062413 PacketPLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
June 24, 2013
7:00 p.m.
Introductory Proceedings
Roll Call
Approval of Minutes: Regular Planning Commission meeting of May 29, 2013.
Opportunity for Citizens to Address the Commission on items not on the Agenda
New Business
ITEM #1 PC Letter#8 Consideration of the 2015-2018 Capital Improvement
Program and a finding of consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan of the Capital Improvement Program
and 2014 Capital Improvement Budget
Public Hearing
ITEM #2 13-CUP-04 Conditional Use Permit to allow a full service restaurant with
alcohol service (EI Tejaban) at 6501 Nicollet Avenue
ITEM #3 13-IUP-02
Interim Use Permit for temporary Honda employee parking at
7700 Pillsbury Avenue (the portion of the former City
Maintenance Garage that is south of
77th
Street).
ITEM #4 13-APUD-02 Amend Planned Unit Development nd Conditional Use
Permit for the Cedar Point Commons Planned Unit
Development. The amendment requests permission to allow
a McDonald's restaurant to occupy one half of the vacant site
at the northwest corner of 66t" Street and Richfield Parkway.
ITEM #5 12-SP-01 Continue public hearing, adult daycare, 6722 Penn Avenue to
July 22, 2013.
Old Business
Liaison Reports
Community Services Advisory Commission
City Council
Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
Richfield School Board
Transportation Commission
Chamber of Commerce
Other
City Planner's Report
Next Meeting Date: July 22, 2013
Adjournment
Auxiliary aid for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96
hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612/861-9738".
Planning Commission
M i n utesI,fl;ll lll li ll))
May 29, 2013
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Rick Jabs and Commissioners Susan
Rosenberg, Dennis Schuller, Tom Rublein, Gordon Vizecky,
Dan Kitzberger and Josh Root
MEMBERS ABSENT: none
STAFF PRESENT; Melissa Poehlman, City Planner
Matt Brillhart, Planning Technician
OTHERS PRESENT: Dale Woodbeck (Lakewinds Natural Foods manager)
Tim Carter (Richfield Bloomington Honda manager)
Jeff Wood (Richfield Bloomington Honda owner)
Sharon Meister (6414 Harriet Avenue)
Chairperson Jabs called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/Root, S/Vizecky to approve the minutes of the April 22, 2013 regular meeting.
Motion carried: 7-0
OPEN FORUM
No members of the public spoke.
PUBLIC HEARING(S)
ITEM #1
i3-CUP-05, '93-FDF-u a i3-PUD-02 — Consideratiar f d veloprnent Plans
and a Conditional Use Permit for the south half of the Planned Unit Development
at 6400 and 6430 Lyndale Avenue. Plans request to construct a 25,000 square
foot grocery store (Lakewinds Natural Foods).
May 29, 2013
City Planner Poehlman (Poehlman) presented the staff report, highlighting key points of
the PUD. Regarding building materials, staff recommends that additional changes be
made to break up the large, single color walls to add visual interest. Staff requests a
materials board.
Chairperson Jabs opened the public hearing and invited a representative from
Lakewinds to speak on behalf of the project and address staff concerns about material
usage.
Dale Woodbeck, general manager of Lakewinds, noted that they had moved the
entrance to the corner and a materials board was being fabricated. They have also
added a trellis over the employee break area to add visual interest to the west elevation.
They are willing to work with staff to reach a mutual agreement on aesthetics. He
stated that they have a shared parking agreement with Cornerstone.
In response to a question from Commissioner Rublein, Woodbeck stated that the hours
of business would be 7am to 9pm daily, possibly closing earlier on Sundays.
In response to a question from Commissioner Schuller, Woodbeck stated that they
hoped to close on the property on August 7, 2013 and begin construction shortly
thereafter.
In response to a question from Commissioner Rublein, Woodbeck stated that the
window murals shown in the renderings were a dot density adhesive applied to the
inside of the glass.
In response to a question from Commissioner Rublein, Woodbeck stated that the hours
of operation of the electric vehicle charging stations was still being worked out. Bike
parking for customers will be provided in the outdoor foyer area and inside the building
for employees.
Sharon Meister (6414 Harriet Avenue) approached the podium and expressed concerns
about the hours and days per week that construction activity would be taking place.
She stated that the construction of the Lyndale Plaza apartments was very disruptive
and violated agreed upon hours of construction. She also expressed concerns with
delivery truck circulation and the architecture of the building.
Poehlman addressed the question regarding delivery truck circulation and stated that
trucks would not be backing up on Lyndale Avenue. Addressing construction hours,
she said that it was in city code, not zoning code, and stated that limits were not placed
on the Lyndale Plaza project, but City Council has the authority do so.
Woodbeck identified the contractor as Stahl Construction and said he believed
construction hours would be primarily Monday through Friday during business hours. At
Chair Jabs request, Woodbeck said he would discuss those concerns with the
contractor.
2
May 29, 2013
In response to a question from Commissioner Rosenberg, Woodbeck said they were
aiming for May 1St occupancy and hoped to have the shell of the building enclosed by
winter.
Commissioner Root urged residents to contact city staff and the police department with
any issues relating to construction hours and noise.
Poehlman read the city codes relating to construction hours and noise, noting that
activities below 85 dB can take place from 7am to 10pm daily, while activities over that
noise level are restricted to 7am to 10pm weekdays and 8am to 10pm Saturdays.
M/Vizecky S/Rublein, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried; 7-0
Commissioner Rublein stated that he hoped the parking situation will be monitored,
noting issues at Menards.
Commissioner Schuller stated that he hoped both the developer and the City would
continue to explore other opportunities for parking space.
Chair Jabs thanked staff for doing thorough analysis of the project.
M/Rublein S/Vizecky, to recommend approval of the conditional use permit, final
development plan and planned unit development.
Motion carried: 7-0
ITEM #2
13-RZN-02, 13-CUP-06, 13-FDP-03 & 13-PUD-03 — Consideration of a change in
zoning of property from Mixed Use — Regional (MU-R) to Planned Mixed Use
PMU); approval of site plans for a Planned Unit Development that would allow
the construction of a new Honda dealership and a Mitsubishi dealership.
City Planner Poehlman presented the staff report, highlighting key points of the Planned
Unit Development including building coverage, setbacks, and usable open space.
Poehlman recommended that the property owner and dealership manager meet with
staff annually beginning in 2015 to discuss the anticipated construction of a multi-story
parking ramp, with a construction deadline of no later than December 31, 2020.
Chairperson Jabs opened the public hearing.
M/Rublein S/Root to close the public hearing.
Motion carried: 7-0
In response to a question from Commissioner Rublein, Tim Carter (RB Honda) stated
that cars would no longer be parked along the fence, as they would have additional
space with the new campus.
3
May 29, 2013
In response to a question from Chair Jabs, Carter stated that his goal was to grow the
business aggressively and hoped to have the parking garage built before 2020.
In response to a question to Commissioner Rublein, Carter stated that a motorcycle
dealership was no longer part of the plan at this time.
In response to a question from Commissioner Rublein, Carter stated that he was not
aware of any concerns by the adjacent Candlewood Suites related to his business or
LaMettry's Auto Body.
Poehlman stated that LaMettry's had submitted their building permit application.
Chair Jabs thanked staff and the applicant for their hard work on this project.
M/Vizecky, S/Root to recommend approval of the rezoning, conditional use permit, final
development plan, and planned unit development.
Motion carried; 7-0
ITEM #3
13-CUP-04 — Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a full service
restaurant with alcohol service (EI Tejaban) at 6519 Nicollet Avenue. Continue
public hearing to June 24t".
M/Vizecky S/Root, to continue the public hearing to the June 24t" meeting of the
Planning Commission.
NEW BUSINESS
None,
OLD BUSINESS
None.
LIAISON REPORTS
Community Services Advisory Commission: No report
City Council: No report
HRA: No report
Richfield School Board: No report
Transportation Commission: No report
Chamber of Commerce: No report
Other: None
4
May 29, 2013
CITY PLANNER'S REPORT
Poehlman noted that a joint study session between the City Council and Planning
Commission is scheduled for June 11t". The topic is impediments to business development,
including parking requirements, fire code sprinkler requirements, and right of way dedication
requirements.
ADJOURNMENT
M/Rublein, S/Vizecky to adjourn the meeting.
Motion carried: 7-0
The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:53 p.m.
Dan Kitzberger
Secretary
5
AGENDA SECTION: NEW BUSINESS
AGENDA ITEM#1
REPOR'# 8
CASE#
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PC MEETING DATE: JUNE 24, 2013
ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the 2015-2018 Capital Improvement Program and a finding of consistency
with the Comprehensive Plan of the Capital Improvement Program and the 2014 Capital
Im rovement Bud et.
I.RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion:
1. Recommend approval of the 2015-2018 Capital Improvement
Program; and
2. Adopt a resolution finding that the 2014 Capital Improvement
Budget and 2015-2018 Capital Improvement Program are
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
II. BACKGROUND
Each year, the City Manager makes a recommendation to the City Council regarding
the Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) for the upcoming year. The Planning
Commission is responsible for reviewing the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and
making a recommendation to the City Council. The Commission is also responsible for
ensuring that the CIB and the CIP are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Finance Manager, Chris Regis will present a summary and answer questions.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
The CIB/CIP is the City's immediate budget and five-year plan for making
investments in publicly owned facilities and infrastructure.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
The Planning Commission is being asked to recommend approval of the CIP
and to adopt a resolution finding that the CIB and the CIP are consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan.
C. FINANCIAL
See the CIB/CIP document attached.
D. LEGAL
The Planning Commission is required by City Charter to prepare and
recommend a CIP for inclusion in the annual budget message of the City
Council.
The Planning Commission is required by State Statute to review all proposed
capital improvements within the City and make written findings to the City
Council for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION S
Recommend approval of the CIP with changes.
Do not recommend approval of the CIP and determine that the CIB is not consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
V. ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Richfield City Charter, Chapter 7, Sections 7.05 and 7.06, Subd. 2(ii) and 2(iii) and
Minnesota Statute, Section 462.356, Subd. 2
2014 Capital Improvement Budget and 2015-2018 Capital Improvement Program
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
Chris Regis, City Finance Manager
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE RICHFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION
FINDING THAT THE 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET AND
2015-2018 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
ARE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan regarding
the proposed capital improvements in the 2014 Capital Improvement Budget and 2015-2018
Capital Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the proposed capital
improvements would be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission finds that the
proposed capital improvements found in the 2014 Capital Improvement Budget and the 2015-
2018 Capital Improvement Program are in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Adopted this 24th day of June, 2013 by the Planning Commission of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Rick Jabs, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Dan Kitzberger, Secretary
CHAPTER 7
RICHFIELD CITY CHARTER
TAXATION AND FINANCES
Section 7.05. Preparation and Submission of Annual Budqet. At a special budget meeting of
the Council on or before September 15, the City Manager must submit to the Council a
proposed budget and a budget message in the form and containing the information specified in
Section 7.06. In preparing the budget and the budget message, the Manager must obtain from
City department heads information regarding (i) proposed expenditures for the ensuing fiscal
year, and (ii) capital projects and capital expenditures proposed to be undertaken in the
ensuing budget year and in the following four fiscal years. The Council must hold one or more
informational meetings on the proposed budget at which the public may provide comments and
may thereafter revise the proposed expenditures and capital projects contained in the
proposed budget document. (Amended Bill 1990-13; Bill No. 2003-23)
Section 7.06. Form of Annual Budqet. Subdivision 1. The budget must contain a
financial plan for the ensuing fiscal year. The financial plan must include: (i) a budget
message, (ii) a general summary of the financial plan, (iii) estimates of revenues applicable to
proposed expenditures, and, (iv) proposed expenditures. Proposed expenditures may not
exceed proposed revenues. Proposed expenditures for the general and special revenue funds
must (i) be listed by organization, unit or activity, and (ii) be in parallel columns opposite the
major and minor object of the expenditure showing the amount of expenditure for the last fiscal
year, the amount estimated for the current fiscal year and the proposed expenditure for the
ensuing fiscal year. The revenues attributable to each general and special fund must be
presented in a similar manner. The statement of revenues must include the source of and
amount of miscellaneous revenues, the amount of surplus of prior fiscal year revenues, and
the amount of revenues raised by property taxes in the prior fiscal year and estimated to be
raised in the current fiscal year. (Amended Bill 1990-13; Bill No. 2003-23)
Subd. 2. The Budget Message. The budget message may be submitted by the
Manager as a separate document but it must accompany the budget. The message must
contain the following elements: (Amended Bill No. 2003-23)
ii) Capital Improvements. The message must contain a description of pending and
proposed capital projects together with estimates of the costs of those projects and the
sources of funds to be used to pay for them. (Amended Bill 2003-23)
iii) Capital Program. The message must contain, or have attached to it, a Capital
Project Plan for the four fiscal years following the fiscal year of the budget. The Capital Project
Plan is to be prepared by the Manager after consultation with the department heads and any
informational meetings conducted under Section 7.05. (Amended Bill 1990-13; Bill No. 2003-
23)
462.356 Procedure to effect plan: generally.
Minnesota State Statute
Subd. 2. Compliance with plan. After a comprehensive municipal plan or section thereof has
been recommended by the planning agency and a copy filed with the governing body, no
publicly owned interest in real property within the municipality shall be acquired or disposed of,
nor shall any capital improvement be authorized by the municipality or special district or
agency thereof or any other political subdivision having jurisdiction within the municipality until
after the planning agency has reviewed the proposed acquisition, disposal, or capital
improvement and reported in writing to the governing body or other special district or agency or
political subdivision concerned, its findings as to compliance of the proposed acquisition,
disposal or improvement with the comprehensive municipal plan. Failure of the planning
agency to report on the proposal within 45 days after such a reference, or such other period as
may be designated by the governing body shall be deemed to have satisfied the requirements
of this subdivision. The governing body may, by resolution adopted by two-thirds vote dispense
with the requirements of this subdivision when in its judgment it finds that the proposed
acquisition or disposal of real property or capital improvement has no relationship to the
comprehensive municipal plan.
2014
CAPITAL IMPR4VEMENT BUDGET
015-2018
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
City Manager's Draft
20'14 Capital Improvement B acic et
PROJECT EXPENDITURE
RECREATION & OPEN SPACE
Park Maintenance 50,000 R
Lincoln Field Loan Repay 28,600 R
Community Garden Relocation 10,000 R
Taft Athletic Facility Lighting 8 Improvements 65,000 R
Taft Lake Fishery 60,000 R
Wood Lake Boardwalk Repair 14,000 R
Vets Park Play Equipment Replacement 47,400 R
Wood Lake Nature Center Parking Lot 175,000 R
TOTAL REC. & OPEN SPACE 450,000
RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENT
North Richfield Parkway 1,025,000 B
320,000 G
69th Street Stormwater Reconstruction 450,000 U
TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENT 1,795,000
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Replacement Central Garage Equipment 575,000 T
Technology Replacement 125,000 T
Water Plant Filter Control Improvements 50,000 U
Water Plant High Service Bowl Replacement 25,000 U
Well House Pump/Bowl Replacement 20,000 U
Sanitary Sewer Main Lining 70,000 U
Lift Station 5 Pump Replacement 20,000 U
Fire CPR Devices 60,000 T
6444 Lyndale Liquor Tuckpointing 100,000 U
TOTAL PUBLIC FACILITIES 1,045,000
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS 3,290,000
ESTIMATED REVENUE BY SOURCE
B) G.O. Improvement Bonds 1,025,000
G) TRPD Grant 320,000
R) Special Revenue 450,000
T) Property Taxes 760,000
U) User Fees 735,000
TOTAL FUNDING BY SOURCE 3,290,000
2015 Capital Im rav r 7E t 'lan
PROJECT EXPENDITURE
RECREATION & OPEN SPACE
Park Maintenance 50,000 R
Community Bandshell 250,000 R
Rink 1 Mechanicai Rooms Roof Replacement 25,000 R
Taft Athletic Facility Lighting 8 Improvements 125,000 R
TOTAL REC. & OPEN SPACE 450,000
RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENT
Portland Avenue Reconstruction 700,000 B
455,000 C
3,750,000 F
2,055,000 M
700,000 U
400,000 X
TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENT 8,060,000
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Replacement Central Garage Equipment 575,000 TL
Technology Replacement 125,000 TL
Water Plant High Service Bowl Replacement 25,000 U
Well House Pump/Bowl Replacement 20,000 U
Interconnect with Neighboring Communities 500,000 U
Repaint Exterior of Penn Water Tower 500,000 U
Well House Roof Replacement 100,000 U
Sanitary Sewer Main Lining 70,000 U
Liquor Operation Capital Improvements 50,000 U
TOTAL PUBLIC FACILITIES 1,965,000
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS 10,475,000
ESTIMATED REVENUE BY SOURCE
B) G.O. Improvement Bonds 700,000
C) Hennepin County 455,000
F) Federal Funding 3,750,000
M) Municipal State Aids 2,055,000
R) Special Revenue 450,000
TL) Tax Levy 700,000
X) Xcel Energy Rate Payers 400,000
U) User Fees 1,965,000
TOTAL FUNDING BY SOURCE 10,475,000
2016 Capital Improvement Plan
PROJECT EXPENDITURE
RECREATION & OPEN SPACE
Park Maintenance 50,000 R
Lincoln Field Loan Repay 161,900 R
Community Center Air Conditioner 31,100 R
Rink 1 Dasher Boards 160,000 R
Seal Coat Community Center Parking Lot 10,000 R
Wood Lake Nature Center Rest Room Improvements 37,000 R
TOTAL REC. & OPEN SPACE 450,000
RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENT
66th Street Reconstruction 900,000 B
3,700,000 C
7,000,000 F
850,000 M
200,000 U
1,500,000 X
76th Street West Reconstruction 1,500,000 B
700,000 P
1,000,000 X
TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENT 17,350,000
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Replacement Central Garage Equipment 575,000 TL
Technology Replacement 125,000 TL
Water Plant High Service Bowl Replacement 25,000 U
Well House Pump/Bowl Replacement Z0,000 U
Water Piant Lime Slaker Replacement 250,000 U
Sanitary Sewer Main Lining 70,000 U
Fire SCBA Replacement 300,000 TL
Liquor Operation Capital Improvements 50,000 U
TOTAL PUBLIC FACILITtES 1,415,000
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS 19,215,000
ESTIMATED REVENUE BY SOURCE
B) G.O. Improvement Bonds 2,400,000
C) Hennepin County 3,700,000
F) Federal Funding 7,000,000
M) Municipal State Aids 850,000
P) Centeppoint nergy Rate Payers 700,000
R) Special Revenue 450,000
TL) General Tax Levy 1,000,000
X) Xcel Energy Rate Payers 2,500,000
U) User Fees 615,000
TOTAL FUNDING BY SOURCE 19,215,000
2017 Capital Improvement Plan
PROJECT EXPENDITURE
RECREATION & OPEN SPACE
ar aintenance 50,000 R
Lincoln Field Loan Repay 87,440 R
Arena Parking Lot Light Fixtures &Seal Coat 25,000 R
Community Center Carpet 25,000 R
Replace Desicant HVAC for Rinks 1 &2 180,000 R
Replace Outdoor Pool Heaters 52,560 R
Wood Lake Nature Center Carpet 30,000 R
TOTAL REC. & OPEN SPACE 450,000
RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENT
66th Street Reconstruction 900,000 B
3,700,000 C
850,000 M
Nicollet Avenue Reconstruction 3,100,000 B
4,900,000 C
3,100,000 P
TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENT 16,550,000
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Replacement Central Garage Equipment 575,000 TL
Technology Replacement 125,000 TL
Water Plant High Service Bowl Replacement 25,000 U
Well House Pump/Bowl Replacement 20,000 U
Sanitary Sewer Main Lining 70,000 U
Liquor Operation Capital Improvements 50,000 U
TOTAL PUBLIC FACILITIES 865,000
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS 17,865,000
ESTIMATED REVENUE BY SOURCE
B) G.O. Improvement Bonds 4,000,000
C) Hennepin County 8,600,000
M) Municipal State Aids 850,000
P) Centerpoint Energy Rate Payers 3,100,000
R) Special Revenue 450,000
TL) General Tax Levy 700,000
U) User Fees 165,000
TOTAL FUNDING BY SOURCE 17,865,000
2018 Capital Improvement Plan
PROJECT EXPENDITURE
RECREATION & OPEN SPACE
ar ain enance 50,000 R
Community Center Boiler 40,000 R
Disc Golf Facility 50,000 R
Outdoor Spray Pool 250,000 R
Pool Floatable 60,000 R
TOTAL REC. & OPEN SPACE 450,000
RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENT
66th Street Reconstruction 750,000 B
3,700,000 C
850,000 M
TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENT 5,300,000
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Replacement Central Garage Equipment 575,000 TL
Technology Replacement 125,000 TL
Well House Pump/Bowl Replacement 20,000 U
Water main(s) replacement under I-35W 500,000 U
Sanitary Sewer Main Lining 70,000 U
Liquor Operation Capitai Improvements 50,000 U
TOTAL PUBLIC FACILITIES 1,340,000
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS 7,090,000
ESTIMATED REVENUE BY SOURCE
B) G.O. Improvement Bonds 750,000
C) Hennepin County 3,700,000
M) Municipal State Aids 850,000
R) Special Revenue 450,000
TL) General Tax Levy 700,000
U) User Fees 640,000
TOTAL FUNDING BY SOURCE 7,090,000
Capital improvement Plan - Beyond 2018
PROJECT EXPENDITURE
RECREATION 8 OPEN SPACE
TOTAL REC. & OPEN SPACE
RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENT
65th Street Reconstruction 4,860,000 B
70 1/2 Street West Reconstruction 1,170,000 B
77th Street Underpass of TH 77 17,000,000 F
5,000,000 M
2,000,000 S
Humboldt Ave/Lakeshore Drive Reconstruction 3,000,000 B
Lyndale Avenue Improvements 2,690,000 B
Penn Avenue Reconstruction 3,775,000 B
7,300,000 C
400,000 X
TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENT 47,195,000
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Well House Pump/Bowl Replacement 40,000 U
TOTAL PUBLIC FACILITIES 40,000
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS 47,235,000
ESTIMATED REVENUE BY SOURCE
B) G.O. improvement Bonds 15,495,000
C) Hennepin County 7,300,000
F) Federal Funding 17,000,000
M) Municipal State Aids 5,000,000
S) State Grants 2,000,000
U) User Fees 40,000
X) Xcel Energy Rate Payers 400,000
TOTAL FUNDING BY SOURCE 47,235,000
2015-2018 CAF'ITAL IMPROVEMENT"PLAN-CITY OF RICHFIELD,IVIINNES07A
Recommended and Scheduled for Four Year Period
TO7AL'
PROJECTS CIP COST _ 2076 2016 2077 2018
v_ _
Beyond 2016
RECREATION
OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMEN7
1 Park Malntenance 5 200,000 5 60,000 R S 50,000 R S 50,000 R S 50,000 R $
2 Community Bandshell S 250,000 260,000 R
3 Rink 7 Mechanical Rooms Roof Replacement S 26,000 26,000 R
4 Taft Atfiletic Field Lighting&Improvements S 125,000 126,000 R
6 Lincoln F=feld Loa Repay 5 249,340 161,900 R 87,440 R
6 Community Center Air Conditioner S 31,100 31,100 R
7 Rink 1 Dasher Boards 5 160,000 160,000 R
8 Seal Coat Communtty Center Parking Lot S 10,000 10,000 R
9 Wood Lake Nature Ctr Rest Room Improv. S 37,000 37,OD0 R
10 Arena Parking Lot Light Pixtures 8 Seal Coat S 26,000 25,000 R
11 CommuNty Center Carpet S 25,000 25,000 R
Replace Deslcant HVAC for Rinks 1&2 S 180,000 180,000 R
Replace Outdoor Pool Heaters 52,660 62,560 R
Wood Lake Nature Center Carpet E 30,000 30,000 R
Community Center Boller S 40,000 40,000 R
Dlsc Golf Facilfty S 50,000 60,000 R
Outdoor Spray Pool S 250,000 2b0,000 R
12 Pool Floatable S 60,000 60,000 f2
TOTAL RECREATION&OPEN SPACE S 1,800,000 S 460,000 5 450,000 S 450,000 S 450,000 E
R) Special Revenue 1,800,000 S _ 460,OOD S 450,000 S 460,000 § 450,000 S
TOl'AL FUNDING BY SOURCE S 1,800,000 E 460,000 5 450,000 S 450,000 $ 460,000 S
PROJECTS TOTAL"
CIP COSTS 2016 2016 2017 2078 Beyond 2018
RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENTS
13 Portland Avenue Reconstruction S 700,000 S 700,000 B 5 S S
S 455,000 465,000 C
14 E 3,750,000 3,760,000 FF
15 S 2,055,000 2,056,000 M
16 S 700,000 700,000 U
17 400,000 400,000 X
18 66th Street Reconstruction S 2,550,000 900,000 B 900,000 B 750,000 B
19 S 11,100,000 3,700,000 C 3,700,000 C 3,700,000 C
20 S 7,000,000 7,000,000 F
S 2,550,000 850,000 M 850,000 M 850,000 M
S 200,000 200,000 U
21 S 1,500,000 1,500,000 X
22 76th Street West Reconstruction S 1,600,000 1,600,000 B
S 700,000 700,000 P
23 S 1,000,000 1,000,000 X
Nicollet Avenue Reconstructlon 5 3,100,000 3,100,000 B
24 Penn Avenue Reconshuction S 4,900,000 4,9D0,000 C
5 3,100,000 3,100,000 P
66th Strent Reconstructfon 4,860,000 4,BG0,000 B
70 1/2 Street West Reconstruction S 1,170,000 1,170,000 8
7th Street Underpass of TH 77 S 17,000,000 17,000,000 F
S 5,OD0,000 5,000,000 M
2,ODO,ODO 2,OOD,000 S
Humboldt Avc/Lakeshore Drive Recon.3,000,000 3,ODQ000 8
Lyndale Avenue Improvements S 2,690,000 2,6 J0,000 8
Penn Avenue Reconstruction S 3,776,ODD 3,7%5,000 B
5 7,300,000 7,300,000 C
400,000 M100,000 X
TOl'AL.RIGIiT OF WAY IMPROVEMENTS S 94,455,000 S 8,060,000 S 17,3b0,000 E 16,550,000 S 5,300,000 5 47,105,000
8)G.O.Improvement 6onds S 23,345,000 S 700,OOD S 2,400,000 5 4,000,000 S 760,000 S 1b,495,000
C)Hennepin County S 23,765,000 45b,000 3,700,000 8,60D,000 3,700,000 7,30D,000
F) Federal Fundin S Z4,000,000 7,ouU,oUO 17,ODO,OOG
FF)Franchise Fees S 3,750,000 3,750,000
M) Municlpal State Aicl S 9,605,000 2,Ob5,000 860,000 850,000 850,000 5,000,000
P)Centerpolnt Rate Payers 3,800,000 700,000 3,100,000
S)State Grants 2,000,000 7.,000,000
U)User F'ees 5 900,000 700,000 200,000
X)Xcal Energy Rate Payers S 3,300,000 __ 400,000_ _____2,500,000_ ______ ___ _____ _____400,000_
TOTAI..FUNDING BY SOURC[ 5 J4,455,000 S 8,060,000 S 17,350,000 5 16,560,000 5 5,300,000 S A7,195,000
2015 2018 CAPI'fAL IM ROVEMENT PLAN-CITY OF RICWFIELU,MINNESOTA
PROJECTS TOTAL`
CIP COSTS 201b 2016 2017 2018 Beyond 2018
PUBLIC FACILITIE.S
26 Replacement Central Garage Equipment S 2,300,000 5 676,000 TL E 675,OD0 TL S 575,000 TL E b76,000 TL S
27 Tech ology Replacement 5 500,000 125,000 TL 125,000 TL 126,000 TL 125,000 7L
28 Water Plant fil[h Service Bowi Replacement S 75,000 26,000 U 25,000 U 26,000 U U
29 Well House Pump/Bowl Replacement 5 120,000 20,000 U 20,000 U 20,000 U 20,000 U 40,000 U
30 Interconnect with Neighboring Communities S 500,000 500,000 U
31 Repaint Exterior Penn Wator Tower S 50D,000 600,000 U
32 Well House Roof Replacement E 100,000 100,000 U
33 Sanitery Sewer Maln Lining 5 280,000 70,000 U 70,000 U 70,000 U 70,000 U
34 Water Piant Lime Slaker Repiacement E 2b0,000 250,000 U
35 Water Mafn(s)Replacemanl Under I-35W E 500,000 600,000 U
36 Fire SCBA Replacement S 30D,000 300,000 TL
37 Liquor Operatfon Capital Improvements S 200,000 60,000 U 50,000 U _ 50,000 U 50,000 U
TOTAL PUBLIC FACIL TIES 5 5,626,000 E 1,966,OOD 5 1,415,000 S 865,000 S 1,340,000 5 40,000
TL)Tax Levy S 3,100,000 S 700,000 S 1,000,000 S 700,000 S 700,000 S
U User Fees S 2,525,000 1,265,000 415,000 165,000 640,000 40,000
TOTAL FUNDING BY SOURCE 5,625,000 5 1,965,000 S 1,415,000 S 865,000 S 1,340,ODD S 40,000
SUMMARY PROJECTS
RecreationlOpen Space DQVelopment b 1,800,000 450,000 460,OOD 460,000 450,000
Right ofWaylmprovements 5 94,455,OOD 8,060,000 17,350,000 16,b50,000 5,300,000 47,195,000
Public Facllities S 5,625,000 1,965,000 1,415,000 86b,000 1,340,000 40,OD0
TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 5 101,880,000 S 10,47b,000 S 19,215,000 E 17,865,000 5 7,090,000 5 47,235,000
B)G.O.Improvement Bonds E 23,345,000 S 70D,000 S 2,400,000 E 4,000,000 - 5 750,000 S 15,495,000
C)Hennepin County 23,755,000 456,000 3,700,000 8,600,000 3,70D,OOD 7,300,000
F) Federal fundinc S 24,000,000 7,000,000 17,000,000
FF Franchise Fees S 3,750,000 3,760,000
M) Municipal State Afd S 9,605,000 2,056,000 850,000 850,000 850,000 5,000,000
P Centerpoint Rate Payers S 3,800,000 700,000 3,100,OOD
R) Special Revenue S 1,8U0,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 460,000
S)State Grants S 2,000,000 2,OOD,ODD
TL)Tax Levy S 3,100,000 700,000 1,OOD,OOD 700,000 700,000
U) User Fees S 3,425,000 1,966,000 615,000 165,000 640,000 40,OD0
X)Xcei Energy Rate Payers S 3,300,000 400,OD0 2,b00,000 400,000
TOTAL FUNDING SOURCES S 701,880,000 5 10,476,000 S 19,215,000 S 17,866,OOD E 7,090,000 5 47,236,000
Total CIP costs do not Include any project costs reflected In the 2014 CI6.
AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA ITEM# 2
REPORT#
CasE# 13-CUP-04
rAI PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
r
PC MEETING DATE: JUNE 24, 2013
ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing to consider a request for a Conditional Use Permit for a full service restaurant
with intoxicating li uor (EI Tejaban) at 6501 Nicollet Avenue (Richfield Shoppes).
I.RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Recommend
approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a full-service restaurant at
6501 Nicollet Avenue.
II. BACKGROUND
The City has received an application requesting a conditional use permit for a full-
service (food and intoxicating beverage service) restaurant at 6501 Nicollet Avenue
Suite 6519). The proposed restaurant would occupy 4,200 square feet of the existing
shopping center and the primary changes would be internal to the building. The
applicant, EI Tejaban, is planning on moving from their current location across the street
in the Richfield Hub shopping center. They will also continue to operate in The Hub with
a new restaurant concept. The proposed restaurant would take over the space formerly
occupied by Eastern Buffet, which vacated the space earlier this year. In 1997, Eastern
Buffet was granted a CUP for a "Class II" traditional restaurant, without alcohol service,
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
Full service (Class I) restaurants with alcohol service are conditionally permitted
in the General Commercial (C-2) District so long as the lot abuts an arterial or
collector street. This requirement is met (lot abuts Nicollet Avenue).
In evaluating a request for a conditional use permit, the Planning Commission
and Council shall also consider its compliance with the eight criteria outlined in
Subsection 547.09 of the City Code and further articulated in the attached
document.
The existing parking at the shopping center is nonconforming and is 18 stalls
short of minimum requirements (including a reduction for transit proximity).
Additionally, full-service restaurants are required to calculate their parking
requirements separately from the remainder of the shopping center. With the
addition of a 4,200 square foot full-service restaurant, total parking requirements
rise to 258 stalls. 218 stalls are provided on-site. Staff required the applicant to
submit a parking demand study for further analysis of the actual parking demand
at the shopping center. Westwood Engineering performed a parking demand
study including observation of actual parking utilization. The parking demand
study showed that the site is adequately parked, and would remain adequately
parked with the addition of a full-service restaurant. Furthermore, the peak
parking demand period of the existing shopping center (2:00 - 3:OOpm) does not
conflict with the anticipated peak parking demand of the proposed restaurant
7:00 - 8:OOpm). The parking demand study showed that the addition of the
proposed restaurant will reduce the peak hour parking surplus from 80 to 46
stalls, and shift the peak demand hour at the shopping center to 6:00 - 7:OOpm.
The existing shopping center is nonconforming in regard to a number of other
requirements as well and City Ordinances require that nonconforming sites be
brought into compliance when possible. Staff evaluated the potential for parking
lot screening improvements, but parking already encroaches upon City
boulevard and additional landscaping and/or fencing is not feasible. Staff also
finds that the fence along the eastern property line, as well as the fence
extension at the north end of the property, meets the intent of the trash enclosure
requirements. There is opportunity for additional impervious surFace along the
northern end of the building; however, limited sunshine could make it difficult to
establish and maintain plants. With a commercial neighbor to the north, staff
sees minimal benefit.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
All requirements necessary for the issuance of a conditional use permit are met.
If approved, this permit will remain valid for one year unless a Building Permit
has been issued and substantial work completed.
C. FINANCIAL
The required processing fee has been paid.
D. LEGAL
Notification: Notice of this public hearing was published in the Sun Current in
accordance with State and Local requirements. Properties within 350 feet were
notified by mail.
Council consideration is scheduled for July 9, 2013
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S
Recommend approval with additional conditions.
Recommend denial with a finding that the proposed use would have an adverse
impact on surrounding properties or the City as a whole.
V. ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Conditional Use Permit requirements
Parking 5'tuay
Existing Site Plan & Proposed Floor Plan
Planning & zoning maps
Photos
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
Luis Caire, applicant representative
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT
AT 6501 NICOLLET AVENUE
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests a
conditional use permit to allow a "Class I" full-service restaurant with a floor area of 4,200
square feet at property commonly known as 6501 Nicollet Avenue, property legally described
as follows:
Lots 1-15 inclusive except that part of Lot 9 lying south of the north 49,00 feet thereof
and east of the west 38.00 feet of said Lot 9, Town's Edge, Village of Richfield,
Hennepin County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield recommended approval of
this requested conditional use permit at its June 24, 2013 meeting; and
WHEREAS, this requested conditional use permit meets the requirements necessary
for issuing a conditional use permit as specified in Richfield's Zoning Code, Section 547.09;
and
WHEREAS, this requested conditional use permit meets the requirements necessary
for issuing a conditional use permit for a full-service restaurant with intoxicating beverage
service as specified in Richfield's Zoning Code, Section 534.07, Subdivision 6; and
WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the conditional use
permit;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. A conditional use permit is issued to allow a full-service restaurant with a floor area
of 4,200 square feet, as described in City Council Letter No. on the Subject
Property legally described above.
2. This conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions in addition to those
specified in Section 547.09 of the City's Zoning Ordinance:
Odor control system is required due to the proximity to residential properties
All site landscaping must be maintained and tended appropriately;
All parking stalls, crosswalks etc. must be striped in accordance with
previously approved plans;
Any property changes including lighting, utilities, landscaping, etc. must
comply be approved by the City and comply with Code requirements;
Sign permits must be applied for separately. This approval does not
constitute approval of any signs. Portable signs are prohibited;
That the recipient of this conditional use permit record this Resolution with the
u ty, p rsuant to Minnesota St tut S.;^ .3, uuu. '! nd the
City's Zoning Ordinance Section 546.05, Subd. 7.
Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall submit a
copy of the recorded conditional use permit.
3. This conditional use permit shall expire one year after it has been issued unless 1)
the use for which the permit was granted has commenced; or 2) Building permits
have been issued and substantial work performed; or 3) Upon written request of the
applicant, the Council extends the expiration date for an additional period not to
exceed one year. Expiration is governed by the City Zoning Ordinance, Section
547.09, Subdivision 9.
4. This conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as conditions regulating
it are observed, and the conditional use permit shall expire if normal operation of the
use has been discontinued for 12 or more months, as required by the City's Zoning
Ordinance, Section 547.09, Subd. 10.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of July 2013.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
Conditional Use Permit Requirements
Subsection 547.09
a) The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the
City's Comprehensive Plan. This requirement is met. This property is
designated as "Community Commercial/Office" in the Comprehensive Plan.
Community Commercial/Office areas are intended to provide space for a wide
variety of retail goods and services that serve residents of Richfield and the
immediate vicinity around Richfield.
b) The proposed use is consistent with the pu poses of the Zoning Code and
the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the
proposed use. This requirement is met. The General Commercial (C-2) District
is intended to provide space for a wide variety of retail and service businesses
that may serve a trade area encompassing Richfield and beyond. Uses are
expected to be compatible with nearby residential properties and not to
significantly degrade the level of serve or safety on nearby roads.
c) The proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment
plans or urban design guidelines. N/A
d) The proposed use is or will be in compliance with the performance standards
specified in Section 544 of this Code. The existing shopping center is
nonconforming in regard to a number of requirements. City Ordinances require
that nonconforming sites be brought into compliance when possible.
The City finds that additional landscaping and/or fencing to provide
required parking lot screening is not feasible given that parking
already encroaches upon City boulevard and right-of-way.
The City also finds that the fence along the eastern property line, as
well as the fence extension at the north end of the property, meets
the intent of the trash enclosure requirements.
There is opportunity for additional impervious surface along the
northern end of the building. With a commercial neighbor to the
north, the City finds that there would be minimal benefit associated
with this change and shall not require the conversion.
The City finds that the existing parking lot is legally nonconforming
with regards to parking lot setback requirements. The requirement
is eight feet, and the existing parking encroaches into Nicollet
Avenue right-of-way. Coming into compliance with this requirement
would significantly reduce the number of available parking spaces.
@) I 1G' /Jl"O/OSG'q USG WII 170I I7c11/ Ui1C Ut; ai,iV iSe liii.ria i c 11 9'OVeiii iiCiit
facilitics, utilities, services or existing oi°proposed improvements. This
requirement is met. The subr itted plans have been reviewed by the Public
Work L7epartment and no undue adverse impacts are anticipated.
The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the public health, safety or
welfare. The applicant must comply with all requirements of the Administrative
Review Committee Report dated May 9, 2013.
g) There is a public need for such use at the proposed location. This
requirement is met.
h) The proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this
Code for the granting of such conditional use permit. This requirement is met.
The proposed use is located on an arterial road as required by Section 534.07,
Subd. 6.
1
Richfield Shoppes, LLC
750 Pennsyivania Ave South,
Galden Valley,
M N —55426.
l pr il 2z, 2013
Re: ZONING C NDI710NAL USE P RMIT L INQLOaD CONCURRENCE LEl f R.
Uear City of Richfiield, Planning and Zoning Dept,:
My iame Is Matth w itie er of Mid America Real Estate--Minnesota, LLC. I am the
t_andlord's Agent represen in Richfield Shoppes, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability
Corporation. Richfield Shoppes, LLC is the landlard and property owner of he premises at
issue in this Canditional Use Perrnit Application.
As the Landlord, we are wrlting today t express our concurrence with EI Tejaban
fVlexican Restaurant, LLC's application for a Conditianal Use Permit to operate a restaurant with
full liauor License at 65 9 Nicollet Av., Richfield, MN 55423.
As landlord we are wiliing to lease the aforementioned premises to EI Tejaban Mexican
Restaurant, LLC conditioned upon any necessary Conditional Use f'ermits. We clearly
und rstand the Tenant's intended purpose and have no objections to the City granting them a
Condil:ional Use Permit to function with a full liquor license. We believe that EI Tejaban
Mexican Kestaurant, LL.0 will bring a valued service to our Shopping Center and the Ricf7field
Camrnunity.
Un behalf of the Richfield Shoppes, LLC and its tenants, I request your suppart in the
prompt passing of this Canditional Us Permit, sa that this project can proceed.
Should you have any questions for Richfield Sh ppes, LI.C, pleasE do not hesitate fio
contaci me, In advance,thank you for your prompt consideration and attention to this matter,
Sincerely,
r`—"
u`"'" ` -c..-z u 'Landlord's A,ei i aiiu
Repr s tati e, Richfield Shoppes, LLC, Landlord
and Praperty Owner.
7699 Anagram Drive
Eden Prairie,MN 553 4
PHONE 952-937-5150
FAX 952-937-5822
uf4:fU'a&tl6
TOLL FREE 888-937-5750
www.westwoodps.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 5, 2013
Re: Richfield Shoppes: Phase II Parking Utilization Study
Richfield, Minnesota
File R0001444.00
To: Bt•uce D. Carlson, Pi•oject Dicector
Mid-America Real Estate— Minnesota, LLC
Fcom: John M. Hagen, P.E. (MN, WI, and TX), PTOE, Senioc Transportation Engineec
Tl e purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the results of the Phase II Parking Demand
Study for the Richfield Shoppes sllopping center located in northeast quadrant of the Nicollet
Avenue intersection with 66th Street. Specifically, a parking utilization was conducted in May
2013 to identify the current parking demand ofthe existing Richfield Shoppes shopping centec
and determine whether the existing shopping center has adequate parking to accommodate the
proposed restaurant.
Backgt•ow d
The existing Richfield Shoppes shopping center is a mixed-use development consisting of
approximately 57,358 square feet of•etail and 9,172 squace feet oi second and third flooc office
space. Cuccently, 10,933 squaee feet ofthe cetail space is vacant, while appcoxi nately 1,284
squa•e feet of the second/third flooc office space is vacant. The site also contains a Dairy Queen
cestaueant in a sepal•ate building located in the southeast cocner of the property that only provides
walk-up" window service, with no indoo custome•/seating areas. Since the existing Dairy
Queen restaurant does not have wait sta ff secving food directly to customers while seated, does
not have in-vehicle sales/service, and since the combined total of all of the on-site cestaurants oc
food services total less than 25 pe•cent of the gross floor area of the shopping center, its flooc
acea was included in thE total retail area of the Richfield Shoppes per tlle City of Richfield's
pacl<ing rec uirements.
As pact of the conditional use permit foc a proposed sit-down restaurant in a vacant por•tion of the
existing Ricl field Shoppes shopping centec, the City of Rich eld has cequested that a Packing
Dema»d Stud_y be completed to see if there is adec uate on-site parking for the existing shopping
ce»ter plus the pcoposed cestaurant. TIIe proposed 4,200 square foot restaurant(witll up to a
maximum of 150 seats) is moving into the same space of the former Eastern Buffet restau•ant
who vacated the subject shopping centec in March 2013. The new cestau•ant is planning on
and and Energy oEVE oNnntrv coNSU iarvrs e ,_ i
Jw1e 5, 2013
Page 2
relocating from thei•cuecent location across the stceet in the Richfield Hub and West Shopping
Center. Westwood Professional Services completed a parking demand study in May 2013. This
study (dated May 2, 2013) compared the City of Richfield's packing requicements with pa king
industry standards. The results ofthe Parking Demaiid Study indicated that the existing
shopping centec is not adequately packed when considering tihe City of Richfield's parking
requicements. Howevec, when considering indust y standard pa•king demand data fi•om the
Institute of Transpot•tation Engineers (ITE), the existing shopping center has adequate packing
spaces to accommodate the existing shopping centej• plus the proposed restaurant.
The Phase II Parking Utilization Study collected actual field data on an average weekday in ocdec
to determine the current demand ofthe existing Rich eld Shoppes shop ing centec. The cesults
of the Phase ll Packing Utilization Study are summacized below.
Parking Utilization Study
The purpose of the parking utilization study is to detecmine if there is suf cient on-site parking
provided to meet the needs of the existing shopping centec plus the proposed cestaucant. Existing
parking demand and supply was measur•ed on Tuesday, May 14, 2013 between the hou•s of
1 1:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. These time periods wece selected since they
coincide with the peak parking demands of the existiing shopping center. The results of the
paeking utilization study are shown in Table 1. A field ceview of the site cevealed that a total of
218 pai•king spaces a•e curcently provided on site. igw e I shows tlle six (6) on-site parking
fields and the existing numbee of packing spaces in each of the sia areas.
As shown in Table l, the peak parking demand foc the existing Richfield Shoppes shopping
ce»tec occucs between 2:00 a id 3:00 p.m., when 106 to 108 vehicles ace packed on tl e site.
Based on our review of the packing demand and supply data presented in rl able l, the existing
Rich eld Shoppes shopping center is curcently adequately packed since the site pcovides moce
packing (218 spaces) than is needed to currently secvice the peak parking demand (106 to 108
stalls between 2:00 and 3:00 p.m.) foc the existing mall. Therefore, the ITL parking demand
numbers pcesented in the May 2013 Parking Demand Study peovides a bettec cepresentation of
the existing parking needs for tl e Richfield Shoppes than the City's cequicements.
Shared Parki ig Aualysis
When a particulac site has a mixtu•e of different land uses, a "shaced parking analysis" shou(d be
conducted in ordec to dete mine if the peak pacl<ing demands for the vacious on site land uses
conflict or complement each othec. Shared pa l<ing occucs when the same parking area serves
two or moce land uses without conflict. The success of shared pa•king elies on the vaciations of
pai king demands between the site's individual land uses, as well as the relationships between the
individual land uses that allow motocists to visit moce than one land use ducing a sin le visit to
the site and/or visit different land uses at different times ofthe day.
M ION
0
M Q ifl lp `-i N NW
O £ o o\° ^ o\° N \ m o
N o p o
l0 lD l0 O c-I tIl l0 N Ql 00 p Oppfl. c- -i V' M l71 i M
M N N i1 pp N d' `-i Ol W
n 4. M N /1 d' Ul M
O E p l0 N N lD N N l0 Q pMp 00
n Q. c-I N lD V7 lf) M
0
M m ° ° ^ \ N \ Q o o N \
N N Ol p Q m m i' M if) M
O E M ° ° N ° ° ° N ° O \
lp G. M
N
M
N
Y a
a
m M , o o o o m o 0 0
c-I N N Ol f c-I ( e-1 C
fY fl. Y ('1 I N V N [f
O v
bA 'i.
j a p o p o ry \ o p o o ap
y Y
O m N m N c.{ p .-{ fvl ^ p U1
f0 M Q. 'ct M l0 f'1 d' N 'cf
a
a
w-
c
Y o 0 0 0 \ \ o
O
Q. y M £ N I N O ry p U1 lp V p O O
Q. y N Q. Vl l0 i' h'1 111 v
O `O
tsif °1 a
a
V
O N ° O ° .-i -1 O ° N ° p .-1 O
N Ql ry O ry r-f fYl N a-1 00 Ol O O
41 N O. i!1 ifl Vl fvl -- V N
i
Q
n
s v
GC m E o o „ o o o o
i , m o
c-i a ` rn ° N
rv ` d rv '+ v
C a
O
7 O E h" ° l0 ° 1 N ° ° M
o\ M viN
e-I O. M
N
Y
N
Ln f'1 d' N Cl'
L
N
O m p \ o , o o ,n \ m \ N o v
N N N ^
N N
0
0
y o o o o o ° ti o "
m am ` ` `-i m `- N °i v
9
c
m r., o o o o r,. o o \ °
a
O M ^i ' ,- ` m m t m N
C Y
OO o p o\° pp o\° o\° N o bA
fO ro
N
d'
M
vl `- 'd' N `
1 m F ('
n
GJi m
Q N
N V 1 O 00 M Ol r1
O
m Q M O M m M '"
N 3
l Q v
a
y °,,'c a 0 5i
Y y Q p U O W LL '" L M
O
a LL d0
N
d
C A, aCk d Qt al
p .
1-.: . 1 y}
1
af'
i
1• 't .. $'S( R'
J.' '1.
r
S,[i A `fr -;,E s.•
f +°1'
Q4; a
1.i . f,` .Y_1 .i . q
F: 5
1 P
R •
f
r `
t t' -+ -..
7 i, .,s - - °1 , . ..e .
C;3 :+ru! 7T
t r`
r>.
Y
r
i ' a'
t..,L
y .. .: a. .I
I '! ,!±
ir
i J`
i :
1' t •S a.
J
n
i ,p s-..
f.,_ .' _._
e
a I '
K' i r 4 .
R i 1 '' i
E • 'A i F 'r
60 . f'
t` - 15 1:1
I+ ,
ri.
t f;1.t1 i i:_ j!
I'.
7^ 1}. j
Ill'- j i j
i ._. ._ p na, ,1 • j 3: j
A r.
Tj
I Qi
l e.R_'rf' 1' t
y„
y
y. q ` , __ y ,,.+._. _ ; .
l t
i
r s <
4
I
1_
q
t F 1_
t '1
q_ ` t, 1'
1
1
r
i. t
S
a
C'3` ..
a . , ,•
1- f ! ..s
4..
C
i; '
b
4 .. E ,; =f; 5 g .. a L r -
4 # . 39 { .,,_ ,
a " a
x_ - ' - ___ ix 'r;: y ,
l -1 f'u
i r
ia u' i: ; YiR I r _
I' t._
y e, . 1 (iP1 t'; ' '"i w II Ep:
flZ
1
t I' I 'a' u- _ w
s 1 iu:1 1 i3 e1 D ° , `i,.., L
s
M 47 't' ir
i`f V '.
l ' ^
I • ,
1 mTi
T
l
4 •[.
y
I
w.t-.•_.- ! . • . . ";,.r.-n. oY`V`1-a NlDT_'v
i. ILiY.D I:'r
Legend: s , i;:
j(;3 1A = Parking Field
Y
g_.
XX = Parkin Spaces per Field
218 =Total Available Parkine Saaces
Norros Qie
v
June 4,2013
qR0001444.00
W,s,•,o,P,,ss;„,$ervie51 Available Parking
7699 Ana9r.im Dr'rve
Jen Prairie,MN 553 A
E 957 3.5,5° Richfield Shoppes: Parking Utilization Study Figure
rnx sz-3-seu
TOLIFftEE 1 B8A 937 iI5U
Richfield , Minnesota 2
UUCStWOOCI ww.,.w siwoodps.o r,
June 5, 2013
Page 5
Understanding the time-of-day distribution of parking demand will help to determine if the peak
parking demand of the proposed restaurant overlaps with the peak parking demand of the
existing shopping cente•. Table 2 shows the co nparison of the time-of-day parking demand fot•
the existing Richfield Shoppes sliopping cente•versus peoposed cestaura t. The time-of-day
distribution of the existing shopping cente•'s parking demand was determined by the parking
utilization study conducted in May 2013; while the tiine-of day distribution ofthe proposed
restaui•ant was based on data foc Higl1-Turnover Sit-Down Restaurants from the Institute of
Ti•ansportation Enginee s (ITE) Parking Generalion Manual, 4th Edition (2010). As shown in
Table 2,the peak parking demand of the existing shopping centei•(2:00 to 3:00 pm.) does not
conflict with the peak pa•king demand of the proposed restaui•ant(7:00 to 8:00 p.m.).
Since the peak parking demand of the existi g shopping center (2:00—3:00 p.m.) does not
conflict with the peak packing demand of the pcoposed cestauratit (7:00—8:00 p.m.), the parking
analysis should account for the time-of-day par king demand distribution. Tables 3 and 4 present
the hourly shared parking demand for the Rich e(d S1loppes shopping centei•assuming full
occupancy based on City of Ricl eld's parking requi•ements without and with the pcoposed
restau•ant, respectively. Tables 5 and 6 presents the houi•ly shaced packing demand based on ITE
standaeds without and with the proposed cestaurant, cespectively.
The City's zoning code i equi•es that Regional Shopping Centers (with 50,000 squaee feet or
moce •etail space) pr ovide four parking spaces foc every 1,000 squace feet of j•etail space. The
I"I'E demand comparison is based on 2.55 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail space on
an avei•age weekday. The City's zoning code also requices that office land uses (less than 50,000
square feet) provide one packing space fo•every 275 square feet of office space. The ITE
demand comparison is based on 2.47 packing spaces per 1,000 squace feet of office space on an
avecage weelcday. Finally, the City's zoni g code 1•equi•es that Class I and II restaucants (sit-
down restaurants such as the o e p•oposed) pcovide 10 parking sp ces pet• 1,000 sguace feet. The
1TE demand compat•ison is based on 0.48 parking spaces per cestaucant seat.
AccoL nting fo•the time-of day parking demand of the existing shopping centei• at full
occupancy, Table 3 shows that the Richfield Shoppes is adec uately parked with an ovecall
sut•plus of 68 parking spaces ducing the peak parkin peciod (2:00—3:00 p.m.) when shared
parl<ing is applied to the City's pai•I<ing requicements.
1'able shows that while applying the vai•iations of pa•ki ig demands between the existing
shopping center and the proposed restau•ant (i.e. —sha•ed parlci g) to the City's pat•king
equicements will •educe tlle overall pacicing surplus ofthe existing shopping centec fi o n 68
spaces to 10 spaces and shifl the peak parking demand houc fi•om 2:00— 3:00 p.m. to 12:00 noon
1:00 p.m. when the proposed cestaurant is added, the site will continue to be adequately parked.
M
ON
Q, o 0
O
O
W
Q \ o\°O
OO O
n
O
c-i
@ o
a o 0
o o o m o
o Y
G)W
OC
t
o cE
a v
E
O 0 fl. o o
L N Ql 41
n. ~ j
IA Y yj U' N
i a
ac
O
y 4 n
Q £ F v
Q. S fl. o
d o o
L ao o .-+ ` o
N N O O
N
3
a
v
s
v
oC E
fl. o o
c o m Q1
v
N e-I 7
X
W o
C u
O
o\° o\°
N O ' o
Q p oo Y u
N
C y
i
0
a
T N
o 0
O d O j
O 00 c-i
Q i--I C
Y
Q
C
OO
c 3
p c u y a i
a •_
L
N f0 W v1
41 J
O O to
L a
vv 0 3
F- V
a
v i n`°.
0
E ,,m E a
m m N o ti c^ ' i r N
a i E m v M a 1Di r a i E m f,.i
r a o
oo m c o E N d r n
m a+n
v v
z E o 0o a m N m
E
o r a m io a °,° rn
m r i rv m m ti m ti N
11 U
O O
A
O W o any
E
rn m `^ N a o m v
E
m N `^ °° a N. °° m
m
3
M m 3 M
v v
E m E o oyo E E u+
Ol T
e-1 N tD Ul N ti a1 N 1
C Q N
C a N
a a rv a vi o a E o v n m °° .-
ci 1 N v
rl N N
W i N 1
N
T
Ol d' N M m
T E
Ql N N
1 O O
ON I N 00 O N
N N
vl V M 1
E --
ul i V N Vlppl ? N 00 N Ol N 1 N 01
I e-I
O T O T
C p, = t' C a =
a
u
tD lD d Q.
u O. 4=
d
W V1 0 v VI Q
Vt O \ N O
C C
C C Y N ' bq 'O Y .L '
O vt Ul uN1 d m Y E O ry v1 n d
N
Vf
W -1 e-1 OG I .0 O .1
C d p N H Y 0. N H Y a
y 10 N 10 r -O
v'i a a
v
o N u o m
a a r
0 0
w y r-2' v a i
F'2
n u. n u_c.v
l0 Y N U 6
u
A Y N Y V Q
C1 d O
Q. . Q O. O_ O_ i1 J n
O y
C .ti V a .--i O p U t o
N G1 C
a a ry
v 3
mc
w a+ Y
OO{ R A
f0 N
N
In
N
C
n`. a`
a y
T
CUw
w
O
w yTi N N
U inhLL LL
ii
m
N v n n v
m m a v m a o v
y ti m o ,_ p m w o '=
U M 01 N Nl h N N
f0 1
c-1 N m a l0 rl
N
o- a m a
L
O 2 2
u. O
C T..' K
E
O
N
O O
o n o Q
o n o
c o a` o
c p U 0 O U
C M LL M LL
Q V O h i O h
C
C L n
O
i U1 O1
a m O m L
a z w c Z w
a
a
o y w v w v v
n oo a
00 0 o
V ^ u N rl U n N v fC0 N
tp ryp.
N
l a y VI VI a V VI VI r i 1l1
4!_ 0 41— L p.S
LL u N
V t LL LL
VI L a 1' O
QO
N
tA
N
V1 V1 N VI
m
C C lp C M C a C l 0 C M C p O
a+ lO ry Ol ry W N N A'1 00 a O
v N t
C ._ U 1 N p N
H u'S w `t> '"> 'a F
x' v> `°> ''
a °
0
ip p p p N E ip N pp M N
lO N 00 N
N
l0 rl ll rl N 00
N W N W
C C
N
E , E o
F OO N
N
N ti e-1 N V
T T
E o m m
o ^ 3 E o m n ° o
c m •-, N ° c N a
vi
tD
m
1D
c c
a Y E o n m
o o o a .° o n ,,. a N o
C v ' Ol N N
O
C
Ol e-1 I 1 N Ol
0 3 , 0 3 m
a a v m
m `
a
E ° `o "' m °tiN° a°o
m
m °
i° "' a' nNtiti
N Q
N
N Q
N
W W
E °
m
o°E `° co
a ,°o
C 1 N C m
I N
1 i
a a
w
E
fv a m N °,-° n v
F
r m in o
N
Ol N y N Ql
N
Ol .-1 M rl N h
NT
10 Ol N m N 0 1 S 10 Ol N m N N N p^j
i rl
i rl
6 T O ?
m m '° a -
o- - n E 3 m o.
u
N N E wd
ai in 0 v
y p
V 1
0 'D VI v
bD W
pp 'O 0 ' GO 'O Y L '
3
Y O rcl d N Y O M r pNj d Y .
C a U! F C C
pA,
O1 y F C N
@ Y f6 L
Q
N N Q
v N 6 v VI 6 L
W D W O
C C F'.'C
C C F_N
N
Y 10 l0 t VI Y 0 l0 L L
p E O Vf y N E O n U u
f7 a d F-w cp a v F-w
C p w
p Z
y LL LL
p L F" d u. u. "
a2-.
Y Y Y N Y Y v j `
2' F {/1 K F p
w a n a W n ma Q. a o
n n F F n n w L
1
in in v p
o
N N y N N O
d
Y fl' E p
N3 7 v 3
C c c v
Q
o0 00
y LL N N
C
N N
O'
O i O
N Ym
a a
d
S'.
c w
0 O a+
ai y ca
wmma
T v v a
m
C vLLi n vLLi
N
vi v
f0
LL LL u. N
Q m t m a o
m m
Y
w ui
m rn rv m n rv ti
V t o .-1 d iD i
N
7LL
c o.
o
a`
Y
vc
o F o F
p o N o 0
c
p o O
o
Y L
a B °i 1
0
c d r e
Q w ` y m ti
Q, Z N a.. Z
f0 O
t y x
y o7S u ° p, 1 u (°
m — o m m
L Q a N VI O a Y VI N a.
u p_
v— ry L p, d— N
O OG m U n O LL a K
bA N
N N N 0 N
VI V1 Q
y 7 .0 C M C GJ 0 M O
in v ''' u O1 u L v
a
G . ut O V G ' +1 p n (p N O
F w w `f> .->
F oc 3 w `> `°> ''a
June 5, 2013
Page 9
Accounting for the time-of-day paeking demand of the existing shopping centei• at f ill
occupancy, Table 5 shows that the Riclifield Shoppes is adec uately parked with an overall
surplus of 80 parking spaces dueing the peak packing peciod (2:00— 3:00 p.m.) when shared
parking is applied to the industcy standa d parking demand data fi•om ITE.
As shown in Table 6, adding the peoposed restaurant will ceduce the overall parking sueplus from
80 to 46 parking spaces, and will likely shi the peak packing demand hour feom 2:00 — 3:00
p.m. to 6:00—7:00 p.m. when shared pa•king is applied to industcy standa d pa•king demand
data from ITE; howevee, the Rich eld Shoppes shoppin center will continue to be adequately
parked.
Conclusions
Based on the results ofthe pac(<ing utilization study, the Richfield Shoppes sllopping centee is
adequately parked when considei•ing the existing parking demand of the site, full occupancy of
the vacant i•etail/office space, and the p•oposed estaucant.
F'.10001444.00Idocsl7•a clReE ortlRicl7field Sho pes Pftase!!Parkrng Stz d}_6-5-2013.docx
1 11S H199 v `
o a
V N
M
tn J C'
Caj Z p
v Z W
H H a `n v
U ro
X o j N Q Q
a w p CL1.
u' fi f C C .0
W E ro O p
M 'L7cUQ
N
M C N tn C
n
n
0
N
o 11
n `'
w
1
H H (Wj
Q
Q
o cn 9
w =
W ~ Z W
oo Y J a'
Z a O
f\ZR\ J Z
I :
O -j:i
Z 'r,'
W
H Q
O
H
M
V
M
Q l
V Z
Q o
Z
M to ° :
t
gW°
I ;
u I
a,
a >a=c— >
ra _ - s,
ros
i U =
X Z
oQn W °_'
a.
in
NZr D
0 ati_
i sz
o
J
Y u M
u L-
L 1F Q
C _'{
LJOp
J -I:__1.__ _-' ch
r-=-
8
I
i o
i
E a W
N I tl IR
C
i F a
e
c
r t
S'e,
ii(
C)
zn o i.e .n o_j ---—.o .o: --— —
I'',
I i O H
C)
l
f
J' c;
uops s ienn U --
Y.
E
f
f;.:> l n 4i-ssed
1
I
JIE
C
I
a
Y
I
fi Vv1__ i
i-F-- 1
i Q i
L_
1+o i
i
VJ ( i
I o z w i
w rn Ir -_
W
119.5
LII01'.LL.
ZZ ...._'____'
I
65' e e - 2
Surrou Zono g
o
C- R,_
t_
4 i
2 u i- E
n __
c-2
I ._l
I c-2 J
LI
R
I I. lL-
65TH STREET
c-=---- -
I I R _
1_; r i RI I I
1
i Q j
I R-
I
I__I j I _
J a- ° I J w I
O
R--I w f.-'
a F'.,-2 U IzR
1 I_I
4_f
la
4
o 66TH STREET
3
R R f—L
f
r
R C-2
R
I i
Feet
0 60 120 240 360 480 600
C-1 - Neighborhood Commercial
C-2- General Commercial
PC-2- Pianned General Commercial
R- Single Family Residential
Path: I:\GIS\Community Development\Staff Planning Tech\Projects\6501 Nicollet Z.mxd
65' 9 l ol /
Surrounding Cornprehens v 6 E
n i , i i
c c
r
r u
I L J
1 4 , d
CC Ci l _ti
CC i_R LD
1— f_J
f 1
IXED 1 CC I i
R LQ r
65TH STREET
I-.-- a ,l L l
If II
l.J l_i R LDfk.1
I
I
l ---
L-
I L JR CGF I _
I
Q
W i Q l o -- Z
E R LDl I i
k
p l
ViIXE U
f
i
Z I uR LD-
I I I
I 41IihRL[b;
I _,
Z I LDR I id i
I i
o 66TH STREET
3
CHURCH ' p
I C H -- —-
SCH CCU
LOi;
I---I I_ I-`-.---
I I ; l
Feet
0 60 120 240 360 480 600
MIXED - Mixed Use N
CC-Community Commercial
CCO- Community Commercial/Office
LDR- Low-Density Residential
SCH - School
CHURCH- Church
Path: I:\GIS\Community Development\StafflPlanning Tech\Projects\6501 Nicollet CP.mxd
A 'P o — 1 9u OD a — 4u c8 u Sh 9 a B
s y . -tu - _
r.':
ti} .:
a
k d.-
F` .
i a'`<a?-a iL; siYY_. ,"i
7 3 (}(F 7\
i A I
Y ..3"",A S[`SZ.'+i}..
z`
r e%
1 y! -
w x,..
a''s ',`_? ' ;Y't;{
f,
t'{ frl t
f II I/li
3
7'
Y +7,.
x: i•r` tl:;i pi i,.l'...
i. ,,=
j:... .'
o i
xY(
f'(y:; :lr T,J lY l fi:?
f t+}+-4 . .
r:f , #t t;
s=_ -- -•
t ''"
t
r+
t „,
w'
y
r7 t
A t>F ;1 `s`
r-
7
sn
t.1r '.
c '<s=
t StF
i•k,-¢' .,1 t
n3
p.•
X
2.1; .
L_ z
SS` C _
e
s',w
yyv
r.;;
4
Y.- .# ' 1`j p W
t
1 (S'._1—
t
4 S.r
Y _' t--
F - i' . {
tti k: W*1 - . f 17 t9
S.:ca.
Y.
iiL+::t 4 i q>a .{{ ....,..
u;a
S i 1
u--. tt.t t4i,,: a T Y`
Y." L. - a. k 'f} { 3 %
fi "': . •
1 . ;}.t:i r :: . i7:
f , . _
t
t. :
f
1d
t .. k.r '--'
T F
F L' 3 ;` 1 2' 'r t Lt`T,
f 3 r t.s y.
4''t a f} t 1
1Y i E k''^'.:
y '
s ,9
y .
3' a.. wN
5;-
5's<
r,......-nawn.rwt
h " S
aR'iW+nav.h.t.-an
N.-.. ._ . T.. •
r.-
V., '..`"`^ ..
A^-""
IM,_ .. .- *.,
c- }:. .. ..
r,
y c.>rw w,K.-»ww s...,-.,.... mw...w,.
r' . . .. ' , `
6 •_..
v
AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA ITEM# 3
REPORT#
CasE# 13-IUP-02
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PC MEETING DATE: JUNE 24, 2013
ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing to consider a request for an Interim Use Permit to allow Richfield Bloomington
Honda to use Cit -owned ro erty at 7700 Pillsbury Avenue for em lo ee arking.
I.RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Recommend
approval of a seven-month interim use permit for off-site employee
arkin at 7700 Pillsbur Avenue.
II. BACKGROUND
Richfield Bloomington Honda ("Honda") plans to expand their business. Earlier this
year, Honda purchased a number of properties across the street from their current
location to facilitate this expansion. On May 29th, 2013 the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend a number of approvals related to Honda's expansion. The
City Council will consider the project on Tuesday, June 25, 2013.
Honda plans a phased expansion that will require parking employee vehicles off-site
while construction is underway. Honda is proposing to lease the City-owned property at
7700 Pillsbury Avenue for temporary use as an employee parking lot. Parking as a
standalone use is not permitted in any zoning district, therefore an interim use permit is
required to allow this nonconforming use.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
The purpose of an interim use permit is to allow a use that may not be
compatible with the Comprehensive Plan to operate for a limited period of time.
Interim use permits are designed to allow a use that is presently acceptable, but
that with anticipated development, will not be acceptable in the future.
In evaluating a request for an interim use permit, the Planning Commission and
City Council shall also consider its compliance with the criteria outlined in
Subsection 547.15 of the City ode and further articulated in the attached
document.
The Council may waive ordinance provisions upon a finding that the temporary
nature of the interim use will eliminate the adverse effects the provisions were
intended to prevent. The Council must find that the temporary nature of this
permit makes the nonconforming use permissible at this time.
Staff recommends approval of a seven-month interim use permit, effective
August 1, 2013 and terminating on March 1, 2014. This will allow Honda to
utilize the City-owned property at 7700 Pillsbury until their first construction
phase is complete. Honda has indicated that parking space constraints may
continue through the second phase of construction and has requested that the
interim use permit extend for one additional year beyond staff recommendation.
Staff recommends the inclusion of two six-month extension options, to be
granted at the discretion of the Community Development Director and terminate
no later than March 1 , 2015. Redevelopment interest in the property would be a
possible reason to deny an extension.
By Ordinance, interim use permits terminate upon the occurrence of any of the
following events, whichever first occurs:
a) The date stated in the permit; or
b) Upon violation of conditions under which the permit was issued.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
Honda is expanding their dealership campus. Due to space constraints, Honda
will require off-site space for employee parking while construction is underway.
7700 Pillsbury Avenue is City-owned property and is the portion of the former
City Garage site that lies south of 77th Street. No redevelopment plans are
proposed for the property at this time.
Approval of an interim use permit would be conditioned upon clearing the lot of
any debris, performing patch repair and striping the parking lot.
Staff recommends a seven-month interim use permit, with two additional six-
month extension options. Honda is proposing to lease the property from August
1, 2013 through March 1, 2014, with the possibility of extending the lease, at
staff's discretion, until no later than March 1, 2015.
In order to approve the interim use permit, the Council must find that the
temporary nature of the permit warrants waiving certain provisions of the Zoning
Code, specifically, the prohibition of parking as a standalone use.
C. FINANCIAL
Honda is proposing to lease the property at 7700 Pillsbury Avenue from the City.
Lease terms are currently being negotiated.
The required application processing fee has been paid.
D. LEGAL
Zoning: MU-N (Mixed Use — Neighborhood)
Land Use: Current: Vacant
Proposed: Standalone parking facility
Comprehensive Plan:Mixed Use
Notification:Neighbors Notice of this public hearing was published in the
Sun Current in accordance with State and Local
requirements. Properties within 350 feet were notified by
mail.
Other Actions: Council consideration is scheduled for July 9, 2013
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION S
Recommend approval of an interim use permit with additional conditions.
Recommend approval of an interim use permit for a different length of time (up to
five years maximum).
Recommend denial with a finding that the requirements necessary to issue an
interim use permit are not met.
V. ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Interim Use Permit Requirements
Consent Agreement
Site Plan; Planning & Zoning maps
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
Richfield Bloomington Honda Representative —Tim Carter
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING AN
INTERIM USE PERMIT
TO ALLOW A STANDALONE PARKING FACILITY
BY RICHFIELD BLOOMINGTON HONDA
AT 7700 PILLSBURY AVENUE
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield (the City) adopted a Comprehensive Plan in 2009 to
guide the development of the community; and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted a Zoning Ordinance or other official controls to assist
in implementing the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests an
interim use permit to allow Richfield Bloomington Honda (the "Applicant") to conduct off-site
employee parking at 7700 Pillsbury Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Property is zoned Mixed Use — Neighborhood (MU-N); and
WHEREAS, the requested interim use of the property is not permitted in the MU-N
District; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the temporary nature of the proposed interim use
eliminates the adverse effects the prohibition was intended to prevent. Termination of the
permit in seven months eliminates the detriment that a standalone parking facility will have on
the area; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 24, 2013 to review
the application for an Interim Use Permit, following mailed and published notice as required by
law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed all materials submitted by the Applicant;
considered the oral and written testimony offered by the applicant and all interested parties;
and has now concluded that the application is in compliance with all applicable standards and
can be considered for approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The proposed Interim Use Permit request meets all applicable conditions and
restrictions stated in Subsection 547.15 of the 2007 Zoning Ordinance.
2. An Interim Use Permit for a standalone parking facility by Richfield Bloomington Honda
at 7700 Pillsbury Avenue, as described in City Council Staff Report No. is
approved with the following conditions:
a. The Interim Use Permit will expire seven (7) months from its effective date of
August 1, 2013, or upon violation of the conditions under which the permit was
issued, whichever occurs first.
b. That the Community Development Director shall hold discretion to grant a
maximum of two (2) six-month extensions of the Interim Use Permit, to expire no
later than March 1, 2015.
c. That the lot be cleared of all debris.
d. That the parking area be patched where necessary and striped accordingly, as
shown on the approved site plan.
e. That 22-foot minimum drive aisles be maintained in the parking area.
f. That a maximum of 68 vehicles be stored on site.
g. That no vehicles be parked or stored on grass buffer areas.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of July,
2013.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
Interim Use Permit Requirements
Subsection 547.15 Subd. 3.
a) The period of time for which the interim use permit is to be granted will
terminate before any adverse impacts are felt upon adjacent properties.
Staff recommends that the permit expire in seven months. At the
discretion of the Community Development Director, the interim use permit
may be extended twice, in six (6) month periods, not to exceed a total
length of one year and seven months. At that time, if conditions continue
to warrant, the Council may issue a new Interim Use Permit to the
applicant. It is not anticipated that employee parking will adversely
impact the community or this area within the duration of the interim use
permit.
b) The use will terminate upon a date or event that can be identified with
certainty. Interim use permits may not be granted for a period greater
than five (5) years. Staff recommends termination on March 1, 2014. At
staff's discretion, the interim use permit may be extended twice, in six (6)
month periods, and terminate no later than March 1, 2015.
c) The use will not adversely impact the health, safety and welfare of the
community during the period of the interim use. It is not anticipated that
employee parking will adversely impact the community or this area within
the duration of the interim use permit.
d) The use is similar to existing uses in the area. Surface parking lots are a
common feature in the area, due to the proximity to Richfield Btoomington
Honda's main campus.
e) An interim use shall conform to zoning regulations except the City Council
may waive ordinance provisions upon a finding that the temporary nature
of the interim use will eliminate the adverse effects the provisions were
intended to prevent. The site is zoned Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MU-N)
and is currently vacant. The short-term nature of the permit will not
prevent future mixed-use redevelopment of the site.
f) There is adequate assurance that the property will be left in suitable
condition after the use is terminated. The property owner has signed a
consent agreement agreeing to this condition.
g) By agreement, the use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is
necessary for the public to take the property in the future. N/A. The
property is owned by the City.
h) The property owner, by agreement, agrees to any conditions that the City
Council has deemed appropriate for permission of the use, including a
condition that the owner will provide an appropriate financial surety to
cover the cost of removing the interim use and interim structures upon the
expiration of the interim use permit. The applicant must comply with all
conciitions ot the interim use permit.
i) The property owner agrees to abide by any additional conditions that the
Council deems appropriate for permission of the use.
CONSI?N'I' AGItEl;Y11:N7'
Vl'111:1ZI:i1. o» cnibcr I;, ?l)U7 thc C it Cc uncil c>thc ('it i l Richi ield ad E t:c1
Orclinancc N. ?Ol)7-1. hicll cstahlish s a I r inc c rk t r rc ulatin tempur li usc 1 lan l
thr u h the issuancc 1 intei im use E criuits tn l
1{f:KI,A. Seeti n =17.1 Su icli isi n ? u1 tl is Orclinancc rr uires a a}licant I r an
intcrim usc l cril it to si n a C nscnt rccmcnt hca cin thr a licant ackn l ci s ancl a rces
that tl c }r(x sccl inteeim use ill n t im x sc acl litic nal costs c n the p ihlic il therc is a uture
nrecl fi r uhlic acyuisiti n o1 hc a}lic mt s r pert thr u h rminci t ic main. that thc ap}licant
h ls n entitlen cnt to 1 ut ire rca}r al ot thc intcriin use F ermit tnd that the a}lical t vill ahicic
1 thc c nciiti t s l a E rc ll that the ('it ('uncil attache t the interim use ermit:
NO'. (Ill_:Rl:l OIZ1.. Zirlllicl i 131 x,t»i on l luu ia as a plicat t (i r
n intcriin usc erinit Ii r en lovec u l:in-- it _--7700 Pillsbiu'
us c f E rc j r.i t) l catio l)
1.'_1'CC lti (l(l V'S:
I .l ihis applicatic u is a l r c 1 h thc 1Zichficld C`itv Cc uncil ancl n ii tci im usc
c:rinit is issue l, the int rim ii ,i the r}crt ill n i in c aclditi nal eosts c u ihe C'it >>
an thcr uhlic entit if it is ncccssar t ac uirc thc E rc crt r l E r(ion thcrcuf b cmincnt
dc niain iltcr issuancc 1 thc intcrim usc E trmit.
I hc applic nt ac n Ic 1 cs thut thc r}x cd usc is tcmj or<ic ancl Cerminatcs
upc n r piration f tl e iut rin l s permit. I he aE lic int has nc I al r «uita il ri llt to i ut u c
rcaE r<) f thc° intc rin lisc cr it a»ci n ust filr < nc a licatio» 1<l th t ur x r.
3.I hc aE licant ill c u l ly ith ill c nelitic>ns im>sed h the C'it C'u u cil i thc
intcriin usc }ermit.
I his <'crosent \rccmcnt shall hc hinclin n an ncr. o rrat r. t nant an ii r
ttscr c l thc E r rrt f<r hich the intcrim usc }cru it has h r» r<nted and the a?lic tit is
uth<rii.ccl t< si n this C onscnt i zrcct»cnt n hcl ICc l saici ncr. o cr i or, tcnant aildi>r usc
of thc pro crt.
I)i l l.l): _,-"._,___,_
5 ic ult (i1 E licant il ust hc tllc ('r>crt O ncr)
S l.fl: Ol -1INNI:U I n )
ti
l!N I 1' O1 111:NN1:1'IN }
l hc i re in instr u»cnt -as ackn lc l ccl hcf>rc mc tllis dn c>l
p,,y,y.(: : -_ - -O_z h' _ -T.-__'.s" , thc ?-Li— -
I
c f
4 C. 1_--- - --- - _..u ti linnc,c ta t b—
w_
2.kx c.. ui
hch ilf I saicl cc>>nE a l}.
o
L L%L' r -
LAURA A LEHMAN
Nc t u v ['ul lic
1, ,
NOTARY PU9LIC•1,11NNESOTA
1Ay Comm.Expires Jan.J1.2016
i i i i i
NAILROAD TRACKS
i
E
I.
I
I
I j i
I
I I
I
I
i
I
I1I
I
I I
j I
I I I
I I
I I/ I
I'II
I
s
r,:) I I
s I mII I
b I I
I i
o
m i i
i i
i A
i i
i i
iz
i I i
i
m I'
i
i
i
I i
i i
I x
n
r
i i
i i
i i
i i
i i
i I
i I
i i
0
I I
I_ — — — — -- — — — — — -J
o
PILLSBURV AVENUE SOUTH
1 _
Renier
m
Consfiuc(ion
R Corporation —
z `" "°" oo o o o o ,; ; r RICHFIELD BLOOMINGTON
HONDA MITSUBISHIn
It
I I 400 West 78th Su•eet,Richfield,MN 55423
7700 Pillsbury Ave - 6/2013 IUP
Surrounding Zoning
R R R MR-2 I I R R R
W
R R R MR-2 R R Q R
QW I-
o,r.
R R Q R 2 R " R p R
Z m
F-
R R MR-2
I I
J R w R
a
R R R M -2 R R R
s
77TH STREET
MU-R
MU-N
PMU MU-N MU-N MU N
7700 PILLSBURY AVE S
MU-N
f.=
40&)
HONDA MU-N
MU-N
MU-N MU N
MU-R
MU-R
MU-N
MU N
MU-N
N
MU N
w:
I
v= I I I
I I .. A" ..
I , ; .
i
GI-1'Y OF BL_C:)nMINGl-Of J
Feet
0 60 120 240 360 480 600
MU-R - Mixed-Use Regional N
MU-N - Mixed-Use Neighborhood
PMU - Planned Mixed Use
R- Single Family Residential
MR-2 - Mutli-Family
I - Industrial
Path: I:\GIS\Community Development\StafflPlanning Tech\Projects\7700 Pillsbury Z.mxd
7700 Pillsbury Ave - 6/2013 IUP
Surrounding Comprehensive Plan
LDR LDR LDR MHD MHD MHD LDR LDR L
W
LDR LDR LDR MHD LDR LDR QL
Q H
f-;;._ ::.>
LDR LDR Q LDR D L LDR p L
p PR mZ
LDR LDR L MHD
MHD
LDR R wL
a
LDR LDR LDR LDR LDR L
s
77TH STREET
RCO
HDR
CCO MHD HDR H
7700PILLSBURYAVES HDR
HONDA
HDR
HDR
HDR H
RCO P K
RCO HDR
HDR
H
R
H
Q
I _
I
I
g .I
I
i ' c,rrY o ai_aorv i cror
i
Feet
0 60 120 240 360 480 600
RCO- Regional Commercial/Office N
CCO- Community Commercial/Office
HDR- High Density Residential
MHD - Medium-High Density Residential
LDR- Low Density Residential
Path: I:\GIS\Community Development\StafflPlanning Tech\Projects\7700 Pillsbury CP.mxd
AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA ITEM# 4
REPORT#
CASE# 13-APUD-02
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PC MEETING DATE: JUNE 24, 2013
ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing regarding a proposed major amendment to the Cedar Point Commons Planned
Unit Development. The requested amendment would allow for a McDonald's restaurant on
approximately one-half of the currently vacant land at the northwest corner of 66th Street and
Richfield Parkway. Currently approved plans call for four retail buildings on this site (entire
site .
I.RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Recommend
adoption of a resolution denying an amendment to the Planned Unit
Development, Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan for
Cedar Point Commons that would allow construction of a Class III
Fast Food restaurant with drive-u facilities.
II. BACKGROUND
The City Council approved a final development plan for the Cedar Point Commons
project in June of 2006. The project included approximately 370,000 square feet of
building, comprised of a Super Target, Home Depot, full-service restaurant, bank, and
seven smaller multi-tenant buildings. Four of the smaller buildings were proposed for
the northwest corner of 66th Street and Richfield Parkway. These buildings were not
constructed along with the rest of the site in 2007, and the area has remained vacant.
Property owner Ryan Companies, has applied for a major amendment to approved
plans in order to reconfigure the area to the west of Richfield Parkway for a McDonald's
restaurant. The north half of the vacant area would remain vacant for the time being.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. PoLICY
In 2004, th Ci y compieie a redeveloprrieni rrasiei ia i io' ihe Cedar Ave iue
Corridor area. The plan called for a mix of commercial and higher density housing that
would be more compatible with airport noise and would be centered upon a greenway.
A resolution approving the Cedar Point Commons project was approved in June of
2006. An amendment to the approved plans must meet both Code requirements and
the requirements of the Cedar Point project resolution unless modified by the City
Council.
A full discussion of all required findings applicable to this proposal is included as an
attachment to this report. The following is a summary of key points.
Zoning Requirements: Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) are intended to
encourage the efficient use of land and resources and to encourage innovation in
planning and building. PUDs provide flexibility in the application of dimensional
requirements, density and land uses if the proposed development is well-designed and
can be successfully integrated into the neighborhood. PUDs are expected to provide
superior design and/or benefit to the community in exchange for the requested flexibility.
The following variations from standard requirements are proposed:
Building siting:
1. Front yards — Front yards (defined as the area between 66th Street and the
south side of the building) may not contain anything other than fencing,
ornamental outdoor furniture, parking areas, signage, and landscaping. Drive-
thru lanes are not permitted.
2. Front setback — The intent of this regulation is to bring the "front" of the
building closer to the street, as to "front" means "to face." While the dimensional
requirement is met, the orientation of the building is incorrect.
3. Building Orientation — Buildings are to be oriented such that at least one
principal entrance faces the public street. This requirement is not met.
4. Creation of a desirable and unified environment - The proposed
orientation and material color selection are not in keeping with the existing
portion of the Cedar Point Commons development. The proposed building turns
it "back" to both 66th Street and Richfield Parkway with the drive-thru ordering
station and pick-up window facing the community and the shops on the other
side of the Parkway. Bike racks have been included; however, they are located
at the main entrance, which faces neither street. While the developer has shown
that there is a small amount of light/white colored stone used in the existing
development, the front (north) of the proposed building is almost entirely white
tile — a design that is a stark contrast to the rest of the development. Staff has
requested the substitution of a metal or grey tile; however, McDonald's
representation says that this is not an option. Staff has also requested to see
other potential designs, but has not received anything. McDonald's has varied
from their corporate standard in other locations, including the restaurant at 66th
Street and Lyndale Avenue. In order to form a desirable and unified
development, variations are required at this location as well.
Internal circulation questions also remain. The proposed parking stall design
would encourage vehicle travel in both directions, while lane width
accommod tes only one-way travel. Additional discussion with the City's
Transportation Engineer and site revisions would be necessary to ensure safe
vehicle movement through the site.
Architecture:
5. Appearance — Buildings are required to have an attractive appearance from
all sides.
6. Windows —Windows or simulated windows are required on any wall that
faces the street.
Circulation:
7. Parking — The applicant has requested a reduced parking requirement
based on their own operational knowledge and experience. Staff has typically
supported a reduction based on internal requirements when the proposed retailer
is prolific in an area. City requirements calls for 67 parking stalls (4,365sf/1000 *
17 — 10% = 67). McDonald's internal calculations call for 1 space per peak shift
employee plus 1 stall/3 seats. (15 + 87seats/3 = 44 parking stalls.) The
proposed plan includes 49 stalls; 18 stalls short of requirements, Staff has
concerns about the degree of departure from City requirements.
8. Queuing space —Although the minimum requirement for 70 feet of queuing
space is met, it is staff's opinion that the proposed drive-thru lane will interFere
with required parking. McDonald's has indicated that up to 70 percent of their
customer traffic can be through the drive-thru lane. As mentioned above, there
are concerns about the availability of parking and the location of the queuing lane
could potentially block all of the parking stalls immediately adjacent to the
building.
9. Intersection level of service —The Public Works Department has indicated
that the proposed driveway radius, unchannelized exit and median changes are
not acceptable. No change will be permitted to the Richfield Parkway median
unless median channelization is added at the site exit. It is unclear whether or
not the delivery service required by McDonald's will work under these conditions.
Landscaping:
10. Parking lot islands —A minimum of 5 percent of parking lots that provide for
25 vehicles must be devoted to landscaped islands with overstory shade trees.
The applicant has included areas that are not landscaped and areas that are not
within the parking lot in this calculation. When calculated as intended and
defined, this requirement is not met. As proposed, 3.3 percent of the parking lot
is devoted to landscaped islands and the required shade trees have not been
provided.
Other site requirements:
11 e Parking lot setback — Parking lots must be set back a minimum of 15 feet
from residential property. The rear half of the adjacent Church is zoned
Residential. This requirement is not met.
12. Lighting — The proposed plan does not meet submittal requirements
measurements must extend to property lines and street centerlines) and also
exceed permitted light levels.
The proposed plan is not in substantial compliance with the regulations of the
guiding district. The applicant has oriented the site to meet the requirement that
drive-thru service windows be a minimum of 150 feet residentially zoned property.
In doing so, the applicant has created a site that is at odds with the intention of all
recent Code amendments and plans related to the relationship of buildings to the
street and creation of developments that are supportive and friendly to pedestrians
and bicyclists.
Comprehensive Plan Agreement: PUDs and the accompanying Conditional Use
Permits (CUPs) require agreement and conformance with the goals and policies of
the City's Comprehensive Plan. This property is designated as Regional
Commercial in the Comprehensive Plan and is within the Cedar Avenue Corridor
Master Plan area. A wide variety of commercial uses are permitted in this area. A
stated policy of the Comprehensive Plan is to "accommodate business growth" that
respects the values and standards of the citizens of Richfield." Development is
expected to be "responsive" to the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed
development does not meet the standards of the community and is not responsive or
complimentary to the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed building turns its
back" to the community. Further, Richfield Parkway, which the proposal abuts, is
identified as a future vehicular and greenway corridor that will traverse much of
Richfield and extend north to the Minneapolis border. The Comprehensive Plan
calls for the inclusion of an off-road trail to be developed in conjunction with the
Three Rivers Park District along Richfield Parkway. The applicant has included the
proposed trail on their plans; however, the driveway from Richfield Parkway has
been designed to accommodate semi-truck turning movements and in doing so
makes pedestrian and bicycle crossing more dangerous. The existing design does
not conform to the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
In order to approve an amendment to the Cedar Point Commons
development, the Council must find that all requirements detailed in the
attached document and summarized above have been met.
The purpose of PUD regulations is to provide an opportunity for innovative
and creative development, while assuring that the development will
complement existing neighborhood character. The proposed development
is the same McDonald's that could be built at any location in the Midwest
and does not complement the existing portion of the Cedar Point
Commons development or the surrounding neighborhood.
The proposal conflicts with numerous requirements of the Zoning Code.
If approved, there are a number of issues related to access and circulation
that must be addressed in order to provide a safe environment.
The area of land in question has been vacant for approximately seven
years. Encouragement of quality development is a goal of the community.
C. FINANCIAL
Required application fee has been paid.
D. LEGAL
Zoning:
xisting: P-Z (Nlanned Generai c;ommerciaij
Proposed: No change
Land Use:
Existing: Vacant
Approved: Multi-tenant retail
Proposed: Fast food restaurant
Comprehensive Plan: Regional Commercial
Notification: Notice of the hearing was mailed to properties within 350 feet of
the proposed development and published in the Sun Current Newspaper.
Other Actions:
Council: Scheduled — July 9, 2013
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S
Recommend approval the proposed amendment to the Cedar Point Commons
planned unit development, final development plan, and conditional use permit.
V. ATTACHMENTS
Draft Resolution
Required findings
Resolution No. 9772 approving Cedar Point Commons
Proposed plans
Renderings and developer photos
Parking reduction request
Planning & Zoning maps
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
Representative(s) of Ryan Companies
Representative(s) of McDonald's
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR CEDAR POINT COMMONS
WHEREAS, Ryan Companies ("Owner") has submitted an application for an
amendment to the planned unit development, conditional use permit and final
development plan of Cedar Point Commons, to the City of Richfield for real property
legally described as (collectively, "the Property):
LOTS 1, 2, AND 3, BLOCK 2, CEDAR POINT COMMONS
WHEREAS, the application proposes to develop approximately one half of the
Property as a Fast Food (Class III) Restaurant with drive-up service; and
WHEREAS, the currently approved plans call for four multi-tenant retail buildings
to occupy the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield held a public
hearing and recommended denial of the requested final development plan and
conditional use permit at its June 24, 2013 meeting; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun-Current and
mailed to properties within 350 feet of the subject property on June 11, 2013; and
WHEREAS, on June 24, 2013, the Planning Commission recommended denial
of the application by a vote of to and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the application an amendment to the
planned unit development, final development plan and conditional use permit on June
25, 2013.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
1.Findings of Fact. The City Council hereby makes the following findings of
fact:
A. The City's zoning ordinance establishes zoning classifications for
individual property. The property legally described as Lots 1, 2,
and 3, Block 2, Cedar Point Commons ("the Property") are zoned
PC-2 (Planned General Commercial).
B. A planned unit development, final development plan and
conditional use permit was approved for the Property on June 27,
2006. This plan called for four retail buildings to be constructed on
the property.
B. Ryan Companies has submitted an application to the City for an
amendment to the planned unit development, final development
plan and conditional use permit for the Property which would allow
construction of a fast food restaurant with drive-up service
approximately one-half of the Property.
C. Planned unit development plans are required to conform to the
goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan. A stated
policy of the Comprehensive Plan is to "accommodate business
growth" that "respects the values and standards of the citizens of
Richfield." Development is expected to be "responsive" to the
surrounding neighborhood. The proposed development does not
meet the standards of the community and is not responsive or
complimentary to the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed
building turns its "back" to the community. Further, Richfield
Parkway, which the proposal abuts, is identified as a future
vehicular and greenway corridor that will traverse much of
Richfield and extend north to the Minneapolis border. The
Comprehensive Plan calls for the inclusion of an off-road trail to be
developed in conjunction with the Three Rivers Park District along
Richfield Parkway. The applicant has included the proposed trail
on their plans; however, the driveway from Richfield Parkway has
been designed to accommodate semi-truck turning movements
and in doing so makes pedestrian and bicycle crossing more
dangerous. The existing design does not conform to the goals and
objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
D. Planned unit development are required to be designed in such a
manner as to form a desirable and unified environment within its
own boundaries. The proposed orientation and material color
selection are not in keeping with the existing portion of the
development. The proposed building turns it "back" to both 66th
Street and Richfield Parkway with the drive-thru ordering station
and pick-up window facing the community and the shops on the
other side of the Parkway. Bike racks have been included;
however, they are located at the main entrance, which faces neither
street. While the developer has shown that there is a small amount
of light/white colored stone used in the existing deveiopment, the
front (north) of the proposed building is almost entirely white tile — a
design that is a stark contrast to the rest of the development. Staff
has requested the substitution of a metal or grey tile; however,
McDonald's representation says that this is not an option. Staff has
also requested to see other potential designs, but has not received
anything. McDonald's has varied from their corporate standard in
other locations, including the restaurant at 66th Street and Lyndale
Avenue. In order to form a more cohesive development, variations
should be made at this location as well.
Internal circulation questions also remain. The proposed parking
stall design would encourage vehicle travel in both directions, while
lane width accommodates only one-way travel. Additional
discussion with the City's Transportation Engineer and site
revisions would be necessary to ensure safe vehicle movement
through the site.
As proposed, the development amendment does not form a
desirable and unified environment with the existing Cedar Point
Commons development.
E. Planned unit developments are required to be in substantial
conformance with the purpose and intent of the guiding district,
and departures from guiding district regulations must be justified
by the design of the development. The proposed development
fails to meet requirements related to: front yards, front setback,
building orientation, appearance, parking, transportation level of
service, parking lot islands, parking lot setback and lighting. The
proposed plan is not in substantial conformance with the guiding
district (C-2) regulations. Departures from Code requirements
cannot be justified by the design of development.
F. Planned unit developments may not create undue adverse impacts
on neighboring properties. As currently designed, proposed
median and site entrance changes are not acceptable. As
designed, the modified median encourages dangerous left turn
movements and the exit poses increased danger to pedestrians
and bicyclists.
G. The defined purpose of planned unit development regulations is to
provide an opportunity for innovative and creative development,
while assuring that development will complement existing
neighborhood character. The proposed development is a standard
McDonald's that could be built in any Midwestern community, as
opposed to an innovative and creative aesign. The proposed
development is not complementary to the existing portion of the
Cedar Point Commons development. The rear of the proposed
building faces the adjacent streets and businesses. The color of
the proposed materials on the north side of the building are in stark
contrast to the existing development.
2.On the basis of the foregoing findings, the application an amendment to the
planned unit development, final development plan, and conditional use permit
are denied.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 25th day of
June, 2013,
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
Required Findings
Part 1: The following findings are necessary for approval of a PUD application
542.09 Subd. 3):
1. The proposed development conforms to the goals and objectives of the City's
Comprehensive Plan and any applicable redevelopment plans. The property
is designated as Regional Commercial in the Comprehensive Plan and is
within the Cedar Avenue Corridor Master Plan area. A wide variety of
commercial uses are permitted in this area. A stated policy of the
Comprehensive Plan is to "accommodate business growth" that "respects the
values and standards of the citizens of Richfield." Development is expected
to be "responsive" to the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed
development does not meet the standards of the community and is not
responsive or complimentary to the surrounding neighborhood. The
proposed building turns its "back" to the community. Further, Richfield
Parkway, which the proposal abuts, is identified as a future vehicular and
greenway corridor that will traverse much of Richfield and extend north to the
Minneapolis border. The Comprehensive Plan calls for the inclusion of an off-
road trail to be developed in conjunction with the Three Rivers Park District
along Richfield Parkway. The applicant has included the proposed trail on
their plans; however, the driveway from Richfield Parkway has been designed
to accommodate semi-truck turning movements and in doing so makes
pedestrian and bicycle crossing more dangerous. The existing design does
not conform to the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a
desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. The proposed
orientation and material color selection are not in keeping with the existing
portion of the development. The proposed building turns it "back" to both 66th
Street and Richfield Parkway with the drive-thru ordering station and pick-up
window facing the community and the shops on the other side of the
Parkway. Bike racks have been included; however, they are located at the
main entrance, which faces neither street. While the developer has shown
that there is a small amount of light/white colored stone used in the existing
development, the front (north) of the proposed building is almost entirely white
tile — a design that is a stark contrast to the rest of the development. Staff
has requested the substitution of a metal or grey tile; however, McDonald's
representation says that this is not an option. Staff has also requested to see
other potential designs, but has not received anything. McDonald's has
varied from their corporate standard in other locations, including the
restaurant at 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue. In order to form a more
cohesive developmen"t, variations should be maae at this locaiion as weii.
Internal circulation questions also remain. The proposed parking stall design
would encourage vehicle travel in both directions, while lane width
accommodates only one-way travel. Additional discussion with the City's
Transportation Engineer and site revisions would be necessary to ensure safe
vehicle movement through the site.
As proposed, the development amendment does not form a desirable and
unified environment with the existing Cedar Point Commons development.
3. The development is in substantial conformance with the purpose and intent of
the guiding district, and departures from the guiding district regulations are
justified by the design of the development. The proposed development is
inconsistent with the following requirements:
Building siting:
Front yards — Front yards (defined as the area between 66th Street and
the south side of the building) may not contain anything other than
fencing, ornamental outdoor furniture, parking areas, signage, and
landscaping. Drive-thru lanes are not permitted.
Front setback — The intent of this regulation is to bring the "front" of the
building closer to the street, as to "front" means "to face." While the
dimensional requirement is met, the orientation of the building is incorrect.
Building Orientation — Buildings are to be oriented such that at least one
principal entrance faces the public street. This requirement is not met.
Architecture:
Appearance — Buildings are required to have an attractive appearance
from all sides.
Windows —Windows or simulated windows are required on any wall that
faces the street.
Circulation:
Parking — The applicant has requested a reduced parking requirement
based on their own operational knowledge and experience. Staff has
typically supported a reduction based on internal requirements when the
proposed retailer is prolific in an area. City requirements calls for 67
parking stalls (4,365sf/1000 * 17 — 10% = 67). McDonald's internal
calculations call for 1 space per peak shift employee plus 1 stall/3 seats.
15 + 87seats/3 = 44 parking stalls.) The proposed plan includes 49 stalls;
18 stalls short of requirements. Staff has concerns about the degree of
departure from City requirements.
Queuing space — Although the minimum requirement for 70 feet of
queuing space is met, it is staff's opinion that the proposed drive-thru lane
will interfere with required parking. McDonald's has indicated that up to 70
percent of their customer traffic can be through the drive-thru lane. As
mentioned above, there are concerns about the availability of parking and
the location of the queuing lane could potentially block all of the parking
stalls immediately adjacent to the building.
Intersection level of service — The Public Works Department has
indicated that the proposed driveway radius, unchannelized exit and
median changes are not acceptable. No change will be permitted to the
Richfield Parkway median unless median channelization is added at the
site exit. It is unclear whether or not the delivery service required by
McDonald's will work under these conditions.
Landscaping:
Parking lot islands —A minimum of 5 percent of parking lots that provide
for 25 vehicles must be devoted to landscaped islands with overstory
shade trees. The applicant has included areas that are not landscaped
and areas that are not within the parking lot in this calculation. When
calculated as intended and defined, this requirement is not met. As
proposed, 3.3 percent of the parking lot is devoted to landscaped islands
and the required shade trees have not been provided.
Other site requirements:
Parking lot setback — Parking lots must be set back a minimum of 15 feet
from residential property. The rear half of the adjacent Church is zoned
Residential. This requirement is not met.
Lighting — The proposed plan does not meet submittal requirements
measurements must extend to property lines and street centerlines) and
also exceed permitted light levels.
The proposed plan is not in substantial compliance with the regulations of the
guiding district. The applicant has oriented the site to meet the requirement
that drive-thru service windows be a minimum of 150 feet residentially zoned
property. In doing so, the applicant has created a site that is at odds with the
intention of all recent Code amendments and plans related to the relationship
of buildings to the street and creation of developments that are supportive
and friendly to pedestrians and bicyclists. The proposed plan does not
compliment the larger development of which it is a part. While Planned Unit
Developments allow from departures from Code requirements, this flexibility
is given in exchange for superior design and integration into the
neighborhood.
4. The developmeni wiii not create an excessive purden on parks, sci oois,
streets or other public facilities and utilities that serve or area proposed to
serve the development. The Public Works Department has reviewed the
proposal and that adequate services are or will be available.
5. The development will not have undue adverse impacts on neighboring
properties. Odor control would be required to protect residential properties
nearby. The current design of inedian and site exit are not acceptable to the
Public Works Department; it is unclear to staff whether or not McDonalds
could make the changes required. Notice of the required public hearing has
been sent to all properties within 350 feet of the proposal.
6. The terms and conditions proposed to maintain the integrity of the plan are
sufficient to protect the public interest. N/A. Staff recommends denial of the
proposal in that it does not meet requirements.
Part 2: All uses are conditional uses in the PC-2 District. The findings
necessary to issue a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) are as follows (Subd. 547.09,
Subd. 6):
1. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of
the City's Comprehensive Plan. See above: Part 1, #1.
2. The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and
the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the
proposed use. The purpose of planned unit development regulations is to
provide an opportunity for innovative and creative development, while
assuring that the development will complement existing neighborhood
character. The proposed development is neither creative nor innovative as it
is the same proposal that could be built on any site in the Midwest. The
proposal does not complement the existing portion of the Cedar Point
Commons development or the surrounding neighborhood.
3. The proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment
plans or urban design guidelines. The Cedar Avenue Corridor Master plan
allows for a wide variety of commercial uses.
4. The proposed use is or will be in compliance with the performance
standards specified in Section 544 of this code. This requirement is not met.
See above — Part 1, #3.
5. The proposed use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental
facilities, utilities, services, or existing or proposed improvements. The Public
Works Department has reviewed the proposal and that adequate services are
or will be available.
i. Tne use wiii not have undue adverse impacis on rhe pubiic nealth, safeiy,
or welfare. As proposed, the median changes and exit would create a traffic
hazard.
7. There is a public need for such use at the proposed location. The
successful development of vacant lots is important to the City.
8. The proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this
code for the granting of such conditional use permit. This requirement is not
met.
RESOLUTIC)1 9. 9 a
2ESOLlJ7'ION AflJ'EOR9ZI G A RB/L V L P 41E6 T PLA ,iVD
COLVDITIC3BVA. 9SE PEREl iT O ' C POIBd' Cd iliVtlOB S PRi?JECT
V l BE6 EA, an application has beer filed with the Ci4y of Richfield which
requests approval of a final development plan and conditional use permit for a
commercial development of 29.6 acres on land generally located be we ra 17fih
Avenue nd Trunk Highway 77 (TH 77} and 63rd and 66th Streets, legally
described in Exhibit A; and
WFi AS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the
request for a final development plan and conditional use permit on April 24, 2006
and voted unanimously to recommend approval; and
W9i @dEAS, the Environmental Assessment Vlforksheet for the praject has
been found adequate; and
tid:A, OIVtII:C UI UIC .JUlJllti IIE.''i1(111(. V11'ilS PUC)IISYI CI I TI E U I CiUCC Iti
and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property on June 1,
2006; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the final
development plan and conditional use permit on June13, 2006; and
VI/HEREAS, the proposed commercial use is consistent with the goals,
policies, and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan:
A. The Comprehensive Plan Guide Plan designates the
project area as Regional Commercial/Office and the
proposed development is consistsnt with this
designation.
B. An objective of the Comprehensive Plan is to "advocate
and suppart with municipal investment a high quality
visual environment throughout the City and particularly
along major transportation corridors." "'he prapos d
development is consistent with this objective.
C. The development is also consistent with the following goal of th
Comprehensive Plan: "Provide an economic climate within
Richfield that will encourage the availability af quality goods,
services and employment opportunities for residents."
D. The development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
goal to, "Prornot diverse develc ment th t will uroaden the tax .
base while reinforcing the residential character of Richfielc6," and
with its accompanying objective, "promote development that can
support itself and broaden the tax base."
E. The development is consistent with the following
Comprehensive Plan objec ive; "promate f ichfield's locational
ad,:;tage with;r ±he greater met;opolitan urca."
F. The development is consist nf with the Compr hensive Plan
objective to "address the means to improve the visual quality
througho at the City, cancer tratir7g on design districts and
transportation corridors, beginning with land use coordination."
G. The development is consistent with the description of the Ced r
Avenue Corridor subarea plan that state as follows: "The
proposal far the Corridor area between East 63rd Street and
Di gona[ Boulevard is proposed to be largely redeveloped fa
attract regional corr mercial and o'ffice."
V1IHEREAS, the commerciaf use is consistent with any officially dopted
redevelopment plans or urban design guidelines:
A. A redevelopmenf project area has been established. The proposed
project is consistent with that projecf area.
6. The project area provides for the facilikation of redevelopment of land
for the construction of commercial/retail development better suited to
withstand airport noise.
C. The project area provides modern transit stops with bus pullouts and
landscaping.
D. The project area provides newer designed, high-volume street
intersections better able to control traffic and interface with pedestrian
traffic.
E. The project area provides for bikeways, pathways for non-vehicular
tra c.
F. The project area enhances streetscape with decorative concrete,
pedestrian lighting, and landscape features.
WHEREAS, the commercial use is or will be in compliance with the
perFormance standards specified in Section 541 of this code:
A. Lighting will provide adequate levels for safe use of paricing
areas. The lighting wiH meet City ordinance requirements for
less than 0.5-foot candles at any residential property line. One
hour after store closings, only safety lighting will remain on.
B. The development wil6 include 1,521 parking stalls, which is
approximately 92 percent of the number of stalls that would be
required under the City's parking standards. The reduction in
parking stalls is acceptable because of the transit-oriented
nature of the development. It is expected that many shoppers
and employees will use modes of transportation other than cars.
Shared parking and differences in peak parking needs for the
different businesses are also expected to reduce the parking
demand.
C. Several traffic improvements are planned in the vicinity of the
development, including a new roundabout at
17t" Avenue and
66th Street and improvements to TH 77 and 66th Street. Those
improvements, which have received necessary appravals, will
accommodate the traffic of the development as well as fiuture
development south of 66th Street. The development includes
transit-oriented elements, including bus pull-outs on 66th Street,
twenty-foot sidewalks throughout the development to allow for
comfortable walking and strolling space for shoppers, and bike
racks to be located throughout the development to allow
shopp r n+ mployees the chcie f u ing alt rnative m d s
of transportation to the development. The project will be
accessible by foot, public transportation, bicycle, and motor
vehicle.
D. The City Zoning Ordinance requirements for landscaping are
exceeded by the proposed landscaping plan. The developer will
provide trees of 3 "/z inch and 4 inch caliper, where the code
requires only 2-'/2 inch caliper. Shade trees will be planf d
along the perimeter very 3Q f e required by code. The
develapment will include approxirr ately 462 trees, where the
code requdres only 329 trees. 'fh east side of 1 It" A,nue has
a 27-foot wide berm that will be planted with multiple layers of
over-story and ornamental trees and shrubs from 65t" Streef fo
64'" Street to separate fhe parking from the s ree# and minimize
the intrusion of headlights into the neighborhood. From 64tn
Street to 63 d Stree the berm wiil turn to a heavily landscaped
edge with evergreen shrubs for year-round screening.
E. Trash will be accomrr odated iroside the truck wells of Home
Depot and SuperTarget. Trash will be accorr madated inside
fhe buildings for all other buildings.
F. Electrical and utility service lines will be installed underground.
G. The west elevafion of the SuperTarget and Home Depot
buildings and the south elevation of the S perTarget buildAng
will use a concrete block material that looks like brick. The
t,a....,.. a,...•.... a.... a..,.. ...•i.a•...,. •oi t.._ iv_
uuiiun iy iisradC iaaa vii u iC uu iCi uuiiuis iya v iin iiiC uuG u i
concrete block material, metal panels and glass, and the
a chitecture fvr the buildings is four-sided architecture.
H. Roof-top mechanical equipment will not be visible from
surrounding roadways, and if it is found to be visible all roof-top
mechanical equipment will be screene with like rnaterial of the
building(s) and approved by the Community Development
Department.
I. The development complies with the City's surface water
management plan. The developer will construct a regional pond
in the MnDOT right-of-way that is located to the north of Cedar
Point Commons and to the west of TH 77. The regionat pond
will be designed and constructed to retain and treat stormwater
runoff for 130 acres, including the 30-acre Cedar Point
Commons development as well as future runoff from the west of
17th Avenue and portions to the south of 66th Street in the
Cedar Avenue Corridor. The stormwater design takes
advantage of the soil conditions tha4 will allow infiltration of
stormwater. The majority of the storm sewer will be perforated
pipe to allow water ta be dispersed throughout the site as the
water flows to the pond. The developer has also included a
water infiltration landscape area in the parking lot between
SuperTarget and Home Depot as a way to reduce stormwater I
runoff.
i
Wf°I R AS, the commercial use will not have undu adverse impacts on
gavernmental facilifiies, utilities, services, or existing or proposed improvements:
There are adequate facilities, utilities and services to support the development.
With the proposed improvements as identified in the Environmental Assessment
vvorksheet, inere will be adequaie Ye adw ys se-v ihe dev iu,r ieni; and
WHEREAS, the comm rcial use wili not have undue adverse impacts on
the public health, safety, or welfare:
A. The development is designed to be pedestrian-friendly and
transit-oriented, and planned traffic improvements will
accommodate additional traffic generated by the development.
B. The development includes a screen wall approximately 800 feet
in I ngth a6o g TFI 77. The wall v oilf scree almost all delivery
acti ity behind Home Depot and SuperTarget. Cor plementary
plantings will blend with the screen wall and architectural
facades.
C. The development includes significant landscaping to provide a
buffer and screening from residenfial developrraent to the wesf.
D. The developer has consulted with a noise consultant to mitigate
the noise impacts on the development caused by the
neighboring airport. The developer has incorporated several
feature into its developmen# in order to mitigate noise,
including: orient ting the site to the west, away frorr the airport;
locating the majority of door to fac r orth, sou#h and w st,
away from the airport; limiting the number of windows facing
east — only .02% of all the building facades is comprised of
windows; and using building materials (other than windows) that
reduce noise levels so as to meet applicable noise standards;
ai iu
WHEE2EAS, there is a public need for such use at the proposed location;
the Comprehensive Plan description of the Cedar Avenue Corridor plan states as
follows: "The intersection of East 66th Street and Cedar Avenue affords the
opportunity to attract a major regional commercial use such as a regional retail
center;" and
WHEREAS, the commercial use meets or will meet all the specific
conditions set by this code for the granting of a final developrnent plan and
conditional use permit; and
WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the
final development plan and conditional use permit; and
NOW, THEREFORE, E !T RESOL!/ED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City Council adopts as its Findings of Fact the WHEREAS
clauses set forth above, and all the facts set forth in the
Background Section of City Council Report No. 142.
2. A final development plan and conditional use permit are approved
for a commercial use as described in City Council Report No. 142,
on the Subject Property legally described in Exhibit A.
3. The final development plan and conditional use permit are subject
to completing the following conditions before being issued:
Ongoing Conditions and Requirements
1) The site shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with
the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below
a) Site Plan, dated 6/1/06
N; l vations,
i)Target, including wall signs and roof logo, dated 3/20/06
ii)Home Depot, including wall signs, dated 1/20/06
iii) Retail Bui(ding, dated 4/4/06
iv) Outbuildings, dated 3/31/06
c) uilding materials, dated 2/27/06
d} Grading Plan, dated 6/1/06
e) Utility Plan, dated 6/1/06
f} Lighting Plan, dated 6/1/06
g) Landscaping Pian, dated 6/1/06
h) Rsrnovals Plan, dated 6/1/Q6
i) Traffic Signage and Striping Plan, dated 6/1/06
j) Project signs, dated 4/27/06 and 3/31/06
k) Cedar Poin Operations, Appendix/
2) Uses not allowed in the planned unit developmen# include: stereo installation,
taxi or limousine service, vehicle parts store, tree trimming services,
assembty, light manufacturing, and warehouse, auto or boat sales/leasing,
service stations, auto detailing, car washes, public-mechanical garage, and
public-auto body garage.
3) Future buildings and additions require major planned unit development
amendment.
4) Design of future buildings shall be similar to SuperTarget and Flome Depot.
5) Maximum height of buildings should be 100 feet (based on Minneapolis-St.
Paul International Airport Zoning Ordinance).
n -r....
N ..aY N •__
f_.. --
N Y p 9v rc iu"c uiniiici i icS"uii'siui iui i lauiii ari ie uir a iana5ca in inai
dIES.
7} Propertv owner and tenants are responsible for ensurinq all appropriate and
reasonable measures are taken so that shoppin carts will stay on the
property.
8) Concrete commercial driveway aprons required at all entrances between
public streets/private & City property.
9) Trash containers shall be stored inside buildings or within the Target or Home
Depot truck wells.
10)Plans approved by City Council are subject to any changes set forth by
required code compliance and policy.
11)Buildings shall be constructed to meet noise standards set forth in the report
of Orfield, dated May 18, 2005. Improvements for noise shall include:
a) Orientatian of the entire site to the west.
b) Majority of all doors in the development face north, south, and west. Away
from the north-south runway.
c) Cedar Point Commons building materials meeting all Orfield requirements,
except windows.
12)During construction, 17th Avenue and 66th Street must be kept free of debris
and sediment, and the tree protection fencing and erosion control fencing
must be maintained.
Before the issuance of the Final Development Plan and Conditional Use
Permit
1) If applicable, evidence of watershed district approval.
2) The developer must provide to the City Attorney for review a declaration of
cavenants or similar instrument that provides for common access and shared
parking consistent with the development plan and that provides for ongoing
maintenance of property.
Befope issuance of de-rr lBtio g e rr its
1) Installation of tree preservation fencing according to approved tree protection
plan, wetland protection fencing, tsmporary rock driveways and erosion
control measures, as developer acquires propertLr.
2) Attend a pre-construction meeting.
Before issuance of grasling permits (not includinq the interim qradinq
permit for the utility relocation)
I
i
1) Submit cons ruction-parking plan for Public Works review and approval.
2) Subrrait Sanitary Sewer Extension permit from fVaPCA.
3) Submit NPD S Permit— Canstruction Stormwafer--from MPCA.
4) Purchase wetland banking credits for stormwater pond.
5) Submif wetland replacement permit from Corps of Engineers, if applicable.
6) Submit encroachment perrnit for grading from MnDOT.
7) Submit watermain extension approval from Department of Health.
8) Submit permit for connection to interceptor sewer from Met Council, if
applicabls.
9) Submit tax abatement coun4y funding approval.
10)Submit revised site plan with the foBlowing changes for staff review and
approval:
a) Sidewalks should b at I st 6 fe t wide only if there is at least 4 feet of
landscaping between the curb and sidewalk for snow storage, otherwise
sidewalks should be at least 10 feet.
b) Add bollards in front afi Flome Depat befi veen sidewalk and parking lat.
c) Acdd trash containers in front of out buildings' entrances to the stores.
7 C.hw.:i r..vi......! r............1.. ...1...-. ...:al_ al__ t_-.
vuuoini icv aau ic wvct, N dll wlul llle IuIIUVUIf) f1UIE.-': "r cemavai oT structures
shall be permitted by the City of Richfield."The City o#Richfield will require
the removal of watermain and re(ated structures by Ryan, but the watermain I
remains property of the City and the City will recycle the watermain. The City
will take hydrants for spare parts. The City may also salvage signs and
streetlights. Any utility or structure not ta6cen by the City for salvaging or
recycled will need to be disposed of by the contractor.
12)Submit revised utility plans for staff review and approval with the following
change: add "and all requirements and standards of the City of Richfield"to
all utility notes mentioning construction shall conform to standard
specifications.
13)Submit a final stormwater management plan to and approved by the Public
Works Director.
14)Submit a final plan for walkways and sidewalks, both public and private, for
review and approval by staff.
15)Submit financial escrow to ensure compliance with grading and erosion
control plans. The city will not release the letter of credit or cash escrow until
the developer submits as-built drawings and a lefter certifying that the utilities
and grading have been completed according to the plans approved by the
ty.
16)API concrete work on the right-of-way must be inspected by the City' s
Engineering Department prior to pouring the concrete. A 24-hour notice is
required.
efore issuance of a buildi og permit(s)
1) Submit pertormance surety for landscaping for 100% of the value.
2) Submit irriqation plan for staff review and approval
3) Submit building samples to ensure color coordination. q
4) Submit maintenance agreement for public improvements and a copy of the
maintenance agreement for the private property.
a) Maintenance Agreement shall include clarification on maintenance of
landscaping and snow removal on 66th Street and 17th Avenue.
b) Maintenance agreement shall clarify responsibility of temporary 3
maintenance of landscaping in the roundabout and medians on 66th E
Street and 17th Avenue.
5) Submit MnDOT approval of landscaping plan along TH 77.
6) Submit amenities plan with benches with backs for staff review and approval.
7) Submit design of Wome Depot's cart corrals.
8) Submit revised lighting plan for staff review and approval with the following
changes:
a) Show lighting effects on the building elements, p rticularly the trellises,
fins and signs.
b) Have sufficient light levels af entrance from 17fh Avenue.
c) Have fhe circuits for lights along 66th Street and 17th Avenue separate
from site lighting.
d) Use high-pres ure sodium lights along public streets.
e) Provide manufacture cut sheets for lighting fixtures.
fl All wall packs shall be shielded.
9) Submit revised building elevations for staff review and approval with the
following changes:
a) Removing the Home Depot lettering on the fins on the east fa ade.
b) Reducing the lettering of the Fiome Depot sign an the north fa ade from
five feet to four feet.
1(1\C hmi4 hnnL m Fr.n.. F..r CA/' .J \AIA/
v vaav nt wvn-uN cc.7 I VI V/1V aIlU V V/'V.
11)Submit roof top plan and cross section elevatians demonstrating roof top
equipment on all buildings will be screen from the pubiic right-of-way.
12)Submit recorded copy of this resolution.
Before issuance of occupancy permitds)
1) Receive approval and record final plat.
2) Provide staff a copy of cross access and parking agreements between lots.
3) Complete all work within 17th Avenue and 66th Street right-of-way.
4) Mill and overlay of 17th Avenue. On other streets that are to be paved, paving
needs to be stopped perpendicular to the curbline. 65th Street, 17th and
Cedar Avenue show stepped patches, pave street full width up to furthest
extent of patching.
5) Need to screen or paint service doors, mechanical equipment and gas and
electrical meter boxes to match wall color.
6) Approval does not include the signs shown on the drawings. Separate sign
permits are required.
7) Target logo on roof must receive approval from City Council. The City
Council must deem the site as an unusual lacation.
8) The developer must provide vidence satisfactory to the City Attorney that the
declaration of covenants establishing access and parking rights and
maintenance obligations, as approved by the City Attorney, has been
recorded against the property and is enforceable against all entities that hold
interests in the property.
4. The final development plan and conditional use permit shall remain in
effect for so long as conditions regulating it are observed, and the
conditional use permit shall expire if normal operation of the use has
been discontinued for 12 or more months, as required by the Zoning
Ordinance, Section 546.05, Subd. 9.
5. This resolution shall be effective uporj the r ahing ofi the properties in
accordance with Transitorv Ordinance No. 2006-9.
6. The City Clerk is directed that this resolution shall bear the same
number as the previous resolution.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of
June, 2006. This resolution replaces and supercedes the resolution as adopted on June
13, 2006
t
Martin J. Ki , Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, ity Clerk
Exhibit A
Legal Description
That part of the following described parcels of land:
Lots 1-6, Block 3; and Lots 1-12, Block 4; and Lots 1-16, Biock 5; and Lots 3-8 and Lots 9-
14, Block 6; all in IVERSON'S SECOND ADDlTION; and Lots 1-14; Block 1; and Lots 1-
14, Block 2; and Lots 1-5 and Lots 9-14 and the Southeriy 25 feet of Lot 6, Block 3; and
Lots 1-4, Block 4; and L.ots 1-2, block 5; all in IVERSON'S THIRD ADDITION; and Lots 1-
10, Block 5; and Lots 1-12, Block 8; and Lots 3-12, Black 15; all in the NEW FORD TOWN;
according to the recorded plats thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota
i
02013 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.Coll 48 Hours before digging:
I 811 or callBtt.com
II . Common Ground Alliance
I ' 1 ' LEGEND
III I i1i I 1,\
SIGN-iRAFFIC/OMER UNKNONN MANHO(.f
589°5733'W 131.83
SB9°57J3 W o
23 9
I .I
j CA9Lf(V BOX Da CAIE VALl2"II- ,w.93 -_ -=S00 02'27£ 1250 n 8 II
I t 57REEi UIE H)DRAN7
j B,- _
I
F---- 35- J/1
h ELECiftIL AIANNOLE CABL£!V
i "' I I I v c-- POfS£R UNO£HGROU YD
a
PRO OSED I71H C` `
K5] SANIiARY AIANHOCE
I , .AVEHUE S011(H __ _ _ I. B CAiCH BASIN
SAN/TARY SEfiER
t
I I v „ I
x bJ6 - a I ' GAS VACYF
SrORM SEfi£R
i n r -. i:... i/s e e I
i I xni--- Y/AiERMA/N
I I LOT 2 M 5lp4MMANNIXE
F'-'I ¢1 I I--------,-
9 -' fENCE L/NE
j N B95 I 1 fl EPHLIVE BOX
I . I I
n`"
P
lI
I C0.YCRE7E SURFACf BIIUM/NWS SURf'ACE
I ~.(;__". J — __ __ .
l l _ am'vv.ea N I4
N
r .- sII
i J-...._ ::!:,
A i ;)J
t
I
I I I W
C"SURVEYOR S N07FSa-
I 60 i
h . <,
I) The Beonngs shown ore based on the plof ol CEOAR POINT COMIAONS
L
I .
SB9°57 33 W 173.26 a
2) Elevofions ore based on NA D '8B dotum. Benchmork: Top Nuf Hydront, N{%Ouod ol Rich/ield
II
N v I \Porkwoy ond 66th Street = 848.38
hF
y f.i-
1
1--
II \ -. I I 3) Field work /or existing conditions was completed on 12-16-2011
q- A d
M I I. I f r_CK
I
3
o,I t ;O LEGAL DESCRIPAON:
s
I
l
Y
M ., (n . Lots i, 2 ond 3, Block 2, CEDAR POINT C01,IMONS, occordinq to the recorded plof the eof, Hennepin
Q a . I
t
County, Minnesola.
I, og` '
I I
i
C\
I 2 I N __ ; >
e:!Y'
e.a. ' .I N
w';;,z,I ' I
I
DEVELOPMENT INFORMAAON
I
e y
I I I ' , I yl',
ti -%i
I
CURRfNT ZONING: PC-2(Plonned Generol CommerciaQ
1' +
i BUILDABLE LOTS: 2
r.
I
8
I
cn n ve or o-, TOTAL SITE AREA: 1.5B ACRfS
1 . u,,vn_ •`_ ___ _ ..
II ._ 2 . _.J'' - _- - _ - _- _ 1'
I PROPOSED STRffT RIGHT OF V/AY AREA: 0.08 ACRfS
I
o
i 11 AA A `A:^ q
v 1__'_________
I j
vV ./V/.J/v.. I LOT 1 AREA: I.05 ACRfS
I. I I iy ' I LOT 2 AREA: 0.45 ACRES
I •f;.;, .
I I
S--i--1 i AA/NL4/UM L07 V/ID7K 172.76
I t:: L/ / 'a
P
IAINL4IU d L0T{flOTI!PER ZONING ORDIN NCE: 90
I
5 _'"' l
I 'I,
v, .
I'\
M/N/MUM LOT SIZE: 20.909 SF
I
I I I .I IdIN/MUM LOTS SIZf PER ZO VING ORDINANCE: 9,000 SF
a I I I SITE LIES fV1TN/N FLOOD ZONE X
4
L 7.
I
Q
I
1 q: I SITE DOES NOT UE V.7THlN SHORELAND 0/SiRICI
t m PjtGWOSEO 177N
I . v c Rc
AVFNUE SOUlII y ' S) 1 1.I u4
bah 1
I o d ?'9? j ; l . ' 1 OWNER/SUBDlV1DER
ro 3
2I
m Ty 3/-. _ / RYAN CO.i/PANIES US, INC.
i R 843E.`, `_ 1 50 SOUTH T£NTH STREET, SUITf 300
n C,0
x^' "'°`
P
d/NNEAPOLIS. MN 55403
m i:'.`_ Cgd°9oJgss` _'-_\`s.r_• ' _ --
e s.sa
I'_ ',I , Gdos?
F
0pb.\
i / ao m..s/n eien
R=2B6.00
z qti-L=fI.J2
d=2°16'03' 1'^
CB=N34°1fi7B"
N89°65557 E fl0.57
1= ,.- . / _ .;
l - = og
n.n=B Oi%
r(•A l15N
66TH'STREETm EAS s,—_
s
s,_a,a,z
i
E---——-- —t?a
I
0'30'60' 90'
l
I
I I L011S723F'Pf(I wq
I Datc 3/14/13 sn t 1 op 1
Cedar Point Commons
al X„ WY n m,
y n Com an es U Inc. Second Addition
3rai zu,svro e.m.a..um.=a o-..a.a.y m+urm suaveroa
w..fm s PtePared for.
StCIOUJ.AIH6630J da Ik L n d 1L Sta•s d fLmot 6/I!/ta upaated Orqe:ee:te ar.e r/. (,Ri)'
m------ PreliminaryN_
PNONE 3f0-]SJ 9 95 p n Qy
FA% 3]0.90&]M D 1TR _______]AL_ 1
ra vr 1-BBB-R]P9195 Nethm Fi Cerlson_--- _—_.-.-__ .___----_.--__ 50 Solltll lOth Street.Sulte 300
1•
Fttvd U+Ew 3.--__....
We5tVY00d ,,.N+m o.ss---
3/14/13 --u,e xv-- '3 --------- --------------- M3nncapoHa.MN 55903 RicLfield.Mh!-- --. .__.---
m
u
I W
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY SITE DATA
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: NEW MCDONALDS RESTAURANT
159'DRIVE THRU SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL
t: _.._LOCATION(S-T-R):26-028-24
28T PARCEL ID: 26-028-24-14-0137
s
o : .. a f e 8'SETBA K r e e r e:::n<B LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 7,BLOCK 7 OF CEDAR POINT COIAMONS SECOND ADDIDON in
RECORDED IN HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESO7A o
e r r
e fIr --t- I ADORESS: 7B0 17TH AVENUE S., RICHf'fELD,MN g
f f f 9
a e Ir F e P- FLOOD ZONE: NSFHA- ZONE J((NO SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA), AS
w y r E HOWN ON FEDERAL EMERGENCY AIANAGEMENT AGENCY FlOOD
e t t - 1 INSURANCE RATE MAP COAIMUNI7Y PANEL NUTABER xXRXXX.
f
T
R15
SIfE AREA: 50.063 S.F. (1.15 ACJy.
g y 8 SETHACK t
x ,, I R O 74W ZONING DISTRICT: PUD Rii}I A C-2 BASE
4 a
E
Ci .
t
q
eO IAAX. BUILDWC HEIGHT: 13EQ PROVIDEO Z
y F ,
d' n 0. -
T I N/A 25 FEET/1 STORY
t
a ..j. e t ._ . , NV - - - ci
t t t r
a
FLOOR AREA RA710:4,365 S.F. /50,063 S.F. = 0.09 c
r
t
b
e t
t < t
e
t < t d.
e
f < t
TOTAL SI7EAAREA: 9,0'RSF 45679ES.f. (1.05 AC) t00Y.
CtI . r t f t ' r
r
da.
BUILDING AREA: 17Y. 4,365 S.F. (0.10 AC) tOY. 5
f i a
p. , . ,
IAIPERVIOUS AREA: N/A 33.555 S.F. (0J7 AC) 73R S OVj
I 15.5 -- `a
I I 173 LANDSCAPE AREA(SITE): N/A 7,759 S.F. (0.18 AC) 179. Na
t 29,650 SF PARKING LOT): >SX 2,007 S.F. (0.05 AC) 6.8Y.
i
fi . t
f
i e . .
A PA710 •:.
FRONTNC
SETBACKS
8'MIN 60E1AAX
PROBDED Sz N yY
t . r t 1 1 i 1 i. _. I REAR B 8' 9
S r \ U SIDE 8' 8'
a: a . , ` , , U aa
y-. t f t 4 7 BUFFER:REQUIREO PROVIDED
60'MAX BLDG SETBACK w
I'llF-17
a < ( t _ - - - _ !
1 _ - - __. :-ti. - -_ _- - - - - ___ '.1 FRONT B I60 61Ax) 8' z
k
I \ '
d t
t t,
f
e F
FFE&111
F 4••;.* 'sioe s' s' e
5 li
lf R62'a .
t e a
N F . a - - . ___.. _,__-- . . I
STADARDUM
REWIRE PRO?DD n 4
MARY: D E
X IO , . O ACCESSIBLE 03 03
0
4
i i B'_ aTOTAL 67 50
t
g
a: , 1
A PARKING S7UDY HAS BEEN SUBIAITTEO TO Jl1STIFY RE UCED PARKING REWIREMENT @a s
E & I ; POTENiIAL ROW LINE '
a =y
r - 1 j' `J I r L 8'BUILDING AND LANDSCAPE SE78ACK -__-SoF o
o n e « ..__ 1_'_ —lb r—E-
L: d &
M - p t r\t < t e e r < y y-e--T F t t e e e r t e f f t e r e B€ds .-'
t--ti e_ +-r f t t e t t t r 3. S ° z
M E r < . . <'. i ,,,„_ _
SYMBOL LEGEND k f
f
r i-- n i i i i i i. i ilE. , 1_ - r P'ti 1 i a
o
77k
F°il ,r , i 1' n`i i i i i i 1`
r- " '
i
I k Ik i t11= C nccESSie E RouTE
j .I
iJ,.. - .--- -
a (
ATION PURPOSES ONLY. DO NOT PAI )y.
I I
NT
c a
x.. .
LOC i
a 3
Q ::,. - '.
3 7RAIL CLEAR DISTANCE ACCESSIQLE PARKING SPACE
Y Y
RICHFIELD PARICWAY SEE
SHBTE
3AZKFOF2 SGN TYPE AND MOUN7ING Z ma a
o .
4 :PU LIC STREEn O d
3
T QA PROPOSED UGHT PONE
o
s c... 25___o
ti 3
a a
y':
iRANSFORAIER PAD
o, c a r^ .
a $ IACDOtJALU'S BRANDEDD IRECiIONAL SIGNAGE
Q
SEE SHEET C3.2 FOR ETAIL
o
Z
e MCDONALDS STANDARD SIGNAGE- SEE NOTE 3 Q.. Zo = v
in
J rr .j., '
CONCRElE PAVEAIENT/SIDEYIALK Z p
i .. t
HEAW DUTY CONCRElE PAVEAIENTxo W
o
u ° L HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT PAVEA!ENT
CALL—OUT LEGEND
Uw
STMIDARD ASPHALT PAVEAIENT
Q
0 7. ALL RADII ARE 3 UNLESS OTHERYlISE NOTED.
F '-OA ADA TRUNCATED DOME DEVICE (TYP.)AND
2. SEE GE07ECHNICAL REPORT FOR FUR7HER INFOf2MATI0IJ ON ADA CURB RAMP. REfERENCE MNDOT EXISTINC CONCRETE PAVEMENT W
Q EXISTING SOILS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN. STANDARD PLATE U z
a OB 6 YdDE C04CRETE SIDEYIALK
LANDSCAPING
J Z
A
3. CON7RACTOR IAUST USE AICDONALD'S APPROVED 57ENCILS FOR J
o I PAVEAIENT MARKINGS- ONLY iEMPLATES RECE VED FROA1 THE OC 14" YdDE N'HITE STOP BAR
Q FOLLOWiNG COMPANY YALL BE ACCEPTEO:STRIPINC. S7RIPES SHALL BE PAINTED RHITE SYISL/4" AT 2'-0" Q
I OD DIRECTIONAL ARROW(TYP.) O.0 A
D PAVElAENT STENCIL COMPANY z02oa0 'I - - P.O. 60%18034
s OE DRIVE-THRU PAVEMEN7 MARKWGSROANOKE, VA. 24014
DEAIOLITION OF E%ISTNG PAVEMENT AND CURB Q
r "
T
PH 80D-250-5547 FAX(540)427-1326 tnSC:.LE
PAVEMENTSTENGLNET OF 10' TRANSITION FROAi 86i[Tv 3"LURB CURB OEIAO y WnaC
P I I j 4. AT DIRECTION OF OYMER, CONTRACTOR TO REPLACE DAMAGED OG BOLLARD O z
i CUR6\flTHIN MILL k OVERLAY AREA. PEDESTRIAN CROSSINC PAVEMENT MARKINGS Q joa
I.
I DEVELOPER TO COMPLEiE EMOLITION OF 25 FT OF p
9
1 5. SEE SHEET DT2.1 FOR DRIVE-THRU DETAIL Q CONCRETE MEDIAN AND REPLACE R7TH STRIPING. BUII.DING SETBACK w
E ,° I I 57RIPES SHALI.E PAIN7ED SYSL/4' AT 2'-" O.C.
i L., L p PROPERTY LINE
w `U
I k-,? PROPOSED CUR. SEE DETAIL
r i T
DATC3IPROPOSEDTHREERIVERSPARKDISTRICTTRAIL.
T H Lt;tUR'E - - ""' TO BE CONS7RUC7ED BY OTHERS. 6/10/"[13
Y `
i
M
BIKE RACK
PROJECi N0.
a T" :-7 6 06 31 01 0
0E 1.
SHEET NUM1IBER
C3.13
p
3)
W
i
f
4
v .
t-
o
iQ
ii.
v i
0 30 60
C.."..-.._ _ _.' :.__:.._. :. . .. .. . - PROVITCDAI I .. . .. .. .. . . ._ .... .Y_ I .._
p
ACCORDAN E YlITH I SCALE FEE7
i
SECTION 53A.07, Z 1
ic SU U. 7 y i
yi I J--'_ I
o
so (.., Y
y 84 f Ci
I
ir
y
i y G-)
r
a I L "'- :,--
r•'• -i "v
v F . I ca
u
v; yr
i
i I
E I n • ,_..pi- .,
I la-—.--A--, - I I r
r U
F i
1 C
N
r i In
i t
o i i
i%
V
n
o A Y. .-_ . .. ,F
o
a q i
o .. p Y m =
o .:
I .
T - - -- - - I
Af__ _. ,
p I `
I , - ao N
1G
F H/Cf/F/ELD PARKWAY RICflFfEfx.Ds ARHWAY o
O.xi:c s u p
u 4
r__
a
j :I
t go s e
a
r, .,
F<
6''
PASSANGER VEHICLE STACKING GARBAGE T RU CK ROUTET
19.00 0 5
F Y I Y
O Y¢ ¢Z d
r:
S 3.00 11.00
a E
P teet
O O
Width 7.00
5.0' ts.o
TfOCIC G.00 I -' ' i FRONT LOADING GARBACE 7RUCK
Lock to Lock Time : 6.0 x i -_e__,
Steering f ngle 31.6
o A
P . I
v y
w
a i
1
a y I DELIVERY TRUCK ROU1E U
m
t i
V
c Il..(1 ' ' _.—ta"_ _—`°, 15.00 48.00I
r rr-
I 2 50 41.00 w o
W u,
u
E 0.00 U i
I J c~n
O O O Oa
p Q
4.00 19.50 oZ
WB-62 f et a ¢
Tractor Nlidfh 8.00 Lock to l ock Time 6.0 w
Z Troiler Width 8.50 Steering Angle 28.4 O Z
o Troctor Track 8.00 Articulating Angle 70.0
Z
o Trailer Track 8.50 Q i_
2 i.
c g LD AHKIYAY
NOTES 2
L EXACT DELIVERY fIOURS TOD. DEIIEVERIES R1LL NOT E I=
MADE DURING HIGH PEAK HOURS(BREAKFASL LUNCH, OR fi/'0/2 13
Y DINNER)SUCH THAT IT N1LL MINIMIZE PARKING AND
fKOJFCT N;;.
F: e CIRCULATION.
6pG3"p10
it,i nu iit.l
C3.5
I ;
u I ___
N ..
4 , NOTES I a
o , '
THE FOOTC NDL LEVELS AS SH VN ARE BASEO ON THE F LL VING
Yl'r.
LR[TERIP.AANYESUHSTITUTIQNS ]N SPECIFIE FIXTURESI R CHANGES
e
e e e
SIGNATURE 5ERIES
0
o oM q,
TO lAYOUT HII.L AfFECT LIGHT7NG LEVELS SHONN AND M LL NOT
2. BE THE RESPONSIHILITY OF SECURITY LIGHTING.
i-v.... 1 . ,..
2. THE C NTRIBUTION OF THE METAL HALIDE SaFF[T /BUILOING i . •..
0
z
LIGHTING IS N T REFLECTED ON THIS DRAVING. r -^?--^r' F
E ': '', z :.. :
Q
c : ; i 3. DISTANCE HETYEEN RE OINGS
U
i:'i'' v
i r
r g z
a
A FINAL ADJUSTYENTS TO PIM[NG ANGLE/DIRECT[aN OF FI%TURES MAY
r„',.,,
BE REOUIRE TO ELIMINATE LIGHT TRESPASS OR GLARE NTO
ADJOINING PROPERTIES OR ROADVAYS.
CANDLE EVELS SH NN ARE YAINTAINED. F
S. FOOT L
r,...
MAINTENANCE FALTOR USED ON THIS DRFVING IS 75
7
c`
i..:
o Z
i 9
z._._ ,___ ..._. __ B@.,e> m
n...Z
Fixtare Snecificatians
3J '5.3 . 3.1 2.
9w'
22• 1.4 •1.3 1J 2.2 28 3.1 6.0 6.8 6.9 7.0 4.6 4J 4.4 6.2 6.9 6.4 7.4 3.6 2.
V
s I r.. .., :,:.,.•.-o::<. d
1 I 7.0 7.3 3.9 3A 2.4 1.5 1.3 1S Zl 2.7 3.6 4.0 5.9 62 4.6 4.8 4.5 4.6 4.3 5.6 6.5 4.4 3.6 2.
A i
1
I
t
E.. ._..,
e m_
o 0
r 2 y
5.8 6.5 6.7 4.1 3.3 2.5 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.6 2.3 3.0 3.6 3.9 4.0 3.8 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.fi 3.8 3.8 3.5 3.0 2.
I ( 4.2 5.6 5.9 5b 3.8 3.1 2.4 1.6 1.2 L2 1.3 1J 2.4 2.9 2.8 2.8 3.0 2J 2.3 2.5 2.9 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.3 1.
1
co p
I 3.4 3.9 4.1 .0 _ 2. 2 _ 1.3 1.2_ 1.2 1.3__1.7 21 2.3_2.3 2 1.6 1.7 2.1_2.2 2.1 2.0_1.5 1. µROEftINO1NFOatMT10N
t 'avc uiaccu y,
I
i
i I 4.0 4.3 .0 / 2.9 2.3 1.9 1. 1.2 1.2 1.2 7.3 1.5 1.8 7.8 1 7.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.0 O.a PAVEO SURFACE RFADINGS 5L XXXXXXJC NN N X 1U(
o
i I 3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.8r.....,:;
1 3.8 4.3 3.8 27 2.3 : .:y;1.8' , ',. ," •
I Average 3.0 4 7. 3 .$
Mini um OS
R
f.' __..
I
ac
4.••
5 14 1.3 1.1
tA
o ,,...> i3
tl n
I . . , .: AvgMin 6.02
a ` i I 7 . 1.0 0.9 OJ 0. Max:Min 14.80
ea`rv
I
5.6 4.1 3J 3. na re . . . ,' -_...__ _-_ •, .
Iyf 1.9 1.8 1.5 1.2 0.9 0.8 OJ 0. as
6.9 5.3 3.9 3.0 \
L (
iaaws s S`r Iit
f
PROPERtt LINE READINGS o $
p /-
I 24 25 2.2 1.5 7.0 0.8 OJ 0.
f?R..--
1 .4 6.5 3.8;
4 Z tll -
1 +.
A erage i.t
Moximum 3.7
s
FfE81TS 4•+-` 3.0 3_2 2.8 2.2 1.4 0.9 0.7 0." Alinimum 0.1n
7\ 4.5 3.8 .\
AIax.Mm 31.00 p k §
a s. 5.2 a.i s.a 2.e z.o i.z o.s o.
Avg:Alin 10.59
1'
a 8 \3.9 3.3 3.0 I I I Lppp ipS
N E- u:..(..c w.nr...S
t{}
I l
n
n • d 2.8: 2J 29 3.5 3.8 5.6 6.6 51 3 3.1 2.5 2.1 22 2.6 3.1 3.6 5.8 6.0 6.2 3J 3A 23 1J 1.0 0.
0
0 _`..
i. , \ :
i
p A
N
Per(arirnnce U sgned LlghUngProAucts A'v n`""
o p @. 24 2.7 3.0 5.1 6.6 fi.6 71 4.3 3.D 2.5 23 22 2.3 2J 4.6 62 7.1 62 5.0 2.
1.0 0.
3
Q Yi
r.. . .. ..-
ao
T-_-_8 0. , z
o d .
m o
m
e ,
v.,
Y
1 -,' _ Ei E-31-
i I . I __
w¢ 1
e ,. -
I , i i j!1 i F
o _ 4
ri tt 1 r f ii,i i
i
o i .\ =
r . -.. ft iV 111 ul f
I i II 1 1
t ' 11i FIi f II„Il,r. C
ii3..-i -2C'
i1Q4CUA.4T E SMEW lSFLRVP
LI... ,rs '
l
4 'ix.'.
iIIG'RPJL
H
v
1' i 'E.f
L - 2 f G 1 '% @115 ERiIC 1
I
WIRFJLEBASEP ATE
x••"••
nra
0 0 t M
llE
C NGE REAf02!:tiGP1A ftAiEYiA I'Ek(PERLIGHfPCYfUMiIFlCiIl afN) I ' LL
d. ':.n ..\.. . ,` . ....._ .... A
i,r'
I'1/' / IE\cLAVC UI
n l ARIC vAr
e,
A < z =' I . .
RICHF'IG
ru ic sTarEi)
y'. 7 I
t l !..}_A --- e cr wnre _h;Q
E I I xr iaa+.•,aer. ;/t
o .t> .. .'ra w.a I : I I u SFi 1/
a -
S
ill'!'M,.
I _
R
a.
SLGFEiOPCf Q
c
4 s
I na r vmi McDonaldsCor oraton
O
I " E.
t '- 4 °x,
rc nm'.
1 I
f I I__
i','
a rrni n Dme Q
x 3"_.:__.. ,...,
E-PLANVIEY!
N
P -
i
f// P
I 2111 rdcDonald's
o r ,.:._ .,...
vo eeas _ rc a I I . . I i ciacuv rsnEnEra
Oakbrcwk,Illmois6052
Tw ar_ o I.'. . , i _
N.u...s-_
fiUv
LL
LIGIIT POLE ASE ON TOP OF
p n
JAMNIIT .- SEfIIGtRI'GlE6ASEQ'!-.
i0UN0ATl
CYOfFOU!DA'N%:OEIA4 \
FRPIXE rNr. m
UESIG_4.CPoTERIA_
U -N Y__'_-_.\/ MSIfIO'SiP1iDA(10SPEGYFICAf10N5FORS fil,'CNiV IS'°PokiS CRHGtfYlAYS:':"i5.
Q
lN'.\AriESAN RV3FIGS'G!IAlS.FlFTMElNI O':.HNYJ
F
FWFDA7)ONOES'G'IPAPNdETE0.S jJ F strcuCrukn wu; .„, , .. .-
a
wWbT ( -i J i I 1 4A%MU4lIpIT PolE flASE REACi:ONS W
No PLA7EtVA5HER(aERUGtI' .. ' 11--1 1 I „1;.;,,i a se a+.E'n 16.845&s fl U !
POLE AkL\CTUREP.; s5
h % r hw.YaMSOx eaESH ut's ees J (n
2 LEVEUt1GNU' / - b- ._.1 ,. - -
mrea.ccuian s Nax;uu!ew.nvsae¢onsECaocusri=un r i
n.
I I 1 ., ()t•4YCHR18 JLi
LOtl(Alll-
7.ViN'IU.IREQJR:ll50LPARA4ETEN5 Q Fc
H p.4pAP.a'EY fAF ESNE SO lS n (O
p o Sf1tAR51FEIJGIH-iSUD i' I, 4 $
in11C11.RI111R - ._
I 5 IAAXAWVDEPTNO qSNREE0S01LGRiP'SPl
r .:._ y....<
FUTEIY/91iN(FERW'71I LqESb\1E55SP45
Ul Q
PoLES'M lfCPJFER µyE0F1YTElYWIift CiiQ'I
PJDECAEES
2i
i4.lLKIhG'.N ' 'W,ITEFTABLESHPLLCEIOCATEDBEttltiTME6 Tf0.1pFT1Y-(:USOAT04 C J.
J N • PROJECT WIND LOAD CRITERIA BASED ON: I " , - I b•r nx n•uMcevmoroi5rursneosa oerorso
Z ASCE 7-10 4IIND SPEEDS (3-SEC PEAK GUST IAPH)q pg{- -.
ti -.•- J a.iNtsa SrcEVOr is taueE v.EOevn FncntEnaaECOao oca+Frtu
nwi 50 YEAR MElN RECURRENCE INTERVAL
4..: , Tn k,v.u isairuut!cr asa e tioaExcEEUFoe«cH r..s :cicFn
F Q I IMLNiV lAI;V.SQLGARMIEI[RSMEM1OiNE111115CE5!GI.SIV LI:OT EUSED.
Q Oo 5.TMEFNGIAEEflOFREC0405W1LRE tEW N=l.iNt!.IU\'BA..EREF.CIIQ`:Sh4JDfS'GNW.1.
9 ¢
4 Q
o t„! SFEEDFOftiHC.:GNIPOtETOBCINSTPllEDiOUCtERA11;EIFIHEf01.t:WII HSA'.WI:
UTA U
o o NOTE: ALL ASB FIXTURES TO BE WSTALLED TILTED AT I oes:cuionnsrw+r.oTeeeN xceeoeorn sFOUVOana+oevcuswuir:
mseuseniF
Ty - ti
c T:Yx;'e R.A7E.lASiFP.-.\ IV
I reuxxaxear-. uieHAxruuvucscr onnsacn.r+us eu'wvES
vExcEEUeo A 30 DEGREE ANG E UNLESS OTHERV ISE SPECIFIED. THi E H•
LeT08
N s nasFa vonra+oES.e++swa uo*eEUSeawioa,novsnN-.
ciraEaoseaTwwei cn8E0'?E INFOt:uDATIC' ` '. li i I I fROAIAREiAt.
YGWHL
to zooyaoazc'
DnTE
p I i 1. . . I i.1Hi5Ffk1ADATIONf ESiGNSfVILNOTBE115E ATLOLAT:045W 1ERETNEGRnUYDSLQ°
E r z,m hwu
x ia+o+6/10/
2013 r--"--r-! raixt;
ronaerc . 3 x r,.
i
I us ccvra n wr
a .exceeat n:ravr*rbm
y¢I I OENERALNOTES: R
K PROJECIN0.ir¢x utw m rmii[n[onv ruw vurE tt wvr xw r c uu iuT w uc rcm w s¢
m a„,..,..a..a..a.R..a„..,o,.....,E.n o,.os. BCTTOk1Nt,TFOf27'@ ' _ \ . iiaxtta. . c:neariFr,a raFSSr smFnGmn:ls wi.eFr ie;v uuorxtuwov[e c roni cruu x ncsxs u.niscs x.vrttr ac
to V'
OWN Y c d(,N.i.T ' ' . 2.ANGICRpOLT551NLL8EASiMlISS+G iPDC55.li0iG'6ALVTM1i1[ORR/S 4i?
29
n
RSSH SH=.T NI A R nouw*faHra-_. i ., ysra+onaoza•
ecnsriN 16063
10E
1.
o MtiV RfAII J ItEtNFqiC NGS1EFtSfAileEAS11 qG15(3HlLL4U PLACE
IGHTPCLE
P
40 3'
CIRTYF
l.____0'___ l:U75SIW.I.6E1!FAWNEXA5141AS6tGiADE N.NOiUPGN.VNAZEDFER0.5T4At5 FOUNDATONJAI.1
NUT-E o., - C7.
1 SCALE FEET A NCOR001.TDETAIL 5.PIAIf5YP119Ch51\I/5]tGPA CSJ.Ipi PGAIYN:iLO fAAS11.IA1
J E ANCHORBOLTDETAIL
EW^'^- s . o s aKe:inswvieEnoiu PCUVavrztur arsi n+s S'1
r
o
Y
H t_qp m
o 1
7-AP 1- w
QMJ . M
o
f
E
T k } A
a
r
4-
a
w
O NF o
t. 83 i
1
4 W F. " N
I P
1
4-IAr(F,.,,1 SHRUBS WILL REACH 5-6'
e..•-`'., AT EIATURfTY
1 ABYF
4- AT NF i
3- g i _ 1
ti
a 20-es j
Nb
o
I -
a 1
i q f' 6-FPR Jl U
YR s'
1
ie _ fi I o
I a M
i%il -' -
PR y', .. —t
i Y N
I I n
45y!AI
0
i
y
EDW T fFE847.5 1 Q<
Y
7-IAJJ
v z
s u e
o
o0zz
T F'R(:RFF 4'AR pnflNfl
p
SHRUBS WILL REACH 5-6' J C y
1 -CAT 1 NN '4
E TO SCREEN TRANSFORMER, WILL HEIGFtT AT MATURfTY 32- D
REACH 4' HEIGH!AT MATURfTY F
q_3
y i 4 TA 4-MJJ
s 1 -FPR I f41 " I I POTEN7IAL ROW LME o
t}- .
3§
1—_
L .. ' LEGENDy
1 303-----
sooa4w,
aE
11-
r T
1 -1 )I ' f il I I - 6 g o
E a I - S.II_ - iURE IRRIGATION t s o i
N ° i U
I- uuirs oF Fu
SYS7EA1 1
R . . ,_I g
p 4'PYC IRRIGAt10N CONDUIT
o E :;Z Z
rv
o
o a „ t SHRUBS WILL REACN 5-6' .... . . _.. . O r
o f HEIGIR AT MNTURf1Y mZ
r m
3 p o
@' w
a z
r., ;1 ,':, ;, ,'a
PLANT SCHEOULE
z
DECIDUOUS TREES
QTY SYM COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME S ZE ROOT SPAGNG REMARKS
W
y NNII NCRTIIY:OOD MAPLE ACER RUBRUU'KORIN'h'OOD' 2.5 CAL 6& PER PL0.NS SINCLE STE A.SPECIAIEN
0 20 40 Z HLS HCNEYLOCUST SUNBlIRST GLEDIi51A 7RIACAN7H05 VAR.IYERAUS'SUNCOLE' 2.5 CAL. B&B PER PLAl15 SI GLE STEM, $PEC N[N
J
D °
o ` PLANTING PLAN evERCReeN rnEES USCALEFEET
w - L.qTY SYlA C0IAAION NAAIE BOTANICAL NAME SIZE R00T SPAqNG REMARKS U
S 3 I IS BLACK HIL S$PRUCE PICEA GLAUCA 8'HT. 6&B PER PLANS -
U Z
z AP AUSTRIAII PIfiE PI4U5 NICRA B'HT. 8&B PER PLANS -
ORNAMENTAL 1REES J
i
F e QTY SYM COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ROOT SPAqNG REMARKS
5 PRC PRAIRIE ROSE CRABAPPIE AIALUS'PRAIRIE ROSE' 2"CAL B&B PER PLANS SINGLE STE A,SPECI!dEN
WI/=i °SAB SERVICEBERRY'AUTUAIN 6RILL ANCE' AMELANCH!ER%GRANDIF pRA'AUTUAIN BRILLIANCE' 2"CAL. B&B PER PLANS SiNGLE STEM,SPECIAIEN
W
O
Q E 6 ISL IVORY SILK IILAC SYRINGA RETICULATA'IVORV S LK' 2"CAL B& PER PLANS SINGLE STEAt.SPECIAIEN U K Z
H
a NOT S: SHRUBS J N o
1. SEE SHEET L1.2, AND L7.3 FOR PLANTING DETAILS & REQUIREMENTS. QTY SYM COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ROOT SPAqNG REMARKS Q
2. INSTALL SOD TO LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION IN ALL DISTURBED AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SOD SHALL BE MINERAL TWE, PRIMARILY COMPOSED OF KENTUCKY BLUE GRASS. iz eow EUCNYI.IUS DY/ARF'MNGED EUONYAWS AlATUS'CO PACTUS' p'S POT co,r- z"oc -
3. PLACE PREEN IN PLANTING BEDS PRIOR TO PLACING MULCH.
ae ra s r+EO+r ASH sPiaen sPiaen nPOrncn'+eo.v v nsH qs PoT covT. ae'oc -
4. INSTALL 4" OF PREMIUM DOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD BARK MULCH IN ALL PLANTING BEDS. INSTALL 3' DIAMETER MULCH RING AROUND ALL TREES IN SOD AREAS.
S
5. INSTALI "x4" BLACK STEEL EDGER, ADD STAKES 4' O.C. MIN. WHERE SOD ABUTS PLANTING BEDS.
e ae roxi vn ieNT eos[ ROSA NUGOSA'FO%1 PAVEAIENT" NS POT cavr. ae'oc - a
i,J6 TAU TAUNTON YEW TAXU$%UEDIA'TAUNTON' 5 POT CP`lT. 98'OL -
i o O. INJIFILL i8" SELECT TvFSGIL BORROW IiJ ALL PLANTING BEDS FER THE DETAIL q W
In B AIKL AIISS KIA1 LILAC SVRINGA PATULA Al1S$KIU 5 POT CONT. 60 OC -
0 7. INCORPORATE COMPOST AND PHOSPHOROUS FREE FERTILIZER INTO ALL PLANTING BEDS AND TREE PLANTINGS PER THE DETAILS. C
a 8. IRRIGATION TO BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED BY OTNERS. IT IS THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE FULL COVERAGES AND START DATES. COORDINATE WORK WITH zs oc i DART'S COLD WNEBARK PHYSOCARPUS OPUUFOLIUS'DART'S GCLD'a5 PoT cadT. aa`oc - Q Z
o IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR AND GENERAL CONTRACTOR. HAND WATER ALL PLANTS UNTIL IRRIGATION IS RUNNING ACCORDINGLY. 2a u uHieea..nNi u ea uN.eaus x anNCNS s'io u eP' qs PoT eaaT. w'oc -
c° 0 9. PROVIDE SCHEDULE 40 4" PVC SLEEVING UNDER ALL PAVEMENTS FOR IRRIGATION BY OTHERS. DUCT TAPE ENDS AND MARK WITH REBAR FOR LOCATING IN THE FU7URE. a
10. MAINTAIN SOD BY WATERING AND MOWING FOR 60 DAYS FROM DAY OF INSTALL.
PERENNIALS ANNUALS
w ° 11. MAWTAIN, GUARANTEE, AND WATER ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND PERENNIALS FOR ONE YEAR FROM PROJECT ACCEPTANCE. REMOVE WEEDS AND MAINTAIN MULCN IN ALL PLANTING AREAS,QTY SYM COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ROOT SPAqNG REMARKS
DURING THE ONE YEAR PERIOD. REPLACE ALL DEAD MATERIAL PER DIRECTION OF OWNER DURING THE ONE YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD.
12. STANDARDS SET FORTH W °A IERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK" REPRESENT GUIDELWE SPEGFlCATIONS ONLY AND SHAL CONSTITUTE MINIMUM QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR PLANT
si soi sTeun oe oao oan.i r He+eeoenius'auar sT[n' z r[ne- qi eoNT. za"oc -
3 c 107 CAT Y/AIKER S lOW CATAIINT NEPETA%FAASENI'WALHER S LOY% 2 yEAR- I COUT. 24'OC _ DAT'
MATERIAL.
13. PLACE 4" PVC CONDUITS UNDER PAVEMENTS FOR FUTURE IRRIGA710N SYSTEMS. MARK ENDS WITH J 3 REBAR PIECES, PAINTED TOP WITH RIGHT RED PAINT, AND SET FWSH TO FINISH GRADE 62 as uine ewesTe.,owc HEnvcN scFUZnc+rei scoPnaiuM'ewc HEaveN 2 vcna- z covr. az°oc - 6/10/013
Y 5 OES BLACK EYED SUSAN RUDBECKIA,GOLDSTRU!A 2 YEAR- 1 C NT. 18'OC ROJ C' N .
160631010
E SFIEET NUMBER
E 2 PLANTING SCHEDULE
L1.1 L1.1
c
a +;%
r ,
y:y y. i s Ar ! ;
J ti
s i f `' .. # ./'[.T.` yq`"°"
A
d x,sy,s+ :
X4 fnh {' yF C NS! P V.T r:
t T k' 1 {l
9".,,".'i . h'F'.. '`
Y 't i+iT..
r
d<.e`` t'sdxR`` .tr ' . .'S} G "tr ` {'r' ,
s_
p , - 1 l 4" w
iG3
Y`.l b,
Z. 4
u ..r rii .
r r`k ^
S
9 ../ y.
d . .. 4 F
y'Y '.V . p .V F W v!sx j
x µkii=hrd r % ti :; .1`4.,
t v•r;<7:tt:;•I[`i F , . °/' t# '
z 4J l'y;ti i Y '"+ .<
f1}G,;'r;,_ . t' ac-1
Fz^`L j.
r
g`
r l , .
rn, ^' 4*.
4,.
F . a s j i; ,
t,
Y A 1
t w,-_, f'p l{
i
g,
ti
@+4'' 1. 3
t+y
ul.
l:a t
y=
s`'"r..•.. r":;
r a :`"- . .'y:C
kF' `';
F -{.
f f
f .
i .
F Z..a,.;.r
f*-i 4 .'!T K.=
tb . , R,
T.
4 .' ;, _
f
fM '.
Clt
i-A (.i.rxt,
iJ':
c''y` 1 'L}
i:
S "}SY'3` N y',1 ` . .
y`
r >
e
r<».< '
y '°iy
j
t`4±
y 1r'
daR
t t
S
S+
c_. '
t
l'
T '„
S Y
y;; .
piit fM
ia
t>71 .4-
A?
S
1' t .,1
k ,r `„,S
2 ,.
2 Xt 1
y{ .'
pt '. F ',J '':
h•.' :, 1 .''4" k -J x .
C ' t {,
i-
c4. a
i1/ ¢y.. i: yt . .'
1-'Y'Ze°.'
9r: ...i t ., . :
t' ... l
5' .
c.- lsti7..:' :'. 'zr "!' ' c-"'if '..
hY
F r.
ti ` .
4
i X}s '
e y' .." j-'r ,vr y,
itiF ri;r •+w t .. -;4'`yili t
r J
g,` ,.. .Y
j` .
3` -. ay -t`r.b,; ,
s,"'
na ..
f r;t'at'r
1e' r r.,
t
x 3+ 'o s(k1 qxa hS .r
p .. 3t i
Y
r^-i r .
f1T._ -
1 ..
I f i 1 ' #
b 7
gr-
fy",y :.
i
T .'.IP t{'.
F 'Y j-..
f t..'* i
t
q.,. '{`,'!,{A1(1-.p; .
k .' '1.J, J.'
f
Y ` H; .s# 'S, :4
5 '
x TY t `t
4.''t a` {
9'`
39 'SS y.+
U.f ;,
k r ,g j r:..''S'- { V
t.
7. t 3_;Y .:F j'
G -kil 2 .
a xl tA.
i p:.;,, s ;, 1.:t.
x '
y n`:: i+ g+i'jt t ri
y`
e.j i.
a !_ _, fi. .'4 .
i..
t +•
tl
1'g
1, aF . t ` Y -
a'
t
T. Y 4 }¢ S'.f.
x.Y •
r'2'd ..
f
R'
vj i
rft' ;-. l'{S 15.- } 3
r +
1 r
j
yr
li.-
a.• .,
Y . '}•
fr5Y
f'
E +'
t_;,.
J t y'ti` f7'
j
j
4
J _..'r'',Ra• r t"' - -'"
i.
At 1 i
a
i k .
S F f .+ i '
t'
y. :
t._
i.
t f.;€
r. _ ,:
K,
ts y..n
5
4
u JY .
F
S' ,.. `
it t`;
3 r rr t 5 Y p,>.r .
5. i.•
n J'.' '}` ; y,{
t R N)
l:
l"
f; }
t
f +p{--. E
r,.
S 6.F.9
i. M-
Z"fY ir
T K
r
1. 3 :
3 - . S.. ,,'s .S'. 3
r aI
1,.. . f
sL Y i
5, q Jy T
f.: '{ +T L.!
f ° ` ''
T ,
z.
i kr' _ v` '
i P( j
7' N
jf.i'
ti
y q p.
3
j'j},
l 5 ,... c ti:`s f <' F'yFf
f}
tFa1 : l
E
y 3} '. ` z y f`
k
i;i 1 t ..
7"{} it'-6
C"E}' p
y . ` . j, ,
r
t .
3 M, i-;r
i . i
T
O i',\R l 1..,
Y5
2')Yy T I't t
z s ` <
s;:f' ,. j .
w K 1
a :L - 4'; :•sY '
k
i s i
ql`r _ _s%ua -:t r
F.
q
a
t °?` f 4k`''?
k S3+ sta -n n .k xn, ,t, e...
r+.,`.'t-'
t ,.:. RY 1i : { r 7 C t 7 d{-w z,`a
C, y, kY > ` i'C.sy5 .- ,
r
JT ` t tr,3taf1 !
1
k F f Y}J tl,i}N b''J
jf,
k(, .'_ :l
1 1 e
a5 V'L.
t .
2
i r `
1 1'
4g
rt-N. .
A?: •
j ;
1;'
cr,,a -; y ' F. C}I '#
Y
t .,
A,
i
r+ °jr `t 1
a• .
y i s.,` i E :
s.. r 1°,f y j a+ ?
l
A
j-1. .['
Fi`AYS ta,; •
f k'.'': ..j.t}°ti g: t
x
j ,
f'
pc t - y.. .(', a'
Y ".
iZ
r.,.
f k>_' f+,,
z.
y i i _s.
R:. t,:h.tt, : . . y.'c.
t F 7. a f
y i {; i; z
Y fi T sF2
r.a:r' s a-i..
y
g .. F _t4 •}. ;
I'
P y_ ,.'.
F",' ¢ t J`fT
f:
Tj}{,•
i'
lt s:`
t
f3
1:7'.k:'?
S :
j
f r '
F' r
z;;q d._s..
f'-..
s`t i.
r r e.["
iP}yep
ri,.
i :.. ,e. sr t^r+.: K I s: t C
F
7 i
r `, .,..
r
l•
f .:,..
t:
4 ' iis.'
J
1.Ci -t Wi' '
f
r ,'
Ay€T,.i
I: _:
y
w
j.h
s i(""
i
4^`y!i .
t
Y ' Jn'- t .
r .- I
f S'
s
y
l{.
t
Ii'f 0 . . y.3u l i .,
j
f c F. ri"' .
Eff
t7' if
s =; t+, f I, s: ; ::'
e
r`
f'f' ric-h i1
if,
n t ° "
t ti
y
c°
y
i h
v r .c, ,r,,.-
f
pS
y.
i f k t"
Y5 Ty r} t sp '
k -
i a J. i
r
r.3 '"'A§'v+ f'a t, y
t:3tii ...;t
3 . .
s
d.
r
Z Y - St' i j j. . }
t
4 :t L'''r r"cR' t 4#
t....
Y 3r fi s 3 ,
4 t f'., r l.t ,1 !+ ,Pj' i46. s',3v„ J
i''
Ja
y < T i s 4 .,r ..+ , s Y 1 { ? Sc '
r r« ,;, <c a
93 a" bJ h Tf c"' 2 t" t t
4
s s
d '
j L . 4 . ..`'„
y'# ,,y{
y rif ;f `"3 ;.
t.
u t , } t_..i qz t
s `"3 :.
y
5,
1'
T"
lr'}
vt rz S: t 1 " a 1 k"'>j t p
i
T .
G +f '
r t ` t
c {
x') j i s
K{.
ij;
Y.,t c .
J' °, i n ; .': S e1 {{ F
t ,1 t[' ?tt 1 t.: l i s 2d+ :it'v i .f, ,. €.
s 1r 1 y yg
1`.?i•..'c`.,t ' ' ts '
i,_.:.'.....
t ` .
a a.x. .?'i t`S
4
z @
1 'I
J4 y'
r FsLy ) i• `4i Y t' ,g
I
i `
x"4x ) t`3
r n'h'` r t`
3 .v`; ..`i _ I
pc.}. y t
t
v
i
F;
f f47 51
V . a Y lr . 1 t;;; - tal,"Yl i4•'
N + s,'..
4.' ! .'
Fie ` Y+7'^.
r` -
t11;-
a
fg{;
r _
rk } 5 } i t({ ' % 'Is ytF t i-AlP.tr ti'.T s i 1 °i L f a K
tu?,: t SY f; ''t''! ,, } f . S.y i 4
A :
cqg>. i.' - f t t M'1 i T .c 7r.t xt` A.7 i .,'k J
y,t'{
s' ' ... N'..
yfik`
F,
F
t c i:.. : : '.
X. tr e'3
9 `
r,'
i.' f a; f.l fi f '. >
Tti_irl"+•".Cx `
a.,;+ '
rk mti t Fhk °
t__: _ ._ a . . _ w..,tr....
f .
a
y `
F`""
r
T r.; `
y ,
f T ./.'z..
jy}
jt Y } : !
p
r
f.l
TA ?
f .'ia °fti
fl
i .
z l 5-.- 'y f.. ` s
t a :- _4' `.
z K
j!
F- ' ;'`' ,
t ;
4S
T . ,A ` _ y q
t:, ;'
y
a(., iba' k t
1 f
T.,' y'„'s»' :'f ": - V ''a".xY f t ' :
f t 5 3ra; . ::
i _?.
a ..`
d -. ?s, .: W t +ei" .
t
N
S 6'
S't i . S'+ i-'.b
R i } ..
p F .ty("f { Jy{+Qs 4_. .t
Y {y
t ...
f
i4_ R
y
W' `-..
j;, ,._. ` .
f'''
w
t . 3
Yr -..' ,.;',
t, R..
r r'w: -rv
Y
t,:
N•.. t
i
k
1,I
r
e'`
1
lY,Y
J
i 4'
C^?t. .
Y. n(
r*- p
i :. R ;
i
rt:f. ,,i
t.
4, .'
j.';
T '
e
t•
f ' . ..;_
l
i Y
I sr S- f.`7y" l' . ,.
l 7f y` 1'
5.' ,
F e
t.
f 1''
W -•
y,if i„/1i ,t
N.- i.i.. F Y - . .
t .- , - 4 ' ry' 1.' { '':'SE1
id ..'i ._
i !
h
f «
t ,
r: r a,t 4 d fS,
r t : '
y.
t '..
r _
s
t`i ..iy,.a, '
i i 4 i ,` -
t.
r kf cf` ZY r. .i c' i ', + - •
9' :B.-, .
5 ,}' t.5b`S i',;'`4ji
1i '} , },,
e`
i R 1 t
xy+rT; 1 i5 :t
t -T;'`
x
Fs `
r
e i4..,ihGAi !t . ..
sf
5 a.± t.'xf3.3 {rJ i a 't '1tt '
at la \
t ..
fti `i/• f f`.[` ;.
Fti :.
5
aa.'is-..
Sj r , t .
s+
3
i' -
2 f -'L ' i
Ih f '
i: ..
i', si',..u ''t t 4A 't+Vi . .' "
t:
h 1
S ,'
1 i.
f af
s•5`I`.'
r,y.':1.
5.. '.
Y - '
r :Yj
tc i
j
T,.
t S r,(`
t 6 1 i Y
y.
i JY r y `
r _.,' f jl:.
K.
jt
r=
1 P h
k -_
3-I
31S
6 i'y 'Y L r;' ..r
1 `s:. 1. i'
y .
1°
y
s
4'~ :,'
r y . .
vyd f
N /,
t Fii.
f
j,`{ "i
p s 4+ •:,
sy"°t'3 ' a' k
t't- t - -' }S i '' , .t.t+y K `..-'r -t pf
y '':'
a:a
i # :. '`*>{.-
t 2Pr...r.a 1 a
iti,
r ..t S,- } _r.Si.
i_. .t F,.,,
y. .:3< -
r`.. _
G-
g
f 4-I f ,j,y'
i` 'x er
5L'h .,,
t }"
C I
T. .-:3 S"'j R .'i{ Y 'jf { J • •t
s
y
3 #'; '„
l n;__i"a.r,r3•; 1'.--'
d'
R
t,'' f r -.}?*""+'.
3,.,
i;
4
1-f.:
y; . -_ - „
N
i y [
r' - dfi
L _ y; , :
g Y
r $,
a
f'
w.: *
tr: ^ ,ri:fi.'k`
a. .
x
e7,
J
I
y ?
3 i
M J
S'` ls.' t'.f •' 4 .
y' ' .''U'
3 :,
p i.,"Y2'
j§` 'Y",`Ft:` x v c:
v
kKy:.
f ".
s
a'
Y ' .: G'' . .
n' f, .='
i:
I .,;{3
f'v
r
L 4;
Ari
R
4'.'k...
1
y . . ..
w 1
i.. '. A
t
Y
a4?
f
Y
t.i.
i s
F`
x,
Y.
U a,
s,:F•y'_
i i — !
I
4
x , y
n:'h '..
1
r'
ry; p :
xN
CS'• t..:}t}
P , , f..
Y7
f `.
f
r
5 ,'
v
Y i . . .-.
i..
a. R3O (:.. .
1: ' r '
s.
ra
y
E-..
A
4-a r.
t t
a
1 '' +l.
t
r'- f
T`
Y
I
i f 3•. 7 I f
e
Ty- t!.. .i?! h'_' tb:.J4`r%-t
a , , t; t.-
s,.._.- ' '
4 1':
y
r
i•. 5,...P:,,p ..
s ., i 9a,,, ?3.
v
i:
41,+ ,:
s! . ..... . - t
P ,
L _ •
1+'I I M1 ti.'
k,
t1J, r
t I G '7...
if tC' : 3
l 1 1' z
J '` ' v -' :;'
F. 4 :- f' I F
F S ...
r Y
it '. .
kl
i'-
I
ai_ Yt4 ;; y ' .1 r ii ,
S l
Il'.1 V
ili
sz,11=Y.ri'll
1 i 4S;
r,';"i11';ir a
t 1J ',,:' .. 4'6),f;SV2 iy i
T rs
i!
y r C :.'i+
S'.
t (ti i£'ta'°
i'`°1 µ;,'3,
r-s # ,, +
y :,r` .;; Yi''
x _li, 'r't i
r
y2:. . ',(" 5 r
I':
t t.. II',
4
F
k
jt ;.
i, xr:
i;.r;,
i'ri
j i.,
1 s a
1•S'
4 t.
Y :
f!
k
j
1. .t:,
s
1" ,
1 Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
Parking Memorandum
e 238N
2550 Urivers^,yAvenue West
To:Melissa Poehlman
St.Pail,unreso a
55114
From: Trish D. Rothe, P.E.
Date: May 23,2013
Subject: Proposed McDonaid's Restaurant
Cedar Point Commons
tn t oe+ , 1 cn Avc S
Richfield, M N
INTRODUCTION
The proposed McDonald's restaurant is part of the Cedar Point Commons
Planned Unit Development. The proposed 4,365 SF McDonald's restaurant is
ocated in the northwest quadrant of 66`h Street E. and 17`h Avenue S. with one
shared access from 17`
h
Avenue S. This memorandum documents the parking
supply calculations utilizing the new land use for the site, and requests a
reduction from the parking requirements in order to adequately serve the
proposed use without over-parking and unnecessarily increasing impervious
area.
PARKING SUPPLY CALCULATIONS
Section 544.13 Subd 6. of the City of Richfield, Minnesota Code of Ordinances
requires minimum parking supply of 17 stalls per 1,000 SF of gross floor area for
Ciass III restaurants (fast-food/convenience). For a 4,365 SF fast food restaurant,
74 spaces would be required. Section 544.13 Subd 8.(b) of the Code allows for a
10% reduction for parking that is located within % mile of a frequently operating
transit line provided that separate pedestrian ways are provided which connect
the parcel. A frequently operating transit station is located directly southwest
of the Site and serves the site with two separate pedestrian ways. With the
abovementioned reduction, 67 spaces would be required for this use.
MCDONALD'S USA, LLC PARKING DEMANDS
McDonald's has improved their site and buiiding designs to optimize operations,
ease of access and customer experience. Building locations are evaluated to
have the best lot flow correlation with ingress-egress points, drive-thru and
parking requirements. Through a long history of site development, McDonaid's
TEL 651 645 4197
FAX 651 645 5116
Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
has found the highest parking demand to be at peak shift. At this time the
actual demand equates to one parking space per employee (15 parking spaces)
and one space per every three seats allocated in the restaurant (87 seats
requiring 29 spaces) for a total of 44 utilized parking spaces. The number of
necessary parking spaces is lower for a McDonald's restaurant than that
demanded by similar establishments due to the high percentage of drive-thru
traffic. The proposed McDonald's development includes 51 parking spaces
including 3 ADA and ADA van parking spaces.
BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED TRAFFIC
Due to the City's streetscape improvements, commitment to sidewalks and
trails, proximity to public transit and overall pedestrian nature of the
V O i7 nt, v Cv^vi a d S iaS ir crease ilie Neile iiidil UIIfIeCIIVIIY af1Q SaiE'Ty
on the Site. Pedestrian connections to both 66th Street and 17`h Avenue are
provided, as well as a connection to Mt. Calvery located directly west of the
proposed McDonald's parcel. Sidewalks will be constructed adjacent to the
property along 17`h Avenue and 7 bike parking spaces will be included in
accordance with section 544.17 of the City Code.
PARKING SUPPLY REDUCTION REQUEST
Based on the actual demand, commitment to pedestrian and bike access, and
desire to minimize unnecessary impervious area,this memorandum serves as an
official request to be granted a parking reduction in the supply requirement for
the proposed McDonald's Restaurant.
6 40 Rich ield P rkvvay - 41'I.ID 6/2013
Surrounding Zoning
R-- MR-3 MR-3
R
R
R MR-3 MR-3
R
65TH STREET
PG2
R R MR-3
R R PG2
MR-3
R
R
R Q
R R
W PC-2 Y
LL' PG2ZQ
R Q PC 2 Q
PG2
J
R F-w
R
PG2
C-2 U
G2
R
PC-2
PG2
PC-2
C-2 G2 C-2 G2
s'. 66TH STREET
y0
G2 G2 G2
G2
G2 G2
C-2 C-2 G2 G2 G2
C-2 C-2 G2 G2
R R R R C-2 C-2 PC-2
R R R R G2 C-2
C-2-General Commercial Feet
PG2- Planned General i,ommerciai 0 5G i 00 20 300 00 50C
R- Single Family Residential
MR-3 - High Density Multi-Family Residential
Path: I:\GIS\Community Development\Staff Planning Tech\Projects\6540 Richfield Pkwy- McZ.mxd
40 Rochf e d a ke v y - P D 6/2 13
Surrounding Cornpre ensive Pean
LDR HDR HDRLDR
LDR
LDR HDR HDR
LDR
65TH STREET
RC
LDR LDR RC
LDR LDR RC
RC
LDR
LDR
LDR
Q
LDR LDR RC Y
RC
LDR LDR j RC d RC
Q
J
LDR I- W
LDR RC
PUB U
CHURCH
LDR
RC
RC
RC
CCO CCO CHURCH
s 66TH STREET
CC Cc Cc
cc
cco cco
cc cc cc o 0
cc cc cc cc
LDR LDR LDR LDR O CC O
LDR LDR LDR LDR O CC
RC- Regional Commerical Feet
c;c;-t;ommunity Commercial 0 50 100 200 300 400 500
CCO- Community Commercial/Office N
O- Office
LDR- Low Density Residential
HDR- High Density Residential
PUB - Public
Path: I:\GIS\Community Devefopment\StafflPlanning lech\Projects\6540 Richfield Pkwy- Mc CI'.mxd
AGEN SECT[oN: PUBLIC HEARING
AGGNDA ITEM# S
REPORT#
CasE# 13-SP-01
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
r
PC MEETING DATE: JUNE 24, 2013
ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION:
Continue the public hearing to consider a Site Plan approval for 6722 Penn Avenue.
I.RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Continue consideration of a request for site plan approval for
6722 Penn Avenue to July 22, 2013.
II. BACKGROUND
The applicant, Chinese Social Service Center, is proposing to open ar adult day care at
the proposed location. A change in use requires site plan approval.
The application, which was submitted on April 22, 2013, is incomplete and therefore
staff is recommending the public hearing be continued to the July 22, 2013 Planning
Commission meeting to allow the applicant time to submit the required materials.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. PoLICY
B. C TICaL IssuEs
None
C. FINANCIAL 1
The required application processing fee has been paid.
D. LEGAL
Notice of this public hearing was published in the Sun Current in accordance
with State and Local requirements.
Mailed notice will be sent to properties within 350 feet in advance of the
continued hearing.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION S
None
V. ATTACHMENTS
None
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
N/A
a -- . e ,_,- <..
u- sT r:+cK r ; z ' :
µ 4.
33 . . Hc.^ ,,sc'
r T F y,}`,''`3 z'#f r , s. w itte c` '-' ' t ,`'
1p
r
S v'-
R. a •-. -.'. ' t . f?-
ss
f-
4" .
xTY'
9' ` .#
i r{,"
y,3''y+c,-'
i ,,"
r,!
j'R
1
t,;., ,-..'z
i 4
i t
x,`' `:#'
x
s- •'<
k ,z.
n
z.i4{"
T .
s '""
ews _ .
v..:.
y
a ;: y .:.p vY:zjl. c. `
s kt . '
i
I i { ` '
r `q
e'`,?_f .,t,
F"- ' -`'- 3'-.
k },4 ..
Sp'::.
r{
x-
r a' `S
u
g-
7 .
t" - .. .. , '"
i^-+._.,
s ._. ..
o.
r
ss+
P+ ;;qe,
t'.
y
y s-nn 'e'-' a1 "p u"'SS- ' y„ _°i q,s..,• y- L ,'""i..`',
i.'+.. 37
x. a- r a„
K
J
i.'`+'
ze„,--,„
F,,, -.:,,.,,`:, :--`
d X`a---T
r 1
1,` a.,
y °
v*` j j 5
a
s
v 8 s'' 1 i
4`
sli.
m. ._ .
l
1`•
r :
F;C24,@ : t-' .:g .
a_ °F. h
1
61
n
t
k _'¢,i .. i ,. t. -
L L i F j,:k J a' 4
p
i it i,
i.
y l - at
i.3 f
i
I
F. .
tt
3 } _ $
f,
t r.' n
a,.2
q,."
x y
t .
s.
µ. s. e
r
v,
t.:. .AV
r :. :,
a,r . e...p] . .. ,_ :,;p,. ' 1..: -. r - -
c '
4
y y
r
i
T .i.c: : ,p
s.
1 .s.
t;
g.:1' ,'•}. Y " ai a"t -,-.r-i"'Y"'3.a} .a i t . .. f
Q w* t C`4sKa'`f°'4",''
i
ii-Y 'r a.'5 . p., . . c :..-:++
G Q Ia. y a4n.ar. -
3e,}
f i C 'ir',..5'a; ` _ e• i-
2.`
9..
k f, Y i b ,.:i.i s ,. F.i`. a. Y i°SSC'-y y 4'- e'?„.
4' •. y s, a .1-@,. ,t,, j,, «..- .X Pt u _i. r`. ,. ,t a ty': 'k.'
2:ia,,., -ti'~i' r'r. - aa F'- - `.f` j-.. j J.,rt ni f i'. 9•
0. , aM4.2. ; 1. r.
i a g e 3 a, c 4 - d,# t_
n, 4-..4. •.;" <re'yi r. 'i'i,t t. 1..., .E- v
l i ,,..,... l' :
Sa;
s y t . M.t Fx r v ,- T•- Q,`Ve'.° 1 w. J• °x 4, yp L c
f~ l y n s 1'.. T:' a 7' rect l1`
r,,mws a:_+ll,y`e -*' re - .''1 At t.x,, .y G° @=.;...,?'
f,.
y ,° x, g
S 1
S,J. c .i ' ,' .
n . _ `
i_:F 1: : SiGAi,},
i .
r s
a 3 ^T k' Y '' r w s x
i '
gl
x, `
t' a.'
p
s
s `- °-.r' ,fi b- `..tfi -•F* ','°Y
p i v
t .y _ e.
Xi.
G'! •
f Ay+ e ti 4. ^ ` ., ta..%
i6i.t '• - s'"
b'f e wjS,
x . .('
r;ry.L,t.•`
a t,q,'r'•.y;
I li .
5:
8 j'' \
C f,
J,
j
H S, l t,.,
q+ j
Y
p ,(.
t'.'. il '
t. e i ` .'
E .'°,y `.s irF`.,
Jti . ! x. .. k ; -. . ``- :"
S',
r> .._ Y b z. : n
cs7r:
Yi .,
Y a .e3
1 ` r '_k
s '
F$.: }
y
F..-•
nJc ' 4,,. ...,,.
4
2 k.'as€S r
E` ,,,5',F
k.+e. r ,`'s-{' ..r : r 3';:'
1P',yY'' ..., _ Y.3 n..,,t... •?e.ns:sl,:'a`c,a_....._.z'
v1rLL;<
t f
s. si
5 `-:,:'
Y i , ,x,
x r ;
i,z x<:
2N .., r ..,
5
3 ;, r ,.t
rw +
k`
r} _.
Y
w
F.s,l: +
n:X.:-:
ez`
a +
r c
t,
t. f
r3
g_j
rv"'.Ai ,sf- t- =
i, y+_"
t "i"`"'s F -' 'i.,+
x `47 j z +r.ny k 32' 1c
f i Y'l ' Y,
C ..''+.._.. i, .
Y.. vw.. ._° .".
t
i.
e:yY .,..,._ .,._ ... „_ :.:: . : _ .-... ..
n
3
r:
f...., C 6t k.
s....
t " • r;,
i .
y
3 r:-;
s`s r-• },
t f ''
t
f k il y.
J : x,.
i
y
k
y'.
r-g ° r
r ir--"
s ti,9. _
r ,f
Y -{ R "{.%..,
7 .
y .:
i r f _.`
3"
W i t Z.
y TF 2.r.i,.}.,.?,th t
e -,.: a.. .. : e'y p i. +.Y,Ffa r<, ,r
i> _ ' -
a a..1 f ' s if=.
y'
i . y' R,.. f,
i.'i'F 1 tr -i-0 -t r s;r3:.w`. f' :t:S.: .-:.'.1..;: i. i' r.`." ..5.;+'!.. .l.tf3"-r; ' _ ? .F`s 3;<<..+f ,.1 v1 a s :. I:,
f: x f+' 1, -z:it r . - -a,"y.t :_,1w. i. i.i r' s-
i
i- ._?': .`.-,. t,.y- t i. 1 . j' f*
f-T' .-....-,r,_ ,..._... .. w+ .- i"° e.- .+ ' t`-- tT . a ". _ _, ...,. .%a . :> .. .. L. _.,, i_'3d._spa.;.a j`, d.' 1..:-.t .sf::sJ ..r;,N: .Y... . . .-yi. ......s q_:! 4.
t
4=. ,2i'. St-r:...,._ -'r. .'._ ,•.. . -};:..<,.."',.'. _ k .. . '':',' a. E:.n: ''' „@-...t}`°'r : _" .' .
3''4.s7r-. 2:=C ._:;:,, ; '• ts";':'°
r.
t< :>: . r.,;. ia
3gr-_•
t . - , . _
1 4,.._ - .'., . .:, i Jj.
at. . -,,_>-.-. $/. -.i&. i` ".y:k•
w...._......,--:- Y 7'
t a"' fN. 6 L r:-.{' y..^".......*....--.
i `
ti
y,_l .:. -.Y--"-34 . j' - ..,1
e_._".—..-.+ _..-s. i:
u..- 'tiC m,l
a-.{_ .? a-w-w 7`
e ..4'. i e
4
d. .S 'J':
t..
j F..Y- i... -t iy, -..y - r
r w . ....
S.v:. -- 4. .± d r F dSt'•`.LF:' .yy" i. "Y i3!-. xS
r i
i..` ;
T_
y 91_ R.
i..$ _..
F:: `'. - ,:_Y-
M
t...'
3_y_ S' e..#:.`
p r x., a , r ,_.
srt. . • s.J.,r
rr
y! ,..
5'.-,
N,.
i s,. '({ •a• _ t.s.r`
a,
Y
4° '
a ' I'
y,,,.
yi':i . ,.t p, y, '
r"''
a 1 e4.._STxs .:
f.s.
a(f1#.,3e^ , i` ',YSC `. .
c..f i"-: y r x ' . { e
y' 1;,- { e
r\
ti.a R ''.- rs.,.
n `,3
tr 3" w J'-
r'
y ,a*
R t' I j
r •#" . 5+ :%
v.
i 5f.. . ), `J."'k y,' . y'Y '4!.' P'r.< .' # t:e'.
C .::...}; _ t ' i sf'
i
e
w
t i-
T3-. _ .-_- e
t.
i'.'","` . .-.
ni r.k`^3,
F A `:' : .
1 `
Y l4-•
4
j $±
e,i .'