HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 265-15 - RestDevPrelimPlan.R2015-009CUPRESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Snow Kreilich Architects applied for a Restricted Development Preliminary
Plan #R2015-009CUP. The Applicant proposes to construct a four-story, 29-unit apartment
building with below grade parking. The property is located at 107, 111, 115, and 121 Sixth
Avenue S.E., Rochester, MN; and,
WHEREAS, the property is described as follows:
The South 9 feet of Lot 5, and all of Lots 6 and 7, of Lot 6 in A.B. HAGGERTY's
SUBDIVISION of Lots 5 and 6, STATE SUBDIVISION OF SCHOOL Section 36,
Township 107, Range 14, in the City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota,
LESS that part deeded to the City of Rochester, described as follows: that part
of Lots 7, 6, 5, and the South 12 feet in width of Lot 4 in Lot 6 of A.B.
HAGGERTY'S SUBDIVISION of Lots 5 and 6 of STATE SUBDIVISION OF
SCHOOL Section 36, Township 107, Range 14, which lies West of a line
commencing at a point on the South line of said Lot 7, 100 feet West of the SE
corner thereof, running thence North and a little West to a point 120 feet West of
the East line of said Lots and on the North line of said premises, that is on the
North line of the South 12 feet of said Lot 4.
AND
The East 120 feet of the following described tract: The South 16 feet in width of
Lot 3, and the North 35 feet in width of Lot 4, all in Lot 6 in A.B. HAGGERTY'S
SUBDIVISION of Lots 5 and 6, of the STATE SUBDIVISION of Section 36,
Township 107, Range 14, in the City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota.
AND
The South 19 feet of Lots 2 and the North 31 feet of Lot 3 in Block 6 in A.B.
HAGGERTY'S SUBDIVISION of Lots 5 and 6, STATE SUBDIVISION of Section
36, Township 107, Range 14, in the City of Rochester, Olmsted County,
Minnesota; and,
WHEREAS, since the property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family Dwelling) Zoning
District and since multi -family residential uses are not permitted within a R-1 zoning district,
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
1
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
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: City sewer and water, and other
utilities are available to serve the site. Final water main
construction plans with profiles will need to be prepared by a civil
engineer and approved by RPU and conform to standard City of
Rochester requirements. Due to necessary utility work to
accommodate this project, the frontage of Sixth Avenue S.E., in front
of the project will need to be reconstructed.
B. Geologic Hazards: There are no known geologic hazards on the
2
property. The proposed storm water strategy utilizes a retention
system which will reduce the likelihood of unstable slopes. The
site is not within a floodway or flood fringe area.
C. Natural Features: There are no known unique natural features at
the site. There is an elevation change from the east to the west of
the site of approximately 10.67 feet. The building is designed to
integrate into the slope and take advantage of the natural slope
through use of below grade parking. Primary building entries are
located at 6t" Ave SE and Mayo Park Drive SE, providing easy
access to the neighborhood and recreational area of the river trail
system. The design of the pedestrian space at the rear of the
property incorporates the terraced nature of the topography
through use of terraced gardens and patio areas. The open
spaces are designed to take advantage of the existing topography.
An open space of approximately 54.83 feet is proposed between
the development and the neighboring property to the north. This
open space functions as a view corridor from the neighborhood to
downtown. To the south, a tenant patio is proposed that, due to
topographical change, provides expansive views of the park, river,
and downtown.
D. Residential Traffic Impact: Access will be taken from the northern
corner of the site, at 6t" Ave SE. The traffic projected to be
generated from the development should not cause the traffic
volumes to exceed capacities on local residential streets. The
proposed use should not generate frequent truck traffic on the local
residential street. The use will not create any additional traffic
during the evening and nighttime hours on the local collector
streets that would not normally occur if the property remained as
single family or duplex/triplex residential use. The proposed
project reduces access points from two to one and removes all
curb cuts along Mayo Park Drive SE. Given the pedestrian, bike,
and transit connections and proximity to downtown, tenants will
likely use alternative modes of transport to travel to and from work
and for leisure activities.
E. Traffic Generation Impact: The anticipated traffic will not
substantially increase the capacity of the adjacent local collector
roadways, and the anticipated development will likely fall below the
threshold required for a Traffic Impact Study. However, the
developer will need to liaise with the Director of the City of
3
Rochester Public Works Department to determine if a Traffic
Impact Study is required for the proposal.
F. Height Impacts: The proposed four story building at
approximately 46.5 feet in height is at a larger scale and proportion
to the adjacent residential uses within the R-1 (Mixed Single Family
Dwelling) Residential Zoning District at a maximum height of 35
feet. However, the portion of the building facing 6t" Ave SE is
reduced in massing and bulk through use of a partial fourth story
set back from the building facade. The latter mitigates the visual
impact of the fourth story when viewed from 6t" Ave SE. Moreover,
the height of the first three stories meets the limit of 35 feet in
height within the R-1 Zoning District. Therefore, the main mass of
the building visually integrates into the built pattern and height of
the neighborhood when viewed from 6t" Ave SE. The proposed
project will not likely block sunlight from reaching adjacent
properties to the north given its setback of approximately 54.83
feet from the north lot line. To the east, there will be some
increased shadows during the low -light hours of evening as the
sun sets in the west. The large setback from the north lot line
creates a view corridor between the building to downtown
Rochester and the Zumbro River.
G. Setbacks: The proposed building achieves and exceeds the
required setbacks for the front yard and northern side yard within
the R-1 (Mixed Single Family Dwelling) Residential Zoning District.
The setback to the north reduces amenity impacts on the neighbor
to the north and reduces shadow impacts. The building
encroaches into the rear yard and southern side yard, both of
which abut Mayo Park. The applicant has applied for design
modifications for these encroachments. The encroachments in the
latter yards do not impact on the privacy or amenity of the dwelling
unit tenants of the building, given the fact that none of the dwelling
units are built at grade. Therefore, there will be ample separation
between the dwelling units and adjacent park/recreation usage.
The proposed units have ample access to light, air, and privacy
given the fact that they are all designed as elevated above grade.
H. Internal Site Design: The building and access to the building
are orientated in such a way to maximize pedestrian and cycling
connections to 6t" Ave SE, the park to the south, and the trail
system to the west. A large patio area at the south elevation
21
provides a 270 degree view of the neighborhood, park, river, and
downtown. The building's glazed lobby also maximizes solar gain
and views through its orientation to the south. Over two-thirds of
the units take advantage of views over the river and downtown
Rochester. The large side yard to the north (over 54 feet) provides
ample building separation between this property and the single
family home to the north. Moreover, the setback allows retention of
views from 6t" Ave SE to the river and downtown.
Screening and Buffering: The developer proposes a
Bufferyard D where the development abuts the property to the
north. This Bufferyard compliance compares well with the
requirement for a Bufferyard D where a multi -family development
within the R-3 Medium Density Residential Zoning District abuts a
single family home. No Bufferyards are required where the
development abuts park land. The developer has complied with
requirements for Boulevard Trees on both road frontages to the
east and west.
J. Ordinance Requirements: Using the parking requirements for a
multi -family use in the R-3 (Medium Density) Residential Zoning
District, 35 parking spaces are required. The developer has
employed and complies with allowances for design modifications to
the parking comparison given proximity to transit and proximity to
skyway connections. Based on allowed design modifications to
parking, the requirement for parking can be reduced to 27 spaces.
The developer is proposing 29 spaces (1 per dwelling unit).
Spillover parking can be met partially on site and partially through
on -street parking given ample street frontage. The Downtown
Parking Overlay Zone is located over the river to the west, which
allows for a 1.1 ratio of parking per dwelling unit. The project
proposed 34 bike parking spaces, 30 of them located within the
building. The location of the project, with its excellent transit,
pedestrian, and cycling connections in such close proximity to
downtown Rochester will likely attract tenants who utilize
alternative modes of transport to and from work and leisure.
The applicant has applied for a design modification to the required
50% landscaping within the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) Residential
Zoning District, given the development's proximity to a municipal
park. The proposed landscaping provision of 31 % compares
favorably with a similar requirement for multi -family residential
5
development within the R-3 Medium Density Residential Zoning
District.
The development exceeds a comparable floor area ratio and
density with the R-3 Medium Density Residential Zoning District
(see Table showing comparisons); however, it is considered that a
Floor Area Ratio of 1.19 and a density of 43.56 dwelling units per
acre is appropriate given location of the development and
consideration given to amenity impacts of immediate neighbors
and the neighborhood.
K. General Compatibility: Multi -family housing is a reasonable use
of this site given the nature of the surrounding area, excellent
pedestrian and bike connections, and proximity to downtown
Rochester. The site is across the Zumbro River from the Central
Development Core area and is in proximity to public transit and
skyway connections. Though the site is designated as Low
Density Residential within the Rochester Land Use Plan, it is one
lot to the south of a large multi -block area that is designated as
Medium Density Residential in the Rochester Land Use Plan.
Moreover, though the area is zoned for single family housing, a
substantial number of properties to the north, east, and south
consist of legal non -conforming multi -family uses. The Land Use
Plan recognizes that while single family and multi -family uses are
significantly different in many respects, the Plan nevertheless
allows, and in some cases promotes, the mixture of these uses in
low -density residential areas. Such areas are identified in older
neighborhoods where structural and use characteristics indicate
that a transition from single family to higher density residential
uses either has already occurred using existing structures or
should occur with replacement of structures. Ensuring the viability
of existing older neighborhoods may not be possible without
encouraging redevelopment through such means as allowing
higher density residential uses.
The design of the building is proportionate and is not out of scale
with neighboring buildings or building pattern. The design is
considerate of neighboring amenity through increased setback to
the north lot line, a set back and partial fourth story, and
incorporation of south -facing glazing and retention of view
corridors through the site. The design encourages pedestrian and
tenant engagement with the adjacent park and neighborhood
through use of outside amenity space and accessibility between
CI
the development and street/park. Given the above reasons, it is
considered that the variance request complies with this provision.
L. Non -Vehicular and Alternate Modes of Travel: The building is
conceived of as having two front doors, one serving 6th Ave SE
and one serving Mayo Park Drive. These entrances open onto
tenant patios with furniture, providing a welcoming outdoor space
for tenants traveling by foot or bike along either road. A second
entrance is provided along Mayo Park Drive, serving a bike storage
room. These two entrances along Mayo Park Drive provide easy
access to the river trail system and Mayo Park for the tenants.
Ample bike parking is provided, with 34 spaces (30 indoors and 4
outdoors). This supports alternate modes of travel by providing
both necessary facilities and convenient access to trails; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Department's May 7, 2015, staff report states that, based upon its
proposed findings of fact, Planning Department staff would recommend approval of the
preliminary plan subject to the following conditions-
1 . The Final Development Plan application shall include:
A. Revised building elevations that identify dimensions, building materials (timer
cladding), colors, and type of glass;
B. Details for the exterior lighting of the building;
C. A Sign Plan if signs will be proposed to aid in traffic circulation throughout the
site;
D. Additional detail for the balconies and terraces, including materials, finishes,
planting, and screening of any exterior HVAC equipment;
E. Additional details showing function of off-street loading, trash removal, and
snow storage/removal;
F. Revised Site and Landscaping Plans which show compliance with the
Bufferyard "D" standards along the northern boundary of the lot;
G. Submission of a detailed Landscaping Plan; and,
H. A Shadow Impact Diagram showing any shadowing effects on adjacent
property.
2. Grading & Drainage Plan approval is required for this application, as well as
payment of any applicable Storm Water Management Area Charge for any
increase in impervious surface.
3. A Traffic Impact Study or a waiver of this obligation is required from the Director of
Public Works.
4. Execution of a City -Owner Contract will be required for the public improvements
required for this proposed development, including reconstruction of 6t" Ave SE
and pedestrian facilities, and Sanitary Manhole installation along Mayo Park Dr
SE.
5. Development charges/obligations applicable to the development of this property
include:
A. Sanitary Sewer Availability Charge (SAC)
B. Water Availability Charge (WAC)
C. Plant Investment Fee (PIF) collected for individual lots at the time of Building
Permit issuance
6. Boulevard trees are required for the development at the rate of 1 tree per 35 feet
of frontage on Mayo Park Drive SE and 6t" Ave SE. A boulevard tree planting
plan shall be approved by the City Forester prior to planting.
7. Park dedication will be required if the property proceeds through a land
subdivision process to create individual parcels. Private parkland is required in
conjunction with this project.
8. The property shall be re -platted into one lot through the platting process.
9. 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.
WHEREAS, on May 13, 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 May 13t" meeting, the Commission
recommended approval of the application based upon Planning Department staffs recommended
findings of fact subject to eight of the staffs nine recommended conditions of approval (conditions
#1, #2, #4 - #9) with the deletion of the second sentence of condition #7; and,
WHEREAS, this matter came before the Common Council as a public hearing on June 1,
2015. At the June 1st 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 June 1, 2015, public hearing, the Common Council permitted all
interested persons to testify and give testimony on the restricted development preliminary plan
request; and,
WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance and substantial weight of the evidence
submitted at the June 1st public hearing, the Common Council determines that the Applicant
satisfied the criteria of R.C.O. §62.708 subject to the eight conditions of approval (conditions #1,
#2, #4 - #9) with condition #7 amended by deleting the second sentence.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Rochester
that the Restricted Development Preliminary Plan #R2015-009CUP is in all things approved
subject to the eight conditions as described and amended above.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council not waive the Final Plan review phase of
this application.
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.1509
10