HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinding of Fact - FalcomHeightsofRochester.GenDevelopPlan#340
BEFORE THE COMMON COUNCIL
CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA
___________________________________
In Re: General Development Plan Findings of Fact,
#340 Conclusions of Law,
and Order
___________________________________
On July 18, 2016, the Common Council of the City of Rochester held a public hearing, upon
notice to the public, to consider the Planning and Zoning Commission's findings of the public
hearing held on June 22, 2016, in response to the application for General Development Plan #340
(Falcon Heights of Rochester).
th
At the July 18 public hearing, all interested persons were given an opportunity to give
testimony and make presentations 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 June 22, 2016, public hearing on this application, the Planning and Zoning
Commission considered the issue of whether General Development Plan #340 satisfied the
conditions of ROCHESTER, MINN., CODE ORDINANCES §61.215 (2013).
2. R.C.O. §61.215, subd. 2, provides that a general development plan must comply
with all of the following criteria:
A. The proposed land uses are generally in accord with the adopted zoning
map. If the general development plan is being processed concurrently
with a rezoning request, the general development plan and the rezoning
request must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. If the general
development plan is being processed concurrently with an amendment to
the land use plan map and a rezoning request, the land use plan map
amendment, rezoning request and general development plan must be
consistent with the policies of the comprehensive plan. If there is
inconsistency between these documents, the means for reconciling the
differences must be addressed.
B. The proposed development, including its lot sizes, density, access and
circulation are compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use
of adjacent property.
C. On-site access and circulation design for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit
vehicles and patrons and private vehicles, and integration of these
facilities with adjacent properties will support the safe travel of persons of
all ages and abilities by minimizing vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle
conflicts through the use of appropriate traffic calming, pedestrian safety,
and other design features appropriate to the context.
D. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing
Plans.
E. The proposed plan makes provisions for planned capital improvements
and streets reflected in the City of Rochester's current 6-Year Capital
Improvement Program, adopted Thoroughfare Plan, the ROCOG Long-
Range Transportation Plan, Official Maps, and any other public facilities
plans adopted by the City. Street system improvements required to
accommodate proposed land uses and projected background traffic are
compatible with the existing uses and uses shown in the adopted Land
Use Plan for the subject and adjacent properties.
F. On and off-site public facilities are adequate, or will be adequate if the
development is phased in, to serve the properties under consideration
and will provide access to adjoining land in a manner that will allow
development of those adjoining lands in accord with this ordinance.
1. Street system adequacy must be based on the street system's ability to
safely accommodate trips from existing and planned land uses on the
existing and proposed street system without creating safety hazards,
generating auto stacking that blocks driveways or intersections, or
disrupting traffic flow on any street, as identified in the traffic impact
report, if required by Section 61.523(C). Capacity from improvements
in the first 3 years of the 6-year CIP shall be included in the
assessment of adequacy.
2. Utilities are now available to directly serve the area of the proposed
land use, or that the City of Rochester is planning for the extension of
utilities to serve the area of the proposed development and such
2
utilities are in the first three years of the City's current 6-Year Capital
Improvements Program, or that other arrangements (contractual,
development agreement, performance bond, etc.) have been made to
ensure that adequate utilities will be available concurrently with
development. If needed utilities will not be available concurrent with
the proposed development, the applicant for the development approval
shall stipulate to a condition that no development will occur and no
further development permit will be issued until concurrency has been
evidenced.
3. The adequacy of other public facilities must be based on the level of
service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing plan
for development.
G. The drainage, erosion, and construction in the area can be handled
through normal engineering and construction practices, or that, at the time
of land subdivision, a more detailed investigation of these matters will be
provided to solve unusual problems that have been identified.
H. Wetlands and Edge Support Areas (as defined in Chapter 59) will be
managed consistent with Chapter 59 and, where applicable, in such a
way as to maintain the quality and quantity of groundwater recharging
lower aquifers and to protect discharge, interflow, infiltration and recharge
processes taking place; provided, however, the Council may waive this
requirement under the provisions of Chapter 59.
I. The lot, block, and street layout for all development and the lot density for
residential development are consistent with the subdivision design
standards contained in Section 64.100 and compatible with existing and
planned development of adjacent parcels.
J. If the eventual platting of the area involves approval of a Type III Land
Subdivision Permit, the proposed development must satisfy one of the
following categories of development:
1. A development bounded on all sides by arterial or higher level
streets, streams or other topographic constraints, existing
development, land already included in an approved General
Development Plan, or permanent open space that limits the
inclusion of other abutting lands;
2. A development with adequate public facilities and constituting
the entire remaining service area of a major public facility
improvement (such as a trunk sewer or water tower) that has
been identified as a project in the Capital Improvement
3
Program;
3. A development that consists of at least 80 acres in land area
regardless of ownership or interest, and consists of all lands for
which the applicant has ownership or interest; or
4. A development for which a development agreement has been
executed by the owner and the city for the entire property
included in the proposed general development plan. The
development agreement must have been drafted based on the
development of the property occurring as proposed in the
general development plan.
K. The Plan is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and the
Complete Streets policy of the City.
L. Where specific building footprint or layouts are identified on the Plan; the
Plan demonstrates that pedestrian access to the customer/tenant
ingress/egress locations in of the building(s), from facilities in both the
public right-of-way, and off-street parking areas that serves the use are
designed to minimize bicycle, pedestrian and vehicular conflicts.
3. R.C.O. §60.532 (5) authorizes the approving body to impose modifications or
conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance
with §61.215.
4. The Planning Department staff reviewed the General Development Plan application
using the criteria found at section 61.215, subd. 2, and recommended the following findings of fact:
A. The property is designated for “low density residential” types of land uses
on the Land Use Plan. Land uses within the GDP would be consistent
with the “low density residential” land use designation for the property.
The property is zoned R-2, and the uses proposed within the GDP are
consistent with the R-2 district.
To achieve the additional units to be attached, the applicant must submit
a performance residential plan for approval. If density exceeds minimum
thresholds, the performance residential development site plan may be
either a Type II or Type III development.
B. The proposed development, including density, access and circulation
does appear compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use of
adjacent properties. The development identifies a secondary access for
4
the development and several access points along the private street that
allow interior units to drive south to Eastwood Rd SE if the residents
choose.
The applicant has revised their GDP to indicate access to the central 76
units further south along the proposed extension of Eastwood Rd SE, in
order that the extension may better serve as a secondary access to the
entire 40-acre development. The applicant states there will only be one
phase and the secondary access will be in place prior to completion of the
nd
72 unit. The extension of Eastwood Rd SE will have to be constructed
prior to generation of 1,200 ADT for development existing off of Red Hawk
DR SE. As part of the site development process, the site will have to meet
landscaping and recreation space requirements to insure computability
with neighboring properties. As part of the parkland dedication
requirement, the applicant is dedicated a 2.81 acre park between the
proposed development and the existing SFD neighborhood to the north.
C. The GDP does appear to support safe travel of pedestrian, bicycles and
vehicles. The GDP has been modified to identify another access and was
re-submitted for review. There are three access points for the interior of
the development, one on Red Hawk Dr and two on the private street –
that does not count those units with direct access onto a street. The GDP
identifies a trail along the private street from Eastwood Rd SE to Red
Hawk Dr SE.
The applicant will have to complete a Performance Residential
Development Plan, in order to establish their proposed use. This future
application will determine specifically the safe travel and minimizing of
conflicts in the development. The site plan for the development should
indicate specific pedestrian and bicycle marking/striping.
D. The mix of housing is consistent with the adopted Land Use and Housing
Plans.
E. Street system improvements required to accommodate the proposed land
use are compatible with existing uses and uses shown in the adopted
Land Use Plan for the subject and adjacent property. The development is
consistent with the low density residential land use plan designation. The
applicant is financially obligated for the cost to improve Eastwood Rd SE
th
from 40 Avenue SE to and including the proposed public cul-de-sac bulb
at the southwest corner of the property.
All infrastructure to be extended to accommodate the development is the
responsibility of the developer, and the roadways in which the
development would take access onto are local residential streets.
F. This criterion is satisfied. The applicant has re-submitted plans for the
secondary access and additional access point to the internal townhome
5
units currently accessed only from Red Hawk Dr SE, now accessed also
on the private street (extension of Eastwood Rd SE). The plans do meet
this criterion and verify system adequacy and safety to accommodate trips
on the proposed street system without creating hazards or causing
disruption.
All infrastructure needed to accommodate the development is the
responsibility of the developer. Where adequate public facilities are
lacking, the developer has the option to enter into a development
agreement with the City. A traffic impact report was waived by the City
Engineer.
The current plan is acceptable to the Fire Department and satisfies Fire
Code regulations as enumerated in the RFD referral. (With the addition of
a fire hydrant as indicated on the RFD referral.)
Certain utilities are available to serve the development. The properties
are within the Rose Harbor High Level Water System Area, which is
available within Red Hawk Dr SE and a stub out from Trumpeter Dr SE.
Both of these locations must be connected into to provide adequate
networking of the water system in this area.
Anticipated static water pressure will range from the upper 60’s to the
upper 70’s PSI within this area depending on finished grades. The water
main must be run through the areas outside of the public streets in such a
war as to provide adequate looping of the system for fire protection and
water quality and water mains must be extended to adjacent properties
per our requirements. The latest layout does not accommodate the
necessary looping very well and some “dead ends” will occur.
There is an existing Development Agreement and two Supplemental
Agreements applicable to the Valley Side Development. Certain terms
and obligations have not been met, and the current proposal varies from
the development planned at the time the existing Agreement and
Supplemental Agreements were executed. If GDP and Special District
elements are approved that are inconsistent with the current Valley Side
agreements, the Owner and City, shall execute a Supplemental
Agreement to address any inconsistencies, prior to recording a Final Plat
and prior to obtaining Site Development Plan (or CUP or final site plan)
approval for the proposed development in the event there is no replat.
Parkland dedication for the development should be in the form of cash in
lieu of land and parkland dedication. The developer can enter into
agreement to reach the adequacy of level required for public facilities and
infrastructure as found in Section 64.130.
6
G. The status of the Grading and Stormwater Management Plan shall be
approved, or approved with conditions, prior to submitting the Final Plat.
Submittal of a Final Plat prior to final Grading and Stormwater
Management Plan approval or approval with conditions requires
authorization from the City Engineer. Payment of any applicable Storm
Water Management Plan Area Charge (SWMPAC) is due concurrent with
Grading Plan approval. Prior to grading approvals, the applicant shall
demonstrate that they have off-site temporary grading easements or are
able to complete grading entirely within the site.
H. No hydric soils exist on the site based on the soil survey.
I. The current plan is acceptable to the Fire Department and does satisfy Fire
Code regulations as enumerated in the RFD referral. (With the note of an
additional hydrant per RFD referral.)
The applicant will have to complete a Performance Residential
Development Site Development Plan, in order to establish their proposed
use. This future application will determine specifically if the lot, block, and
street layout for the development lot density are consistent with the
subdivision, R-2 and other LDM standards. A preliminary plat has also
been submitted and is being reviewed concurrently with the GDP. The
preliminary plat appears to meet the requirements for approval pursuant
to satisfaction of recommended conditions of approval.
J. The general development plan boundaries are already included in an
existing development agreement (#4); the General Development Plan is
replacing the previous 2008 plan and has the same boundaries.
K. The Plan appears to be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.
Additional site detail, such as sidewalks and pedestrian trails, will be
reviewed at the platting and final site plan stage.
L. The proposed development isn’t a commercial development but a residential
development that will provide off-street parking for townhomes. The applicant
will complete a Site Development Plan to verify pedestrian access and
minimizing of bicycle, pedestrian and vehicular conflicts.
5. Based upon its recommended findings of fact, the Planning Department staff
recommended approval of the General Development Plan subject to the following conditions:
A. There is an existing Development Agreement and two Supplemental
Agreements applicable to the Valley Side Development. Certain terms
and obligations have not been met, and the current proposal varies from
7
the development planned at the time the existing Agreement and
Supplemental Agreements were executed. If GDP and Special District
elements are approved that are inconsistent with the current Valley Side
agreements, the Owner and City, shall execute a Supplemental
Agreement to address any inconsistencies, prior to recording a Final Plat
and prior to obtaining Site Development Plan approval for the proposed
development in the event there is no replat.
B. The status of the Grading and Stormwater Management Plan shall be
approved, or approved with conditions, prior to submitting the Final Plat.
Submittal of a Final Plat prior to final Grading and Stormwater
Management Plan approval or approval with conditions requires
authorization from the City Engineer. Payment of any applicable Storm
Water Management Plan Area Charge (SWMPAC) is due concurrent with
Grading Plan approval. Ownership and Maintenance of the proposed on-
site private storm water management facilities shall be addressed by
Agreement with the City, prior to recording the Final Plat. It appears that
the proximity of certain improvements to the south Property line will
require off-site temporary grading easements. Prior to or concurrent with
Final Plat approval, the applicant should demonstrate that they have
easements in place, or that they can construct all on-site improvements
without grading off-site.
C. The applicant is financially obligated for the cost to improve Eastwood Rd
SE from 40th Ave SE to and including the proposed public cul-de-sac
bulb at the southwest corner of the Property. These improvements shall
be completed concurrent with development of the Property and through a
City-Owner Contract.
D. Since Eastwood Rd SE is no longer planned to extend easterly across
this Property as a public road, a public turn-around is needed at the
southerly extend of Hawthorne Court SE which shall be constructed as
part of the City-Owner Contract public improvements for Falcon Heights of
Rochester. The applicant will be required to obtain any applicable off-site
easements for grading unless the design demonstrates that the turn-
around can be constructed without grading off-site.
E. This development is conditioned on Council approval of the proposed
vacation for portions of the Red Hawk Dr SE & Falcon Rd SE rights-of-
way. There are existing public utilities within Red Hawk Dr SE & Falcon
Rd SE. The developer will be obligated to plat public easements to
accommodate the existing public utilities such that a public easement
extends at least 10 ft from the centerline of all public utilities.
8
F. The developer is obligated to dedicate all applicable public easement for
new infrastructure that is needed for this development. Said dedication
shall be via the plat where applicable, and via separate document if exact
alignments are not known at the time of Final Plat.
G. Public Works support for the proposed street realignment within the
easterly and southerly portion of the proposed development is contingent
on the Owner reaching an agreement with the City Parks Department
regarding maintenance of pedestrian facilities (including snow removal)
along the public road frontages of the proposed park land, as well as,
maintenance of the proposed storm water pond feature within the
proposed pond parcel. Pedestrian Facilities are required along both
frontages of all public streets within/abutting this development. In
addition, all driveways shall be constructed as standard “Type A”
approaches with a sidewalk section. It is unclear if these criteria were
proposed to be met from the details shown on the GDP.
H. Execution of a City-Owner Contract, and dedication of any applicable
public easements (not shown on the plat) is required prior for any new /
additional public infrastructure needed to serve this development. Public
sidewalk along the frontages of the proposed parkland shall be
constructed at the developer’s expense and the work include in the
Contract. Preliminary Construction Plan comments will be provided
separately to the applicant’s consulting engineer.
I. There are certain development charge obligations contained in the
Second Supplemental Agreement that are due at the present time (with or
without this project moving forward). An invoice for these obligations will
be sent shortly and payment is due consistent with the terms of the
agreement.
J. One additional fire hydrant in the NW corner of the development, between
the two ‘E’ buildings, shall be added for property water supply for
emergency fire operations on the back side (west) of those buildings.
K. Any stormwater facilities shall be required to have a drainage easement.
L. The water main must be run through the areas outside of the public
streets in such a way as to provide adequate looping of the system for fire
protection and water quality and water mains must be extended to
adjacent properties per RPU requirements.
M. The 40-acre development shall be limited to 1,200 average daily trips
until the proposed secondary access is provided; this is 72 units –
9
completion of the proposed secondary access must occur to allow
rd
construction of the 73 unit and beyond.
N. Dedication of a 10 foot wide platted public utility easements are required
along the frontages of all public streets.
O. The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication
requirements be met via: combination of land and cash with land
dedication and payment due prior to recordation of the final plat. Land
dedication to be the 2.81 acre lot shown on the GDP.
P. The applicant shall submit a revised general development plan with the
following revisions:
(1) Strike bufferyard information from the general development plan;
and,
(2) Under ‘General Development Plans’, letter ‘B.’, strike references to
the Special District. The zoning for the townhome development
portion of the site is R-2. The parkland area is Special District.
6At its June 22, 2016, meeting, the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission
.
held a public hearing on this General Development Plan, reviewed the application according to the
requirements of section 61.215, subd. 2, adopted the Planning Department’s recommended
findings of fact, and recommended approval of the General Development Plan application subject
to 16 conditions of approval.
th
7. At the July 18 public hearing before the Common Council, the Applicant’s
representative indicated agreement with all of the Planning and Zoning Commission’s
recommended findings of fact and recommended approval of the application subject to the 16
conditions of approval.
th
8. At the July 18 public hearing before the Common Council, the Common Council
concurred with and adopted as its own the findings of fact and recommendation of the
Planning and Zoning Commission as described above.
10
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. R.C.O. §61.215, subd. 2, provides that the Council shall approve a general
development plan if the following criteria are satisfied:
A. The proposed land uses are generally in accord with the adopted zoning
map. If the general development plan is being processed concurrently
with a rezoning request, the general development plan and the rezoning
request must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. If the general
development plan is being processed concurrently with an amendment to
the land use plan map and a rezoning request, the land use plan map
amendment, rezoning request and general development plan must be
consistent with the policies of the comprehensive plan. If there is
inconsistency between these documents, the means for reconciling the
differences must be addressed.
B. The proposed development, including its lot sizes, density, access and
circulation are compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use
of adjacent property.
C. On-site access and circulation design for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit
vehicles and patrons and private vehicles, and integration of these
facilities with adjacent properties will support the safe travel of persons of
all ages and abilities by minimizing vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle
conflicts through the use of appropriate traffic calming, pedestrian safety,
and other design features appropriate to the context.
D. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing
Plans.
E. The proposed plan makes provisions for planned capital improvements
and streets reflected in the City of Rochester's current 6-Year Capital
Improvement Program, adopted Thoroughfare Plan, the ROCOG Long-
Range Transportation Plan, Official Maps, and any other public facilities
plans adopted by the City. Street system improvements required to
accommodate proposed land uses and projected background traffic are
compatible with the existing uses and uses shown in the adopted Land
Use Plan for the subject and adjacent properties.
F. On and off-site public facilities are adequate, or will be adequate if the
development is phased in, to serve the properties under consideration
and will provide access to adjoining land in a manner that will allow
development of those adjoining lands in accord with this ordinance.
11
1. Street system adequacy must be based on the street system's
ability to safely accommodate trips from existing and planned land
uses on the existing and proposed street system without creating
safety hazards, generating auto stacking that blocks driveways or
intersections, or disrupting traffic flow on any street, as identified in
the traffic impact report, if required by Section 61.523(C). Capacity
from improvements in the first 3 years of the 6-year CIP shall be
included in the assessment of adequacy.
2. Utilities are now available to directly serve the area of the
proposed land use, or that the City of Rochester is planning for the
extension of utilities to serve the area of the proposed development
and such utilities are in the first three years of the City's current 6-
Year Capital Improvements Program, or that other arrangements
(contractual, development agreement, performance bond, etc.)
have been made to ensure that adequate utilities will be available
concurrently with development. If needed utilities will not be
available concurrent with the proposed development, the applicant
for the development approval shall stipulate to a condition that no
development will occur and no further development permit will be
issued until concurrency has been evidenced.
3. The adequacy of other public facilities must be based on the level
of service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing
plan for development.
G. The drainage, erosion, and construction in the area can be handled
through normal engineering and construction practices, or that, at the time
of land subdivision, a more detailed investigation of these matters will be
provided to solve unusual problems that have been identified.
H. Wetlands and Edge Support Areas (as defined in Chapter 59) will be
managed consistent with Chapter 59 and, where applicable, in such a
way as to maintain the quality and quantity of groundwater recharging
lower aquifers and to protect discharge, interflow, infiltration and recharge
processes taking place; provided, however, the Council may waive this
requirement under the provisions of Chapter 59.
I. The lot, block, and street layout for all development and the lot density for
residential development are consistent with the subdivision design
standards contained in Section 64.100 and compatible with existing and
planned development of adjacent parcels.
J. If the eventual platting of the area involves approval of a Type III Land
12
Subdivision Permit, the proposed development must satisfy one of the
following categories of development:
1. A development bounded on all sides by arterial or higher level
streets, streams or other topographic constraints, existing
development, land already included in an approved General
Development Plan, or permanent open space that limits the
inclusion of other abutting lands;
2. A development with adequate public facilities and constituting
the entire remaining service area of a major public facility
improvement (such as a trunk sewer or water tower) that has
been identified as a project in the Capital Improvement
Program;
3. A development that consists of at least 80 acres in land area
regardless of ownership or interest, and consists of all lands for
which the applicant has ownership or interest; or
4. A development for which a development agreement has been
executed by the owner and the city for the entire property
included in the proposed general development plan. The
development agreement must have been drafted based on the
development of the property occurring as proposed in the
general development plan.
K. The Plan is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and the
Complete Streets policy of the City.
L. Where specific building footprint or layouts are identified on the Plan; the
Plan demonstrates that pedestrian access to the customer/tenant
ingress/egress locations in of the building(s), from facilities in both the
public right-of-way, and off-street parking areas that serves the use are
designed to minimize bicycle, pedestrian and vehicular conflicts.
2. R.C.O. §60.532 (5) authorizes the Council to impose conditions on its approval of a
general development plan.
3. By a substantial amount of the evidence and testimony presented at the July 18,
2016, public hearing, it is hereby determined by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that
General Development Plan #340 complies with the requirements of §61.215, subd. 2 subject to the
13
satisfaction of the 16 conditions of approval described above.
14
ORDER
The Common Council of the City of Rochester, pursuant to R.C.O. §61.215, subd. 2,does
hereby approve General Development Plan #340 subject to the satisfaction of the 16 conditions of
approval described above.
Dated at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of July, 2016.
____________________________________
Randy Staver
President of the Rochester Common Council
Approved at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of July, 2016.
______________________________
Ardell F. Brede
Mayor of the City of Rochester
FOF.Zone15\\GDP\\340
15