HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 018-13x ! 13
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Carpenter & Torgerson II, LLC, applied for a Type III, Phase II,
Incentive/Restricted Development #R2012-028CUP which amends Incentive/Restricted
Development Preliminary Plan #03-50. The applicant is proposing to amend the approved
conditional use permit to construct an addition to the Courtyard by Marriott Hotel by adding a
108 guest room Homewood Suites by Hilton. The proposed addition would be 6 stories and
constructed to the west of the existing hotel and is proposed to be constructed over the alley
and have commercial lease space on. the first floor. The property is located along the north
side of Second Street S.W., west of 13th Avenue S.W., and along the south side of First Street
S.W.; and,
WHEREAS, the legal description of the property involved in this application is Lots 4, 5,
20, and 21, Block 4, A.W. Kutzky's Addition to the City of Rochester; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed hotel on the lots zoned R-3 needs to be considered through
the restrictive development process since transient accommodations are not permitted in the R-3
zoning district; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed development needs to be considered through the incentive
development process since the development involves a floor area ratio of 2.32, which exceeds
the permitted floor area ratio of .50; and,
WHEREAS, R.C.O. § 62.708 (Criteria for Type III Developments) provides the relevant
criteria for the review of the restricted development portion of this application; and,
WHEREAS, R.C.O. § 62.630 provides the relevant criteria for the review of the incentive
development portion of this application; and,
WHEREAS, on December 12, 2012, the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission
held a public hearing on said restricted development preliminary plan, reviewed the application
according to the requirements of R.C.O. §62.708 and made the following Findings of Fact:
•
(A) Capacity of Public Facilities: The existing or future planned utilities in
the area are adequate to serve the proposed development except for
storm water management. Storm water management must be provided
and a Storm Water Management fee will be applicable to all. new area of
impervious surface associated with the redevelopment of the property. In
addition, the owner may be required to provide on -site rate control
facilities to address inadequate public storm sewer serving the area of the
development. The owner will be responsible for all cost associated with
any relocation of utilities for this development.
1
r
• (B) Geologic Hazards: There are no known geologic hazards upon the site
under consideration for this development.
(C) Natural Features: The proposed development, to the extent practical,
will utilize the existing topography and natural features of the site.
Is
(D) Residential Traffic Impact:
a) The traffic being generated from the proposed use can be handled
on the existing street system and should not cause capacity of
adjacent street to be exceeded. The site plan, as presently
designed, accommodates the traffic generated by the use to use
the alley as access into the parking area.
b) This proposal will not generate frequent truck traffic on local
residential streets. Deliveries to the hotel will be accommodated
from the alley.
c) This development should not create additional traffic during
evening and nighttime hours on local residential streets.
(E) Traffic Generation Impact: The anticipated traffic generated by the
development should not cause the capacity of the adjacent streets to be
exceeded. The current site plan provides for the only access to the
parking area is from the alley. There will be no access permitted to First
Street SW or Second Street SW.
(F) Height Impacts: The proposed hotel will exceed the height limits in the
B-1 and .R-3 district. The allowed height is 30 feet; the proposed structure
would have a maximum height of 83 feet, 9 inches. The average height of
the building is 72'. The proposed hotel is six stories adjacent to the multi-
family dwelling. The height of the proposed building is generally
compatible with the surrounding.
The applicant has submitted a shadow study for the project. Based on
the shadow study, shadows will be casted on the adjacent properties and
the properties across the street.
(G) Setbacks: The building setback along First Street SW is only
approximately six feet from the north property line. The proposed setback
is acceptable for the project.
(H) Internal Site Design: The proposed development indicates adequate
orientation of the building to street frontages. The vehicle traffic will use
the alley to access the parking ramp area proposed.
2
• (1) Screening and Buffering: Heavy landscaping is proposed within the
streetscape of 2"d Street SW and on the north side of the building. A "D"
bufferyard is proposed along the west property boundary adjacent to the
multi -family dwelling.
(J) Ordinance Requirements: There are portions of the ordinance
requirements that the proposed development does not meet. These
relate to building height, setbacks, parking, and signage. This issue will
be addressed as part of the review process for the requested variances.
(K) General Compatibility: The proposed development would constitute a
substantial addition to the block but would not significantly change the
character of the surrounding area since this general area trends to
accommodate the needs of the Saint Mary's Hospital patients and visitors.
However, the Second Street Corridor Plan recommends that buildings
abutting neighborhoods to step down to range 2 '/2 to four stories where
new developments meet the existing neighborhood.
(L) Non -Vehicular and Alternate Modes of Travel: Pedestrian oriented
space is incorporated into the streetscape design along the project
frontage of Second Street. Bicycle parking is provided on the site; and,
WHEREAS, at its December 12, 2012, public hearing, the Commission reviewed the
•application according to the requirements of R.C.O. §62.630 and made the following Findings of
Fact:
•
1) Preliminary Development Plan Criteria:
a) Suitability of the plan: The proposed site is suitable as the
location for an Incentive Development and is consistent with the
Land Use Plan. It is located on a major arterial roadway in which a
corridor plan has been adopted by the City which supports
redevelopment through the corridor. The proposal is a
redevelopment of a site that is currently served by public facilities.
The question of suitability is not to the proposed uses but to the
height and placement of building.
b) Site Design Criteria.
1) Capacity of Public Facilities: The existing or future planned
utilities in the area are adequate to serve, the proposed
development except for storm water management. Storm water
management must be provided and a Storm Water Management
fee will be applicable to all new area of impervious surface
3
i
associated with the redevelopment of the property. In addition, the
owner may be required to provide on -site rate control facilities to
address inadequate public storm sewer serving the area of the
development. The owner will be responsible for all cost associated
with any relocation of utilities for this development..
2) Geologic Hazards: There are no known geologic hazards upon
the site under consideration for this development.
3) Natural Features: The proposed development, to the extent
practical, will utilize the existing topography and natural features of
the site.
4) Traffic Generation Impact: The traffic being generated from the
proposed use can be handled on the existing street system and
should not cause capacity of adjacent street to be exceeded. The
current site plan provides for the only access to the parking area is
from the alley. There will be no access permitted to 1st St. SW or
2nd St. SW.
5)
Height Impacts: The proposed hotel will exceed the height limits
in the B-1 and R-3 district. The allowed height is 30 feet; the
proposed structure would have a maximum height of 83' 9" feet.
•
The average height of the building is 72'. The proposed hotel is 6
stories adjacent to the multi -family dwelling. The height of the
proposed building is generally compatible with the surrounding.
6)
Setbacks: The building setback along 1st Street SW is only
approximately 6 feet from the north property line. The proposed
setback is acceptable for the project.
7)
Internal Site Design: The proposed development indicates
adequate orientation of the building to street frontages. The
vehicle traffic will use the alley to access the parking ramp area
proposed.
8)
Screening and Buffering: Heavy landscaping is proposed within
the streetscape of 2nd Street SW and on the north side of the
building. A "D" bufferyard is proposed along the west property
boundary adjacent to the multi -family dwelling.
9)
Ordinance Requirements: There are portions of the ordinance
requirements that the proposed development does not meet.
These relate to building height, setbacks, parking and signage.
This issue will be addressed as part of the review process for the
4
P
• request variance.
•
10) Non -Vehicular and Alternate Modes of Travel: Pedestrian
oriented space is incorporated into the streetscape design along
the project frontage of Second Street. Bicycle parking is provided
on the site.
11) Consistent with the Second Street Corridor Plan: The proposal
is consistent with many of the matters detailed in the Plan,
however, the building design on the property north of the alley is
not consistent (height and setback) with the design and land use
pattern of the Gateway District; and,
WHEREAS, the Commission, based upon its Findings of Fact, recommended approval of
the application based upon the following conditions:
1. The final development plan application shall include:
• Complete building elevations that identify building materials and colors;
(Materials consist of stone veneer, brick, and EIFS ranging in color from
light tan, pale sage, sand, sienna brown, and charcoal colors.)
• The two metal doors along the front of the building shall contain a glass
element to continue on the urban design of the building.
2. An approved grading/drainage plan is required prior to construction.
3. Storm water management must be provided and a Storm Water
Management fee will be applicable to all new areas of impervious surface
associated with the redevelopment of this property. In addition, the owner
may be required to provide on -site rate control facilities to address
inadequate public storm sewer serving the area of the proposed
development.
4. A Maintenance Declaration shall be executed by the Owner for any
required on -site rate control facilities that are necessary for the
development.
5. The alley shall be constructed to City design standards. The alley shall be
a minimum of 20 feet in width of concrete from 13th Ave. SW to the west
property line.
6. The approval of this development is contingent upon the applicant
receiving a vacation of the air rights, 15.6 feet and greater above ground
5
• elevation within the current platted alley. Dedication of application new
easement within the alley area may be necessary through the vacation
process.
7. The proposed streetscape plan detailed is approvable through execution
of the Revocable Permit Agreement prior to construction.
8. Execution of a City -Owner Contract and dedication of any needed public
easements is required prior to construction and/or relocation of any public
improvements associated with the development.
9. The Property will be subject to an assessment for the frontage along 2"d
Street SW, currently proposed for reconstruction in 2016.
10. The developer is responsible for all the cost associates with utility
relocation to accommodate this development. Existing water services
stubbed to the property must be abandoned properly at the main in the
street, prior to any building excavation, per the requirements of the RPU.
Water Division.
11. The applicant has submitted a detailed landscape plan, however, a final
landscape plan with all plant material labeled must be submitted prior
• approval of the final plan; and,
12. The Council's actions in approving this development occur in response to
the applicant's or its 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; and,
•
WHEREAS, the Common Council held a public hearing on the Incentive/Restricted
Development Preliminary Plan request on January 7, 20.13, and permitted all interested persons
to be heard; and,
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, the applicant's representative agreed with the above
conditions; and,
WHEREAS, the Common Council determined that the applicant satisfied the conditions
of R.C.O. §§62.708, 62.630 by a preponderance of the evidence submitted at the public hearing
subject to the 12 conditions identified above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
Rochester that the Type III, Phase II, Incentive/Restricted Development #R2012-028CUP,
21
requested by Carpenter & Torgerson II, LLC, is granted subject to the above 12 conditions.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council waives the Final Plan review phase of this
application.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS 77,4 DAY OF W , 2013.
ACTING PRESIDENT OF SAID
COMMON MUNCIL
ATTEST:
WY CLERK
APPROVED THIS &,J) DAY OF �d� 12013.
•
(Seal of the City of
Rochester, Minnesota)
Zone101Rest1ncenDevPre.1228
0
MAYOR OF SAID CITY