Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 410-14 • 410-14 F9 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Darlene Drew ("Applicant') applied for a Type III, Phase II Incentive Development Preliminary Plan (#R2014-019CUP) to permit the construction of a three-story building consisting of two floors of office space and one floor of residential space. The property is located at 2400 Country Club Road West; and, WHEREAS, the legal description for the properties affected by the application is as follows: CITY LANDS 107-14-33 and Block 2 of The Aspens; and, WHEREAS, the project is being proposed through the Incentive Development Conditional use Permit process because the development exceeds the permitted floor area ratio in the B-5 Zoning District; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.630 sets forth the criteria for incentive developments; and, WHEREAS, based upon section 62.630, the Planning Department recommended the • following findings of fact as to the Incentive Development application: Preliminary Development Plan Criteria: A. Suitability of the Area: The site for the proposed development is 36,619 square feet or .84 acres. There is an existing building on site and there are other commercial uses less than 1,000 feet from the proposed lot in which the proposed development is to be constructed. B. Site Design Criteria: (1) Capacity of Public Facilities: Utilities are available to serve the proposed development. (2) Geologic Hazards: The site is identified to be within the Decorah Edge overlay, but there are no Decorah Edge characteristics on site (seeps, wetlands, wet soils, or other features) that prove to be any concern. (3) Natural Features: The site has approximately 40 feet in elevation change from the northwest corner to the southwest corner from 1026 to 1056. • (4) Traffic Generation Impact: Second Street is a Major Urban Arterial designed to handle large amounts of traffic. The access location is nearly the same as the current access which has good site lines for entering and exiting the site. (5) Height Impacts: This project proposes a three-story residential use development above two floors of commercial office space with a height of 35 feet. The maximum height allowed for residential uses above ground floor non-residential uses is 35 feet. (6) Setbacks: All setback requirements are met within the B-5 (Residential Commercial Zoning District at a 15'0" front yard setback and a 10'0" side and rear yard. (7) Internal Site Design: There appears to be adequate building separation to open spaces and street frontages through the use of landscaping, a roof top patio, and public walks. The building is oriented towards the north but allows for a large enough site distance to put the focal point on other natural features rather than the building. (8) Screening and Buffering: The applicant is proposing a • detailed Landscape Plan identifying the existing landscape area that will be on the site as well as boulevard trees. There will be landscaping all around the perimeter of the building and along most of the property lines. (9) Ordinance Requirements: The development does exceed the landscape area requirements for the B-5 Zoning District and is providing enough parking spaces based on the number of bedrooms and floor area calculations for the business uses. (10) Non-Vehicular and Alternate Modes of Travel: A sidewalk connection is provided to the bituminous path along Second Street S.W., that will connect to the front entrance of the building. Bike racks will need to be labeled and shown on the site plan on the north side of the building. (11) Properties located in planning area for which a detailed Master Plan has been adopted by the Council. Not applicable;a nd, WHEREAS, the Planning Department recommended the following conditions of approval if the Incentive Development application were approved: 1. A Final Plat is required replatting the two parcels into one parcel. • 2 2. An updated Site Plan is required showing: A. All outdoor storage containers aesthetically screened by a permanent fence, wall, or landscape area from adjacent properties and street rights-of-way; B. Bike racks on the north side of the building to provide ease of alternate modes of transportation to the site; C. Parking stalls to be 17-feet in length with a drive aisle of 25 feet. 3. Elevation drawing details are required showing the proposed building materials. 4. A detailed Floor Plan showing the layout of the commercial tenant office spaces and the two bedroom residential use on the third floor. 5. The Fire Prevention Bureau will need to comment on the location of the existing fire hydrants as they relate to protection of this building. If they require an additional fire hydrant, it, along with the connecting main and valve, must be shown on the final plan. • 6. The properly sized water service must be shown on the final plan. 7. Boulevard trees are required for the development. A Tree Planting Plan shall be approved by the City Forester. 8. Grading & Drainage Plan approved is required for this application. 9. Execution of a City-Owner Contract and dedication of applicable public utility easements will be required if the extension of new public watermain/hydrant is required for this project. 10. Development of this property is subject to a Plant Investment Fee (PIF) that will be calculated and collected through the Building Permit review and approval process. 11. The Property has not been charged for or paid for SAC & WAC. The following obligations are calculated as follows, and are due prior to issuance of a utility connection permit for the proposed redevelopment: A. Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) @ $2,738.65 per developable acre x 0.48 developable acres (0.84 total acres — 0.36 acres slopes > 18%) _ $1,314.55. • 3 • B. Water Availability Charge (WAC) @ $2,738.65 per developable acre x 0.48 developable acres (0.84 total acres — 0.36 acres slopes > 18% _ $1,314.55. 12. Any future commercial use, other than an office use for the nonresidential development portion of this project, would require the applicant to resubmit a request for an Incentive Development. 13. 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; and, WHEREAS, on August 27, 2014, the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this Incentive Development Preliminary Plan, reviewed the application according to the requirements of section 62.630, adopted the Planning Department's recommended findings of fact, and recommended approval of the application subject to the Planning Department's recommended conditions except for conditions#2, #3, and #4; and, WHEREAS, on September 15, 2014, the Common Council held a public hearing on the • Incentive Development Preliminary Plan (#R2014-003CUP) and gave all interested persons the opportunity to make presentations and give testimony concerning the application; and, WHEREAS, at the September 15th public hearing, the applicant's representative agreed with all of the Commission recommended conditions of approval including the proposed deletion of conditions#2, #3, and #4; and, WHEREAS, based upon all of the evidence and testimony submitted during the September 15th public hearing, the Council accepts the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommended findings of fact and conditions of approval (conditions#1, and #5 -#13). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that it adopt the Planning and Zoning Commission's findings of fact and that the Incentive Development Preliminary Plan (#R2014-019CUP) requested by Darlene Drew is granted subject to the above ten conditions (conditions#1, #5-#13). 4 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City not waive the Final Plan Review for this application. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS 15th DAY OF SEPTEMBER ,2014. PRESIDENT C SAID COMMON COUNCIL ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED THIS jEt DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014. MAYOR OF SAID CITY �erscsra x.srt.i.tir Zone 10Uncendev.14-019.prelim 5