HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/20/1970_Regular07.
CITY OF P.c`dEa'TER ��'"
ouNciLcyrT>�A
;Lp - July .1 c,3J
r-
ReC-Ulan 0 P. a:r
A. Call 'to`LIrdinr and App, rovaI of. i:Iinutes,
b, Hearings (7:30 2o..;.r,)
Rezoning of I.uit.s 15:, 16&. 18-:25, Christensen-Sehi Sub diviSion.from Rtli tor-
� �u" '11..20' Rezoning of g.r6perty._N'&:.14 of T;_ H. 63 bet "3Ld A�;e;.iTo 'E.- and 23rd St. from R-= to3. L-3
Rezan�zg. Runde' 1 anti- Libby p'ropex.ties Trott R-l. ,to..2'-I-i �rYuQr��t�ce�
4. F.ezoni na `i .55ft oft ! z�,1Tc' b. Co.len Hi f r.. v;z.
py ,' ,. 11 Addition_ r.an R4I t� ._ 1 .
5. Arterc'ni.rits:'to T.,ard lise tl'an'in the -are.A of J'� S. 52 to Countty..Cl,.ib. i noz acid from
0 'nrl Sro So t��. to U. Sa Je G� z�.:.:-� i��-
6. Variance, Floor Aria ilequzrements. at 417-:419 6th S;t, S e • Tr,
C. Organizatiana! ;Bus,-ress
l` tiay0r, G Appointments to the Library Hoard.
D. 'Letters and Peitio:is.'
E.. Reports. and_ ;tscoa--nend anion
1. Ad.-n. As,st...- Tabulation off bids on Sidewalk',,Tmprovnr::ent Projects
20 Adn; 'ASst� -, Request �_0 Fi-ar Pdrtabl� A�'LVert7.sing ,%railer
Ci ty Clerk - Licenses and Bonds.::
En`ineer - Sealer- u 6iater Extension tBerean Lutheran L'hurch)
5. Engi,naer = -Ass'essr.;e;it Rollr atermain .Extensioa� to `Vocational School �
�6. Eno-ined - Asse'ssmienC.,Roll- -Sewer & viarer iP_ 1,�7ti2 L��7e, .�i,E'i.(Coliegevie' Additionj��2,r�*�
Engineer -' h_,� ensiorc.a Sanitary Se�•7er to. Libby''s ll
Engineer Elevated W-ester. Tan:{ 6; -Trunk +. � " h 7 D l_. A e g Lire =or. High �.,ci�al Lystrict td.. Seri �.ce _.r-a..
cs, �n�ztiseer - S:eGrer 6Ta ei- aii3 Extension (Doughboy t.-� ( g y Pa'rkside, Trailer Court) t4 � 4
Engineer - Request N7 D. t.o* study., pro -ram traffic sip na.I.s
lIe Finance Approves of Bil:s�2.
12. Punning--,,.St*nda a Go1or, for. -Water. Towers
Planning - :Appoiut' menLL ' of-:Opara.t-ional -ilia nz ng. Technician
�+. P-olice - P.eque's:t" to set„ off :rockets- (John':2•iarshali Figh School).
-5. Po.., -ice - Appli ratio:_. for -Dance--License. (Harpy �Tarrior Bar)
V ,--_b..• Planning Apr lica_ticn to sell- a.ne-.disp.lay trailers., at 1827 South Broadway
F.-Resolutions and Ordiiianc•ez;
1, Reso,lut ,on. �31sar_gge cf Order.. (S-11 er -1 ke Exp. Painting Contract)
G. Ztems . is bled
Ho Other Business
r r r r
��-..:) �' 'a :_•'I ��. _ E ti DATE
A(Xc.%jDA. SECTION: 6RIG5MATINC D&PT:.
HEARINGS.• '. i - CITY PLANNING-
T E tit I T E tit O E 5,C R I P T l O N.' .- Planning Commission initiated" change ` of ' Zoning .. " PREP D BY:
Districting _on Lots- `15, 16, and; 1$ ristense'n--Sehl Subdivision
NO .(2401, 2405, 2415', 1424, 2435,". and 2440 Riverview Heights from 'tlie
R-1, District t.o'> the R-Sa District..
June 26.,* 1970
City ; P.lanningarid. Zoning' _Commission:
`On :June 24,- 1970 `the City Planning and Zoning-,-Commission•considered, the above
described,chan,ge.in- zoning districting:•-:We`,find this :proposed change to be: in
Accord with the .Ci:ty's-adopted" Land Use. Plan" and.the general development plan :for'
_this area. .. We also find that one_ lot. in this area is -.already zoned ari _R-mSa Disstrict
so this'
•�roposal would be an -"orderly extension of that district.;
Based. on these. f indings: we: recommend. that this change 'i n zoning' districting . be,
granted, approval-..- -
Council Action Needed
1. ' The"City. Clerk should publish: in. -the Post -Bulletin a legal notice of the :hearing: "
This. should 'be done ,not later- than Ju1y'=1, 197Q, The: property owner"s should
be' notified of -this hearing' in .writing:;
2..: Following -thepublic hearing if the:council decides to. proceed with this - change"
of zoning it .should instruct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance granting
the • change
Attached: ;
1:. copy of the •City •Planning Department's 'rep-ort.
2. `Copy -.'of- list, of -property owners ' to be. notified.
• DI•STRIBUTION: (1) City Clerk_
(2), City "Planning_ "Department
C,CL �'•:I`.,"" `,v^Ui., ,:' htoriod . by: _. �.�, .Se-cond . b.y:w
I
'. `PLAPMR, COy,MISSTION INITIATED CHANGE. .OI' ZO3Ii1G,DIST:ICTING 0-LI1 LOTS. 15, 16, A,
18-25' CHRISTEtiTSENT - SEHL SULDIVISIOd FRO-H TH% R-1 TO THE 'R-Sa ZOrT: (2401 2405,
2415, 2425, 2424, 2430, 2435, 2440 River View Heights.)'
We have reviewed the -above Commission_ Initiated change of. zone., and' -find the.
following:
.-.Department Review.:. No- objections recieved. ;
City -Planning -Department:
Background The area proposed for rezoning: to the R-Sa District is already
built up: The -.existing lots in the; area meet -the minimum lot area and frontage
requirements of the Zoning Or.d.inance, with th.e'.exception of..Lot 15 that has .one
Street frontage that is adequate,and another that is -inadequate, .but the lot .
already pxists`so there is
.no way to change this now. The area i.s a-ll lo.cat.ed
small. hilltop that is accessible by."anarrow.hillside road. This. .property
was recently annexed to the city and a perma-rent,zoning district is needed:..
Lot 17 has been in the city for several years and.it is zoned an R-Sa.'Distr-ict.;
At the 'time it was zoned the City Planning and Zoning Commission and. Common
Council adopted a plan calling.for all of this hilltop area to be zoned an R-S'
District upon annexa"tion.to the city-.
Conclusion•
We find that this change in zoning districting is'in accord with the.City's ,
adopted Land.. Use Plan, and the plan for this general atea'. It ,is_.als:o_ an.
extension"of"an existing R-Sa District. Based on these findings w.e recommend
that this..change in Zoning Districting be granted approval.
y 20:'1970
�t Y
AG6,DA:S:ECTION:. ORtGINQT(NG DE.PTr
HEARINGS CITY PLANNING _
ITEM ITEtit aESCRIPTION:. Petition to :change tlie.,Zoning Districting on PREPgRfD`BY:
the 'North -505.5 feet . of, .that part 61. the ,South 11, of the N.M. k of ,�
NO"•E�-a Section 25, T107N, R14W which. lies west aril°. north of'the T.H: No. .63 e lky `Q
.
between rd-Aveoue. N. E. and , 23rd. Street N.E. from: the R-1 Dis trict'
to the,5 3.District
June 26,' 1970. _ -
City "Planning and Zoning -'Commission;
On June .24; "1970 ,the City Planning a'nd Zoning Commission considered` the above
described petition,. ;
We find that this petition is not..in accord -with the general, provisions of the.
City'"s adopted -Land -Use Plan 'and".the property adjoins existing residential
deVelcipment'on the --north and west :sides. Tie also find. that traffic access from
the' would create -some serious proiilems -on ,Highway 63.:
Based on.these'findings we recommend. that -this petition.be denied:..
Council.. Action:
1. The.. City: C>lerk should, publish a legal notice"of hearing: in"':the .Pos.t=Bulletin. .
no. later than:-J.uIy_ 1., ,-,19J0.:: -The :p.r_oger-..fy ownex s should^ b.e seut ,:a wri,ttenri ,.
,notice of the hearing r
2' Following the%.'hearing, Council should decide- .whether it. will accept or.reject
the> recommendation. of the City'. Planning and. Zoning. Commission: ' . If the
recommendation is.: accepted- that would end the°.proceedings. If. -the recommendation
is denied the Council should then instruct the, City- Attorney -•to. prepare- an
ordinance granting the 'change
Attached:_.
1. 'Copy of :the City.. Planning Department's report.
2:. List'- of --property owners to. be notified.
ez
DISTRIBUTI614: .(1.) City Clerk
(2) City'Planning"Department
o'c"Lf �t�.I e / .��a+•E.��i, :' mot by: _ ��.. Second �O.
PETITION FOR A ZONE CHANGE ON THE NORTH 505.5 FEET OF THAT PART. OF .THE
-SOUTH i OF THE NORTHWEST 14 OF SECTION 25, TWP 107, - RANGE 14, 14HICH LIES
WEST AND NORTH OF TH NO. 63 FRb'1 THE R-1 DISTRICT TO THE B-3 DISTRICT
We.have reviewed the above`application and we find the following:
1. -Name of-, Petitioner.: Rochester'Sand & Gravel Company
2''. Reason for Petition:. Request by interested party for B-3 zoning.
3,- City Departmental Review:.
Jun'e- 11, 1970
R. P. Klobuchar, Assistant District Engineer
Minnesota Department of Highways
-We have no objection to this zone change. It is noted that control
of access exists along T.H. 63 abutting this parcel with access per-
mitted at a single -specified location.. No median :opening now -exists
and access. therefore is .available only.from the. southb ound roadway.
Due to' -the proximity of- adjacent median openings .for public "streets
a -median opening cannot be provided for the subject parcel.' Its
development therefore should. b*e based on access from= the southbound
roadway only. -
4. City. Planning Department:
Exist ing..: Land,-_ Use:'
_ _The property to -be rezoned is -vacant land that is being filled. It lies,
along the west side of-U.S. 63 North between 3rd Avenue N.E. and 23rd
Street N.E. The area to the west and north is -all single family residential
use,. The property to the east of U.S. 63 is a steep hillside that'is vacant
and is zoned an R-1 District. A•small area is currently being.considered
to be rezoned to a B-la District.
Access:..
Access to'this property can only be gained from the south bound lane
of U.S. 63. There is a median running in front of the full length of
this. property. It might be possible to�work with the land owners to
the north and south and get.some-access from 3rd Avenue N.E. and 23rd
Street N.E. at points_ where -there are openings in the median. This'
would help to improve the situation.
Land Use Plan:
The Ci.ty's adopted Land Use Plan has this ar.e'-designated.as being best
suited for some type of residential use. It is conceivable' -that with
this property.being located adjacent to the highway that some higher
density of residential use could be permitted -in this location. Because.
of the rather poor accessibility and the areas proximity to established.
single family residential areas that this should be a low to medium
residential use .area.
I
:Proposed Zoning Districting:
;The proposed.B-3 District would permit this property to be tRd for a
wide variety of intense commercial uses. Some of'the more undesirable.
of these could be'contractor's storage yards and drive-in restaurants.
Also, rather elaborate. outdoor advertizing devices could -be erected in
this area if it were zoned a B-3 District.
Conclusion:
We feel that s•ince.'this proposal is -not in accord with the Land Use Plan
that this change of zoning should be denied.
-We would suggest though 'that consideration be -given to possibly an R-2
District on this property. This would allow,for some..increase.in intensity
-of use and give some consideration of compatibility to the adjoining
residential uses.: Such a district would also -prevent excessive outdoor
advertizing on one of the principal approaches.into the city from -the
north which is as yet fairly well.uncluttered..
_ M E E T I N
DATE July 20, 1970
.AGENDA.SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT:
Hearing City Planning
ITEM.: ITEM D.ESCRIPT10N: PREPARED - BY_
-PTanning Commission Initiated change of zoning districting on
N O•iS' Libby property . and Rundell,
FJune . 25,- 1970
City Planning and Zoning Commission;.'
On'June 24,_ 1970°the City Planning and Zoning.Commission considered changing the
Zoning Districting on the above -described properties from the R-1 District,to
the-M-1 Dis,trict: We fin& that, in:geneial,.these changes.are in accord with.
the City's Ado pted:Land Use Plan.
After thorough''consideration of these proposals, we recommend that the Libby
property be re -zoned -from the R-1 District to the M=1 District and.,the Runde l
property be re -zoned from the R-1 District to the B-3 District to complement:
the.the B-3 District and existing.commercial us-e that exists ,to the North.
Council Action Needed;
1. The City Clerk should publish a.legal notice of the hearing not -later than
July 1,.-1970.
2. Following the Public Hearing, if the Council chooses•to proceed with the
proposed Zoning District Amendments, -it should instruct the City Attorney
to prepare an Ordinance to be acted upon.,
Attached-..
1. Copy of -City Planning Department Report.
2.. Copy of Legal Descriptions -for Rundell Property, Libby's, & Railroad.
.3. Copy of list of. property owners.to be notified.
C11L�
EU.;o
.hlotion
by:�a»n�� �T�
r., Second
by:.
to'
3
��C
MAY
L.
q
l
The previou-s' doc�ume-nt is ima ed_-to the
g_
bryest- ualitYp ossb-le.
q
The original document is of very poor-
.
q u.a 1-ity.
Scanned by Olmsted County
Imaging Department-
b
K
f7
O
Fit
0
F+
Y
n
fJ.
rt
14
Fr
O
x
F�•
yyQ0
O
W
lb
W
r'F
K
r
rn
K
O
B
H
O"
Fi.
K
f].
C
f�
a 1 ¢.'
r 1
G
r
aj ej^.
Fjr
'r
• t
t f
0
7
I:
In fDrt
- � J
%D CDti
_
M
pf
_' _ —�-mod
- i Ll...�m.•
•
fMJn
0
N•
r
r
°o �
ono co
N
m M+
r r.
r m
Y
kD f7b A
O O
13
C m
n
cn to
rt
CrA v
Li
€,
I-h 3 `
VA
Ll
T2�ypt'`�-'��\i
rt
iD LA. N
ray � fA rt 7C' 4,W
Z O r �.
rt
A4.
rn
1 rt
J-, ,
c(.m.'".e._._._., .. -� I{Fy'TLw,.,v.�...".....Yi'£= y..+•u.......,.._e_..,.._r (`�i�t`1�74.'yZ4�i`' _ Y
PLANNING"CO'L-NISSION INITIATED CHANGE OF ZONING-DISTRICTING.ON LIBBY'S OIL
CITY,. AND RUNDELL LUMBER PROPERTY, FROM THE R-1 DISTRICT TO THE M-1 DISTRICT
1. 'City -Departmental -Review:
May 25, 1970
R.P:.Klobuchar, Assistant District Engineer
Minnesota Department.of Highways
The Minnesota highway Department has no comments, recommendations,
or objections.to the -above described zone change proposal except
that no additional access will.be provided -from either T.H. 14_or ,
T.H. 63 to area located within the lone change.
2.. City Planning Department:.
-Existing Land Use:
The area proposed to be rezoned is divided into three basic areas.(1)
Rundell. Lumber Company.(2)-Libby's and (3) Oil City. These.areas are
used for commercial.and industrial uses as follows
(1) Lumber yard-.
(2) 'Canning of vegetables
(3) Oil City
(a) Bulk oil and petroleum products storage areas (Coop, Skelly,
and Phillips)
(b) Junk yard
(c) Warehouses-
(d) Plumbing contractor
(e) Propane gas storage and sale
'. Existing Zoning:
All of these properties are currently -zoned as an R-1 District.because
lands that are newly annexed to the City are automatically placed in
that district under. provisions of Paragraph 14.06 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Land Use Plan:
The City's adopted Land Use Plan designates -these areas as being best
suited for industrial type development. -
Proposed Zoning:
The Olmsted County -Fairgrounds is.currently being considered for rezoning
to the M=l District. The property immediately to the north of the Rundell.
Lumber Company is now'a B-3 District. To change the zoning on the properties
under consideration to the M-1 District would be in accord with the adopted
Land Use Plan and would also be an orderly extension of the adjoining
M-1 Districts.
Discussion:
The M-1 District would create a situation where the bulk petroleum
storage areas.and the junk yard would be non -conforming uses since
these uses,are first permitted in the M-2 District.
Also tt should be noted that the Rundell Property -and Libby Property.
are located in an area that is subject to the.i.ntermediate Regional.
Flood. -.Consideration should begiven to.this situation in'any new
development undertaken-in.these areas.
There is also a problem With parking on the street right -of -way -at
Libbyls and the junk yard..: These parking facilities will have --to
be ielocated'off the public street right-of-way as soon as possible.
Conclusion:
.Based.on the.above findings, we recommend that the zoning districting be
changed to the M-1 District. The area is located in rather close,proximity
to existing.and future residential..areas which could be adversely -affected
by some of -the. uses that are permitted 'in the 1`1-2 District.
.�� B .�� ✓ri.- -=,'r�J�...-�cl+i. r yi, :DT y 9.71
.. �i `.r
.. .. -
ni
AGE•,+DA.SECTFON': p;R'fGINA'TING:'DERT.
HEARINGS r
ITEh�- GTE,h� DESRIPi.ION petition to .chart a the Zonn Districting on the PREP ED' BY
North 5,5. feet. of Lot �4, Block- 6, Golden- Hill -'.Addition -from the R 1:- .
District -to the M-1 District' (1632
-June , 26, :1970
-City 'Planning and. -Zoning Commss•ionc. -
- On .June. 24, - 1970 . the City Planning -.and Zoning .:Commission- cpnsidere'd; the above '.
described,-' petition We fi '& that this, petition is' iri accord 'with-the`City's
-ado ted .=Land Use Plan. and. the 'property adjoins the M=1 District" on. the north
P
and east:;
Base3 .on these findings we- recommend _that this petition be granted approval
,Council: Action 'Needed :`
1. The C-i y °Clerk. should ;pubhisii a;..legal notice' of: hearing "in.`the Post-Bulle in
_no later than July 1; 1970. The. property owner's should be sent a: written:
notice of hearing.`
2. Following the:hearing. the Council,should'decide whather it-.will'.accep.t the
City Planning -=and Zoning .Commission''recommendat on hf the. Council .decides
to proceed with the change.,of,zon ng then it should 'instruct: the, City
Attorney, to .prepare= -an ordinance granting ;ttie ,change:
At.tached::
1.-Copy-of the City .Planning Department's report. y
' 2 List of property owners< -that. need to .be notified.
r-
DISTRIBUTION: (l) _City -Clerk _
(2). -City Planning -Department
"QN_Y2 :e. /.,:: + E `��:. f: mgrion- by. - Second- y s- - _�',to ..�....�. ._-
IN
t' -�
_fir
!- 2 ST S
LLL
�--,ia ,;- r. —,.- y..
I2�„f7-
•
rsao o�'p��A�ss�d Zcd-ie ,C�ian
ro
—� NcwA
t'1 .• `f t 'fit 't:r- ,
The previous document is imaged -to the
p_
6est'quality possible. -
The original docume-nt is of very poor -
quality.
Scanned by Olmsted County -
Im;aging .Department
-PETITION FOR A ZONE CHANGE ON THE NORTH 55 FEET OF LOT 4, BLOCK 6,_GOLDEN
HILL,ADDITION"FROM THE R-1 DISTRICT TO THE M-1 DISTRICT..
We have -reviewed -the' above application and we find the following:
1. Name.of'Petitioners: R. Larry Morrow and Rosann A. Morrow
2.. _Reason,for Petition: To obtain zoning as 'a conforming use.
3 City Departmental Review: No objections.
4. City Planning Department:
Existing Land Use:
On the north .end of this block, just south -of -16th, Street- S.E., there is
an electrical contractor's shop and then a sewer contractor's yard and.
building. ,Then there are six.houses. The property, on the east"end of ,
this block is all industrial use except -.for one -house in -the S.E: corner. .
The:property on the west .side of Second Avenue S.E.' is all residential
in character.:
The petitioner is.using his house and -property for trucking business that
`is illegal under the Zoning Ordinance' in. the R-1 District. :
Land Use Plan:
The City's adopted Land Use Plan'has this area designated as being suited
for future industrial development. As 'such -this -petition is 'in accord
with the long range objective,.of the. plan.
Existing Zoning:
The property immediately to the north and east of this lot -is zoned
an M-1 District. The land to be. rezoned is in an R-I.District.
(See attached map.)
Conclusion:
We feel that since this lot immediately -adjoins an M-1 District,- that this
proposed chanae.would be an orderly extension of the M-1 District zoning
boundary line. It is also in accord -.with the' City's adopted Land Use :Plan.
Ow this basis. we recommend that this change be,granted approval.
We would further recommend that if favorable consideration is given to -the
above change that the.City Planning and Zoning Commission initiate a change
of zoning on the rest of this block to 1.7th Street S.E. Such a.proposal'
would treat the whole block in a like manner.
- CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Room 22;.Summit tuilding.
717- 3'rd .Avenue S. E.
; Rochester; Minnesota
DATE: 'Tune 4, 1970
SUBJECT: P20POS'ED LAND USE PLANT REVISIONS, U.S. 52 TO COUNTRY CLUB 'MANi0R
TO: Operating Departments of City for Comment-
PREPARED BY: City Planning Department
-Rochester, Minnesota
Introduction:
For.the past two years the City Planning Department has been working with the
various.land owners in the.area of-U.S.'. 52 to Country Club Manor in an effort
to reach agreement on a general -land use. plan for this area'. We'were.also
attempting -to -layout the. local street .heeds. This program has. been .on again,
off. again, over this period of. time.
In.`•'ovember 1969 the city initiated -annexation of this -entire area was heard
by the Minnesota Municipal Commission and finally they were unable to -find this
area about to become urban or suburban in character. None of the land owners
were willing to testify to the M.M.C. that they were interested in developing
their land. .As a result annexation was denied just about two month ago: NoTr•.
within that short time all of a sudden interest is running real high to get
pieces of.this area annexed so it can be gotten ready for development.
Because of this the Planning Department felt that it would be desirable to work
toward agreement on -general 'land -use in the area and amend the Land Use Plan
to reflect current thinking. in this area.
Existing Land Use Plan:
The existing Land Use Plan is shoran on the map designated_as Figure 1. It is
a rather basic -plan that was adopted seven (7) years ago for this area and it
is now .in need of revision and updating.
Proaosed Land Use Plan Revisions.: (See Figure 2, Items are designated by -number,
in a circle) - -
To update the.Land Use Plan as it applies to the area from U.S. 52 to Country
Club Ntanor•we have proposed the following amendments:
1. Remove the community park designation for the -area south of U.S. 14.
2. Remove the commercial use designation .for. the area north of end Street
S.-W. at 23rd Avenue S.W.
3. Change th
,to the was:
4. :Move the p
5. Designate
35th Avenu-
6. Desion,
as being sts
7. Designate t
and west o
8. Designate c'
for a neih :'-
9. Designate t'.
being suite:!
10. Designate t'
Just east er
use.
11. Designate
being `suit:.
12. Designata
multi-fa:i .-
Procedure:
The City Planning
matter for June 24, :.
and submit your
h Street `i.'
5eing suit ceJL ;
' _
!y :? .
•
4
=? Street :'."
center.
.7
l4, anr;
�1
,l
v Lis;.
�
.... f i
its being cr,
-.-
.. _ - --�-�,• .
:gal use.
i.
Uuld you
�:-r than Jc:-
.D`•
The - revious document is ima ed to the ,
p g_ _
6esf quality possi b-le.
The oriinal document is of very poor-
9 _
_q ua l-ity.
Scanned by Olmsted County
Imaging Department
• EXISTING PR0P0-S E.D
COLLEGE 0R
r(D
..
(-D JR..00LLEGE
.' HIGH SCH..00, L
JP.HIGH SCH.00L
M ENTARY' S•.CH 0 0 L
C OMMUHIT.`r' P A R
Y F I E L D
PLAYGROUND
:i
`= C 0 �4 M .E .R C I A L- A R'-E- A
C.I V I C C E N T E R
- FI-RE STA T.I.0
�,,r �� y 1 ,' �, �,�, w✓ Fi• ��� gip/ t j a ��uf� ���I ' j/ - � � � ]� �� � .
23
o FrA
.� ' ;�•`
•. f CIS � V �1aV// � o_�
Cb
% C)Ab
11 i
1
•� •,f j Fes!
-...--_� ��.��. ;J J' I i -...-.�..w_r_..al.:ar ..w........:.....a_.L - �.r._-.....�.u_�..-�.........-_ � _ v.r--`."_.,......r.�_.�....v_.-..:.`:..a .._r__ •., .- �
-•yam \L ' ''"� _ � 7 J / C V A V 4 J •... < . nRr.._:�_.'''. ' ... ' -�� V � _ � I
:� /�` `� �' � - �--_ _.. ,-••S�'. � _ I ♦ \ � r��r-`��+..-.-.�. � .!~.•_JY.'•Jcr•.'driwrtlWss�' ;/
�� �y � It ' j- G►y, ` n �.,_ -- r ` �� �_�----.•.�...._..._ � ��-�� y 4 '�=^!, �br.�.� f ' . • i
� `'�'`•. �'' ram:' ""r� �,•-.-'--���' J`� -'i,'.,3J3
�•�-' -,fir - `� ti �: TTf
k ����t=1� �.µ�l� �..71
l� j .�
. ��4! �•
Iry
<J ��, ,'` tom' '�_.���,• � L
`r- .. ��~` JA co
- ... C -♦.c . it _ 'Tz
c �4
!d.: / !
Ii N q �,
rn
......�-_.-.-.. _.-..� n� l ...� - ^". �....-.�-..r.<.�.�:_u.-.v.... - �. .._ _ _--_ �..•--_z,...�•+..�._-,...�ri�..-..-.L �:J w `.�.... a,rtY,..r'�:-...--�.a-._.- _- -.
' 36400
------ Emil Kruse
3000 7th St. N.W.
36500
-- --- Joseph'Gores
. 37102
------- Box 608
" 37104
------ Johnson, Drake & Piper Inc.
Country Club Manor.
37101
------ Frederick J. Furlow
709 9th Ave. S.W.
36800-------
Marbloc Inc.
35901
------ 1215 6th St. N.W.
36604
------ Quarve & Anderson Co.
-- Route. 4.
35905
------ -Alvin Benihe
:330 3rd Ave. N.W.
Cailton Penz
35904
------ Penz, Dew.itz Inc: 3800 South Bdwy.
% Schumann Yaeger Robert DeWitz
2726 N.W. 17th
Ave.
35801
------ Ray J. Arend
406 16th Ave. S.W.
36601
------ Joseph W., Clements
Route 1
36901-------
Special School Disttict #4
40301
------ 1st National Bank of Rochester.
.�
40401
------ Lester Fiegels ���
45-
1003 9th Ave. N.W. > ��pa'
Z�)e •
40402
------ Albert Angelici.
1139.2nd St. S.W.
40200
------ Mayo Properties Assn.
200 1st St. S.W.
38701
------ I. 0. I.
212 1st Ave. S.W.
'.
35802
------ Carlisle Fraser
P.O. Box 882
35902
------ Joseph W..Hamm
1615 5th Ave. N.E.
39801
------ Helen M. Mount s� „�,/ 7� 0 : $-fan
A 'r !i�% a u� 7-
Box .44
San Valley, Calif.
38501
------ Thiss Outdoor'Advertising
505 17th Ave. N.W.
r �A/
v ? f ,
I1 - -
++� June 29, 1970
City Planning and Zonin- Commission
Room 22, Summit Building
. 717- 3 Ave. S. E..
Rochester, Minn. 55901
Gentlemen:
Subject: Proposed Land -use plan revisions, U.S. 52 to Country Club rianor
One of your proposed.chan-es is to "Remove the commercial use
designation for the area north of 2nd Street S. W. at 23rd Ave. S. W..'t
As we.brought up at the meeting on June 24th, we don't agree with
this zone change from commercial to residential, and we would like
to go on record to this effect.
Secondly, your proposal to move an elementary school site to the
south and east, further away from all the proposed residential areas
into a proposed .commercial area hardly appears to bean intelligent, .
calculated move. We would lice to go on record as opposing -this
change also.
Very truly your
�
'�.Zl.d f . G�
LESTER FIEGEL JR. `.
ELIZABETH NB_RGER
CC-Tn.USTESS FTEGEL TRUST
PROPERTY
Copy:First National Bank.Trust Department
JUN 3 01970
CITY PLANNING DEPT.
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA
FRED W. SCHUSTER.
FIRST NATIONAL BANK- BUILDING. ROCHESTER. MINNESOTA 55901
July 15, 1970
The Honorable Mayor and Common Council _
City Hall
Rochester,.Minnesota
Subject.: Land Use Plan in area .of US 52.
to Country Club Manor' and from
Second Street Southwest'to'
US 14
Gentlemen:
-It-is respectfully requested that the .subject Land Use Pion
be referred'back to the Planning -and Zoning Commission for
further discussion, specifically'in respect to the forty,
acres owned by Mayo Foundation lying North of West Zumbro "
Addition.
This. subject has lain dormant for: many months. I .failed.:to.
understand that a-recommendation.would go t.o the Council.from
this meeting, thinking it was being brought_up for -review and
discussion of changes. Although-in.attendance at.the Planning
and Zoning Meeting of June 24,. I.missed the discussion in
view of the fact that the subject was advanced fr.om number
12 to number l on the agenda.
Yours very truly,
Fred W..S:chuster Agency
Real Estate Agent
Mayo.��'oundation.
Fred W. 5cfiuster
FWS/dw
1
Cn"i'`,�•9� �� E �'� DATE July 20, 1970
AGE`+DA SECTION: ORIGI.NATINC, DEFT:
HEARINGS _ CITY PLANNING
I T.E M: .ITEM 6'E S C R I P T I ON; Application To Vary Th:e. Floor Area Requirements P",AE D. BY:
Of The Zoning Ordinance As It Applies To The Property At 417 and
N O• '/ 419 6th, Street S-.W. (/•,
r-J.uly 9, 1970
City Planning and Zoning Commission:
On June 8, 1970'the City Planning and Zoning'Commission considered the above
described application for a variance. We find that the applicant owns sevezal
parcels of land in this area and he has constructed three-a�aitment buildings.''
..in close proximity -to each other on separate parcels. The'buildings are financed
as a single unit, they are operated asa single.unit, and the°off-street parking
serves all of the -buildings. This being the -case we feel that this development
should be -considered as an apartment complex.
.Based on these findings -we recommend that this application for a. variance be
granted to .allow the construction of: the proposed structure as' -shown in the
.applications:
We also. _wish to point out that if this' Variance is -granted, the owner will .
have to make application for a conditional use permit because office buildings
are a conditional use in the'R-4 District. -
Council Action Needed:.
1. The City Clerk should publish a -legal notice of.hearing in -the Post -Bulletin
not .later than July .10, ' 1970.
2.. Following the hearing, if the Council decides'to proceed -to grant this
variance; the City Attorney should be instructed to prepare a.resolution-
-of that effect.
Attached:
1. Copy of the.City Planning Department Report.
2. List of• persons. to be notified. --
DISTRIBUTION: (1) City Clerk
(2) City Planning Department
�f+,�!.p=,;: Rlotion 6y: ..... __��.�r Second bY:.�_..r�—t0.
77
�'..' ._fy� _ , II• ��1. -' 'y' \ A4
1
-k4F8Is
i a ► s �5, ,�'� F#
f st' `"�.r x �. +meµ n 2'"rr=.,+� s n ; ;� } ,,,z} `S :. t" r, y. '
417 - 419 .` Sixth Street 5. W. (Looking 'to ;North
-along East side)
#�a: s
lz
�.•� iC., {t`�'sn ; �"�^.2
'N�'-"-
,s i
iu t
J K"-"
A�ns,�.f�f
�u T ..SMq.
.kip Cf`at "ay'r..�''",...• Y '4 '4� Pam"
�Js>a, '-'-- +r ,.
' ��.'2+r-.... �ror^"S�"'� r_+,�"�'�4 s-e-.+. t •iy vim.. lg� �r�+•!�tv� ^.y�
.. _ �yy. J"� •- ,�,1,., �.�.�`-.. � o , ''�. '�
b.. t�.. iJa, ty"�fF Y _a.".-yR' S e-' '•G.�� }
,. xs'w h"",-.c�..,,r - •'%'' c °� i ice"" �`+ _4 ` - -
.-417 -,419 Sixth Street-'S. W. '(Looking -to North
along. West side)
--.-_
•�, i ti
SAP ^
� 1. e - .ai it �' �. � �-• _ .
a ;NTH ST_
Q`
S �iJ o.
Fzs S i
14,
x..
001
Tr
illj
4' - tl I f -- .�G - —IT
_..
i fff
r .. 7Thr SIT
a
77
_ t �
��"!`2�` �e,.�'� 1?r' tff .i- � j .;� e >: r '- a �*• 'r � r .,
• APPLICATION TO VARY THE FLOOR AREA REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AS IT
APPLIES TO THE PROPERTY AT 417 & 419 - 6th STREET S.W.
We have.reviewed the,above application and find the following:
1. Name of'Petitioner: Rodney A. Younge
2. Reason for -Petition: As owner of the Soldier's Field Motel & Apar-tment
complex I -am realizing an urgent need for a building to house an office,
quarters for the manager, and 1,000 feet of. recreational area for the complex.
in -the basement. This building, to .be properly placed, and.use up some o.f.
the most undesirable parking, should. be situated,to the East of # (see
diagram) to be centrally located. The five lost parking spaces will be re
placed by at least twelve places we have .acquired on property to.the East
of this same building, giving a total of 106 parking stalls for the whole
complex. In the Soldier's Field complex we have thousands of buildable .
footage -left to satisfy the foot per floor area ratio needed. However, if
taken by separate lots there is not enough footage on #2 to allow"the build-
ing to be built in this place. We are'.asking.that this.group of buildings
be considered as a complex. -They are -financed as.a group, operate,as a
group,, parking aridproperty are involved as `a group, and the.building_proposed
1s. definately needed for the -complete complex as a group-. Your favorable
consideration of this proposal will be greatly appreciated.
3. City Department Reports: No objections. received:
4. City Planning Department Review:
BACKGROUND: On February 23, 1970, Mr. Young e,made application to vary the
provisions of Paragraph 24.041 of the Zoning Ordinance as it pertains to the
floor area ratio effecting the property. The application was the same as the
present .one that was filed.with the City.on July 2, 1970,. and is now under.
consideration. On March 24, 1970, the previous application was recommended
by the City Planning and Zoning Commission. to. be denied. The Common Council
accepted -that recommendation on April 6,. 1970,.and the variance was denied.
(See attached report of the .City Planning Department dated March 18, 1970)-
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Parcel Size_: Building "B" situated on Lots 5 and 6, Block 4, Head and McMahon's
Addition. -Each of -these lots has a frontage. of 50.0 feet and a depth of 156.0
feet giving a parcel size -of 100.0 feet of frontage -and 156.,0 feet of depth.
The property has.an 18 foot alley along the.east and north sides thus separating
it from any other properties or. the same block that are owned by the applicant.
Because of this, we.must consider the site in this case as being limited to
Lots 5 & 6; Block 4, Head & McMahon's Addition.
Parcel Area: The area of the parcel is 156.0 feet by 100.0 feet or 15,600.0
square feet.
Building Size: (Dimensions were scaled from applicant's plan)
Ground Coverage (Existing Buildiri ):
45".'ft-. X 115 ft. = 5,175 sq. ft.
,
Floor Area (Existing Building);
Building 3 floors X.5,175 sq. ft./ floor = .15,525 S.F.
Balconies 4 balconies X (5' X 115') = 2,300 S.F.
Total Floor Area'Including Balcony = ' 17,825 S.F.
Total Floor Area Excluding Balcony = 15,525 S.F.
Floor Area Ratio (Existing Buildin-):
FAR (Including Balconies) 17,825 S.F. = 1.1426.
15,600 S.F.
FAR. (Excluding Balconies)'15;525. S.F. 0.9952
15.,600 S.F.
Building Coverage (Existing Building):
53175 S.F. X 100 33.17%
151600.S.F.
Proposed Structure: .
Building Size (Ground Floor) 25' X ..0'" _ -1,000 'S.F!
Building Size (Floor -Area) 1-000 S.F. X 2 Floors 2,0010 S.F.
DISCUSSION:
Ordinance Provisions; The provisions.of Paragraph 24.041 of the Zoning
Ordinance is stated ^as follows:
24.041 Floor area ratio - Defined - Floor..area of the building on any lot -
is the floor area of such:building divided by the area of -the lot.
For the purpose.of determining the floor area ratio the "floo.r.area" of
a building .is.the sum of the gross horizontal areas.of the several floors
of the building measured from the exterior faces of the exterior walls or
from the.center line of walls separating two buildings., The "floor area"
of a building shall include basement -floor area when more than one-half (z)
of the basement height is above the established curb level or above the
finished lot grao.e level where curb level has not been established_,
elevator shafts and stairwells at'each floor, 'floor space used for
mechanical equipment, (except equipment, open or enclosed, located on the
roof)' penthouses, attic space having-he'adroom of seven feet ten inches or,
more, interior balconies and mezzanines, and enclosed porches., and floor
area devoted to off-street parking or loading shall not be included in
"floor area"
The maximum floor area ratio is 1.0.
The maximum Building coverage is 40% of the lot area.
Interpretation of Ordinance Provisions:
Accessory Uses: The Zoning Inspector has interpreted the'term "accessory
Uses" in this case to apply to the balconies; The reason for this is that
there are no .interior hallways providing access to the apartment units
-2-
Interior hallways' and interior balconies are included as floor area in
other cases..
Floor Area ,Ratio; The floor area' ratio of the e:c'is.ting'.buiIding. (including
the:.balconies_ is 1.1426-which is already in excess of the maximum. allowed
of I.O. The maximum floor area in this case cannot exceed 15,600.:sq. ft..
If the balconies -are not included, the-0 the floor area ratio is 0.99.52
which is less-than.the maximum.allowe.d of.1.0. If this were .assumed, to:
be a correct interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance,'then.an additional
75 sq• ft. of building ::floor space could be developed on this lot. (The
applicant is proposing ,to develop: 2,000 sq. ft. of -additional -floor
-space.)
Lot Coverage:
.The .lot coverage. of the existing building is 33.17%.which is less than
the maximum allowed of.40.0%
If the proposed building -were added, the lot coverage it would.be
6,175 S.F. X 10& 39..-58%
15,600 S.F.
The maximum building coverage.would be 6,240 S.F.
CONCLUSION:. Basedon the above calculations we find that the property.
is already developed in excess of ehe'allowable maximaum floor .areof'15,600
S.F- adding more -floor space.on this'lo.t would further aggrevate a condition
that is not -in conformance with -the Zoning Ordinance.
Because. of these factors, t_he City Planning'Department reco;nmends that this
application for a•variance be denied.
-3-
i_
rtirj �;J 3 6 J,fl. R� ji�•a►..... L_ a :z i�i DATE :
AGENDA; SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
:'
6502--0-70r.
•
Inc. .-=, n
._uC1 �.i'.r°!�nTl�i��S ..
n
City Rn;ineer
�_
ITEM:
ITEM.1DESCR'.IPTION:
PREPARED BY:
NO. C �¢
C.
to
pr,tar `7 T
S . • ater Xtensio.i. to L•ot 20 : Allendale
C.
n Feasibi.lity eport is attac1,:r�d` on the ,proposed"LXten�ion of Sanitary Sewe r
au '. T.Tatern?ai n to serve Lot 20. A1-landal2 Subdivision:'.
This' improveTent was:.requ6sted by t=fie. Berean Lut]�eran. Cbur•cr�_:a_iich is,presently
buildin- on Lot 20 add are urgently in need of these services.
The Falbility "eport offers 2 alternate locations for this extension.
Council Action .Redues.ted;
Accept Feasibility " eport (attached)
Adopt Beso1ution 3A ordering ieari1g
Encl: Feasioili.ty Report ✓
Property. List
Property Map ✓ -
f.r�J�iCrti:v�V:. Mo?ion by: Second b
„ to . . .
DEPARTMENT OF CITY ENGINEER'
h • '1602 - 4th•-Street S E. "
Phone 288-4316:
C. A. ARMSTRONG, City -Engineer
:MARK R. GRAY, Diiector of Maintenane
July. 20,-1970
:Job No.` 6502-0=_70A
REPORT 0�7 FEASIBILITY. OF -PROP', M LOCAL P1 RL OVEHEITT
Honorable I. ay
Common Council
City. of.. Roc7,es.ter, • `%'innesota_ -
A resolution proposink -. Extension- of. Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to
Lot 20.-in•Allendale.-Sub division; was-.referred 'to this office on Jul' _3,. 1970,
for t:ie-Engineer'-s Preliminary Report
T'� } y- ;
Ie , report tha� th. improv. Eaent is feasi�le There are ttiao (2):• alternative'
routes..for extending- sewar'. and water' to-. serve the--Berean Lutheran-Chureu
property on. Lot. 20 .:W iei is -requesting: this. improvement. N temate `ona is 'to '-
extend .the sanitary sewer main .in tZe. •proposed 20th Avenue location ; fro:a .tile
present terminal on t`ie,'nortii line of- Lot. 21, ,south 'to and "across' Lot 20. Tiiis =,
1•7ould_Eprovide -se7vier and. TTater- servi ce `'to Briease'--s and'Dahle's -tract_ in Lot 21 --as. .
:Tell. as S.enjem's tract _ and, the= Berean-- Lutheran Chuxcil. tract in L o.t 20.. :This =
alternate is estimated. at $12,590 Taaich could. amount to an .assessment of
approximately, $18.00 per fronts foot fox, the frontages' .,of..the4.,tracts--affected,
plus cost of -light-o-f•-way.ulhica mus't'be acquired.'from Male's and. the church
tracts.
Alternate tyro is to extend the setter main only in: the frontage road. -from: i s
present terminal -in --front- of -Lot- 2Ia At O';:Teill'a residence,•. -south for. a .:distance
of 85 ;feet', to lie northtarest: corner of t' e. churci� property: At this oo�i.nt the
church ---could connect: to the extended ,seater -main and the vat.ernain c,7hieh is already
inolace. _.
The estimated cost of .this.-._ alternate is $12:00 ��h, ciz,'�-could ;be- all assessed to,
the c,�ur(:�i property'on. Lot 20. -
'Alternate one would ;):rovide sewer and water service . to the Senjein'.s lot -as
)tell as the. cnurc1i 1'ot, any fu.tUre service to. and future' subdivision of 'the
.Bries'e •an:d•_Dahle tracts.
Alternate two will provide immediate service to the church lot at eae. lowest
present expense.
, -
co recommend" tlat the Council hold a, hearing to determine the interes is of
the various o-wners -on tine 'two alternatives , 'and then. order. 'the: improvement
made on':the one that is.deemed .to b.e the best'.
C.A. Arnstrong
City Engineer
- '. S '„ ly.� lye r •� .'1 1 I.1 L f. 1
I
!o��:Y7 DATE
AGENDA SECTION.' ORIGINATING DE PT: Jots' 020272-68
-?ecw endati6,_1 Y rneer s. City T'naiDept 820.1
ITEM:. , ITEk DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY.
N O• Assessment Roll, 6, atenaain T_xtensi on to 'vocational Se ool .A� u s trcn;;
assessment data and proposed assessment Bell is'submitted-'for idaterc�ain
extension to the Zoc'_:ester Vocational S.c1i6ol in 2nd-Street S.^.
The -,work was contracted in'.196.9.
By. prio� Lmderstanding between. tine -Sclio.ol Board and t' ei 'eater Department
1./2 _the' cost of normal 8".main,is asse%ssed -to -t'ie Sciool Board and the
i remaining costs are' :orne by the.-!•?ater, D8,partment:
Council Action ` ._-quested... '
Adopt.Pesolution for,: 3.and,f01"a orderin- assess^ten.t hearing.
",ncl: A$seSS_17"Ient at '
Ass`ssme-Lit -'o11
The total cost of 'this project is -estimated .to be $15,072'.24.. Of.this
amount, $5,864.86'is estimated to be assessed and•$9,207.38 paid by the.
Water �De"paartment.
0V
�J�✓�� �ti� � �1.=�';•�.: Motion bY= Second b
gym. Y : to
x' ,,.� jj [!
AGcNDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEP7:`
Jove 6313 3-69 '
P a co?mro Id ions City.. i ngir_eer t. -,25.�
ITEM:
_
ITEMf'DESCRIPTION.
PREPRED 6Y:
N O.-.�
ice✓
_
oll forantary rer ate;an n1.t�rnnua S..
roiAssessment
for lots in Colle;;evi A4.,. ddir:i:on.
Assess_,.. Data and Proposed _zs��ssrent r-oll is'su�mitted for "Sanitary Seer
and :`latermSil rl>tens 1On in. 13,t:_I /,Venue-S.i,i. fro:l .'�ti1- Street S.ia, t0 SeIC'e lot
.55. less. t ,e .north 10., feet, :rind. all-,of'..lo.ts 56; .57, 5°', 59 lock., 1' Colleg6vin_,�
Additi on''. ,
T e wor was contracted and constructed .in 1909.;
f
Me total cost is.assessed. to.the one residence. which it serves..
Council Asti on 'eques�ted
Adoat T'zsoluti on fo L1_ `; and" form "9 ordering assessment aearir_g.
Encl : Assessment Data
Assessment Roll'
This.project is estimated to cost.$2;590.26 which is all to be assessed.
CCU�.14. Motion by: Second b
g�:tu���: �' 4`:o�"a_Ji'..C;9? EGL � �l 'V cDATE� �_�:�-7.1
AGENDA SECTION" ORIGINATING DEPT:
?ecom n=_ndations tiginearing
ITEM: ITEMI'DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY:
NO. 2-nsion of Sanitary Se: er 'in 3rd _-venue.S.E.' y's : �. A ! L�"_.
S to Z,17J :� .rt-Is -ro_z
Peceive Feasibility deport on- "Extension -of -Sla3itary Sewer in 3rd
.venues S,'E. 'from- 12ti. Street S: - to 13th Street S.. to serve
Libby M,, _Neill Libby. Plant`.`,.
t Council Action 'Pe nuLste-d
Adopt _resolution. form 3A orderin- 'near in-. ;
Encl.
Feasibility deport.
Froject Budget -
-Prope:. ty .`:iap and List
The estimated cost of this project .is $9,286.00 which is to be assessed
to Libby.'s.
Ca0l.Jesi-1410 Motion by: ._._ Second by._ to.
i - �1J a a> Pj 1:j:�'� U•�J-• I l 1 DATE
A•GENQA' SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT:
• Jo,�.6901 .
Recor_>n>�ndatioris Engineering
ITEM: I.TEM;'DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY:
EleUated Water i3n1 �: Trunk Lines for 'riigh Level IflstrlCt
�j
N O• - d N. •1.. Servi ce Area. -
Tze Public :docks Go:�mittee'recomulends that a hearing be held on t'L-r s- project.
It is proposed: that t':ze trunk main.b6' extended .east. to- the proposed 'evelopment
of the Grindlay Property and. the '.future high ground of the Indian IHeightS
Subdivisions.
A suggdsted assessment .program based- on area and intensity of use will be prepared_
. before the nearinb.
11-7
The estimated cost -of this project is $128,869.00, which -is all to be
assessed to benefitted properties. -
C0 V i iv e-. :rYi E', �.- M of i o n by:_ _ Se c o n d b y - - t o
DATE :
7-20--70
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING 'DEPT:
Re orts 'an d Recommendations
city Engineer's
ITEM:
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
PREPARED. 'BY:
Sewer and Water Extension to Doughboy Property & Parkside Trailer
N O•r
Court
J. Andre
r
This is a request for the Council to initiate a local improvement project
.for Sanitary Sewer Trunk Line and Watermain along the East side of Highway
52 from Eastwood Drive S. E. to 24th Avenue.S..E.
This sewer and water extension will be for the purposes of serving the Doughboy
and Parkside Trailer Court properties which are now being considered for
annexation by the Minnesota Municipal Commission. Before making a ruling on
the proposed annexation, the MMC has asked the City forfeasibility report
..a
in order to determine if the City can -provide the necessary services to this.
area -if it is annexed. A copy of the attached Engineer's feasibility report
has been sent to the MMC.
Although the request to initiatean improvement project probably.is,not necessary
to get favorable action from the MMC on the proposed -annexation, the City Engineer
feels that. it is necessary for.his department in order to proceed.with.the project._
This is because of the Highway permits and ROW acquisitions necessary, as well.`
as involved arrangements to be -made between the -City Water Department and`the
People's Coop. Power about the existing water system...
- -Council Action:
If. -the Council decides to.proceed with the project at -this time it should:
Adopt Resolution Form 2-A
Receive Engineer's Feasibility Report ( Attached )
Adopt Resolution Form 3-A Ordering Hearing.
C0U$dCIL AC 1 ION: Motion by: Second by..' to:
.m+t'hJ� all
a :
—SPVIT
. � .Fn, DEPARTMENT OF CITY ENGINEER
F. .
1602 - 4th Street. S.E:
-- Phone 288-431'6
C.. A. ARMSTRONG City. Engineer
MARK -R.• GRAY, Director - of 'Mointenati6
.. '7'
July.14", 1970..
Feasibility Report on. Pronosed••Sanitary Sewer.Trunk Line
i. and Watermain .along East-Sicte' of. Trunk Hig'_zway 1`52 from
„ East --rood Drive.S.E. .to 24t1i Avenue..S.E. _
The primary purpose of this project is to. -:extend the City 'of'' .
Rochester's sanitary serer and wate=ain system to the area -in
Section 7-T106ti--Pti13:1- Marion Townsliip' !,Which is proposed -for
annexation, on which a hearing was . held by .the •`dunicipal Commission .
'Of the: State of 'Tirinasota on ',fay 13,` 1970,. The' area propos-ed for '
annexation `is designated as Parcels A,H; C,D, =and E in -the notice of
Hearing. At this t1iile 'there is no City Sanitary• Se?der T7ithin_ tais
area.
T'ie se,..•rer and -^7atermaln construction as proposed in, this project
and described above will- provide direct .service to the frontage abutting
the east .side .of Trunk Higaway #52, ' and permit. extension of service',
laterals into the' interior of the. parcels. The costs of these future
service laterals are not included in this report.It is estimated that -
they can be installed -:at normal expense ahen required. = "
SMITA':iy. . SEWER-CONSTPOCTIO;d S\20 COST. ES T ITILA E
Tile. proposed- sanitary sewer cons truction' will' consist -of. a 10". sewer
main beginning at `the present terminal of the -sewer system on. the aouth.
line of lot 35 Auditors Plat. A"thence extending east to the east side
of Trunk Highway ;,E52, and continuing -southerly along, t?ie east side .of TH-
52. to Avenue Avenue S.L. which is at the southeast corner of .Parcel C of -th e
proposed annexation.
This proposed 10" -sewer' main Trill have -sufficient capacity -to serve
the -natural drainage, area lying east of: Trunk-11igh-uay- #52- comprising 300
acres .Tiith an'estimated future population_ of, 3000.
This seT er 'main should be connected at its -beginning point wifain .
5 years'to a larger -and `adequate out•fall. For -the -present it wi11 discharge.
into 'the existing -10'' seiner main in which there' is only enough capacity _
remaining to accomodate ,a -maximum population of 1500 in -this dis.trict.:
TWATER i•LAI,I ' COI STRUCTION &_ COS;T ESTL'IATB
_ There. is a central- water sys.teri 0W ied and.:�operated by the ,Peoples
Cooperative- Posher' Association: which -presently provides water -service to -
-.Par'cel G-D,E-,..part'of Parcel `A, Delditts-Addition,,-Rose'Harbor Addition,
and ^larvale Addition.: This i,7ater- supp]y.and•:reservoir-.(50,00.0. gallon
elevated. tank) is 'not sufficient to provide adequate water- supply for. -
ti-ie -proposed fur ther,.developmznts - in Parcels A and E.
.' The most practical -method .of providin; .adequate Muter service to
these parcels is to -cons-trust an. S" watern_ain connection from the
terminal of the" exis Ling_ Ci ty- watermain on the' saes t side of. Trunk
Hight-idy f,`5.2.,. across -the highaTay to the east side, and eFxtend it southerly
a1on�."tile- east side of ,the `highi�ray to the' ues.t..end of -I4th Street in
Dellitts . Addition.
At.. t'nat• point :the netia i3" main can ?�e connected �ritii the :existing 6"
People's Cooperative Power ::Association waternain in 14th Street. I=f the".'
_ City would then acquire -the peoples -Cooperative Pox.,er Association (Pose
Harbor) *eater sys tern) the ,combination would. provide a 's.atisf.actory dater supply'for. both the 'e is tin& and. proposed developments in the --area. lying
east of Tn 52 and ,hest of the east boundaries of Rose Harbor. and ,'Iarvale.
Distribution laterals could",la.ter be extended -into the interior as required.,-:;
The estimated cost. of :this proposed.. 3"- =aatermain connection,: i s '$27, 394. .
The feasibili'ty of this, proposal'.is dependentupon the City acquirinS'- '
and tak, g over the opera. oa "of the. -Peoples 'Cooperative Power Associations
i
"Rose- ?arbor" water sys tern. This ' acquisition has'. been considered -favorably
- by' the' City 'dater Department and the ,Peoples- Cooperative -.Power -Association,
but no i conclusion has been'reached in respect to the costs -"and other
arrangements..
However, if -the Ci-tyis' going .to -annex any or all of the proposed
Parcels-(A-i,-C-D-E)' we must accept the -fact that annekation.-of DeTdit-ts:.-
-Additibn,...Rose Harbor, aridllfdrvale;.�ill also,.-follo•7,, and that the -'City will.
certainly acquire the Peoples-Cooperative.trater system eventually It will
--be better to do so now_ than- later.
The.alternative to - combining the t..ao water sys terns .is for the City to
extend the proposed g inch water'main cons truction•beyond.l4th Street, paste
` :DeWitts� Addition into Parcel B and part. of z1; : and operate a_ water-sys tem' . ;
independently of the existing Peoples Cooperative systen. -The.estimated';"
cost of this additional extension .is $41,400 - in- addition to- . the proposed
$271)'39,4 from the present City main: to 14th Street.
This alternative .is. not recommended, however, because of its. duplication:
.. of water mains thru'the area, and because it would tend to delay and further'.
complicate the necessary combination of the tti4o water systems.
. , -;4=
. '� .'C9J s' .�'� DATE :`. 7 -20 -70 .
AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEP'T:
Reports and.Recommendations- Engineering Dept./Traffic
ITEM: I ITEM DIESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY
N'O•� �/� -Request State Highway Departmentto Install Signals Jack -Dolan
The Mayor and Council are requested to adopt a resolution requesting_ the
Minnesota Highway Department to study and program traffic signals -.at the
...following intersections if warranted:
1. Highway # 63 (So. Broadway) .and 16th St. S,.E. The City's share would
be 1/2 of the cost or $18,000., which has already been budgeted for 1970.'
2: 'Highway -AP 63 (So. Broadway) and.14th St. S. E. The City's share will
be approximately $13,000.. which should be budgeted for 197.1...
-3.. Highway # 52 and 2nd St. S. W. The City share will be approximately
$27,000 which should be budgeted for 1971.
These locations have been discussed off and on with the Public Safety'.'
Committee and the full Council.
COWNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second .by. to:.
AGENDA SECTION; ORIGINATING. DEPT:
REPORTS AND REMNENDATIONS CITY PLANNING
ITEm: ITEM.. DESCRIPTION: Standard.Color ror.Water Towers PREPARED.BY:
N O•G
July 9, 1970
City Planning and Zoning Commission:
On July 81, 1970 the Committee on Urban Environment recommended to the City.
Planning and Zoning Commission that the City of Rochester -adopt a standard
color for water towers. (See attached recommendation.)
We feel that the mist .blue aluminum color -has proven very acceptable.on the
Apache Water Tower and we -therefore concur -with the recommendation of the
Committee' on Urban Environment.
We recommend that the City of Rochester adopt asr..'a standard".water tower'
color the. mist blue aluminum.-
Council Action Needed:
1. Approval of..the recommendation and referral to- the Public Utility'Board
for. implementation as repainting is needed..
Attached:.
1. Copy of the C.U.E. recommendation.
'DISTRIBUTION: (1) City Clerk
(2) City Planning Department' (water towers)
(3) Committee .on -Urban Environment
`;r.l'`s'_ . �, +•J• ;. mori.on by:___,�.._Second by:to
�a
_
June 15, 1970
City Planning and Zoning Commission
717 Southeast Third Avenue
Rochester, Minnesota
Gentlemen:
We, the Committee on Urban Environment, do hereby propose that all water towers
located within the City of Rochester be painted Mist Blue Aluminum as manufactured
by Mobil and as used on- the Apache tower. This color change: may be implemented
through normal. maintenance procedures as existing towers require repainting.
We advocate changing the color to Mist'Blue for•a-number of reasons.. This
has proven to be very effective in making a water tower as visually
particular color
inconspicuous as possible. It blends well with all atmospheric conditions and
possesses the necessary reflectivity to meet technical -requirements. We would also
add that adoption of the Mist Blue'Aluminum color for all city water towers wil-I
de-emphasize the commercial aspects of the .Apache tower.
Respectfully submitted
Committee on .Urban Environment- .
hairma n
+� vvV � i� IBC t`U�Y 41L
AG:NDAR;ECTION: _ ORIGINATIN.G' DE PT:
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CITY PLANNING
ITEN1 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Authorization To .Hire Mr. Harland Walker As� PREP D BY.
N ,� 2 Operational Planning Technician.
O
I Hereby recommend that Mr. Harland Walker be employed as Operational Planning
Technician in the City Planning Department beginning August'3, 1.970and his
...rate of pay be Grade 19, --Step A.
Mr. Walker has had considerable experience in the engineering and.planning
-..fields having most. recently _served on:the-s.taff of the Rochester - Olmsted'
Transportation Planning Study, and -then with.the,Olmsted County Department
of Development. He.is lacking a degree in'planni.ng, but I. feel he is well:
q.ualified'by virtue of experience to serve.as an operational-planning..technician.'
Council Action Needed:
1. Approval -of a motion to employ Mr.'Walker is: needed:
Distribution: (1) City Clerk
(2) Planning Department
>;G LI
I'`�:I.
�,F+�E!-j�i,
t.totion
by::�..
Second.
by:e_...�-s_.�.��...�
to
'AG,ENDA .SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT:.
-Reports and: Recommendat.i ons Police
ITEM= ITEM DESCRIPTION'. PREPARED BY:
/ Request'of John Marshall -High School
NO•E-I-r for permission to . set off rockets 'at home games.- J . J Macken,
The Police.-Department:re-commends that the request of the -Student
Council. oJohn Marshall High School for permission --to set'.off a
rocket every time the.Rockets sc.or:e at -their home football games
be approved.
Rockets would be shot from beyond the zone of -the `football field
into t.he.sky. Commercially-'cons_tructed rockets would be used
and set .off, under c 1 o s 0 adult -supervision.
Attached: Letter from Roy S. Johnson, Student Council- Advisor
Mayor Day and - -- ---- -- - - =- -- — -- - ----�.... - --- The Common Council
City of Rochester,
Minnesota 55901
Gentlemen:
The Student Council. of John Marshall Senior
High School'requests permission -to set off a.rocket.
every time the Rockets score at our home football
games beginning Friday, -September I1, 1970.
The rockets would be shot from beyond the zone
of the football field up into the sky. As in the.
past, commercially constructed rockets would be
used and the rockets would be set off under close
adult supervision..
Sinc rely,
Roy . Jo nson
Student Council.'Advisor
COUNCIL AC IVrir j.: Motion by: Second by:
� e� o.a ¢..y G. a.: 9 8 L/ �:y. V C.,;✓ v 7 V 'j.l L �a ra �✓ n- n w � u --
A&EENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEP'T:
-Reports and Recommendations
Police
ITEM:
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Application
the Happy Warrior. Bar
PREPARED BY:
NO• (s
and co'c.ktai l lounge
-of
for a dance 1 i cerise .
J . Macken
'
I have reviewed -the
application..of.the Happy Warrior Bar
and Cocktail Lounge
for a dance license u-nder the.pro-
visions• of 160.300
of the Municipal Code of Rochester.
They have fulfilled
the .cond.itiohs set forth under 1,. 2 and
3 of 160.300., and I
recommend that the application -be
approved and that the
license be issued:
4.sOlJNCE
AC 10i"i: Motion by.
Second by.._..�n� .�fo:-
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPi:
REPORTS AND. RECOMMENDATIONS
CITY PLANNING
ITEmt
)/
liE�! .D'ESCRIPiIO'N: Application .To Sell And Display Trailers From Th
Property at 1827 South Broadway
PREPARED 6Y:
City Planning and Zoning Commission:
'On July 15, 1970.the City Planning and -Zoning Commission considered this
application. .The Planning Department advised us that this property is zoned
a B-lb District and is used as a motel. To.da-te authorization for the out-
door display and sale of merchandise in B-lb Districts have been limited to
gasolind�.service stations. _.
We feel that this use- would not be `:compatible with. the- principal use of ,this
prpperty and we therefore•recommend that -this application be denied..
Council.Ac'Elon Needed:
1. A motion of the Council.is.needed to. act on this request.
Attached:
1. A copy of the application.
DISTRIBUTION: (1) City Clerk
(.2) City Planning Department
v'�.L �':I s; { `�,F+,(! �7�ii. ;: 1.!otion by: ,.�._..� Second b.Y:�. .��-.t.�.-� to t1 L:a
urle 16, 1970
S'i
City Council.
.�0 Cit y Hall ' .. -. .:,;:: � i � ` • i•' i .`' • - - - - -
l a .
Q Roche s to r, 'Hinr_e s o to
Dear Sirs,
I was inforlr�ed byi7r, Bill, V 1sce that i have to have an
enclosed building to display carping trailers for sale in the
city of Rochester or oet a temporary permit deleting the building
requirements.
I have camping trailers di splayed -naw at the Golden y_i 11 .Motel
at 1827 South Broadway, - There is' ap.proxi rrately 150 feet of open
display. area along Broadway and,. adequate parking area for customers.
S. would like the council to issue me. a temporary permit to
4
display -these Apache camping trailers until September 15, 1970.
At that- time all trailers gill be removed from said lot:
Mj•16 year old son is handling the sales as a teriiporary
Q,zm-ner O.
Thankyou for your assistance in this platter.
S� cereiv,
Ronald J 0.hnsor
Qirner
Golden Hill 1,iotel '
► W'1N129IG10
C• : f PL A DUNG .DEFT. - / b � • .
TA���-L� �� rye' �•
--_.^------_ � •/! 4".n'V�" i / /CGS+/�--- ��- _-'GGi�i� R"
K t Ut, Z) i it UuN t;UU �Jfir .. jai DATE
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEP•T:
Resolutions and Ordinance'Public Utilities
ITEM: ITEM. DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY:
N O• �- Change . of Order .- -Silver Lake Expansion Painting Contract J. Andre "
The Public Utility Board recommends that.a resolution be adopted'approving'a
change order to the contract with' A. Shelgren, &. Son, Inca for the Silver
Lake Expansion Painting Contract.
The original contract price is $55,762.00. From this amount, the Board
would like to deduct $80.00 for omitting the "painting. of new piping in
-the circulating -water intake house and deduct the balance'o.f the contingency
fund which is $1,000.00. This would establish:i-total amended -contract amount
of $54,682.00
Council Action Requested:
To approve.a resolution authoriz.n.g and directing the Mayor and.City
Clerk".to execute the change of order document-s'.'
t+OWNCIL ACT1011: Motion by: Second . by, fo
INN OR?•y4TI0id
1.1 Minutes of Standing Committees 7-13-70
2. Minutes of. Committee -of the Whble. iieet-i ng 7-15-70•
3. Letter concerning Dump Site (Clara Siem)
4. Letter concerning 2nd St. S. W. Improvements (K & K Electric Supply)
5. Referred to Planning & Zoning Commission:
a.- Protest against zone change on -north 55 ft of Lot 4,
Block 6, Golden Hill Addition
b ' petition to change zoning on property. at 1103 9th St. 'Ai.S1.
co application for variance on property at 1103 9th St. N.W.
a, application for variance Lot 9, Bloch: 2, Valhalla 4th Subdivision
e. application for plat approval - replat of part of Sunrise Estates..
to Bailey and Berg Pteplat
f. protest of Rochester Toiziz Board on annexation part of N14
of Section 11-north of State Aid Road "D" .
r NOTE TIME.CHANGE IN REGULAR COMMITTEE MEETINGS
STANDING COMMITTEE ':AGENDA
- ..SUMMIT BU-ILDING
JULY 13, 1970
PUBLIC .SAFETY-- -No Meeting.
FINANCE.-- No Meeting.
PUBLIC WORKS 12:30 P.M. = 2:30 P.M. _
.1. Initiate local improvement project.for 6012-3-70B sanitary
sewer extension in Northwood Drive.N.E. (part of. Northwood
3rd and`unplatted lots on,Si.erra Lane N.E.). Also decide
on sidewalk construction by -City.
- <+frNCGtt4r..f ...-']I_c.e%�. k't .IH+iY;,ltr'-vt+��-S.b�.d-t✓.�-=•-t.� L�e.ZuN .yam ,
-2. Watermain.extens'ion^fo_Berean Lutheran Church in•Allendale
Make final determination -of location and make fea-sibility.
report for July 20th.,
- � 2 '� ;...� tQR��-c...�.e./ G�-u-� G �._,•� G� Lf"' `. " G1..G4-G.
3-.` Review City Engineers proposed feasibility report for -July
20th on the proposed sanitary sewer and watermain`extension
-to Doughboy,property and Parkside Trailer Court for Councils -
action on July 20th.. The"Municipal Commission is waiting
for this �. e_c ��•�,:_,- z`, . _ .A� . � 2 /
1L3�-a.�'!`^--�) 1G-e.t.-..�-Lt�:.r-:..-oG. G.�:L �'J..� Lat1�.�.2�.- .GSA �G�_,�a..._�..:�4,.1.2 . , ,`��'r✓I �'r, . ;r� ra,:�.- .
v
4. Consider initiating a local/.improvement assessment project
for sewer extension, water-service.installatioh and street
grading.of cul-de-sac at Hutchings Replat on South end -of
101th Ave . S . E . -41
.�•lit.
5.. Request of Francis Seh1 and Gustafson., for sanitary sewer
y,. and watermain in 3rd Ave.'N.E. and 24th`St..N.E. in Sehls
First 'Subdivision. (Deferred from June 29th)
•6. Review the Northwest high-level water tower. (Valhalla and
Arnold) .
7., North ate 8th Subdivision ROW matter. (Deferred from
_ - June 29th)�
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 2:30 P.M. - 5:00.P.M..
Meet with County Board 'on -Street Construction Program..
2 MHD Plans -on North Broadway from 24th St. to North of
37th Street. ,T
fi'-�i.�i�..t�.r �U+-'/L.J �f ��G G"i'rLC..: ems, .�ll�v4t�,.�✓ _ . .
' �7 �La-�j'i-s•-e� !..:.-.tia� C�.,i :..��_ " �'' A' ... / � --L•ui ;,.V.�.....r:+���,c��tra"i.�'
Committee .of the Whole Meeting
Room 4-, City Hall
July- 15, 1970
7:00 P.M.
1: 'Approved the replacement of a door. at Fire Station # 2
(Silver Lake) at an estimated cost of $2,600., such funds.to
be appropriated from budgeted funds of the Fire Department.
Finance.Directbr instructed to make the necessary budget
adjustments.
2. -Committee agreed that the improvement of 20th St.-N. W.
between 21st St. 'and 25th_Ave,-would be initiated as a local
improvement assessment project..'. If all of the property owners
south of 20th.St.. did not dedicate the necessary right-of-way,
the Council would condemn and assess the abutting property
owners north and south of 20th St. for'the right-of-way,costs
in addition to street, sewer and water project -costs.
3. Committee reviewed possible changes in the City ordinance
relating to the issuance of additional liquor licenses. Public'
'Safety Committee will meet with interested parties on the possible
changes.
. ��, r� 3a` rat ..., 4..s��� ` ./•� �. �,�.�.�� .
i
':o the Members of the City `
Council (Past and Present) -.2. - -July 5, 1970 Y
{
Just what action would the Rochester City Council have taken
if Oronoco Township had taker_ a similar step to establish a dump
site in Rochester? Why, who would ever have thought of such a
thing ! Ri.dculous. ! Outrageous !. Can..you imagine such an ab-
surdity !
Oronoco has every right to feel just as -the -City of Rochester
would feel, were the situation reversed. And, I hope that Oronoco
Township will be just as adamant at this time as Rochester was when
it purchased the property in question. The City of 'Rochester is
deserving of all the difficulties which it is encountering in this
transaction.
For your information, I am not a resident of Oronoco -- I am
a tax• -paying resident of the City of Rochester.
Xr -f.�
Clara M. Siem +
202 Sixth Street S. W.
July 5, 1970 Rochester, Minnesota
i
I
July 5, 1970 �.
-ro.the Members of the City
Council .(Past a_.a Present); .
I have 'e d the article (page-15, Rochester Post -Bulletin,
July 2, 1970).entitled "Asks to.Bypass Adjustment Unit.-- City
Seeking Shortcut 'to Develop New Dump".
The City of Rochester has known from the beginning of rnego-
tiations for the land in question tobe-used as a dump site that
it met with severe disapproval of Oronoco Township, and -right-
fully so; but still, Rochester proceeded, arbitrarily and ada--
mantly,,with the completion of negotiations for the acreage with
no other intention than to use -it for a dump site.
Establishing the dump site outside -the area served by the
dump site is not'only disrespectful of our good neighbors, ab-
surd, ridiculous, and atrocious.-- it is obnoxious.
Equally obnoxious are the -proposals indicated in the above- 1
mentioned article as a means of setting aside the legal require
-ments in the present controversy.in connection with the use of, !
- r'
the acreage as a dump -site; namely, 4
(1) The motion aimed.at bypassing the Olmsted County
Board of.Adjustment with the.Cityts appeal from
a denial of a zoning permit for the.dump;,
'(2) The endeavor to read into the requirements of a
special use exception permit that the ordinancew'
does not apply to municipal projects; I
(3) The submission of a motion asking that the plan-
ning and adjustment boards be added as third
party defer_dants'in pending litigation ........;
(4) The City Attorneys statement that bypassing �
the Board of Adjustment would.save the time
required for a hearing by that body in review.
of the planning bodyls decision rejecting the
use permit (a hearing which the City :Attorney,
himself, admitted would be "futile" anyway).
(5) The City Attorney's assertion, "Because the ex--�
fisting city .dump is almost full, we cannot afford
further delay in appearances before a board that
is composed of people who are.already opposed".
(If the City of Rochester has purchased land for a dump site -
within the area served by the dump site, such could have been in
operation long before this. date.)
(See Page 2) !'
-Pal-