HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinding of Fact - WillowCreekCommons.GenDevelopPlan#243
BEFORE THE COMMON COUNCIL
CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA
___________________________________
In Re: General Development Plan Findings of Fact,
#243 Conclusions of Law,
(Willow Creek Commons) and Order
___________________________________
On June 19, 2006, 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 May 24, 2006, in response to the application for General Development Plan #243.
The June 19, 2006, public hearing was continued until June 18, 2007. The June 18, 2007,
public hearing was continued to December 17, 2007, which was recessed until December 19,
2007. On January 28, 2008, the Applicant requested this item be tabled indefinitely “in order to
resolve the issues identified by the planning staff as it relates to the FEMA map revision.” On
November 17, 2016, the Applicant requested this item be removed from the table and placed upon
the Council’s December 19, 2016, meeting agenda. At all of the public hearings on this matter, 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 public hearing on this application, the Planning and Zoning Commission
considered the issue of whether General Development Plan #243 satisfied the conditions of
1
ROCHESTER, MINN., CODE ORDINANCES §61.215 (2002).
2. R.C.O. §61.215 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, the land use plan map 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. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing
Plans.
D. 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.
E. 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 shall 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
2
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 shall be based on the level of
service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing plan
for development.
F. 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.
G. Areas in DEOZ will be managed in such a way as to maintain the quality
and quantity of groundwater recharging lower aquifers and to protect
discharge, interflow, and infiltration, and recharge processes taking place.
H. 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.
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 and Zoning Commission reviewed the General Development Plan
application using the criteria found at Section 61.215 and recommended the following findings of
fact:
3
A. A Zoning District amendment and Land Use Plan amend is being
considered concurrent with this GDP. If the amendments are approved,
the land uses within the GDP would be consistent with the land use
designation and zoning for the property.
At the time of development, site capacity calculations will need to be
completed. Based on the calculations, the development density shown on
the GDP may actually be less. The site capacity calculations will
determine what the developable acreage is after subtracting certain
environmental features. Also, a portion of the property is subject to the
provisions of the Shoreland regulations.
B. Access to this site would need to be provided from the adjacent property
to the east, which is also owned by the applicant. There is an approved
preliminary plat on the property to the east which would provide access
via a public roadway which is identified as public road A on the GDP.
With the number of units proposed a secondary access would be
required. A private roadway connection is shown on the southern portion
of the adjacent property which connects with the future frontage roadway
which will run north/south through the adjacent property.
The proposed private access to the Commercial Drive SW will need to be
designed so that intersects perpendicular to Commercial Drive SW.
At the time of development, site capacity calculations will need to be
completed. Based on the calculations, the development density shown on
the GDP may actually be less. The site capacity calculations will
determine what the developable acreage is after subtracting certain
environmental features. Also, a portion of the property is subject to the
provisions of the Shoreland regulations.
C. A Zoning District amendment and Land Use Plan amendment is being
considered concurrent with this GDP. If the amendments are approved,
the land uses within the GDP would be consistent with the land use
designation and zoning for the property.
At the time of development, site capacity calculations will need to be
completed. Based on the calculations, the development density shown on
the GDP may actually be less. The site capacity calculations will
determine what the developable acreage is after subtracting certain
environmental features. Also, a portion of the property is subject to the
provisions of the Shoreland regulations.
The policies and goals found in Chapters 2 and 3 of the Rochester Urban
Service Area Land Use Plan encourage developing a range of densities
and development styles. The Housing Plan includes, as a standard for
physical and social environments of residential neighborhoods “adequate
4
open space and recreational facilities conveniently located to serve
residents.”
D. The development of a highway improvement project to upgrade TH 63 to
th
a freeway facility from TH 52 south past 48 St. SW has been in the
planning and design stages since 1994. In 1995 the TH 63 South
Corridor Study was completed which reaffirmed the historic Thoroughfare
Plan designation of TH 63 as a freeway, and identified the need for two
thth
interchanges at 40 and 48 Streets in order to provide adequate
capacity for local access to/from TH 63 from what was expected to be a
significant area of commercial/industrial zoning. In fact much of the area
has now been zoned for these uses, including the lands to the south of
the site.
In 1998 MnDOT, the City of Rochester and Olmsted County agreed to
begin the next phase of project development activities that would lead to
the eventual construction of the planned interchanges by undertaking the
TH 63 Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment project. With
thth
the recently completed interchanges at 40 Street and 48 Street and
near completion of the associated roadways the property will have good
access. Until these improvements are completed, there is limited capacity
on the existing roadways to accommodate the development.
Development of this property is dependent on roadway improvements to
thth
40 St SW and the construction of a frontage roadway from 40 Street
th
SW to 48 Street SW, to provide adequate public infrastructure to serve
the proposed use of the property.
E. Currently the street system isn’t adequate to accommodate the planned
th
land uses; however, with the recently completed interchanges at 40
th
Street and 48 Street and near completion of the associated roadways
the property will have good access. Until these improvements are
completed, there is limited capacity on the existing roadways to
accommodate the development.
The northerly portion of the property (below 1080 elevation) is within the
Main Level Water System Area, which will be available with the
development of the commercial property to the east. The southern
portion of the property (above 1080 elevation) is within the Intermediate
Level Water System Area, which will be available with the development of
the West 80 development.
The static water pressures within the Main Level area will range from 37
to 48 PSI depending on final grades. Static water pressures within the
Intermediate Level area will range from 73 to 87 PSI depending on final
grades. The water mains in both pressure zones will need to be
networked properly to provide adequate water quality and flows for fire
5
protection. In addition, the water mains must be extended to adjacent
properties per the requirements of RPU Water.
Development of the property is dependent on the extension of sanitary
sewer and public water main through and from the abutting property to the
east.
This proposed development will have a parkland dedication requirement
of approximately + 5.90 acres which is based on the 174 twin homes and
a 68 unit condo being constructed. Depending on the number of units
within the condo building parkland dedication requirements will change.
The park department recommends that the dedication requirement be in
the form of land. The proposed GDP does not identify any public
parkland on the property. The applicant is requesting that the Council
accept cash in lieu of land.
Based on the Park Department this development would not meet the
parkland dedication requirements.
F. The property drains towards the north. The Plan proposes storm water
management facilities throughout the property. Detailed grading and
drainage plans will be required when the property is platted or developed.
The large storm water in the northeast corner of the property is located
within the floodway which isn’t permitted. The applicant has been working
a submitting a CLOMR (conditional letter of map revision) which would
move the floodway further to the north so the pond wouldn’t be located in
the floodway.
G. According to the Bedrock Geology Map from the Geologic Atlas of
Olmsted County the Decorah Shale is the first encountered bedrock on
the portion of the property as well as the St. Peter Sandstone and
Cummingsville Formation. In areas where the Decorah Shale is present
the developer and consultants should consider incorporating subdrain
and tiling in the engineering design for the Site. Development of this
property may have an impact on groundwater supplies and re-charge for
the City’s drinking water supply. Development of this site should include
re-infiltration of intercepted groundwater flows.
H. A Zoning District amendment and Land Use Plan amendment are being
considered concurrent with this GDP. If the amendments are approved,
the land uses within the GDP would be consistent with the land use
designation and zoning for the property.
thth
With the recently completed interchanges at 40 Street and 48 Street
and near completion of the associated roadways the property will have
good access to commercial and employment centers. Until these
6
improvements are completed, there is limited capacity on the existing
roadways to accommodate the development.
5. Based upon its recommended findings of fact, the Planning and Zoning
Department staff recommended approval of the General Development Plan subject to the
following conditions of approval:
A. There are inadequate on and off site public facilities, specifically Sanitary
Sewer, Water, and Storm Water Management Facilities, 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, that
outlines the developer's and City's obligations related, but not limited to:
access, storm water management (including any obligations for off-site
facilities), transportation improvements (including any off-site
improvements necessary to accommodate this development), pedestrian
facilities, contributions for existing & future public infrastructure, and the
extension of public utilities to abutting properties where applicable.
B. Grading & Drainage Plan approval is required prior to Final Plat submittal.
The proposed pond locations indicated on the GDP are considered
conceptual until formal drainage reports and grading plans have been
reviewed and approved by Public Works.
C. Full development of the Property would exceed the 1200 adt allowed on a
single access. Development will be limited to 1200 adt until a secondary
access is available to serve the Property.
D. The water main in both pressure zones shall be networked property to
provide adequate water quality and flows for fire protection and water
mains must be extended to adjacent properties per the requirements of
RPU.
E. Development of this property is contingent upon the extension of sanitary
sewer, public waterman and infrastructure through/from the abutting
Willow Creek Commons GDP.
6At its meeting on May 24, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission
.
recommended approval of General Development Plan #243 based upon the Planning
7
Department’s recommended findings of fact and conditions of approval with the
recommendation that the Park and Recreation Department and the applicant revisit the park
land dedication requirement.
th
7. At the December 19 public hearing, the applicant’s representative indicated
“acceptance of the recommendations of the City staff and Planning Commission.” The
applicant’s representative suggested the issue of parkland dedication should not hold up
approval of this application. He suggested that a condition of approval be added requiring the
parkland dedication issue be resolved prior to the time of final plat submittal. He offered to
meet with city staff to resolve the issue.
th
8. At the December 19 public hearing, the Planning Department staff
recommended the addition of the following condition of approval:
F. The plat shall be revised to include the following:
(1) Include Willow Creek as an Outlot;
(2) Access to Outlot G;
(3) Identifying the floodway and 100-year flood boundaries on the face
of the plat;
(4) Drainage easement on Lot 31, Block 1;
(5) Public Utility easement over the water main running through Outlot
A; and
(6) Roadway names revised according to the GIS/Addressing referral.
th
9. At the December 19 public hearing, the City Attorney recommended the
addition of the following condition of approval based upon the applicant’s representative’s
suggestion:
8
G. The scope, extent, form, and amount of parkland dedication shall be
resolved prior to the time of the submittal of the final plat application.
th
10. At the December 19 public hearing, the applicant’s representative responded
“that’s fine” in response to the proposed seven conditions.
11. The Common Council concurs with and adopts as its own the findings of fact,
conditions of approval, and recommendation for approval proposed by the Planning and Zoning
Commission, the Planning Department, and the City Attorney as stated above.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. R.C.O. §61.215 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
Comprehensive Plan and zoning map, or that the means for reconciling
any differences have been addressed. A GDP may be processed
simultaneously with a rezoning or plan amendment request.
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. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing
Plans.
D. 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.
9
E. 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 shall 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 shall be based on the level
of service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing
plan for development.
F. 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.
G. Areas in DEOZ will be managed in such a way as to maintain the quality
and quantity of groundwater recharging lower aquifers and to protect
discharge, interflow, and infiltration, and recharge processes taking place.
H. 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.
10
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 all of the public
hearings, it is hereby determined by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that General
Development Plan #243 complies with the requirements of §61.215 if the applicant satisfies the
seven conditions of approval described herein.
ORDER
The Common Council of the City of Rochester, pursuant to R.C.O. §61.215, does hereby
approve General Development Plan #243 subject to the satisfaction of the seven conditions of
approval described herein.
Dated at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of December, 2016.
____________________________________
Randy Staver
President of the Rochester Common Council
Approved at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of December, 2016.
______________________________
Ardell F. Brede
Mayor of the City of Rochester
FOF.Zone15\\GDP\\243
11