HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 168-13WHEREAS, Arlyn Gagnon applied for a Restricted Development #R2013-003CUP. The
Applicant proposes to establish the Charles E. Gagnon Museum and Sculpture Garden at 2500
Fourth Street S.W., and,
WHEREAS, the property is described as the East 145 feet of Lots Nine (9) and
Fourteen (14) and the South 280 feet of Lot Fourteen (14), Hillcrest Subdivision, Olmsted
County, Minnesota; and,
WHEREAS, since the property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) and museums is not
a use listed in the permitted uses within the R-1 zoning district, the Applicant is proposing the
development through the restricted developmen 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 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 ouncil 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,
is
WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.712 states the
approval criteria if it finds:
1. The applicant has demonstrated
compensates for failing to address
cil may waive the need to satisfy certain
the plan as submitted adequately
criterion in question; and,
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
1
•
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 already serve the site. The existing utilities appear
adequate to the serve the proposed use of the dwelling.
B.
Geologic Hazards: The s,te is already development and the only
change occurring on the property is to establish the use of the
single family dwelling as a museum. The site is not known to
contain any of the listed geologic hazards.
C.
Natural Features: No ne structures are being built; however, a
walking path would be established in the rear yard to allow for the
viewing of sculptures within the rear yard.
• D.
Residential Traffic Impact: Limiting the number of visitors and the
+
requirement that visits are by appointment only will allow for
controlling the amount of traffic on the adjacent residential street.
With a maximum of 15 visitors at any onetime and by appointment
only will not cause traffic volumes to exceed the capacity of the
truck traffic
local street. There would be no more additional on the
local residential street then would is typically found on a local
residential street. The museum would only house the works of
Charles E. Gagnon so the re would be no change out of museum
pieces. Since the museum is not open in the evening there would
be no additional traffic during the evening and nighttime hours.
E.
Traffic Generation Impact: The anticipated traffic will not
substantially increase the capacity of the adjacent roadways. With
a maximum of 15 visitors at any onetime and by appointment only
will not cause traffic volumes to exceed the capacity of the local
street.
F.
Height Impacts: Thee isting structure will not be changing
except for any modifications necessary to meet the regulations of
the building code for the u e of the dwelling.
2
'7
•
is
G. Setbacks: The existing structure will not be changing except for
any modifications necessaryto meet the regulations of the building
code for the use of the dweling.
H. Internal Site Design: The existing structure will not be
changing except for any modifications necessary to meet the
regulations of the building code.
I. Screening and Buffering: The property has existing
vegetation that buffers it from the adjacent properties.
J. Ordinance Requirements: With the limiting of the number of
visitors and the requirements at all visitors require an appointment
will provide for control in the amount of traffic to the site and
parking needed to accorn odate the visitors. The circular driveway
would appear to be able to accommodate the vehicle traffic
generated by the propose o use. Based on the proposed use there
appears adequate parking for the proposed use of the dwelling as
a museum.
K. General Compatibility: Typically a museum wouldn't seem
compatible with single family detached dwellings; however, do to
the fact that visitors to the museum are by appointment only and
there is a limit to the numoer of visitors at any onetime one could
find that the museum would be compatible since it should not
generate much traffic. Sir I ice it is only a museum for the works for
Charles E. Gagnon, the contents of the museum will not be
changing over which would likely create less traffic than if the
museum pieces/sculptures were always changing. Therefore, the
surrounding neighborhood should not be affected by this proposed
use.
L. Non -Vehicular and Alternate Modes of Travel: There is no
sidewalk within the right-of-way of 4t" Street SW. There is a
sidewalk from the driveway to the main entrance for the dwelling;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Department's March 8, 2013, staff report states that, if the City
supports the application, Planning Department staff would recommend the following conditions
of approval be imposed:
1. The museum shall only be open for visitors Wednesdays through
3
•
•
CJ
2
K
Ell
Sundays from the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Visits to the museum
shall be via appointment only.
The maximum number of visitors at only
more than 15 persons.
one time shall be limited to no
The dwelling shall be brought up to meet the minimum building code
requirements for the new use.
The applicant shall obtain any ne essary licenses required to serve food
at the museum if food is served.
5. Any signage for the museum shall meet sign standard "R" of Section
63.225 of the Land Development Manual; and,
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2013, the Roc ester 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 March 13th meeting, the Commission
recommended approval based upon Planning Department staffs recommended findings of fact
subject to the five conditions of approval with condition #1 amended to read as follows:
1. The museum shall only be open for visitors five days a week from the hours
of 10:00 a.m., to 5:00 p.m. Visits to the museum shall be via appointment
only; and,
WHEREAS, on April 1, 2013, the Common Council held a public hearing on the restricted
development preliminary plan request and permitted all interested persons to be heard; and,
WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance of the evidence submitted at the April 1st public
hearing, the Common Council adopts as its own the Planning Commission's recommended
findings of fact and five conditions of approval as described above; and,
WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance and substantial weight of the evidence
submitted at the April 1st public hearing, the Common Council determines that the Applicant
satisfied the criteria of R.C.O. §62.708 subject to the five conditions of approval stated herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
Rochester that the Restricted Development #R2013-003CUP requested by Olmsted Countyis in
all things approved subject to the above five conditions.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council waive the Final Plan review phase of this
application.
•
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS /57' DAYQF lA , 2013.
ACTING PRESI ENT OF'SAID
COMMON,C'OUNCIL
ATTEST:
C CLERK
APPROVED THIS z--J DAY OF l9 , 2013.
(Seal of the City of
Rochester, Minnesota)
Zone101RestDevPre.1303
M
•
5
YOR OF SAID CITY
M