HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinding of Fact - WestEightyDevelopment.GeneralDevelopPlan341
BEFORE THE COMMON COUNCIL
CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA
___________________________________
In Re: General Development Plan Findings of Fact,
#341 Conclusions of Law,
and Order
___________________________________
On August 1, 2016, and August 15, 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 July 13, 2016, in response to the application
for General Development Plan #341 (West Eighty Development).
stth
At the August 1 and August 15 public hearings, 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 July 13, 2016, public hearing on this application, the Planning and Zoning
Commission considered the issue of whether General Development Plan #341 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. A land use plan and zoning map amendment are being considered
concurrently with the GDP. If the map amendments are denied, the GDP’s
proposed uses will be inconsistent with the land use plan and zoning map
designations.
If the map amendments are approved, the GDP should be revised to identify
the Shoreland District on the subject site.
B. The proposed development is not compatible with the existing and
permissible future use of adjacent property. Existing and permissible future
uses of the adjacent property and properties across Commercial Dr SW are
those allowed within the M-1 District, a mixed commercial-industrial district.
Such uses include 24-hour truck stop and fast food restaurants, with exterior
lighting satisfying Standard ‘D’.
4
If the land use plan and zoning map amendments are approved, the GDP
should be revised to indicate additional buffering between Lot 6, Block 2 (the
adjacent M-1 site) and along Commercial Dr SW. Additional buffering may
include berms and physical structures and extra space with plantings.
If the land use plan and zoning map amendments are approved, multi-family
could be established and would be isolated. The GDP should identify
additional recreation space for onsite resident use.
C. The GDP identifies existing access points and pedestrian connection to other
pedestrian facilities offsite. The GDP does not identify controlled access; the
GDP should be updated to reflect existing controlled access along the
frontage.
D. The GDP proposes multi-family uses.
E. The applicant is required to complete a traffic impact report or study; this has
not been submitted. The applicant has stated the report should be submitted
th
by June 16.
F. The applicant is required to complete a traffic impact report or study; this has
not been submitted. The applicant has stated the report should be submitted
th
by June 16. The GDP should also identify the designations of adjacent and
th
nearby streets, including 48 Street SW and Commercial Dr SW. (The traffic
impact study has been submitted on Thursday, June 16; it was emailed to
Richard Freese, City Public Works Director. City Public Works and Planning
Transportation Planner review is pending.).
Secondary access will be required for this development before it is allowed to
exceed 1,200 average daily trips (ADT). Currently the only access is
Commercial Dr SW’s connection to 48th Street SW. Secondary access is
required for public safety purposes. The development may need to be
phased until such time Commercial Dr SW is extended by the abutting
th
Owner, from the north line of West Eighty, to 40 Street SW.
At a traffic generation of 6.59 ADT/unit, the development could construct 182
units before secondary access must be completed.
There is an existing Development Agreement and multiple Supplemental
Agreements for this Property. The current proposal varies from the
development plan and uses being considered at the time the existing
Agreements were executed and is inconsistent with certain terms. To address
the adequacy of public facilities for the current proposal, a Supplemental
Agreement should be required to address any inconsistencies from the
existing agreement such the need for parkland dedication, and Owner’s
obligations related to extension of Commercial Dr SW for a secondary
access. The Owner’s representative should contact City Public Works to
5
initiate the process for preparing a Supplemental Agreement for execution by
the Owner.
If the land use plan and zoning maps are approved, since multi-family uses
would be isolated on this site the GDP should identify additional on-site
recreation space for future residents.
G. Grading and drainage plan approval will be required as part of a plat or site
plan approval.
H. Hydric soils exist on the site according to the Soil Survey. The property owner
is responsible for identifying wetlands on the property and submitting the
information as part of this application.
I. The lot, block, and street layout and lot density for residential development
are consistent with the subdivision design standards and compatible with
existing and planned development of adjacent parcels.
J. A Type III Land Subdivision permit may or may not be necessary in the future
for this development, depending on future proposals. However, the GDP
satisfies this subsection; bounded topographic constraints to the north and
west (steep slopes and Willow Creek), bounded by an arterial to the south
th
(48 Street SW) and bounded by existing development and an approved
GDP to the east.
K. If the land use plan map amendment is approved, the GDP will comply with
the Comprehensive Plan.
L. The GDP does not identify a specific footprint. Pedestrian access and
internal circulation will be reviewed at a final site plan stage, such as a CUP
or Site Development Plan.
5. Based upon its recommended findings of fact, the Planning Department staff
recommended denial of the General Development Plan. However, if the Council decided to
approve the General Development Plan, the Planning Department Staff recommended the
General Development Plan be continued to a later date to allow the Staff time to review the
submitted traffic study. The Planning Department staff also recommended any approval of the
General Development Plan be subject to the following conditions:
A. There is an existing Development Agreement and multiple Supplemental
Agreements for this Property. The current proposal varies from the
6
development plan and uses being considered at the time the existing
Agreements were executed and is inconsistent with certain terms. To
address the adequacy of public facilities for the current proposal, a
Supplemental Agreement should be required to address any
inconsistencies from the existing agreement such the need for parkland
dedication, and Owner’s obligations related to extension of Commercial
Dr SW for a secondary access. The Owner’s representative should
contact me at (507) 328-2427 to initiate the process for preparing a
Supplemental Agreement for execution by the Owner.
B. Approval of a Traffic Impact Report / Traffic Impact Study is required.
C. The status of the subdivision 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.
D. It appears that the density for the proposed development may result in the
need for a secondary access to facilitate full build-out. The development
may need to be phased until such time Commercial Dr SW is extended by
the abutting Owner, from the north line of West Eighty, to 40th St SW.
rd
The development may construct 182 units; construction of the 183 unit
and beyond requires completion of the secondary access.
E. Execution of a City-Owner Contract, and dedication of any applicable
public easements (not shown on a final plat) is required prior for any new
/ additional public infrastructure needed to serve this development.
F. Public Works development related charges for this Property are included
in the existing Development Agreement, and / or will be included in the
Supplemental Agreement and City-Owner Contract. Payment will be due
as part of the City-Owner Contract invoicing, or Site Development Plan /
Building Permit approval process, consistent with the terms of the
Agreements. Obligations related to SAC, WAC have previously been
paid, and the WCTID obligation is a current assessment. Remaining
development related charge obligations that are applicable concurrent
with development include Parkland Dedication obligations, a Plant
Investment Fee, and any applicable Storm Water Management Plan Area
Charge.
G. Park Dedication will be required and the Park and Recreation Department
recommends that dedication be met via: Cash payment in lieu of land.
Dedication shall be required for any subdivision of the subject lands and
is required prior to recordation of the Final Plat.
7
H. All water services left unused with the development of this property must
be properly abandoned per RPU Water requirements.
I. The GDP shall be revised to indicate Shoreland District boundaries,
street designations, additional buffering, additional recreation space and
existing controlled access.
J. Prior to the submittal of the Site Development Plan, the applicant shall
submit written approval of the traffic impact study by City Public Works.
6At its July 13, 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 denial of the General Development Plan application.
th
7. At the August 15 public hearing before the Common Council, the Applicant’s
representative testified in favor of the General Development Plan application and submitted
the following recommended findings of fact in support of that application:
A. A land use plan and zoning map amendment are being considered
concurrently with the GDP amendment. The GDP should be
amended to identify the Shoreland District on the site.
B. The proposed development is compatible with the existing and
permissible future uses of adjacent properties. The GDP should be
revised to indicate additional buffering between Lot 6, Block 2, to
the north and along Commercial Drive SW. Additional buffering
may include berms and physical structures and extra space with
plantings. Due to the proximity of the site to a public park, the
GDP need not be revised to identify additional recreational space
for onsite resident use.
C. The GDP identifies existing access points and pedestrian
connection to other pedestrian facilities offsite. The GDP should
be updated to reflect existing controlled access along the frontage.
D. The GDP proposed multi-family uses which are consistent with
Land Use and Housing Plans.
8
E. A traffic impact report has been submitted by the Applicant and
approved by Public Works.
F. A traffic impact report has been submitted by the Applicant and
approved by Public Works. A secondary access will not be
necessary or required to complete development of the 234 units
contemplated by the Applicant.
A Supplemental Agreement should be required to address the
need for any additional public facilities than those provided in the
present Development Agreement, as supplemented, caused by the
current proposal, such as the need for parkland dedication.
Because of the proximity of the site to a public park, the GDP need
not be revised to identify additional on-site recreation space.
G. Grading and drainage plan approval will be required as part of a
plat or site plan approval.
H. Hydraulic soils exist on the site according to the Soil Survey. The
owner is responsible for identifying wetlands on the site and
submitting information as part of this application.
I. The lot, block, and street layout and lot density for residential
development are consistent with the subdivision design standards
and compatible with existing and planned development of adjacent
parcels.
J. A Type III Land Subdivision permit may or may not be necessary in
the future for this development, depending on future proposals.
However, the GDP satisfies this subsection; bounded topographic
constraints to the north and west, bounded by an arterial street to
the south (48th Street SW) and bounded by existing development
and an approved GDP to the east.
K. If the Land Use Plan Amendment is approved, the Plan will comply
with the Comprehensive Plan and the Complete Streets policy of
the City.
L. The GDP does not identify a specific footprint. Pedestrian access
and internal circulation will be reviewed at a final site plat stage,
such as a CUP or Site Development Plan.
th
8. At the August 15 public hearing before the Common Council, the Common
Council concurred with and adopted as its own the findings of fact and recommendation of the
9
applicant as described above.
th
9. At the August 15 public hearing, the Council accepted the Planning
Department’s recommended conditions of approval #A, #C, and #E - #J. Additionally, the
Council imposed the following two additional conditions:
K. The General Development Plan must be revised to indicate
additional buffering between Lot 6, Block 2 (the adjacent M-1 site)
and along Commercial Drive S.W. Additional buffering may
include berms, physical structures, and extra space with plantings.
L. The applicant must work with Public Works, and pay and install a
temporary turnaround at the north end of the existing frontage
road.
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.
10
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 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.
11
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
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
12
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 August 15,
2016, public hearing, it is hereby determined by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that
General Development Plan #341 complies with the requirements of §61.215, subd. 2 subject to the
satisfaction of the ten conditions of approval described above (conditions #A, #C, and #E - #L).
ORDER
The Common Council of the City of Rochester, pursuant to R.C.O. §61.215, subd. 2,does
hereby approve General Development Plan #341 subject to the satisfaction of the ten conditions of
approval described above (conditions #A, #C, and #E - #L).
13
Dated at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of August, 2016.
____________________________________
Randy Staver
President of the Rochester Common Council
Approved at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of August, 2016.
______________________________
Ardell F. Brede
Mayor of the City of Rochester
FOF.Zone15\\GDP\\341
14