Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 548-16 - RiverwalkDowntownCityApartments.R2016-034CUPRESOLUTION WHEREAS, GZ East Center Street applied for a Restricted Development Preliminary Plan #R2016-034CUP. The Applicant proposes to develop a six -story building with 149 residential units with 174 at -grade and underground parking spaces with a small area for commercial use. The property is located along the north side of East Center Street east of the Zumbro River and south of Mayo Field; and, WHEREAS, the property is described as follows: The West 98 feet of the East 148 feet of the South 200 feet of Lot Nineteen (19) of State Subdivision, Section Thirty-six (36), Township One Hundred Seven (107), Range Fourteen (14), Olmsted County, Minnesota. ALSO The East 50 feet of the South 200 feet of Lot 19, State Plat of Section 36, Township 107, Range 14, all located in the City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota. ALSO The West 50 feet of the South 200 feet of Lot 18, State Plat of Section 36, Township 107, Range 14, in the city of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota. ALSO The East 50 feet of the West 100 feet of the South 215 feet of Lot 18, State Sub. of Section 36, Township 107, Range 14, in the City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota. Containing in all, 1.16 acres, more or less; and, WHEREAS, since the property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) and since the proposed mix of intensity and density of development is not permitted under these zoning designations, the Applicant is proposing the development through the restricted development process; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.700 recognizes that certain land uses which are generally not allowed within a given zoning district can, if regulated, "serve both the public interest and allow a more equitable balancing of private interests than that achieved by strict adherence to standard zoning regulations;" and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.700 further states that the ordinances providing for restricted developments encourage innovation and experimentation in the development of land that would otherwise not be possible under the established zoning district regulations; and, 1 WHEREAS, this application requires a two-step review process consisting of a preliminary plan and a final plan. The preliminary plan phase follows the Type III, Phase II procedure with a hearing before the Planning Commission and a hearing before the Council. The final plan phase is a Type III, Phase III procedure with a hearing before the City Council; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.706 states the Council must approve a restricted development preliminary plan if it finds the development satisfies the criteria listed in R.C.O. §62.708, subd. 2 or a modification for any unmet criteria has been granted as provided in R.C.O. §62.712; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.712 states the Council may waive the need to satisfy certain approval criteria if it finds- 1. The applicant has demonstrated that the plan as submitted adequately compensates for failing to address the criterion in question; and, 2. The strict application of any provision would result in exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship upon, the owner of such property, provided the modification may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the purposes of this ordinance or the policies of the Land Use Plan; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.708 (Criteria for Type III Developments), subd. 2 provides the relevant criteria for the review of this application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Department applied the criteria found at R.C.O. §62.708, subd. 2 (Preliminary Type III Development Plan) to this application and prepared the following findings of fact: A. Capacity of Public Facilities: The site is located within a developed area. City sewer and water and other utilities are available to serve the site, subject to applicable connection fees. Grading & Drainage Plan approval is required prior to Final CUP approval. Payment of any applicable Storm Water Management Area Charge for any increase in impervious surface. Execution of a Maintenance Agreement is required for the proposed on -site facilities prior to Grading Plan approval. B. Geologic Hazards: There are no known geologic hazards on the property. There are no slopes and the parcel is flat. The site has no known sinkholes and there are no hydric or floodplain soils. 2 C. Natural Features: The development proposal will not substantially alter the existing topography of the site. New vegetation and landscaping is proposed with the development. D. Residential Traffic Impact: A Traffic Impact Report (TIR) submitted by the applicant and approved by Rochester Public Works shows that traffic caused by the proposed development will not exceed planned capacities on local residential streets. Frequent truck traffic to the site is not anticipated due to the residential use. Infrequent truck traffic to the site for residents moving in or out will primarily utilize East Center Street. Based on the Traffic Impact Report submitted by the applicant and approved by Rochester Public Works, the proposed development will not create additional traffic during evening and nighttime hours on local residential streets. Primary access to the site is from East Center Street, which is classified as a Secondary Urban Arterial, not a local residential street. E. Traffic Generation Impact: The TIR submitted by the applicant and approved by Rochester Public Works shows that the development will not cause the capacity of adjacent streets to be exceeded. Public roadway improvements related to the development will not be required. F. Height Impacts: Images of shadow produced by the development at various times of the day throughout the year was submitted by the applicant. A shadow study was submitted with the application. The part of Mayo Field located directly to the north of the proposed building will receive the greatest amount of shade throughout the day. According to the study, the single-family property to the east of the site would be blocked from sunlight throughout the year in the mid -to -late afternoon, but the blockage of sunlight does would not occur for a majority of the day. The terrain of the site and the surrounding properties is relatively flat, and the surrounding neighborhood is consistently developed. The proposed residential building will not significantly alter views from adjacent residential buildings. G. Setbacks: The site is located at the edge of a residential 3 neighborhood that is generally zoned for low -density residential development in ranging from single-family dwellings to small multi- family buildings of 3-4 units. The proposed multi -family building would meet the required side setbacks within the R-1 and R-2 districts, but would not meet the required rear setbacks in those districts. The proposed building would have 10 foot front and rear setbacks. Surrounding R-1 and R-2 zoning districts would require 25 foot front and rear setbacks. The development compensates for these shorter setbacks by adjusting the building height and building setback along the east property line that is shared with a single-family dwelling. The easternmost 20 feet of the building has a two-story height and a front setback of a greater depth than the adjacent single-family dwelling to the east. H. Internal Site Design: The residential building places pedestrian entrances onto the Center Street frontage and to the driveway to Mayo Field. This frontage placement maximizes building frontage facing street frontages and the focal point of the river. Additionally, the development includes a terrace intended to provide visual connection to Mayo Field. Screening and Buffering: The site abuts a single-family residential lot to the east. The building height along the east property line steps down from the proposed six -story height to a two-story height. The entrance to the parking area is located on the east side of the lot, but vehicle circulation will occur inside of the building. According to the conceptual landscaping plan, a Type E landscape buffer is proposed along the east property line, which is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance requirement for a multi -family residential use in an R-4 zoning district next to a single-family residential use. J. Ordinance Requirements: The parking requirements for the residential uses and spillover parking requirements are met by the parking provided within the parking structure on the ground level and lower level. A comparable residential development within the R-4 zoning district would be required to have a minimum of 35% of the lot area as landscaping. The proposed landscaped area is around 25% of 21 the lot area within the development site. However, the applicant proposes substantial off -site landscaping improvements to the adjacent Mayo Field site along the East Center Street frontage, which illustrates the intent to comply with landscaping requirements. K. General Compatibility: The site's location at the edge of a residential neighborhood, along a primary street, and next to a river corridor across from downtown Rochester provides an opportunity for additional residential density beyond what currently exists within the area with minimal impact to the residential neighborhood. The site is within walking distance of a high concentration of commercial uses and employment. Proposed street setbacks are similar to street setbacks of surrounding residential dwellings. Although the surrounding neighborhood consists primarily of single-family detached dwellings, there are examples of multi- family buildings in the surrounding neighborhood. The Lofts at Mayo Park is a four-story, 29-unit multi -family building with underground parking that is located approximately one block south of the project site along 6t" Avenue SE. Center Street Village Apartments is a three-story multi -family building located two blocks to the east. Residences of Old Town Hall is a five -story multi -family building located on the same block as the project site to the east. L. Non -Vehicular and Alternate Modes of Travel: Primary entrances to the building are placed along East Center Street and along the west side of the building facing the Zumbro River. The project is located next to a public transit route along East Center Street. Entrances to the building along East Center Street, whether to the lobby or to individual units, are given individual walkway connections to the East Center Street sidewalk. Entrances along the west side of the building are given walkway connections to a primary walkway that connects to the East Center Street sidewalk. Pedestrian -oriented spaces are provided along the East Center Street frontage in the form of front porches for walk-up units and indoor and outdoor common space at the southwest corner of the building. Bike racks are provided in the parking structure and along the north side of the site; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Department's November 9, 2016, staff report states that, based 5 upon its proposed findings of fact, Planning Department staff would recommend Preliminary Plan approval of the Restricted Development Plan — Conditional Use Permit subject to the following conditions- 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project will be required to be re - platted. 2. The Final Plan submittal shall include the following: A. Placement of boulevard trees at a minimum distance of 10 feet from existing fire hydrants. B. A photometric plan showing compliance with lighting standard R, or a request for a modification to the lighting standard under Zoning Ordinance section 62.712. C. Revised signage designs showing compliance with sign standard R, or a request for a modification to the signage standards under Zoning Ordinance section 62.712. D. Additional details for any proposed accessory commercial uses such as intended location, size, signage, and access. 3. Prior to Final Restricted Development approval, necessary approvals by the Park Board for intended improvements to the Mayo Field property shall be completed. 4. Prior to Final Restricted Development submittal, Grading & Drainage Plan approval is required, as well as, payment of any applicable Storm Water Management Area Charge for any increase in impervious surface. Execution of a Maintenance Agreement is required for the proposed on - site facilities prior to Grading Plan approval. 5. Prior to building permit approval, execution of a City -Owner Contract will be required for any public improvements required for this proposed redevelopment. 6. Prior to building permit approval, any proposed private features within City owned property, and within existing or proposed public easements will require prior approval of a Revocable Permit. 7. Prior to building permit approval, all existing water services must be abandoned at the main in the street per our requirements. CI 8. Prior to Final Restricted Development approval, the existing fire hydrant connection design must be revised in order to provide water service to this building. The service size must be labeled; and, WHEREAS, on November 9, 2016, the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this restricted development preliminary plan and reviewed the application according to the requirements of R.C.O. §62.708. At its November 9t" meeting, the Commission recommended approval of the application based upon Planning Department staffs recommended findings of fact subject to the staffs eight recommended conditions of approval and the addition of condition #9 to read as follows: 9. Prior to approval of final plans, a more extensive shadow study be completed to illustrate shadow impacts on surrounding properties; and, WHEREAS, this matter came before the Common Council as a public hearing on December 5, 2016. At the December 5t" public hearing, the Common Council permitted all interested persons to testify and give testimony on the restricted development preliminary plan request. The Council also considered written submissions that were to sent to the Council's attention; and, WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance and substantial weight of the evidence submitted at the December 5t" public hearing, the Common Council determined that the Applicant satisfied the criteria of R.C.O. §62.708 subject to the Planning Commission's recommended nine conditions of approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the Restricted Development Preliminary Plan #R2016-034CUP is in all things approved subject to the nine conditions as described above. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS ATTEST: CITY CLERK DAY OF , 2016. PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 2016. MAYOR OF SAID CITY (Seal of the City of Rochester, Minnesota) Zone 15\RestDevPre.1634 i