Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 384-15 - Ruth.RestDevePrelimPlan.R2015020CUP.RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Alan Ruth applied for a Restricted Development Preliminary Plan #R2015- 020CUP. The Applicant proposes to amend the Cascade Creek Development Restricted Development #R2009-026CUP to allow for the construction of a two-story daycare facility with associated parking. The property is located at Lot 1, Block 2 of Cascade Redevelopment Plat north of Fourth Street N.W., and west of Sixth Avenue N.W., Rochester, MN; and, WHEREAS, the property is described as follows: Lot 1 Block 2 Cascade Creek Redevelopment comprising of .32 acres; and, WHEREAS, since the Applicant seeks to amend the original Restricted Development approval (#R2009-026CUP) to change the approved six townhome units to an 11,310 square foot daycare facility to allow for the expansion of the operations of the existing New Horizon Daycare facility, the Applicant is proposing the development through the restricted development process; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.700 recognizes that certain land uses which are generally not allowed within a given zoning district can, if regulated, "serve both the public interest and allow a more equitable balancing of private interests than that achieved by strict adherence to standard zoning regulations;" and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.700 further states that the ordinances providing for restricted developments encourage innovation and experimentation in the development of land that would otherwise not be possible under the established zoning district regulations; and, WHEREAS, this application requires a two-step review process consisting of a preliminary plan and a final plan. The preliminary plan phase follows the Type III, Phase II procedure with a hearing before the Planning Commission and a hearing before the Council. The final plan phase is a Type III, Phase III procedure with a hearing before the City Council; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.706 states the Council must approve a restricted development preliminary plan if it finds the development satisfies the criteria listed in R.C.O. §62.708, subd. 2 or a modification for any unmet criteria has been granted as provided in R.C.O. §62.712; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.712 states the Council may waive the need to satisfy certain approval criteria if it finds: 1. The applicant has demonstrated that the plan as submitted adequately compensates for failing to address the criterion in question; and, 1 2. The strict application of any provision would result in exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship upon, the owner of such property, provided the modification may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the purposes of this ordinance or the policies of the Land Use Plan; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.708 (Criteria for Type III Developments), subd. 2 provides the relevant criteria for the review of this application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Department applied the criteria found at R.C.O. §62.708, subd. 2 (Preliminary Type III Development Plan) to this application and prepared the following findings of fact: A. Capacity of Public Facilities: City sewer and water, and other utilities are available to serve the site. Final plans will need to be prepared by a civil engineer and approved by RPU and conform to standard City of Rochester requirements. B. Geologic Hazards: There are no known geologic hazards on the property. Cascade Creek runs just west of the property causing the site to be inundated by the 500 year flood zone. There are no comments regarding wetlands. C. Natural Features: There are no known unique natural features at the site. D. Residential Traffic Impact: Access to the site is by way of 4t" Street NW, a residential roadway. The use will create additional traffic during the peak times when pick up and drop off occur. E. Traffic Generation Impact: The anticipated traffic will not substantially increase the capacity of the adjacent roadways. F. Height Impacts: The proposed buildings fall within the permitted height limits within the R-2 zoning district. It will not prohibit any views that were not already altered by the previously approved Restricted Development. G. Setbacks: The setbacks are below the minimum requirements; however the intended urban mixed use development of this area designs buildings closer to the right-of-way to provide a pedestrian friendly environment. Adequate privacy is still maintained on site. 2 H. Internal Site Design: The site layout provides adequate building separation and orientation to the existing single family dwelling located to the south. Circulation is designed to move patrons through the site efficiently with Kutzky Ct NW wrapping the site on the north, east and west. There are good pedestrian connections, providing access to the adjacent trail system and developments. Screening and Buffering: There will be parking lot screening with a low brick wall along 4t" Street NW and four trees within the islands in the parking lot. Boulevard trees will also be planted along 4t" Street NW. Bufferyards are not required on this lot as the project is part of a larger development site which includes the existing daycare facility and apartments. J. Ordinance Requirements: Adequate amounts of off-street parking are being provided and loading areas are addressed by privately signed stalls for short term visitors on site. K. General Compatibility: The character of the surrounding neighborhood should not be affected by this proposed use. The building materials and massing are designed to blend with the existing Restricted Development and the height is in line with the residential lots to the south. L. Non -Vehicular and Alternate Modes of Travel: The location of this project adjacent to the downtown core provides incentive to utilize alternative modes of travel. There are good pedestrian connections to Civic Center NW, the Cascade Creek trail, and a nearby bus station; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Department's July 1, 2015, staff report states that, based upon its proposed findings of fact, Planning Department staff would recommend approval of the preliminary plan subject to the following conditions- 1 . An official E911 address will be required for this property/building. 2. A Traffic Impact Study or a waiver of this obligation is required from the Director of Public Works. 3. Boulevard trees will be required for the development. Prior to the 3 development of the property, the Owner shall determine which of the two available options, Payment Method or Install Boulevard Trees, will be used to meet their boulevard tree obligations for each phase of development. Once the option is selected, the Owner shall either make applicable cash payment to the Rochester Park & Recreation Department or submit a planting plan to the City Forester for a planting permit prior to final development approval. 4. There is an existing development agreement for this property and development is subject to the terms of said agreement. 5. Grading & Drainage Plan approval is required for this application, as well as, payment of any applicable Storm Water Management Plan Area Charge (SWMPAC) for the increase in impervious surface. 6. Development Related Charges for SAC & WAC were previously paid for this Property and there are no other SAC & WAC obligations due. A Plant Investment Fee is applicable and will be collected through the Building Permit approval process. 7. The Council's actions in approving this development occur in response to the applicant's or his/her representative's oral and written representations as to the appearance of the building design, exterior fagade, and landscaping. As such, the applicant must not deviate from the appearance of the building design, exterior fagade and landscaping as originally presented to the Council without the Council's prior approval. 8. Three parking stalls must be removed from the original plan and used as landscape area, bringing the total parking stall count to 21 spaces; and, WHEREAS, on July 8, 2015, the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this restricted development preliminary plan and reviewed the application according to the requirements of R.C.O. §62.708. At its July 8t" meeting, the Commission recommended approval of the application based upon Planning Department staffs recommended findings of fact subject to the staffs eight recommended conditions of approval; and, WHEREAS, this matter came before the Common Council as a public hearing on August 3, 2015. At the August 3rd public hearing, the Common Council permitted all interested persons to testify and give testimony on the restricted development preliminary plan request; and, WHEREAS, at the August 3rd public hearing, the Planning Department staff recommended the addition of condition of approval #9 to read as follows: 21 9. A cross parking and access agreement is needed for the eastern parking stalls and drive aisle. WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance and substantial weight of the evidence submitted at the August 3rd public hearing, the Common Council determines that the Applicant satisfied the criteria of R.C.O. §62.708 subject to the Planning Commission's recommended eight conditions of approval and the Planning Department staffs recommended ninth condition of approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the Restricted Development Preliminary Plan #R2015-020CUP is in all things approved subject to the nine conditions as described above. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS ATTEST: CITY CLERK DAY OF , 2015. PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 2015. MAYOR OF SAID CITY (Seal of the City of Rochester, Minnesota) Zone 15\RestDevPre.1520 5