Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinding of Fact - ReflectionsMayoLakeSecond.LandSubdPermit.R2016-001 BEFORE THE COMMON COUNCIL CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA ________________________________________ In Re: Land Subdivision Permit #R2016-001 Findings of Fact, Reflections on Mayo Lake Second Conclusions of Law And Order ________________________________________ On April 4, 2016, the Common Council of the City of Rochester conducted a public hearing, upon notice to the public, to consider the Planning and Zoning Commission's findings of the public hearing held on March 9, 2016, in response to Land Subdivision Permit (Preliminary th Plat) #R2016-001. At the April 4 public hearing, all interested persons were given the opportunity to make presentations and give testimony concerning the application. Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, the Common Council of the City of Rochester does hereby make the following findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. At its public hearing on this application, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered the issue of whether Land Subdivision Permit (Preliminary Plat) #R2016-001 satisfied the conditions of section 61.225, subd. 2, of the Rochester Code of Ordinances. 2. R.C.O. §61.225, subd. 2, provides that the Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a land subdivision if all of the following findings with respect to the proposed development are made: A. The proposed land subdivision conforms to all relevant requirements of this ordinance and variances have been granted to permit any nonconformance; B. The proposed water system and sanitary sewer system are adequate to serve the normal and fire protection demands of proposed development and to provide for the efficient and timely extension to serve future development; C. The plan for soil erosion and stormwater management meets the adopted standards of the City of Rochester and is consistent with the adopted Stormwater Management Plan or adopted drainage or stormwater policies; D. The vehicular and non-motorized system is consistent with adopted transportation plans and is consistent with the street layout standards listed in section 64.120 and traffic service standards in section 61.526; E. The lot and block layout provide for safe and convenient vehicular, service and emergency access, efficient utility service connections, and adequate buildable area in each lot for planned uses; F. The proposed land subdivision has taken into account the current six- year and other Long-Range Capital Improvements Programs and the elements listed therein in the design of the subdivision; G. The proposed subdivision, if in a residential zoning district, addresses the need for spillover parking consistent with the requirements of section 63.426; H. The right-of-ways and easements of adequate size and dimension are provided for the purpose of constructing the street, utility, and drainage facilities needed to serve the development; I. The proposed parks, trail thoroughfares and open space dedications are consistent with adopted plans, policies and regulations; J. The proposed subdivision will not have off-site impacts on the street, drainage, water or wastewater systems that exceed adopted standards; K. The proposed subdivision will not have adverse impacts on the safety or viability of permitted uses on adjacent properties; L. The proposed land subdivision is designed in such a manner as to allow for continued development in an efficient manner on adjacent undeveloped lands; 2 2 M. The soils, topography and water tables have been adequately studied to ensure that all lots are developable for their designated purposes; N. The proposed land subdivision is consistent with the standards of the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan; O. Any land located within Zone A as shown on the currently adopted Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps of Flood Insurance Study, Rochester, Minnesota, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is determined to be suitable for its intended use and that the proposed subdivision adequately mitigates the risks of flooding, inadequate drainage, soil and rock formations with severe limitations for development, severe erosion potential, or any other floodplain related risks to the health, safety or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision in a manner consistent with this ordinance; P. The proposed land subdivision, if approved, would not result in a violation of federal or state law, or city or county ordinance; and Q. The proposed land subdivision permit is consistent with any approved and applicable General Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit or Traffic Impact Study. 3. R.C.O. §61.226 authorizes the approving body to impose modifications or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to ensure compliance with §61.225. 4. The Planning and Zoning Commission concluded that the application for Land Subdivision Permit #R2016-001 satisfied the requirements of R.C.O. §61.225 if the following conditions are imposed: A. There are inadequate on and off site public facilities, specifically Public Roadways, Sanitary Sewer, Water, and Storm Water Management Facilities, existing to accommodate the development of this Property. No development will be allowed to occur until the City Council has determined that all required public facilities are adequate for said development. Alternatively, the developer may 3 3 request to join with the City in making these inadequate public facilities adequate for this development, and may enter into a development agreement, prior to Final Plat submittal, that outlines the developer's and City's obligations related, but not limited to: access, parking restrictions, stormwater management (including any obligations for off-site facilities), transportation improvements (including any off-site improvements necessary to accommodate this development), pedestrian facilities, contributions for existing & future public infrastructure, and the extension of public utilities to abutting properties where applicable. B. Grading & Drainage Plan approval is required prior to recording the Final Plat. C. The applicant agrees that this subdivision will have an impact on the need for Parkland and that the dedication requirements (.488 acres) shall be cash in lieu of land with payment due prior to the recordation of the final plat. D. Ownership and maintenance of the proposed Outlots needs to be addressed prior to Final Plat approval. E. Public easements are required for all public utilities and any public drainage and must be shown on the plat. F. The owner is responsible for posting one side of the private roadways “No Parking.” G. Cul-de-sacs shall be posted no parking. H. An access application must be submitted to Olmsted County for County Road 125 access points. Outlot F South Shore Lane SW access must remain sited across from 4047 Mayowood Road access on the west side. I. Access control shall be re-established along CSAH 25. J. A pedestrian connection must be provided between the lots on the western cul-de-sac of Outlot E also known as Mayo Lake Road SW and Mayowood Road S.W. K. A portion of the roadway on Mayo Lake Road shall be dedicated to adequate pedestrian facilities either by constructing sidewalk 4 4 laying adequate road markings or by other reasonable and appropriate means. th 5. At the April 4 public hearing, the Applicant’s representative agreed with the above conditions as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission except for condition of approval #K. th 6. At the April 4 public hearing, the Council deleted condition of approval #K. 7. The Council concurs with and adopts as its own the findings of fact, conditions of approval, and recommendation proposed by the Planning and Zoning Commission except for condition of approval #K. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. R.C.O. §61.225, subd. 2, provides that the Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a land subdivision if all of the following findings with respect to the proposed development are made: A. The proposed land subdivision conforms to all relevant requirements of this ordinance and variances have been granted to permit any nonconformance; B. The proposed water system and sanitary sewer system are adequate to serve the normal and fire protection demands of proposed development and to provide for the efficient and timely extension to serve future development; C. The plan for soil erosion and stormwater management meets the adopted standards of the City of Rochester and is consistent with the adopted Stormwater Management Plan or adopted drainage or stormwater policies; D. The vehicular and non-motorized system is consistent with adopted transportation plans and is consistent with the street layout standards listed in section 64.120 and traffic service standards in 5 5 section 61.526; E. The lot and block layout provide for safe and convenient vehicular, service and emergency access, efficient utility service connections, and adequate buildable area in each lot for planned uses; F. The proposed land subdivision has taken into account the current six-year and other Long-Range Capital Improvements Programs and the elements listed therein in the design of the subdivision; G. The proposed land subdivision, if in a residential zoning district, addresses the need for spillover parking consistent with the requirements of section 63.426; H. The right-of-ways and easements of adequate size and dimension are provided for the purpose of constructing the street, utility, and drainage facilities needed to serve the development; I. The proposed parks, trail thoroughfares and open space dedications are consistent with adopted plans, policies and regulations; J. The proposed subdivision will not have off-site impacts on the street, drainage, water or wastewater systems that exceed adopted standards; K. The proposed subdivision will not have adverse impacts on the safety or viability of permitted uses on adjacent properties; L. The proposed land subdivision is designed in such a manner as to allow for continued development in an efficient manner on adjacent undeveloped lands; M. The soils, topography and water tables have been adequately studied to ensure that all lots are developable for their designated purposes; N. The proposed land subdivision is consistent with the standards of the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan; O. Any land located within Zone A as shown on the currently adopted Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps of Flood Insurance Study, Rochester, Minnesota, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is determined to be suitable for its intended use and that the proposed subdivision adequately mitigates the risks 6 6 of flooding, inadequate drainage, soil and rock formations with severe limitations for development, severe erosion potential, or any other floodplain related risks to the health, safety or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision in a manner consistent with this ordinance; P. The proposed land subdivision, if approved, would not result in a violation of federal or state law, or city or county ordinance; and Q. The proposed land subdivision permit is consistent with any approved and applicable General Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit or Traffic Impact Study. 2. R.C.O. §61.226 authorizes the Council to impose conditions on its approval of a development permit. 3. By a substantial amount of the evidence and testimony presented at the April 4, 2016, hearing, it is hereby determined by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that Land Subdivision Permit #R2016-001 complies with the requirements of R.C.O. §61.225, subd. 2, if the Applicant satisfies the first ten conditions of approval recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission (conditions #A - #J). ORDER The Common Council of the City of Rochester, pursuant to R.C.O. §61.225, subd. 2, does hereby approve Land Subdivision Permit (Preliminary Plat) #R2016-001 subject to the first ten conditions of approval recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission (conditions #A - #J). 7 7 Dated at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of April, 2016. ________________________________ Randy Staver President of the Rochester Common Council Approved at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of April, 2016. ______________________________ Ardell F. Brede Mayor of the City of Rochester Fof.Zone15\\LandSub\\1601 8 8