The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3.a. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Discussion Changing Maximum Building Height in the R-4 High Density Residential District and the DT Downtown District EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City Council Work Session: January 4, 2022 AGENDA ITEM: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Discussion Changing Maximum Building AGENDA SECTION: Height in the R-4 High Density Discussion Residential District and the DT Downtown District PREPARED BY: Adam Kienberger, Community Development Director and Eric Van Oss, Economic AGENDA NO. 3.a. Development Coordinator ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission presentation, APPROVED BY: LJM Comprehensive Plan Map RECOMMENDED ACTION: Continue discussion and feedback on the recommendation of the Planning Commission regarding high density maximum building heights. SUMMARY Rosemount continues to seek a variety of housing options, and currently has several sites guided for High Density Residential. Many of these sites are greenfield parcels situated along the growing County Road 42 corridor, or a few remaining redevelopment near downtown. Currently the maximum building height for R-4 High Density Residential is 35’. In the Downtown District maximum building height is 45’. The development community has indicated that the current 35’ and 45’ maximum height requirement limits the financial feasibility of developing these sites. Therefore, staff brought a recommendation to the Planning Commission to discuss amending the maximum building height in the R-4 High Density Residential District from 35’ to 4 stories not to exceed 48’. Staff is also recommending the maximum building height in the Downtown District be changed from 45’ to 4 stories not to exceed 48’. The Planning Commission th discussed this item at their meeting on October 26 and the City Council discussed this item on st November 1. Additional discussion was requested by the City Council before moving to a draft ordinance amendment. BACKGROUND Staff spoke with several developers regarding past and planned projects. The costs of multifamily construction have greatly increased in suburban markets. Fixed costs like land, elevators, roof, and underground parking/foundations has become increasingly expensive. The cost of underground parking is particularly expensive; however, underground parking is preferable to surface level parking. In the th Morrison Redevelopment the 4 story was critical to the financial feasibility of the project, especially due to the significant cost associated with the underground parking garage. Most developers need additional density and units to spread out the fixed costs associated with development. Staff reviewed other communities’ maximum building heights in similarly designated high density and mixed-use districts. Among Rosemount’s neighboring communities, similar high-density districts have higher maximum building heights or story requirements. Rosemount has the lowest maximum height requirements for high density districts in the area. Some suburban communities have ceased regulating building height for high density districts. Some examples of height maximums are in the table below: City Zoning Height Apple Valley M-8 5 stories or 65’ Eagan R-4 Residential Multiple District 60’ Lakeville M-2 Mixed Use Cedar Corridor 4 stories or 48’ Rosemount R-4 / Downtown District 35’ in R4, 45’ in Downtown Both the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Commercial Visioning project outlined a need for diverse housing options and mixed-use residential projects that support walkability and commercial nodes. Multifamily projects are a key element to achieving diverse housing stock, affordability, and mixed-use commercial centers. As it stands, the current height maximums in the two districts represent a barrier to achieving these long-term policy goals. Developers are not able to ask for a variance, as economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Currently any proposed project that exceeds the height maximum would have to be approved as a Planned Unit Development (PUD). PUDs are generally reserved for times when the zoning ordinance regulations do not accomplish the Comprehensive Plan goals for a specific site. Since the barriers to development due to the maximum height requirements apply to all R-4 or Downtown zoning districts, staff recommends it is most appropriate to amend the zoning ordinance. The 35’ maximum height requirement was implemented at time when suburban multifamily development took place under different economic conditions. Due to the change in market conditions, the maximum height requirements in the zoning ordinance are no longer able to further the goals set forth in the Comprehensive Plan within the R-4 and Downtown zoning districts. Staff recommends the code be amended to reflect this reality and to also limit the use of PUDs as a way to circumvent the zoning ordinance. Updating the zoning code allows the city to have a more consistent planning policy and helps streamline the entitlement process to both the benefit of the City and developers. Staff is proposing both districts to allow buildings of up to 4 stories not to exceed 48’. Generally, the industry standard for 4 story buildings is 45’. Due to grading and site-specific issues; however, 4 story projects, such as the Morrison, can go slightly over. To provide flexibility, streamline the regulatory process, and reduce the need for variances staff believes 48’ is an appropriate height maximum and is inline with neighboring communities. Additionally, the sites and neighborhoods impacted by this change is severely limited. Outside of Downtown Rosemount there are only 3 sites zoned or guided for high density residential. All 3 are located in the Akron/County Road 42 intersection. The proposed amendment would change the 35’ maximum building height that is currently listed in the R4 zoning district to 4 stories not to exceed 48’ in that district: 11-4-9: 8. Maximum building height: a. Principle structure: 4 stories not to exceed 48’ The proposed amendment would change the 45’ maximum building height that is currently listed in the Downtown zoning district to 4 stories not to exceed 48’ in that district: 11-4-11: 6. Maximum building height a. Principle structure: 4 stories not to exceed 48’ RECOMMENDATION th Planning Commission discussed this item at their meeting on October 26 and agreed with the recommendation while also adding a maximum height limit to be determined by staff. Typically, these types of text amendments are done with a Public Hearing via the Planning Commission and forwarded to 2 the City Council for final adoption. In this instance staff wanted to seek direct feedback from the City Council prior to presenting a text amendment for Public Hearing and recommendation. If the City Council agrees with the staff and Planning Commission direction, a Public Hearing can be scheduled for an upcoming City Council meeting so this change can be adopted. 3 Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Discussion Background fixed costs An additional floor/units spread out associated •$50,000 per unit in additional cost -$25,000•Underground parking•Elevators, materials, roof/HVAC, labor•Land•Increased Fixed Costs for Multifamily•other financial incentives projects financially unfeasible without tax credits or Maximum height restrictions make multifamily •Rosemount and the County Road 42 corridor Districts are largely confined to Downtown Sites guided for High Density and Downtown Zoning •Downtown District 45’•4 High Density Residential 35’-R•Current Maximum Height• Maximum Height in Dakota County No Maximum Height for 3+ Units4-RWest Saint Paul 4 stories or 48’2-MLakeville45’4-RFarmington60’4-REagan5 stories or 65’8-MApple Valley HeightZoningCity Need Developers won’t apply if there is uncertainty of process/approval •Upfront costs of site plan review (architect, surveys, fees) •Ensure a level of certainty and consistency •not accomplish the Comprehensive Plan goalsPUDs are reserved for when zoning ordinance regulations do •Site Specific•Limit the use of PUDs as a way to circumvent the zoning ordinance•Planned Unit Development (PUD) •A variance cannot be granted for economic considerations•The zoning ordinance is a barrier to furthering these goals •The zoning ordinance does not reflect the market reality •need for diverse housing optionsCity’s Comprehensive Plan and Commercial Visioning project outlined a • Suggestion Streamlines development process •connectivity less impervious surface and greater Encourages underground parking, •Morrison Allows heights similar to the •specific issues such as uneven gradeStories allow for flexibility for site •floor parking st with 1Principle structure: 4 stories or 5 stories • O'LEARY'S POND WENNSMANPONDERIC K S O N PON D WACHTER LAKE VALLEY OAK POND SHANNONPONDHAWKINS POND COPPER POND SCHWARZ POND MARE POND BIRGER POND KEEGAN LAKE MARE POND KEEGAN LAKE MCMENOMY POND WILDE LAKE KIRSCHNER MARSH GERONO MIEPOND MI SSI SSIPPI RI V E R (STH 3)160TH ST W (CSAH 46)BISCAYNE AVE(CSAH 38)MCANDREWS RD W CLAYTON AVE (US 52)DODD 145TH ST E (CSAH 42)EVERMOOR PKWY155TH ST W DODD B L V D 151ST ST W BLAINE AVE (CSAH 71)NE 160TH ST W (CSAH 46)RICH VALLEY BLVDTH ST W (CSAH 42)DIAMOND PATH (CR 33)COURTHOUSE B LVD S (S TH 5 5 ) EMAR DODD BLVD 160TH ST E (CR 48)BISCAYNE AVETRLDIAMOND PATH (CSAH 33)TRL (STH 3)150 140TH ST EDODD BLVDA CHIPPENDALE AVES ROBERT TRLDODD B L V D S ROBERT TRL (STH 3)MARA (STH 3)BLAINE AVEAKRON AVE (CR 73)BLVD US 52 / STH 55160TH ST W (CSAH 46)BACARDI AVEEVERMOOR AUTU MN BONAIRE PATH W 145TH ST W SHANNON160TH ST E (CSAH 46)PATH142ND ST EAUBURN AV E AKRON AVE (CR 73)145TH ST E (CSAH 42)S ROBERT TRTRL CLAYTON AVE (US 52)PKWYCONNEMARA C O U R T H O U S E B L V D ( S T H 5 5 ) 145TH ST W SHANNON PKW Y CON AKRON AVE160TH ST E BLOOMFIELD PATH TRL 140TH ST E CONN S RO B E R T 150TH ST W (CSAH 42)BISCAYNE AVEPKW Y ROSEMOUNT MINNESOTA 4/21/2020 T:\Project\CommDev\LandUse_Zoning.aprx I:\GIS\Map_Library\CommDev\LandUse\Land Use Comp Plan 11x17.pdf 2040 Land Use Plan 0 0.5 10.25 Mile 2030 MUSA 2040 MUSA AG Agriculture DT Downtown NC Neighborhood Commercial RC Regional Commercial CC Community Commercial AGR Agricultural Research RR Rural Residential LDR Low Density Residential TR Transitional Residential MDR Medium Density Residential HDR High Density Residential PI Public/Institutional PO Existing Parks/Open Space BP Business Park LI Light Industrial GI General Industrial WM Waste Management