HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.a. 20-14-SP, 20-23-CUP Request by David Schmitz for a Conditional Use Permit and Simple Plat to establish a microbrewery and taproom in an AG-Agricultural zoning district.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council Regular Meeting: June 2, 2020
AGENDA ITEM: 20-14-SP, 20-23-CUP Request by David
Schmitz for a Conditional Use Permit and
Simple Plat to establish a microbrewery
and taproom in an AG-Agricultural zoning
district.
AGENDA SECTION: New
Business
PREPARED BY: Kyle Klatt, Senior Planner AGENDA NO. 9.a.
ATTACHMENTS: Simple Plat Resolution; CUP Resolution;
Site Location Map; Application Narrative;
Letter from Applicant (with site aerial
photo); Variance Resolution;
Administrative Subdivision; Site Plan –
Preliminary Plat; Topographic Survey and
Grading Plan; Final Plat; Storm Water
Plan; Landscape Plan; Floor Plan;
Exterior Elevations; City Engineer Review
Memo; Parks Director Review Memo;
Building Official Review Memo; Public
Comment Letters, Emails, and Petition;
Public Comment Map; Brewery Survey
Table; Comparable Air Photos (4);
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
(4/14 and 5/12)
APPROVED BY: LJM
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the City
Council make the following actions:
1. Motion to adopt a resolution approving a Simple Plat for North 20 Brewery
Addition subject to the conditions.
2. Motion to adopt a resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit to establish a
microbrewery and ancillary taproom on Lot 1, Block 1 of the North 20 Brewery
Addition subject to conditions.
SUMMARY
The City Council is being asked to consider requests by David Schmitz to facilitate the construction of a
microbrewery with taproom on property he owns at 12296 Bacardi Avenue in Rosemount. The
application includes the following specific requests: a simple plat to divide the existing 19.83-acre parcel
into two separate lots so that the microbrewery will be located on a separate parcel and a conditional use
permit (CUP) to establish a microbrewery in an AG – Agriculture zoning district. The Planning
Commission (acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments) approved a related variance at its May 12,
2020 meeting to allow the platting of a separate parcel for the microbrewery smaller than otherwise
allowed in an AG – Agriculture zoning district. The proposed microbrewery would be housed within a
2
4,355 square feet structure with roughly one quarter of the space devoted to the brewing operation and the
other portion available for seating, meeting area, and a small kitchen. The Planning Commission is
recommending approval of the Simple Plat and CUP with the conditions as listed in the attached
resolutions. The Commission also strongly supported a future safety/speed study that is scheduled for
Bacardi Avenue. There was strong interest in reducing the speed on Bacardi Avenue in response to
concerns expressed by residents regarding the existing speeds and the addition of the commercial venture.
Property Owner: David Schmitz, 2100 126th Street West, Rosemount, MN
Applicant: David Schmitz (DCJD, LLC), Same Address
Location: 12296 Bacardi Avenue (PID 340161017010)
Site Area in Acres: 19.83 Acres (not including neighboring strip of land)
Comprehensive Plan Designation RR – Rural Residential
Current Zoning: AG – Agriculture
Proposed Conditional Use: Microbrewery (Defined in Section 11-4-1. D of City Code)
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
On April 14, 2020 the Planning Commission conducted a virtual/online meeting to consider the
applicant’s request, and heard from staff, the applicant and his representatives, and several members of the
public during the public hearing portion of the meeting. The Commission did not take any action at this
time, and instead continued its discussion on the matter to its May 12, 2020 meeting. In response to
questions and comments from the April meeting, staff had gathered information about other comparable
breweries in order to better evaluate the potential customer traffic to the site and the applicant created an
alternate site plan to provide more separation from the adjacent properties and to provide room for
additional parking on the site. The following sections include a summary of each of the Planning
Commission meetings concerning the proposed microbrewery. Any new or updated information has been
incorporated into the staff review and analysis later in this report.
Planning Commission Meeting – 4/14/20
Because of restrictions put in place by the State of Minnesota to address the COVID-19 situation, the
Commission conducted an online meeting and public hearing concerning the microbrewery request on
April 14, 2020. Several members of the public addressed the Commission during the meeting or
submitted written comments in advance of the meeting. All written comments (letters and emails) were
included in the attachments for the meeting or distributed prior to the meeting if they were submitted after
the agenda packet was delivered to Commissioners. Rather than list all individuals that have addressed the
City along with their specific comments, staff has instead drafted a summary of the comments focusing on
the major issues and concerns raised by those in favor and opposed to the request. In addition to the
written comments, the minutes from the meeting include a summary of each individual speaker (all
received written comments and the minutes are included in the Council meeting attachments).
General Summary of Comments and Concerns Opposed to the Request:
• Increased traffic in the area; traffic has already been
increasing with surrounding development; increased
traffic on adjacent local roads that are narrow and
curved
• Safety for walkers and bikers along Bacardi; lack of
sidewalks or paths in the area; the road is narrow
with no shoulder
• One of the primary routes to the site passes by Red
Pine Elementary School.
• The speed of traffic along Bacardi Avenue is a
concern; the 50mph is too high
• There is a dangerous curve at 120th Street and
Bacardi; several cars have left the road in this
location.
• There is the potential for an increase in impaired
drivers along Bacardi
• The brewery will change the residential character of
the area; businesses should not be allowed in a
residential area
• The use is better suited in business district or
downtown; the business could make use of existing
vacant space in commercial areas
• The proposal goes against comprehensive plan
calling for preservation of north central and
3
northwest portion of Rosemount for rural residential
development
• The project does not promote renewal and
expansion in existing commercial areas
• Infrastructure in the area is inadequate to support
commercial uses
• Potential impacts to wetland features
• The site is not an economically viable location for a
taproom; the use would be better situated along a
busier road
• Potential impacts to insurance rates and property
values
• There is limited access to site and all access would be
through residential areas
• Several uncontrolled railroad crossings in the area
are a potential safety hazard
• The surrounding roads are not adequate to serve the
proposes use (unmarked gravel roads and residential
streets)
• There is no street lighting in the area
• There are numerous other opportunities to purchase
liquor in the community
• The lack of public water and sewer to serve project
• The hours of operation will be incompatible with
surrounding residential uses
• Truck traffic is not compatible with the residential
and scenic qualities of the area
• There are potential problems for wells during dry
periods due to increase in water usage by the
brewery
• A brewery would negatively impact the adjacent
nature preserve
• The brewery would be located within a Metro
Conservation Corridor; the use could impact wildlife
in the area
• The use would lead to the paving of Bacardi Avenue
and potential extensions of water and sewer service
• Increased noise from cars and activity at brewery
• Other breweries are not located in a residential area
• Concern about an increase in crime with increases in
traffic and activity
• There is the potential for other impacts including
odors, dust, and trash
General Summary of Comments Supportive of the Request:
• Convenience of having a local brewery and keeping
business in town
• The setting is attractive for a microbrewery and
taproom and would allow the public to enjoy the
natural features of the site
• Traffic has already increased in the area and will
continue to do so with or without a brewery
• The City can take steps to minimize impacts like
building a trail
• The project would add a needed family-friendly
public gathering place in the City
• The project would lead to an increase in local
economic activity
• Traffic is not an issue at other rural breweries
• The proposal is low-key and appropriate in a rural
area
• The project supports the goals in Comprehensive
Plan for providing local shopping, entertainment,
employment, and community gathering facilities
• The proposal is consistent with the planned
development of the area
• There would be an increase in community pride with
a local brewing establishment
Commissioners generally discussed the application and public hearing comments and stated that they
would like to see additional information before deciding on the matter. Staff indicated that the City would
try to gather information about the seating capacity and patronage at other similar facilities to come up
with a better estimation of the expected traffic. Commissioners also commented that the building should
be set back further from the road to be more consistent with existing development along Bacardi Ave and
that the parking area should not be directly across from the neighbor’s house. It was also suggested that
additional screening could be used to help hide the commercial use from other properties. The
Commission voted to continue its discussion on the application and directed staff to research the size and
capacity of other similar breweries.
Planning Commission Meeting – 5/12/20
For the subsequent Planning Commission meeting, staff identified and gathered information on several
breweries focusing on those that are somewhat similar in size and operation to the proposed use. The
complete list of breweries reviewed along with the information collected about each one is included as an
attachment. Please note that all but two of the breweries are located within the state of Minnesota in a
variety of different settings ranging from suburban downtowns to large agricultural acreages. The intent of
4
focusing on the chosen breweries was to provide a good cross section of breweries of roughly the same
size as the proposed North 20 building. Staff was able to find information on seating capacity for almost
all the surveyed businesses, and through direct contact was able to get a good estimate of the typical
number of customers each day for six of the businesses. Unfortunately, due to the current pandemic
restrictions and reduced staffing and operating hours for these types of uses, staff was not able to obtain
any additional customer details for others. In order to further help visualize what some of these sites look
like (especially in rural areas), staff has provided aerial images of four breweries on the list.
Looking at the information in the spreadsheet, there are a few things that stand out and are relevant to the
City’s review of the North 20 Brewing proposal:
• Overall the breweries surveyed are open on a more limited bases than the hours initially proposed
by the applicant. The days of operation and hours of operation do vary however, with larger
facilities and those offering more traditional restaurant and expanded bar options open for longer
periods of time. Breweries in urban settings also tended to have more expansive hours of
operation than those located in more rural settings.
• The seating capacity of the surveyed businesses ranged from 58 seats to over 400, with the median
somewhere around 100. These numbers are skewed by the larger venues which often have large
outdoor seating areas available for use in the warmer months.
• Many of the breweries include either separate or connected event spaces that can accommodate
larger group gatherings or events like weddings and receptions. The applicant’s request does not
include such space, which would be outside the scope of the requested conditional use permit.
• For those that were able to provide information about the number of customers served, the results
varied from 50-80 customers per day on a typical weekday for smaller operations up to 500-700
customers a day during peak weekend days in the summer in larger facilities (especially those with
patio seating).
While the overall sample size of the businesses surveyed is small, it does provide insight into the operation
of other similar businesses and the proposed microbrewery. In particular, the applicant’s microbrewery
and taproom generally will have more in common with the smaller taprooms and breweries, will not have a
large outdoor patio searing area (compared to some of the others), and will not include event space that
can generate significant peak periods of activity on nights and weekends.
Staff presented updated information to the Planning Commission on May 12th and addressed questions
from Commissioners concerning the strip of property adjacent to Bacardi Avenue, traffic and safety
concerns along Bacardi Avenue and 120th Street, and the hours of operation. The applicant noted that
they did not agree with the reduced hours of operation proposed by Staff and asked that the Commission
consider later hours that would allow customers to take advantage of the longer daylight hours during
summer months, particularly on the patio. The applicant further explained their plans for the property,
stating that they envision a small neighborhood brewery that is very family-friendly. The Commission
discussed the hours of operation and worked with the applicant to arrive at recommended hours of 4pm
to 9pm Monday through Thursday, 4pm to 10:00 on Friday, 11am to 10pm on Saturday, and 11am to 9pm
on Sunday. The outdoor patio will close at 9pm every day. These hours are a condition of approval.
The Planning Commission acknowledged that although the public hearing was closed, the City had
received several written comments since the previous meeting. After summarizing each of the new letters
and emails, the Commission allowed additional public comment concerning the request, and received four
comments in support of the microbrewery, six comments opposed, and one operational question. The
Commission discussed the information presented by staff and the applicant in addition to the comments
received from the public. Much of the discussion focused on the safety issues associated with Bacardi
Avenue and the pending speed study that will be performed by the City.
5
After completing it review, the Commission approved the requested variances and recommended approval
of the Simple Plat and CUP for the microbrewery with revisions to the hours of operation as follows:
Monday – Thursday 4-9p.m.; Friday 4-10p.m.; Saturday 11a.m.-10p.m.; and Sunday 11a.m.-9p.m. with the
patio staying open until 9 pm each night. The Commission’s vote on the two Council recommendations
were split (5 ayes to 2 nays for the Simple Plat and 4 ayes and 3 nays for the CUP). The dissenting voters
noted the change in character from residential to commercial and safety concerns along Bacardi Avenue as
the primary reasons for their votes.
As part of its discussion, the Planning Commission strongly recommended that the City conduct a speed
study along Bacardi Avenue north of Bonaire Path, and that this study also investigate options for
improving safety along this corridor. The Commission asked that this study be completed as soon as
possible once traffic patterns are back to normal conditions (post-pandemic restrictions). Staff noted that
the speed study is intended to reflect how people typically drive along the road based on the conditions of
the road, and that just because a speed limit is lowered doesn’t always result in the drivers changing their
driving behavior.
Since the May 12 Planning Commission meeting and in advance of the City Council meeting, the City has
received 6 additional emails in opposition to the request, and 1 email in support of the request. All
comments have been added to the attachments and other comments received.
Revised Site Plan
Prior to the May meeting, the applicant had submitted an updated site plan that moved the proposed
building further to the east and south of its previous location. The plan was prepared in direct response to
some of the feedback from the previous meeting and follow-up conversations with City staff. The
building is now oriented parallel with Bacardi Avenue and moved further away from both the road and the
neighboring property to the north (the nature preserve). Under the original plan, the building would have
been set back 50 feet from the Bacardi Avenue right-of-way and approximately 170 feet from the northern
property line. As revised, the applicant is now proposing a setback of 118 feet from the right-of-way and
217 feet from the north. The outdoor seating/patio area is somewhat more refined on the updated plan as
well and has been designed to accommodate roughly 23 seats around the northeastern corner of the
building. The entrance has also shifted to the south by about 40 feet, which means the southernmost edge
of the parking lot will be directly across from the neighbor’s driveway on the other side of Bacardi Avenue
(this still leaves the proposed brewery and most of the parking lot well north of the neighbors’ house).
The parking area has been adjusted in accordance with the other site revisions, and now also is aligned
parallel with Bacardi Avenue instead of being situated at a 45-degree angle to the street.
The updated site plan does address some of the City’s previous review comments; however, since the City
did not receive a full set of updated plans (including grading, drainage, erosion control, and storm water
management plans) until the week before the Council meeting, any approval of the revised plan must be
conditioned upon City approval of all updated documents. Based on staff’s initial review, the updated plan
should function comparable to the previous submission, and offers the following improvements over the
initial layout:
• The updated plan provides a larger setback from Bacardi Avenue and the nature preserve
providing additional space from neighboring properties.
• The plan allows for more parking spaces, including four additional spaces beyond the ones shown,
and provides some opportunities for overflow parking further to the south.
• It provides additional space for screening and landscaping between the parking area and Bacardi
Avenue.
6
• It allows the applicant to take advantage of views to the north and east while keeping outdoor
seating and overhead doors facing away from residential homes.
In order to further minimize the potential for traffic backing up into Bacardi Avenue or parking along the
public street, staff had requested the applicant designate a parking overflow area that could accommodate
any peak demand periods that exceeds the lot capacity. The most recent plan submittal includes a parking
overflow area. Final review of the all grading plans will include an evaluation of feasibility of this location
from a topographic standpoint; however, the location is reasonable.
BACKGROUND
The applicant owns the property at 12296 Bacardi Avenue which currently houses a single-family
residential structure (non-homestead) and a 3,300 square foot detached accessory building. The site is
located a little more than one mile north of Bonaire Path and ¼ mile south of 120th Street on the eastern
side of Bacardi Avenue. Overall the property slopes from its highest point along Bacardi Avenue in the
northwest part of the site towards the east and includes a series of rolling hills and valleys that lead to a
wetland at the far eastern property boundary extending into the adjacent parcel. The site is split between
open fields and grass areas in the northern half of the property and heavily wooded areas covering the
southern portion of the property.
The subject property is located within the City’s north-central rural area and is outside of the 2040 planned
urban service area (MUSA). The site is not planned to have public sewer and water services within the
time-frame of the recently adopted land use plan. All of the surrounding properties are either large-lot
rural residential (larger than 5 acres per house), permanent open space, or are being used for active
agricultural activity. The zoning in the area reflects the current property uses, with a mixture of rural
residential zoning for the smaller residential sites and agricultural zoning for the larger parcels of land.
Most of the property surrounding the applicant’s site is zoned agricultural except for the 5-acre residential
property immediately across Bacardi Avenue.
One of the issues unique to this portion of the City that must be addressed by the applicant is the current
alignment of Bacardi Avenue next to the properties abutting it. In this area, Bacardi Avenue does not
follow the adjacent section line like other roads in the City, and there is a gap between the edge of
prescriptive road right-of-way and properties to the east. This gap is currently owned by the property
owner on the west side of the road, which presents two problems. First, the applicant technically owns a
parcel that does not directly abut right-of-way and therefore cannot be developed without such access (the
existing driveway may have some grandfathered rights, but this is a legal question outside the scope of the
City’s land use authority). Secondly, the City’s zoning and setback requirements are measured from
property lines, which pushes any buildings or other improvements much further back from the road than
would otherwise be required by the City with a standard right-of-way. This issue has come up in other
projects along Bacardi Avenue, including the Leidner subdivision and the City’s purchase of the Wiklund
property to the north. The applicant has acknowledged this problem and has indicated that he will work
to resolve the property issue with the adjoining property owner. The adjoining property owner has signed
off on the application to permit the review process to proceed and the applicant has indicated that he has a
signed purchase agreement for the gap property.
The applicant is proposing to construct a new microbrewery structure on the northwest portion of the
property that will include a brewing area, taproom, meeting room, outdoor patio, parking area, and related
improvements including a new well and septic treatment area. The microbrewery will be 4,355 square feet
in size and designed to look like a rural structure complete with gabled barn-style roof, vertical siding
panels (composite/fiber cement siding), large overhead doors, and other decorative elements intended to
mimic a barn or other agricultural structure. The proposed microbrewery will be located on a relatively
flat portion of the site closer to Bacardi Avenue than the existing single-family home and will be accessed
via a new driveway about 450 feet north of the residential driveway.
7
Within the structure roughly half of the floor space would be devoted to the brewing operation, which will
include fermentation tanks, coolers, and other brewing equipment. The other portions of the operation
will include a bar and seating area for the taproom, restrooms, meeting area, and kitchen. The applicant
has indicated the kitchen will serve a limited menu of food items (i.e. pizza and appetizers) to compliment
the beer available for sale. The plans also include an outdoor concrete patio in the northeast corner of the
building to provide an outdoor seating area for patrons of the facility. The overall interior seating capacity
is expected to be 89 persons, with an additional 23 seats available in the patio area, which results in a
parking requirement of 38 stalls (including the brewery operations).
The City’s zoning regulations include several different categories for breweries and related uses, and the
City has chosen to allow certain types of actives in agricultural areas through a conditional use permit to
help promote these types of activities within the community. The specific uses allowed are spelled out in
the zoning ordinance as follows: Farm wineries, with or without associated event spaces, microbreweries,
microdistilleries, winery associated retail and restaurants without drive-through facilities. Specifically
looking at microbreweries, the zoning ordinance defines these and related uses as:
BREWERY, MICRO: A facility that produces not more than three thousand five hundred (3,500)
barrels of malt liquor in a calendar year as regulated by Minnesota statutes, as may be amended.
TAPROOM: An area within a microbrewery, small brewery or brewery; or a premise adjacent to the
microbrewery, small brewery or brewery and under the same ownership as the microbrewery, small
brewery or brewery; that provides the on-sale of the malt liquor produced by the microbrewery, small
brewery or brewery.
Under this definition, the facility will be limited to the overall amount of beer that can be brewed over the
course of a year and is the smallest of the brewery categories defined by the code. Also listed above is the
definition for a taproom since the applicant is asking to include one as part of his proposed facility. Please
note that a taproom as defined limits the sale of beer only to that produced on the premises, must be
adjacent to the brewery, and must be under the same ownership as the brewery. Because the uses allowed
within an AG zoning district include winery with restaurants without drive-through facilities and notes
microbreweries in the same section, the applicant’s proposed kitchen and seating area is allowed as part of
the conditional use permit request.
No septic or soils data has been provided to the City, and the applicant will also need to demonstrate
compliance with the City’s well and septic system design requirements prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
ISSUE ANALYIS
There are three components to the request in front of the Planning Commission, and staff will be
reviewing the most important information related to each in the sections below. Please note that the
required site plan review is processed as part of a conditional use permit and is also included in the
sections that follow.
Subdivision - Simple Plat
The applicant is proposing construct the microbrewery on property he presently owns at 12296 Bacardi
Avenue; however, due to issues associated with the project financing (among other reasons) he is
requesting a subdivision to split the brewery parcel from the existing residential home site. The existing
parcel and property to be acquired adjacent to Bacardi Avenue is 20.84 acres in size, and the applicant is
proposing to subdivide the property into two parcels of 2.5 acres and 17.85 acres in size, with the smaller
parcel created specifically for the proposed microbrewery and majority of the site remaining with the
residential structure. As you will note from adding up these two areas, the proposed subdivision includes
8
some additional land not currently owned by the applicant.
Due to the issue associated with the Bacardi Avenue right-of-way as noted above, the applicant is
proposing to include additional land currently owned by the neighboring property across Bacardi Avenue
with the proposed subdivision. This will allow the applicant to plat to the centerline of the road and utilize
all the property on the east of the road (the “gap” area). To date the City has received an
acknowledgement from the affected property owner consenting to the application moving forward;
however, the applicant does yet not control this property but does have a signed purchase agreement with
the owner. The land use request as presented cannot move forward without this change in ownership and
failure to address this issue will render the remaining CUP request null and void since it is dependent on
the site plan and simple plat depicted. The additional land to be acquired is approximately one acre, and all
lies east of the centerline of Bacardi Avenue.
The property owner to the south has also indicated that he controls an easement across the applicant’s
property that dates back to a time before Bacardi Avenue existed in its present configuration. This owner
is concerned that the proposed subdivision and construction will eliminate a potential access option
considering the right-of-way alignment issues along Bacardi Avenue. Please note that this is a private
easement and is not a document that can be enforced or used by the City. As such, staff does not believe
this is a matter that the City should try to regulate since it pertains to private property agreements. Staff is
suggesting that the owners resolve and potential conflicts as a condition of approval, and the applicant has
indicated that he has already approached the owner to discuss this issue.
Another issue with the proposed subdivision is that the 2.5-acre brewery parcel does not meet the density
requirements for the AG – Agriculture zoning district. The zoning ordinance requires a maximum density
of one dwelling unit per 40 acres. Although no housing is proposed for the smaller lot, staff’s
interpretation of the code is that the minimum number of parcels that can be created from a 40-acre site is
one under this standard. In this case, the 20-acre lot is already below the density threshold established by
the zoning ordinance. In order to move forward with the request as presented, the applicant has therefore
applied for a variance to allow the subdivision of a lot below the minimum requirements of the AG zoning
district. Related to this request, the larger parcel does not have the required frontage of 300 feet along
Bacardi Avenue, which also requires a variance from the City’s requirements. The Board of Appeals and
Adjustments approved the requested variances which allows the application as presented to move forward.
The applicant is proposing a simple plat for the subdivision, which allows the City to waive some of the
normal subdivision application requirements and to combine the preliminary and final plat review into one
action. While the proposed plat does create two new buildable parcels, the resulting rural lots will not be
served by any new public improvements (roads or public sewer and water); therefore, many of the City’s
standard plat application materials are not necessary for this subdivision.
Variance Request and Approval
The applicant requested the Board of Appeals and Adjustments (Planning Commission) granted variances
from the AG – Agricultural zoning district lot width and density regulations as follows:
• Section 11-4-1 (F-2) Minimum Lot Width. This section of code specifies that the minimum lot
width for in an AG zoning district is 300 feet and the applicant is proposing to create a lot with a
width of 239.23 feet.
• Section 11-4-1 (F-6) Maximum Gross Density. The maximum density is one dwelling unit per
40 acres and the applicant is proposing to create two lots under the 40-acre requirement as the two
lots combined are approximately 20.84 acres.
9
The Board’s findings for the granting of the variances are include in the attached resolution approving the
variances. With revisions made to the plans since the Council meeting, the applicant will be able to meet
the minimum lot size threshold of 2.5 acres. To ensure this is addressed in the final plat documents, staff
is recommending a condition of approval clarifying the required minimum lot size for the brewery parcel.
Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit Review
The site plan review and conditional use permit review comments are included as part of the following
section. The proposed conditional use would allow the construction of a 4,355 square foot microbrewery
and taproom and related ancillary uses from a parcel with direct access to Bacardi Avenue.
Building and Materials
The applicant is proposing to construct a building to house the microbrewery and taproom that mimics
the appearance of a historic barn or granary building typical of the region. The predominant feature will
be vertical composite siding with a gable roof facing Bacardi Avenue to the west. Accents will include
corrugated metal in limited quantities along with a mix of wood and glass for the doors and windows.
Two larger roll-up doors will provide access to a patio area facing east and overlooking the natural areas
east of the building. The proposed plans include an expansion area on the northwest side of the building;
however, any expansion is not included as part of the current request and would be subject to City
approval at a future date.
The City does not identify any specific design requirements for a microbrewery in an agricultural zoning
district, therefore the proposed design should be reviewed for consistency with the City’s agricultural and
residential standards for the AG district. As proposed, the building meets or exceeds the City’s standards
for such uses.
Building Layout and Setbacks
Internally the proposed building will divide space between the actual brewing operations and the
taproom/ancillary uses related to the microbrewery. The northwest portion of the building will house the
fermentation tanks, coolers, and other brewing equipment while the remainder of the structure will be
devoted to the taproom, restrooms, kitchen, and a small meeting room. The applicant has stated that the
taproom will serve a light menu intended to supplement the main brewing activity taking place within the
facility. The taproom will be able to accommodate up to 89 individuals with seating at a bar area, tables,
and the meeting room. Two larger roll-up doors facing toward the east will provide access to an outdoor
patio area.
The building is configured on the site to face towards the southwest and at a roughly 45-degree angle to
Bacardi Avenue. The parking lot will also be angled in the same manner and will extend from the front
building line to the southwest corner of the property. A walkway is proposed in front of the building that
will wrap around the building to the outdoor patio. The site plan also documents the proposed storm
water ponding area, potential future expansion area, the location of the trash enclosure, and the primary
and alternative septic treatment areas.
As drafted, the site plan has been designed to meet all applicable building setbacks in the AG zoning
district. Most notably, the closest portion of the building facing Bacardi Avenue and all parking areas will
be set back at least 50 feet from the front property line/street right-of-way, which is the minimum front
yard setback required in this zoning district. With over 2 acres around the building, the site plan conforms
to the minimum side and rear setbacks of 30 feet as well. Please note that the setbacks assume that the
applicant will be able to obtain fee title to and plat the gap property between the current parcel and
Bacardi Avenue.
10
Access and Parking
The proposed access to the site will occur with a new private driveway about 450 feet north of the
driveway to the single-family residence on the property. This driveway will lead to a 35-stall parking lot in
front of the microbrewery. The parking lot incudes four additional proof-of parking stalls that would not
be constructed with the building, but that could be installed relatively quickly if the demand arises for these
stalls. The 39 stalls meet the minimum requirements of the off-street parking ordinance based on a seating
capacity of 112 for the tap room/general seating area (one stall per three seats) and the total gross floor
area devoted to the microbrewery (one stall per 500 square feet of gross floor area). A condition of
approval prohibits parking along Bacardi Avenue for the use and the applicant would have to provide an
overflow parking area if demand exceeds the number of stalls provided. The applicant is proposing a
gravel or recycled asphalt and cement material for the driveway and parking whereas the code typically
requires a hard surface (concrete or bituminous surface) for these surfaces.
Because Bacardi Avenue is not paved adjacent to the property, staff is recommending a condition of
approval that requires the driveway and parking area to be paved at the time the City paves Bacardi
Avenue in front of the microbrewery. Paving of Bacardi Avenue is not in the City’s 10-year Capital
Improvement Program, and the traffic expected from the microbrewery is not extensive enough to
requiring paving on its own.
Traffic Review
Prior to the May 12th Planning Commission meeting, staff reached out to the City’s transportation
consultant (Bolton and Menk) and asked them to provide a general analysis of the anticipated traffic from
the proposed microbrewery. One of the problems faced with performing this review, however, is that the
ITE Trip General Manual used to estimate traffic generated by various uses and activities does not include
a category specific for a brewery or taproom. The closest use based on the definitions used by the manual
is a Winery (defined as being in a rural area and to which people must drive to consume their beverages
and with the possibility of special events). The problem in using this category is that these types of uses
are expected to have peak traffic periods based on events and the seasonal nature of the business, and this
is reflected in a very high number of weekend trips compared to weekday trips for the use. A second
category called “Drinking Place” was also considered for the analysis but was not used to estimate traffic
because the definition and expected activity was not consistent with a microbrewery and taproom.
Staff had reviewed the survey information with the City’s transportation consultant, and generally
discussed some of the feedback from the meeting with them. As a result of these conversations, their
initial projections were adjusted downward by 25% to eliminate the manufacturing area of the proposed
brewery from the projections. With this adjustment, the expected traffic generated the brewery would be
approximately 150-200 trips during the week and 650 each week-end day. Please keep in mind that these
numbers are based on a winery use that considers a higher peak demand period than would be expected
with a brewery and taproom. In order to further refine the traffic estimate, staff is suggesting that the
customer visits provided by the surveyed breweries be used to approximate a number more specific to a
brewery use. Based on these numbers (looking at similar sized breweries) staff estimates that there could
be 50-100 trips each week day and 200-500 trips per day on Saturdays and Sundays. This number is based
on a general count of customers visiting the site and attempting to account for shared rides, employee
trips, and delivery vehicles. The actual traffic to the site will vary depending on a number of factors
including time of the year, weather, other events occurring in the City, etc.
One of the concerns that has repeatedly been expressed by residents of the area is safety along Bacardi
Avenue, which is a rural, two land undivided gravel road. Like other roads in the community, this road has
an expected capacity (i.e. number of cars that can use the road while maintaining a reasonable level of
service) and the City will continue to monitor the number of cars and speed of traffic along this road with
or without the microbrewery. Based on the latest MnDOT projections from 2018, traffic on Bacardi
averaged 750 vehicles per day in the southern section of the road near the Bonaire Path intersection and
11
140 vehicles per day near the 120th Street curve (for comparison Bonaire Path averages approximately 2000
vehicles for day). Given the location of the testing meters, it appears the traffic count in front of the
subject property is between 150-200 vehicles a day (a relatively low number compared to other streets in
the City). The City’s transportation plan contains estimates for the capacity of various types of roadways
in the community, and for example, a two-lane undivided road can accommodate 6,000 vehicles per day
while maintaining a reasonable level of service (level of service C). With a gravel road, there are certainly
factors that make a direct comparison to a paved road more difficult, but based the City’s traffic planning
plan and forecasts, Bacardi should be able to accommodate the expected traffic from the brewery based on
the most recent traffic counts.
One issue consistently raised by neighbors was the curve near 120th and the number of autos that leave the
road during certain weather conditions. Staff had requested a review of accidents by the Rosemount PD
and found there are no incidents over the last 5 years in that location. There was an accident in 2016 and
2017 at Bonaire and Bacardi. Staff has not approached Eagan PD as Rosemount has access to county-wide
accident reports through our local CAD system.
Bacardi is one of only a small number of gravel roads left in the City, and two existing segments of such
roads are being paved this year (the southern section of Biscayne Avenue and the northernmost portion of
Akron Avenue). The traffic projections show increasing levels of traffic on the northern segment of
Bacardi Avenue without the Brewery, and these numbers will continue to move upwards with growth and
development within Rosemount and neighboring communities. As noted during the public hearing
concerning the microbrewery, the City has been planning to conduct a speed study along Bacardi Avenue
in 2021, partially in response to development in the area and partly due to ever changing traffic patterns in
the community. While this study will focus on evaluating the most appropriate speed limit for Bacardi
Avenue, it will give the City a chance to examine other issues and concerns with the roadway. Whether or
not the microbrewery is approved, this study will give the City a chance to further study potential safety
issues along the roadway. One of the challenges in planning for Bacardi Avenue is that it is a local access
road that functions more as a collector carrying traffic between Bonaire Path and South Robert Trail
through Eagan.
Considering the road and traffic situation, staff is recommending some mitigation strategies that could be
adopted with the proposal to help reduce the expected impact on traffic and safety along Bacardi Avenue,
including the following:
• Provide adequate parking on the site to eliminate any parking along Bacardi Avenue. The
applicant has prepared a revised site plan that accommodates additional parking over the initial
plan. This plan depicts 35 stalls, with the potential to add an additional four stalls if needed. Staff
is recommending that a specific overflow parking area be designated to further guarantee that
parking will not occur along Bacardi Avenue or within surrounding residential neighborhoods, and
any impact associated with an unusual peak demand period will be absorbed on the site.
• As an optional strategy, the City could install no parking signs along Bacardi Avenue. This step
may not be necessary if the applicant properly manages parking on the site.
Ultimately, the size and impacts of the microbrewery project will be limited by the site, operational
management, and the size of the proposed building. Even if the demand is there for larger gatherings or if
there are especially busy periods, the number of seats within the facility is finite, and the CUP approval
includes a specific area for outdoor seating that cannot be expanded without further review and approval
by the City. Revised conditions of approval have been drafted to clarify the City’s expectation concerning
these site and parking issues.
12
Wetlands
There is a large wetland complex located immediately east of the applicant’s parcel, and a small portion of
this wetland area encroaches on to the subject parcel. Because it is nearly 1,000 feet from the proposed
construction activity, staff is not requiring that the applicant complete a full wetland delineation for the
property and is instead suggesting that the applicant include drainage and utility easements up to the
required buffer of the wetland as required under the City’s wetland management ordinances. In addition
to the drainage and utility easements, the applicant will also need to dedicate a conservation easement over
the same areas. The limits of the buffering may be based on the ordinary high-water level of the
waterbody on this portion of the site.
Lighting
The applicant has not submitted a specific lighting plan, but the building elevation drawings depict light
fixtures on the side of the building. The City Engineer is recommending additional lighting near the
driveway entrance to improve the safety at this entrance for vehicles at night. Staff is recommending that
the applicant prepare a lighting plan for the property, and that this plan use downcast fixtures to minimize
glare to adjacent properties.
Bacardi Avenue Right-of-Way
As currently proposed, the applicant would be acquiring property to the centerline of Bacardi Avenue, and
then would in turn dedicate the required right-of-way back to the City as part of the subdivision. The
width of the right-of-way is consistent with other dedications in the area, and the 33 feet would match the
partial dedication on the opposite side of the road.
Utilities
The site is located outside of the City’s planned urban service area, and the applicant is proposing to
construct a new private sewage treatment system and private well to serve the microbrewery. Both
systems must be designed to accommodate the expected commercial demand from the proposed uses and
must be sized to meet all current state department of health and pollution control agency standards.
Grading and Storm Water Management
The applicant has submitted a grading plan with the site and development plans along with a storm water
plan that has been reviewed by the City Engineer. The plan calls for the creation of a storm water
infiltration basin in the southeast corner of the microbrewery property that will collect new storm water
runoff from the building and parking lot. The structure will be constructed on a relatively flat portion of
the property, but some grading is necessary to level the building site and to drain the parking area towards
the infiltration basin. The City Engineer’s report includes several comments concerning the stormwater
plan that will need to be address by the applicant prior to construction of the facility.
Landscaping
A separate landscape plan has been submitted with the application, and the plan depicts 18 evergreen trees
planted around the perimeter of the parking area. The plan does not call for the removal of any existing
trees on the site, and the building and parking lot are in an open area of the property away from the tree
line around the northern property boundary and the single-family home. A portion of the septic area does
slightly encroach into the northern tree line, and the applicant is encouraged to minimize any disruption to
the trees in this area when the drain field is constructed.
The zoning ordinance does not require any specific plantings within AG zoning districts; however, because
the proposed use is commercial in nature, staff would like to see the development adhere to the
commercial landscaping standards of one tree per 3,000 square feet of area. The commercial standards
also require foundation plantings of one planting per 10 linear feet of building and should also be met by
the applicant.
13
Development Fees
Although many of the City’s standard development fees will not apply to the proposed subdivision
because it will not be served by public water and sewer service, there are two development fees that will
apply as follows:
• Fee in Lieu of Land Dedication - $9,000per acres for commercial development.
• Surface Water Trunk Area Assessment - $6,865 per acre.
Because the new development is focused on the microbrewery lot (Lot 1, Block 1) staff is recommending
that the fees apply only to the 2.5-acre parcel. Development fees for any future development or
redevelopment of the single-family home parcel (Lot 2, Block 1) would need to be reevaluated in the
future. This site is located outside of the City’s MUSA boundary and no further development is
anticipated under the Comprehensive Plan.
Other Concerns
After the initial Planning Commission meeting, staff contacted the Minnesota Department of Health to
discuss any potential concerns with the installation of a new private well to serve the microbrewery. Based
on the anticipated water usage for the facility, it does fall short of needing approval from the Minnesota
DNR and will be permitted by Dakota County like other private wells within the City. The DNR can
investigate and enforce issues associated with well interference (when one well directly impacts another in
some manner), but the hydrologist from the Department of Health noted that these have typically only
occurred under temporary dewatering situations (i.e. the installation of major public infrastructure)
through areas of ground water) or with large amounts of irrigation (golf courses). Through the County’s
permitting process, the well will be surveyed every few years, water samples will be collected, and site will
be visited on an annual basis to check for any potential issues. Similarly, the applicant will need to secure
appropriate permits from either the Department of Health or Department of Agriculture to serve food
and beverages on the premises. The type of food served will determine the appropriate regulating body.
Since one of the major concerns from residents continues to be potential visual impacts from the
microbrewery, staff is asking that the applicant provide full screening from the parking lot to Bacardi
Avenue through the landscape plan. Additional trees may need to be included on the plan between the
parking area and the street, and the landscape plan should be updated accordingly.
The applicant will still need to provide buffers around the wetlands on the site, and the City will be
determining the appropriate wetland line to use for determining these buffers. Ultimately, the wetland line
and buffer easement will need to be included on the plat, and the applicant will need to dedicate
conservation easements over these areas.
Because revised detailed plans still need to be submitted, the City Engineer has not updated her pervious
review comments but has updated the memorandum to specify a more detailed review can commence
once the full set of updated plans (including storm water management plan) are submitted.
Conditional Use Permit
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.
Staff is listing the requirements for approving a conditional use permit int the following section, along with
a set of draft findings that may be considered by the Planning Commission based on the development and
site plan review as presented.
14
Review and Analysis (CUP Requirements and Draft Findings)
1) Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city.
Finding: The zoning ordinance allows certain specific activities that are more commercial in
nature within the AG – Agricultural zoning district and that allow a reasonable economic return on
larger parcels that have historically been used for farming activities but are no longer viable for
such activities. The site design and conditions of approval are intended to address any off-site
impacts from construction and operation of a microbrewery on the site. The brewing of beer and
service of food and beverages will take place entirely within enclosed structure except for an
outdoor patio facing away from the public street.
2) Will be harmonious with the objectives of the comprehensive plan and city code provisions. Finding: The site is
guided for Rural Residential land uses, and the AG – Agricultural zoning district is listed as an
acceptable zoning for this land category. The Comprehensive Plan supports activities that
promote a reasonable economic return on larger agricultural properties outside of the City’s MUSA
boundary. The Plan further supports the expansion of restaurant and local shopping opportunities
within the community. The proposed microbrewery complies with all applicant site and building
design standards in the zoning ordinance.
3) 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 microbrewery is designed to resemble an agricultural building, and will use architectural
features and elements that look like a historic farm out building
4) 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 be served with private well and septic systems designed to meet current
standards and appropriately sized for the expected uses.
5) 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. Finding: All processing associated with the microbrewery will occur within an
enclosed building, and no external impacts, including noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors are
expected from the use.
6) Will have vehicular ingress and egress to the property which does not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic
on surrounding public streets. Finding: The use will generate additional truck and vehicular traffic,
but not in a capacity that would be substantially different from an active agricultural use. There is
sufficient capacity along Bacardi Avenue to handle additional traffic from the use. The applicant
has designed the site to comply with all parking and access spacing requirements.
7) 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 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. The site is located adjacent to the Wiklund Nature
Preserve, but the microbrewery will be situated over 150 feet from this boundary and will leave
existing trees along the northern property line in place that will act as a buffer to the preserve.
The AG – Agriculture zoning district includes several specific requirements for microbreweries as follows:
1) The site and building(s) shall be designed to limit the effects of this use on adjacent properties and public rights-of-
15
way. No loading docks or overhead vehicle doors shall be on a side abutting any public rights-of-way or any
residential use or district. Comment: the proposed building does not include a loading dock, and the
pull up doors providing access to the outdoor patio face away from the public street.
2) The principal building shall be the primary source for screening of the loading area or any required outdoor
equipment. Comment: Other than the screened trash enclosure area, the applicant is not planning
to install any outdoor equipment or designate a loading area for the facility.
3) All drives, loading and parking areas for the farm winery and associated uses shall be paved with a concrete or
bituminous surface including concrete curbing. Comment: Staff is recommending a condition of approval
that requires paving of the driveway and parking lot at the time the City paved Bacardi Avenue in
front of the use. The delay in paving is consistent with the agricultural character of the area.
4) Pedestrian circulation between the parking area and the farm winery and associated uses shall be provided through
sidewalks at least five feet (5') in width and paved with concrete, bituminous, pavers or similar hardscape.
Comment: A concrete walkway connecting the parking lot, building, and outdoor patio is shown
on the development plans.
5) Outdoor seating is subject to the performance standards outlined for outdoor seating in section 3-1-14 of this Code
and subsection 11-4-14D of this chapter. Comment: The applicant will need to comply with these
standards.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission and staff recommend approval of a Simple Plat and Conditional Use Permit
request to allow the establishment of a microbrewery and associated taproom at 12296 Bacardi Avenue.
The recommendation for approval is based on the information provided to the Planning Commission, the
draft findings of fact presented in this report, and the recommended conditions of approval for each
request.
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020- 74
A RESOLUTION APPROVING
A SIMPLE PLAT FOR NORTH 20 BREWERY
WHEREAS, the Planning Department received an application for approval of a Simple Plat for
North 20 Brewery located at 12296 Bacardi Avenue, legally described as follows:
The North ½ of the Southwest ¼ of the Northeast ¼ of Section 16, Township 115, Range 19,
Dakota County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount published notices in the official newspaper concerning the
application on February 14, 2020, and March 27, 2020, and mailed notices to property owners within
500 feet of the subject property on February 13, 2020 and March 25, 2020; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount conducted a public hearing as
required by ordinance for the purpose of receiving public comment regarding the proposed North
20 Brewery Simple Plat on February 26, 2020, April 14, 2020 and May 12, 2020; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application on April 14, 2020 and May 12,
2020 and found it consistent with the criteria for simple plat review outlined in the Subdivision
Ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend approval of the
application for a Simple Plat on May 12, 2020.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, The Council of the City of Rosemount does
hereby approve the North 20 Brewery Simple Plat subject to the following conditions:
1)Submission of updated grading, drainage, and erosion control plans and a storm water
management plan that reflects the updated site plan submitted for the May 12, 2020
Planning Commission meeting.
2)Dedication of drainage and utility easements on the final plat up to the required buffer
required by the City’s wetland conservation ordinance around the wetland depicted at the far
eastern portion of Lot 2, Block 1, standard drainage and utility easements around the
perimeter of the sites and along all drainageways.
3)Conservation easements in a form acceptable to the City shall be recorded with the final plat
and cover the wetland and wetland buffers as identified on the plat and associated drawings.
4)Recording of a deed restriction over Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 that prohibits the sale of the either
parcel independent from other property (residential and commercial) with specific
provisions and limitations as approved by the City Attorney.
5)Payment of a fee in lieu of park land dedication of $23,670 for Lot 1, Block 1. Additional
park dedication will be required upon any future development of Lot 2, Block 1.
6)Payment of the required storm water trunk area assessment of $6,865 per acre for the 2.5-
acre microbrewery parcel (Lot 1, Block 1) adjusted to apply to the final acreage on the final
plat. Additional storm water trunk area fees will be required upon any future subdivision of
the remaining parcel.
7) Each lot must accommodate a sewage treatment system meeting all City and County
requirements and designed by a licensed septic designer.
8) Construction of a well capable of providing the water demands for the microbrewery and
meeting all Dakota County and Minnesota Department of Health Standards.
9) Incorporation of recommendations from the City Engineer in a review memorandum dated
May 12, 2020 relative to drainage, grading, easements, utilities, storm water management, and
other subjects covered in the review.
10) The microbrewery will be required to connect to public water and sewer service should these
services become available to the parcel in the future.
11) The applicant shall work with the property owner to the south to resolve any private access
and easement issues within the subdivision prior to release of the plat for recording.
12) Applicant shall obtain fee title to the property identified as “Parcel 1” on the map labeled
Administrative Subdivision (Map C-1) to eliminate an existing gap between the subject
property and Bacardi Avenue right-of-way. This is required prior to release of the final plat.
13) The microbrewery parcel (Lot 1, Block 1) shall meet the minimum lot size of 2.5 acres for an
AG – Agricultural zoning district.
ADOPTED this 2nd day of June, 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- 75
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP)
FOR DAVID SCHMITZ TO ESTABLISH A MICROBREWERY AND ANCILLARY
TAPROOM ON LOT 1, BLOCK 1 OF THE NORTH 20 BREWERY ADDITION.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an
application from David Schmitz, 12296 Bacardi Avenue requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
to establish a microbrewery and ancillary taproom on Lot 1, Block 1 of the North 20 Brewery addition;
and
WHEREAS, on May 12, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount reviewed and
conducted a public hearing for the conditional use permit application of North 20 Brewery; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend that the City Council
approve the conditional use permit application for North 20 Brewery with conditions; and
WHEREAS, on June 2, 2020, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the Planning
Commission recommendations for the conditional use permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby
approves the conditional use permit to establish a microbrewery and ancillary taproom on Lot 1,
Block 1 of the North 20 Brewery addition, subject to the following conditions:
1.Submission of updated grading, drainage, and erosion control plans and a storm water management
plan that reflects the updated site plan submitted for the May 12, 2020 Planning Commission meeting.
2.Installation of septic system designed by a licensed septic designer and meeting all applicable city and
county standards.
3.Hours of operation shall be limited to the following: Monday-Thursday 4:00 PM to 9:00 PM; Friday
4:00 PM to 10:00 PM; Saturday 11:00 AM to 10:00 PM; Sunday 11:00 AM to 9:00 PM. On all days,
the outdoor patio shall be closed at 9:00 PM.
4.Secure a liquor license for the taproom and compliance with all City standards for the taproom as
regulated by the license.
5.Compliance with all requirements of the Building Official in a memorandum dated April 8, 2020.
6.All driveways and parking areas shall be capable of supporting access by emergency vehicles and
equipment.
7.The parking area shall comply with the minimum setback of 50 feet from the Bacardi Avenue right-
of-way.
8.The driveway and parking area shall be paved with concrete or bituminous surface at the time the city
paves Bacardi Avenue in front of the Microbrewery property at the owner’s expense. All parking stalls
shall be clearly marked to ensure the maximum capacity of the parking area is available for use at all
times.
9.No parking for patrons of the microbrewery is allowed along Bacardi Avenue or within surrounding
neighborhoods. Should parking problems occur at the site, the applicant will be required to expand
the on-site parking lot.
10.City may sign Bacardi Avenue for no parking if necessary.
11.The applicant shall designate an overflow parking area that may be used during peak visitation periods
above and beyond 4-proof of parking stalls depicted on site plan
12.Submission of a lighting plan that includes lighting at the driveway entrance and uses down cast
2
fixtures. All lighting shall comply with the City’s lighting requirements.
13. Submission of an updated landscape plan that meets the City’s minimum requirements for
commercial development (1 tree per 3,000 square feet of area) and that includes the required
foundation plantings. Additional plantings may be required along the western edge of the parking lot
to provide a fully screen the parking lot from Bacardi Avenue.
14. Compliance with the performance standards outlined for outdoor seating in section 3-1-14 and
subsection 11-4-14D of the City Code.
15. Submission of a dust control plan for the driveway and parking area.
16. The taproom operation shall operate in compliance with the City definition of a microbrewery which
means no more than 3,500 barrels of malt liquor can be produced in a calendar year and taproom
which means that sales are limited to the on-sale of the malt liquor produced by the brewery.
17. Outdoor live music or on-site food trucks are prohibited.
ADOPTED this 2nd day of June, 2020 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
__________________________________________
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Erin Fasbender, City Clerk
Hello Neighbor,
We are writing this letter to you, our neighbor, with the hope that we can have an open dialogue about the
proposed brewery on Bacardi Avenue. Like you, we have lived in this neighborhood for many years and want
to maintain and enjoy the “country” feel as much as possible. With that in mind, we would like to share some
of our thoughts and, hopefully, address some of your concerns.
After becoming friends with Bob and Jeanne Manseau, we purchased their Bacardi property in 2004 with the
idea of trying to do something with the property that would keep the land as open as possible. We appreciate
the beauty of the countryside and the wildlife that lives in the area. Since that time, development has crept up
all around us. Large housing additions have sprung up to the north and south, with other potential
developments in the works. We all have watched these housing developments get closer and closer. With the
new houses have come increased traffic on Bacardi Avenue. Like many of you, we enjoy walking on Bacardi
Avenue. This is becoming and will continue to become more difficult as the housing developments creep
closer.
When we purchased the property on Bacardi, we knew that it was not something we could afford to sit on
forever as a non-income producing property. We have thought about many ideas over the years such as a
wedding venue, brewery or housing development. Because of the topography, farming is not a viable option to
produce any significant income. For various reasons the most palatable idea has become the brewery idea.
The brewery concept allows us to keep the land in its most natural state and to share it with others in the
community. We have been working on this project for over five years and have done much research. The
research shows that there are benefits to landowners within a certain distance of the brewery, including
increased land values. The research also supports that a brewery will benefit the community in that it acts as a
social center for neighbors, families and friends. We see this brewery as an asset to the city of Rosemount and
especially to the neighborhood. I know many of us enjoy our open spaces, but it would also be nice to get to
know our neighbors better. The brewery could provide a social setting where we come together to visit.
Similar to many other breweries we have visited, we envision the setting of our brewery to be a family friendly
gathering space that promotes community and supports fun activities, such as local fundraisers and trivia
nights. A brewery is not a “bar,” but an establishment that proudly serves only craft beer and root beer that is
brewed on-site during limited hours.
We would love to discuss the brewery concept with you further. We had hoped to invite neighbors over for
continued conversation, but due to COVID-19, will have to settle for phone conversations or other forms of
communication, such as e-mails.
If you have questions about the proposed project, or would like to discuss it further, we can be reached at 651-
353-6176 or schmitdl@frontiernet.net. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. We are looking
forward to carrying on the conversation and hope to answer any concerns you might have.
Sincerely,
The Schmitz Family
Dave, Robin, Christian (Katie), Lauren (Ross), Jordan (Kelly) and Alison
PARCEL AThe SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 16, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County,Minnesota, EXCEPT the South 400 feet of the North 700 feet of the East 609 feet ofsaid SE 1/4 lying west of the following described line: Beginning 73.56 feet west ofthe northeast corner of said SE 1/4; thence S 1°01'24" E a distance of 800 feet andsaid line there terminating.PARCEL C400.0300.0609.0PARCEL BThe N 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 16,Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota.PARCEL CThe South 400 feet of the North 700 feet of the East 609 feet of the SE 1/4 of the NW1/4 of Section 16, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying west ofthe following described line: Beginning 73.56 feet west of the northeast corner of saidSE 1/4; thence S 1°01'24" E a distance of 800 feet and said line there terminating.PARCEL 1 (PORTION OF PARCEL A TO BE DEEDED TO PARCEL B)Beginning at the northeast corner of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 16, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County,Minnesota; thence S 89°46'59" W, assumed bearing, along the north line of said SE 1/4 a distance of 73.56 feet; thence S1°01'24" E a distance of 651.27 feet to the westerly extension of the south line of the N 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 ofsaid Section 16; thence N 89°47'32" E, along said south line, a distance of 61.34 feet to the east line of the SE 1/4 of theNW 1/4 of said Section 16; thence N 0°03'06" E, along said east line, a distance of 651.22 feet to the point of beginning.(43,924 SQ. FT.)PARCEL 1BACARDI AVENUE
BREWERYPROPERTY(2.82 ACRES)219.0422.0PROPOSED BREWERY PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONThe north 422 feet of the west 219 feet of the N 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 16, Township 115, Range 19,Dakota County, Minnesota.And,The north 422 feet of the following described parcel: Beginning at the northeast corner of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 ofSection 16, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota; thence S 89°46'59" W, assumed bearing, along thenorth line of said SE 1/4 a distance of 73.56 feet; thence S 1°01'24" E a distance of 651.27 feet to the westerly extensionof the south line of the N 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of said Section 16; thence N 89°47'32" E, along said south line, adistance of 61.34 feet to the east line of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 16; thence N 0°03'06" E, along said eastline, a distance of 651.22 feet to the point of beginning.APPRO Development, Inc.21476 Grenada AvenueLakeville, MN 55044952-469-2171ADMINISTRATIVESUBDIVISIONSCHMITZ BREW PUBROSEMOUNT, MN
BACARDI AVENUE NEW WELL50' FRONT BUILDING/PARKING SETBACKLOT 1BLOCK 1LOT 2BLOCK 1BREWERYFF=970.0PATIOAPPRO Development, Inc.21476 Grenada AvenueLakeville, MN 55044952-469-2171PRELIMINARY PLAT -NORTH 20 BREWERYADDITIONSCHMITZ BREW PUBROSEMOUNT, MNNOTES1. UTILITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE LOCATION. LOCATIONS OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES COMPILEDFROM VISUAL EVIDENCE (FLAGGING & PAINT MARKS) AND RECORD DRAWINGS (DESIGN & AS-BUILT).CALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 811 FOR ALL UTILITY, GAS LINE, AND ELECTRICAL LINE LOCATIONSPRIOR TO EXCAVATION.2. PROPERTY CURRENTLY ZONED AG (AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT). 3. SURVEY COMPLETED IN JANUARY, 2020.4. TOTAL AREA OF PROPERTY AS SHOWN:A. AREA OF PROPERTY TO BE PLATTED: 907,675 SQ. FT. (20.84 AC.)B. PROPOSED LOT 1, BLOCK 1 = 108,918 SQ. FT. (2.50 AC.)C. DEDICATED BACARDI AVENUE = 21,492 SQ. FT. (0.49 AC.)D. PROPOSED LOT 2, BLOCK 1 = 777,261 SQ. FT. (17.85 AC.)BENCHMARK - NAVD - 1988
33.0BACARDI AVENUE ALTERNATE SEPTICPRIMARY SEPTICNEW WELL969.4964.8INFILTRATIONBASINBOTTOM=953.0964.6SILT FENCERIP-RAP OVERFLOWELEV=956.550' FRONT BUILDING/PARKING SETBACK33' ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT30.030' SIDE YARD SETBACK969.5968.5TOP OF PONDELEV=957.5TRASH ENCL.MON. SIGNBREWERYFF=970.0RECYCLEDASHPHALT/CONCPARKINGPATIO968.99.024.024.0969.550.03' HIGH RET. WALLDOWNSPOUTS ATCORNERS OFBUILDINGSITE PLAN, ANDGRADING/DRAINAGEPLANPROPOSED LEGENDWATER MAINSANITARY SEWERSTORM SEWERWATER SERVICESANITARY SERVICECHAIN LINK FENCEVINYL/WOOD FENCELIGHT POLEHYDRANTWATER VALVESANITARY MANHOLESTORM MANHOLECATCH BASINSILT FENCEGRADING LIMITS999CONTOUR LINESPOT ELEVATIONDRAINAGE ARROWDETAILNOTESSSSWWWWSSSSNOTES1) UTILITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE LOCATION. LOCATIONS OF UNDERGROUNDUTILITIES COMPILED FROM VISUAL EVIDENCE (FLAGGING & PAINT MARKS) AND RECORDDRAWINGS (DESIGN & AS-BUILT). CALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 811 FOR ALL UTILITY,GAS LINE, AND ELECTRICAL LINE LOCATIONS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION.2) CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PER CITY SPECIFICATIONS.3) INSTALL SILT FENCE PRIOR TO EXCAVATION AS NEEDED.4) RE-VEGETATE THE SITE WITHIN 48 HOURS OF FINAL GRADING.5) CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE STOCK PILE AREAS AND CONCRETE WASHOUT AREASPRIOR TO EXCAVATION AND PROVIDE NECESSARY EROSION CONTROL.6) PROPOSED SLOPES AS SHOWN ARE NOT GREATER THAN 3:1.7) USE "CITY OF ROSEMOUNT UTILITY AND STREET CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS ANDSPECIFICATIONS" AND USE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT STANDARD PLATES.8) PROPOSED WELL AS SHOWN.9) SANITARY SERVICE WILL HAVE PRIMARY AND ALTERNATE SEPTIC SITES.10) STORM RUNOFF WILL BE DIRECTED TO PROPOSED INFILTRATION BASIN.11) THE INFILTRATION BASIN SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC. ONCEBASIN IS EXCAVATED TO GRANULAR DEPTH, ALL HEAVY EQUIPMENT SHALL BE KEPT OUTOF THIS AREA.12) THE SIDE SLOPES OF THE INFILTRATION BASIN SHALL HAVE EROSION CONTROL BLANKETINSTALLED. INFILTRATION BASIN TO HAVE 6" OF COMPOST MIXED IN WITH THE TOP 1FOOT OF ON-SITE SAND MATERIAL. USE MNDOT SEED MIX #35-241.
BACARDI AVENUELOT 1BLOCK 1LOT 2BLOCK 166.0DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION AND RECORDS, COUNTY OF DAKOTA, STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY RECORDER, COUNTY OF DAKOTA, STATE OF MINNESOTACITY COUNCIL, CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTACOUNTY SURVEYOR, COUNTY OF DAKOTA, STATE OF MINNESOTASURVEYORS CERTIFICATENORTH 20 BREWERY ADDITION
APPRO Development, Inc.21476 Grenada AvenueLakeville, MN 55044952-469-2171SWPPPSCHMITZ BREW PUBROSEMOUNT, MNCOUNTY SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGELATITUDELONGITUDEDAKOTA161151944.7711-93.1053COMPANYCONTACTE-MAILSite InspectorConstruction InstallerSWPPP Designer Jacobson Engineers & SurveyorsGrant Jacobsongrant.j@engrsurv.comLong Term O&MNAME OF WATER BODY TYPESPECIALWATER?IMPAIREDWATER?APPROVED TMDL?PRIVATE WETLAND WETLANDNONON/ABMPUNITQUANTITYROCK CONSTRUCTIONENTRANCEEACH1SILT FENCELF700EROSION CONTROL BLANKETSF5,000RIP-RAPCY5SEED/MULCHACRE0
NATURE PRESERVEEXIST. HOUSEBACARDI AVEEXIST. POLE BARNTREE LINETREE LINEEXIST. DRIVEPROPERTY LINE 1329'+/-30' BLDG SETBACKPROPERTY LINE 1329'+/-PROPERTY LINE 424'+/-50' BLDG & PKG SETBACKMONUMENT SIGN(6) TYPE A(6) TYPE B(6) TYPE CTRASH ENCL.DOWNSPOUTS @ CORNERSOF BLDG.20' PARKING SETBACK(4) FUTURE SPACES 20' PARKING SETBACK30' BLDG SETBACKBREWERYINFILTRATION PONDOVERFLOW PARKINGFENCED PATIOAREAPRIMARY SEPTICALTERNATE SEPTICGRAVEL PARKING LOT35 SPACESOWNER TO APPLY MAGNESIUM CHLORIDEAS NEEDED FOR DUST CONTROL16' LIGHT POLE W/LED DOWNLIGHTWALL MTD.LED FLOOD LTS.SITE INFORMATION:TOTAL LOT AREA:19.83 ACRES ZONING:AG AGRICULTUREBUILDING SETBACKS:FRONT: 50' SIDE: 30'REAR:30'PARKING SETBACKS:FRONT:50'SIDE:20'PROPOSED BUILDING SIZE:AREA:4,355 SFPARKING REQUIREMENTS: REQUIRED PARKING STALL SIZE: 90 DEGREES, 9'-0" x 20'-0"24'-0" AISLE (MIN)PARKING SUMMARY:RESTAURANT/BAR/PATIO : 1 PER 3 SEAT -112/3 = 37BREWERY: 1 PER 500 S.F. = 1TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: = 38AMOUNT OF PARKING SHOWN = 39 TOTAL SPACES (2 ACCESSIBLE)INCLUDING 4 FUTURE SPACESZONING ORDINANCE USED:CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MNCITY CODE -ON-LINE DATE: 07-17-2018SYM.QUANTITYCOMMON NAMERED PINEBLACK HILLS SPRUCESCOTCH PINE666ABCPLANT MATERIAL LEGENDBOTANICAL NAMEPINUS RESINOSAPICEA GLAUCA DENSATAPINUS SYLVSTRIASIZE/ROOT6'-0" HIGH MIN. BALLED AND BURLAPPED6'-0" HIGH MIN. BALLED AND BURLAPPED6'-0" HIGH MIN. BALLED AND BURLAPPEDREMARKS6x6 POST, BLDG. TRIM COLORSIDING TO MATCH BLDG.TRIM TO MATCH BUILDING6' - 0"14' - 6"ScaleProject numberDateDrawn byChecked by21476 GRENADA AVENUELAKEVILLE, MN 55044PH: 952-469-2171FAX: 952-469-2173EMAIL: office@approdevelopment.comPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAs indicated5/28/2020 11:35:11 AMA1-1SITE &LANDSCAPE PLAN19-01-007612296 Bacardi Ave. WRosemount, MNNew Brewery05/28/2020BPJAC40'20'0'40'No. Description Date1" = 40'-0"A1-11SITE & LANDSCAPE PLANNORTH3/8" = 1'-0"A1-12DUMPSTER ELEVATION
10 TON CHILLERKITCHENBREWINGHOST.GAS FP10' x 8' ROLL UP DOORWALK-INCOOLERFDFDWOMENSMENSJAN.RETAILBENCHBEER TAPSBEER TAPSSERVERSWASH STATIONVESTIBULERETAILBAR(13 SEATS)TVTV(4) 36" BARN DOORSSERVINGTABLE SEATING: 62BAR SEATING: 13CONF. SEATING: 14TOTAL SEATING: 8924' - 7"16' - 0"12' - 11"60' - 0"8' - 3"5' - 5"9' - 7 1/2"53' - 0"21' - 9 1/2"20' - 5"12' x 10' FIXED WINDOWTRENCH DRAIN4' X 8' FIXED WINDOW4' X 8' FIXED WINDOW4' X 8' FIXED WINDOW8X12 FALSE COLUMN, TYP.8X12 FALSE BEAM, TYP.9' X 8' STORE FRONT9' X 8' STORE FRONT4070307030703070307030702040204070406' - 0"15' - 3 1/2"MEETING RM.20' X 40' CONC. PATIO4' CONC. WALK4' CONC. WALK10' x 8' ROLL UP DOORScaleProject numberDateDrawn byChecked by21476 GRENADA AVENUELAKEVILLE, MN 55044PH: 952-469-2171FAX: 952-469-2173EMAIL: office@approdevelopment.comPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION1/4" = 1'-0"5/28/2020 11:35:12 AMA2-1FLOOR PLAN19-01-007612296 Bacardi Ave. WRosemount, MNNew Brewery05/28/2020bpJACNo. Description Date1/4" = 1'-0"A2-11FLOOR PLAN4'2'0'4'NORTH
MEMORANDUM
To: Kyle Klatt, Senior Planner
CC: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director
Brian Erickson, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Stacy Bodsberg, Planning and Personnel Secretary
From: Stephanie Smith, Assistant City Engineer
Date: April 14, 2020, Updated May 12, 2020
Subject: North 20 Brewing Microbrewery and Taproom Simple Plat - Engineering
Review – Update
SUBMITTAL:
The plans for North 20 Microbrewery have been prepared by Jacobson Engineers & Surveyors,
dated February 7th, 2020. Engineering review comments were generated from the following
documents included in the submittal:
▫ Preliminary and Final Plat
▫ Site Plan with Survey and Grading
(dated 2/7/2020)
▫ SWPPP
▫ Stormwater Narrative and Modeling
Results
The applicant submitted an updated site plan, but grading and stormwater plans were
not included with this resubmittal. When those are received, staff will review and
additional comments may apply to ensure the applicant meets City standards and
engineering guidelines.
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.
§ GIS Fees: $60/unit
§ Storm Sewer Trunk Charge: $6865/ net developable acre
2. Stormwater management plan must be signed by an engineer registered in the state of
Minnesota.
RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENTS:
The plat consists of re-platting two existing parcels on either side of Bacardi Avenue. Bacardi
Avenue right of way will be platted to address an existing access issue for the parcel on the east
side. The parcel on the east side will also be divided into two lots: the microbrewery site and the
existing home site.
3. Applicant shall dedicate right-of-way for the east side of Bacardi Avenue per City
requirements.
4. Drainage and Utility (D&U) easements shall be dedicated around the perimeter of the
lots, over the stormwater BMP and drainage way.
5. Applicant shall enter into a Stormwater Maintenance and Easement Agreement with the
City for the proposed, private stormwater BMPs.
6. Conservation easements are required over the wetland and buffers. Signage for
conservation easements shall be provided by the developer.
7. Signage for buffer areas around the infiltration basin shall be installed by the developer
and an extended maintenance warranty shall be required to ensure establishment of the
naturally vegetated areas.
8. Trees are not allowed to be planted within D&U easements, over the proposed storm
sewer, or within a pond access location. Trees located on individual properties shall not
be planted near the sanitary sewer and water service lines.
9. The width of drainage and utility easements shall be verified during final design.
STREETS AND PARKING LOTS
Bacardi Avenue right of way will be platted to provide access to the lots on the east side. The
microbrewery parking lot will have an access off Bacardi Avenue. The planning memo shall
respond to questions and concerns about the traffic impacts of this development from
the April 14, 2020 Planning Commission meeting.
10. Turnaround at the end of the parking aisle shall be minimum of 10 feet by 24 feet.
11. Sidewalk shall be separated from the parking lot either by elevation or by horizontal
separate.
12. As there is no street lighting on Bacardi Avenue at this location, applicant shall provide
lighting at the microbrewery access for improved visibility.
WATER AND SANITARY SEWER
This part of town is outside the Municipal Urban Service Area, and therefore does not have City
water or sanitary sewer. The applicant has proposed a well and septic system to serve the
microbrewery and taproom.
13. Include the septic system area in the construction limits for both grading and erosion
and sediment control plans.
STORMWATER
The applicant proposes an infiltration basin east of the parking lot for stormwater management.
14. Grading shall be revised to have a maximum grade of 4:1.
15. Infiltrometer testing to verify the infiltration rate shall be required prior to public
acceptance of the infiltration basin.
16. Soil amendment is required in basins where the infiltration rate is higher than 8.3 inches
per hour.
WSB Engineering reviewed the North 20 Brewing Microbrewery and Taproom grading and
stormwater management plan on behalf of the City. The recommended conditions of approval
are in the attached memo dated April 3, 2020 and have been summarized below:
17. An operations and maintenance plan for the stormwater management features should be
submitted.
18. A NPDES permit shall be obtained prior to the start of construction.
19. The wetland the property discharges to is classified as Preserve in the City’s Wetland
Management Plan. Per the City’s Engineering Guidelines, NURP equivalent treatment
must be provided prior to discharging the wetland.
20. A drainage and utility easement should be placed over the wetland HWL within the
parcel. The HWL of the wetland is 910.1 feet per the City-wide model.
21. Over an acre of disturbance is proposed so a NPDES permit will be required. Applicant
should submit a SWPPP and erosion control plans for review.
22. Basin grading should be updated to have 4:1 side slopes.
23. The infiltration basin HWL should be added to the plans. Per the City’s Engineering
Guidelines, no discharge or infiltration can be assumed when establishing the 100-year,
24-hour storm event high water level.
24. From the City’s GIS system, it appears there is a culvert running west to east under
Bacardi Avenue at the north edge of the parcel. Applicant should verify the presence of
this culvert and include surveyed information on the culvert if verified.
25. It is recommended to pipe the drainage instead of sheet flow to the infiltration basin.
26. Per the City’s Engineering Guidelines, storage of the 100-year, 24-hour storm is required
on site. For events with longer duration, a maximum peak stormwater discharge rate will
be limited to 0.05 cfs/acre.
27. Remove exfiltration from modeling.
28. Per the City’s Engineering Guidelines, 1/12 of an acre-foot/acre/day of infiltration for
the entire site’s acreage must be provided on site. Based on the site being 2.32 acres and
assuming the 0.7 in/hr infiltration rate noted in the drainage report, the required
infiltration area is approximately 2,950 square feet. The proposed infiltration area is only
855 square feet at the bottom.
29. Proposed drainage map includes the northern section that does not drain to the
infiltration basin. Please update the plan set to reflect proposed conditions.
30. Modeling calculations should be updated for the full buildout condition. Currently the
proposed model is not including the impervious from the future expansions of the
parcel.
31. Soil borings should be provided to confirm separation from groundwater/bedrock and
to confirm design infiltration rate. A soil boring report was received, but not in time
for a full review prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Additional
conditions may apply once this review is completed.
32. The results for the 10-day snowmelt event should be included in future submittals.
33. The HydroCAD models should be updated to use a MSE3 distribution.
34. Applicant should confirm freeboard requirements are being met when the high water
level has been established after making the required updates. Verification of compliance
will be confirmed in future submittals.
35. The water quality calculations should be updated for the full buildout condition.
Currently the calculations are not including the impervious from the future expansions.
36. Please indicate how all impervious from the roof is led to the infiltration basin. Current
drainage patterns show one half of the roof will discharge to the wetland without
pretreatment.
Should you have any questions or comments regarding the items listed above, please contact me
at 651-322-2015.
Attached: WSB Schmitz Brewery Plan Review Memo, 4/3/2020
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: Schmitz Brewery
The Parks and Recreation Department recently reviewed the plans for the Schmitz Brewery
development. After reviewing the plans, the Parks and Recreation Department staff has the
following comments:
Parks Dedication
The parks dedication requirement for a Commercial development is either a 10% of the total parcel
as land dedication, a cash dedication or combination of the two. Staff is recommending that the City
collect cash in-lieu of land for the development that is currently being processed. The cash
dedication for the 2.63 acre development would be $23,670 (2.63 acres x $9,000 per acre).
Please let me know if you have any questions about this memo.
MEMORANDUM
To: Kyle Klatt, Senior Planner
Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director
From: Rick Chase, Building Official/Fire Marshal
Date: April 8, 2020
Subject: Schmitz Brewery
The following comments are provided based on the 2020 Minnesota State
Building Code which by reference incorporates the Minnesota State Fire
Code. Site plan review completed using civil plan page C-3 dated 02/07/20.
• The referenced site plan page substantially meets the minimum
requirements of the 2020 Minnesota State Fire Code. Any changes to the
final site plan will require further review.
• Premise identification is required to be visible from right of way.
• Recommend the applicant discuss proposed and future expansion related
to fire sprinkler requirements with the Architect of record.
• Recommend the applicant discuss setbacks for future expansion with septic
designer.
Sincerely,
Rick Chase
Building Official/Fire Marshal
From:Kala Diederich
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:Opposed to the taproom
Date:Sunday, March 15, 2020 5:56:04 PM
We live off Biscayne in Eagan and we already have too much traffic driving way too fast. We have lots of kids and
families out walking, dog walking and biking. We have increased traffic from the new homes in Bella Vista off
Bicardi Ave and also the traffic from the gun club and school. We have no sidewalks or paths. We also plan to
contact the City of Eagan about reducing speed limits or adding stop signs or a speed bump to slow down the cars. I
worry about the safety of my children and others on the streets.
There must be a better location already zoned commercial that could accommodate a tap room and microbrewery.
Kala and Brian Diederich
564 Spruce Cir
Eagan Mn 55123
612-750-4116
Sent from my iPhone
From:DARREN TRZYNKA
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:Microbrewery at 12296 Bacardi Avenue
Date:Wednesday, March 18, 2020 1:20:17 PM
Hi Kyle,
I wanted to pass along feedback for this potential establishment. I currently live at
550 Caylin Court. The Biscayne road into Bacardi Road is a dangerous very narrow
road that is on the back side of our property along with many others. Many
kids/adults are on that street and the people that travel that road already drive way
faster than allowed. With the potential in number of vehicles plus to be honest the
number of likely intoxicated drivers could make a dangerous situation happen for an
unsuspecting child or adult on the road.
Thanks
Darren Trzynka
From:David Elliott
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:Construction of Microbrewery and Taproom on 12296 Bacardi Avenue
Date:Tuesday, March 31, 2020 4:08:55 PM
Dear Mr. Klatt,
I am totally opposed to the construction of a microbrewery and taproom on the property of 12296 Bacardi Avenue.
I live close to the intersection of Pine Lane and Sycamore Drive a half a block away from 120th St. W. in Eagan.
Construction of this would increase traffic on Biscayne, 120th St. W., Pine Lane and Sycamore Drive.
We have no sidewalks and use these roads for walking, running, biking and walking our pets. Lots of children
present. Very peaceful.
This is like adding a McDonalds right in the middle of a residential neighborhood.
People already rip through our neighborhood using that back road.
Then you mix in alcohol when folks leave this brewery! They will be taking backroads to avoid main roads and
come through our neighborhood.
There are better locations for a microbrewery and taproom.
I am in total opposition.
Thank you for your time.
David Elliott
From:Mark Peterson
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:Proposed Microbrewery
Date:Tuesday, April 7, 2020 6:21:29 PM
Kyle,
Our house is along 120th Street West and have concerns about the proposed brew pub. 120th and
Bacardi Ave W are highly trafficked by walkers and bikers from the area each day. Without any sidewalks
or trails along these streets there is very little room for cars and walkers to properly, and safely, coexist.
We are greatly concerned about bringing an establishment which would bring in additional commercial
traffic into this area, especially one whose primary revenue source is to sell and service alcohol. There
are no significant traffic commercial enterprises in the area and we are opposed to bringing in this type of
establishment here.
It would seem a far more logical step to place a commercial establishment such as this in an area already
equipped with the infrastructure and traffic patterns to support it.
Thanks.
Mark Peterson
email: mpeters88@yahoo.com
From:Beth Olenius
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:FwProposed brewery on Bacardi
Date:Wednesday, April 8, 2020 8:22:15 PM
Hello Kyle,
We live on the southwest corner of Bacardi and 126th. We wanted to contact you
with some comments and support regarding the proposed brewery. While we are
concerned about extra traffic on the road in front of our home, we know it is going to
be there regardless of brewery or not. We are excited to have something built in
Rosemount that is not residential. We think the brewery would be great for the city as
well as a fun location to come together with our family, neighbors and the community!
We think there are some things you could do with the plans to make it work for all like
adding sidewalks or something. There is a lot of traffic already on Bacardi and as
homes continue to be built around us the traffic will continue to increase. Hopefully
the city can come up with some plans to satisfy the concerns of those of us closest in
proximity to the proposed site while encouraging family owned business growth in
Rosemount.
Please contact us if you'd like to discuss further.
Thanks,
Beth and Dave Olenius
612-386-8018
Get Outlook for Android
From:Yvonne Casella
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:12296 Bacardi Ave
Date:Wednesday, April 8, 2020 3:39:11 PM
I’m writing to voice by opposition to rezoning the above address. There are only residential homes currently in the
area. We would like to keep it that way for the safety of our children & neighbors who use the street for walking &
biking.
We live on the northern part of Biscayne and have had 7 cars flip upside down on the turn to 120th St. into our
backyard. I feel adding additional traffic would add to these incidents.
One question I have is how can a residential area with only well water and no fire hydrants nearby support a
business?
Thank you,
Yvonne
From:dana casella
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:12296 Bacardi ave
Date:Thursday, April 9, 2020 5:17:57 PM
Hi Kyle,
I am a resident of the area near 12296 Bacardi ave. I wanted to voice my concern about the re-zoning proposal. I am
strongly against this proposal. I believe it will create an unsafe environment for the residents, children and wildlife
who live near the area because of increased traffic.
Thank you for your time.
Best,
Dana
Sent from my iPhone
From:Amie Kieffer
To:Lindquist, Kim; Klatt, Kyle
Subject:Excited for new project: Local Brewery in Rosemount
Date:Thursday, April 9, 2020 4:59:02 PM
Dear Planning Commission Members,
I hope this email finds you and yours very well.
I am excited about something I've been hearing about as a Rosemount resident (I grew up here
and I also moved back here with my own family!)
There are so many reasons to love this town and I don't think everyone knows it or they would
be more interested and also more interested in making the "long hike" to visit 'out in
Rosemount'!
That being said - I think we could add so much to our community as it says on the Rosemount
signs - "Pride and Progress" with the addition of something fun and relaxing, unique to this
area - where people can get away in their backyard so to speak, yet also bring in new business
and grow our community!
I was visiting a friend who lives near Bacardi and was excited to hear about the proposed
brewery on that road. It looks like the brewery is coming up for the planning commission to
review soon.
As a young parent, it would be so nice to have a place we could go and meet up with friends to
visit, try new craft beverages made right here in Rosemount, and possibly play board games,
etc. There are very few places where people can go and socialize in a casual environment
where we would not have to find a baby-sitter for the kids.
Please give this project your strong consideration and support, it would make a lot of
Rosemount citizens very happy!
I think it would do more than we can even imagine in connecting people and what an
awesome way to support local business - by allowing locals to share their time, talents and
energy with other locals in such a neat way.
Thank you for your time!
Sincerely,
Amie & Steve Daly
Daly Family in Bloomfield
14216 Azalea Path
Rosemount, MN 55068
Virus-free. www.avast.com
1
Klatt, Kyle
Subject:FW: Re:
From: Lori Geller <walz0059@umn.edu>
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 7:57 AM
To: Lindquist, Kim <kim.lindquist@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Cc: Klatt, Kyle <Kyle.Klatt@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: Re:
Our address is 12575 Biscayne Ave W, Rosemount MN 55068
Thank you,
Lori Geller
> On Apr 9, 2020, at 9:44 PM, Lori Geller <walz0059@umn.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Thursday April 9th, 2020
>
> Dear Kyle Klatt senior planner and the planning commission,
>
> Thank you for working on this project, especially in these critical times. We appreciate the time our representatives
take to make well educated decisions.
>
> We write on behalf of Dave and Robin Schmitz who are proposing the creation of a brewery in the "Bacardi"
neighborhood. We strongly support their efforts as this will bring tremendous economic growth to our community.
>
> We have always tried to support our local community by dining, purchasing and attending events at local
businesses. We know that this promotes growth physically, financially and socially. We live in a wonderful community
but it severely lacks diversity that encourages other people to come visit, and honestly makes local residents go
elsewhere.
>
> Surrounding communities of similar or sometimes even smaller populations have far exceeded the opportunities that
Rosemount offers. Hastings, Lakeville, Montgomery, Northfield all have multiple breweries/wineries. If we bring a local
resident with a great product and service, it is a wonderful way to bring people into the community or stay in the
community.
>
> I understand there are concerns regarding increased traffic in the neighborhood and having to pay fees for paving the
road. These are valid concerns. However, as a neighbor who has multiple young children I still feel like this can be
done in a safe manner. The 2040 Rosemount plan already anticipates having to make new roads and/or pave current
roads near us. This is a great sign that our community is thriving! Change is inevitable and as uncomfortable as it may
be for some, it creates growth if you allow.
>
> Please take our thoughts into consideration as the meeting is near. We will do our best to attend virtually. My
husband and myself are both essential healthcare providers and are attending events as we are able.
>
> Warmly,
> Lori and Nick Geller
From:Martin, Logan
To:Klatt, Kyle; Nemcek, Anthony; Lindquist, Kim
Subject:FW: Support for the Proposed Microbrewery and Taproom
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 5:27:59 PM
Attachments:image001.png
Importance:High
From: Hall, Amy <Amy.Hall@insight.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 5:01 PM
To: city council members <citycouncil@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: Support for the Proposed Microbrewery and Taproom
Importance: High
Dear City Council Persons,
I am a 20+ year resident of Rosemount. I live in the Bella Vista neighborhood situated on Bicardi
Avenue and Bonaire Path. I am also the owner of a rental property in the Harmony Village
neighborhood. I recently became aware of another local resident’s (Dave Schmitz) proposal to build
a microbrewery and taproom just north of my home on Bicardi Avenue. Please consider this email
confirmation of my full support for the proposition for the microbrewery under consideration and
discussion at this evening’s council meeting.
The craft brewing industry is growing and evidence of that can be seen in all of the local
neighborhood microbreweries and distilleries popping up all over the Twin Cities (hello, Eagan). If
you have experienced the atmosphere of any of these establishments, you will quickly find that they
are favorite places for residents of all demographics and typically they are geared to attract families.
In fact, one of the many benefits of these establishments is their appeal to families as they are low
key, quaint and they provide a place for people of all ages to enjoy time together. I think the
proposition that is laid out here is very appealing. I am especially fond of the proposed barn-like
architecture as it will fit very nicely into the area and landscape. I am also happy to hear that it holds
a relatively small number of guests which a maximum capacity of eighty-four. And for me
personally, I look forward to spending time with friends and family and discretionary income at an
establishment in Rosemount rather than driving miles to another city. I am really excited and quite
frankly, pleasantly surprised that this proposal is up for consideration – it feels like we are
progressive (!!!) and positioning businesses that are mirroring the interests of our culture, and the
growing and diversifying community we call home.
If you are seeking a successful case study; please consider the example of Canon Falls Winery. This
winery is located in Cannon Falls and is a great example of a business developed in the small town
that has gained business from not only the local community but residents from all over the greater
twin cities area. For many, it put this town on the map.
This is exciting times for our community! I hope that with your support, this proposition continues
to move forward in the approval phases. I look forward to listening to tonight and future meeting’s
broadcasts regarding this topic.
Regards,
Amy
AMY HALL | Senior Manager – NetApp & Nvidia | Insight
t. 952.715.4321 | c. 612.741.2396 | amy.hall@insight.com | insight.com
From:Kate Beckwith
To:city council members
Subject:Business Variance on Bacardi Ave.
Date:Monday, April 27, 2020 10:33:50 AM
To whom it may concern,
As a resident of Rosemount and the Bacardi Ave. area for nearly 20 years, I am disappointed
by the news of the business proposal for our road. For many reasons, I write to you to say that
Bacardi Avenue is not the right place for a brewery. First of all, I do believe that a brewery
would be a fantastic business to bring to Rosemount, but a quiet road outside the downtown
area of Rosemount is not the place for it. It could have such a potential to bring customers to
the downtown area of Rosemount if it was instead placed in one of the lots within the
downtown business district of Rosemount along Highway three that are empty right now. The
proposed site of the brewery is adjacent to a protected wildlife metro greenway, a space that
we should be doing our duty to preserve, not destroy through bringing a disruptive human
establishment to. Secondly, the neighborhood it is placed in is a small piece of beautiful
natural Minnesota habitat land that is unique to Rosemount. Oftentimes I go in runs down
Bacardi Avenue and see families on walks and people riding bikes, all activities that would
become severely disrupted and even dangerous if a brewery would be placed on Bacardi
Avenue. The prospect of drunk drivers speeding down Bacardi Avenue and the neighborhoods
it connects to would be a danger that could easily be avoided if the variance was cancelled,
and proposed in a more appropriate area. Finally, the prospective site is far off the beaten path,
and I would imagine that a brewery would have a very difficult time bringing in customers
because it is far away from other business establishments.
Thank you for your time and dedication to the safety and future of the wonderful community I
call home. I hope you consider saying no to the proposed Bacardi Avenue business variance.
Sincerely,
Kate Beckwith
From:Tanya Beckwith
To:city council members
Subject:Variance @ 12296 Bacardi Ave.
Date:Monday, April 27, 2020 10:10:10 AM
Dear Rosemount City Council -
I am writing to PLEASE ask you to say NO to the business variance request @ 12296 Bacardi Ave.
PLEASE - for the safety of our families, the safety of our kids who want to be outside, the quality of our
neighborhood and the limited nature we have left in our community - please.
1.The transportation system is not capable nor safe to handle this request. The proximity to Red Pine.
2.Why ... why when there are many businesses open in Rosemount business district would you do this
to BEAUTIFUL, UNHARMED, NATURAL BEAUTY - WHY
3. Safety to pedestrians and school kids. This is the one safe to school route for walking and biking for
our kids. Hwy 3 is a death trap that can not be used to get to RHS, RMS, RES. Why would you want to
bring drunk drivers to a rural route. The car speed today for walkers, bikers and runners is too high - add
alcohol.
4.Neighborhood noise and odor and garbage -- this will come with a business. That why there is zoning
for business and one for residential.
5.Neighborhood safety. It is DARK on Barcardi - and it should be - it is a GREENSPACE!!!! Adding
lights will ruin the greenspace and because it is dark and natural it is not safe for a brewery with drinking
and driving.
Bottom line - our green space in Rosemount is so limited. Why do you want to take this away. The
impact it will have to existing home owners quality of life and the NEGATIVE impact it will have to new
residents to the community who, especially in the time of Covid19, want to get OUTSIDE. This Greenway
is a pull for Rosemount - to bike, to walk to run. Please don't ruin it. The birds, the ducks, the geese -- the
frogs -- they are beautiful on that road. Please don't kill the environment that is there for us all to enjoy.
Keep the businesses where they need to be -- where the police can monitor safety like they do by
Carbones and Celts. Please keep the traffic and drinking community localized for all to enjoy SAFELY.
Thank you.
Tanya Beckwith
11360 Albavar Path
From:Yvonne Casella
To:city council members; citycouncil@cityofeagan.com
Subject:12296 Bacardi Ave Variance Proposal
Date:Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:10:43 PM
Hello,
I am admittedly opposed to the variance for business at 12296 Bacardi Ave for three main
reasons. First being that an increase in traffic in the neighborhood is unsafe for the residents
and children who live in Eagan (120th Street and Biscayne Ave) and Rosemount.
Throughout my time in this area, I have had multiple cars flip into my backyard because of the
90 degree turn and steep culvert. Mixing high traffic and alcohol does not look out for the
safety of the residents in the area. Secondly, many residents are concerned that having a
commercial business in a residential area will decrease property values. Third, as you know
there is a wildlife preserve donated by the next-door neighbor adjacent to the proposed site.
Moreover, there is a wetlands area boarding the property. Not only does this raise concern for
the wildlife in the area. But it also impacts environmental aspects surrounding the area such as
pollution, water usage, and overall noise.
As a resident of the area for the past 22 years, we support residential development but we do
not support business development in our neighborhood. Especially a business of this manner.
Many Eagan residents in the neighborhood feel strongly about opposing the variance for their
safety, property values and the loss of rural environment. Our Eagan residents signed a
petition, which is public record for the city council meeting that the city of Rosemount had on
April 14th.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best,
Joe & Yvonne Casella
651-357-2194
4962 Sycamore Drive
From:Lindquist, Kim
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:Fwd: Brewery/Taproom, Planning Commission
Date:Thursday, May 7, 2020 9:21:26 AM
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Foster, Emmy" <emmy.foster@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Date: May 7, 2020 at 9:20:06 AM CDT
To: "Lindquist, Kim" <kim.lindquist@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Cc: "Martin, Logan" <Logan.Martin@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: FW: Brewery/Taproom, Planning Commission
From: Sandie Cody <outlook_24B39A3991082F59@outlook.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 7:58 AM
To: Comment <Comment@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: Brewery/Taproom, Planning Commission
I am still against this project. I know the traffic was going to be look at. But I believe
you will need about 100 to 150 cars a day during the week, and 200 to 250 cars car on
the weekend to make money. People are not going to walk there.
Another big concern is noise; noise travel out here. At night when I out looking at the
stars, I can here every car going down Bacardi Ave, I hear the traffic on Hwy 3, and I can
hear the trains from County RD 42 and Hwy 52, sound travels out here. During the day,
I hear the gun cub, I can hear the cows by Bacardi. People out here are quiet and
respect this. But I do not need to hear music and loud talk and car door closing. I like to
sit on the deck and just here people walking by and the wind blowing, birds singing.
The planning commission should not approved this project, and I would like to see each
person vote to see where they stand, and explain the reason for how they voted.
Dale Cody
2275 126th Street West
Rosemount MN 55068
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
1
Klatt, Kyle
Subject:FW: 12296 Bacardi Ave
4914 Brooklyn Lane
From: Jennifer Dahlquist <jenniferdahlquist@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 3:29 PM
To: Klatt, Kyle <Kyle.Klatt@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: 12296 Bacardi Ave
Good Afternoon, Kyle,
I saw your name on a sign on Bacardi regarding the proposed brewery on 12296 Bacardi Ave. I
live over on Brooklyn Lane, so am not a Rosemount resident, but rather an Eagan resident. I
am not opposed to the brewery as I like the concept. That said, I am an avid runner and run
down Bacardi, or walk the dog, daily. I would hope the City gives serious consideration to
reducing the speed limit if this were to proceed.
Thank you,
Jennifer
--
Jennifer Dahlquist
JenniferDahlquist@gmail.com
From:Katherine Gayl
To:Lindquist, Kim; Klatt, Kyle
Subject:Support Rosemount Brewery
Date:Friday, April 24, 2020 8:20:33 AM
Dear Rosemount City Council members:
I am writing to ask you to support the proposal of a long-time Rosemount (since 1988)
resident Dave Schmitz and family to build a microbrewery and tasting room in Rosemount.
Approval of a microbrewery built on a privately owned plot of land within our city limits by
Rosemount resident is a major step towards keeping money in our community, supporting
local businesses and strengthening our community.
The proposed microbrewery is in direct support of the Rosemount 2030 Land Use Plan, and
will provide local shopping, entertainment, employment and community gathering facilities.
The brewery is a logical step in creation of a planned “livable community, integrated with
natural, cultural and historic resources, while enhancing economic opportunity and community
wellbeing.” The Schmitz family would like to work with local farmers to have them use the
spent grains for feed for their livestock. They will also be leaving prairie and woodlands on
the remainder of the property.
Located minutes from Hwy 3 and taking into consideration planned future roadways
connecting Hwy 3, Akron and Blaine Avenues, as well as close proximity to the proposed
Rosemount Interpretive Trail Corridor connection to Lebanon Hills park, the brewery will be
directly supporting planned development of the area.
These uneasy times, have proven to us the importance of neighborhood and value of local
small businesses. Isolation has united us on social platforms, and exposed the lack of a social
hub for the community. Rosemount needs a hub that is financially rooted in our community,
compliments and preserves our rural environment, and celebrates all Rosemount has to offer.
A unique experience that will not only provide a place to gather and socialize, but a place to
host local events, and continue building Rosemount traditions for years to come.
When the benefits are so great and in direct support of Rosemount Comprehensive
Development Plan, it makes good sense to support the proposal to approve building of a
microbrewery.
Thank you so much for your help.
Sincerely,
Katherine Gayl
2980 120th St W, Rosemount, MN 55068
646-242-6466
From:Rebecca Bourdon
To:Klatt, Kyle; Lindquist, Kim
Subject:Support for local brewery
Date:Friday, April 24, 2020 7:51:47 AM
Rebecca Higgins
1386 Ashbrook Path
Rosemount, MN 55068
4/24/20
Dear Rosemount City Council members:
I am writing to ask you to support the proposal of a long-time Rosemount (since 1988) resident Dave Schmitz and
family to build a microbrewery and tasting room in Rosemount.
Approval of a microbrewery built on a privately owned plot of land within our city limits by Rosemount resident is a
major step towards keeping money in our community, supporting local businesses and strengthening our
community.
The proposed microbrewery is in direct support of the Rosemount 2030 Land Use Plan, and will provide local
shopping, entertainment, employment and community gathering facilities. The brewery is a logical step in creation
of a planned “livable community, integrated with natural, cultural and historic resources, while enhancing economic
opportunity and community wellbeing.”
The Schmitz family would like to work with local farmers to have them use the spent grains for feed for their
livestock. They will also be leaving prairie and woodlands on the remainder of the property.
Located minutes from Hwy 3 and taking into consideration planned future roadways connecting Hwy 3, Akron and
Blaine Avenues, as well as close proximity to the proposed Rosemount Interpretive Trail Corridor connection to
Lebanon Hills park, the brewery will be directly supporting planned development of the area.
These uneasy times, have proven to us the importance of neighborhood and value of local small businesses.
Isolation has united us on social platforms, and exposed the lack of a social hub for the community.
Rosemount needs a hub that is financially rooted in our community, compliments and preserves our rural
environment, and celebrates all Rosemount has to offer. A unique experience that will not only provide a place to
gather and socialize, but a place to host local events, and continue building Rosemount traditions for years to come.
When the benefits are so great and in direct support of Rosemount Comprehensive Development Plan, it makes
good sense to support the proposal to approve building of a microbrewery.
Thank you so much for your help.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Higgins
Phone: 612.210.1188
Sent from my iPhone
From:chuck.klug@gmail.com
To:city council members
Subject:Variance at 12296 Bacardi Ave
Date:Saturday, May 2, 2020 9:19:08 AM
Why would you approve a variance for a tap room/ brewery next to a Nature Preserve that was donated to the City
of Rosemount. I may not have a Rosemount address however I do spend a large amount of money at businesses in
Rosemount and pay sales tax that goes to the city of Rosemount and attend and support a Church in Rosemount.
My quality of life will be affected by the approval of this tap room / brewery as my backyard goes up to 120th.
Please I am requesting and pleading for my family and neighbors that this variance is not approved.
Sent from my iPhone
Charles and Susan Klug
4970 Sycamore Drive
Eagan MN 55123
303-990-0833 cell
From:Chuck Klug
To:city council members
Cc:kyle.platt@ci.rosemount.mn.us
Subject:Variance 12296 Bacardi Ave.
Date:Saturday, May 2, 2020 11:30:24 AM
Rosemount City Council and Planner,
We are emailing again to say NO to the application for a variance at 12296 Bacardi Ave. for a
brewery and taproom.
Our primary concerns are as follows:
· Opening a business in a residential / agriculture zone –
o The proposed site is surrounded by family homes and a family farm.
· Decline in neighborhood safety –
o A brewery and taproom involves alcohol. There will be increased crime in the area.
· Decline in property values –
o Property values will decrease with a drinking establishment in the immediate vicinity
of a family residential area.
· Increased traffic –
o Bacardi Ave. is used by individuals and families of all ages for walking, biking, running,
horseback riding, riding small carts and scooters, etc. The road is used by all
regardless of the season or weather.
o Eagan access roads to the site go past an elementary school and through a family
neighborhood.
o Bacardi Ave. is icy in the winter and there are often accidents on the corner of Bacardi
Ave. and 120th Street as people enter that sharp corner too fast. .
o People at the taproom will be drinking – it will only be a matter of time before there
will be an accident.
· Increased lighting, noise and odors –
o A brewery and taproom will increase light, noise and smells in the surrounding area.
o The proposed business hours are seven days per week with long hours which do not
align with or promote family life and activities.
· Negative environmental impacts –
o The proposed site is directly adjacent to a nature sanctuary that was donated to the
city of Rosemount.
o There will be negative impacts to water, soil and air quality.
o There will be increased trash in the area.
During the April council meeting, two members stated they drove out to observe the variance site.
The consensus was that while they do not disagree with the intent to own and operate a business, it
did not make sense to build a brewery and taproom on the proposed site. Have all council members
done this due diligence? Have you requested the applicant provide an alternate Plan B land
location?
Although we reside in Eagan, we support Rosemount businesses – stores, restaurants, gas stations,
church, library, post office and more – because these locations are closer in proximity than similar
Eagan locations. We would no longer be willing to support Rosemount area businesses if the
variance is approved.
And, even though the area surrounding the proposed site borders several cities – Rosemount, Eagan
and Inver Grove Heights – we are ONE neighborhood and community, and all impacts should be
considered.
This is not just a Rosemount issue. We request that you broaden your perspectives when making
your decision.
Thank you for your consideration,
Charles and Susan Klug
4970 Sycamore Drive
Eagan, MN 55123
From:KURT MITCHELL
To:Klatt, Kyle; Lindquist, Kim
Subject:Rosemount microbrewery
Date:Thursday, April 30, 2020 5:21:44 PM
Yes, I am copying Ms. Geller's letter,
Kurt Mitchell
11499 Ashley Court
Inver Grove Heights MN
I am writing to ask you to support the proposal of a long-time (since 1988) Rosemount
resident Dave Schmitz and family to build a microbrewery and tasting room in
Rosemount. Approval of a microbrewery built on a privately owned plot of land within
our city limits by Rosemount resident is a major step towards keeping money in our
community, supporting local businesses and strengthening our community. The
proposed microbrewery is in direct support of the Rosemount 2030 Land Use Plan,
and will provide local shopping, entertainment, employment and community gathering
facilities. The brewery is a logical step in creation of a planned “livable community,
integrated with natural, cultural and historic resources, while enhancing economic
opportunity and community wellbeing.” They plan to work with local farmers to have
them use the spent grains for feed for their livestock. They also will be leaving prairie
and woodlands on the remainder of the property. Located minutes from Hwy 3 and
taking into consideration planned future roadways connecting Hwy 3, Akron and
Blaine Avenues, as well as close proximity to the proposed Rosemount Interpretive
Trail Corridor connection to Lebanon Hills park, the brewery will be directly supporting
planned development of the area. These uneasy times, have proven to us the
importance of neighborhood and value of local small businesses. Isolation has united
us on social platforms, and exposed the lack of a social hub for the community.
Rosemount needs a hub that is financially rooted in our community, compliments and
preserves our rural environment, and celebrates all Rosemount has to offer. A unique
experience that will not only provide a place to gather and socialize, but a place to
host local events, and continue building Rosemount traditions for years to come.
When the benefits are so great and in direct support of Rosemount Comprehensive
Development Plan, it makes good sense to support the proposal to approve building
of a microbrewery. Thank you so much for your help.
What a great location for a local tap room and social gathering place that many of us
can walk or bike to get there. Some of us in the burbs are tired of nothing but chain
establishments.
I understand the complaints from the not in my backyard comments, but if you have
undeveloped land around you, zoning laws change, and there is never a guarantee
that the land will remain green space, agricultural, industrial, light industrial, rural, low
density housing, mixed use etc.
Thanks for listening.
Kurt Mitchell
kmitchellmt@comcast.net
651-492-6307
From:Aaron Ofsthun
To:city council members
Cc:Aaron Ofsthun
Subject:Brewery proposal
Date:Tuesday, April 21, 2020 4:38:53 PM
Hello,
I'm writing to you in regards to the proposal to build a brewery in Rosemount per the link below.
https://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/3999/public-hearing-notice-for-website-schmitz-brewery-
4-14-2020?bidId=
I just wanted to voice my approval for such a proposal. Breweries and taprooms have long been a favorite gathering
of mine for friends and family and can be a great source of pride for a town because it's "theirs", especially if it were
to become a co-op type of brewery. Either way, I would love to see a brewery finally come to Rosemount.
Thank you,
Aaron Ofsthun
Sent from my iPhone
13816 Adan Avenue
From:Dave Ritzman
To:city council members
Subject:"No" to variance for micro brewery at 12296 Bacardi
Date:Tuesday, April 28, 2020 11:47:13 AM
Hello Rosemount City Council,
I am voicing a "no" or disapproval for proposed variance to build a micro brewery on land plot
at 12296 Bacardi.
My backyard backs up to 120th and Bacardi. For several reasons (e.g., impact on...traffic,
safety, environment, etc.), I don't approve of the build in this location. I am glad to share more
if you desire. I am an entrepreneur/business owner myself. I get it and do hope they build
elsewhere and are successful.
Please let me know if you have any questions or desire more insight.
Respectfully,
Dave
David Ritzman
4954 Sycamore Dr,
Eagan, MN 55123
From:denise travers
To:city council members
Subject:comment on 12296 bacardi business request
Date:Tuesday, April 28, 2020 3:21:04 PM
I live at 12467 Biscayne Ave. W. Rosemount.
Please accept this as our comment on this request. We would definitely vote NO on this
request.
Jerry & Denise Travers
From:rodest@frontiernet.net
To:city council members
Subject:Business @12296 Bacardi Ave
Date:Friday, April 24, 2020 12:40:14 PM
Dear Council Members,
My name is Rod Turnquist and I live at 2009 120th Street West, on the north end of Bacardi Avenue. I
am opposed to the variance allowing a business at 12296 Bacardi Avenue. I do not want to see increased
traffic on the gravel road, nor would I want the gravel road to be paved. This is a quiet neighborhood and
I feel the addition of a public business of this nature with the associated high levels of traffic would lessen
the peacefulness of the surrounding small acreage lots, including my own.
I believe Mr. Schmitz' business would be better suited for an area where it is not on a path through an
established residential area, such as the Red Pine development, and local small acreage lots along
Bacardi Avenue.
I own 10 acres, and although Amberwood is underway to the north of my property, I have turned down
many offers from developers. I am vehemently opposed to the addition of a business within this short
distance of my property. Protecting the privacy and serenity of the property for the owners on Bacardi
Avenue is of the highest importance to me.
I notice many walkers and bikers, including small children, enjoying the views of woods, farmland and the
Wickland Preserve. Increased traffic would create hazards for these people not to mention clouds of dust
for them and the homeowners. The impact would be detrimental.
Thank you in advance for taking these issues into consideration as you consider the fate of the proposed
business at 12296 Bacardi Avenue.
Respectfully,
Rod Turnquist
From:Bodsberg, Stacy
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:FW: Email for Planning Commission
Date:Tuesday, May 12, 2020 2:57:18 PM
Stacy Bodsberg, Planning/Personnel Office Specialist
City of Rosemount, 2875 145th Street, Rosemount, MN 55068
Ph. 651-322-2051 / http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us
From: Steven W. Kreitz <stevenkreitz2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 2:44 PM
To: Bodsberg, Stacy <Stacy.Bodsberg@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: Email for Planning Commission
Good afternoon Stacy! I hope this note finds you well and your family safe and healthy.
This seems like always the way I start an email now over the past couple of months. The
new normal, I think.
I wish to give you again my input to pass on to the planning commission in preparation for
tonight's meeting.
My email concerns surround the possible taproom and brew house proposed on Bacardi
Ave.
So, I did call in last month during the Zoom meeting to express my thoughts on the project,
but I thought an email would also help.
So here are my comments. As a neighbor, I oppose the possible taproom on the following
points:
1. Additional heavy car and truck traffic on a rural, residential, unpaved road.
2. Drunk drivers driving Bacardi too fast (possibly killing someone in the process). Speed
is already a major issue on Bacardi.
3. Siting a large commercial building in a rural, sparsely populated neighborhood.
4. Passing zoning variances that seem to go counter to the Met Council intentions of the
current Comprehensive Plan for Rosemount.
5. A large commercial/industrial water well drawing large amounts of water for beer
production out of a delicate aquafer.
6. A commercial septic system on a large scale located above (up-hill) of a known-
drainage ditch easement with moving water present for part of each year.
7. A parking lot which will be lit, and noise and traffic in and out to Bacardi.
8. Accidents on corner of 120th and Bacardi and Bacardi and Biscayne, as surely many
vehicles will come from the North to the taproom.
9. Cars and traffic from the North passing through an Eagan neighborhood that does not
have sidewalks. Red Pine Elementary is located on the route.
10. The near surety of expansion of the facility in the future. Expanded hours, expanded
facility usage, etc.
11. Bacardi is used by many, many people each day for walking and jogging.
12. Site is adjacent to a wildlife refuge, and a commercial building would impact the wildlife
detrimentally.
13. Finally, there is strong opposition by most of the neighbors in the immediate region.
That's about it from me. I am the person who voiced a strong DESIRE to have a
Rosemount taproom, BUT NOT AT THE PROPOSED LOCATION ON BACARDI! Surely,
the planning commission can recommend or suggest other excellent locations for this
venture in a more suitable location rather than siting it on a rural, ag site! Much better
locations down off of 42 in the more industrial area of Rosemount (like all other
breweries/taprooms in MN).
Hey, good luck to all on the discussion tonight. I hope that you stay safe and healthy during
these difficult days.
Sincerely yours,
Steven Kreitz
1785 120th St W
Rosemount, MN 55068
(651) 322-2791
From:Bodsberg, Stacy
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:FW: 5-12 meeting Bacardi Tap room
Date:Tuesday, May 12, 2020 6:06:28 PM
Stacy Bodsberg, Planning/Personnel Office Specialist
City of Rosemount, 2875 145th Street, Rosemount, MN 55068
Ph. 651-322-2051 / http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us
-----Original Message-----
From: yvonne.casella@gmail.com <yvonne.casella@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 6:02 PM
To: Bodsberg, Stacy <Stacy.Bodsberg@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: 5-12 meeting Bacardi Tap room
Stacy,
I echo every point Steve Kreitz made in his email sent to you today. Neighbors unanimously oppose a commercial
brewery/ tap room in is proposed location. How many no votes do you need to reject this proposal?
As previously stated the location in a existing rural neighborhood & agricultural area just doesn’t make any sense.
Place it in the downtown area where it would be welcomed and patronized by all.
We live in Eagan and have also voiced our opposition to city.
Hopefully Rosemount has reviewed the information sent from the City of Eagan Planners.
Thank you.
From:Bodsberg, Stacy
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:FW: Bacardi Ave. Taproom/Bar
Date:Tuesday, May 12, 2020 3:47:49 PM
And another one.
Stacy Bodsberg, Planning/Personnel Office Specialist
City of Rosemount, 2875 145th Street, Rosemount, MN 55068
Ph. 651-322-2051 / http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us
From: Debbie Ruppe <rupped@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 3:47 PM
To: Bodsberg, Stacy <Stacy.Bodsberg@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: Bacardi Ave. Taproom/Bar
Good Afternoon Stacy,
I wanted to send you an email regarding the Planning Commission Meeting tonight on the
Taproom/Bar on Bacardi Avenue. I would appreciate it if you could please pass this information on at
the meeting tonight.
We live at 12050 Bacardi Ave. – 900 feet from the property. We have owned this property since
2012 and live here. We moved here and built our home for the agricultural rural residential area.
This commercial bar/taproom will definitely change this area and indirectly us and our neighbors
(Which oppose) going forward to a commercial area that the Planning Commission and the City of
Rosemount will make a decision on. Here are my comments to oppose the possible Bar/Taproom:
1. Additional travel creates additional dust on my home. Would want more screening and
chemicals to keep the dust down.
2. Bar/Taproom hours are 7 days a week year round unlike a rural winery. Therefore, I would
consider this a commercial bar.
3. The commercial bar will increase the traffic a minimum of 5 times compared to the normal
daily traffic.
4. We can hear the noise from the Rosemount High School football games, what type of noise
and lighting are we going to experience being 900 feet away?
5. What happens when/if our well dries up when they use excessive amounts of water? Who is
responsible for this?
6. With this commercial bar variance, why couldn’t anyone else do the same with an additional 2
½ acres above their home 2 ½ acres? If this goes through, I would like to have the same
opportunity on my property. I would like the option myself to have a Taproom/Commercial
Bar on Bacardi Avenue. I come from a family that owns several bars and restaurants.
7. I would like to invite any of the planning commission to come over to our home and view how
many people use this road for walking, jogging and biking day and night. There are many
people who walk, jog and bike ride in the dark. There is no lighting on Bacardi. This makes it
very unsafe to have additional traffic for a commercial bar.
Thank you. I appreciate your time.
Debbie Ruppe
12050 Bacardi Ave. W
Rosemount, MN 55068
651-592-4594
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From:Bodsberg, Stacy
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:FW: Schmitz 12296 Bacardi Ave hearing
Date:Tuesday, May 12, 2020 4:09:49 PM
Stacy Bodsberg, Planning/Personnel Office Specialist
City of Rosemount, 2875 145th Street, Rosemount, MN 55068
Ph. 651-322-2051 / http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us
From: Aina Wiklund <aiwika@msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 4:09 PM
To: Bodsberg, Stacy <Stacy.Bodsberg@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: Schmitz 12296 Bacardi Ave hearing
Respected Commission Members!
All of us agree that life is too short and our names soon forgotten. But names
of some people live on through the legacy connected to them, good or bad.
The majority of those legacies concern good or harmful deeds towards people
or the earth.
In the case at hand, it takes self-deceit to think that one's actions in seeking
enrichment will not harm the quality of life for many neighbors. Also, it shows
great disrespect for zoning laws to be an enabler of such self-deceit.
Please think of your own legacies!
Aina Wiklund
12110 Bacardi Ave, Rosemount
From:Lindquist, Kim
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:Fwd: Taproom on Bacardi
Date:Saturday, May 9, 2020 6:57:12 PM
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Foster, Emmy" <emmy.foster@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Date: May 9, 2020 at 5:08:43 PM CDT
To: "Lindquist, Kim" <kim.lindquist@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Cc: "Martin, Logan" <Logan.Martin@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: FW: Taproom on Bacardi
Please see email below. Thanks
From: Justin Cauley <cauleyj@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 9, 2020 3:25 PM
To: Comment <Comment@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: Taproom on Bacardi
Hello,
I recently moved to this neighborhood and I walk my kids on Bacardi. The only way that
I would concede the building of a taproom is if sidewalks were installed on both sides
of the road. The increased traffic of potentially intoxicated drivers ruins the rural
appeal of this area not to mention the safety for bikes and pedestrian traffic.
Thank you,
Justin Cauley
From:Curtis Henry
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:Rosemount Brewery
Date:Monday, May 11, 2020 4:01:20 PM
Mr. Klatt-
I am writing you to ask you to support the proposed micro-brewery in Rosemount.
As a resident of Rosemount for the past 14 years, I feel that Rosemount continue to slip further
and further behind our neighboring communities. I feel that I spend more time and my
disposable cash in Apple Valley, Lakeville, Hastings, or Farmington. This is due to the lack
of options in our community. The micro-brewery provides the citizens of community a place
to gather and socialize. I enjoying going to a micro-brewery to have a delicious beer, play a
board game with friends, and just slow down to enjoy life.
I watched the Planning Commission's meeting when they discussed the proposal. It seemed
like they had an overall lack of understanding of a micro-brewery and the culture. Most
people do not go to a micro-brewery to get drunk (like many of the establishment off Hwy 3).
Like most people, the micro-brewery is an opportunity to enjoy fresh artisan beer and
community.
I have driven by the proposed location to get a better understanding of the concerns of the
members of the planning commissions. I do not believe that the increased traffic would
negatively impact those in the area. I believe that the city should post a 30 mph speed limit on
that road to reduce the issues with being on a dirt road.
The owner of the property is asking the city the ability to use his property to build a business
that will improve the community that he has called home for 22 years. His proposal is in line
with the Rosemount 2030 Land Use Plan. They are looking to build a business that can be a
gathering place for our fellow residents. A place that we can rebuild our connections in the
post-COVID world. A business that is rooted in Rosemount and will help support other
business in Rosemount.
I hope you will support the plan to provide a micro-brewery in Rosemount.
Thank you,
Curtis Henry
3823 154th St W
Rosemount, MN
612-308-0731
From:Bodsberg, Stacy
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:FW: Email for Planning Commission
Date:Tuesday, May 12, 2020 2:57:18 PM
Stacy Bodsberg, Planning/Personnel Office Specialist
City of Rosemount, 2875 145th Street, Rosemount, MN 55068
Ph. 651-322-2051 / http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us
From: Steven W. Kreitz <stevenkreitz2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 2:44 PM
To: Bodsberg, Stacy <Stacy.Bodsberg@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: Email for Planning Commission
Good afternoon Stacy! I hope this note finds you well and your family safe and healthy.
This seems like always the way I start an email now over the past couple of months. The
new normal, I think.
I wish to give you again my input to pass on to the planning commission in preparation for
tonight's meeting.
My email concerns surround the possible taproom and brew house proposed on Bacardi
Ave.
So, I did call in last month during the Zoom meeting to express my thoughts on the project,
but I thought an email would also help.
So here are my comments. As a neighbor, I oppose the possible taproom on the following
points:
1. Additional heavy car and truck traffic on a rural, residential, unpaved road.
2. Drunk drivers driving Bacardi too fast (possibly killing someone in the process). Speed
is already a major issue on Bacardi.
3. Siting a large commercial building in a rural, sparsely populated neighborhood.
4. Passing zoning variances that seem to go counter to the Met Council intentions of the
current Comprehensive Plan for Rosemount.
5. A large commercial/industrial water well drawing large amounts of water for beer
production out of a delicate aquafer.
6. A commercial septic system on a large scale located above (up-hill) of a known-
drainage ditch easement with moving water present for part of each year.
7. A parking lot which will be lit, and noise and traffic in and out to Bacardi.
8. Accidents on corner of 120th and Bacardi and Bacardi and Biscayne, as surely many
vehicles will come from the North to the taproom.
9. Cars and traffic from the North passing through an Eagan neighborhood that does not
have sidewalks. Red Pine Elementary is located on the route.
10. The near surety of expansion of the facility in the future. Expanded hours, expanded
facility usage, etc.
11. Bacardi is used by many, many people each day for walking and jogging.
12. Site is adjacent to a wildlife refuge, and a commercial building would impact the wildlife
detrimentally.
13. Finally, there is strong opposition by most of the neighbors in the immediate region.
That's about it from me. I am the person who voiced a strong DESIRE to have a
Rosemount taproom, BUT NOT AT THE PROPOSED LOCATION ON BACARDI! Surely,
the planning commission can recommend or suggest other excellent locations for this
venture in a more suitable location rather than siting it on a rural, ag site! Much better
locations down off of 42 in the more industrial area of Rosemount (like all other
breweries/taprooms in MN).
Hey, good luck to all on the discussion tonight. I hope that you stay safe and healthy during
these difficult days.
Sincerely yours,
Steven Kreitz
1785 120th St W
Rosemount, MN 55068
(651) 322-2791
From:Jewelz
To:city council members
Cc:Klatt, Kyle; Lindquist, Kim
Subject:Microbrewery/Tap Room on 12296 Bacardi Ave.
Date:Monday, May 11, 2020 3:26:23 PM
5/11/2020
Dear Rosemount City Council Members of the Planning Commission,
I am writing again to voice my concern about the overall neighborhood safety that would be affected
by the Microbrewery and Tap Room on 12296 Bacardi Ave. Since the last meeting on 4/14/2020, I
have had time to absorb all the information presented. I have since taken multiple walks by myself
with my dogs and with my small children.
Here are three things I have notice on my walks since the last meeting: More foot, bike and car
traffic in the area due to people hearing about this potential location for the Brewery and wanting to
come “check it out”. Like I said in my previous email, when I go for walks with my family and we see
a car coming toward us, our family stops and moves as far over to the side as we can and waits for
the car to pass, then we continue our walk. Our normal walk only takes an hour or less, since the
meeting with all the stops we have had to take its been any where from 1.5hrs-2hrs to complete it.
In just one walk, I counted at least 25 people out either riding bikes, walking or jogging and at least
10 cars drove by which only about 3 of them slowed down then they passed us.
Second, the hours of operation. Why would you start a Brewery before school gets out? Can that
wait until after school is out and everyone is home. I am opposed to the hours suggested during the
week days. Red Pine school busses use Bacardi road to go to and from the school and kids ride their
bikes/walk to/from school on that road and starting at 3pm with the potential increase in traffic
really puts those kids at risk. If the Brewery opened at 5pm, at least the kids are at home safe and
free from random people coming in from other communities try to check out the location.
Third, if this gets approved, what will the speed limit be? Why would the city keep it at 50MPH when
you know from the traffic report that it would cause an increase in traffic? Other streets within
town, 145th in particular by 1st State Bank, recently had their speed limit drop, why can’t this street
speed limit be drop and have street signs that state “watch for pedestrians” and what the speed
limit is?
Lastly, I have seen signs placed around the neighborhood and joining neighborhoods in both support
and opposing this Microbrewery/Tap room, someone created an online Facebook and nextdoor
“support” group for this brewery to try and reach out to Rosemount residents and other
communities surrounding Rosemount to get more supporters. After reviewing the latest Agenda
documents that were uploaded as of 5/8/2020 for this coming 5/12/2020 meeting , I noticed a
blanket letter was used for people to fill in.
From reading the document that was uploaded from 4/14/2020 and recently 5/8/2020, I can tell
that the majority of the neighbors that live near, by or off of Bacardi do NOT want this, and the
majority of the ones in favor of the Brewery/Tap Room, don’t live near Bacardi. Please consider the
feedback given from the supporters vs the opposers. You have a LOT of long time Rosemount
residents living in the area near, by or off of Bacardi who have stayed living in this area for a reason,
one that many have clearly stated in their letters and why they would like to keep it the way it is.
Now if you had this Brewery/Tap Room proposed in a location within Down Town Rosemount, I
would support that!
Thank you,
Julie Neisius
12525 Biscayne Ave
Rosemount, MN 55068
Sent from my iPhone
From:Michael Wahowske
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:Opposed to Zoning Variance at 12296 Bacardi Avenue
Date:Saturday, May 23, 2020 4:05:59 PM
To Kyle, Klatt, Senior Planner, City of Rosemount:
I am writing to let you know I oppose the proposed zoning variance at 12296 Bacardi Avenue.
I have been a resident for over 20 years only 0.5 miles from the location where the variance is
being proposed.There are several reasons I oppose this variance.
According to the City of Rosemount web site, there are five standards by which a variance can
be be approved and all five standards must be met to approve the variance. I disagree with
results communicated in the Executive Summary from the Planning Commission Meeting of
April 14, 2020, that this proposed variance meets these five standards,
There are issues beyond the stretching the technical requirements of this proposal being
consistent with the comprehensive plan, and stretching the intent of the other standards. There
are the issues of right-of-way and access to the proposed development. There are the lighting,
water and sewer issues. The list of issues, questions, and concerns are quite lengthy as
discussed in the Executive Summary. The essential character of this area is rural, residential,
and agricultural. It is not commercial. Approval of this variance will significantly and
permanently alter the essence of this area. Families frequently run, walk, and bike this area.
With the current COVID-19 pandemic, this use has greatly increased. One evening recently I
estimated there were about 50 people on this gravel road on my two mile walk Neighbors
have also commented about the increased usage of this road for families. This proposed
business will not only increase traffic in the area, but will also result in people not familiar to
the area coming into the area and then subsequently leaving the area in varying degrees of
intoxication. These issues will greatly reduce the safety for those traveling this road by
whatever mode of travel. I have seen deer, coyote, fox, geese, turkey, raccoon, pheasant, and
bald eagles in this area. Additional human encroachment and activity will significantly impact
the natural environment.
I also question the economic viability of the business proposed on this site. The current
market saturation in the Twin Cities of microbreweries and tap rooms has been frequently
discussed in the local media. My understanding is the owners do not have industry
experience. As the saying goes, the three most important things in real estate are location,
location, location. Because this location will not have any opportunity for the random
passerby to know of its existence, it will require extensive marketing just to get itself known.
These strong headwinds do not suggest that a long-term viable business can be maintained.
From the perspective of the owners, I suspect the only thing that makes this endeavor
financially possible is that they have free land and so not have to purchase or lease property.
If the finances had a better potential return, they would be looking to establish their business
in a superior location instead of essentially their backyard. Lastly, it is well documented that
the failure rate for these types of businesses is very high. I fully expect that if this business
somehow gets started, we will be looking at an empty building within two to three years. I
understand the City's desire to promote economic growth and increase the tax base. However,
the eventual and ultimate failure of this business, and the empty, out-place building left
behind, will not meet that objective and actually have the opposite effect.
In summary, I believe this proposed variance is counter to the intent of what is an acceptable
variance, and will significantly reduce the character of this neighborhood. I recommend that
this proposed variance not be accepted.
Respectfully,
Michael Wahowske
4978 Sycamore Drive
Eagan, MN 55123
From:Yvonne Casella
To:city council members
Cc:Rosemount Mayor
Subject:Bacardi Ave Brewery/bar
Date:Wednesday, May 27, 2020 5:03:43 PM
I oppose the proposed brewery/bar on 12296 Bacardi Ave for the following reasons:
* A brewery is a bar no matter how Dave Schmidt frames it. The brewery/bar is not wanted by any neighbors in the
surrounding neighborhood and connecting street that would feed the traffic to the bar. Place a brewery in the
downtown area zoned for it with no opposition.
* A bar/brewery does not fit into the existing landscape of the area of only homes & farm land. Homes were here
first, homeowners should have a say in keeping the value of their largest investment. Also the main traffic flow
would past Red Pine Elementary school. Only 1 mile north of the bar.
* This has been a very rushed proposal with the planning commission. There has not been any brewery water
consumption, affects of the wildlife/greenway land conservation preserve or traffic studies completed.
* Planning committee that voted yes to approve the land variance to break off the 2.5 acres (not the normal).The
planners verbalized that they personally want a brewery in Rosemount. Why would they vote for personal reasons
and not what’s best for the residents of the area.
Please vote NO.
Thank you,
Yvonne Casella
From:presslineind@att.net
To:"Lawrence Marciano"; city council members
Cc:citycouncil@cityofeagan.com; joe.atkins@co.dakota.mn.us; Drew.Goeldner@district196.org;
Denise.Vonasek@district196.org; yvonne.casella@gmail.com; "Aina Wiklund"; fred@funjumpsent.com;
lynda.schlukebier@gmail.com; andreabester@hotmail.com; "Ellen Leidner"; "Ben Kreitz"; "Josh Kreitz"; "Joe
Kreitz"; "Dr. Joe Kreitz (MIT Address)"; dean.wenzel@uponor.com; "Lisa Wenzel (neighbors)"; "heather passe"
Subject:RE: Application for Variance, Simple Plat and Conditional Use Permit for Microbrewery and Taproom at 12296
Bacardi, Ave., Rosemount, MN
Date:Tuesday, May 26, 2020 12:24:02 PM
LJ
Your letter is on point!
My wife Marnie and I strongly agree with ALL your points, there are many more we could bring up.
This rush to build a Brewery and tap room out here is wrong, without any traffic, pedestrian,
property value, water and sewer implications or environmental impact (it is right next to Gateway
Nature Preserve) studies being done.
We are concerned about the impact also, on our quality of life.
The increased traffic and impact on safety, is of great concern.
Especially, on Bacardi, a dirt road with a 55 mph speed limit.
Where, as you state, 120th St W, is asphalt and has a 30 mph speed limit!
In addition, we are very concerned about the extremely high usage of water (see Googles answer),
being removed from the aquafer, on a daily basis, that all of us, well residents, rely on every day.
Google says, when you type in : How many gallons of water does it take to make a gallon of beer?
Here is the answer, I cut and pasted directly from the web:
Winner: Beer at 296 gallons of water per gallon of beer. It takes 872 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon
of wine. But if you look at standard servings of each, the race gets closer with about 28 gallons of water
needed for 12 fluid ounces of beer and 34 gallons of water needed for 5 fluid ounces of wine.So if your
correct and it takes 20 gallons of water to brew
So, if the brewery will brew 1,000 gallons of beer a day, even a week
That would be 296,000 GALLONS of water a DAY or a week, gone from the Aquafer.
Let’s be generous and say 1,000 gallons of beer a week x 296 gallons of water x 52 weeks a year =
15,392,000
That’s 15 MILLION plus, gallons of water a YEAR!
Thank God it’s not a winery!
How long will it take before our wells are thousands of feet deep, to reach water?
So where will 15,392,000 gallons of water go?
Oh wait, minus the 52,000 gallons of beer
So where will 15 MILLION, 340 Thousand, gallons of waste water go?
Let alone the thousands of gallons of human waste generated, along with the volume of water used
when flushing?
Where will all that go, into a holding tank?
I do not think a mound system, would be able to handle the amount of waste and waste water that
would be generated?
The overall impact needs to be investigated, before allowing anything to happen!
Also what needs to be investigated is, how did this project get past the residents of the area without
several open meeting’s, allowing citizen’s to voice their concerns.
My-self, I believe that there is some collusion going on, between the property owners and the city.
How did they act so fast to purchase the right-of-way, that was the main hold-up of the entire
project, without anyone knowing about it?
Why would the city in 2015 pass a ruling, allowing tap rooms out here, then let it sit for 5 years, then
all of sudden one is approved, transparency, I think not.
Good job LJ for bringing this to light to.
I hope our representative’s, you have sent this to, will actually care about the citizens of their
community that elected them and ask for opinion/input.
There are so many avenue’s that could have been used to make everyone aware, that are/would be
impacted by this,
social media, direct mailings, posting’s, or some other way that ALL residents would have been made
aware of this project, not just those within 300 feet.
(Oh and a front page newspaper article, after the fact that it has been approved, does not count)
Peter Dantzer
P.S.
The amount of water needed per gallon of beer, blew me away!
From: Lawrence Marciano <ljmarciano@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 8:39 AM
To: Citycouncil@ci.rosemount.mn.us
Cc: citycouncil@cityofeagan.com; joe.atkins@co.dakota.mn.us; Drew.Goeldner@district196.org;
Denise.Vonasek@district196.org; yvonne.casella@gmail.com; Aina Wiklund <aiwika@msn.com>;
fred@funjumpsent.com; lynda.schlukebier@gmail.com; andreabester@hotmail.com; Peter Dantzer
<presslineind@att.net>; Ellen Leidner <snowtopper82@gmail.com>; Ben Kreitz
<brkreitz@gmail.com>; Josh Kreitz <Joshkreitz@gmail.com>; Joe Kreitz <joekreitz@gmail.com>; Dr.
Joe Kreitz (MIT Address) <jkreitz@mit.edu>; <dean.wenzel@uponor.com>
<dean.wenzel@uponor.com>; Lisa Wenzel (neighbors) <lisa.wenzel@thomsonreuters.com>;
heather passe <heather.passe@hotmail.com>
Subject: Application for Variance, Simple Plat and Conditional Use Permit for Microbrewery and
Taproom at 12296 Bacardi, Ave., Rosemount, MN
May 26, 2020
RE: Application for Variance, Simple Plat and Conditional Use Permit for Microbrewery and Taproom
at 12296 Bacardi, Ave., Rosemount, MN
Dear Mayor Droste and Members of the Rosemount City Council,
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to present my thoughts regarding the above referenced
matter. You no doubt have heard or will hear myriad issues in opposition to this. All these issues are
valid, and my intentions are not to discount any of those presented by other citizens. I would like to
focus on three giving my upmost attention to the one which I consider to be the most important,
public safety, as I do not believe has been adequately studied or addressed.
1) Safety: Although this proposed establishment is on a rural dirt road with a 55 mph
speed limit (another topic that should really be addressed), there are quite a few
residential neighborhoods, homes, etc. along and adjacent to this road. Residents and
their young families use this road for walking, jogging, biking, etc. I was actually
offended by one of the planning commissioner’s suggestion that people shouldn’t be
walking on the road. This is the solution, really? Be that as in may, people do walk on
this road and continue onto a paved parcel, 120th St., which is located in Eagan. The
speed limit on 120th is 30 mph and is approximately ½ mile from the proposed brewery.
As I hope you were made aware these Eagan neighborhoods do not have sidewalks. By
having a brewery so close to residential neighborhoods without sidewalks put people’s
lives at risk. So, although it’s easy to say residents should not be walking in the road, it
just isn’t practical in neighborhoods with this many homes and without sidewalks.
An assumption was made that the majority of the traffic to support this business was
going to come from Rosemount via Bacardi Ave. W. There was no study or data
provided to substantiate this finding. In reality, if anyone coming from the north is going
to frequent this establishment, they will be coming from Red Pine Lane. The intersection
of Red Pine Lane and South Robert Trail is already heavily taxed. The traffic light
combined with railroad tracks (certain vehicles like school buses must make a complete
stop at the railroad tracks) add further density at this location. There is also an
elementary school in this neighborhood. During evening school events, parents park on
this very road exiting at Red Pine. It is not prudent to have people under the influence
driving down this road and it is not prudent to approve this project. I truly believe its not
a matter of if something tragic will happen, but when.
2) Wrong Location: This agricultural and heavy residential area is quite simply not the
right location for this type of business especially one serving alcohol. I realize there is an
exception for agricultural land to have a business on them. The example provided during
Rosemount’s first Public Hearing was an apple orchard or vineyard. Both of these
businesses are different than a brewery/tap room because they are typically selling the
products produced on their land. This is not the case here. If the current parcel was a
25 acre hops farm, this argument would make sense. This business belongs in a
commercial zone not next to a forever wild preservation area.
3) Water Consumption: Quite a few residents in this area rely on wells for household
water, including me. To the best of my knowledge, no water consumption analysis was
done as part of this application. It takes 20 gallons of water to make a pint of beer not to
mention all the water used to sterilize equipment, etc. What happens when the
residents of this area are challenged to pump water because of this business’s
disproportionate use of water?
I have copied in other elected officials including those from Eagan as I believe their citizens
are the ones most adversely effected. Although the approval of this request is within this bodies’
decision-making authority, the effects of this project reaches much further than Rosemount. I would
argue this isn’t just a Rosemount issue but also an Eagan issue, a Dakota County issue, and a State
issue. I’ve also sent a copy to Congresswoman Angie Craig’s office; Congresswoman Craig lives in
Eagan and has raised her family there. Lastly, I’m copying in the principal of Red Pine Elementary as I
strongly believe this project adds risk to his students and their parents.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Very truly yours,
Lawrence (L.J.) Marciano
From:rodest@frontiernet.net
To:city council members
Subject:Brewery on Bacardi Ave
Date:Wednesday, May 27, 2020 11:36:53 AM
Dear Council Members-
My name is Rod Turnquist and I live on the north end of Bacardi Avenue.
I am opposed to the proposed business development along Bacardi Avenue. The increase in traffic and
the decrease in property values are two of my concerns.
Please refer to my previous email dated April 24, 2020 for more details.
Is there any way that the City Council could offer Mr. Schmitz some financial incentive to locate his
proposed business somewhere else? Possibly the U More Park land?
Sincerely,
Rod Turnquist
From:dana casella
To:city council members
Subject:Brewery on Bacardi
Date:Sunday, May 24, 2020 6:00:14 PM
Hello,
I am a resident who’s property is directly connected to 120th street. (Aka the proposed brewery street.) I am very
concerned about placing a business in a residential environment. Not only a business but a bar/ brewery! That’s
absolutely ridiculous and disrespectful to all property owners, pedestrians and wildlife in the surround area. Please
vote no to this brewery!! The increased traffic in my neighborhood would negatively impact all residents. I am
extremely concerned for the safety of my home because of the sharp 90 degree turn that 120th street has.
The applicant has stated several times that this brewery will be a neighborhood establishment with minimal
drinking. However you simply cannot control intoxication levels of each customer. Beyond that, how does one
claim that it will be a neighborhood establishment when many neighbors are extremely opposed to the brewery.
Please put yourself in our shoes. Would you want a bar in your backyard? Would you want intoxicated drivers in
your neighborhood?
Please vote NO.
Thank you for your time.
Best,
Dana Casella
4962 Sycamore Drive
Sent from my iPhone
From:joe casella
To:city council members; citycouncil@cityofeagan.com; joe.atkins@co.dakota.mn.us
Subject:Bar/Brewery at 12296 Bacardi
Date:Wednesday, May 27, 2020 7:22:33 AM
My name is Joe Casella and I live at 4962 Sycamore drive . My backyard borders the corner of
120th street and Bacardi . Please see comments below from Mr. Marciano . I support his position
and the questions that remain troubling and unanswered .
From: Lawrence Marciano <ljmarciano@gmail.com>
Date: May 26, 2020 at 8:43:46 AM CDT
To: Citycouncil@ci.rosemount.mn.us
Cc: citycouncil@cityofeagan.com, joe.atkins@co.dakota.mn.us, Drew.Goeldner@district196.org,
Denise.Vonasek@district196.org, yvonne.casella@gmail.com, Aina Wiklund <aiwika@msn.com>,
fred@funjumpsent.com, lynda.schlukebier@gmail.com, andreabester@hotmail.com, Peter Dantzer
<presslineind@att.net>, Ellen Leidner <snowtopper82@gmail.com>, Ben Kreitz
<brkreitz@gmail.com>, Josh Kreitz <Joshkreitz@gmail.com>, Joe Kreitz <joekreitz@gmail.com>, "Dr.
Joe Kreitz (MIT Address)" <jkreitz@mit.edu>, "<dean.wenzel@uponor.com>"
<dean.wenzel@uponor.com>, "Lisa Wenzel (neighbors)" <lisa.wenzel@thomsonreuters.com>,
heather passe <heather.passe@hotmail.com>
Subject: Application for Variance, Simple Plat and Conditional Use Permit for Microbrewery and
Taproom at 12296 Bacardi, Ave., Rosemount, MN
May 26, 2020
RE: Application for Variance, Simple Plat and Conditional Use Permit for Microbrewery and Taproom
at 12296 Bacardi, Ave., Rosemount, MN
Dear Mayor Droste and Members of the Rosemount City Council,
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to present my thoughts regarding the above referenced
matter. You no doubt have heard or will hear myriad issues in opposition to this. All these issues are
valid, and my intentions are not to discount any of those presented by other citizens. I would like to
focus on three giving my upmost attention to the one which I consider to be the most important,
public safety, as I do not believe has been adequately studied or addressed.
1) Safety: Although this proposed establishment is on a rural dirt road with a 55 mph
speed limit (another topic that should really be addressed), there are quite a few
residential neighborhoods, homes, etc. along and adjacent to this road. Residents and
their young families use this road for walking, jogging, biking, etc. I was actually
offended by one of the planning commissioner’s suggestion that people shouldn’t be
walking on the road. This is the solution, really? Be that as in may, people do walk on
this road and continue onto a paved parcel, 120th St., which is located in Eagan. The
speed limit on 120th is 30 mph and is approximately ½ mile from the proposed brewery.
As I hope you were made aware these Eagan neighborhoods do not have sidewalks. By
having a brewery so close to residential neighborhoods without sidewalks put people’s
lives at risk. So, although it’s easy to say residents should not be walking in the road, it
just isn’t practical in neighborhoods with this many homes and without sidewalks.
An assumption was made that the majority of the traffic to support this business was
going to come from Rosemount via Bacardi Ave. W. There was no study or data
provided to substantiate this finding. In reality, if anyone coming from the north is going
to frequent this establishment, they will be coming from Red Pine Lane. The intersection
of Red Pine Lane and South Robert Trail is already heavily taxed. The traffic light
combined with railroad tracks (certain vehicles like school buses must make a complete
stop at the railroad tracks) add further density at this location. There is also an
elementary school in this neighborhood. During evening school events, parents park on
this very road exiting at Red Pine. It is not prudent to have people under the influence
driving down this road and it is not prudent to approve this project. I truly believe its not
a matter of if something tragic will happen, but when.
2) Wrong Location: This agricultural and heavy residential area is quite simply not the
right location for this type of business especially one serving alcohol. I realize there is an
exception for agricultural land to have a business on them. The example provided during
Rosemount’s first Public Hearing was an apple orchard or vineyard. Both of these
businesses are different than a brewery/tap room because they are typically selling the
products produced on their land. This is not the case here. If the current parcel was a
25 acre hops farm, this argument would make sense. This business belongs in a
commercial zone not next to a forever wild preservation area.
3) Water Consumption: Quite a few residents in this area rely on wells for household
water, including me. To the best of my knowledge, no water consumption analysis was
done as part of this application. It takes 20 gallons of water to make a pint of beer not to
mention all the water used to sterilize equipment, etc. What happens when the
residents of this area are challenged to pump water because of this business’s
disproportionate use of water?
I have copied in other elected officials including those from Eagan as I believe their citizens
are the ones most adversely effected. Although the approval of this request is within this bodies’
decision-making authority, the effects of this project reaches much further than Rosemount. I would
argue this isn’t just a Rosemount issue but also an Eagan issue, a Dakota County issue, and a State
issue. I’ve also sent a copy to Congresswoman Angie Craig’s office; Congresswoman Craig lives in
Eagan and has raised her family there. Lastly, I’m copying in the principal of Red Pine Elementary as I
strongly believe this project adds risk to his students and their parents.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Very truly yours,
Lawrence (L.J.) Marciano
--
Joe Casella
651.600.8144
joefcasella@gmail.com
From:Brian Cody
To:city council members
Subject:Microbrewery/Taproom on Bacardi Avenue
Date:Monday, May 11, 2020 9:42:40 PM
Rosemount City Council,
I am writing this email to ask you to not allow the variances and this Microbrewery/Taproom
to move forward. The brewery would transform the neighborhood from a peaceful area to
having an excess of traffic, noise, and crime. It's no secret that any establishment that serves
alcohol leads to an increase in impaired driving in the area. This is regardless of the time of
day or night. Being in a downtown area, it could be monitored better by police whereas in a
rural residential and agricultural area this would not occur.
I grew up on 126th Street where my parents built their house over 30 years ago. I grew up
riding my bike with the other neighborhood kids up and down all the roads including Bacardi
Avenue. We used to ride our bikes to the small lake at the corner of 126th Street and Bacardi
Avenue and fished from the side of the road. We also used Bacardi Avenue to ride our bikes
to Red Pine Elementary for school or friend's houses in that area. The neighborhood kids were
able to travel around for fun and for school with little risk of being hit by cars. Having a
brewery on Bacardi Avenue would increase the level of traffic on ALL ROADS in the area
and not just Bacardi as there are multiple ways to get to Bacardi and not just 120th Street and
Bonaire.
I plan on buying my parent's house on 126th Street this summer and would like my kids to
grow up in the safe, quiet, and full of wildlife area that I did. I would like them to be able to
ride their bikes independently like I did when exploring. This brewery would take away the
peacefullness of the area and increase the risk of unsafe driving behavior.
Please look at the map of people who are opposed to the brewery and those who are in
support. The neighbors that live in the area and will be affected on a daily basis by the
brewery are opposed to it. These neighbors like their privacy and peaceful neighborhood the
way it is and that's why they moved there. The people that are supportive of the brewery do
not live in the area and will not be affected by it.
Please do not allow the brewery to be built in the area proposed. Can the city planning
commision help locate a better more suitable site in our downtown and commercial areas? A
microbrewry would be nice to see in Rosemount but in a better location to where people do
not have to drive down neighborhood roads to get to.
Thank You
Brian Cody and Nikki Wise
3345 144th Street West and buying 2275 126th Street West this summer.
From:Mary Beth Hindbjorgen
To:city council members
Subject:No to the Bar/Brewery
Date:Friday, May 29, 2020 12:58:51 PM
The address is 12296 Barcardi Ave Rosemount MN. I would like to say NO for the
following reasons:
Increased traffic, litter, and safety concerns. Thank you. Mary Beth Hindbjorgen.
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS,
FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan,
METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS
User Community
City of
Rosemount
0 2,0001,000 Feet
Public Comments Received
Opposed - Letter
Opposed - Petition
Support - Letter
Proposed Site
One signature received on the
petition was from outside of the
community and was not mapped.
Last Updated:
5/7/2020
Brewery Address Community Days Open Weekday Hours Weekend Hours Seating Patrons Per Night Notes
Proposed Brewery 12296 Bacardi Avenue Rosemount All
M-W (3-9pm)
Thurs-Fri (3-11pm)Sat 11am-11pm Sun 11am-9pm 112 Includes outdoor seating area
Revelation
146 S Atlantic Ave
Hallock, MN 56728 Hallock T, W, Th, F, S 4-9pm 12-9pm 70 50-200 Downtown
Disgruntled Brewing
735 2nd St NE
Perham, MN 56573 Perham All 11am-7pm 11am-7pm (Sat)11am-4pm (Sunday)60
Junkyard
1416 1st Ave N
Moorhead, MN 56560 Moorhead All 10am-8pm 11am-7pm (Sat) 12-6pm (Sunday)120
150-700 (summer
patio max)Large patio and events
Copper Trail
205 Broadway St
Alexandria, MN 56308 Alexandria Mon-Saturday 4-7pm 12-8pm (Fri/Sat)120
50 (weekday) 200
(Friday/Saturday)
Intial rural location, but
moved to downtown last month
22 Northmen Brewing
6693 County Rd 34 NW
Alexandria, MN 56308 Alexandria W, Th, F, S, S 12-9pm 12-9pm (Sat) 12-6pm (Sunday)100 400 (weekend)
Rural brewery and winery
event area - paved road
Big Axe
25435 Main St
Nisswa, MN 56468 Nisswa All 11am-9pm (11pm Fri)11am-10 pm (Sat) 11am-6pm (Sun)70
Lost Sanity
12 W Main St
Madelia, MN 56062 Madelia All 4-8pm 2-8pm 58
First Street
201 N Lincoln Ave
Hastings, MN 68901 Hastings Tues-Sunday 3-7pm 3-7pm 65
Spiral Brewing
111 2nd St E
Hastings, MN 55033 Hastings Wed-Sunday 2-10pm 12-11pm 100
Schram
8785 Airport Rd
Waconia, MN 55387 Waconia Tues-Sunday 12-5pm 12-9pm 75 + 200 patio 50 seats for events
Spilled Grain
300 Elm St E
Annandale, MN 55302 Annandale Mon-Sunday 4-7pm 12-6pm and 12-4pm (Sun)150
80-500
(summer patio max)
Ovalde
16557 County Rd 25
Rollingstone, MN 55969 Rollingstone No taproom currently
Sapsucker
2752 215th Ave
Mora, MN 55051 Mora Saturday 12-6pm (Sat)Cidery with event space
Alluvial
3715 West 190th St
Ames, IA 50014 Ames Wed-Sunday 4-10pm 12-10pm (Sat) 12-6pm (Sun)140
80-700
(summer patio) Rural brewery and winery
Bald Man
2020 Silver Bell Rd # 28
Eagan, MN 55122 Eagan Tues-Sunday 4-7pm 1-7 (Fri/Sat) 4-7 (sun)170 + 60 patio
Lakeville
8790 Upper 208th St W
Lakeville, MN 55044 Lakeville Mon-Sunday
3-10 (Mon/Tues)
11-10 (W-Th)
11am-1am (fri) 9-1am (sat)
9am-10pm (sun)132 + 50 patio
3rd Act
4120 Radio Drive
Woodbury, MN 55129 Woodbury All 3-10pm
11am-11pm (fri/sat)
11am-10pm (sun)
Blackberry Farm
106 Everett Ave
Maryville, TN 37804 Maryville, TN Mon-Sat 4-6pm 2-6pm (Fri) 12-6pm (sat)
The Farm Brewery
16015 John Marshall Hwy
Broad Run, VA 20137 Haymarket, VA M, Th, Fri, Sat, Sun 3-9pm 11am-11pm (fri/sat) 11am-8pm (sun)400
Private events Tuesday and
Wednesday - multiple event spaces
Example Rural Brewery Aerial Images
Alluvial: Ames, IA
Sapsucker: Mora, MN
Example Rural Brewery Aerial Images
Schram: Waconia, MN
22 Northmen: Alexandria, MN
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
April 14, 2020
PAGE 1
I. Regular Meeting
Call to Order:
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on April 14, 2020.
Chair Kenninger called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with Commissioners Freeman, Reed, Schmisek, VanderWiel,
Marlow and Rivera. Also, in attendance were Community Development Director Lindquist, Senior Planner Klatt,
Planner Nemcek, Engineer Erickson, Assistant Engineer Smith and Recording Secretary Bodsberg.
The Pledge of Allegiance was said.
Oath of Office: Mayor Droste gave the oaths of office to Commissioners Melissa Kenninger and Brent Marlow.
Additions to Agenda: None.
Audience Input: None.
Consent Agenda:
a. Approval of the February 26, 2020, Regular Meeting Minutes.
b. Request by Prestwick, LLC, for Final Plat Approval of Prestwick Place 20th Addition (18-41-FP).
MOTION by Freeman.
Second by Reed.
Ayes: 7. Nays: 0.
Public Hearing:
RECESS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND OPEN BOARD OF APPEALS AND
ADJUSTMENTS MEETING
6.a. Request by Schmitz Brewery for a Variance to establish a Microbrewery and Taproom in an AG-Agricultural
Zoning District. (20-31-V) 6.b. Request by David Schmitz for a Simple Plat and Conditional Use Permit to
Establish a Microbrewery and Taproom in an AG-Agricultural Zoning District. (20-14-SP & 20-23-CUP)
Senior Planner Klatt gave a summary of the staff report for the Planning Commission addressing both the variance
request and other applications associated with the project. Klatt indicated that staff is recommending a continuance of
the item to provide time to get more information relating to some of the public comments already received. He noted
that the packet provides many emails that were received along with a petition and a map is provided which illustrates the
properties owned by the commenters.
Commissioner Schmisek inquired on why the parking lot is not going to be concrete seeing that it is a commercial use.
Klatt stated that the Commission can add that to the conditions of approval. Staff noted that the adjoining road is gravel
and felt that requiring paving when the road was paved adjacent to the site was reasonable. Schmisek stated that the
safety of the property being on a gravel road is concerning and noted that the speed limit on that road is 50 mph.
Commissioner Reed stated that he is concerned about the setback of the building. Reed stated that he would like to see
the building setback further off the street. He noted that the resident located directly across the street from the
applicant’s property is not in favor of the project.
Assistant Engineer Smith stated that there is a drainage way that goes from the northwest to the southeast through the
property. That is one reason the proposed building is placed where it is on the lot.
Commissioner VanderWiel stated that her concerns lie with the location of the building. The parking should not be
located directly across from the neighbor. Screening should also be added to hide the commercial use.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
April 14, 2020
PAGE 2
Commissioner Marlow inquired if the applicant would be required to submit a photometric plan to see how the lighting
would affect the neighboring residents. Klatt stated that it is required.
Commissioner Kenninger stated that she agrees with the stated concerns and that more research on the Commissioners
concerns needs to be done. She suggested opening the public hearing for all aspects of the project at this time.
The public hearing opened at 7:33 pm.
Public Comments:
Dave Schmitz, 2100 126th St W, applicant, stated that he wrote a letter to the 19 surrounding homes and explained the
project and his business idea. The project is very family focused. The building location would be preferred to be back
from the road a little, but the land would have to be graded so much for that to happen, which would be costly. This
operation is a family business and they would like to share their property view with the residents of the city.
Community Development Director Lindquist asked the applicant to explain the business operations. Mr. Schmitz stated
that the hours of operation will be Monday-Wednesday 3pm-9pm, Thursday-Friday 3pm-11pm, Saturday 11am-11pm,
Sunday 11am-9pm. The operation would like to be kept on the smaller side.
Jack Matasosky, Appro Development, 21476 Grenada Avenue, Lakeville, stated that the operation will have limited
hours and food items. The parking spots are limited to 84 spots. The idea for this project is for it to not be a bar but a
location for families to come together. There will also be no live music.
Chair Kenninger inquired about why the applicant decided to not pave the parking lot. Mr. Matasosky stated that the
intent is to use the recycled asphalt to minimize the dust. Since the road isn’t paved all of the rocks and dust would come
into the parking lot if it was paved.
Commissioner Rivera inquired what a future expansion would entail. Mr. Schmitz stated that the likelihood of an
expansion is very low. The goal is to keep the operation small.
Joe Casella, 4962 Sycamore Drive, Eagan, stated that he is opposed to the project due to the increase traffic and public
safety issues. He stated that 120th Street is a busy street and cars have flipped over into his yard numerous times.
Jackie Fremo, 12780 Bacardi Ave, stated that she is opposed to the project due to the possible impact on the area and
traffic. She is concerned about the smell and possible pollution that the brewery might inflict on the area.
Mr. Schmitz stated that the smell and pollution would be minimal. They plan to brew only one day a week.
Dale Cody, 2275 126th Street West, stated that he is opposed to the project due to the increase in traffic. He stated that
126th Street West has no sidewalks and is not a paved road. A lot of people walk in this area and he is concerned about
an increase in impaired drivers. A traffic study needs to be done on 126th Street West too, not just on Bacardi Avenue.
The comprehensive plan has stated that this area is supposed to stay Rural Residential.
Assistant Engineer Smith stated that the speed study on Bacardi Ave was done prior to this project coming forward.
Reed inquired what the nature of a future traffic study would entail. Smith stated that the side streets were not going to
be included and that the speed would be evaluated to see if it is appropriate in that location on Bacardi Ave with the
increase of traffic. Kenninger inquired if it would be possible to include the side streets around Bacardi Ave in the traffic
study. Smith stated that it’s something they can look at.
Lece Pegatchnik, 548 Spruce Street, Eagan, stated that she is opposed to the project since people will have to drive
through neighborhoods in order to get to the brewery property.
Fred and Deborah Ruppe, 12050 Bacardi Ave, stated that they are concerned with the noise that may come from the
property; hours of operation seem excessive. The quiet nights that they enjoy may be taken from them. The smell that
would come from a brewery would impact the neighborhood. The increase in traffic would also impact the
neighborhood.
Bob and Julie Berken, 2300 126th Street West, the number of cars on the road during the traffic study were vastly low.
The safety of the neighborhood is important. The properties surrounding the applicant will be most affected and are all
opposed to the project.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
April 14, 2020
PAGE 3
Lori Lucke, 2145 126th Street West, stated that she is opposed to the project and agrees with most of the comments
from other residents. It was stated earlier that there will be no parking on Bacardi Ave and in the event that they need
overflow parking, it will most likely put the visitor parking into the neighborhoods.
Lance and Mara Schottenbauer, 12483 Bacardi Ave, stated that she lives directly across the street from the applicant’s
property. She has a concern about how the property would be serviced in case of a fire. Another safety concern is the
parking lot size and that if the property needs fire help would there be enough room in the parking lot for the fire trucks.
Klatt stated that the application has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal. The review stated that the application does
comply. Lindquist stated that the City does have other commercial facilities outside of the MUSA and therefor does not
have city water or a fire hydrant. The fire station has other ways that they can address a fire if they need to. Klatt stated
that city roads are designed to sustain fire rescues. A review memo from the Fire Marshal can be found in the Planning
Commission packet. Ms. Schottenbauer stated that she also has a concern about the reasonable use for the property.
Having to drive through a neighborhood in order to get to the brewery is concerning. Lindquist stated that every
property owner has the right to reasonably use their property. The residents concern about having to drive through a
residential area is more of a policy use for the Planning Commission and City Council to decide on. Ms. Schottenbauer
stated that she would like to see additional screening with the landscape on the front of the property. But she has
concerns about safety and that a blind spot may be created. Klatt stated that the city does have requirements for
landscape placement to ensure sight distances are maintained. Ms. Schottenbauer inquired if the hours of operation
would be the entire entity or the taproom. The hours are concerning with the main product being an intoxicating
product. Mr. Schmitz stated that the hours of operation are for the taproom hours.
Steven Kreitz, 1785 120th Street West, Eagan stated that he is opposed to this project. The idea of this project is great
but just not in this specific location. The traffic on 120th Street and the accidents that have happened is only going to
increase. Mr. Kreitz would like to see 120th Street and 126th Street included in the traffic study. He stated that the
property has septic and well. The amount of water used at this brewery will be 8-10 gallons of water for every 1 gallon of
beer produced. He is curious as to what the possibility of surrounding wells going dry with the added water use. Klatt
stated that additional permits will be needed for the impact of the well and if the property will need to obtain a larger
well. Additional approval steps will be needed if this item continues forward.
Julie Neisius, 12525 Biscayne Ave, stated that the area has had an increase in traffic throughout the last 12 years. She
asked if sidewalks are going to be put in place and who would pay for the sidewalks and paving of the road. She inquired
about exterior materials; that commercial buildings need to be brick. This property is not proposing a brick exterior.
Klatt stated that the design requirements in a commercial zone would be brick but, in this case, they are in AG zone.
The exterior of the building does meet the standards in the specific zoning area. Assistant Engineer Smith stated that
improving Bacardi is not part of the city’s current plan. If a paving and sidewalk project would be proposed the city
would follow their assessment policy.
Keith Bester, 2140 120th Street West, questioned why the proposed property is being split to 2.5 acres vs. the standard 5
acres in this area. Klatt stated that the applicant is requesting the 2.5 acres for the property. Mr. Schmitz stated that
because of the storm water and park fees. The cost of those fees is the main reason for requesting the 2.5 acres. Mr.
Bester stated that the neighboring nature preserve is important, and he has concerns about bringing in a brewery that
would impose on the original state of the preserve. Klatt stated that the City does not have specific set backs required
from the nature preserve. Mr. Bester questioned if there are any concerns with the wetland/creek and that the culvert
was recently fixed. Smith stated that there is a condition that would require the applicant to provide an easement that
would protect the wetland and place a buffer around the wetland.
Yvonne Casella, 4962 Sycamore Drive, Eagan, stated that the school busses for Red Pine both in the morning and
afternoon will pass the brewery and she is concerned about traffic and safety.
Lori Geller, 12575 Biscayne Ave, stated that she is in support of this project. She stated that most neighbors opposing
the project do not have small children. She has small children and the decision should not be based on fear.
MOTION by Schmisek to close the public hearing.
Second by VanderWiel.
Ayes: 7. Nays: 0. Motion Passes
The public hearing was closed at 9:28 pm.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
April 14, 2020
PAGE 4
Additional Comments:
Chair Kenninger stated that she would like to see additional information come forward.
Commissioner Schmisek inquired if the next meeting would be enough time to get the answers to all of the questions.
Kenninger stated that this item would be continued to the May 12, 2020, meeting. Lindquist stated that traffic is
absolutely a concern but with our current times a traffic study will not provide a very good idea of what this area is like
on a typical basis. Smith stated that they will be looking at a more in-depth speed study on Bacardi for 2021.
MOTION by Reed to continue item until the May 12th, 2020, meeting.
Second by Freeman.
Ayes: 7. Nays: 0. Motion Passes
MOTION by Reed to recess Board of Appeals and Adjustments meeting and reopen the Planning
Commission meeting.
Second by VanderWiel.
Ayes: 7. Nays: 0. Motion Passes.
RECESS BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS MEETING AND RE-CONVENE REGULAR
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
Five-minute break was taken at 9:37 pm
6.c. Request by Builder Jones for Approval of a Planned Unit Development Master Development Plan with
Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Final Plat at 2316, 2318, and 2322 Bonaire Path. (20-25-PUD, 20-26-PP, 20-27-FP)
Planner Nemcek gave a brief summary of the staff report for the Planning Commission.
Kenninger inquired about the one small lot and to see if it meets the setbacks with its neighbor to the east. Nemcek
stated that an updated final plat was provided and that the lot was widened enough that the increase in the width makes
up for the increase in side yard setback requirement. Kenninger inquired about the cul-de-sac and whether it will stay a
permanent cul-de-sac. Nemcek stated that it will be a permanent cul-de-sac. Additional homes will be added to the cul-
de-sac during future development.
Reed inquired about what the advantage would be to have a light at Bonaire Ave and Highway 3. City Engineer Smith
stated that the traffic levels will continue to be monitored and that MnDOT has no current plans to add a light in that
location.
The public hearing opened at 10:05 pm.
Public Comments:
Rob Eldridge, representative for Builder Jones, 10515 165th Street, Lakeville, stated that Builder Jones is a newer
construction company that have been in business for around 5 years. They are a going to complete the development
with a couple other builders. The design for the development and having the lot size on the smaller end is because the
housing trend is showing that people are looking for smaller lots and some smaller homes. Homes could also be used for
people to downsize and go from a two-story home to a single-story home.
John Wilson, 13541 Birdsong Court, stated that the development seems to have too many homes. He would like to see
the development less congested. Mr. Wilson inquired about completing the attachment to Bonaire Path during phase
one and if there will be sidewalks through the neighborhood. Nemcek stated that the need to manage the storm water
on site is the reason why the developer drew the plans in the proposed configuration. The sidewalk will extend along the
south side of Birdsong Path and along Bengal Street. Mr. Eldridge stated that the lot size for the development was
configured around the stormwater easement and the pipeline easement that are in place through the development. The
Bonaire access being completed during the first phase is still being discussed but with having to maintain the stormwater
on site. It seems like it will be difficult to make that happen.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2020
PAGE 2
Public Comments: None.
MOTION by Kenninger to close the public hearing.
Second by VanderWiel.
Ayes: 7. Nays: 0. Motion Passes
The public hearing was closed at 7:00 pm.
Additional Comments: None.
MOTION by Kenninger to continue item to the May 26, 2020 Planning Commission Meeting.
Second by VanderWiel.
Ayes: 7. Nays: 0. Motion Passes
Old Business:
6.a. Request by David Schmitz for a Conditional Use Permit, Simple Plat, and Variance to establish a Microbrewery
and Taproom in an AG-Agricultural Zoning District. (20-14-SP, 20-23-CUP & 20-31-V)
Senior Planner Klatt gave a summary of the staff report for the Planning Commission, noting the changes made to the
plans such as moving the building back from the road and shifting the parking.
Commissioner Rivera questioned if the applicant has obtained the parcel needed for access and if the applicant does not
obtain this parcel can the brewery still move forward. Klatt stated that the applicant does need to obtain the parcel for
the project to proceed.
Commissioner Schmisek inquired about the safety concerns on 120th and Bacardi. Has the Eagan police department
been contacted? Klatt stated that staff has been working with the Rosemount police department on safety concerns.
Jack Matasosky, Appro Development, 21476 Grenada Avenue, Lakeville, stated that the applicant is proposing a small
neighborhood brewery on their property. They wish to share their passion of brewing beer and root beer. They want it
to be very family friendly and not just a bar. The plans have been changed to move the building back from the public
right-of-way. Because of the limited parking the largest event that can be held is capped at about 85 people.
Dave Schmitz, Applicant, stated that he would like to discuss the limited hours proposed. The conditions state that the
patio must close an hour before taproom closing. If this is the case it would negatively impact the business.
Commissioner Rivera inquired how far along the applicant is in obtaining the piece of land adjacent to the road. Mr.
Schmitz stated that a price has been agreed on and a purchase order is being drawn for purchase.
Chair Kenninger inquired about the hours of operation for the brewery. Mr. Schmitz stated that they looked at
surrounding breweries and that is how they came up with their hours. He doesn’t agree with the requirement to close the
patio an hour before the closing time. Mr. Schmitz stated that they will not have outside music. The location is
surrounded by woods and buffered well and that evening noise shouldn’t be an issue. Mr. Schmitz would like to see the
hours changed to Monday – Thursday 4-9; Friday 4-11; Saturday 11-11 and Sunday 11-9. With the patio staying open
until sundown. Ms. Lindquist stated that she would like to see a set time for the patio to close so that everyone
understands expectations. It would be hard to enforce a sundown closing time.
Commissioner Reed inquired about the process to change the business hours after this item passes. Lindquist stated that
the hours will be a condition of approval. The applicant can request an amendment later which requires Council
approval.
Commissioner Freeman stated that the latest sunset is on June 20th and its 8:30 pm. Keeping the patio open until 9 pm
would make sense to her.
Commissioner Schmisek stated that he agrees with the hours except for the Friday and Saturday being open until 11pm.
Mr. Schmitz stated that he would agree to close Friday and Saturday at 10 pm. In exchange for the patio to be open until
9pm.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2020
PAGE 3
Chair Kenninger recapped the hours discussed with the applicant as Monday – Thursday 4-9; Friday 4-10; Saturday 11-
10; and Sunday 11-9 with the patio staying open until 9 pm. Klatt stated that in the survey staff completed only three
breweries in the area stayed open past 10:00 pm
Chair Kenninger read the letters received since the last Planning Commission meeting. She acknowledged the public
hearing was closed at the last meeting but would allow additional comments as the project was modified since the last
meeting.
Curtis Henry, 3823 154th Street West, stated that he supports the brewery and that Rosemount needs a new business. As
a regular customer of microbreweries he noted that these are places to gather with friends to enjoy conversation and
making memories. The beer is secondary. Rosemount lacks such a place.
Katherine Gayl, 2980 120th Street West, questioned how the brewery will support the Rosemount 2030 development
plan. She would like to better understand the long-term community benefits of having the brewery in the current
location.
David Chumbley, 13819 Clare Downs Way, stated that he is in full support of this project. Looking at comparisons,
there’s a similar type location in Amery, WI. The name is Amery Ale Works and it’s outside of town on a rural road. It’s
a very family, friendly facility with the same casual, social gathering location as the primary objective.
Lori Lucke, 2145 126th Street West, questioned if the noise from that location could be measured before approval. From
her property they can hear neighbors around them. She is concerned about the new building location proposed and feels
it has moved directly across the street from a residential house. Neighbors purposely moved to this area for the space
and quietness surrounding them.
Klatt explained that the property has moved further south but that it isn’t in line with the neighboring property. More
screening has been put in place.
Kymi and William Kieffer, 3245 145th Street West, stated that they are very much in support of this project and excited
for this business to come into Rosemount.
Dale Cody, 2275 126th Street West, questioned if any of the neighboring properties are in favor of this project. Noise
does travel and it will affect the neighbors. He asked if anyone would want to purchase a home that is located directly
across the street from the proposed brewery.
Brian Cody, 3345 144th Street West, stated that this summer he is purchasing his parents’ home (2275 126th Street West).
His concerns lie with the level of traffic that this brewery will create.
Lece Pogatchnik, 548 Spruce Street, Eagan, questioned if the speed will be looked at on Biscayne Ave to 120th Street
West. Assistant City Engineer Smith stated that a traffic speed study is not currently planned for that section of
Biscayne Ave near 120th Street.
Ms. Pogatchnik stated that her concerns lie with the fact that Eagan Police should be contacted to see if they have plans
to look at the speed in this area. Smith replied that engineering staff has been in contact with the City of Eagan staff
but that they have not mentioned any speed studies that they plan for that area.
Lori Geller, 12575 Biscayne Ave, stated that she is in support of this project. All the neighboring properties have
between 2-5 acres. She is not concerned about the possible noise that would come from the proposed business.
Julie Neisius, 12525 Biscayne Ave, questioned, with the brewery having an outdoor patio, what does the applicant plan
on using for bug control. Mr. Schmitz stated that at this point they have not reviewed their options but do not plan on
applying anything that would be harmful.
Fred Ruppe, 12050 Bacardi Ave, stated that his home faces the applicant’s property. His concern is that the noise will
carry from the brewery. The reason that they purchased the home in this location is for the quiet country feel. This
business will absolutely change the neighborhood.
Mr. Schmitz stated that they do take the neighbors comments to heart and that they have spoken with several neighbors.
That is why they moved the building back off the road and adding the additional buffers.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2020
PAGE 4
MOTION by Kenninger to close the public hearing.
Second by Reed.
Ayes: 7. Nays: 0. Motion Passes
The public hearing was closed at 9:03 pm.
Chair Kenninger stated that a lot of information has come forth either in favor or opposed to this project. She liked
seeing the new plans that shifted the location of the building back off the road and neighbor. This is an allowed use to
have the brewery on this property. The variance is very administrative and appropriate for what is requested. A brewery
is not a bar but is a family friendly environment. She supports the revised proposed hour; with the suggestion that that
the patio closes at 9:00 pm.
Commissioner Reed stated that he agrees with Chair Kenninger’s statement. He likes the amended hours that are
proposed, but he does not like that location of the business and would like to see it outside of a residential
neighborhood. He indicated he would vote no unless a condition was put into place with a lower speed limit on Bacardi
Ave. Its concerning to put commercial traffic on a residential road.
Lindquist indicated that staff does not support a condition of approval compelling the City to act that is beyond the
control of the applicant. Smith stated that they are not comfortable changing a speed limit without the accurate data
which will be obtained during the study scheduled next year.
Commissioner Freeman stated that she likes the idea of a brewery itself and in a rural location. Past farm breweries that
she has visited are peaceful and not at all like a wild bar. She agrees with the concerns about the traffic on Bacardi. The
traffic and speed on Bacardi Ave are out of control of the applicant. A traffic study needs to be done soon in this area
and would like to see the speed limit lowered on Bacardi Ave. She also, supports the new proposed hours.
Commissioner Schmisek stated that he likes the idea of a brewery and but is struggling with placing the brewery in a
residential neighborhood. He agrees with the proposed hours of operation but is concerned about the safety issues on
Bacardi Ave.
Commissioner VanderWiel stated that she likes the idea of a brewery in the City, but that she will be voting against
approval for this specific project as she feels like this project will alter the neighborhood. She stated that surrounding
properties would like to use their land as well when they are outside they will have to listen to the noise of a neighboring
commercial use. She does not believe the variance request is administrative in nature.
Commissioner Marlow stated that the use is allowed on this property and that microbreweries are family friendly.
Patrons do not visit breweries to get drunk. The safety concerns with Bacardi will be there with or without the brewery.
Commissioner Rivera stated that she can see both sides to the concerns. She understands that the neighbors not wanting
a commercial use in their backyard but that breweries are calm family friendly uses. She also likes that the starting hours
were moved back so that they are not open when the kids are coming home from school. She noted that the speed limit
on the gravel road is concerning.
Chair Kenninger stated that they need to strongly voice to the Council that a speed study needs to be completed,
hopefully before the establishment opens. She asked if there are there any road signs that could be placed in the
meantime? Smith stated that the specialty signs are usually not recommended because they don’t change driver behavior.
Community Development Director Lindquist stated that the commission should not be tying the road speed to this
specific project as the applicant cannot regulate the speed limit.
Commissioner Schmisek questioned how you can support the project knowing that it could be unsafe for the
neighborhood. Lindquist stated that this use is allowed in the zoning district. Klatt stated that staff placed conditions to
mitigate the impacts on the neighborhood and the speed on the road will be addressed in the near future.
Commissioner Reed inquired what we could expect out of a speed study. City Engineer Erickson stated that what they
would expect is a review of the road conditions and the approved speed for that section of the road. The study takes
into account the geometrics and that portion is rather straight. He would be surprised if the speed limit was lowered to
30 miles an hour.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2020
PAGE 5
Lindquist stated that the speed study shows how people drive and the basis of the study is that people drive for the
conditions of the road. Smith stated that just because a speed limit is lowered doesn’t mean that the population will
change their driving behavior.
MOTION by Kenninger by the Planning Commission (acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments) to
adopt a resolution approving a variance to allow the platting of a lot that does not meet the minimum density
and lot frontage requirements of the AG-Agriculture Zoning District, subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of a conditional use permit by the City Council to establish a microbrewery on the lot to be
created as a result of the variance.
2. Recording of a deed restriction over Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 that prohibit the sale of either parcel
independent from other property (residential and commercial) with specific provisions and limitations
as approved by the City Attorney.
3. The microbrewery parcel (Lot 1, Block 1) shall be adjusted to a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres.
Second by Freeman.
Ayes: 5. Nays: 2. VanderWiel & Reed. Motion Passes
MOTION by Kenninger to recommend the City Council approve a Simple Plat for North 20 Brewery
Addition subject to the following conditions:
1. Submission of updated grading, drainage, and erosion control plans and a storm water management
plan that reflects the updated site plan submitted for the May 12, 2020, Planning Commission
meeting.
2. Dedication of drainage and utility easements on the final plat up to the required buffer required by the
City’s wetland conservation ordinance around the wetland depicted at the far eastern portion of Lot 2,
Block 1, standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of the sites and along all
drainageways.
3. Conservation easements in a form acceptable to the City shall be recorded with the final plat and
cover the wetland and wetland buffers as identified on the plat and associated drawings.
4. Recording of a deed restriction over Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 that prohibits the sale of either parcel
independent from other property (residential and commercial) with specific provisions and limitations
as approved by the City Attorney.
5. Payment of a fee-in-lieu of park land dedication of $23,670 for Lot 1, Block 1. Additional park
dedication will be required upon any future development of Lot 2, Block 1.
6. Payment of the required storm water trunk area assessment of $6,865 per acre for the 2.5 acre
microbrewery parcel (Lot 1, Block 1) adjusted to apply to the final acreage on the final plat. Additional
storm water trunk area fees will be required upon any future subdivision of the remaining parcel.
7. Each lot must accommodate a sewage treatment system meeting all City and County requirements and
designed by a licensed septic designer.
8. Construction of a well capable of providing the water demands for the microbrewery and meeting all
Dakota County and Minnesota Department of Health Standards.
9. Incorporation of recommendations from the City Engineer in a review memorandum dated May 12,
2020, relative to drainage, grading, easements, utilities, storm water management, and other subjects
covered in the review.
10. The microbrewery will be required to connect to public water and sewer service should these services
become available to the parcel in the future.
11. The applicant shall work with the property owner to the south to resolve any private access and
easement issues within the subdivision prior to release of the plat for recording.
12. Applicant shall obtain fee title to the property identified as “Parcel 1” on the map labeled
Administrative Subdivision (Map C-1) to eliminate an existing gap between the subject property and
Bacardi Avenue right-of-way. This is required prior to release of the final plat.
13. The microbrewery parcel (Lot 1, Block 1) shall be adjusted to a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres.
Second by Rivera.
Ayes: 5. Nays: 2. VanderWiel & Reed. Motion Passes
MOTION by Kenninger to recommend the City Council approve a Conditional Use Permit to establish a
microbrewery and ancillary taproom on Lot 1, Block 1 of the North 20 Brewery Addition subject to the
following conditions:
1. Submission of updated grading, drainage, and erosion control plans and a storm water management
plan that reflects the updated site plan submitted for the May 12, 2020 Planning Commission meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2020
PAGE 6
2. Installation of septic system designed by a licensed septic designer and meeting all applicable city and
county standards.
3. Hours of operation shall be limited to the following: Monday-Thursday 4:00 PM to 9:00 PM; Friday
4:00 PM to 10:00 PM; Saturday 11:00 AM to 10:00 PM; Sunday 11:00 AM to 9:00 PM. On all days,
the outdoor patio shall be closed at 9:00 PM.
4. Secure a liquor license for the taproom and compliance with all City standards for the taproom as
regulated by the license.
5. Compliance with all requirements of the Building Official in a memorandum dated April 8, 2020.
6. All driveways and parking areas shall be capable of supporting access by emergency vehicles and
equipment.
7. The parking area shall comply with the minimum setback of 50 feet from the Bacardi Avenue right-
of-way.
8. The driveway and parking area shall be paved with concrete or bituminous surface at the time the city
paves Bacardi Avenue in front of the Microbrewery property at the owner’s expense. All parking stalls
shall be clearly marked to ensure the maximum capacity of the parking area is available for use at all
times.
9. No parking for patrons of the microbrewery is allowed along Bacardi Avenue or within surrounding
neighborhoods. Should parking problems occur at the site, the applicant will be required to expand
the on-site parking lot.
10. City may sign Bacardi Avenue for no parking if necessary.
11. The applicant shall designate an overflow parking area that may be used during peak visitation periods
above and beyond 4-proof of parking stalls depicted on site plan
12. Submission of a lighting plan that includes lighting at the driveway entrance and uses down cast
fixtures. All lighting shall comply with the City’s lighting requirements.
13. Submission of an updated landscape plan that meets the City’s minimum requirements for
commercial development (1 tree per 3,000 square feet of area) and that includes the required
foundation plantings. Additional plantings may be required along the western edge of the parking lot
to provide a fully screen the parking lot from Bacardi Avenue.
14. Compliance with the performance standards outlined for outdoor seating in section 3-1-14 and
subsection 11-4-14D of the City Code.
15. Submission of a dust control plan for the driveway and parking area.
16. The taproom operation shall operate in compliance with the City definition of a microbrewery which
means no more than 3,500 barrels of malt liquor can be produced in a calendar year and taproom
which means that sales are limited to the on-sale of the malt liquor produced by the brewery.
17. Outdoor live music or on-site food trucks are prohibited.
Second by Freeman.
Ayes: 4. Nays: 3. VanderWiel, Reed & Schmisek. Motion Passes
Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Chair Kenninger adjourned the
meeting at 9:51 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Stacy Bodsberg, Recording Secretary