HomeMy WebLinkAbout20230725 PC RM - PACKET
AGENDA
Planning Commission Regular
Meeting
Tuesday, July 25, 2023
6:30 PM
City Council Chambers, City Hall
1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
3. AUDIENCE INPUT
4. CONSENT AGENDA
a. Minutes of the June 27, 2023 Regular Meeting Minutes
5. OLD BUSINESS
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. Request by KJ Walk for an amendment to the Rosewood Commons PUD and
conditional use permits for an outdoor seating area and a drive-through facility.
7. NEW BUSINESS
8. DISCUSSION
9. ADJOURNMENT
Page 1 of 28
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Rosemount Planning Commission was
held on Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 6:30 PM in Rosemount Council Chambers 2875 145th Street West.
Chair Kenninger called the meeting to order with Commissioners Reed, Powell, Whitman, Hebert, Rivera
and Thiagarajan in attendance.
Staff present included the following: Community Development Director Kienberger, Planner Hogan, and
Community Development Technician Rooney.
The Pledge of Allegiance was said.
ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
None.
AUDIENCE INPUT
None.
CONSENT AGENDA
Mention by Kenninger of the modification and approval of consent agenda.
Motion to approve consent Kenninger. Second Reed.
Approved by all.
PUBLIC HEARING
a. Request by David and Kristin Kallaus for a Variance from the maximum allowed lot coverage
standard.
Planner Hogan shared an overview of the variance request to increase the lot coverage standard to
allow for the construction of a patio at 13200 Aulden Ave.
Commissioner Rivera asked why variance were not needed for neighboring properties that have patios.
Planner Hogan explained that the property survey that was approved by the City was close to that
maximum allowed lot coverage of 35%. The property owners would have only been able to add an
additional 57 square feet of impervious surface coverage to the property after the principal structure
was built. A majority of the properties in the surrounding area were not as restricted on adding lot
coverage as the subject property was.
Commissioner Rivera asked if it was due to the natural gas pipeline that runs through the property that
caused the property to have a higher lot coverage.
Planner Hogan explained that the pipeline was one of the reasons why the house was setback further on
the lot and a reason why the lot coverage was higher due to the driveway needed to be larger than the
standard driveways in the area.
Page 2 of 28
Commissioner Whitman asked what the purpose for lot coverage and as well as what are the standards
and how does the City come up with those?
Planner Hogan explained that the City’s standard lot coverage is 30% with the main reason being to
control drainage issues. Planner Hogan continued with stating that newer developments within the city
have higher lot coverage standards due to many of the lots being smaller in size. This development that
the subject property is located in, Bella Vista 3rd Addition, has that higher standard of 30%, 35%, and
40% depending on the square footage of the lot.
Commissioner Whitman commented that this subject property is barely in that 35% lot coverage
category.
Planner Hogan agreed and stated that the property’s square footage was on the lower end of the 35%
lot coverage category.
Commissioner Whitman asked if drainage was a concern or any concerns with approving this variance
due to drainage.
Planner Hogan noted there were no concerns for drainage.
Public Hearing opened at 6:39pm.
Kathleen Rowland
Address: 13239 Aulden Ave
Ms. Rowland stated that she had just poured a patio a few weeks ago and she got the public notice
letter in the mail and was curious as to see why they had to go through the variance process, and she
didn’t. She explained that it was nice to see how this process works and wished the applicant luck with
the project.
Public hearing closed 6:40pm.
Motion by: Kenninger
Seconded by: Powell
Motion to close the public hearing.
Commissioner Rivera shared that it looks like a very beautiful patio. Commissioner Reed shared that it
seems very straight forward and well thought out. Chair Kenninger noted that they will be making a vote
as the board of appeals and adjustments and will not move forward to the City Council.
Motion by board of appeals and adjustments.
Moved by Kenninger and Seconded by Powell.
NEW BUSINESS
None.
Page 3 of 28
DISCUSSION
Chair Kenninger noted the Joint Work Session between City Council and Planning Commission on July
11th, 2023 to go over the City’s Zoning Code update.
Chair Kenninger noted the next meetings.
ADJORNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 6:45pm.
Page 4 of 28
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Planning Commission Regular Meeting: July 25, 2023
AGENDA ITEM: Request by KJ Walk for an amendment to the
Rosewood Commons PUD and conditional use
permits for an outdoor seating area and a drive-
through facility.
AGENDA SECTION:
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PREPARED BY: Anthony Nemcek , Senior Planner AGENDA NO. 6.a.
ATTACHMENTS: Site Location, Site Plan, Grading Plan, Landscape
Plan, Elevations, Trash Enclosure, Perspective 1,
Perspective 2
APPROVED BY: AK
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Motion to recommend the City Council approve a Major Amendment to the Rosewood
Commons Planned Unit Development Agreement, subject to:
a. Approval of an amendment to the Rosewood Commons Planned Unit Development
Agreement.
b. A deviation from Section 11-6-1: Off Street Parking to reduce the minimum number of
parking stalls from 105 to 102.
c. a deviation from Section 11-6-3: Landscaping Requirements to remove the requirement
that the number of trees required as part of parking lot landscaping be in addition to the
number of trees required based on site area.
d. The trash enclosure plans shall be updated to feature exterior materials that match the
principal structures.
e. The total number of restaurant seats shall not exceed 218 between the two buildings.
f. The landscape plan shall be updated to replace ash trees with another species.
g. The applicant shall apply for a sign permit for any site signage.
h. Payment of $15,480 in lieu of park land dedication.
i. Payment of any area charges that were not collected as part of the subdivision
agreement.
2. Motion to recommend the City Council approve a conditional use permit for an outdoor seating or
dining area containing more than eleven seats, subject to:
a. Continuous fencing is required around the entire outdoor seating area prior to issuance of a
liquor license.
b. No public address system shall be audible from an adjacent non-commercial parcel
boundary.
Page 5 of 28
3. Motion to recommend the City Council approve a conditional use permit for a drive-through facility,
subject to:
a. Any public address and ordering system must be inaudible from adjacent non-commercial
property boundaries.
b. Signage related to the drive through facility must be approved through the regular sign
permitting process.
BACKGROUND
The applicant, KJ Walk is seeking approval of requests to construct two commercial buildings in the
northwest quadrant of the intersection of Business Parkway and CSAH 42. The parcels on which the
buildings would be constructed are part of the Rosewood Commons Planned Unit Development. One
of the buildings will be a standalone restaurant, while the other will be a multi-tenant retail building
with a drive-through facility serving a fast-food or fast-casual restaurant. The applicant is seeking
deviations from the code related to exterior materials, to allow parking lot landscaping to count
toward the total landscaping requirement, a reduction in the number of parking stalls required by
three, and a reduction in the setback requirement for parking from a private drive. Staff is
recommending approval of the requests, subject to the conditions listed in the recommended action.
Applicant: KJ Walk, Inc.
Property Owner: KJ Walk, Inc.
Site Location: 14910 and 14904 Business Parkway (NW of Business Parkway and CSAH
42)
Site Area in Acres: Approximately 1.72 Acres
Current Zoning: C4 PUD-General Commercial Planned Unit Development
Comp Plan Designation: CC-Community Commercial
The City Council approved the Rosewood Commons Planned Unit Development in 2020. That approval
covered the construction of six apartment buildings (two of which would have commercial space on
the ground floor) and a hotel. The apartment buildings required a comprehensive plan amendment
and rezoning from commercial uses to residential. The applicant also requested approval to construct a
memory care facility east of Business Parkway, but that portion of their request was denied to
maintain that parcel’s commercial land use designation and zoning. That parcel is now the site of the
New Horizon Academy, and the applicant received approval to replace the hotel component of the
PUD with a memory care facility, which is nearing completion. The subject property the applicant is
currently requesting approvals for was once contained in an outlot with the understanding that any
development of the site would require approval of a major amendment to the Rosewood Commons
PUD as well as any necessary platting.
In 2022, the subject property was platted into two parcels along with an approval by the City Council of
a PUD amendment to allow for parcels that do not meet the minimum width required by the zoning
ordinance. This deviation was permitted based on the fact that the two parcels would be part of a
larger overall commercial development containing shared drive aisles and parking areas.
There are three components that require action, which are listed as follows:
Page 6 of 28
• Major PUD Amendment to the Rosewood Commons Master Development Plan that includes a
site plan review. This action will bring the proposed plans into the Rosewood Commons PUD
and also amend the associated PUD agreement.
• Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor dining area with seating for more than eleven.
• Conditional Use Permit for a drive through facility.
ISSUE ANALYSIS
Legal Authority. Major Planned Unit Development Amendments are legislative decisions because the
City is formulating public policy, which in this case is related to the proposed deviations from the
zoning ordinance.
Conditional Use Permit approvals are quasi-judicial decisions for the City, meaning that the City is
acting as a judge to determine if the regulations within the Zoning Ordinance are being followed.
Generally, if these applications meet the City’s established requirements, they must be approved.
Staff review of each application is provided below.
Site Plan Review
The proposed site development plans incorporate the sharing of parking and access between the two
commercial buildings; therefore, the staff review comments associated with these two parcels are
incorporated into one section.
Land Use and Zoning
The site is guided for CC-Community Commercial uses in the City’s comprehensive land use plan, and it
is within the C4-General Commercial zoning district. The site is also covered by the Rosewood
Commons PUD overlay district. Any deviations that were approved with the initial phase of
development within the PUD are only permitted within that initial development area. Likewise, the
proposed deviations currently being reviewed only apply to the subject parcels being reviewed with
these requests.
The proposed buildings and their anticipated uses are allowed by the zoning ordinance and are
consistent with the comprehensive plan. The outdoor dining area and drive-through facility are
permitted conditionally by the zoning ordinance. A thorough review of those conditions is provided
later in this report.
Building Setbacks
Required Setback Provided Setback Frontage
Building Parking Building Parking
North (149th Street West) 30 feet 10 feet 63 0
East (Business Parkway) 10 feet 10 feet 33.27 14.58
South (CSAH 42) 10+20 feet 10 feet 63.34 feet 13.37
feet
West (Outlot A Rosewood
Commons 2nd Addition)
10 feet 10 feet 35.50 n/a
Page 7 of 28
The applicant is requesting, as part of their submittal, elimination of the setback requirement related
to parking on properties adjacent to a private driveway easement. Staff is supportive of this request as
the site development plans include a 6’ pedestrian facility between the private drive along the north
side of the property and the parking area. The area to the north is part of the Rosewood Commons
development. Staff would be less supportive if the area to the north of the site was a separate project
or an incompatible use. The site plans show the development meeting all other setback requirements,
including the additional setback requirement along the south side of the property due to its location
along an arterial road.
Exterior Materials
The applicant has provided exterior elevations that include a breakdown in the percentage of each
material. The zoning ordinance requires at least 50% of the building be finished with brick or stone and
no more than 10% EIFS. The applicant is requesting the ability to include up to 18.5% EIFS in exchange
for including stone and brick beyond that required by the zoning ordinance. The applicant’s plans
show that 81.8% of the non-glass areas are brick or stone on the eastern building. The non-glass areas
of the western building contain 80.9% brick or stone. Staff is supportive of this request since the EIFS is
limited to accent areas and the overall result is building elevations primarily consisting of brick or stone
when the applicant could have identified other materials for use that would result in less brick or stone
on the elevations.
Parking and Access
The site plan provided by the applicant shows a total of 105 parking spaces on the site. The applicant
estimated parking requirements based on the anticipated number of seats in the restaurant areas and
the square footage of the retail/office portion of the multi-tenant building. The code requires 6 stalls
per 1,000 square feet of retail or 5 stalls per 1,000 square feet for shopping centers. Office uses also
require 1 stall per 200 square feet or 5 per 1,000 square feet. Staff agrees with the calculations
provided by the applicant as shown in the table on the attached site plan, which shows the site falling
just shy of the code requirement of 105 stalls by three stalls. The applicant’s initial submittal provided
enough parking stalls to meet the requirement. Following the direction of staff to relocate a trash
enclosure and add an additional enclosure, as well as to provide an additional parking lot island to
accommodate more landscaping, the total number of parking stalls was reduced by three. Staff
supports the level of parking shown and is recommending approval of a reduction in the number of
stalls required on the site by three. Staff is also recommending a condition of approval that limits
restaurant seating to that shown on the table to ensure sufficient parking is provided once the
restaurants are built. The seating will be reviewed for compliance with that condition during the
building permit process.
Use Parking required
Restaurant (218 total seats @ 3 stalls per seat) 73 stalls
Retail (1,900 sf @ 6 stalls per 1,000 sf) 12 stalls
Office (3,800 sf @ 5 stalls per 1,000 sf) 19 stalls
Total Required 105 stalls
Page 8 of 28
Total Provided 102 stalls
Vehicular access into the site will be made from the private roadway located immediately north of the
site. The site is also bound by sidewalks on the north and east sides. The City’s fire marshal requested
and received an exhibit showing the turning radius of emergency apparatus within the site and has
found that the site layout is able to accommodate emergency vehicles.
Landscaping
The applicant has provided a landscape plan with their submittal that generally meets the
requirements of the City’s zoning ordinance based on the size of the subject property. The City Code
requires one tree per 3,000 square feet of site area, which in this case results in a requirement of 25
trees. There is an additional requirement related to the landscaping of the parking areas. The code
requires landscaping around the parking lot equal to 10% of the total parking area, which in turn must
contain one tree per 250 square feet of parking lot landscaping. This tree requirement is in addition to
the number of trees required based on the size of the site. Therefore, the total number of trees
required on site is 43. Staff worked with the applicant to update their plan to provide more parking lot
landscaping, which now meets the code requirement, and to identify where more trees might be
placed to get closer to the total tree requirement of 43 trees. A shortfall still exists, and staff is
recommending a deviation that does not require the parking lot landscaping to be calculated in
addition to that required based on site area.
The City Code also requires foundation plantings or shrubbery in an amount based on the total linear
feet of building perimeter. Based on the size of the buildings, a total of 65 shrubs is required. The
applicant has provided a total of 193 foundation plantings. These plantings are placed along the sides
of the property that abut public rights of way and around the outdoor dining area associated with the
restaurant in the western building.
The following table lays out the landscaping requirements for the site.
Calculation Formula Number Required Number Provided
Site Trees 1 per 3,000 sf 74,923/3,000=25 trees 25 trees
Parking Lot Trees 1 per 250 sf 4311/250=18 trees 7 trees
Foundation Plantings 1 per 10 linear feet 644/10=65 foundation plants 193 foundation plants
Staff is also including a recommended condition that the applicant update the final landscape plan to
replace the trees identified as ash trees with another species due to the impact of the emerald ash
borer on existing tree populations in the region.
Utilities
The site’s sewer and water will connect to the system at stubs to mains located within the private
street immediately north of the site. Stormwater will enter the City’s system at a point to the east.
The overall system within the Rosewood Commons PUD area was reviewed as part of the initial
approval, and the development proposed for the subject parcels is consistent with what was
Page 9 of 28
anticipated for the site at that time. All utilities in the vicinity were reviewed for compliance with the
City's engineering design standards, and the City's engineer has provided no further comments in
relation to this specific request.
Parks and Open Space
In a review of the City’s Parks Master Plan, no parks are identified in the subject property, therefore
staff is recommending the City collect cash-in-lieu of park dedication. The City Code requires 10% of
the development area be dedicated for parks and open space, which equals .172 acres. Based on the
City’s 2023 fee list, at $90,000 per acre the dedication fee-in-lieu is $15,480. Because the parcels are
already platted and the developer has asked to pay the fee with the building permit, the exact amount
per building will be calculated and collected based on the individual parcel area.
Site Lighting
The site lighting will consist of 8’ high wall-mounted lights and 20’ high pole-mounted lights. These are
both within the maximum height for site lighting prescribed by the City Code. The applicant also
provided a photometric plan that shows the lighting at the boundaries of adjacent parcels falls below
the maximum lumen allowed.
Trash Enclosure
The applicant’s plans show two trash enclosures constructed of durable materials that generally meet
the requirements of the code. Staff worked with the applicant to adjust the site plan to ensure there are
not conflicts with traffic movements in the site, particularly related to the drive-through facility. The
elevations indicate that applicant would construct the enclosures using concrete block. The code
requires trash enclosures for new construction to complement the principal structures on the site.
Therefore, staff is recommending a condition of approval to update the design to feature exterior
materials similar to that of the principal structures.
Conditional Use Permit – Outdoor Dining Area Containing Seating for Eleven or More
As a conditional use, outdoor seating or dining areas for eleven (11) or more seats are subject to the
general CUP standards outlined in Section 11-10-7 as well as the standards specific to this use in
Section 11-4-14.D. These standards evaluate the City’s land use and zoning performance standards
and the potential impact of the proposed use on the surrounding neighborhood. These standards and
staff findings for each are provided below.
1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the
neighborhood or the city.
Finding: The outdoor seating or dining area will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
general welfare of the neighborhood or the City of Rosemount.
2. Will be harmonious with the objectives of the comprehensive plan and city code provisions.
Finding: The subject property is guided CC – Community Commercial by the comprehensive plan
and zoned C-4 – General Commercial. Outdoor seating or dining areas for eleven or more people
are a conditional use in this zoning district.
According to the comprehensive plan, the Community Commercial land use designation is intended
Page 10 of 28
to provide retail, professional offices, and personal services that serve the daily and weekly needs of
the residents of Rosemount. Close proximity to arterial streets is needed for visibility while
individual business accesses shall be provided predominantly from collector, local, or private
streets. By comparison, the purpose and intent of the C-4 – Community Commercial district is to
provide a wide range of goods and services to the entire community. Due to their proximity to
major arterial streets, businesses in this district are dependent on large volumes of traffic, and thus
need to be highly visible and accessible.
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 plans provided by the applicant show the dining area to have significant landscaping
surrounding it. Final construction of the fence area surrounding the patio will be reviewed through
the building permit process for conformance with the building code.
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 proposed commercial development is served adequately by existing essential public
facilities and services.
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: The outdoor dining area will be located on the south side of the restaurant building facing
CSAH 42 over 450’ from the nearest residence. Therefore, staff finds the proposed dining area will
likely have minimal if any impacts on the other properties in the vicinity.
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 proposed dining area will not interfere with any drive aisles.
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 proposed use 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.
8. These standards apply in addition to specific conditions as may be applied throughout this code.
Page 11 of 28
Finding: Outdoor dining areas for eleven or more seats are also subject to the specific conditional
use permit standards in Section 11-4-11.D as outlined below.
In addition to the general conditional use permit standards reviewed above, the proposed use must
comply with the specific performance standards for outdoor seating or dining areas for eleven (11)
or more seats. These standards along with staff findings are detailed below.
1. The site and enclosure(s) shall be designed to limit the effects of outdoor seating or dining
areas on contiguous properties and/or public rights of way.
Findings: The area will be located approximately 450’ from the nearest residence. The applicant’s
plan calls for the outdoor dining areas to include foundation plantings along its perimeter. The
distance and landscape design will limit the effects of the areas on contiguous properties and the
public right-of-way.
2. The seating area shall be located on private property along the front, side or rear of the
principal building but shall not be located within a required setback or on the side abutting
any residential use or district.
Findings: The proposed outdoor seating area will be located along the south side of the building
and beyond the required 30’ minimum setback standard.
3. The seating area shall not interfere with circulation in any required parking, loading,
maneuvering or pedestrian area. A minimum four foot (4') passageway shall be maintained
along the private sidewalk for pedestrians.
Findings: The plan provided by the applicant shows a continuous sidewalk along all sides of the
building and outside the outdoor dining area.
4. The seating area shall be located in a controlled or cordoned area acceptable to the city with
at least one opening to an acceptable pedestrian walk.
Findings: The applicant’s plan shows a contiguous area delineated by landscaping. If a fence is
desired, staff will review the plans during the standards permit review process to ensure an opening
to the sidewalk is provided.
5. When a liquor license is granted, an uninterrupted enclosure is required and the enclosure
shall only have access through the principal building.
Page 12 of 28
Findings: If a liquor license is requested by the future user of the site, compliance requires the
presence of a continuous enclosure. Staff is recommending a condition of approval that reiterates
that a fence is required in order for the site to receive a liquor license.
6. The seating area shall not be permitted within two hundred feet (200') of any residential use
or district as measured at the property line and shall be separated from residential use or
district by the principal structure or other method of screening acceptable to the city. The
minimum distance from a residential use or district may be reduced should the city
determine the applicant has added sufficient elements to reduce the impact of this use.
Findings: The outdoor dining area will be located greater than 200’ from both the R1 district
northeast of the site and the mixed-use area immediately north of the site. It is screened from
those areas by the building itself.
7. No public address system shall be audible from a noncommercial or nonindustrial use or
district.
Finding: A condition of this approval will note that no public address system shall be audible from
any residential use or district.
Conditional Use Permit – Drive Through Facility
As a conditional use, drive-through facilities are subject to the general CUP standards outlined in
Section 11-10-7 as well as the standards specific to this use in Section 11-4-14.D. These standards
evaluate the City’s land use and zoning performance standards and the potential impact of the
proposed use on the surrounding neighborhood. These standards and staff findings for each are
provided below.
1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the
neighborhood or the city.
Finding: The Drive-Through will not change any traffic patterns exterior to the site. Screening will
be provided to minimize impacts to traffic on Business Parkway from headlights.
2. Will be harmonious with the objectives of the comprehensive plan and city code provisions.
Finding: The use and location are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies. The applicant is
not seeking any variances or deviations from the City Code provisions to accommodate the drive-
through.
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.
Page 13 of 28
Finding: The area is guided for Community Commercial uses. The site plan is laid out in a manner
consistent with commercial development in a suburban environment.
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 is served by existing services including storm water removal. The project will not
require any new public services or utilities.
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: The proposed development is within the expectations for commercial development in the
area in which it is located.
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 site layout will not result in impacts to the public streets in the vicinity.
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 proposed use 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.
In addition to the general conditional use permit standards reviewed above, the proposed use must
comply with the following specific performance standards:
1. The site and building(s) shall be designed to limit the effects of the drive-through on adjacent
properties and public rights of way. No use with a drive-through window shall be located abutting
any residential use or district.
Finding: The drive-through window will face Business Parkway and is immediately across from
another commercial district and use.
2. Drive-through facilities shall have a minimum six (6) stacking spaces per drive-through window.
Fast food uses operating more than one window per individual drive aisle shall meet the stacking
requirements for a single drive-through facility. Each space shall be a minimum of nine feet (9') wide
by eighteen feet (18') long.
Page 14 of 28
Finding: The plans provided by the applicant indicate at least ten stacking spaces that are 20’ long
and 14’ wide, which exceeds the dimensional requirements of the City Code.
3. The principal building shall be the primary source for screening the drive-through facility and
stacking and exiting areas from adjacent properties and/or rights of way. Landscaping and berming
shall be a secondary source for screening drive-through, stacking or exiting areas. Should
landscaping and berming be found ineffective by the city, the city may approve screening walls
and/or decorative fencing as an alternative. Screening walls shall be constructed of the same
materials as the principal building and shall not extend more than twenty five feet (25') without a
change in architecture to reduce their mass and appearance. Stacking areas shall have a minimum
ninety percent (90%) opacity screen to a height of six feet (6') while exiting areas shall have a
minimum fifty percent (50%) opacity screen to a height of at least four feet (4').
Finding: Screening is provided by landscaping along the eastern and southern property lines.
4. Stacking lanes, order board intercom, and service window shall be designed and located to
minimize noises, emissions, and headlight glare upon adjacent properties and public rights of way.
Finding: The stacking lanes, order boards and drive-through windows are configured to limit their
impact on adjacent properties and public rights-of-way.
5. Stacking lanes shall not interfere with circulation through any required parking, loading,
maneuvering or pedestrian area.
Finding: The stacking lanes of the drive through are located along the eastern side of the building.
Parking for the site is located south, west, and north of the building, and therefore there is no
interference between drive-through stacking and the parking area.
6. No public address system shall be audible from a noncommercial or nonindustrial use or district.
Finding: Staff has prepared a condition stating that public address or ordering speakers shall not be
audible from the boundaries of adjacent residential parcels.
7. In addition to the freestanding sign allowed by the sign ordinance, fast food uses may display
menu signs related to drive-through facilities, provided that:
a. Not more than one menu sign per defined drive-through aisle is allowed.
b. Individual menu signs shall be single sided with an area not to exceed thirty-two (32) square
feet including both menu information and sign cabinet.
c. The height of the menu sign(s) shall not exceed eight feet (8') including its base or pole
measured from grade to the top of the structure.
d. The menu sign(s) shall not encroach into any parking setback and shall be located directly
adjacent to the drive-through aisle and oriented in such a manner that the sign provides
information to the drive-through patrons only and does not provide supplemental advertising to
pass-by traffic and does not impair visibility or obstruct circulation.
Page 15 of 28
Finding: The actual design of the menu boards has not been provided. Staff has prepared a
condition that requires conformance with the above menu board standards.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff has reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and worked with the applicant to make
improvements where possible, such as to the landscaping plan and to update the location of the trash
enclosures. Staff finds that the proposed deviations result in a quality development that is in line with
the City’s goals contained in the comprehensive plan and the intent of the zoning ordinance. Staff is
recommending approval of the requests subject to conditions.
Page 16 of 28
Page 17 of 28
33
5
.
6
9
4
0
.
5
3
E
ϭ
Ϭ
Σ
ϯ
ϵ
Ζ
ϯ
ϲ
Η
t
3
6
.
7
1
12
3
.
3
1
55
.
0
0
35.50
89
.
5
0
18
9
.
7
2
148.75
26.76
119.49
0+001+002+003+004+00
0+
0
0
143.01
80.74 1
8
.
0
0
97
.
5
4
ZERO CURB W/
TRANSITIONS12
6001 Egan Drive, Ste 100, Savage, MN 55378
Phone: 952.226.3200 Web: www.kjwalk.com
Date:Revision:
Original
Cover-Site Plan
SHEET 1 of 4
Date: 6/29/2023
FILE PATH: G:\.shortcut-targets-by-id\0B7rlATRBOKEBSGQ2T0JkZi0xUTg\Work Files\Rosemount Projects\Rosewood Commons\Engineering\CAD\DWGs\ROSEWOOD COMMONS2-Site Plan.dwg
ROSEWOOD COMMONS SECOND ADDITION
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me,
or under my direct supervision, and that I am a
duly registered engineer under the laws of the
State of Minnesota.
Luke Warren Israelson
Registration #: 51362
Legend
Existing watermain
Proposed watermain
Existing sanitary
Proposed sanitary
Existing storm
Proposed storm
Existing hydrant
Proposed hydrant
Existing gate valve
Proposed gate valve
Existing manhole
Proposed manhole
Proposed catchbasin
Silt fence
Inlet protectors
Parking lot lights
Building Lights
Rip Rap
Drainage Arrow
Spot Elevation
Back of Curb Spot Elevation
963.90
DEVELOPER/ENGINEER/BUILDER
KJ Walk, Inc.Luke Israelson
6001 Egan Drive, Ste 100 952.826.9068
Savage, MN 55378
Legal Description:
Lot 1 and 2, Block 1, Rosewood Commons Second Addition,
Dakota County, Minnesota.
05/15/2023
For Review
June 29, 2023
Impervious vs Pervious
Area Sq Ft Percent
Total Area 74,963
Building Foot Print 11,200 14.94%
Green Space 13,355 17.82%
Parking 43,108 57.50%
Sidewalks 7,300 9.74%
BENCHMARK
T.N.H AT 149TH ST W AND
BUSINESS PARKWAY - ELEV. 949.75
DATUM: NAD83
0 30 60 90
ROSEMOUNT, MN
SHEET INDEX
1 Cover and Site Plan
2 Grading and Erosion Control
3 SWPPP
4 Landscape Plan
Surface materials for the streets/parking, sidewalks and driveways
will be a combination of blacktop, concrete and stamped concrete.
952.80
Rosewood Commons
Use and Parking Requirements
Lot/Block USE UNITS /
AREA
# of Seats 1/30
Total Floor Area
REQUIRED
PARKING
Lot 1 Blk 1 Restaurant 3,660 Sq Ft 122 41
Lot 1 Blk 1 Patio 967 Sq Ft 32 11
Lot 2 Blk 1 Restaurant 1,940 Sq Ft 64 22
Lot 2 Blk 1 Retail 1,900 Sq Ft 6 per 1000 Sq Ft 12
Lot 2 Blk 1 Office 3,800 Sq Ft 5 per 1000 Sq Ft 19
Total Required 105
Total Provided 102
Revised05/31/2023
Revised06/09/2023
Revised06/29/2023
Page 18 of 28
954.50
953.00
951.00
956.13 955.669
5
6
0+001+002+003+004+00
0+
0
0
951.75
954.61 951.32
951.38
952.15
951.91
953.10
95
2
953.05 953.00
ZERO CURB W/
TRANSITIONS12
6001 Egan Drive, Ste 100, Savage, MN 55378
Phone: 952.226.3200 Web: www.kjwalk.com
Date:Revision:
Original
Site Plan- Grading and
Erosion Control Plan
SHEET 2 of 4
Date: 6/29/2023
FILE PATH: G:\.shortcut-targets-by-id\0B7rlATRBOKEBSGQ2T0JkZi0xUTg\Work Files\Rosemount Projects\Rosewood Commons\Engineering\CAD\DWGs\ROSEWOOD COMMONS2-Site Plan.dwg
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me,
or under my direct supervision, and that I am a
duly registered engineer under the laws of the
State of Minnesota.
Luke Warren Israelson
Registration #: 51362
ROSEMOUNT, MN
0 20 40 60
Silt Fence to be installed along perimeter of
construction area prior to the start of work.
LEGEND
SILT FENCE
INLET PROTECTORS
DRAINAGE ARROW
SPOT ELEVATION
BACK OF CURB SPOT ELEVATION
NOTES:
DISTURBED AREAS TO BE TEMPORARY SEEDED AND MULCHED WITHIN 14 DAYS
OF STOPPAGE OF WORK.
PERMANENT COVER TO BE INSTALLED WITHIN 14 DAYS OF FINAL GRADE BEING
ESTABLISHED.
TEMPORARY SEEDING AND PERMANENT SEEDING IN UNDEVELOPED AREAS TO BE
EROSION CONTROL MIX
FINISH SEED/SOD TO BE BLUEGRASS AND/OR FESCUES.
963.90
05/15/2023
952.80
Revised05/31/2023
Revised06/09/2023
For Review
June 29, 2023
Revised06/29/2023
Page 19 of 28
6001 Egan Drive, Ste 100, Savage, MN 55378
Phone: 952.226.3200 Web: www.kjwalk.com
Date:Revision:
SWPPP PLAN
SHEET 3 of 4
Date: 6/29/2023
FILE PATH: G:\.shortcut-targets-by-id\0B7rlATRBOKEBSGQ2T0JkZi0xUTg\Work Files\Rosemount Projects\Rosewood Commons\Engineering\CAD\DWGs\ROSEWOOD COMMONS2-Site Plan.dwg
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me,
or under my direct supervision, and that I am a
duly registered engineer under the laws of the
State of Minnesota.
Luke Warren Israelson
Registration #: 51362
ROSEMOUNT, MN
SWPPP (STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN)
Original05/15/2023
Revised05/31/2023
Revised06/09/2023
For Review
June 29, 2023
Revised06/29/2023
Page 20 of 28
0+001+002+003+00
0+
0
0
ZERO CURB W/
TRANSITIONS12
L
L
M
L M A
9
5
6
0+001+002+003+00
0+
0
0
95
2
ZERO CURB W/
TRANSITIONS12
6001 Egan Drive, Ste 100, Savage, MN 55378
Phone: 952.226.3200 Web: www.kjwalk.com
Date:Revision:
Original
Site Plan- Paving and
Landscape Plan
SHEET 4 of 4
Date: 6/29/2023
FILE PATH: G:\.shortcut-targets-by-id\0B7rlATRBOKEBSGQ2T0JkZi0xUTg\Work Files\Rosemount Projects\Rosewood Commons\Engineering\CAD\DWGs\ROSEWOOD COMMONS2-Site Plan.dwg
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me,
or under my direct supervision, and that I am a
duly registered engineer under the laws of the
State of Minnesota.
Luke Warren Israelson
Registration #: 51362
1/
3
T
R
E
E
HE
I
G
H
T
ROOT CROWN AT
FINISH GRADE,
OR 1-2" ABOVE GRADE
FINISH GRADE
TILLED OR BROKEN UP
SOIL MIN 12" DEEP
2" SETTLED LAYER OF MULCH
2X WIDTH OF ROOTBALL
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
TREE PLANTING
ROOT CROWN AT
FINISH GRADE,
OR 1-2" ABOVE GRADE
FINISH GRADE
TILLED OR BROKEN UP
SOIL MIN 12" DEEP
2" SETTLED LAYER OF MULCH
2X WIDTH OF ROOTBALL
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
TYP. SHRUB PLANTING
Landscape Planting
Common Name Botanical Name Size
Autumn Blaze Maple Acre Freemanii 'Jeffsred'2.5"10
Ash Fraxinus 2.5"11
Linden Tilia 2.5"11
Total Trees 32
Shrubs 193
St. John's Wort, Low Grow Sumac, Tor Spirea, Hyperion Daylily,
Dwarf Lilac, Or similar
Total 225
ROSEMOUNT, MN
A
L
M
NOTES:
* CONIFEROUS TREES STAGGERED WITH 15' SPACING
* DECIDUOUS TREES-20' SPACING
* THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT TREES ON SITE
PAVING PLANLANDSCAPE PLAN
NOTE:
ALL NEWLY INSTALLED STREETS ARE PRIVATE
AND WILL BE MAINTAINED PRIVATELY.
1.5" WEAR
1.5" BASE
6" CL5 AGGEGATE BASE
TYPICAL PARKING LOT SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
4" CONCRETE WALK
4" SAND
TYPICAL SIDEWALK SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
2' SAND SUBGRADE
B 418 CURB AND GUTTER
NOT TO SCALE
1.5% TYP
LEGEND
MAPLE
ASH
LINDEN
SHRUB
FEATHER REED GRASS OR SIMILAR
TIP-IN CURB AND GUTTER
TIP-OUT CURB AND GUTTER
Paving 41,903 SQ FT
Curb and Gutter 2,100 LF
Sidewalk 5,750 SQ FT
Trash Enclosure Concrete 222 SQ FT
05/15/2023
Revised05/31/2023
Revised06/09/2023
For Review
June 29, 2023
Revised06/29/2023
Page 21 of 28
Page 22 of 28
Page 23 of 28
Page 24 of 28
Page 25 of 28
ÁÁÁÁ
Á
Á
Á
Á
Á
Á
/'6#.&1145
Á
Á%10%4'6'$.1%-%10%4'6'$.1%-
%10%4'6'$.1%-
%10%4'6'$.1%-%10%4'6'$.1%-
/'6#.411(9+6*/'6#.(4#/+0)
ÁÁÁÁ
/'6#.411(9+6*/'6#.(4#/+0)
Page 26 of 28
Page 27 of 28
Page 28 of 28