HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 310-17 - GroveApartments.Mueller.CUP#R2016-040CUP
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Kellie Mueller applied for a Restricted Development Final Plan – Conditional
Use Permit #R2016-040CUP to allow for the development of an eight-unit multi-family building.
th
The property is located at the southwest corner of 10 Street N.W., and Fourth Avenue N.W.; and,
WHEREAS, the property is legally described as follows:
Section 35, Township 107, Range 14, Northern Addition. Lot 4, Block 5, North 20
Feet of Lot 4, and all of Lot 5, Block 5.
Containing in all, 0.25 acres, more or less; and,
WHEREAS, since the property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family), and since the
proposed density of development is not permitted under this zoning designation, the Applicant
is proposing the development through the restricted development process; and,
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 final
plan if it finds the development satisfies the criteria listed in R.C.O. §62.708, subd. 3 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. 3 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. 3
1
(Final Type III Development Plan) to this application and prepared the following findings of fact:
A. Public Facility Design: Private and public utility facilities have
been reviewed by applicable reviewing agencies. Additional
necessary requirements for these aspects of the design have been
included as conditions of approval.
B. Geologic Hazards: There are no known geologic hazards on the
site.
C. Access Effect: The development will utilize the existing alley to
the west of the site for vehicular access to the site. The preliminary
plan approval did not identify potential problems in the operation of
access to the parking area within this development.
D. Pedestrian Circulation: The plan includes walkway connections
from the public sidewalks to the entrances of each of the individual
residential units.
E. Foundation and Site Plantings: The landscaping plan shows the
required boulevard trees. Additionally, it includes additional shrubs
along the building foundation along the street frontages and
additional landscaping along the parking lot for screening. The
landscape buffer proposed along the south property line is
condensed with placement only along the parking area, and does
not include canopy trees. Because of the condensed space along
this property line, and the location of the adjacent dwelling to the
south less than 10 feet from the proposed building, the grouping of
this landscaping along the parking area is appropriate. Other than
the landscape buffer along the south property line, landscaping
meets or exceeds requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
F. Site Status: The site is one property under one ownership. As
proposed, the development and proposed use would remain under
one ownership.
G. Screening and Bufferyards: With the staff-proposed condition
of approval to relocate air-conditioning units along the south
property line to another location away from the adjacent residential
use, the bufferyard design along the property frontages and interior
lot lines is consistent with the approved preliminary plans.
2
H. Final Building Design: The final building design is consistent
with the preliminary plan in building height, setbacks, and the
layout of the site. The proposed setbacks through the final plan
have been altered from the preliminary plan to meet the applicable
conditions of approval.
I. Internal Circulation Areas: The proposed parking area to the
west of the building meets applicable requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance and is consistent with the preliminary plan approval.
J. Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development will provide
one parking space per unit and the surrounding public streets allow
on street parking which can accommodate spillover parking as
needed by the tenants of the project. The Zoning Analysis and
Comparable Development Table identifies a number of deficiencies
as it relates to the zoning ordinance. The commission will need to
find that the modifications to the ordinances are allowable under
the provisions of the LDM 62.712 Modifications. Site appearance
standards consistent with either consistent with applicable
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance or with the preliminary plan
approval.
K. Non-vehicular and Alternate Travel Modes: The project
proposed to incorporate pedestrian oriented spaces, individual
pedestrian access to the building entrances. The project is situated
to allow tenants to walk to the nearby bus transit stops or use the
existing trail and sidewalk system to connect to their destination by
non-vehicular modes of travel. A bike rack is proposed within the
site with three bicycle parking spaces; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Department’s June 14, 2017, staff report states that the Planning
Department staff recommends approval of the Restricted Development Plan – Conditional Use
Permit subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to building permit approval, a certificate of survey for the project
boundary and location of the residential home south of the project site
shall be provided.
2. The Final Plan shall be revised to include the following:
A. Details for bicycle parking and fences proposed for the site.
3
B. The new water service to be tapped at least two feet from the
existing service connection.
C. Relocation of air conditioners to locations on the site that comply
with 63.127 of the Zoning Ordinance for the placement of
appurtenant structures that may generate noise.
3. In lieu of reconstructing the alley along the frontage of the Property, the
Owner may request and execute a Contribution Agreement to memorialize
its financial obligations for future reconstruction.
4. Grading and Drainage Plan approval is required, as well as, payment of
any applicable Storm Water Management Area Charge for any increase
in impervious surfaces prior to the issuance of a building permit for the
project. Execution of a Maintenance Agreement is necessary prior to
Grading Plan approval for any required on-site facilities.
5. Approval of a revocable permit is required for any private features
proposed within the public ROW or other public easements.
6. Execution of a City-Owner Contract will be needed for any public
improvements required for this proposed redevelopment.
7. Charges/fees applicable to the development of the property include the
following:
A. Sewer Availability Charge (SAC)
B. Water Availability Charge (WAC)
C. Storm Water Management Charge (SWMAC)
D. Plant Investment Fee (PIF)
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2017, the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission held a
public hearing on this restricted development final plan, reviewed the application according to the
requirements of R.C.O. §62.708, and recommended approval based upon Planning Department
staff’s recommended findings of fact subject to the seven conditions of approval described above;
and,
WHEREAS, on July 5, 2017, the Common Council held a public hearing on the restricted
development final plan request and permitted all interested persons to be heard; and,
4
th
WHEREAS, at the July 5 public hearing the applicant agreed with the recommended
seven conditions of approval except for condition #2(c); and,
WHEREAS, based upon R.C.O. §62.712, the Council waived condition of approval #2(c);
and,
th
WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance of the evidence submitted at the July 5 public
hearing, the Common Council adopts as its own the Planning Commission’s recommended
findings of fact and seven conditions of approval as described and amended above; and,
WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance and substantial weight of the evidence
th
submitted at the July 5 public hearing, the Common Council determines that the Applicant
satisfied the criteria of R.C.O. §62.708 subject to the seven conditions of approval recommended
by the Planning and Zoning Commission as amended above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Rochester
that the Restricted Development Final Plan – Conditional Use Permit #R2016-040CUP requested
by Kellie Mueller is in all things approved subject to the seven conditions of approval as stated and
amended above.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS __________ DAY OF _______________, 2017.
_____________________________________
PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL
ATTEST: __________________________
CITY CLERK
APPROVED THIS _____ DAY OF ______________________, 2017.
________________________________
MAYOR OF SAID CITY
(Seal of the City of
Rochester, Minnesota)
Zone15\\RestDevFinal.1640
5