Rosemount City Council — Transcript
Tuesday, August 25, 2026
Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment for Aspenfield
Site Plan Review for KJ Walk Multi-Tenant Commercial Building
Votes (2)
Request by Aspenfield for a comprehensive land use plan amendment to change the designation for 1.94 acres along County Road 42 from high-density residential to community commercial.
Dissent: None
Moved by Commissioner Reid [0:38:22] · Seconded by Commissioner Bugai [0:38:27]
The discussion centered on the rationale for the re-designation, specifically to accommodate a senior housing development and commercial uses. Staff explained the comprehensive plan amendment process, including consultation with the Metropolitan Council. The applicant clarified that the pipeline bisecting the site is abandoned, and an encroachment agreement allows development within the easement. Public concerns regarding increased traffic, noise, crime, and potential impact on property values were raised and addressed, with staff noting the residential buffer to the north and the non-specific nature of the initial public notice. Commissioners expressed support for commercial development in the area and acknowledged the buffering effect of future buildings.
Request by KJ Walk for approval of a site plan review to allow for construction of a multi-tenant commercial building with a drive-thru facility.
Dissent: None
Moved by Commissioner Ellis [1:13:00] · Seconded by Commissioner Beadner [1:13:09]
The commission reviewed the site plan for a multi-tenant commercial building with a drive-thru, confirming its compliance with zoning requirements for setbacks, parking (28 stalls), landscaping (19 trees), and lighting. Discussions included concerns about potential restaurant odors, pedestrian safety for students from the nearby new middle school, and the impact of construction traffic on an adjacent business. The applicant identified potential tenants (K Taco, Pizza Supreme) and indicated a spring start for construction. The commission added a condition to ensure drive-thru traffic and stacking remain contained on the subject property.
Notable Quotes (12)
this is coming before the planning commission ahead of any proposed development on the site...as the comprehensive plan amendment process is longer than the rezoning process...
staff it's staff's understanding that the applicant has had more conversations with the pipeline easement holder about what would be allowed within that easement area...they have been able to get some encroachments approved by them.
That gas line is an abandoned line, so it's not an active line at this point. Our encroachment agreement does allow for roads, paving, you know, parking lots to encroach over that easement area.
are we here tonight just to approve the change from high resident um high density resident to CC for the outlined area? Yes. And nothing further is being discussed tonight. Correct.
My concern is that it's going to continue getting reszoned and they're going to mean more and more commercial issues going to keep moving east which will lower the values of the Konamara traffic.
I think it's this will be a good fit there. I think the uh the um the high in residential create a nice buffer there too. And and to your point, Anthony, I think create actually help with the noise reduction overall because majority of that will be coming from 42 and DC DCTC.
I'm a little sensitive because there is residential right across the street. Um and if done right, this is great because I mean we've already got the daycare center there and solo salon. So and that's working great. I drive by there all the time and this could fit in very nicely. I guess the one concern I have is about the restaurant type.
with the new middle school, I mean, this is going to be potentially the closest um restaurant or place depending on what it is and if it's appealing to them, right? And so I guess the question in my mind is, have we thought about safety for the students who are going to be potentially walking and trying to get to that location?
the construction entrance as it's currently placed on there is utilizing our entrance to our parking lot. And that is the only entrance to our parking lot...I would like to either suggest or some other option to not use our single entrance.
My concern was maybe making that entrance into our parking lot maybe an exit only so people aren't lining up too many different places...and that they only encroach and they impede their own traffic within their parking lot, not causing a line into ours or out on that main road.
Uh yeah, we can uh certainly look at um cutting into that entrance first and using that for construction entrance if if the city is think that's a good idea.
Just to maybe further clarify that is listed as condition E conformance with all required standards associated with drive-through facilities and noting that drive-through traffic shall be managed and contained within the subject parcels property or similar language.
Ordinances & Resolutions (6)
The plan undergoing amendment for the Aspenfield project.
Subdivision action required for parcels creation and land assembly.
Required for individual parcels and new developments.
Required with pipeline easement holder for Aspenfield and for utility easements for KJ Walk.
Governs drive-through facility standards within the MX2 Highway Mixed Use district.
Established buildable lots for the KJ Walk project area.