HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 443-15 - Guyse.RestrictDevPlan2015-017RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Sandra Guyse applied for a Restricted Development Preliminary Plan
#R2015-017CUP. The Applicant proposes to construct a three-story, 18-unit apartment building
with below grade parking. The property is located at 311 and 307 Seventh Street N.W.,
Rochester, MN; and,
WHEREAS, the property is described as follows:
Block 12, Lot 13 and Block 12, Lot 12 Northern Addition; and,
WHEREAS, since the property is zoned as the R-2 (Low Density Residential) Zoning
District and a three-story, 18 unit apartment building is not listed as a permitted use, 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
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 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
1
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 staff 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 are available to serve the site. The existing water services
must be abandoned at the main in the street and the curb boxes
removed and a newly properly sized water service must be
approved per the requirements of Rochester Public Utilities.
B. Geologic Hazards: There are no known geologic hazards on the
property. There are no slopes and the parcel is completely flat.
The site has a low to moderate sinkhole probability and there are
no hydric or floodplain soils.
C. Natural Features: There are no known unique natural features at
the site. There is less than a 2% elevation change from the north
end to the south end of the site. The elevation of the site is from
998 MSL along the west and north edge of the site with a majority
of the site at 1000 MSL.
D. Residential Traffic Impact: Access to the site is off of an alley on
the north via 4t" Avenue NW. There are capacity and width
concerns on both 4t" Avenue NW and 7t" Street NW. The
proposed project will enhance these concerns. The elimination of
the right turn from 7t" Street NW to 4t" Avenue NW will cause the
traffic volumes to exceed capacities on the Major Urban Arterials
because of the proximity to the intersection of two Major Urban
Arterials and the congestion of turning traffic into the alley. The
proposed use will generate 120 Weekday Trips, 10 AM Peak Hour
Trips, and 12 PM Peak Hour Trips (Institute of Transportation
Engineers 9t" Edition). Currently 4t" Ave NW is 66 feet wide, 4t"
Avenue NW as a Major Urban Arterial is projected to be a two lane
arterial with a required width of 75'.. Currently 7t" St. NW is 74 feet
wide. 7t" Street NW as a Major Urban Arterial is projected to be a
four lane undivided arterial with a required width of 90'. ADT on 7t"
2
Street = 9200 (2012). ADT on 4t" Ave = 6400 (2012). Based on
current road width and traffic volumes, 7t" Street and 4t" Ave do not
meet width requirements and additional road right of way may be
needed in the future. Without the benefit of a Traffic Analysis for
this proposal, it is Staff's view that eliminating a turn lane and
adding turning traffic to a congested road that is already at
capacity will cause undue residential traffic issues.
E. Traffic Generation Impact: The anticipated traffic will
substantially increase the capacity of the adjacent roadways with
the proposed access onto an alley as well as by adding bump outs
and on street parking. The proposed access point onto an alley
and conceptual improvements with bump outs and on street
parking do not reduce the impact of access points on the traffic
flow of adjacent streets, in fact Staff is concerned with the
congestion that would be caused related to turning traffic on an
already busy road and the current width constraints of both 7t"
Street and 4t" Ave NW.
F. Height Impacts: The proposed building at thirty-seven feet is at
a larger scale and proportion to the adjacent residential property
than the permitted uses within the R-2 (Low Density Residential)
Zoning District at a maximum height of thirty-five feet. The
massing and the overall size of the building could potentially block
sunlight from reaching adjacent properties and the siting of the
structure will substantially block vistas from the primary exposures
of adjacent residential dwellings due to the differences in elevation
as well as the proximity to the property lines.
G. Setbacks: The proposed building encroaches into the required
front, side street side yard and rear yard setbacks by more than
any of the uses listed in the R-2 (Low Density Residential) Zoning
District and the building height and bulk are not in a manner
consistent with the neighborhood. Adjacent properties to the west
across 4t" Ave NW, the front yard setback is considerably further
from the front yard lot line at 35 feet. To the east and on the same
block, the rear yard setback for properties south of the alley is
between 11 and 32 feet to the closest structure, in this case,
garages. The massing and bulk of the building is out of character
with other residential uses in the neighborhood, which demonstrate
more open space and less concentrated development. These
setbacks would be further reduced when applying Section 63.10.
3
This section states "Yards for lots where the existing right-of-way
width of an adjacent street is not consistent with the planned right-
of-way width as shown on an adopted Official Street Map or on the
Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan shall be measured from
the right-of-way line of such street as designated on said
thoroughfare plan or official map." 4t" Avenue NW as a Major
Urban Arterial is projected to be a two lane arterial with a required
width of 75'. Currently 4t" Ave NW is 66 feet wide. 7t" Street NW as
a Major Urban Arterial is projected to be a four lane undivided
arterial with a required width of 90'. Currently 7t" St. NW is 74 feet
wide. An additional four and a half feet will be required along 4t"
Ave NW making the proposed setback two and a half feet, and an
additional eight feet will be required along 7t" St NW making the
proposed setback three feet.
H. Internal Site Design: The site layout does not appear to
provide adequate building separation and orientation to the
existing residential uses located in the area. The design of the site
also pushes the building within a very close proximity to the
intersection of two Major Urban Arterials. The access taken off of
4t" Avenue NW from an alley (and the proposed bump outs and on
street parking) appears to add congestion and circulation concerns
to an already busy intersection. (ADT on 7t" Street = 9200 (2012).
ADT on 4t" Ave = 6400 (2012)).
Screening and Buffering: Landscape space is proposed
around the entire property and the narrative states that they are
providing 30 percent of the site with green space. The landscape
requirement for a multi -family use in the R-2 is 42 percent. The
proposed north, south and west bufferyards are not adequate and
do not meet the screening and buffering requirements for a multi-
family use in the R-2.
J. Ordinance Requirements: The total site area for this proposal is
.29 acres (12,632 square feet). The applicant proposes a total of
17,595 square feet of floor area and a density of 18 residential
units. On a .29 acre lot, the density would be 62.10 units per acre
with a floor area ratio 1.40. The proposed Floor Area and Density
exceeds those standards of higher less restrictive R-4 (High
Density Residential) Zoning District standards by twice the floor
area and almost twice the density. The massing of the building on
a small lot also creates spillover and off street parking concerns as
21
well as a shortage of required landscaping.
K. General Compatibility: The character of the surrounding
neighborhood will be affected by this proposed use. The three
story, 18 unit multifamily use with a density of 62.10 units per acre
and a floor area ratio of 1.40 in a R-2 (Low Density) area with
single family, duplex, and tri-plex uses is incompatible with the
area. The creation of bump outs and on -street parking near the
intersection of two Major Urban Arterials and the before mentioned
density, floor area, and height compared to the surrounding uses,
lack of landscaping, recreation space, and buffering all make it
incompatible.
L. Non -Vehicular and Alternate Modes of Travel: The proposed
development does detail how they intend to incorporate pedestrian
oriented space, pedestrian access to the building entrances, and
non -vehicular and alternate modes of travel by incorporating direct
walk-up access to the public sidewalk, a welcoming front entrance,
a public seating area, and bike racks; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Department's August 5, 2015, staff report states that, based upon
its proposed findings of fact, Planning Department staff would recommend denial of the
preliminary plan on the basis that the development had not addressed or satisfied all of the
applicable criteria, and a practical solution consistent with the public interest could not be
incorporated into the final plan; and
WHEREAS, on June 10 and August 12, 2015, 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 its August 12t" meeting, the
Commission recommended approval of the application based upon the finding that the
development had addressed and satisfied all of the applicable criteria under section 62.706; and,
WHEREAS, this matter came before the Common Council as a public hearing on
September 9, 2015. At the September 9t" public hearing, the Common Council permitted all
interested persons to testify and give testimony on the restricted development preliminary plan
request; and,
WHEREAS, at the September 9t" public hearing, the Planning Department staff
recommended the imposition of the following conditions of approval should the Council accept the
Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation for approval of the application-
1. In order to make it more consistent with the density of at least the R-4
(High Density) Residential Zoning District, no more than twelve units
5
allowed on the two residential lots with a total cumulative acreage at .29,
making the density calculation 41.38 units per acre rather than 62.10
units per acre.
2. Step -back the third -story at least fifteen feet on two of the four sides to
prevent the overwhelming massing of the building.
3. A detailed Landscape Plan showing:
(a) A dense vegetative buffer in the NE corner consisting of a solid
hedge, over story trees, and understory trees to provide a solid
screen from the adjacent properties to the east and north.
(b) Plantings along the easterly property line consisting of a solid
hedge along the entire property line, over story trees planted every
35 feet, as a well as a mix of understory trees and other varieties of
plants where appropriate to provide a screen from the adjacent
property to the east.
(c) The plant material associated with the rain garden.
4. The trash enclosure needs to be the same materials as the building (brick,
burnished block, or EIFS).
5. All requirements of the Public Works Department need to be met related to the road
right-of-way (on -street parking, bump -outs, the use of pavers as public sidewalk,
etc.)
6. Remove the fence shown on the retaining wall on the east side of the building; and,
WHEREAS, at the September 9t" public hearing, the Applicant's representative 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 are available to serve the site. RPU and the Fire
Department indicated no issues with public facility capacity during
the pre -development meeting nor during the agency review.
B. Geologic Hazards: Not applicable.
C. Natural Features: Not applicable.
CI
D. Residential Traffic Impact: (1) The development will have virtually
zero impact on local residential streets. It is located at the intersection
of two Major Urban Arterials (ROCOG 2040 Plan) and is accessed via
the same alley that currently is used by the property (via arterial).
Thus, residential streets will remain unchanged. The total additional
amount of vehicles for this proposed development is 10.
(2) Not applicable; no truck traffic necessary.
(3) The development will have virtually zero impact on local
residential streets. It is located at the intersection of two Major Urban
Arterials and is accessed via the same alley that currently is used by
the property (via arterial). Thus, residential streets will remain
unchanged. The total additional amount of vehicles for this proposed
development is 10.
E. Traffic Generation Impact: Due to feedback from Public
Works indicating lack of approval for the neighborhood supported
traffic calming measures (bump outs, on -street parking, etc.) they will
be eliminated from the plan. Thus, there shall be no impact to the
capacity of adjacent streets. There are no additional access points
proposed. The total additional amount of vehicles for this proposed
development is 10.
F. Height Impacts: The roof peak of the existing corner residential
building is approximately 30 feet, eight inches. The majority of the
proposed building would be 34 feet above grade, below the zoning
maximum. Due to the need for elevator access for wheelchair
accessibility above the ground floor, the elevator tower portion at
the south side would be 37 feet above grade. Notwithstanding-
(1) The elevator tower, being on the south side, will have zero
impact on shadow casting. Through analysis of sun angle modeling,
we can predict that the rest of the building's shadows will not affect
adjacent properties "during a majority of the day for over four months
out of the year."
(2) The siting of the proposed structure will not substantially block
vistas from the primary exposures of adjacent residential dwellings.
G. Setbacks: The proposed building respects the existing setbacks
of the existing corner residential building and does not reduce the
setbacks along Fourth Avenue N.W., or Seventh Street N.W., any
further than what exists currently. The existing building setbacks
are already non -conforming with the zoning ordinance since the
ordinance was applied after the buildings were built. In addition,
the proposed building height and bulk are located in a manner
consistent with an intersection of two major urban arterials.
H. Internal Site Design: The proposed development responds to
the urban context of the intersection of two major urban arterials.
Corner lots should be designed as focal points. They should
contain higher intensity developments with buildings that address
the street and provide access to parking in the rear (or
underground in this case). The neighborhood has seen this site
layout as conducive to creating a prominent "gateway" into their
neighborhood, one that they can potentially see incorporating
neighborhood signage.
Screening and Buffering: The screening and buffering are
improved by pushing the building to the intersection. This leaves a
much larger separation (as compared to current conditions) from the
adjacent residential homes to the east. This larger separation is used
as green space and underground parking access from the alley. The
bufferyards along Fourth Avenue N.W., and Seventh Street N.W., can
be achieved through planting of street trees and landscaping.
J. Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development includes
adequate amounts of off-street parking and landscape area. It
does not meet the ordinance requirements.
K. General Compatibility: Traditionally, the core neighborhoods
have been designed around principles of compactness, diversity,
walkability, and safety. These urban neighborhoods are compact
enough to connect with well -established pedestrian destinations
through a hierarchy of interconnected streets and paths. They offer a
variety of housing choices including dwelling types of mixed density,
mixed income, and mixed uses. A diverse mix of activities and
amenities occur proximate to housing to ensure that many needs of
daily living should occur within walking distance to add to
neighborhood vitality. At all times, the environment should appear
pedestrian -friendly with features such as safe, attractive, and
comfortable streets, paths, and public open spaces that promote
activity.
M.
The proposed development is generally compatible with and
complimentary to the character of the neighborhood.
L. Non -Vehicular and Alternate Modes of Travel: The proposed
development incorporates pedestrian oriented space, pedestrian access
to the building entrances, and non -vehicular and alternate modes of travel
by incorporating direct walk-up access to the public sidewalk, a
welcoming front entrance, a public seating area, and bike racks. In
addition to the bike racks located at the exterior near the intersection,
there is also room for bike storage in the basement; and,
WHEREAS, at the September 9t" public hearing, the Applicant's representative objected to
the Planning Department staffs recommended conditions of approval 1, 2, and 3, and agreed with
recommended conditions of approval 4, 5, and 6; and,
WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance and substantial weight of the evidence
submitted at the September 9t" public hearing, the Common Council adopts the Applicant's
proposed findings of fact as its own and determines that the Applicant satisfied the criteria of
R.C.O. §62.708 subject to the Planning Department staffs recommended conditions of approval
#4, #5, and #6, and the following third condition of approval:
7. Applicant shall be solely responsible for the repair of the alley should Applicant
cause damage to the alley as part of the construction project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Rochester
that the Restricted Development Preliminary Plan #R2015-017CUP is in all things approved
subject to the four conditions as described above (Planning Department staffs conditions of
approval #4, #5, and #6, and condition of approval #7).
a
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
DAY OF , 2015.
PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL
APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 2015.
MAYOR OF SAID CITY
(Seal of the City of
Rochester, Minnesota)
Zone 15\RestDevPre.1517
10