HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 110B-04 R21S
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Wesley Investments, Inc., requested approval of land disturbing activities
associated with Preliminary Plat #04-02 that would allow the modification of the grades by ten
feet or more. Section 62.1101(B)(1)(a) of the Rochester Code of Ordinances defines such a
modification of the grades as a "Substantial Land Alteration". The property is located in the
Pebble Creek Special District and is located south of 51St Street N.W., and east of the Kingsbury
Hills Third Subdivision; and,
WHEREAS, R.C.O. § 62.1105 states that the City must approve a conditional use permit
authorizing an excavation activity if the applicant satisfies all of the requirements of Section
61.146 and, in addition, satisfies the following findings:
A. The activity will not result in a danger to life or property due to (1) steep or
unstable slopes, (2) unsafe access to the property, (3) excessive traffic, or (4)
proximity to existing or planned residential areas, parks and roadways;
B. Visual, noise, dust, and/or excessive on- or off-site environmental impacts on
public parks, roadways and residential areas can be adequately mitigated by the
Applicant and a fully detailed plan is submitted by the Applicant to demonstrate
• the mitigation methods to be used, the cost of such mitigation, the source of
.funds for such mitigation, and adequate legal assurance that all of such
mitigation activities are carried out;
C. The use of trucks and heavy equipment will not adversely impact the safety and
maintenance of public roads providing access to the site, or such impacts will be
mitigated;
D. The proposed use will not adversely affect air quality or ground water or surface
water quality;
E. The proposed use will not adversely affect the scenic quality of Rochester or the
natural landscapes, environment, wildlife and wildlife habitat; or if such effects
are anticipated to occur, the reclamation plan provides for adequate _restoration
of the site following completion of the excavation activity;
F. The activity will be compatible with existing development and development
anticipated in the future, including other uses as shown in the Comprehensive
Plan, including but not limited to: patterns of land use, recreational uses, existing
or planned development, public facilities, open space resources and other
natural resources;
• 1
• G. The activity will not unduly affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties;
H. The site plan provides for adequate buffers and screening year-round from
unsightly features of the excavation operation;
I. The reclamation plan provides for adequate and appropriate restoration and
stabilization of cut and fill areas;
j J. The excavation activity will not result in_negative impacts on drainage patterns or
j stormwater management facilities;
K: The proposed activity will minimize impacts on sinkholes, wetlands and other
natural features affecting ground water or surface water quality;
L. The intensity and the anticipated duration of the proposed excavation activity is
appropriate for the size and location of the activity;
M. Permanent and interim erosion and sediment control plans have been approved
by the City;
N. Surety has been provided that guarantees the site will be fully restored, after
completion of the excavation activity, to a safe condition, and one that permits
• reuse of the site in a manner compatible with the Comprehensive Plan,
neighborhood plans, the Land Use Plan and applicable City policies.
O. The proposed activity complies with the requirements of the adopted building
code; and,
WHEREAS, on March 1, 2004, the City of Rochester Common Council held a public
hearing on this Substantial Land Alteration application, reviewed the application according to the
requirements of R.C.O. § 61.146 and made the following findings:
1. Not applicable.
2. Not applicable.
3. Not applicable.
4. The Rochester Public Works Department will need to review and approve the
grading and drainage plan for this work. This plan must accommodate
permanent and interim erosion and sediment control.
5. Not applicable.
6. Not applicable.
7. Not applicable.
8. Not applicable.
•
2
• WHEREAS, the City of Rochester Common Council also reviewed the application
according to the requirements of R.C.O. § 62.1105 and made the following findings:
1. The activity should not result in danger to life or property. Generally, the
slopes will be regarded, to be suitable for residential uses. The grading
and drainage plans will need to comply with City standards and be
approved by the Rochester Public Works Department.
2. The grading plan for this project needs to be approved by the Rochester
Public Works Department and it will document the extent of the work. All
fill material exists on site and will be used to level the slopes within this
plat to more suitable grades for residential uses. Noise and dust control
will need to comply with City standards.
3. The equipment conducting the grading work on the property will also be
the equipment utilized to move the earth. All materials will stay on-site, it
will not be necessary to truck in fill or haul fill from the site, which will
minimize the impact on the surroundings roads.
4. The proposed excavation work should not affect air quality or ground and
surface water quality.
5. The proposed grading work should not adversely affect the scenic quality
• of Rochester. There will not be any steep slopes or exposed rock faces.
The natural topography of the area is being re-graded to provide adequate
slopes for residential uses.
6. The result of the proposed activity will be compatible with existing
development and development anticipated in the future. The finished
result of the grading work will allow for development that is consistent with
the land use plan.
7. The result of the proposed activity will be compatible with existing
development and development anticipated in the future. The finished
result of the grading work will allow for development that is consistent with
the land use plan.
8. The grading will only take place during one phase, spring of 2004. There
are homes in the immediate area that will be visually affected by the
grading activity, but only for a short time. Noise and dust control will need
to comply with City standards.
9. The grading and drainage plan will need to provide the proper restoration
and stabilization in accordance with the adopted codes for the City of
• 3
Rochester.
10. The grading and drainage plans will need to be reviewed and approved by
the City. Stormwater management will be required for the development.
11. The areas of grading do not contain sinkholes or wetlands and should not
affect the ground water or surface quality once restoration and
stabilization is completed.
12. The grading work is expected to be completed in one phase, spring of
2004. The duration seems appropriate for this type of activity and the size
of the project.
13. The Rochester Public Works Department will need to review and approve
the grading and drainage plan for this work. This plan must accommodate
permanent and interim erosion and sediment control.
14. Surety will need to be provided that guarantees the site will be fully
restored after the completion of the excavation
for this development can
lf
be provided through the owner-contractprocess
grading is to occur prior to an owner-contract, a separate surety will need
to be provided.
• 15. The grading and drainage plan will need to be approved by the Rochester
Public Works Department prior to any grading on the property; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the
substantial land alteration activity.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
Rochester that, based upon the above-stated findings of fact, the Applicant has shown by a
substantial weight of the evidence submitted
at the
Rochester public hearing tht it has
Cod of Ordinances satisfied the criteria
found at Sections 61.146 and 62.1105 of the
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Common Council that the City does approve the
proposed conditional use permit authorizing the Substantial Land Alteration activity as proposed
by Wesley Investments, Inc., associated with Preliminary Plat #04-02.
I
4
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS DAY OF 2004.
P SIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL
ATTEST:
2 07Y CITY CLER
APPROVED THIS 2O01 DAY OF /1i336��7e 12004.
MAYOR OF SAID CITY
(Seal of the City of
Rochester, Minnesota)
I
Zore2000\Sub1anda!t.61
i
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
5