HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinding of Fact & F6 - LUPR2015-006.ZoningDistAmendR2015-007.Findings
BEFORE THE COMMON COUNCIL
CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA
___________________________________
In Re: Land Use Plan Amendment #R2015-006 Findings of Fact,
and Zoning District Amendment #R2015-007 Conclusions of Law,
and Order
___________________________________
On January 4, 2015, the Common Council of the City of Rochester conducted a public
hearing, with notice to the public, to hear the application of Joseph Development (“Applicant”) to
consider an amendment to the land use plan designation for property located east of Kenosha
Drive N.W., and north of Valleyhigh Road N.E. (“Site”). The Applicant seeks to change
approximately 7.55 acres of land on the Site from the “Low Density Residential” designation to the
“Medium Density Residential” designation. The Applicant also seeks a zoning district change for
approximately 7.55 acres of land on the Site from the R-2 Zoning District (General Commercial) to
the R-3 Zoning District (Medium Density Residential).
th
At the January 4 public hearing, all interested persons were given an opportunity to give
th
testimony and make presentations concerning the application. During the January 4 public
hearing, the Council received into the record and considered those materials included as part of
the Council agenda packet. All documents are on file with the City Clerk.
Following the public hearing, the Council considered and discussed the entire matter.
th
Based upon all of the testimony and evidence presented at the January 4 public hearing, the
Council made the following findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order.
1
1
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Site is located east of Kenosha Drive N.W., and north of Valleyhigh Road N.E.
2. The applicant has filed three applications for the Site. The first application,
R2015-006LUPA, is a petition to amend the land use designation on 7.55 acres of land from
“Low Density Residential” to “Medium Density Residential.” The second application, R2015-
007ZC, is a petition to amend the zoning district designation on 7.55 acres of land from R-2
(Low Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential). The third application is a
general development plan that identifies the property being developed with a 139-unit senior
living facility.
3. The property is currently vacant.
4. To the north of the Site, there R-2 zoning developed as single family homes. To the
east of the Site, there is land part of a large 49-acre parcel zoned B-4. To the south of the
Site across Valleyhigh Road NW, there is R-3 Zoning (Medium Density Residential) for a
townhome development and B-1 (Restricted Commercial) zoning for commercial development.
To the west of the site, there is a combination of senior apartment housing and vacant land,
both zoned R-2.
5. The property has frontage on Valleyhigh Road NW and Kenosha Drive NW.
Valleyhigh Road NW is designated as a Major Regional Arterial on the Functional Designation
Map Rochester Urban Area Road System ROCOG 2040. The site will access Kenosha Drive
NW, however shows a second access on the GDP to the east onto future Superior Drive NW.
2
2
th
6. The Applicant’s consultant completed a traffic impact study on November 17,
th
submitted to staff on November 30. The summary stated the minimal traffic generated by the
development (438 daily trips) will not greatly impact the existing right of way. Comments from
Rochester Public Works indicates the report did not show how the generated trips would be
distributed to all intersections in the area, nor did the mentioned future development west get
included in the 2027 scenario. The assumption that all the development traffic would be using
the Valleyhigh Road/Kenosha Drive intersection is not acceptable. This does not give
residents of the neighborhood north an accurate depiction of additional traffic through their
neighborhood. Prior to a site development plan approval, the development would be required
to obtain approval from the City Traffic Engineer stating the results of the provided study are
sufficient.
7. A Grading Plan and Drainage Report will be required during the development
phase of the project. The existing stormwater retention pond at the southwest corner of the
property must be maintained.
8. No hydric soils exist on the property based on the Soil Survey. There are no
current wetland applications on the property however the property owner is responsible for
identifying wetlands. The Site does not have any Decorah Edge features on it.
9. The Site is not located within any floodway or flood prone areas.
Land Use Plan Amendment
10. The Land Use Map reflects the policies and goals of the Land Use Plan.
3
3
11. Chapter II, Policies and Recommendations, of the Future Land Use Plan for the
Rochester Urban Service Area recommends 21 Growth Guidelines of which ten are part of the
Recommended Growth Pattern which constitute the general policy basis of the Plan. The
applicable guidelines are as follows:
A. Growth should occur in conjunction with community services and facilities
and existing growth centers and should be exemplified by the illustration of
the Multiple Growth Center Concept.
B. All municipal service areas should be well defined and developed to
accommodate and encourage new development.
C. Medium and high-density housing should be developed in close proximity
to commercial, industrial, and institutional centers and public facilities and
services.
D. Industrial development should be concentrated in industrial parks and should
be permitted only in existing or planned public facility service areas.
E. Commercial development should be concentrated in growth centers, with
regional, community and neighborhood shopping facilities provided in the
Rochester area and community commercial activities in the smaller growth
centers.
F. Strip commercial development should be prohibited. Commercial
development should be concentrated in clusters.
G. Where possible, growth patterns should be structured so as not to interfere
with residential neighborhoods, prime agricultural land, and significant
environmental areas. Prime agricultural land should be preserved.
H. Nonprime agricultural land and environmental areas located beyond
designated growth areas should be retained for agricultural or open space
uses where possible.
I. Residential development occurring in agricultural areas should be of very
low-density, should be prohibited from locating in areas with existing uses
(such as feedlots) which are incompatible with residential uses, should be
located in close proximity to urban service areas, and on nonprime
agricultural land where possible.
4
4
J. Preserve land, which has a unique recreational, geological, or
environmental significance.
5
5
12. Chapter III of the Land Use Plan states, in part, that before land is desirable for
medium density residential and commercial uses, it must exhibit a number of important features
including those expressed in the following location criteria found in Chapter II:
A. The plan designations have been made based not only on locational
factors but also on projected demand for various uses. Thus, a site that
may be suitable for either a commercial or a residential use may be
designated on the plan for residential purposes based on projected land
area needs. Within limits of projected needs (with allowances made for
an excess of land supply over demand for each use designation), only the
best sites have been identified for uses with greater intensity of use than
low-density residential use.
B. An important goal of the Land Use Plan is to accommodate and
encourage mixed density and mixed use development. While the
locational criteria indicate suitability for the predominant use and the level
of intensity of use in an area, it is not intended to designate areas
exclusively for the uses indicated.
C. The Plan reflects the broad assumption that all of the urban service area
is developable and can be put to reasonable private use. At the scale of
specific parcels examined through detailed general development plans,
some areas have limitations of terrain and other site constraints that make
them unsuited for conventional development. In such cases, the Plan
designation does not imply a right to develop in a conventional manner,
but instead to realize a reasonable overall use sensitive to site
constraints. Eventual use of sites with steep slopes, wetlands and other
site constraints may include clusters of uses on readily developable parts
of the site with sensitive areas left as public or private open space.
D. The locational criteria for all the use designations reflect considerations of
access, traffic characteristics, and road characteristics; other public
infrastructure; proximity to other uses (especially those that can be
nuisances for residential uses); and terrain. Due to their reliance on high
capacity streets capable of handling large volumes of traffic and heavy
commercial vehicles, the application of locational criteria for industrial use
should be heavily weighted toward those criteria applying to the
transportation system. Consistent with the overall intent of the Plan, other
locational criteria for industrial uses should be evaluated as desirable but
not essential site characteristics.
6
6
13. The Planning Department staff applied the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use
Plan’s “Medium Density Residential” location criteria in processing that part of this application
seeking to change the land use designation of 7.55 acres of the Site to the “Medium Density
Residential” designation. Those criteria are:
A. Having level to fairly rolling terrain, outside flood prone or poorly drained
areas with steep slopes.
B. In close proximity to commercial area, employment centers, recreation areas
or other facilities that serve smaller households.
C. Having good access by means of collector, arterial and expressway and
transit systems to employment centers, commercial areas and community
facilities.
D. Buffered from the adverse influences of commercial, industrial and other
incompatible activities.
14. The Planning Department staff report, dated December 3, 2015, applied the above
criteria to the Site and suggested the following findings of fact:
A. The property has rather level terrain. There is a low spot on the
southwest corner of the property where the stormwater retention pond is
located. The remainder of the site slopes up to the northeast. Lidar data
shows the site sloping down at the northeast corner. The majority of the
site has a grade change of only 14 feet, or 4%. The site is not near any
flood prone or poorly drained areas.
B. The property is approximately a quarter mile from commercial,
employment centers and recreation areas. A Mayo Clinic facility is
located directly southeast of this site with numerous office, retail, and
commercial uses located along West Circle Drive NW. The IBM campus
is about three quarters of a mile to the east of this site. The property is
located half a mile from the Douglas Trail.
C. The property has frontage on Valleyhigh Drive NW which provides a
connection to West Circle Drive NW. Both thoroughfares provide good
access and connectivity to employment centers in the area, commercial
7
7
nodes, and community facilities. The site is not currently served by direct
transit service. Timing of transit service to this property will in part be
dependent on the development of abutting private lands.
D. Currently there are no commercial or industrial uses around the area from
which the property would need to be buffered from. The north and west
developments are residential in nature. The future commercially
designated property to the east will be required to construct adequate
bufferyards adjacent to the site during the development review process.
15. Based upon the recommended findings of fact as found in the December 3, 2015,
staff report, the Planning Department staff recommended approval of the Land Use Plan
Amendment.
16. On December 9, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing
to review the proposed land use plan amendment. The Commission recommended the approval
of Land Use Plan Amendment #R2015-006LUPA based upon the Planning Department’s
recommended findings of fact.
Zoning District Amendment
17. Rochester Code of Ordinances (RCO) §60.338 provides that the Council shall
approve a petition to amend the zoning map or the text of the zoning ordinance if the amendment
satisfies one of the following criteria:
A. The area, as presently zoned, is inconsistent with the policies and
goals of the Comprehensive Plan;
B. The area was originally zoned erroneously due to a technical or
administrative error;
C. While both the present and proposed zoning districts are consistent
with the Plan, the proposed district better furthers the policies and
goals of the Comprehensive Plan as found in Chapters 2 and 3 of the
8
8
Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, Chapter 3 of the
Housing Plan, and Chapter 10 of the ROCOG Long Range
Transportation Plan; or
D. The area has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the
public interest to rezone so as to encourage development or
redevelopment of the area.
18. R.C.O. §60.338 also provides that the Council shall approve a petition to amend the
zoning map or the text of the zoning ordinance if the amendment satisfies all of the following
criteria:
A. the permitted uses allowed within the proposed zoning district will be
appropriate on the subject property and compatible with adjacent
properties and the neighborhood; and
B. the proposed amendment does not involve spot zoning. (Spot Zoning
involves the classification of a single lot or several small lots to a
district which is different than that assigned to surrounding properties,
for reasons inconsistent with the purposes set forth in this ordinance,
the state enabling legislation, or the decisions of courts in this state.)
19. The Planning Department staff report, dated December 3, 2015, suggested the
following findings of fact concerning the proposed R-3 rezoning:
A. The Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan designates this
property as appropriate for “low density residential” types of uses.
A Land Use Plan amendment is being considered concurrent with
this application. If the Land Use Plan amendment from “low
density residential” to “medium density residential” is approved,
rezoning 7.55 acres of land to R-3 (Medium Density Residential)
would be consistent with the “medium density residential” land use
designation. If the Land Use Plan amendment is not approved, the
proposed rezoning would be inconsistent with the Land Use Plan.
The R-3 Zoning designation is consistent with zoning in the area
and encourages development and infill of vacant land.
B. According to the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance, the R-3
9
9
Zoning District is intended to maintain areas developed
predominantly with multi-unit residential buildings outside of the
Central Development Core, or areas of existing low density
development where the need to encourage redevelopment has
been identified on the Land Use Plan. The R-3 Zoning District
designation provides a buffer for single family residential from
commercial uses. This zone change request would provide a
separation between the commercial uses across Valleyhigh Road
NW to the existing single family homes.
C. The amendment to R-3 zoning would be consistent with the
Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan if R2015-006LUPA
is approved as “medium density residential”, and would not be
considered spot zoning. Additionally, there is R-3 zoning directly
south of the site across Valleyhigh Road NW.
20. Based upon the recommended findings of fact as found in the December 3, 2015,
staff report, the Planning Department staff recommended approval of this zone change request.
21. On December 9, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing
to review the proposed rezoning request. The Commission recommended the approval of Zoning
District Amendment #R2015-007zc based upon the Planning Department’s recommended findings
of fact.
th
22. At the January 4 public hearing before the Common Council, the Applicant’s
representative appeared and gave a presentation in support of the application.
th
23. At the January 4 public hearing before the Common Council, no one appeared in
opposition to the requests.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. This matter is properly before the Common Council pursuant to Minn. Stat.
§462.355, subdivisions 2 and 3, and §462.356.
10
10
2. By the greater weight of the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, the
Common Council of the City of Rochester determines that the Land Use Plan and Land Use Map
should be amended, upon consideration of the goals, objectives, strategies and policies of the
current Urban Service Area Land Use Plan. The proposed Land Use Plan amendment is
consistent with the existing Land Use Plan.
3. By the greater weight of the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, the
Common Council of the City of Rochester hereby determines that the Applicant has satisfied the
criteria at R.C.O. §60.338 for a zoning district change for the Site to the R-3 Zoning District. The
proposed zone change would be consistent with the current land use plan, as amended, for the
Site.
ORDER
The Common Council of the City of Rochester, pursuant to Minn. Stat. §462.355,
subdivisions 2 and 3, does hereby order that the Applicant's request for an amendment to the
Land Use Plan so as to amend the Site’s current land use designation of “Low Density
Residential” to “Medium Density Residential” (Land Use Plan Amendment #R2015-006LUPA) be
in all things approved.
The Council does also hereby order that the Applicant’s request for a zoning district change
for an amendment to the zoning district designation for the Site from the R-2 Zoning District
designation to the R-3 Zoning District (Zoning District Amendment #R2015-007ZC) be in all things
approved.
11
11
Dated at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of January, 2016.
______________________________
Randy Staver, President
City of Rochester Common Council
Approved at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of January, 2016.
______________________________
Ardell F. Brede
Mayor of the City of Rochester
Fof.Zone15/LUP.ZONE.06
12
12