Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 6780 ���p CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL y� � No. 6 7 3 0 G `AkfSH04� A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPLICATION TO REZONE TO RPUD AND A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A PROPOSED CONDOMINIUM BUILDING AT 2520 SHADYWOOD ROAD FILE NO. 17-3944 WHEREAS, Westwood Professional Service, on behalf of the property owner Ugorets 8098, LLC, a Minnesota company, (hereina$er jointly "the Applicant") is the owner of 2520 Shadywood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the"City"), identified as Hennepin County PINS 20-117-23-11-0038, and legally described as: Lot 8, Block l, The Marsh at Lafayette, (hereinafter the"Property"); and WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied to the City of Orono to amend its zoning map to designate the Property as Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD)and for approval of a Development Plan. This zoning designation RPUD would allow the constxuction of a 5 story, 40 unit condominium building on the Property(hereinafter the"Proposed Development") and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 19,2017 and reviewed the application at this same meeting and WHEREAS,the City Council reviewed the application at their meeting on July 10, 20l 7. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 17-3944. 2. The documents submitted by the Applicant, the analysis contained within staff memos, the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference. 3. The City Council considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL No. 6750 the Applicant and the public, and the effect of the Proposed Development on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 4. The Property is zoned B-4 Office/ Professional. The Property is approximately 3.16 acres in area of which approximately 0.6 acres is wetland. 5. The RPUD zoning district requires 5 acres, or a finding that one of the following apply: a. Unusual physical features of the property itself or of the surrounding neighborhood such that development as a RPUD will conserve a physical or topographic feature of importance to the neighborhood or community. b. The property is directly adjacent to or across a public street from property which has been developed previously as a RPUD or planned residential development and will be perceived as and will function as an extension of that previously approved development. c. The property is located in an area where the proposed development provides a transition between a commercial or industrial area and an existing residential area or on an intermediate or principal arterial as defined in the comprehensive plan. d.The property contains steep slopes or a substantial number of significant trees that could be preserved through the clustering of buildings or other design techniques not generally allowed by the existing zoning district. The Council finds that these exceptions do not apply to the subject proposal. 6. The Property is adjacent to an office building to the north,a church to the west, and single family to the east and south. 7. The Proposed Development is for a 40 unit condominium building, which would create an effective density of 15.63 units per acre. The proposed density is higher than planned for in the Comprehensive Plan, where 15 units per acre is the maximum anticipated. 8. The Proposed Development shows a 5 story building comprised of residential floors, a penthouse, and an underground parking level with an estimated defined height of 48 feet 8 inches. This building would be the highest in the City and Council finds that this height would negatively impact the character of the surrounding neighborhood, including the two story commercial areas in Navarre. 9. The Applicant is unable to satisfactorily address the concerns that the Proposed Development would negatively impact the adjacent residential neighborhoods. 10. The Council finds that the proposed rezoning and Proposed Development are not in the best interest for the physical development of the City pursuant to Zoning Code Section 78-43. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL No. 6780 11. The City Council finds that the Applicants' request would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby denies the rezoning application and proposed development plan, Adopted by the Orono City Council on the��{� day of u� , 2017. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Wa1sh, Mayor '