HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinding of Fact - GeneralDevelopPlan#339.RogerTreePlantingService
BEFORE THE COMMON COUNCIL
CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA
___________________________________
In Re: General Development Plan Findings of Fact,
#339 Conclusions of Law,
and Order
___________________________________
On November 21, 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 October 26, 2016, in response to the application for General
Development Plan #339.
st
At the November 21 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 October 26, 2016, public hearing on this application, the Planning and Zoning
Commission considered the issue of whether General Development Plan #339 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. Additional flood district regulation information should be identified on the
GDP. Flood Prone and Flood Way Districts should be identified, in order to
determine consistency to the zoning map. Shoreland District should be
revised and re-identified on the property. Without this information, the GDP
does not comply with this criterion.
B. The site is 15.5 acres in size and has space to accommodate required buffer
yards. The subject site and adjacent properties have significant areas within
the flood plain and Shoreland District. Development on either site requires
compliance to LDM regulations. The site is adjacent to existing M-1 located at
th
the SE corner of 30 Avenue SE and Marion Rd SE. Commercial operations
exist to the east, south and west of the subject site. Although the proposed
development may be compatible with existing surrounding uses, it could be
considered incompatible if surrounding properties transition to low-density
4
residential uses as permitted by the R-1 zoning district.
C. This criterion is not satisfied.
The General Development Plan does not identify information necessary to
verify satisfaction of this criterion. Accesses, existing and/or proposed, are
not indicated. Internal circulation of the existing or proposed uses is not
identified. The General Development Plan should be revised to indicate
existing and future access compliant with access management standards.
D. The GDP does not indicate which existing buildings on the site are used for
residential purposes and at what intensity.
The GDP proposes existing single family dwellings for housing. The single
family dwellings will become nonconforming uses within the M-1 district.
Residential uses are not permitted uses within the M-1 District. Chapter 65 of
the LDM regulates nonconforming uses.
E. The GDP does not identify existing and proposed access points in order to
determine if additional ROW or right-turn lane improvements are necessary
on Marion Rd SE or other adjacent streets.
F. The GDP does not identify existing and proposed access points and internal
circulation in order to determine street system adequacy to safely
accommodate trips from the existing and planned land uses on the street
system.
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 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 (or other development plan approval
if there is no plat), and prior to other development plan approvals, that
outlines the developer's and City's obligations related, but not limited to:
access, stormwater management (including any obligations for on or 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.
The property abutting Marion Ln SE is within the SE Intermediate Level
Water System Area, which is available along the entire North Property. The
property abutting 30 Ave SE is within the Main Level Water System Area,
which is available along the entire West Property. Static water pressures
5
within the Intermediate Level Area will be around 90 PSI. The builders must
install pressure-reducing devices near the domestic water meters as required
by the Minnesota Plumbing Code. Static water pressures within the Main
Level Area will range from 58 to 64 PSI. The water mains must be extended
to adjacent properties per RPU Water requirements.
All necessary improvements to the existing infrastructure can be made if
agreed to by the applicant according to the level of service standards in
Section 64.130.
G. The status of the Grading and Stormwater Management Plan shall be
approved, or approved with conditions, prior to submitting the Final Plat (or
other development plan approval if there is no plat). Submittal of a Final Plat
(or other development plan approval if there is no plat) prior to final Grading
and Stormwater Management Plan approval or approval with conditions
requires authorization from the City Engineer.
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 GDP does not indicate existing and future proposed access points onto
the property, internal circulation and street/private road layout.
J. Platting may or may not occur for this property. However, the GDP satisfies
this subsection; bounded by an arterial to the north, existing development on
the east and west and topographic constraints to the south (Badger Run).
K. The plan does not currently comply with the Land Use Plan Map. If the land
use plan map amendment is approved, the GDP will comply with the
Comprehensive Plan. Any uses on the site must comply with Flood District
and Shoreland District regulations.
L. The GDP does not address this criterion and should be revised to indicate
compliance.
5. Based upon its recommended findings of fact, the Planning Department staff
recommended denial of the General Development Plan. The Planning Department staff
stated that this General Development Plan application is missing the following necessary
information required for review:
6
A. Additional flood district regulation information including Flood Prone,
Foodway, and Shoreland Districts.
B. On-site access and circulation design for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit
vehicles and patrons, and private vehicles.
C. Existing and proposed uses for the residential buildings on the site.
D. Identification of wetlands on the project site.
6. The Planning Department also listed the following additional requirements as
submitted by referral agencies that will be required for approval of industrial uses on the
project site:
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 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 (or other development plan approval if there is no plat), and
prior to other development plan approvals, that outlines the developer's
and City's obligations related, but not limited to: access, stormwater
management (including any obligations for on or 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. The status of the Grading and Stormwater Management Plan shall be
approved, or approved with conditions, prior to submitting the Final Plat
(or other development plan approval if there is no plat). Submittal of a
Final Plat (or other development plan approval if there is no plat) prior to
final Grading and Stormwater Management Plan approval or approval
with conditions requires authorization from the City Engineer.
C. Ownership and maintenance of any private on-site stormwater quality and
rate control facilities, and areas containing jurisdictional wetlands needs
to be addressed prior to any Final Plat approval (or other development
plan approval if there is no plat).
7
D. Execution of a City-Owner Contract, and dedication of any applicable on
and off-site public easements is required prior to construction of any
public infrastructure to serve the Property.
E. The water mains must be extended to adjacent properties per RPU
requirements.
F. Boulevard trees will be required for the development. Prior to the
development of the property, the Owner shall determine which of the two
available options, Payment Method or Install Boulevard Trees, will be
used to meet their boulevard tree obligations for each phase of
development. Once the option is selected, the Owner shall either make
applicable cash payment to the Rochester Park and Recreation
Department or submit a planting plan to the city Forester for a planting
permit prior to final development approval. Trees shall be planted every
35 feet.
6At its October 26, 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.
st
7. At the November 21 public hearing before the Common Council, the Applicant
representative testified in favor of the General Development Plan application, but did not
submit any additional facts that were responsive to the Planning and Zoning Commission’s
findings of fact nor responsive to the applicable criteria nor responsive to the Planning
Department’s list of missing information. Instead, the Applicant insisted that he had already
acquired the “Industrial” land use designation from Olmsted County many years ago and
complained about the amount of money he has had to spend in this matter.
st
8. At the November 21 public hearing before the Common Council, the Common
Council, after denying the Applicant’s requested land use plan amendment and zoning map
8
amendment, concurred with and adopted as its own the findings of fact and recommendation
of the Planning and Zoning Commission as described above.
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
9
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.
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
10
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
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
11
general development plan.
3. By a substantial amount of the evidence and testimony presented at the November
21, 2016, public hearing, it is hereby determined by the Common Council of the City of Rochester
that proposed General Development Plan #339 does not comply with the requirements of §61.215,
subd. 2.
ORDER
The Common Council of the City of Rochester, pursuant to R.C.O. §61.215, subd. 2, does
hereby deny General Development Plan #339.
Dated at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of November, 2016.
____________________________________
Randy Staver
President of the Rochester Common Council
Approved at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of November, 2016.
______________________________
Ardell F. Brede
Mayor of the City of Rochester
FOF.Zone15\\GDP\\339
12