rezoning to R1 PUD-Low Density Residential Planned Unit
Development. The deviations from the R1 standards requested by the applicant include a reduction in the
minimum lot size from 10,000 square feet to 8,125 square feet, reduction in the minimum lot width from
6
80 feet to 65 feet, reduction in the side yard setback from 10 feet to 7.5 feet. In order to make the
preliminary plat work with the number of lots proposed, the applicant is not requesting a deviation from
the front yard setback since the lot width is measured from the setback line. The applicant is requesting a
reduction in the rear lot setback from 30 feet to 25 feet, which staff supports. Additionally, the City Code
does permit encroachments into a required setback for building appendages such as balconies and decks.
The applicant has also requested maximum lot coverage that is based on the size of a given lot. In this
case, the applicant is proposing a maximum lot coverage of 35% for lots over 9,750 square feet and 40%
for lots under 9,750 square feet. Staff is recommending that lots over 11,000 square feet meet the R1 lot
coverage standard of 30%. Other than that, the standards proposed by the applicant accommodate the
proposed preliminary plat and are acceptable to staff.
Comparison of Lot Requirements and Standards
Category Standard R-1 Zoning Emerald Isle Greystone Meadow Ridge
Min. Lot Size 10,000 sq. ft. 8,125 sq. ft. 8,600 sq. ft. 7,800 sq. ft.
Min. Lot Width 80 ft. 65 ft. 60 ft. 65 ft.
Min. Front Yard Setback 30 ft. 30 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft.
Min. Side Yard Setback 10 ft. 7.5 ft. 7.5 ft. 7.5 ft.
Min. Rear Yard Setback 30 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 30 ft.
Max. Lot Coverage 30% 30% to 40% 35% to 40% 30% to 45%
The applicant is also requesting the ten acres in the southeast portion of the site be rezoned to R4 PUD-
High Density Residential Planned Unit Development in anticipation of the future development of an
apartment building on that site. The exact standards that will be contained within the Planned Unit
Development agreement for the apartment site will be reviewed and approved with the apartment
building.
Phasing and Preliminary Plat
The applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary plat to allow for development of 151 single-family
lots. Additional outlots are provided in the preliminary plat to accommodate the stormwater ponding as
well as the future apartment building. Development of the single family lots will take place in three
phases. The first phase of development will occur in the northwest portion of the site, and it will utilize
the extension of Addison Avenue that was constructed with Lennar’s townhome development west of the
site. This will allow time for Connemara Trail to be constructed in order to serve the second and third
phases.
Street and Sidewalk System
Once the site is fully developed, the main access to the site will be from two intersections along
Connemara Trail, with secondary access via the Addison Avenue extension from the northwest. The site
contains only one permanent cul-de-sac. Because the first phase of development will occur in the
northwest portion of the site, access will be provided by the extension of Addison Avenue. The applicant
is proposing a temporary extension of Connemara Trail to provide a second access point until the entire
development is built out. At that time, or when the apartment building site is developed, Connemara Trail
will be extended to the eastern site boundary. A condition related to this is included in the resolution of
approval.
Sidewalks are provided throughout the development on at least one side of all streets, which is consistent
with City policy. A sidewalk is shown on the north side of Connemara Trail and a bituminous trail will be
constructed along the south side. This is consistent with the pedestrian facilities elsewhere along
Connemara in this vicinity. Sidewalk connections are provided to the adjacent neighborhoods. One
condition contained within the engineer’s memo and called out in the staff recommendation is that the
sidewalk along the northern side of Addison Avenue (Street A) be continued to at least the intersection
with Street C.
7
Parks
The Rosemount Parks and Recreation Department reviewed the plans for Emerald Isle and is
recommending cash in-lieu of land to meet the park dedication requirement for the proposed
development. The requirement for 151 single family units is $513,400 (151 x $3,4300). The Parks and
Recreation department is also recommending that accommodations be made for a trail to be added along
County Road 42 in the future, and access to that trail should be provided in the plans for the apartment
development.
Landscaping and Tree Preservation
The landscaping plan provided by the applicant shows one tree on the front yard of each interior lot and
two trees on each corner lot as required by the City Code. The landscaping plan also includes enhanced
landscaping along Connemara Trail, and the City Code requires boulevard trees at 50-foot intervals for
apartment buildings, which will be reviewed when that portion of the site is developed. Additional trees
and shrubs will be planted around the perimeter of the stormwater infrastructure and where the local
streets intersect with Connemara Trail.
A tree inventory was conducted by the applicant and a total of 67.5 caliper inches of significant trees were
identified. The significant trees are all located within the tree line along the parcel boundaries at the
southwest corner of the site. A single 12” elm tree will be impacted by the construction of the Connemara
Trail extension. Because developers are allowed to remove 25% of the significant trees on a site before
replacement is required, no additional trees must be planted to meet the requirements of the tree
preservation ordinance.
Stormwater Management
The developer will be managing the stormwater on site with the use of retention and infiltration basins.
The Assistant City Engineer and the City’s stormwater consultant have reviewed the plan and provided
comments in the attached memo dated February 26, 2020. The location of some of the catch basins will
need to be relocated from the cul-de-sac to the backyard storm pipe to avoid a second inlet to the pond.
Stormwater infiltration basins and retention ponds will be located within outlots to help discourage
encroachment into those areas, as has been observed in other subdivisions where ponds and basins have
been incorporated into the plat.
Utilities
The applicant is proposing connecting to the Met Council’s sanitary sewer that runs from west to east
through the site, which requires approval from the Metropolitan Council. The applicant will also have to
provide a sanitary sewer stub along the eastern property line that is located at a depth that can serve the
adjacent parcel should development occur there. Additional utility stubs shall be provided to the outlot in
which the future apartment building will be located. These are included as conditions within the City
Engineer’s Memo dated February 26, 2020 that is included with the attachments.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff has reviewed the plans and materials provided by the applicant and presented in this report. Based
on that information, staff and the Planning Commission are recommending approval of the requests for a
preliminary plat, a planned unit development master plan with rezoning, and a comprehensive plan
amendment that will allow the applicant to develop 151 single-family lots.
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020-XX
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN
AMENDMENT TO REGUIDE 20 ACRES OF THE EMERALD ISLE
DEVELOPMENT SITE FROM MDR-MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LDR-
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THE SOUTHEAST 10 ACRES OF THE SITE
FROM CC-COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO HDR-HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL.
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment concerning
properties located North of County Road 42 and 1,250 feet East of Akron Avenue, legally described as
follows:
The East half (E ½) of the Northeast Quarter (NE ¼) of Section 27, Township 115 North,
Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota, excepting therefrom the following described
parcel:
The Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SW ¼ of SE ¼ of
NE ¼) of Section 27, Township 115 North, Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, on February 26, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount held a public
hearing and reviewed the Comprehensive Plan amendment changing the land use of 20 acres of the
site from MDR-Medium Density Residential to LDR-Low Density Residential and the southeast 10
acres of the site from CC-Community Commercial to HDR-High Density Residential; and
WHEREAS, on February 26, 2020, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
adopt an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2020, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the Planning
Commission’s recommendations; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Council of the City of Rosemount hereby
approves an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use of 20 acres of the site
from MDR-Medium Density Residential to LDR-Low Density Residential and the southeast 10 acres
of the site from CC-Community Commercial to HDR-High Density Residential, subject to the
approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment by the Metropolitan Council.
ADOPTED this 19th day of May, 2020, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
__________________________________________
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Erin Fasbender, City Clerk
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020 -
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
FOR EMERALD ISLE
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount received a request for Preliminary Plat approval from CNC
Development IV, LLC., concerning property legally described as:
The East half (E ½) of the Northeast Quarter (NE ¼) of Section 27, Township 115 North,
Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota, excepting therefrom the following described
parcel:
The Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SW ¼ of SE ¼ of
NE ¼) of Section 27, Township 115 North, Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, on February 26, 2020 the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount held a
public hearing and reviewed the Preliminary Plat for Emerald Isle; and
WHEREAS, on February 26, 2020 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
Preliminary Plat for Emerald Isle, subject to conditions; and
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2020 the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the Planning
Commission’s recommendations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Council of the City of Rosemount hereby
approves the Preliminary Plat for Emerald Isle, subject to the following conditions:
1.Approval of a Planned Unit Development Master Development Plan with Rezoning.
2.Approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment reguiding the site to LDR and HDR.
3.Conformance with all the requirements of the City Engineer as detailed in the attached
memorandum dated February 26, 2020.
4. Payment of $513,400 as cash-in-lieu of park dedication.
ADOPTED this 19th day of May, 2020, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
__________________________________________
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Erin Fasbender, City Clerk
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020 -
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH REZONING FOR EMERALD ISLE
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received a
request for a Planned Unit Development Master Development Plan with Rezoning from CNC
Development IV, LLC., concerning property legally described as:
The East half (E ½) of the Northeast Quarter (NE ¼) of Section 27, Township 115 North,
Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota, excepting therefrom the following described
parcel:
The Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SW ¼ of SE ¼ of
NE ¼) of Section 27, Township 115 North, Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, on February 26, 2020 the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount held a
public hearing and reviewed the PUD Master Development Plan with Rezoning for Emerald Isle;
and
WHEREAS, on February 26, 2020 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the PUD
Master Development Plan with Rezoning for Emerald Isle, subject to conditions; and
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2020 the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the Planning
Commission’s recommendations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Council of the City of Rosemount hereby
approves the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Development Plan of Emerald Isle and the
Rezoning from AG – Agricultural to R1 PUD – Low Density Residential Planned Unit
Development and R4 PUD-High Density Residential Planned Unit Development, subject to:
a.Execution of a PUD agreement.
b.Approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment reguiding the site to LDR and
HDR.
c.The front building elevation design shall include one of the following elements:
i.Three and a half (3.5) feet of brick or stone wainscoting, excluding doors,
windows or the wall behind the front porch;
ii.A front porch with railing that extends at least 30% of the width of the
front elevation, including the garage;
iii.A side entry garage;
iv.Or, no more than 70% lap siding, excluding doors and windows.
d.A deviation from City Code Section 11-4-5 F.1. to reduce the interior lot
minimum area of 10,000 to 8,125 square feet and corner lot minimum area from
12, 000 to 10,625 square feet.
e.A deviation from City Code Section 11-4-5 F.2. to reduce the minimum lot width
from eighty (80) feet to sixty-five (65) feet for interior lots and from ninety (90)
feet to eighty-five (85) feet for corner lots.
2
f.A deviation from City Code Section 11-4-5 F.5. to reduce the side yard setback
from ten (10) feet to seven and one half (7.5) feet except in areas where
existence of larger drainage and utility easements require additional setbacks.
g.A deviation from City Code Section 11-4-5 F.6. to reduce the rear yard setback
from thirty (30) feet to twenty-five (25) feet.
h.A deviation from City Code Section 11-4-5 F.9. to increase the maximum lot
coverage from thirty percent (30%) to 35% for lots between 9,750 square feet
and 11,000 square feet and 40% for lots under 9,750.
i.Incorporation of the recommendations from the City Engineer in a review
memorandum dated February 26, 2020, relative to drainage, grading, street design,
easements, utilities, and the adjacent sidewalks.
j.A temporary cul-de-sac shall be constructed at the stub of Street D.
k.Subdivision monuments shall be subject to sign permits and normal zoning
standards.
l.The applicant shall receive approval from the Metropolitan Council for any
connection to the Met Council sanitary interceptor line.
m.Payment of a landscape surety in the amount of $97,020.
n.The applicant must receive final site and building plan approval for the R-4 high
density residential portion of the project.
ADOPTED this 19th day of May, 2020, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
__________________________________________
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Erin Fasbender, City Clerk
City of Rosemount
Ordinance No. B-XXX
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE B
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ZONING ORDINANCE
Emerald Isle
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Ordinance B, adopted September 19, 1989, entitled “City of Rosemount Zoning
Ordinance,” is hereby amended to rezone property from AG-Agriculture to R1 PUD – Low Density
Residential Planned Unit Development and R4 PUD-High Density Residential Planned Unit
Development that is located 1,250 feet east of Akron Avenue north of County Road 42 within the
City of Rosemount legally described as follows:
The East half (E ½) of the Northeast Quarter (NE ¼) of Section 27, Township 115 North,
Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota, excepting therefrom the following described
parcel:
The Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SW ¼ of SE ¼ of
NE ¼) of Section 27, Township 115 North, Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota.
Section 2. The Zoning Map of the City of Rosemount, referred to and described in said
Ordinance No. B as that certain map entitled “Zoning Map of the City of Rosemount,” shall not be
republished to show the aforesaid rezoning, but the Clerk shall appropriately mark the said zoning
map on file in the Clerk’s office for the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove provided for
in this Ordinance and all of the notation references and other information shown thereon are hereby
incorporated by reference and made part of this Ordinance.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication
according to law.
ENACTED AND ORDAINED into an Ordinance this 19th day of May, 2020.
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
Erin Fasbender, City Clerk
City of Rosemount
Ordinance No. B-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE B
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ZONING ORDINANCE
Emerald Isle
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Ordinance B, adopted
September 19, 1989, entitled “City of Rosemount Zoning
Ordinance,” is hereby amended to rezone property from
AG-Agriculture to R1 PUD – Low Density Residential
Planned Unit Development and R4 PUD-High Density
Residential Planned Unit Development that is located
1,250 feet east of Akron Avenue north of County Road 42
within the City of Rosemount legally described as
follows:
The East half (E ½) of the Northeast Quarter (NE ¼) of
Section 27, Township 115 North, Range 19 West, Dakota
County, Minnesota, excepting therefrom the following
described parcel:
The Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter (SW ¼ of SE ¼ of NE ¼) of Section
27, Township 115 North, Range 19 West, Dakota County,
Minnesota.
Section 2. The Zoning Map of the City of
Rosemount, referred to and described in said Ordinance
No. B as that certain map entitled “Zoning Map of the
City of Rosemount,” shall not be republished to show
the aforesaid rezoning, but the Clerk shall appropriately
mark the said zoning map on file in the Clerk’s office for
the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove
provided for in this Ordinance and all of the notation
references and other information shown thereon are
hereby incorporated by reference and made part of this
Ordinance.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately
upon its passage and publication according to law.
ENACTED AND ORDAINED into an Ordinance this
19 th day of May, 2020.
/s/William H. Droste, Mayor
Attested: Erin Fasbender, City Clerk
City of Rosemount
Dakota County, Minnesota
05/19/2020
1
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS
AND RESTRICTIONS
EMERALD ISLE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS DECLARATION made this ______ day of _________________, 2020, by Builder
Jones, LLC (hereinafter referred to as the “Declarant”);
WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of the real property as described on Attachment One,
attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Subject
Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is subject to certain zoning and land use restrictions
imposed by the City of Rosemount (hereinafter referred to as the “City”) in connection with the
approval of an application for a master development plan planned unit development for a residential
development on the Subject Property; and
WHEREAS, the City has approved such development on the basis of the determination by
the City Council of the City that such development is acceptable only by reason of the details of the
development proposed and the unique land use characteristics of the proposed use of the Subject
Property; and that but for the details of the development proposed and the unique land use
characteristics of such proposed use, the master development plan planned unit development would
not have been approved; and
2
WHEREAS, as a condition of approval of the master development plan planned unit
development, the City has required the execution and filing of this Declarat ion of Covenants,
Conditions and Restrictions (hereinafter the “Declaration”); and
WHEREAS, to secure the benefits and advantages of approval of such planned unit
development, Declarant desires to subject the Subject Property to the terms hereof.
NOW, TH EREFORE, the Declarant declares that the Subject Property is, and shall be, held,
transferred, sold, conveyed and occupied subject to the covenants, conditions, and restrictions,
hereinafter set forth.
1.The use and development of the Subject Property shall conform to the following
documents, plans and drawings:
a.City Resolution No. 2020-XX, Attachment Two
b.Site Plan, Attachment Three
d.Grading and Drainage Plan, Attachment Four
e.Overall Utility Plan, Attachment Five
f.Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan, Attachment 6
g.Landscape Plan, Attachment s 7-9
All of which attachments are copies of original documents on file with the City and are made a part
hereof.
2.Development and maintenance of structures and uses on the Subject Property shall
conform to the following standards and requirements:
a.Maintenance of the stormwater basin, infiltration basin and associated
stormwater infrastructure necessary for the long term operation and function will be
performed by the City. All other maintenance including but not limited to garbage
3
collection, or landscape replacement or the like shall be the responsibility of the of the
private property owners. All maintenance of the stormwater basin and infiltration basin
shall be the responsibility of the City after the basins have been established.
b.Maintenance and replacement of trees and landscaping other than that
associated with the stormwater basin and infiltration basin described in standard a. shall be
the responsibility of the adjoining homeowners’ association.
c.The home design front elevation shall include a minimum of three and a
half (3.5) feet of brick or stone wainscoting, excluding doors, windows or the wall behind
the front porch; a front porch with railing that extends at least 30% of the width of the front
elevation, including the garage; a side entry garage; or no more than 70% lap siding,
excluding doors and windows.
3.The Subject Property may only be developed and used in accordance with Paragraphs
1 and 2 of this Declaration unless the owner first secures approval by the City Council of an
amendment to the planned unit development plan or a rezoning to a zoning classification that permits
such other development and use.
4.In connection with the approval of development of the Subject Property, the following
deviations from City Zoning or Subdivision Code provisions were approved:
a.Section 11-4-5 F. 1. R-1 Minimum Lot Area: The minimum lot area for
interior lots shall be 8,125 square feet and 10,625 for corner lots.
b.Section 11-4-5 F. 2 . R-1 Minimum Lot Width: The minimum lot width
shall be sixty-five (65) feet for interior lots and eighty-five (85) feet for corner lots.
4
c. Section 11-4-5 F. 5. R-1 Minimum Side Yard Setback: The minimum side
yard setback shall be 7.5 feet except for areas where existence of larger drainage and
utility easements require additional setbacks.
d. Section 11-4-5 F.6. R-1 Minimum Rear Yard Setback: The minimum rear
yard setback shall be twenty-five (25) feet.
e. Section 11-4-5 F.5. R-1 Minimum Lot Coverage: The maximum lot
coverage shall be 30% for lots over 11,000 square feet, 35% for lots between 9,750 and
11000 square feet, and 40% for lots under 9,750 square feet.
In all ot her r espects t he us e and development of the S ubject Property shall conform t o t he
requirements o f the Paragraphs 1 and 2 of t his Declaration and the City Code o f Ordinances.
5. This Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions provides only t he Subject Property
only master development plan planned unit development approval. Prior to the improvement or
development of the Subject Property, beyond the rough grading, a final development plan planned
unit development approval pursuant to Zoning Code Section 11-10-6 C. 5. of the Subject Property is
required and an addendum filed with County Recorder to this Declaration of Covenants and
Res tric tions .
6. The obligations and restrictions of this Declaration run with the land of the Subject
Property and shall be enforceable against the Declarant, its successors and assigns, by the City of
Rosemount acting through its City Council. This Declaration may be amended from time to time by
a written amendment executed by the City and the owner or owners of the lot or lots to be affected by
said amendment.
5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned as duly authorized agents, officers or representatives of
Declarant have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the day and year first above written.
DECLARANT
CNC Development IV, LLC.
By
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of _________, 2020,
by _____________________, the _________________, for and on behalf of
_________________________, a ____________________, by and on behalf of said
_______________________.
_______________________________
Notary Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
2875 145TH STREET WEST
ROSEMOUNT, MN 55068
651-423-4411
EXCERPT FROM THE FEBRUARY 26, 2020, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
5.b. Request by CNC Development IV, LLC., for Planned Unit Development Master Development Plan with
Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Approval to develop 151 single-family lots.
(20-09-PUD, 20-10-PP, 20-11-RZ, 20-12-CP))
Planner Nemcek gave a brief summary of the staff report for the Planning Commission.
Kenninger inquired about the proposed land use change map and if Flint Hills has first right of refusal adjacent to the
subject property. Nemcek stated that is correct. Kenninger stated that the left over commercial, east of the site, would be
effectively abandoned.
Schmisek stated that he has a concern about losing any commercial property but thought that little piece would be cut
off. Another concern is that of the additional traffic on Connemara Trail. Schmisek inquired if there are any talks about
changing the intersection at Connemara and Akron, such as a round-about or a signal light. Lindquist stated signal lights
will be installed at Akron and County Road 42 but none are proposed at Connemara.
Reed inquired about the flow of the sidewalks on Connemara Trail. Engineer Smith stated that the trail and sidewalk
along Connemara Trail will be extended into this subdivision and that Dakota County will be installing an underpass
under County Highway 42 so that pedestrians will have a safer place to cross the highway in this area.
The public hearing opened at 6:58 pm.
Public Comments:
Kenninger inquired how the new single-family home owners will be notified that an apartment building is also planned
to be built near their new homes.
Rick Osberg, Engineer, James R. Hill, Inc., stated that they have been working with staff to get to today’s plan. The
property owners do not have an interested party to build the apartment currently. Besides the fact that the property is
guided for high density there isn’t much information to give to a potential buyer.
Rivera questioned if the stub road would be a future through road. Nemcek stated that is correct.
MOTION by Rivera to close the public hearing.
Second by Schmisek.
Ayes: 5. Nays: 0. Motion Passes.
The public hearing was closed at 7:03 pm.
Additional Comments:
Kenninger stated that her biggest concern was with changing the zoning of this area. But also agrees that this is a great
use of the land. She would like to ensure that the 151 new homeowners are aware that there will be a future apartment
building on the property next to this site. She requested that be added as a condition of approval.
Reed stated that since having the trail system continue through Connemara Trail he is in favor.
Schmisek inquired if there will be access from the development to Connemara Trail. Nemcek stated that from the
commercial there will be one access point onto Connemara Trail.
MOTION by Freeman to recommend that the City Council approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan
amendment to reguide 20 acres of the development site from MDR-Medium Density Residential to LDR-Low
Density Residential and the southeast 10 acres of the site from CC-Community Commercial to HDR-High
Density Residential.
Second by Reed.
Ayes: 5. Nays: 0. Motion Passes.
MOTION by Schmisek to recommend the City Council approve the Preliminary Plat for Emerald Isle, subject
to the following conditions:
a. Approval of a Planned Unit Development Master Development Plan with Rezoning.
b. Approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment reguiding the site to LDR and HDR.
c. Conformance with all the requirements of the City Engineer as detailed in the attached memorandum
dated February 26, 2020.
d. Payment of $513,400 as cash-in-lieu of park dedication.
Second by Freeman.
Ayes: 5. Nays: 0. Motion Passes.
MOTION by Rivera to recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development Master Development Plan
with rezoning of the property for AG-Agriculture to R1 PUD-Low Density Residential Planned Unit
Development and R4 PUD-High Density Residential Planned Unit Development, subject to the following
conditions:
a. Execution of a PUD Agreement.
b. Approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment reguiding the site to LDR and HDR.
c. The front building elevation design shall include one of the following elements:
i. Three and a half (3.5) feet of brick or stone wainscoting, excluding doors, windows or the
wall behind the front porch;
ii. A front porch with railing that extends at least 30% of the width of the front elevation,
including the garage;
iii. A side entry garage;
iv. Or, no more than 70% lap siding, excluding doors and windows.
d. A deviation from City Code Section 11-4-5 F.1. to reduce the interior lot minimum area of 10,000 to
8,125 square feet and corner lot minimum area from 12,000 to 10,625 square feet.
e. A deviation from City Code Section 11-4-5 F.2. to reduce the minimum lot width from eighty (80)
feet to sixty-five (65) feet for interior lots and from ninety (90) feet to eighty-five (85) feet for corner
lots.
f. A deviation from City Code Section 11-4-5 F.5. to reduce the side yard setback from ten (10) feet to
seven and one half (7.5) feet except in areas where existence of larger drainage and utility easements
require additional setbacks.
g. A deviation from City Code Section 11-4-5 F.6. to reduce the rear yard setback thirty (30) feet to
twenty-five (25) feet.
h. A deviation from City Code Section 11-4-5 F.9. to increase the maximum lot coverage from thirty
percent (30%) to thirty-five percent (35%) lots more than 9,750 square feet in area.
i. Incorporation of the recommendations from the City Engineer in a review memorandum dated
February 26, 2020, relative to drainage, grading, street design, easements, utilities, and the adjacent
sidewalks.
j. A temporary cul-de-sac shall be constructed at the stub of Street D.
k. Subdivision monuments shall be subject to sign permits and normal zoning standards.
l. The applicant shall receive approval from the Metropolitan Council for any connection to the Met
Council sanitary interceptor line.
m. Payment of a landscape surety in the amount of $97,020.
n. The applicant must receive final site and building plan approval for the R-4 High Density residential
portion of the project.
o. The developer post a sign on the multi-family site indicating that the property is a future apartment
building site.
Second by Schmisek.
Ayes: 5. Nays: 0. Motion Passes.
145TH ST E (CSAH 42)AKRON AVE
ROSEMOUNT
MINNESOTA
2/14/2020
T:\Project\CommDev\LandUse\LandUseChanges.aprx I:\GIS\Map_Library\CommDev\LandUse\ProposedAmendments\02142020.pdf
Proposed Land Use Change
0 500 1,000250Feet
145TH ST E (CSAH 42)AKRON AVEAG Agriculture
DT Downtown
NC Neighborhood Commercial
RC Regional Commercial
CC Community Commercial
AGR Agricultural Research
RR Rural Residential
LDR Low Density Residential
TR Transitional Residential
MDR Medium Density Residential
HDR High Density Residential
PI Public/Institutional
PO Existing Parks/Open Space
BP Business Park
LI Light Industrial
GI General Industrial
WM Waste Management
Existing Land Use Plan Proposed Land Use Plan
DRAWN BY
DATE
REVISIONS
PLM
121221
CAD FILE
2SS.GZJ
PROJECT NO.
2
2.1
The East half (E1/2) of the Northeast Quarter (NE 1/4) of Section 27, Township 115
North, Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota, excepting therefrom the
following described parcel:
The Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SW1/4 of
SE1/4 of NE1/4) of Section 27, Township 115 North, Range 19 West, Dakota County,
Minnesota
PROPERTY DESCRIPITON EMERALD ISLEROSEMO8NT MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLATFORCNC DEVELOPMENT2 WEST C.R. 2 S8ITE 12 B8RNSVILLE MN P+ONE 2.. PKDPSWRQ#MUKLQF.FRPPLANNERS EN*INEERS S8RVEYORSZZZ.MUKLQF.FRPJames R. Hill, Inc.A. 222 8SGDWH BORFN 1
DRAWN BY
DATE
REVISIONS
PLM
222
CAD FILE
2SS2.GZJ
PROJECT NO.
2
2.2EMERALD ISLEROSEMO8NT MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLATFORCNC DEVELOPMENT2 WEST C.R. 2 S8ITE 2 B8RNSVILLE MN P+ONE 2.. PKDPSWRQ#MUKLQF.FRPPLANNERS EN*INEERS S8RVEYORSZZZ.MUKLQF.FRPJames R. Hill, Inc.A. 222 8SGDWH BORFN
DRAWN BY
DATE
REVISIONS
PLM
222
CAD FILE
233SS2.GZJ
PROJECT NO.
233
2.3EMERALD ISLEROSEMO8NT MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLATFORCNC DEVELOPMENT2 WEST C.R. 2 S8ITE 2 B8RNSVILLE MN 33P+ONE 2.. PKDPSWRQ#MUKLQF.FRPPLANNERS EN*INEERS S8RVEYORSZZZ.MUKLQF.FRPJames R. Hill, Inc.A. 222 8SGDWH BORFN
DRAWN BY
DATE
REVISIONS
PLM
222
CAD FILE
2SS2.GZJ
PROJECT NO.
2
2.4EMERALD ISLEROSEMO8NT MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLATFORCNC DEVELOPMENT2 WEST C.R. 42 S8ITE 2 B8RNSVILLE MN P+ONE 2..44 PKDPSWRQ#MUKLQF.FRPPLANNERS EN*INEERS S8RVEYORSZZZ.MUKLQF.FRPJames R. Hill, Inc.A. 222 8SGDWH BORFN
Plat phasingGrading Ph 1Grading Ph 2Grading Phasing
SB-1
SB-2
SB-4
SB-3
SB-5
SB-6
SB-7
SB-8
SB-9
SB-10
SB-1
SB-1SB-2SB-4SB-3SB-5SB-6SB-7SB-8SB-9SB-10G
RWO
SB-1
SB-1SB-2SB-4SB-3SB-5SB-6SB-7SB-8SB-9SB-10
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: February 26, 2020
Subject: Emerald Isle Preliminary Plat - Engineering Review
SUBMITTAL:
The plans for Emerald Isle have been prepared by James R. Hill, Inc. Engineering review
comments were generated from the following preliminary documents included in the submittal:
▫ Preliminary Plat (dated 12/12/2019)
▫ Existing Conditions Survey (dated
1/13/2020)
▫ Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
(dated 1/13/2020)
▫ Grading Plan (dated 1/13/2020)
▫ Street and Utility Plan (dated
1/13/2020)
▫ Stormwater Report (dated
1/9/2020)
▫ Phasing Plan (dated 1/13/2020)
GENERAL COMMENTS:
1. The development fees below are estimated based on the current Schedule of Rates and
Fees. These fees are due with the final plat and subdivision agreement.
Sanitary Sewer Trunk Charge: $1075/acre
Watermain Trunk Charge: $6500/acre
Storm Sewer Trunk Charge: $6865/acre
2. Plans shall be signed by an engineer licensed in the state of Minnesota.
3. Outlot A, B and C shall be covered by drainage and utility easement and shall be
dedicated to the City.
STREET AND SIDEWALK
The development consists of internal, local streets that connect to the existing Addison Avenue
stub at the eastern property line and Connemara Trail, a collector roadway, that bisects the
southern third of the site. 5-foot sidewalks are on one side of the streets throughout the
development. 5-foot sidewalk and 8-foot trail will extend on either side of Connemara Trail to
the property line.
4. Sidewalk shall be constructed on both sides of Addison Avenue from the intersection
with Street B to the western property line to match the existing Addison Avenue section.
5. Construction plans for Connemara Trail and associated utilities, including trunk
stormwater pipe, shall be designed by the City.
6. Connemara Trail shall be constructed at one time, as opposed to the 200-foot section
proposed by the applicant’s phasing plan.
7. Street names shall be labeled on the construction plans.
8. Street slopes and profile drawings shall be included in the construction plans for review
for consistency with the Engineering Guidelines.
9. Lot 50, Block 1 shall have the driveway constructed on the west side of the property to
allow the occupant vehicles to turn around on the dead end street.
10. Type-three barricades with “Future Thru Street” signage shall be placed east of the
intersection of Connemara Trail and Street G and the end of Street D on the Preliminary
Site Plan.
11. MnDOT standard detail plates for ADA pedestrian ramps shall be included in the plan
set. Street signage and lighting plan shall be submitted for review.
12. Connemara Trail typical street section shall match the section for the proposed City
Project 2018-09.
WATER AND SANITARY SEWER
13. Utility stubs shall be provided to Outlot D, the future apartment site.
14. Sanitary sewer shall be stubbed to the eastern property line at an elevation to provide
service to future development.
15. The applicant proposes two connections to the Metropolitan Council’s interceptor sewer
line. Applicant must obtain permits for these connections. Staff recommends one
connection.
16. Sanitary sewer connections shall be core-drilled.
17. Staff recommends using a 0.50% slope for 8” sanitary sewer to ensure that construction
minimums are met.
18. Applicant’s engineer shall work with staff to reduce the number of sanitary manhole
structures.
19. Watermain under Connemara Trail shall be 12” diameter.
20. All watermain shall be ductile iron pipe.
21. Number and locations of valve shall be adjusted to meet Engineering Guidelines.
22. Connections to active mains shall be wet taps.
23. As-built are not available for the utility connections to the Prestwick Place 17th
development. Applicant’s engineer shall verify locations in the field.
STORMWATER
The applicant proposes to meet the City’s stormwater requirements by construction retention
and infiltration basins on their site.
24. Applicant proposes a swale and stormwater pipe within the Metropolitan Council
easement. Applicant shall obtain permits for this work.
25. Catchbasins on the cul-de-sac shall be relocated and connect to the backyard storm pipe
to avoid a second inlet to the pond.
26. Access routes to ponds and yard catchbasins shall meet Engineer Guidelines and be
shown on the plans.
27. Upon completion of the infiltration basin, the applicant’s engineer shall submit
infiltrometer testing to certify the functionality of the basin as modeled.
28. Applicants consultant shall work to reduce the number of storm structures.
The City’s stormwater consultant reviewed the submittal and their comments are listed below.
The full memorandum is attached.
29. No operation and maintenance plan was included with this submittal.
30. There are many errors in Stormwater Narrative.
31. The Drainage Area Maps do not match the stormwater narrative.
32. The total drainage to each basin is correct when comparing the drainage maps and
HydroCAD, however the stormwater narrative varies in drainage area totals multiple
times to pond 101P and 107P. For calculations on our end, we used the drainage area
provided in HydroCAD, which matches the areas on the drainage map.
33. Offsite Drainage from DCTC and CSAH 42 should be modeled to 47P/107P. Appears
this area is being bypassed in the proposed conditions to Future Regional Basin 3037.
This basin should be included in Model to show any changes in HWL.
34. Narrative states 104P but we assumed 104P is actually 107P as shown in HydroCAD and
the drainage maps.
35. No “fugitive areas” were seen on the drainage map. Please identify where these areas are
coming from, Prestwick 17th, 18th, and Greystone show no drainage area coming onto
the Courteau property.
36. HydroCAD model 10-day depth used is 7.1 inches. Please updated to match the
Engineering Guidelines Value of 7.2 inches for the 10-day event.
37. HydroCAD outlet pipe differs in length and size for 102P. The plan says its 15 and 18
inches and 170’ in length, but HydroCAD is 15-inch for 168 feet.
38. Regional Outlet control structure will be required for basin 107P and 101P.
39. Please include drainage of proposed right of way for Street 20 in drainage to 103P. The
centerline looks to be included in plans, but not its drainage. See attached PUD plans for
more info.
40. Please state in Narrative that 104P is sending overflows to Future Regional Basin 3037,
and 101P is sending overflows and offsite runoff to Future Regional Basin 1787.
41. Provide a designated EOF section for 101P, 103P, and 107P.
42. Developer must submit a SWPPP for City review.
43. Add the following comment in the erosion control sequencing: Construct the NURP
pond in the initial phase of grading to act as pretreatment of runoff during construction.
Clean out any accumulated sediments before final restoration.
44. Post construction testing of infiltration basins will be required using an ASTM approved
method after final restoration of the contributing drainage area.
45. Block 3 lot 5 has a driveway slope of 9.3%, we recommend driveway slopes of less than
9%.
46. Provide all pipe sizing calculations for City review, along with casting types. It is
recommended to have a drop of 0.1 feet across all manholes, and matching crowns.
47. Gutter flow must not exceed 300-feet and flow rates to each CB must not exceed 3.0 cfs.
48. All storm sewer pipe must be RCP, even in backyards.
49. Storm sewer pipe runs must not exceed 300 feet. The following pipe runs are not in
compliance. CBMH 102-101, CBMH 101-100.
50. No profiles were given with this submittal, therefore utility easements couldn’t be
checked and utility crossings weren’t verified. Please include profiles in next submittal.
51. Include regional outlet control structure and detail in the plan for 101P and 107P.
52. No detail is given for the OCS for 107P.
53. CBMH 303 and CBMH 107 should be moved to be along lot lines and not within a
driveway.
54. Include proposed storm sewer for draining 1070S to verify drainage area of 107P.
55. Please verify if the submittal needs permits for creation of ponding on top of a gas line
and over easement at 107P, and 103P.
56. All NURP basins should be lined with a 1’ clay liner.
57. Provide a minimum of 1 foot of freeboard from the basin HWL and the basement floor
elevation. The following buildings are not in compliance: 1. Block 4, Lots 1, 2, and 44
58. Provide a minimum of 1.5 feet of freeboard from the Emergency Overflow Route and
the Low Opening. The following buildings are not in compliance:
• 1. Block 2, Lots 1, 9, and 11
• 2. Block 3, Lots 3-5, 7-8, and 12-16
• 3. Block 4 lots 3-4, 7-8, 27, and 31
• 4. Block 5 lot 1
• 5. Block 6 Lots 1, 6-7, 13
59. Block 1 Lots 34 and 35 low opening are lower than the low point in the road.
60. Infiltration area listed on the plans does not match the stormwater narrative nor the total
area shown.
61. Soil infiltration rate must be less than 8.3 in/hr, soil underneath the media will need to
be amended.
62. Narrative should be updated with the following methodology - 1/12 ac-ft per ac per day
calculation is used to calculate the required infiltration surface area in the infiltration
basin. Currently with the drainage areas given in HydroCAD this is being met.
Should you have any questions or comments regarding the items listed above, please contact me
at 651-322-2015.
Attached: WSB Memorandum RE: Emerald Isle – Courteau Property Plan Review dated
February 18, 2020
K:\015413-000\Admin\Docs\015413-000-Emerald_Isle-02182020.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, WSB
Laura Cummings, WSB
Date: February 18, 2020
Re: Emerald Isle – Courteau Property Plan Review
WSB Project No. R-015413-000
We have reviewed the documents provided by Westwood on 02/05/20 for the Emerald Isle –
Courteau Property Plan development. Documents Reviewed include:
· Stormwater Management Narrative and Summary for The Courteau Site – dated 1-9-
2020
· Emerald Isle Preliminary Site Development Plans– dated 1-13-2020
· Preliminary Plat 1.13.2020
Based on our review of the plan we offer the following comments for your consideration.
Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Comments:
1. General:
a. No operation and maintenance plan was included with this submittal.
b. No SWPPP was included with this submittal.
c. There are many errors in Stormwater Narrative.
d. These plans are not signed by a professional engineer.
e. The Drainage Area Maps do not match the stormwater narrative.
2. Basins:
a. The total drainage to each basin is correct when comparing the drainage maps
and HydroCAD, however the stormwater narrative varies in drainage area totals
multiple times to pond 101P and 107P. For calculations on our end, we used the
drainage area provided in HydroCAD, which matches the areas on the drainage
map.
b. Offsite Drainage from DCTC and CSAH 42 should be modeled to 47P/107P.
Appears this area is being bypassed in the proposed conditions to Future
Regional Basin 3037. This basin should be included in Model to show any
changes in HWL.
c. Narrative states 104P but we assumed 104P is actually 107P as shown in
HydroCAD and the drainage maps.
d. No “fugitive areas” were seen on the drainage map. Please identify where these
areas are coming from, Prestwick 17th, 18th, and Greystone show no drainage
area coming onto the Courteau property.
e. HydroCAD model 10-day depth used is 7.1 inches. Please updated to match the
Engineering Guidelines Value of 7.2 inches for the 10-day event.
f. HydroCAD outlet pipe differs in length and size for 102P. The plan says its 15
and 18 inches and 170’ in length, but HydroCAD is 15-inch for 168 feet.
g. Regional Outlet control structure will be required for basin 107P and 101P.
Ms. Stephanie Smith
February 18, 2020
Page 2
K:\015413-000\Admin\Docs\015413-000-Emerald_Isle-02182020.docx
h. Please include drainage of proposed right of way for Street 20 in drainage to
103P. The centerline looks to be included in plans, but not its drainage. See
attached PUD plans for more info.
i. Please state in Narrative that 104P is sending overflows to Future Regional
Basin 3037, and 101P is sending overflows and offsite runoff to Future Regional
Basin 1787.
3. Emergency Overflow Routes:
a. Provide a designated EOF section for 101P, 103P, and 107P.
4. Retaining Walls:
a. Not applicable.
5. Erosion Control:
a. Developer must submit a SWPPP for City review.
b. Add the following comment in the erosion control sequencing.
i. Construct the NURP pond in the initial phase of grading to act as
pretreatment of runoff during construction. Clean out any accumulated
sediments before final restoration.
c. Post construction testing of infiltration basins will be required using an ASTM
approved method after final restoration of the contributing drainage area.
6. Grading:
a. Block 3 lot 5 has a driveway slope of 9.3%, we recommend driveway slopes of
less than 9%.
Stormwater Management Plan:
7. General Storm Sewer Design:
a. Provide all pipe sizing calculations for City review, along with casting types. It is
recommended to have a drop of 0.1 feet across all manholes, and matching
crowns.
b. Gutter flow must not exceed 300-feet and flow rates to each CB must not exceed
3.0 cfs.
c. All storm sewer pipe must be RCP, even in backyards.
d. Storm sewer pipe runs must not exceed 300 feet.
i. The following pipe runs are not in compliance.
1. CBMH 102-101, CBMH 101-100.
e. No profiles were given with this submittal, therefore utility easements couldn’t be
checked and utility crossings weren’t verified. Please include profiles in next
submittal.
f. Include regional outlet control structure and detail in the plan for 101P and 107P.
g. No detail is given for the OCS for 107P.
h. CBMH 303 and CBMH 107 should be moved to be along lot lines and not within
a driveway.
i. Include proposed storm sewer for draining 1070S to verify drainage area of
107P.
8. Water Quality:
a. No comments.
9. Rate Control:
a. Please verify if the submittal needs permits for creation of ponding on top of a
gas line and over easement at 107P, and 103P.
b. All NURP basins should be lined with a 1’ clay liner.
Ms. Stephanie Smith
February 18, 2020
Page 3
K:\015413-000\Admin\Docs\015413-000-Emerald_Isle-02182020.docx
10. Freeboard:
a. Provide a minimum of 1 foot of freeboard from the basin HWL and the basement
floor elevation.
i. The following buildings are not in compliance.
1. Block 4, Lots 1, 2, and 44
b. Provide a minimum of 1.5 feet of freeboard from the Emergency Overflow Route
and the Low Opening.
i. The following buildings are not in compliance.
1. Block 2, Lots 1, 9, and 11
2. Block 3, Lots 3-5, 7-8, and 12-16
3. Block 4 lots 3-4, 7-8, 27, and 31
4. Block 5 lot 1
5. Block 6 Lots 1, 6-7, 13
c. Block 1 Lots 34 and 35 low opening are lower than the low point in the road.
11. Infiltration
a. Infiltration area listed on the plans does not match the stormwater narrative nor
the total area shown.
b. Soil infiltration rate must be less than 8.3 in/hr, soil underneath the media will
need to be amended.
c. Narrative should be updated with the following methodology - 1/12 ac-ft per ac
per day calculation is used to calculate the required infiltration surface area in the
infiltration basin. Currently with the drainage areas given in HydroCAD this is
being met.
Required infiltration surface area = [/ / /] ∗[ ]
[ /]∗[ / ]∗[/] or
()
(/)∗ 0.0416 (%&’(.)*%+&,)
12. Wetlands:
a. No wetlands are shown on the plans.
13. Easements:
a. Utility easements will be verified once storm sewer profiles are provided.
MEMORANDUM
To: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director
Kyle Klatt, Senior Planner
Anthony Nemcek, Planner
From: Dan Schultz, Parks and Recreation Director
Date: February 18, 2020
Subject: Emerald Isle - CNC Development Master PUD and Preliminary Plat
The Parks and Recreation Department recently reviewed the plans for the Emerald Isle
development. After reviewing the plans, the Parks and Recreation Department staff has the
following comments:
Local Trails and Sidewalks
The trail and sidewalk amenities appear to be designed in a manner that works toward the City’s goal
of having a well-connected community. The proposed trail and sidewalk system is designed to match
up to the existing/proposed system. Staff does recommend that accommodations are made for a
trail to be added along County Road 42 in the future.
Parks Dedication
The parks dedication requirement for 151 single family units is either 6.04 acres of land, cash in-lieu
of land or a combination of the two. Staff is recommending that the City collect cash in-lieu of land
for the single-family development that is currently being processed. The cash dedication for 151
units would be $513,400 (151 x $3,400 per unit).
Please let me know if you have any questions about this memo.