Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 278-12 • RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Olmsted County applied for a Restricted Development #R2012-006CUP. The Applicant proposes to develop a regional public safety training center. The training center would consist of the following uses: K9 training area; a 43-foot, 6-inch high fire training tower and outdoor fire training activities; a paved driving range; and an outdoor weapons training range. The property is located east of St. Bridget Road S.E., and is located on the property housing the Olmsted County Maintenance Shops at 1188 50th Street S.W., and, WHEREAS, the property is approximately 84 acres of land located east of St. Bridget Road SE and the Forest Knoll Subdivision, and south of 45th Street SE (County Road 101), and is legally described as follows: The part of the North Half of Section 36 described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner thence southwest 810 feet for the point of beginning thence South 480.42 feet thence Southwest 1090 feet thence Southeast 470 feet thence Southwest 500 feet thence north 64.40 feet thence West to the East line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter thence North to the Northwest Corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter thence East 1310.71 feet thence Northeast 1811.94 feet to the point of beginning. Section 36, Township 106, Range 14 • And The part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 25 described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of the Southeast Quarter thence South 89 degree 40' 56" West 200 feet for the point of beginning thence North 00 degrees 20' 43" West 200 feet thence North 89 degrees 40'56" East 200 feet to the East line of the Southeast Quarter thence North 00 degrees 20' 43" West along East line 460 feet thence South 89 degrees 40' 56" West 1650 feet thence South 00 degrees 19' 04" East 660 feet to the South line of said Southeast Quarter thence North 89 degrees 40' 56" East along South line 1450.32 feet to the point of beginning. Section 25, Township 106, Range 14; and, WHEREAS, since the property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) and the proposed uses fall under Area Accessory Development but doesn't truly fit the uses listed under Area Accessory uses, 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 • 1 e equitable balancing of private interests than that achieved by strict adherence to standard jorning 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, 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: RPU will work with the applicant's engineer to determine the proper water main layout, sizing and metering to adequately serve the facility. B. Geologic Hazards: A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and is on file with the Planning Department. The site is within the shoreland area of public waters and will need to meet requirements for stormwater runoff and related shoreland regulations. 2 • C. Natural Features: The existing topography is taken into consideration as the majority of the training center is to be located at the bottom of the quarry which will be buffered by the existing quarry walls. D. Residential Traffic Impact: Access to the site is by way of St. Bridget Road (CSAH 20) which is designated as a Major Regional Arterial on the Rochester-Olmsted Council of Governments (ROCOG) Thoroughfare Plan. The proposed development is not located in a residential area. The property is surrounded by agricultural land and a flood reservoir. E. Traffic Generation Impact: The anticipated traffic will not cause the capacity of the adjacent roadway to be exceeded. A right-turn lane and by-pass already existing on St. Bridget Road to accommodate the existing truck traffic to the site. F. Height Impacts: The height of the burn tower is 43' 6' which exceeds the permitted maximum permitted height within the R-1 zoning. The planning commission can permit a 25% increase in height in the R-1 when investigating the effect of shadows, loss of • privacy and the closing of views resulting from the contrast created between the height and location of the building. The tower is setback over 250 feet from the nearest property line so the tower will not likely have any effect on the adjacent properties. G. Setbacks: The proposed building exceeds the setbacks requirements for any of the uses listed in the R-1 zoning district. Over 200 feet is the closest point to any of the buildings from the property lines. H. Internal Site Design: The site layout provides adequate building separation and orientation to the existing natural features on the site. I. Screening and Buffering: The development is occurring in an old quarry. The existing elevations changes caused by the quarry activity acts as a natural buffer to the adjacent properties. J. Ordinance Requirements: The project manager (Olmsted County) will determine what the parking needs for the regional training center is and will provide the parking that is necessary for • 3 the uses. Currently two parking areas are identified on the plan. K. General Compatibility: The overall site layout of the property appears to be generally compatible with the existing nature of the property. The proposed development is approximately Y2 mile off of St, Bridget Road so it will likely be hardly noticeable from the residential neighborhood to the west, across St. Bridget Road. The properties to the north, south and east are not currently located in the city and are mostly used for agricultural land uses or serves as a flood reservoir. These properties are identified for low density residential uses on the City of Rochester Land Use Plan map. L. Non-Vehicular and Alternate Modes of Travel: The use of the property as a regional training center doesn't lend itself for non- vehicular and alternate modes of travel as the center isn't adjacent to public sidewalks, trails or a public road; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Department's May 4, 2012, staff report states that, if the City supports the application, Planning Department staff would recommend the following conditions of approval be imposed: 1. A Development Agreement has been executed for the property and • development shall be conducted consistent with the terms of the Agreement. 2. Grading and Drainage Plan approval is required prior to any grading --Grading activity taking place on the Property that is related to the proposed development. Since the site is in the shoreland, grading activities will need to meet the requirements for stormwater runoff and related shoreland regulations. 3. Execution of a City-Owner Contract, or alternatively a Contract between Olmsted County and Contractor that covers the same City warranty and surety requirements is required prior to the construction of any public infrastructure associated with development of the property. 4. Development charges are applicable to the property for SAC and WAC. The timing for when payment is to be applicable will need to be agreed to between the County and City prior to development. Execution of an amendment to Development Agreement will be required if any of the negotiated terms are in conflict with the terms of the existing Development Agreement. 5. The perimeter fence shall not be located on the future City of Rochester • 4 • water tower property; and, WHEREAS, on May 9, 2012, 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 that meeting, the Commission added a sixth condition of approval to read as follows: 6. An acoustical engineer/consultant be consulted prior to the City Council meeting with additional information to be supplied to the City Council; and, WHEREAS, at its May 9tn meeting, the Commission recommended approval based upon Planning Department staffs recommended findings of fact subject to the six conditions of approval; and, WHEREAS, on June 18, 2012, the Common Council held a public hearing on the restricted development preliminary plan request and permitted all interested persons to be heard; and, WHEREAS, at the June 18, 2012 public hearing the applicant presented the results of a Summary Report for Shooting Range Sound Pressure Level Measurements for the site prepared by ESI Engineering meeting the requirements of condition 6 and concluding that the shooting range noise levels should meet the State of Minnesota requirements at the residential 4Vreas west of the site; and, WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance of the evidence submitted at the June 18tn public hearing, the Common Council adopts as its own the Planning Commission's recommended findings of fact and first five conditions of approval as described above with the addition of the following three extra conditions: 1. An advisory board monitoring the operations at the site shall be created with a representative from each of the Olmsted County Sheriffs office, the Rochester Police Department, the Rochester Fire Department, Rochester Community and Technical College, and at least two residents from the neighborhoods adjacent to the site. 2. The 8 foot high Hasco barriers planned for the shooting range shall be replaced by 12 foot high Hasco barriers on the west side. 3. The operation of the shooting range shall comply with the National Rifle Association's Range Source Book: A Guide to Planning and Construction as identified in Minn. Stat. section 87A.02, subd. 2; and, • 5 WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance and substantial weight of the evidence Oubmitted at the June 18th public hearing, the Common Council determines that the Applicant satisfied the criteria of R.C.O. §62.708 subject to the eight remaining conditions stated herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the Restricted Development #R2012-006CUP requested by Olmsted County is in all things approved subject to the above eight conditions. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS l Zs h _ DAY 2012. 4A*~ • ' GX) PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL ATTEST: parrurs CI ER APPROVED THIS 1 DAY OF �� 12012. MAYOR OF SAID CITY (Seal of the City of Rochester, Minnesota) Zone 10\RestDevPre.1206 6