HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/17/1980_RegularCITY OF ROCHESIER
Council Agenda
Meeting A21
Regular Adjourned
A. CALL TO ORDER AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES
HEARINGS
�o-5"7
November 17, 1980
7:30 P.M.
1. Continued Hearing on Assessments for Improvements in 24th Avenue S.E.
2. Proposed Sewer Service Charge Increase
3. PUD (Final Plan) Known as Broadstreet Cafe
4. Housing Plan for the Rochester -Olmsted County Area
5. Final Plat Campus Village Subdivision
6. Community Development Block Grant Regulations
C. ORGANIZATIONAL. BUSINESS
1. Appointments to Boards and Committees
D. LETTERS AND PETITIONS
Petition for Local Improvements
E. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. City Administrator - Request for Street Lighting
2. CityAdministrator - Request to Move and Store Building `��� vet
3. City
Administrator - Request for Limousine Franchise 1Q+.ao:-. J
4. City Administrator - Request to Purchase Property at 8 Second Street N.E.
5. City Administrator - Payment of Supervisor of Youth Employment River
Clean-up Crew
6. City Attorney - Set Public Hearing Date to Consider Charter Amendments
7. City Clerk - Licenses & Bonds
8. Finance - Award Bids for Sidewalk Snowplow
9. .Finance - Award of Bids for Tandem Rolls
10. Finance - Approval of Accounts Payable
11. Personnel - Approval of Pension Contribution
12. Planning Dept. - Variance to Section 31.26 to Allow Metes & Bounds Conveyance
at 37th Street N.W.
13. Planning Dept. - Metes and Bounds Conveyance of Unplatted Land at 37th"
Street N.W.
14. Planning Dept. - Application for General Development at 82 Street and
20th Street S.E. Known as Campus Village
._t�5p Planning Dept. - Petition to Initiate Orderly Annexation on 40.82 Acres
i,r.131�' of Land North of the Golf and Country Club
16. Planning Dept. - Initiation of Orderly Annexation on General Warehouse Property
Located at 2905 Valleyhigh Drive
17. Public Services - Supplemental Agreement for Project 7907-1-80 Seehusen
Industrial Park
18. Public Services - Supplemental Agreement 04 for Project #790401079 Radichel
First Subdivision
Council Agenda
Page 2
November 17, 1980
E. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (continued)
19.
Public
Services
- Supplemental Agreement #5 for Project #7904-1-79 Radichel
First Subdivision
20.
Public
Services
- Supplemental Agreement #2 for Sewer and Watermain to T.H.
63 North
21.
Public
Services
- Special Assessments, Sidewalk Replacement N1-1979 J8634
22.
Public
Services
- Parking Removal in Front of Pepsi -Cola Bottling Company
23.
Public
Services
- Parking Space for County Coroner
24.
Public
Services
- Request for a 36' Driveway at 902 Seventh Street N.W.
25.
City Administrator - Proposed Amendments to Animal Control Ordinances
26.
City Administrator - Proposal to Develop a Merit Based Salary Program for
Exempt Employees
F. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
G. TABLED ITEMS
H. OTHER BUSINESS
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETIN
DAZE;G -Oct. 20, 198C
AGENDA SECTION:
OPIGINATING DEPT:
IICM.. ITEM DESCRIPTION; PREPARED BY:
Proposed Assessments for Improvements in 24th Avenue S.E
N O� Melodv. Mavhill and Mavfair CfrPPfc c v,,
r
This is a hearing to consider levying the proposed assessments for
the following projects:
7002-0-78A (J8663) "Sanitary Sewer extension in 24th Avenue
S.E. from 15th Street S.E. to a point 300 feet north"
7002-0-79 (J8695) "Extension of sanitary sewer in Melody,
Mayfair and Mayhill Streets S.E. from 24th Avenue S.E. to
west line of Marvale Subdivision"
7002-0-70 - previously deferred assessment for S.E. trunkline
sewer.
The construction expenses and previously deferred costs total $104,102
to be distributed in the following manner:
To be presently assessed $ 90,348.88
Deferred to lands outside City Limits 13,953.12
Total $104,102.00
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
A motion adopting the proposed resolution accepting the assessments.
itli�4 :
/.o
UNCIL ACTION: Motion by5 ^" Second 6v; �"a"m"`' to:
o-- AA, t �� � •e I�
�-w'rr �_ 8�--•-�. �7a•S6 � � ��.vrNsw � k1So �'-Gwwl� y �.a, yl¢�!
6 (f
4 ol R 0 CS T
FFII i# h
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
1602 41h STREET S.E.
Phone (507) 288-4316
November 14, 1980
TO: Steve Kvenvold
FROM: Roger Plumb��
RE: Request of Mr. Posthumus for deferred assessment
The attached memo lists eleven deferred projects and the following
summary data:
Mr. Posthumus
11 Projects Property
Frontages 511.5 ft. to 3,160 ft. 259.01 ft.
Acreage 7 acres to 457 acres 1.44 acres
Amounts $14,350 to $292,492 $7,775.26
The Posthumus property is substantially smaller than all of the
deferred parcels in the eleven projects. We further note that
Mr. Posthumus petitioned for the subject project.
We recommend that the Posthumus parcel not be deferred.
An Equal 0p1wAundy/*m,6vf 7&(inn &player
'L'•.
a//LJ7.f.00L�L 5.5901 +r4��JE D.AVGVtt'S''•
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
• 1602 41h STREET Si.
Phone (507) 288-4316
October 28, 1980
TO: Al Toddie �y
FROM: Francis Clark A(�z
The following list of projects have had deferred assessments with
the following general stipulation:
"Defer for A years or 5' years or until platted or developed
whichever occurs first." J as determined by the Common -Council)
Project 7106 4-
Watermain Extension along the East Side of T.H. 52 from 4M Street
N.W. to Pennington Business Park.
Project 6921-0-70
Watermain Extension from 22nd Street N.E. @ l0th.Avenue S,o Northern
Hills Drive N.E.
Project 5808-0-70_
Extension of Sanitary Sewer Trunkline West of Valleyhiah Drive N.W.
between 15th and 19th Street N.W.
Project 7305
Trunkline Sanitary Sewer Extension along County Roads No. 4 and 151
and Watermain Extension along County Road 151 to serve Pace Foods in,
S.W. 1/4 Section 21, Cascade Township.
Project 7403-1-74
Watermain Extension from 7th Street N.W. at 6th Place N.W. to Cascade
Industrial Park Addition and within.
i , Fj.d Op/.od"iy/vmsf;* X608 Z"PLyn
f
Project 7308-0-73 Part II
Part II - Sanitary Sewer Trunkline along the C. b N.W. Railroad from
east line W 1/2 - N.W. 1/4 Section 34-1-7-14 to the west line S.E. 1/4
Section 29-107-14.
Project 7505-0-75
Underground Construction on Valkyrie Drive N.W.;And 20th Street N.W. to
serve Hiawatha Childrens Home and Woodqate 1st.
Project 7606-0-76
Extension of Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to serve a portion of that
part of the N.E. 1/4 Section 13, Rochester Township: lying east of
CSAH 11 and south of Pinewood Road S.E.
Project 7402-1-74 -
Watermain Extension in 7th Street N.W. and in Arends Industrial Park 1st
Subdivision.
Project 6016-78 4r
Extension of Watermain in the West Service Drive T.N. 52 from a point 450'
north of centerline of 14th Street N.W. to a point 960' north of centerline
14th Street N.W.
Project 7703-I-II-III-IV
Construction of Water Reservoir and Connecting Trunkmains to serve the
low District of N.W. Service Area lying north of 41st Street N.W.
SUMMARY
I would summarize these elevtn projects as follows:
1. The frontages deferred, range from 511.50 ft. to 3,160 ft. and the acreages,.
range from 7.0 acres to 457 acres.
2. There are four projects with both a front foot and acreage deferrment
ranging from 830 feet to 3,160 feet and from 7 acres to.71 acres.
3. The deferred amounts range from $14,350 to $292,492.
4. Mr. Posthumus' parcel has a 259.01 ft. frontage and is 1.44 acres in area,
with a proposed assessment of $7,775.26
(11-13-80)
DATA
7002-0-78A and J 8663
Job No. 7002-0-79 Dept # J 8695
We Submit the following data for the Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed
and Ordering Preparation of the Proposed Assessment, for the following local improve-
ment (s).
Sanitary sewer extension in 24th Avenue S.E. from 15th Street S.E. to a point
300',north. Extension of sanitary sewer in Melody, Mayfair and Mayhill Streets S.E.
from 24th Avenue S.E. to west line Marvale Subdivision.
The Construction costs are: $ 83,342.70
Contractort
Previously Deferred (7002-0-70): $ 7,929.00
$91,271.70
The Expenses incurred in making said improvements are:
Engineering (12%) $ 10,001.13
Adv. & Publication $ 97.76
Bond Sale Expense $ 171.17
Interest 10/1/79 to 9/l/80 (336 days @ 6.18 p per Annum)
336 x $45,000 g 6.18% 2,560.24
365
Total Expense $ 12,830.30
TOTAL CO:,STRUCTION & EXPENSE $ 104,102.00
The distribution of the above costs are as follows:
To be Presently Assessed
Deferred Assessment
To be Paid by City Funds
TOTAL
90,348.88
$ 13,753.12 out of City
$ 104,102.00
8301
8305
83 02.
83/O . 820U
0 �p 83
� 830
µpC UI �(!k•ftt,f
0
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
1602 4th STREET S.E.
Phone (507) 288-4316
October 28, 1980
TO: Stevan Kvenvolldd
FROM: Roger Plumb K• ��� '7`
RE: General Policy on Construction of Sewer & Water Service Connections
Areas where sanitary sewer & watermain are in place. —
For grading and surfacing projects the existing services are checked for
adequacy and replaced if defective. New service connections are stubbed
to vacant lots.
II Areas where Sevier & water are not in place and the street surface is paved.
Prior to 1978 it was the property owners responsibility to hire a
contractor to stub the service connections into the boulevard. Due
to tardy installation by some home owners, this policy was changed
in 1978 so that the sewer and water connections to the boulevard
are included as part of the project and the cost assessed.
III Areas where sewer and water are not in place prior to the sewer
and ,grater project and the street surface is not paved with a
bituminous or concrete surface.
It is the property owners responsibility to hire a contractor
to install the service connection. In this case we would not
delay a contractor from restoring the crushed stone roadway
if property owners do not have sewer & water service lines
installed. Since the home owner pays for both the lateral
to the boulevard and the lateral from the boulevard to the
house, there is normally no need to install laterals where
the street is not paved.
An Equal Opprf((ndy/:i(gmafitr i7 tiunT�pleyr,
ROCA z J
TER
October 21, 1980
TO: Steve Kvenvold
FROM: Roger Plumb ,6,�'
RE: Proposed Assessments - 24th Avenue S.E.
]c
A/pk l7l G. I,L 1 c
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
1602 4th STREET S.E.
Phone (507) 288-4316
In response to the concerns expressed by Mr. Andrist, the public
hearing on this project was continued.
We have reviewed this matter and discovered that both the Andrist
property and the Kraling property have not yet been annexed into
the City of Rochester, and therefore the assessments to these two
parcels should be deferred until they become annexed to the City.
We have submitted a revised assessment roll and data sheet to the
City Clerk reflecting these corrections.
An Equal Opporianityl;Wmatiie Align Empluytr
a
a�
V
I
if
Simc L"
C
1�3
I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION "IEDAIE �- 11/17/80
AGENDA SECTION: CPIGINATING DEPT:
Hearings City Administrator
IItM: ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY.
N v o '1- Sewer Service Charge Increase S. Kvenvold
r On October 20, 1980, the Common Council gave the first reading to an
ordinance increasing the sewer service charge from $.30/100 C.F. to
$.45/100 C.F. effective January 1, 1981 and to $.618/100 C.F. on
January 1, 1983.
A portion of an earlier memorandum from the finance Director is again
attached for your review.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Request a motion adopting the prepared ordinance implementing
the increase to $.45/100 C.F. as recommended.
Vk�, !`t P 3 Awnwoomm
x
wUPICIL ACTION: Motion by: Second 6
ME110
October 15, 1980
TO: Stevan E. Kvenvold, City Administrator
FROM: Paul C. Utesch, Director of Finance
RE: Advanced Wastewater Treatment Project - Sewer Service Charges
and Bond Issue
i
This memo is a progress update relative to the financing of the $55.9 million
dollar advanced wastewater treatment plant project.
The schedules and projections on the attached pages i and 3 thru 8 were
submitted by: Kirkham. -Michael & Associates
Wallace Holland :astler SchMitz and Company
A Joint Venture.
And the debt service schedule for the proposed bond issue on page 9 was
Prepared by Evenson-Codge, Inc. The statement of revenues and expenses on
page 2 is presented by the Department of Finance. All data for the year
ended December 31, 1977 thru DecLmber 31, 1979 were taken from the Comprehensive
Annual Financial Reports, which were audited by the firm Smith Schafer and
Ferguson.
In summary -- Page 4) .
1) A preliminary project source and application of funds.
2) The net operating loss was $62,506 for the year ended December 31, 1979 --
it was $96,161 for the eight months ended August 31, 1980. For the years 1979
and 1980 the cumulative net operating loss is estimated to be in excess of
$200,000.
U �}> This schedule provides for 18 months of capitalized interest (about S800,000).
a v} In other words the proposed bond issue will provide for interest thru mid 19S2.
The proposed first steno sewer service charge would increase from $.30/100 C.F.
on January to S.45/100 C.F. Th: second stage adjustment would be S1.35/
service/mo. + S.613/100 C.F. + $160,000/yr. industrial waste high strength
surcharge on January 1, 1983.
4) Capitalized interest is 18 months (the same as 3).
The prupnsed first stage sower service charge r•;oulo increase from $.30/100 C.F.
Oil January 1, 1116-1to S.35/100 C.F. The second stage adjustment would be S1.35/
service/ro. + j.618/100 C.F. effective JantJ)iy 1, 1982. And the third stage
$160,000/yr. industrial waste high strength surcharge would be effective
January 1, 19b3.
5) Is the same as 3 -- e.-cept there is no capitalised interest.
MEW
October 15, 1980
Re: Wastewater Treatment Project
Sewer Service Charges and Bond Issue
6) This schedule provides for no capitalized interest -- proposes 3 stages
and is the same as 4 -- except the stare I adiustn.ents would be $.45/100 C.F.
on January 1, 1981 compared to S.35/100 C.F. as proposed in alternate 4.
7) The estimated cash flo+i computation - prepared by the Joint Venture. It
is noted the maximum projected cash flow deficit is $9,900,000 in April 1983.
9) The preliminary proposed debt service schedule prepared by Cvenson-Dodge,
Inc.
Proposed rates are found on pages 21 thru 23 of the Joint Venture's 1979
Industrial Cost Recovery/Sewer Service Charge System Report.
In Conclusion:
Subject to the consultants review and reccm,rendation -- the rate adjustment
alternative presented en page 3 %-.ould provide the most favorable estimated
project cash flow. It is a bit heavy cn the frcnt end. But this is a plus ---
considering the projected 2 year (1979 and 1980) net operating loss of about
$200,000. And it defers the stage 2 increase of 51.35/service/mo. + S.618/100
C.F. until January 1, 1983. Compared a January 1, 1982 implementation of
this stage 2 adjustment as presented on page 4.
Action Calendar:
A fast track action calendar is necessary --- construction has been under -
Way for a month. The tentative bond sale date is Vednesday, November 12, 1980.
Subject to review of the financial consultants and bond counsel --- resolutions
for the authorization of the issuance of up to $9,900,000 of grant anticipation
notes will be available for the Cor cn Councils' consideration, tionday,
October 20, 1930. The actual issue will probably be about $6.2 million
dollars.
The Common Council should also consider, on the same date, a proposed resolution
authorizing tine issuance of about $2.6 million dollars of temporary local
improvement bonds - to finance the construction of 29 local improvement projects
which have been authorized for construction in 1980/81.
If possible the COMMDn Council should, also, consider the first reading of the
sewer service charge adjustment ordinance t.onday, October 20, 1980.
Respectfully submitted,
V..-(2 U,•..-(2 —
Paul C. Uteseh
Director of finance
6: 1')yor and Common Council
Iran Verlich, I:venson-Dodge, Inc.
Jerry Mallonoy, Dorsry, Windhorst. Ilannaford, Whitney R lialladay
hen 80YOr, the JOillL Venture
Al Schafer, SNith Schafer and Ferquson
Irrd Suhler, City Attorney
(,`n nor Vl.ri, . n:.•.,.•, .... „� n..i.,:.. r..._..: ___
+ rt
1 n IC) N
O N u
O n r+ o
N ro •}
7 rn
5CD l7 r)
N rr
O < S N
O ro N
(D n C N
fD � ro
7 rf n <
a ti =r <
roN -sn
n In N
U` ro
17 -n n
ao S
3 � u
a :i (j
Iv N
ct 7 O
_G ro A
� � N
a
H n
7 rw
fJ ro to
o O n
N M N
o n
rD
n n "
00
q } (n
n In
O co
> --A
In CD o
p
In T
r± o n
fD -S
N +
V CA
ro
} Cn
-A O
O
3 O
Gty
\
:T
:T C
ro a
L
(u L
a a
fp N
IV
•
w
ry
ro
Q
O
7
In
ro
ro
N
ro
n
ro
n
(v
N
0
M
W
.P
(n
O
(D
u�
f
u)to
(O
rn
Ca
w
co
co
N
A
�+
v
.(
rn
a)
�+
in
w
4
4-
vl
o�
co
r m I-
X
...
._
n ^ a
c)
ii
ZS
ci
ri
�� rn
C7
O
O
O
U
m n}
A
Cn
N
N
CA
fn m
N
N
N
J
J
n} r•i
O}
cn
(n
(n
N
n z, <
= m n}
co
ON
N
a u ''
lD
(D
N
co
�
c
0
0
0
O
fnm
m
C.,
cm)
C:)
C.
C)O
JJ T
C)
O
C)Cn
CD
m
m
A
r n}
CO
CO
V
V
cal
Cn
m
V
O
N
Cn
O
.=
In C
0
0
0
0
o
rn
O
CI
O
CD
O
cm)
O
O
O
O
4 A
F O
=i
L!
N
N
l/I
N
V
rn
in
ti
O
clo
V
to
I
CD,
co
�L)
(n
n
Cv
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
Co
O
O
O
O
O
W
to
cn
to
m
co
C1}
m
C»
Ili
-+
c»
(n
to
(n
.A
C1}
v
4p
Ir
0
CD
0
o
r
In
O
O
(D
O
A
0
0
0
C)
n
rn
r-
A U
r•l (l
va�a
(n
(n
CO
O
CDO
rV
CV
m C- '
w
w
-0
O
O
= nl
O
C,
U
O.
O
C)
—Irn r1
O
pO
O
:.:
M
U 0
lf
-*}
;o n
0 2•
Ul
ul
In
co
O
N
Ji
O)
IV
N
O
O
C7
C>
p
-1} )
C.)
U
O
C7
fl l'J
;: I-
tA In
;u
0
n
x
m
N
--1
m
A
O
CD
1 m m
pao
C-)
C) a A
ocm
� C C
m a m
C-) c
m m
co P�
co
o2>m
C/f X
M m
m m
D t`n
M m
n} In
A
A
m
X.
m
m_
REQUEST FOR COUCICIL ACTION! MEDAIE
AGENDA SECTION: OPIGINATING DEP'T:it
iL
--
Hearings Consolidated Planning ',+ 1 3 ie.I
IM: ITEM DESCRIPTION, Application for Planned Unit Development PREPARED.BY:
N O Q 3 (Final Plan) located at 723 Second Street S.W. known as
Broadstreet Cafe.
r
November 13, 1980
The preliminary plan was approved by the Council on October 6, 1980, with
six conditions. Five conditions regulated the operation of the cafe and one
required further information for the final plan.
As requested, a plan of the patio dining area has been submitted (see attached).
The patio will be 12 x 19 feet and located near the front entry of the cafe
next to the porch. A low hedge on the street side of the patio is proposed
as screening. Seating for about 10 will be provided by small tables and
accompanying chairs. Since the patio will not be used at night, no lighting
is provided for that area.
The rest of the plan remains as approved by the Council.
The plan is in a form which can be acted upon by the Council. The following
conditions should be incorporated into the PUD-
1. signs shall not be permitted in the front yard;
2. the total seating capacity shall not exceed 50;
3. hours of operation shall not be more than Tuesday through
Thursday 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.; Friday through Sunday 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.
and closed Mondays;
4. cafe service shall be limited to the first floor, porch, and patio;
5. the sale of any literature is restricted to inside the building.
Council Action Needed:
1. The City Clerk will need to publish a legal notice of public hearing in the
Post Bulletin no later than Friday, November 7, 1980. Written notice of
the hearing will need to be sent to the owners of the land and all
property owners within 350 feet of the proposal.
2. Council may take action by motion on plans dated "Received October 14, 1980,
Consolidated Planning Department, Olmsted County, Minnesota" consisting
of two (2) pages.
3. If necessary, a resolution adopting the plans and ordinance for the
rezoning should be prepared.
cUUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second b,: to
K
pCtgmm&,
VKIVEW r
R SIM
ue�
J�ausYi ub
FAme
I ! I
CAFE FARKIM6
J'? T, I W., "t
NGW
ff,
110
1�5. W . 2 df:,)r
I
preorp- RTr uue
mi,n N6 PRIVEWAY
SITt rLAN
0
.jgcr4N Aof7'1
_ �rl
olldd
'PH I N ILI
H7LlO
17NIN14
N:atv.LiA
in
);,Iv Iflo
fvawoN
MAW t
I CV? , t
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETIN IE c 11/:17/80
AGENDA SECTION:
ITEM: ITEM DESCRIPTI(
NOIj.,/ Housing Plan
r
November 12, 1980
OPIGINATING DEPT.-
Consolidated Planning
PREPARED BY:
Sri
On July 9, 1980, following a public hearing conducted on April 30, 1980, and
a final recommendation from the Housing Citizens Advisory Committee received
on June 25, 1980, the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously
recommended acceptance of the Housing Plan (motion by Mr. Ward, seconded by
Dr. Zollman.)
Attached is a memorandum highlighting major proposals in the Housing Plan.
Copies of the final recommendation on the Housing Plan have been distributed
previously.
The Council has scheduled a public hearing on the Plan for November 17, 1980.
PW/dmt
C. o. w. C-- `(1 4 h
Tf!?,(�/I.
COUNCIL ACTION: Mol,on by: Second by: Io:
County of Olmsted
CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARThIENT
1421 3rd Avenue S.E.
ROCI[ESTE'R, \IN 55901
Phone (507) 285-8232
serving the townships and communities of Olmsted County
To: Rochester Mayor and Common Council
Olmsted County Board of Commissioners
via: Stevan Kvenvold, City Administrator
Richard Devlin, County Administrator
From: Philip H. Wheeler, Long Range Planning Supervisor
Date: November 6, 1960
Re: Housing Plan
Tom O. Moore
Planning Director
DIVISIONS
Administrative 285-8232
Long Range 285-8224
operational 285.8218
Technical Services 285-8225
In order to facilitate your review of the proposed Housing Plan for the
Rochester -Olmsted County Area, the staff has prepared the attached Housing
Plan Fact Sheet. The purpose of the fact sheet is to highlight policy
proposals that may prove controversial and to address concerns that were
raised during Planning Commission hearings on the Plan.
The Council has scheduled a formal public hearing on the proposed Plan
for November 17, 1980. The County Board will need to schedule a review
session with representatives of the Housing Citizens Advisory Committee
and the PAC in order to review the Plan prior to scheduling either an
initial public information meeting or filing a notice of intent to enact.
PHW/mc
u
An Equal Opportunity / Affirntatice Action Employer
Housing Plan Fact Sheet -
Preparation: The Housing Plan was prepared by the Housing Citizens Advisory
Committee, appointed by ROCOG and made up of members representing bankers,
tenants, the Chamber of Commerce, major employers, Realtors, Homebuilders,
Senior Citizens, The League of Women Voters, the HRA, both City and County
Planning Commissions, and the Township Officers Association. Staff assistance
was provided by the Planning Department.
Pur ose: 1. To reduce the impact of local regulations on housing costs;
2. To better organize the expenditure,of public funds in meeting
housing needs.
If adopted, the Plan would become an element of the Comprehensive
Plan, providing general policy quidance in housing -related matters.
Data Base: 1970 Census data and a random sample survey conducted in 1978
by the Planning Department staff and volunteers.
Review to Date: The Plan has been recommended for approval by the HRA, and
both City and County Planning Commissions. The Commissions conducted a public
hearing on April 30, 1980, received testimony through June, and acted to
recommend adoption of the Plan with amendments in July, 1980.
Major Proposals:
1. County to adopt a series of housing codes applying to different types
of problems and areas in the ROCOG area.
2. City and County to coordinate subsidized rehab and new construction
for different need groups generally according to specific target
objectives.
3. ROCOG to establish a Housing Technical Committee to evaluate the
impact of local regulations on housing activities, review changes in
the Housing Plan, and initiate actions with the planning commissions,
governing bodies, or HRA as appropriate. Committee membership would
include representatives of builders, developers, and realtors; land-
lords; bankers; building code officials; planners; social service
agencies; and three citizen members.
4. ROCOG area governing bodies to establish an areawide HRA and Com-
munity Action Agency, staffed so as to be able to make possible the
full use of available housing programs. Membership could probably
consist of the existing HRA plus additional County members proportion-
ate to population.
Page 2
5. City to revise Zoning Ordinance to grant density bonuses to projects
providing up to a certain proportion of low cost housing.
6. City, County, and School District to use banking policies to encourage
banks to provide housing loans to low and moderate income households.
Major Needs Identified: In 1978, 76% of female -headed households and 40% of
all households paid over a quarter of monthly income for housing. 15% of
housing units had more than 5 structural deficiencies and 29% lived in hous-
ing over 30 years old. By far the biggest problem affecting area households
was the high cost of housing relative to income, especially for elderly, young
families, renters, and female headed households.
' REQUESTETIN
l FOR COMICIL ACTION ME
G 11I17I80
AGENDA SECTION: CPIGINATING DEPT:
Hearings Consolidated Planning
IITEM: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Application for Final Plat located at PREPARED BY.
N O p 5 8-1 Street and 20th Avenue S.E. to be known as Campus Village ^
r
November 13, 1980
Consolidated Planning Department Review:
The preliminary plat was waived as permitted in the Subdivision Ordinance. The
final plat has been reviewed by various City Departments. This plat is a
portion of the General Development Plan - known as Campus Village which received
approval by the CP & ZC on November 12, 1980, and is scheduled for Council
review on November 17, 1980.
The proposed plat is slightly over 5 acres in size and will consist of 4 lots
in 3 blocks. Public right -of -`way will be dedicated in front of each lot.
Easements are being provided as requested.
After the General Development Plan is approved, the remainder of the site
will be platted. However, that portion will require a preliminary plat since
it abuts no platted streets. The General Development Plan has shown public
alleys which the Public Services Department requests to be private. The
applicant has removed the alleys rather than reserving them as private. The
plat now reflects that decision and does not show the alley as being dedicated.
However, the alleys can be added later if the status on their acceptance
by the City should be changed.
The Planning Staff recommends the final plat be approved subject to the
following condition:
1. Provide temporary turn -around at ends of Village Circle.
Council Action Needed:
1. The City Clerk will need to publish a legal notice of public hearing in the
Post Bulletin no later than Friday, November 7, 1980. Written notice of
the hearing will need to be sent to the owner of the property being
subdivided and all owners within 200 feet of the property being subdivided
no later than Friday, November 7, 1980.
2. Council may take action by motion on plat dated "Received November 12, 1980,
Consolidated Planning Department, Olmsted County, Minnesota".
3. If necessary, a resolution shall be prepared approving the final plat.
COUNCIL ACTION: Moron by: Second bv;
CAAlp ills
V lL L .
T.
T.
89"45' 08" 500.79 r-
sz9.04 _ 33 O 3300 9two viSGl UTILITYr 3300 3300 Nn.79 'T UT LI TY 1 1 , i_ I ii _ 71 I 1
EASEMENT i wEASEMENT I i ill ul 1O CASEMENT
TV
I I 1
r5 UTILITY I IIII I 1 1 I I = WI
I EASEMENT Z ( '
> 1 ( j( Ir': 1... :'�.lo••i1 I I I 4 I :.•!�Y i I I
1 On
11 l ll1
0 0 1 I 1 1 I EO UTILITY �1 �10 1 1 I I
0 1 III I EASEMENT l I
(. I I W I I I L�J Uj 1
V� a i _ .1 I I I N I f ;' i• 1:� 'd I i'-1� I I l
:< 1 I o W l 1 I III I l
I 1 1 I o J 1 I III s
' I 1 1 o V I ' I I l Q L3 i
0o
Wm I i III V I 1 I i�l l U � I
1 I la III IW ml ( 1001 I I� W 01
Q a� 1v `I V p I
34 I I ( m1 11 Y a
I
W I � z
I 1 1 III I J I 1
rr 1 1._. 4 ( I
1 ... �1 ,I>.' I: .. I•,,i �7 I a1��1f •t" .. 7i• .. ,F 1
N 1 •1 ^I
W P1 I ,i`i3 j. I i tilj i � i
i - I
I W sll I I WI I I �W I
I CIT
I � 1I� I uW l 3 III uW I ZT
azu.va 11_—_—_�
t, 89 34 99'45'08" +332.00 90. 12
T— —1
'`.,•� 269 U098",.; , no.6_, I° I 90.17_ T-
Nw cm e9L5'OS" 4W43 - ' CDN Q 33 00 I33.00 1 95.00 I 1 95.00 I 33.00 1 33.00 ;� 269"45'08"
Ma
LOT :/ YT
r a 269 45'08 322.00
4m of
° N LINE LOT T, REPLAY Of IA
LOT I, SLOG N 1.[AMPUSTOWN p
SUSOIWISION
Nw 1/4 ( N. E. 1/4
S —ITE
3t. s-
J
S W- V4 1 I 5 E.1/4
UTILITY EASEMENT DEFINE"
An unobstructed easumnt for the cnnstruction and maintenan•T
Necessary ovrnccad, underground, or surface public Will"" � 1
rights to conduct drainage and trU;ming On said easo"Nnt•
COUNTY SNRYEYUR ..
T.erti! that
L thi, plat has been'a
. chacaed "tn, •„U•al'' �•'
0
0
r
M
a
.7
14
%
YWP
MARfnN
PIP" I T* P IL7:1so
\ I , I I
OCN*STE.
YWP
I Y ATI*"AL jh5?.fvTt
ROCHf',TER SIATI JUNLOR rCLL(
Lbr,Amom of: ,-, I..
P p IS
llY
SIX
IV 16 1 N I T Y MI >A�
- -
17
*R4.
41
TO: C,iSoli•!,: Plnnn:ng . ,,.liti:nt
1421 - 31d .cnue S.I.
Rochester, Minnesota ;+,,;.01
FROM: Dep rti..,.nt of Public Scrvicrs
160 -- 4th Strcct S.E.
Rdehester, Minnesota Mol
RE: .-_Campus_Village_Subdivision._..-__.
DATE' October 27,-1980— • --- - -
In reply to your request for our review and comments on the '&iVe'matter,
vie submit the following:
_ Comments by -Rona ld -Pa ine ------------ __
_L__-The_plat- as- submitted-has-59,334-sq,-ftstreet_-11.G;*--8r------ - ---
------ 12,BB&57_sq__t't_of-alley-R=O,W,-to-sel=veA19'—��t.& -------___,
2_streets._The- houses _could_be_serv-ed_Rff_afstieet_andsaxa—____—__
--- the maintenance of_the_additjg!lal_221_of _pubti_tR.9..W_...1his
unneeded R.O.W. would_hav_e to forever_beju&intain! IX-u a--____---_
--_ y City resulting in extra unneeded
_2. Snow plowing operations are_generallX dLreSted_tAwarAShe--__.___�
-,result-that traffic is kept mov_ing_on throughfarrn —__--
V'_- out the City_ With this_objectiv-e_in mind the Stregt MaintP[uTntp —
Division _plows _the _alleys only after all ra,t,
3. `Snow plowinc,_of alleys normally reSstLis _in�nns3�erahle_—_—
�__ narrowing_of anal,redder_Rdr_r_gbt�cea�ylhen.-a.Ueysbecame
___--narrow the -users _generally-_flay-e.jn0r.e- diffirnt tvy _-anp„vai Y_
__ ___vehicles in
n
Campus Village Subdivision
Comments by Roger Plumb
The use of alleys for garage access would substantially improve
the appearance of the street side of those units. However, it
would result in increased maintenance and repair costs for the
alleys. For many years now the general practice on subdivisions
has been to not install public alleys for vehicular access. This
has been advantageous to our maintenance expenditures since the
public maintenance & repair costs have been only on the public
street side of the houses. We would recommend that if the
developer wishes to obtain the improved appearance that the
alley areas be developed and maintained as private property
rather than as an added public expense.
Comments by David Rossman
Sufficient R/W should be included for temporary turn-arounds at the
end of each circle and the alley should be private alleys.
REQUEST FOR COM"ICIL ACTION MEDAlE G lI/17/im
AGENDA SECTION: I ORIGINATING DEPT:
Hearings Planning
ITEM: ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY:
N O.13-4 The Regulations for the Community Development Block Grant Progrkm
tNovember 14, 1980
This public hearing is being held in compliance with the Community Development
Block Grant Regulations to provide citizens an opportunity to voice their
opinions on the manner by which the local staff administered this program
for the past six years. The notice that is attached was published in the
Rochester Post Bulletin on November 7, 1980.
The City has expended 87% of the total funds made available by HUD. This
is above the national average. For you information a comparison of the funds
allocated to amount expended for each project is shown below.
Project Project Amount Amount Percent
No. Name Al InrAtarl Rxonn,1.a Ramaininn
1977
Planning -Development District
$ 14,474.34
14,474.34
0%
1966
Contigency
30,000.00
0
100%
2007
Senior Citizens Center
1,208,509.00
1,012,611.00
1.5%
2010
Bus Shelters
19,000.00
1,134.50
94.0%
2013
Ability Building Center
86,571.00
85,992.00
2.9%
2014
Shelter for Battered Women
100,371.00
100,371.00
0%
2015
Site acquisition - Low Income
300,285.00
225,000.00
25.0%
Housing
2016
Group Home - Mentally Retardec
74,331.00
71,143.00
4.3%
2017
Group Home - Alcholics
66,400.00
66,400.00
0%
2018
Group Home - Handicapped Adult
58,300.00
0
100%
2020
Group Home - Mentally Ill
73,586.00
73,586.00
0%
2103
S.E. Sanitary Sewer
321,000.00
321,000.00
2128
Bear Creek Neighborhood - Streit
98,857.00
58,446.03
40.8%
2651
Bear Creek Neighborhood - Play
35,000.00
5,288.38
84.8%
ground Equipment
2916
Shoreline Stabilization
48,000.00
48,000.00
08
4021
Development District Adm.
388,507.66
388,507.66
0%
4023
General Administration
40,100.00
4,789.59
88.1%
Continued
COUNCIL ACTION: Molicn ti,: Second bv:
Page 2
11/14/80
Regulations for the Community Development Block Grant Program
Project Project
No. Name
Amount Amount Percent
Allocated Exnended RPmAinina
4025
Planning Dept.
21,052.00
21,052.00
0%
Administration
4026
Architectural Barrier
68,000.00
25,920.36
62.0%
Removal
6325
Bear Creek Neighborhood
38,656.00
17,437.15
54.8%
Traffic Signal
8674
Meadow Park Neighborhood -
359,000.00
285,140.71
20.5%
Sewer District
3,272,000.00
2,849,372.50
12.9%
Reprogramming of funds can be anticipated in the near future as amounts allocated
to an activity occasionally exceeded the actual costs incurred, this is especially
true in those activities involving construction.
Public Hearings regarding the development of next years applicaton are tentatively
scheduled for December 1, 1980 and January 5, 1981.
No action is required.
GL/tmf
l
PAGE 20 POST -BULLETIN, ROCFiE5TE.R, nUNN., Friday, November 7, 1980 _
PUBLIC HEARING
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
(Program Assessment)
The Rochester City Council invites any persons interested In com-
menting on the administration of this program to attend a public
hearing being held at the Council meeting, November 17th, 1980,
730 p.m. at the Council Chambers located on the Second Floor
of City Hall, 224 1 st Avenue SW, Rochester, MN.
The purpose of this hearing is to provide to all persons an oppor-
tvnity to express their opinions concerning the past operation of
the program and suggest ways in which the program could be
improved.
Items presently scheduled to be addressed at the hearing are:
1. Identification of the projects that have received an alloca-
tion of Community Development Block Grant funds, which are as
follows:
Senior Citizens Center $1,028,509
(remodeling of existing building) 21,000
S.E. Sanitary Sewer ......................... . 321,000
Architectural Barrier Removal ................
Development District Administration ............383,508
Site Acquisition for Low Income Housing ........300,285
Silver Lake Stabilization ........................ 48,000
Ability Building Center ............. ...........88,571
Golden Hill Sewer and Surfacing (curb and gutter) 359,000
Shelter for Battered Women ....................100,371
Playground Equipment/Bike Path, McQuillan Park .35,000
Bus Shelters .............................. ....19,000
Marion Road, WalkwoyJTraffic Light .............38,656
Group Home — Mentally III ....................73,586
Group Home — Mentally Retarded ..............73,506
Longfellow Area Street .........................98,857
Planning Department —Housing Pion .............21,052
Administration................................40,100
Contingency/Local Option ......................30,000
Planning —Development District .................14,474
Group Home —Alcoholics .......................66,400
Group Home Handicapped Children ...58,300
Total $3,272,000
2. The rate at which the funds are expended. The Department
of Housing and Urban Development has made available
$3,272,000.00 of Community Development Block Grant funds
over the past 6 years of which Rochestor has expanded
$2,736,333 or 83.6%' .
3. Requesting a response from the audience concerning the
program administration.
A public hearing is scheduled for December 1, 1980 to discuss
the process involved in submitting projects for the upcoming pro-
gram year. If you are unable to attend this meeting and are in-
lorested in the program, please write to Mayor Chuck Hazama,
City Hall or call Gary Luoders at 285-8219.
�' LU�:cj F-3, i" C.e-W'!CiL ACTION MEDAIE cG 11/17/ i0
AGENDA SECTION: CPIGINATING DEPT:
Organizational Business Mayor's Office
ITEM: 11EM DESC RIV110 N:
N D.e-1 Appointments to Boards and Committees
r I hereby submit for your approval the following appointments
were submitted separately.
ENERGY AWARENESS COMMITTEE:
PREPARED BY:
I
ayor Hazama
i
All applications j
Elsa Hutchison
1005 8th Avenue S. W.
Fill vacancy created by
Jim Ayers resignation
Roger Daly
503 14th Avenue S. W.
Fill vacancy created by
Roger Johnson's resignation
John Bass
633 16th Street S. W.
Fill vacancy created by
Cy Griebenow's resignation
MAYOR'S ADVISORY
COMMITTEE ON ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE:
John Perkins
1006 14th Avenue S. W.
Fill vacancy created by
resignation of Joy Fogarty
Graham T. Howard
1225 First Street N. W.
Fill vacancy created by
resignation of Janet Riggs
BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS:
George Schroeder - two
year term to May 1982
2021 33rd Street NW
Expired term of William
Canfield who resigned
Beth Calavano - two year
term to May 1982
4020 17th Avenue N.W.
Expired term of Bryan McSweeney
who resigned
Tom Coleman - reappoint
for two year term to May 1982
402 31 Street N14
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS:
Ed Hentges - reappoint for three year term (Sept. 1983
206 3rd Street SE
Gerald Gilreat:h - reappoint for three years (Sept. 1983)
1114 NW loth Avenue
Ct pp ACTION:
CONTINUED........ '
✓V UfV viL 1 ION: nt or,on !,y: Second nv• lo:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS
C-1
11/17/80
Appointments Continued......
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS:
Peter McHardy - reappoint for three year term (Sept. 1983)
2311 Viking Drive N. W.
js Margaret Brimijoin - three year term to Sept. 1983
1214 SW 6th Street
Fill vacancy created by James Novak resignation
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE:
Tony Casalenuovo
2110 5th Avenue S. W.
New appointment to complete the roster
Leilani Gibbs
2040 24th Street N. 14.
New appointment to complete the roster
REQUEST FOR CCU"aC@I_ ACT1®irl
MEETING 11_17_80
DAl E :
AGENDA SECTION:
Letters and Petitions
„LM: ITEM DESCRIPTION:
N O• Q-I Local Improvements
r
OPIGINATING DEPT:
City Administrator
The following petition for local improvements has been received:
"Extension of Sanitary Sewer and Watermain on 31st Avenue
N.W. from 43rd Street N.W. to 48th Street N.W."
Petition received from Cordul Establishment Inc.
EPARED BY:
. Kurcan
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION:
A motion adopting the prepared resolution referring said petition
to the Public Services Department for the preparation of the
necessary feasibility report.
iI,vJUFJCIL ACTION: Mo, a, by: Second by: I
�E-QWZST FOR COU"XIL ACTION
MEETING 11/17/80
DALE:
AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT:
Reports and Recommendations City Administrator
ITtM: ITEM DESCRIPTION:
N v•� I Request for Street Liqhtinq
r
PREPARED BY:
S. Kurcan
The attached memo from the Public Utilities Department requests
permission to install street lighting in several new subdivisions.
Due to the 1981 budget constraints, funds for additional street
lighting of a major nature are limited.
The cost to the street lighting program of the 39 additional units
requested would be about $1,000 for 1981. It is felt by this office
that the cost could be absorbed without significant impact to our
budget, therefore, we would recommend the installation of the
requested lights.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
A motion approving the installation of additional street
lighting as outlined by the Public Utilities Department memo.
y
uUNCIL ACTION: Motion by; Second by: to:
Rochester
Public
J Utilities
November 10, 1980
506 FIRST AVENUE NE E30X 6057
ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55901
Telephone #(507) 285-8955
TO: Stevan Kvenvold, City Administrator 11 'Jv
FROM: R. John Miner, Director, Electric Division V
SUBJECT: CITY STREETLIGHTING
As we discussed last week, the Public Utility Department has prepared plans
for the installation of streetlighting in several new residential subdivisions.
In the past, the street lights have been routinely installed and added to the
City's regular monthly bill for streetlighting. Because of the limitations
imposed on the City's 1981 budget, and because the City and the Public Utility
Department have not as yet developed a streetlighting plan, I believe that it
would be advisable for your office to approve any major additions to the City
streetlighting system.
The following is a list of the residential subdivisions and the proposed number
of street lights to be installed in each:
1. Innsbruck VI 8
2. Western III 14
3. Meadow Park South III 3
4. Belair 1
5. Rochester Villa Trailer Court 3
The above quantities of street lights generally reflect minimum requirements
based on partial building. Additional street lights would be required at a
later date as the subdivisions are completed.
Streetlighting has also been requested at the following locations:
1. In the vicinity of Eastwood State Bank, 17th Avenue SE 10
2. 20th Street SE from 3rd Avenue to llth Avenue.
(This is a major lighting project which has not yet
been designed.)
To estimate the impact of this additional streetlighting on the City's monthly
costs, you may assume that each light would be billed at approximately $2.50
per month.
Stevan Kvenvold, City Administrator
November 10, 1980
Page 2
Steve, we will wait to hear from your office before proceeding with the in-
stallation of this additional streetlighting. Please call me if you have
any questions.
cc: John A. Cobb, General Manager
Rr-!R.UEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION "DATE:' 11-17-80
AGENDA SECTION: CPIGINATING DEPT:
Reports and Recommendations City Administrator
ITEM: ITEM DESCRIPTION: _
N D-�-a Request to Move and Store Buildinq
EPARED BY:
Kurc
Jack Prow has requested permission to move a building (White Swan apartments)
to the Prow Motel at 510 17th Avenue N.W. and store said building for
thirty days. It was originally requested that this building be moved to
the 100 block of 7th Avenue S.E., which presently has a PUD designation
requiring a zoning change. This property is presently tied up pending a
sale which makes it impossible to move it there at this time.
It is the intention of Mr. Prow to determine within the 30-day period
where the building will be moved to on a permanent basis. One possibility
would be to use it as an addition to the building at 17th Avenue N.W.
Mr. Prow wishes to be heard by Council to further explain his request.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
If Council wishes to grant permission to move the White Swan to the
present Prows Motel property, it should instruct the staff to issue the
necessary permits contingent upon required City departments approval of
the move, storage and final placement of the building.
L"u^-
®UNCIL ACTION: Morton by: Second by; 1 rot
TO:
County of Olmsted
o CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1421 3rd Avenue S.E.
ROCHESTER, MN 55901
l Phone (507) 285.8232
serving the townships and communities of Olmsted County
Stevan Kvenvold
City Administrator
FROM: Donald Beed
Zoning Administrator
DATE: November 13, 1980
Tom O. Moore
Planning Director
DIVISIONS
Administrative 285.8232
Lang Range 285-8224
Operational 285-8218
Technical Services 285-8225
On November 13, 1980, Mr. Jack Prow contacted our office inquiring
whether he could receive approval from the City to temporarily move
the White Swan Apartments to his motel property at 510 - 17th
Avenue N.W.
Evidently, the White Swan was to be removed from its present sfte at
938 Second Street S.W. (Hilleren Property) before November 1, 1980
to make room for a temporary surface parking lot. However, because
the final site has not been determined, the apartment building has not
been removed. The Hilleren developers are requesting that the building
be removed from the site next week and Mr. Prow is now asking that
the City approve a moving permit so he can temporarily store the
apartment building at his motel site until the final location is
determined.
As of this date, Mr. Prow has two locations which he would like to place
this apartment building. The first would be at the 100 block of
Seventh Avenue S.E., which is presently zoned as a PUD. The PUD
district would have to be repealed before the building could be moved
there. The second site would be to incorporate the building into
his motel complex on 17th Avenue N.W. and rent them out as motel
units.
Mr. Prow has informed me that 3-4 weeks will be needed until the final
determination of the site will be made.
DB/dmt
Apr Equal Oppeuntnity / Afj4rmality Artion Ernphgtrr
ET I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEDAiE:C II -I/ -HD
AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT:
Reports and Recommendations City Administrator
ITEM: ITEM DESCRIPTION:
N o.�-3 Request for Limousine Franchise
r
PREPARED BY:
S. Kurcan
Alden Wildfeuer requests to be heard by City Council for additional
consideration of his request for a limousine franchise.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
If Council wishes to discuss the issue, a motion to reconsider
would be in order. After discussion of the request, Council
could then move to either deny or approve the request.
� "'4 4. t "e.
OUNCIL ACTION: M.I.on by: Second bv:
I�EAUEST VOR COU ICIL ACTlOaa MEDAlE G 11/17/80
AGENDA SECTION: I CPIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM::
N Of-Lf
A
Reports and Recommendations I City Administrator
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
REPAIRED BY:
Request to Purchase Property at 8 Second Avenue N. E. IS. Kvenvold
A motion is requested approving the purchase of property at 8 Second Ave. NE.
It is anticipated that this property will shortly be needed to accomodate
the NW drive-in bank. Although the project is not finalized, the property
owner would be much less adversely affected if the City were to take action
to purchase the property at this time. It is recommended that the City
purchase the property at this time. A memorandum from Mr. Manning outlining
the situation is attached for your review.
If the purchase is approved, vie would recommend that the necessary funds be
appropriated from the Future Property Acquisition account and that this fund
would be reimbursed by tax increment bond funds when the project becomes a
reality. This same method was used to purchase the property at 14 Second Ave. NE
when that parcel was purchased in July.
COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second bv:
o m
v
Sc
�•: r
I .`v
}
1
LL
N
co
N
N
U
w
0
0
dd
r-
0
h
V
lD
IRONWOOD SQUARE -SUITE 301
STFVF.N C. YouNcois,r
ATTORNEY AT LAW
300 THIRD AVENUE: S.I?,
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA 5,5901
November 3, 1980
Mr. Ron Manning
Administrator's Office
City Hall
Rochester, Minnesota 55901
RE: Ann Brehmer
Dear Mr. Manning:
TELEPHONE
BOW2620434
i
Pursuant to our recent telephone conversation, I wish
to advise you that the existing liens on Ms. Brehmer's property for
which the City is negotiating purchase are as follows:
National Escrow Corporation
Account No. 504155- $3,057.23 (principal as of
November 1, 1980)
National Escrow Corporation
Account No. 525251
Housing Development Grant
$3,782.30 (principal as of
November 1, 19S0)
$4,054.76
As we have previously discussed, it is necessary that the above
grant amount be paid off should the City purchase Ms. Brehmer's property.
Ms. Brehmer's situation is such that she is unable to make nnnthly pay-
ments on these mortgages or to refinance for purchase of replacement
housing in that she is going to lose the rental income from her existing
dwelling upon purchase by the City. Under those circumstances, I think
it is imperative that every effort be made to satisfy these liens on the
property and, at the same time, leave Ms. Brehmer with sufficient funds
to purchase replacement housing. As you are further aware, she has found
a home which she would like to acquire, although the property does not
have rental potential so that her future income will be markedly decreased.
I would appreciate it if you would contact me after reviewing
these figures to discuss this matter further,
Very truly yours,
e,T C. ;You, c�itii sl,�
SCY,cmr
MEMORANDUM
November 13, 1980
TO: Stevan Kvenvold
FROM: Ron Manning iQJ,vk
RE: Acquisition of Property for Northwestern National Bank Drive -In Site
One of the property owners, Mrs. Ann Brehmer who will be displaced by the
Northwestern National Bank Drive -In Project, has found a replacement home she
would buy if the City will acquire her present home now.
Mrs. Brehmer and her Attorney have agreed to sell her home to the City for the
City's appraised value of $56,900.00 with certain conditions. Mrs. Brehmer's
only income is from Social Security and from renting out two rooms of her
present home. At this time she also has two home improvement loans in the
amount of $6,839.53 and a home improvement grant in the amount of $4, 054.76
which also are liens against her home
If Mrs. Brehmer is required to pay off the existing liens of $10,894.29, she
will not.have enough cash equity to purchase a comparable replacement home.
Under the Uniform Relocation Act, however, she is eligible to receive up to $15,000.00
for a replacement housing payment for purchasing a comparable home. The following
work -up indicates that Mrs. Brehmer would need a replacement housing payment in
the amount of $8,494.00.
purchase price of Mrs. Brehmer's home $56,900
less existing liens 10,894
remaining equity $46,006
purchase price of replacement home $54,500
less equity from existing home (46,006)
amount of replacement housing payment 8,494
The City presently owns Parcels 207, 211 and 14. (Refer to attached map.)
Mrs. Brehmer's home is Parcel 8.
It is my recommendation that the Common Council favorably consider the immediate
acquisition of Mrs. Brehmer's Property for the purchase price of $56,900.00 and that
a replacement housing payment in the amount of $8,494.00 be approved. I further
recommend that Parking Meter Funds be used to finance these costs and that the Parking
Pieter Fund be reimbursed at the time bonds are sold to finance the public costs of the
Rauenhorst/Northwestern National Bank Project.
RM/dmr
Attachments
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEDATE G 11/17/80
AGENDA SECTION: I OPIGINAIING DEPT:
Reports and Recommendations I City Administrator
ITEM: ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY:
N O �'1 Payment. for Supervisor of Youth Employment River Clean Up Area I S. Kvenvold
r For a number of years, the City of Rochester has been involved in
employing youths during the summer months through the Youth Employment
Porgram which usually involves a minimal financial participation on the
part of the City.
During this past summer, the City and County were involved in the program
whereby youths were given the task of clearing debris from the communities
river banks, with the only financial participation being the cost of the
supervisor of the youths. The City and County shared the expense of the
supervisor, with the City share being 51,180.74. Since there does not exist
a specific appropriation for this purpose, it is necessary to appropriate the
sum from the Contingency Account.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Request a motion appropriating $1,180.74 from the Contingency Account
for the above referenced purpose.
�� 14 "-
OUNCIL ACTION: ION: Motion by: Second bv: lo'
SEMCAC, INC.
P.0.Box 549 • Rushford, MN 55971 • (507) 864-7741
September 9, 1980
Fred Wagner
Personnel Department
City Hall
Rochester, MN 55901
Dear Fred:
Enclosed please find a worksheet indicating what
was paid to Van Bredison, the supervisor of the
"River Crew". As per our contract which states
that the city of Rochester will pay one half of
what was paid the supervisor. The city owes
Semcac Inc., $1180.74. Please make check payable
to Semcac, Inc. and send it directly to me as soon
as possible.
Sincerely,
tdichael J, her
Youth Employment Supervisor
MaVbds
Enclosure
• ry aa'vva/IVa/i R. f!vYiV/V Vnl[:
NUA SECIION: OPIGINAItNG DEPJ:
Reports and Recommendations City Attorney
Ai IiEfd UESCktI'TIUNi Set a•1711, public hearing for adoption ofrecommended amendments to City Charter. K'F'G BY: uhler, Ji
r There are a variety of ways in which the Charter of the City of
Rochester may be amended. One way is by the process of passing
an ordinance which has the unanimous approval of all members of
the Common Council.
On two prior occasions since March of this year -the Council has
had for its consideration Charter amendments. These have been
favorably acted upon by the Council.
However, when I recently reviewed the statutory procedure for
amending -the Charter by ordinance I discovered that we have
not completely acted in accordance with the technical requirements
of the statute.
Minn. Stat. §410.12, subd. 7 (1978) provides for amendment by
ordinance "after a public hearin up on two weeks ublished
notice containins the text o t e or000se amen meat . In
these instances, the ordinances were presented for your initial
consideration under "grganizational business" or as "reports and
recommendations" and no public hearing was noted or held.
Naturally, I,am-not pleased that we essentially will be required
to start this process anew, although since two other Charter
Commission reoommendations 'are pending for Council consideration
it will not be a complete duplication of effort. Therefore, I
would request that the Council sqt a date for hearing not only
on the most recent changes recommended by the Charter Commission,
but those which were acted upon previously without a public hearing.
These matters are:
(a) Revision of Section 1, Repeal of Sections.4, 5,
6, and 7. Also, revision of Sections 8 and 9,
repeal of Sections 10, 11, 12 and 13. (See Council
Agenda for meeting of April 21, 1980).
(b) Revision of Sections 21, 28, 32, 36 and 39, and
repeal of Sections 34, 37 and 38. (See Council
Agenda for meeting of May 19, 1980).
The other matters recently recommended for approval by the Charter
Commission include: ,
RE
14CI . ACTION: Molion by, � y Second by.-- lof '
i
(a) Revision of Sections 43 and 44. (See RCA
prepared for meeting of October 6, 1980,
where this was tabled because not all members
of the Council were present).
(b) Amendment of Sections 20, 89, and 107. (A
separate memorandum will be prepared to
explain this proposal for your consideration
at a Committee of the Whole meeting).
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION
Adopt the prepared resolution instructing the City Clerk to set
a public hearing on the adoption of the recommended amendments
to the Charter of the City of Rochester.
REQUEST FOR COM,!CIL ACTION MEDAL ." 11-17-80
AGENDA SECTION: CVIGINATING DEPT.'
Reports and Recommendations I City Clerk
lwM: ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY:
Licenses and Bonds Judy Schorr
r
The following Licenses and Bonds are submitted for your consideration:
Diane P. Moyer of the Aldrich Memorial nursery School requests approval
of their application for a Single Gambling License. The Aldrich School
would like to hold a raffle on January 14, 1981; they request that the
Common Council waive the bond requirement.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve or Deny the Above Licenses and Bonds
The following license Was received on November 17, 1980 for your
consideration:
Joseph H. Blackwell, Sr., owner of Joe's Sandwich Emporium at 31 Fourth
Street S.E., requests approval of his application for an On -Sale Non -
Intoxicating Malt Liquor License. Mr. Blackwell has paid the license
fee requirement. Approval pending departmental approvals.
David Christenson, 2824 Fairview Court S.E., Rochester, requests approval
of his application for a Temporary Dance Permit for the Mayo Civil Auditorium
to be held on Friday, November 21, 1980. Mr. Christenson is holding the
dance as a fund-raising project for collection of funds to entitle him to
travel with "Up With People" group.
,OUNCIL ACTION: ION: Motion b,, 5econd bv: to.
M Ell;F1C'i 11-17-SO
t:
AGENDA SECTION; OPIGINATING DEPT.'
Reports and Recommendations City Clerk
IILM DESCkH"ION;
N U� % Licenses and Bonds
PREPARE[) BY:
Judy Scherr
The following Licenses and Bonds are submitted for your consideration:
Diane P. Moyer of the Aldrich Memorial Nursery School requests approval
of their- application for a Single Gambling License. The Aldrich School
would like to hold a raffle on January 14, 1981; they request that the
Common Council waive the bond requirement.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve or Deny the Above Licenses and Bonds
COUNCIL ACTION: ION: Moron by; Second Gv: lo:
REOUST FOR COWN'CIL ACTION
""Dri1E v II/I�/uu
AGENDA SECTION.
Reports and Recommendations
TES IIEIA DESCRIPIiON,
Award of bids for sidewalk snowplow
OPIGINATING DEPT:
Finance
Bids were opened at 10i00 A.M., November 13, 1980, for a 4-wheel
drive rubber tire tractor with diesel engine and the following
equipment: angle plow, snowblower, and flail mower.
The unit will be used for sidewalk snow removal in the winter and
mowing at the Landfill in the summer.
PREPARED :c
Dave Wernecke
Only one bid was received - from MacQueen Equipment Company in the
amount of 528,790.00. This unit will be paid for by $20,000 budgeted
in 1980 for a skid loader, and $20,000 budgeted in 1981 for a sidewalk
snowplow.
Acceptance of the MacQueen bid is recommended.
OUNCIL ACTION: �,%ol,on bY, Second by; tot
ItL'kIli :,`n'I P-u-,4 l.V(J:;:l,iI- llK.,l IUim
U A I L
AGENDA SECTION: OPIG114ATING DEPT:
Reports and Recommendations finance
T( IILM DESCkIPHUNI
y O,-_q Award of bids for tandem roller
Bids were received at 11:00 A.M., November 12, 1980, for a
tandem steel drum roller for the Street 8 Alley Division.
A tabulation of the bids is attached.
Acceptance of the low hid of Borchert -Ingersoll in the net
amount of $15,780 is recommended. This unit has drive and _
vibration on both drums. $17,000 is budgeted in the Equipment
Revolving fund.
OUNICIL ACTIo!!: Motion byl Second by: toe
kEPAkED :f:
Dave Wernecke
m
ri
n
n
X
m
2
v
O
1
ra
C7
z
f7r
n
.Q
Y
A
99
I
I
f
10
i
I
I
I
301
J
UL
`N 'co
n
m
v
V)
►a
m
C7
V
iri
to
P
ra
'il
ri
7
m
nm
7
cni
fn
ri
ri
Z
o
�
c
m
m
{
p
N
n
C
n
Z
c
F
rn
r�
m
ci
r
-a
H
r
Q.
J
n
i
••
r
•
o
r
ca
o
m
O
�
A
S
Z
V
C
C
L
T
IS
u
CD
Y
FV
V
l�
Lb
P]
O
BORCHERT_
INGERSOLL
HAYOEN-
MURPHY
�-:: r�-rr:.—�:
t — w•__c�._T_ n _ _ r.-+._r___.�<a:
_.L_..
�_ I_. _s �_ _: a:=
_�.:yc: _�—.: e:�—:
rO7
w o'
w!
oo
W z
� : N
A
ra
o
4 .
�_'_._..__...__
.. o
4_
RUF FERI
_.._-•�-•o- -._'cat
v. o �
-. — �
DGE'
J01INSON
I
I
i
;
I
oo o
I
.__
.
MEETING _� �.TC,
DAIS:
AGENDA SECTION: CPICINATING DEPT:
Reports and Recommendations Finance
..Ems ITEM DESCRIPTION:
N O.�.(6 Approval of Accounts Payable
r
PREPARED BY:
P. Utesch
Request a motion to approve payment of Accounts Payable (submitted separately)
-----with the exception of:
COUNCIL AC 1 IOIN: Mop,on by: Second bv: Io:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION M`DATE`'
AGENDA SECTION: OPIGINAIING DEPT:
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PERSONNEL
IT ITEM UESCRIPIIUN, PREPARED BY:
N O.`Z:-ri IAPPROVAL OF PENSIQM CONTRIBUTION . r,.A
r
Minnesota Statute 69.77 Police and Firefighters' Relief Association
Guidelines, Subd. 2 - (1) requires that each employee covered under
the retirement association effective January 1, 1981 and after contributing
eight (8") percent of the maximum rate of salary for retirement and
survivorship benefits.
The statute,does allow for a minimum of 11'/year increase until the
maximum of 8% is reached.
It is recommended that the contribution rate be set at seven (70/0 percent
effective 1/1/81 and raised to eight (81%) percent effective 1/l/82.
PAC Approved
Council Action Requested
Approval of Resolution prepared by City Attorney's Office
9
COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by, second by, to:
REQUEST FOR COUNICII_ ACIAGNI MEDAIE � 11/17/80
AGENDA SECTION:
Reports 6 Recommendations
OPIGINATING DEPT:
Consolidated Planning
ITEM: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Variance to Section 31.26, Subdivision 3, Para- PREPARED BY:
NO. r- graphs 3, 4, 6 5, of the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the Metes
L and ;-Convey ance of Un latted Land located at 37th Street
and the proposed West River Parkway. 11 VU"
r
November 13, 1980
Consolidated Planning Department Review:
See attached staff report dated November 13, 1980.
Council Action Needed:
1. Should the Council decide to grant the variance to the Subdivision Ordinance,
it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution that can be
adopted.
Attached:
1. City Clerk's Copy of Application.
2. Copy of Consolidated Planning Department Report.
DISTRIBUTION:
6) City Clerk
2. City Attorney
3. Consolidated Planning Department
4. Applicant: This application will be considered sometime after 7:30 p.m.
in the Council Chambers of City Hall.
.TAE/dmt
A
(� II. Cj1*hLL Mer.en by; Second T,y: to
DATE: November 14, 1980
TO: Stevan Kvenvold, City Administrator
FROM: Frederick S. Suhler, Jr., City Attorney
RE: Request For Variance: Elcor Enterprise
I note we have another request from Elcor Enterprises
for a metes and bounds conveyance for property located near 37th
Street and proposed West River Road. Because of the negative
Planning Staff recommendation and what appears to me to be a
potential for abuse of the subdivision regulations, I feelconstrained
to add my written comments on this proposal.
Occasionally, I have noticed that when "metes and bounds"
questions come up in the past there has been some confusion (of
which I have been guilty of) concerning the interplay between two
sections of the R.C.O. One which relates to fairly straight
forward proposals (R.C.O. §31.26) and those which require special
findings or a variance from the Council (R.C.O. §31.27).
R.C.O. §31.26 sets forth a general rule that all metes and
bounds conveyances of unplatted land must be approved by the
Council. If certain conditions are shown by the applicant (unnecessary
hardship and that the conveyance will not interfere with the purpose
of the subdivision regulations) the Council may, without any further
findings, approve the conveyance if:
(1) The dedication of utility or street easements
is not involved.
(2) No more than three separate parcels are created.
(3) The separate parcels created otherwise meet the
frontage and area requirements of the zoning ordinance.
If all three of the above noted conditions will not be
present, then the Council must go one step further and consider the
matter as a variance request under R.C.O. §31.27, (The prior metes
and bounds request by Elcor back in September met these three
requirements).
In this instance however, a variance will be required
because:
(a) more than three separate parcels are being
created; and,
CITY OF ROCHESTER
MINNESOTA
Office of City Attorney
Page 2
(b) two of the parcels do not meet minimum street
frontage requirements.
The standards set forth in R.C.O. §31.27 relating to a
variance (i.e. what the Council must find to justify granting
of one) are more stringent than a normal metes and bounds.
These findings must consider the following concerns:
(1) Hardship to the applicant. Not only
hardship to the applicant as in the normal
situation under R.C.O. §31.26, but in addition
that it is hardship not experienced by similarly
situated property owners.
(2) Interference with the purpose of subdivision.
Re ula�tions. Here, you not only consider whether it
interferes with the zoning ordinance as under §31.26,
but whether it is in the community or public interest.
(3) Preservation of property rights. A variance is
necessary to preserve existing property rights of
the applicant.
(4) General Nature. (Basically, that the situation
presented is unique so that it is not feasible to
enact a general subdivision regulation which would
cover a similar situation in the future).
Without presupposing to interfere with the function of the
Common Council to make a final decision on these questions in this
case, it seems to me that Elcor will have an extremely difficult
time meeting the standards required to obtain a variance in this
instance.
Another factor which concerns me is that if the Common
Council approves this particular request, they will have established
a precedent (for good or ill) which would permit the entire
development of this larger parcel without any of the protections
to the public which the platting process are designed to address.
I would request that you include these written remarks
in the agenda material which relates to this item.
FSS/jpt
`t
County of Olmsted
CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1421 3rd Avenue S.E.
rr�� " YD•-`1
ROCHE'STER, MN 55901.
Phone (507) 285.8232
serving the townships and conintunities of Olmsted County
TO: Rochester Common Council
FROM: Jeffrey A. Ellerbusch, PlannerZi
Operational Planning Division
DATE: November 13, 1980
Tom 0. Moore
Planning Director
DIVISIONS
Administrative 2854232
Inng Range 285-8224
Operational 285.8218
Technical Sereices'28.5-8225
RE: Subdivision Variance ,780-4 to Allow a Metes and Bounds Conveyance
of Unplatted Land Between 37th Street N.W. and the Proposed West
River Parkway.
The Planning Department Staff has reviewed the above described petition
and finds the following:
Name of Applicant
Report Attachments
Elcor Enterprises, Inc.
Richard Hexum
3705 Enterprise Drive S.W.
Rochester, MN 55901
Applicant's Letter
Public Services Comments
Location Map
Copy of Certificate of Survey
The Metes and Bounds Conveyance of this property was previously considered
by the Common Council on September 22 of this year when the owners proposed
to subdivide their existing 15.59 acre tract of unplatted land into three
parcels of 2.33, 9.45, and 3.81 acres in size.
The Common Council, taking into account the need for 60 feet of right-of-way
for West River Parkway along the entire southern boundary of this property,
denied the metes and bounds subdivision as proposed and allowed the conveyance
of only the 2.33 acre parcel found in the northwest corner. This action
was subject to the conveyance to the city of a 60 foot wide'strip of land
for future right-of-way lying adjacent to the 2.33 acre parcel (Northwestern
Bank Site). This strip of land totaled 0.58 acres in size.
The property has yet to be platted, and the applicants now request a
variance to allow the metes and bounds subdivision of the remaining 12.68
acres into four parcels labeled A through D on the attached survey. The
subdivision layout is the same as the one reviewed by the Council in
September, however, the needed right-of-way for West River Parkway is
described as a separate 1.44 acre tract known as "Parcel h".
t/
Au Syual Opp,rou,ia' / AfJirmativr Arlin Rmplftwr
Page 2
November 13, 1980
Subdivision Variance #80-4
•Variances to the Subdivision Ordinance Section 31.26, Subdivision 3,
Paragraph 3, 4, and 5 is are necessary to allow such a metes and bounds
lot split.
The proposal exceeds the total number of lots that can be created by metes
and bounds. Two new parcels were created by the previous application. This
proposal would create four more for a total of six parcels from the original
tract. Paragraph 4 limits the number of parcels to be created to only
three.
The two parcels labeled "A & C", which will be retained by the property
owner, do not meet the minimum Frontage requirements on a public road
as required by Paragraph 5 of the ordinance. This deficiency could be
alleviated by the establishment of the portion of the needed right-of-way
for West River Parkway being dedicated or conveyed to the city for future
roadway purposes.
Finally, Paragraph 3 of the Subdivision Ordinance states that metes and
bounds conveyances can be approved only if the dedication of public utility
or street easements is not involved. There is a definite need for street
right-of-way and easements in this case as requested by the Public Services
Department.
The applicant is requesting this variance to allow approval of the metes
and bounds conveyance which will facilitate the transfer of ownership
of "Parcel B".
The owners have indicated a willingness to plat the property in the future
and will be addressing these questions to the Council at the meeting.
November 17, 1980.
The obvious vehicle for fulfilling the public needs created by the
subdivision of this property is the subdivision plat. Right-of-way
needs, utility easements, and access restrictions can be handled only by
the plat. The staff feels the application of the subdivision regulations
to this land will not create an unusual and exceptional hardship in that
the appropriate method of subdivision is available to the applicant.
JAE/dmt
Common Council
City Hall
Rochester, MN 55901
Gentlemen:
We respectfully request a variance of the provisions of article 31.27
of the Rochester• Subdivision Ordinance for the following reasons:
1. Tq facilitate the preparation of legal documents and transfer
of property.
Respectfully Submitted
Pick Hexuin
For Elcor Enterprises, Inc.
COMMENTS:
The property should be platted at this time because easements and
street right-of-way are needed. (Fred Rahn)
The south line of 37th Street has present access limitations. These
should be shown now. Also, the north line of West River Parkway should
be shown with limited access. (Dave Rosman)
1. "1
Qj
SQ,,ARE
MANOR
aMM T ?WEL Cc4YVED Tb
CITY FoL R.ow.
SQUARE
As C*ijamioN of
MPRRdlRL
X
f7
—H 14 -
lfwoAL Haw 15 To
bu MeTes i Bomim
2
WIf-HP,TER CEWAT
TREATMENT PL A
0
ILI
Li
CC
1 �1 4. •" 1 .Cili..
rA
:80.
0 / rX .
r 'J4
I \�+ p i (9
I I d Fl,
� _I
G, , a
a` $� � � .F v D, Ln
N
•a n+yyw_ Y Y ( -'+. y_. -_. ICo I.COT _t�. - _ - �U S.C.�C�
i_ f V7 1 V V JC. Y 7 a
p gy 1
.. ,
ul
ul
Dv AN
ni? aid
r
1
i..if- L4Y
Y
`_i^_ ___ __ .__ _ i:"•.7.. .tom ;'. - '..
� i � 1•Pr
V2�1
I li .IIP
MEETING 1.1/1.7/80
DALE:
AGENDA SECTION: ( CPIGINATING DE PT:
Reports & Recommendations Consolidated Planning
Vera: ITEM DESCRIPHON4 metes m bounos Conveyance or Unplat
37th Street N.W. and the Proposed West River Parkway.
N o.�c.i3
November 13, 1980
Consolidated Planning Department Review
at IPREPARED- BY:
The applicant in this proposal, Elcor Enterprises, Inc. propose to subdivide an
existing 12.68 acre parcel into four tracts of 0.854, 9.45, 0.935, and 1.44 acres
in size. The details of this proposal are outlined in a staff report to the
Council concerning the subdivision variances needed to be granted prior to any
action on this metes and bounds conveyance.
Council approval by resolution is required for the metes and bounds conveyance of
any unplatted land as in this case.
Consideration of the subdivision variances requested must go hand in hand with this
proposed metes and bounds subdivision. Official action on the variances must be
made prior to action on this matter.
Council Action Needed:
1. If the Council wishes to proceed and approve this conveyance of unplatted land
by metes and bounds, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a
resolution using the attached legal description of the new tracts proposed.
Attached:
1. Certificate of Survey and Legal Descriptions of the Parcels Proposed.
DISTRIBUTION:
(::D City Clerk
2. City Attorney
3. Consolidated Planning Department File
4. Applicant: This matter will be considered sometime after 7:30 p.m. in
City Hall immediately after the variance request to the subdivision
ordinance.
M
too
UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by;
zi
1
,
/wVY d
� •O.etid'�
AO a
i
±'61
d:
.�
10,
� rJ
tv
p
An
�
11
fo''
1
1.
fair ��
rp_ [✓ _ _ S0r1
1 I, 00l rVr
T
iv
VLP
it",
U
�.
v
LA
[�
r--1a
3c� S.00
uo1 171��O' W
-•- i21.0o --•
1.F:
vt
.rlr
I
MEETING 11/]7/80
REQUEST FOR CCZJ,�!ICIL ACTION DALE
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
Reports & Recommendations lConsolidated Planning
..Emi ITEM DESCRIPTION: Application for General Development Plan
located at 8'i Street & 20th Avenue S.E. to be known as Campus
NO•5-/�
I November 13, 1980
City Planning and Zoning Commission Review:
PREPARED BY:
Ronald C. Baile,.
The Commission reviewed this application on November 12, 1980, and voted to
approve the plan. The plan is a suitable use of the land and a good design.
The applicant stated at the meeting he would remove the alleys rather than
reserve them as private and constructed out of concrete. The Commission
considered the alleys a good idea and approved the plan with the alleys as public
and not required to be of concrete. The staff requested a driveway be relocated and
to add a walkway to 21st Avenue both of which the applicant has agreed to. The
remote parking area should be retained, too, and left for public use. The
Commission agrees that a street connection is not necessary through to 21st Avenue.
Motion to approve by Gill, sgconded by Fogarty, carried unanimously with following
conditions:
1. relocate driveway near entry to Village Court
2. provide walkway from Village Court to 21st Avenue S.E.
Council Action Needed:
1. Council may take action by a motion.
2. If necessary, a resolution adopting the General Development Plan dated
"Received October 22, 1980, Olmsted County, Minnesota, consisting of one (1)
page should be prepared.
Attached:
1. Copy of Application
2. Copy of General Development Plan and Staff Report dated Novemher 7, 1980.
DISTRIBUTION:
City Clerk
City Attorney
3. Consolidated Planning Department File
4. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:30 p.m. in
the Council Chambers in City Hall.
5. Engineer (Yaggy Associates)
RCB/dmt
M4
t,iUNCIL ACTION: Mo,o„ 6,: second I,:
a
County of Olmsted
CONSOLIDATED PL.ANIVLNG DEPARTMENT
1421 3rd Avenue S.E.
ROCHESTER, MN 55901,
Phone (507) 285.8232
serving the townships and communities of Olmsted County
TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Ronald C. Bailey, AIA
Urban Designer (5
15
Long Range Planning
DATE: November 7, 1980
Tom O. Moore
Planning Director
DIVISIONS
Administrative 285.8232
Long Range 285.8224
Operatiaual 285.8218
Technical Services 28.5.8225
RE: Application for General Development Plan located at 81; Street
and 20th Avenue S.E. to be known as Campus Village.
Applicant
Attachments
Referral Departments
Campus Town, Inc.
1620 - 14th Street N.W.
Rochester, MN 55901
Vicinity, Land Use & Zoning Maps
Site Plan
Referral Letters
Public Services & Public Utilities
Other Departments - no objections,
This 21 acre site is located in SE Rochester just east of Homestead Acres
and north of Highway 14. The relatively flat site is undeveloped and
designated as medium density residential use on the Futurp Land Use
Map. The proposed development area is zoned R 3, medium density residential.
The site is in the flood fringe, but is elevated. Adjacent areas are
zoned R-3 to the west and R-4, B-4, and B-la to the east. To the south
is B-4 and County AG zone. R-1 borders the site on the north side. Lands
on the east and west are developed and undeveloped on the north and south
sides of the proposed site development.
Public utilities and access are available to this site and could handle
the proposed development.
The proposal plans for 144 dwelling units on the site with an average
density of 6.7 units per acre. The two story units with garages
would be arranged in linear groups of 4, 6, 8, and 10. An interconnecting
street would serve one hundred units by driveways and the rest would be
served by alleys from the rear. Land use intensity requirements for
an R-3 zone are met by the proposal. The arrangement and connection of
buildings as proposed is permitted in this zone as well.
A centralized recreation area about one acre in size with a tennis court
is proposed to serve the development.
e
An Equal Opportunity f Affrnnntitw At -Non E'ralduyrr
0
Page 2
November 7, 1980
General Development Plan - Campus Town, Inc.
The Public Services Department requests that the alleys be maintained
as private property. This is also requested for the remote parking
area in Village Court or for it to be redesigned to allow easier
maintenance.
In addition, a second exit and walkway is requested by Public Services
to be provided to 21st Avenue S.E. The driveway at the entrance to Village
Court should be relocated for minimizing traffic conflicts.
The Planning Department does not consider an access to 21st Avenue necessary
since the main portion of the proposal is serve$ by a loop street. 8� Street
S.E, can easily handle the traffic and -it does connect to 21st Avenue if a
driver desires to get access to Highway 14 south of the site. Furthermore,
the commercial zoned areas would encourage using the connection from
8)Street to 21st Avenue through the proposal as a short cut and put
undesireable traffic volumes through the residential area of the proposal.
The Planning Staff does agree with Public Services about the status of
the alleys.
Recommendation:
The Planning Staff recommends that the General Development Plan be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. Designate the alleys and remote parking area as private to
be maintained by Campus Village;
2. Provide a walkway from Village Court to 21st Avenue S.E.;
3. Relocate the driveway at the entrance to Village'Court;
4. If the alleys are to be public, they shall be constructed
out of concrete.
RCB/dmt
i wialis - :...;"
.n i--
be
lll•
sc..r
to
'SLUP. �� 'Y 9Tt01FIX
�
'1 lL Z 1
m
\\
11 _ I
STATE HOSPI
I-
TWp
���f � �• / i TwpTwp
171
tii" ` � a 1 x9GHE a7Enr
'LAT '►• ROC"[ST[I AA.A
• L \. ? V"ATIMAL IM)TItYT[
IRI
�.
:'-C
,-kt
w 1�
k: h
r � 1
[13.
� ti
CAS[6[4 TWp 1LHAVERHILL
a
n
..
,
ROrrtESTER STATE JUNIOR COLLEGE
- 4 n 1 f.lpV-✓L^/
ED
K\IALOWS
•.o.w<[ K
i
P!Ff
-
t
xucn1tsrtn �'�.. J HIRlIqirlr>,. .�. 1-J4�•L
Vl(.I N ITY MAP T ....I�-_
S \ JeWO '�L1.�
1
'`'I lil•1 ;`Ir ��;In�,rl�
,
_74
l..l k�ff lll ifFC-(lillll laL l
i�� It.�jyi '•i".I li.�ll��lil 1Li}aii•irflr
44 :;'f:�'1I. 1�1j IZ 1 •1y+1�j � 1• o
-y
i i Illl .yL J IIV/SSrrJJt
)!S•: Sly••!•■ ■.:• `"_-.J;r.'`1E�"111 ��'�ix�� �{f'.
:�'i •'��S ' �i »! •p s ■ F"F-""T'�r; t r J':. 1I ("F{t 4-1 ['�,f i
•, CCt;r ,i. - e ,tt'R111"'_.--T'_.•T'�"I frJtE Ij�{'r t r t'i .;.t. ri,}'-!11. •i.�1 `�1 �■ •■.'• �.jyy� LL:.+:L � "a�iw�r�['('r
I,t:3� r i_J �.� f_:.a.l•;1ii1:II• I _'r.� •�`—
,
s.i�vy1.�1•e•: Tp 11 11 ri
c
••oi
14
-
•may --�'' yI-.
x`
•■�•R UF•" •aea .
roc rnow.L lnne•tt -
rKorao!:-�b 6VWEKA
i7t1r,wJwM59T PAN
,•,aA. 'a• •c •o b i
� ° a
• • 019
i � 1
• ire,1j,
_- ;tip•;•• \fli,rt�
r
14 .—.....:.
FUTURE LAND USE MAP
1"• 100
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
• • MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
ti :'�'�•.' HIGH DCMSITY RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
-./ INDUSTRIAL
MEDICAL FACILITILS
PUBttt rACILITIFS
OPEN SPACE
L� FLOOD PRONE
E i'IY'f �. a-�. •
B-lo R - 2 r Ir
o _ 4 •
3 TJ
R_ IFF R- I
`" t
mawn-lUT (°LAIN
)
j.. R 3 l i R-a
.s g_4 0
�\1
p 4� R 3
TT
0I b
AC
TTMti L ` a
PAR
F. —
RIF. �_ L
R-3� R-1 ZONING MAP � r•�
\ 1L I••R moo'
R — 3 R-SA ESTATE A RESIDUEt IAL
Y• A-SN ESTATE R RESIDENTIAL
�•i D PU1T u R-1 SINBLI FAMILY PESIOENTIAL
:� \l R-2 LOW DEN:11Y RISIDEWAL
�^ R-3 l R-7 MCDEU'1 Df!ISIIY RESI11@f1EAL
IT_.- 1. "S. 'R•R BIWE 006111 RESIOCNTIAL
�A - = R-1R RISIDENIIAL DL`.II M
R 3 FF J •0 I .. 6-T6 NEMM1 URNo4D DUSE:•ISS
.. .. .I, L1a „ L}fib C-2 CENTRAL BUSINESS
' "' ; .. •'�� 8-3 Dfhl kdl 6U51!IE Si
R-R 6U411LAL DU(INEL' TRRST
N•1 llWlt INDUSTRIAL
��f'T' et_.. �•C- R-2 EE-2 DENCAAL INDUSTRIAL
FP . 15 t INSTITUTIONAL
S ��� f�-I If FLODD FRINGE DYERLAY—A
Y 1 FY ILOOD'aAY
i
TO: Consolidated Pinning Department
1421 - 3rd Av�;ii'c S.E.
Rochester, Minnesota 55901
rROM: Department of Public Services
1602 - 4th Street S.E.
Rochester, Minnesota 55901
c DATE: October 2.8, 1980
RE: General Development Plan of Campus Village
U
In reply to your request for our review and comments on'the above matter,
we submit the following:
__ (COMMENT-BY_ROGER E. PLUMB)��_�r__
-11_ The use of alleys for garage access would substantially improve
the appearance of the street side of those units_ However., it would
result in increased maintenance -and repair costs for the alleys. For
many years now the general practice on subdivisions has been to not
install public alleys for vehicular access. This has been advantageous
to our maintenance expenditures since the public maintenance and regair
costs have been only on the public street side of the houses. We would
recommend that if the developer wishes to obtain the im rp oved Mearance,
that they alley areas be developed and maintained as privateProperty
rather than as an added public expense.
2. Pedestrian access should be provided to 21st Ave. SE.
3. Vehicular access to 21st Ave. should be considered for direct access
to T.H. 14 for east -west bound trips.
l4.- The driveway on the south side of Village Court immediately east of _
VillageCircleshould be —a minimum of twenty foot from the crosswalk
area.
Continued:
Campus Village Core^-nued:
-r
5. The small parking lot shown on Village Court should be changed to show
parking on ends of the island. The City would not plow the parking stalls.
This area should be shown as an outlot and be maintained by adjacent
property owners or by an association of property owners.
COMMENTS BY RONALD M. PAINE
1. Snow plowing operations are generally directed toward the result
that traffic is kept moving on thoroughfares through out the City. With
this objective in mind alleys are plowed only after the traffic routes
are plowed.
2. There now is planned 115,012 Sq. Ft. of surfacing for streets to
serve 99 living units and 2.1,942 Sq. Ft. of alley to serve 44 living
units. The 44 units being served off of the alley could just as well be
served off of the streets.
To accept the plat as it now is shown would mean that 20% more surfacing
would forever have to be plowed, patched and generally repaired.
3. The small parking lot located on Village Court should be changed to
show parking on two ends of the island so that City maintenance crews
would not have additional maintenance work.
4. On 4th St. SW in 500 Block there now exists perpendicular parking
which is used by the apartments along this area. At present we do not
plow the parking stalls in this area. If this plan is approved with
parking stalls set up in the island off of Village Court, I request
that the Council pass it subject to citizens doing their own cleanin
of behind curb alignment parking area.
Continued:
R.M. Paine Conmient-�'Jontinued:
5. Any alley accepted should be constructed out of concrete. f�
6. Snow plowing of alleys normally results in considerable narrowing of
an already narrow area. When alleys become narrow the users generally have
more difficulty maneuvering cars in and out of that area.
COMMENTS BY DAVID ROSSMAN
1. A second exit should be provided to 21st Ave. S.E.
2. A sidewalk should be provided to 21st Ave. S.E.
3. The alleys should be considered private alleys.
4. The parking lot in Village Court should be redesigned as Ron Paine
described.
5. Move the 1st driveway shown on Village Court.
COMMENTS BY ALBERT J. TODDIE
The parking area in Village Court should be platted as an outlot, and should
be maintained by the adjacent property owners - or - by an association of
property owners from Campus Village.
�1
r` Rochestde
�.aD Public
Utilities
October 27, 1980
CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: Mr. Ronald C. Bailey
1421 3rd Avenue SE
Rochester, MN 55901
506 FIRST AVENUE NE BOX 6057
ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55901
RE: General Development Plan of Campus Village
Dear Mr. Bailey:
The Water Division has reviewed the general development plan.
We will work with the developers engineers as to our needs for
watermain sizing, valving, fire hydrant locations and utility
easement needs.
There shall be a separate 1" water service from the watermain for
each living unit within this complex,
Sincerely,
Harold E. Wobschall
Water Dept.
HW/an
�<•�(•T., A.Y.• 1•� i, � P;a AA Ilr'A� rn
m
0
(s
A
2
F
m 2
�a
= 3 k
g
s
ski
m3 i
33 I�f
:•
n
v N
x
A
n:MEETING 1]/]7/80PE ?U CGpTn-'Cp ACTION DATE: —
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
Reports & Recommendations Consolidated Planning
ITEM, ITEM DESCRIPTION: Petition to Initiate Orderly Annexation PWED
BY.
Proceedings on 40.82 Acres of Unplatted Land Lying North of the I N Of-f Golf & Country Club and South of Cascade Creek.
r-
November 13, 1980
City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation:
On Wednesday, November 12, 1980, the CP & ZC reviewed this annexation request
by Mohn Home Builders.
The Planning Commission finds this property adjacent to the existing city limits
and capable of being serviced by public utilities within a reasonable period
of time.
The property owner's representative told the Commission that they understood
the proposed flood plain moratorium and felt that an ordinance would be in
place by the time their property was annexed to the city and developed.
The Commission received no other comment from interested parties for this
request.
Based on the findings, the property meets the requirements for annexation. The
Commission recommends the Council initiate orderly annexation on this property.
Motion by Gill, seconded by Fogarty to approve. All voted in favor.
Consolidated Planning Department Recommendation:
See attached Staff Report dated November 6, 1980.
Council Action Needed:
If the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to
prepare a resolution initiating the proceedings in accordance with the
Orderly Annexation Agreement with Cascade Township.
Jr"A..c .�.9 �
Attached:
6 0.1+, i e I+ &4�+
1. Copy of Applicant's Letter requesting annexation.
• 287'
VOELKER CONSULTING SERVICE
KAMILRR EAST, SUITH n
ROCIIES'rER, MINN. 55901 818 O
uI hl -7�
$
NORTHWESTERN -
NATIONAL BANK BANCO
nechysler MinrWrcta 55901 •'_—_'__ `,/f
fit,-uI+G'�',^Z•'+7. L.tLu�G�ts2�4! _h r l�-C.-_i_�/� ..
� ,1:09190069ti1: 015,1,9071I' 0287 a
'I
tter will be considered
. in the Council Chambers
to:
County of •lmstei
- ^A , CONSOLIDATED PLANN/NO DEPARTMENT
1421 3rd Avenue S.E.
W q ROCHESTER, MN 55901
'»�' •1 Phone (507) 285-8232
a
serving the townships and communities of Olmsted County
TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Jeffrey A. Ellerbusch, Planner
Operational Planning Division
DATE: November 6, 1980
Tom O. Moore
Planning Director
DIV USIONS
Administrative 285-8232
Long Range 285,8224
Operational 285-8218
Technical Services 285.0225
RE: Request to Initiate Orderly Annexation Proceedings on 40.82 acres
of Unplatted Land Southeast of Cascade Creek and North of the
Rochester Golf and Country Club lying on both sides of Country
Club Road.
The Planning Staff has reviewed the above described annexation request
and finds the following:
Name of Petitioner Stanley C. Mohn
Mohn Home Builders
316 Second Avenue S.E.
Rochester, Minnesota 55901
Existing Land Use The portion of this property between
Country Club Road and Cascade Creek
is used for agricultural purposes.
The portion on the south side of
Country Club Road is wooded hillside
with a small home located near the
entrance to the Country Club and a
single family home and farm buildings
located at the eastern boundary of the
property.
Existing Zoning At the present time the property is
zoned AG (Agricultural) under the Olmsted
County Zoning Ordinance. The portion
of the property classified by the Soil
Conservation Service as alluvial soil (water
deposited) is zoned Floodplain in the
County.
Future Land Use Map The Land Use Plan shows the portion of
this property north of Country Club
Road in the Flood Prone Area with a strip
of land outside of the floodplain along
the road designated for "Medium Density
Residential" use. All the lands south
of the road are planned for "Low Density
Residential" use.
An Equal Opportunity / Afrrnatioe Artion Employer
Page 2
November 6, 1980
Orderly Annexation
Transportation Country Club Road, an arterial street,
divides the property into two pieces.
Access to both parcels is provided from
established private driveways from Country
Club Road.
Cascade Creek General
Development Plan
Floodplain Information
Sewer and Water Availability
Referral Agency Comments
Analysis
The northernmost portion of this property
lies in the proposed 200 acre lake which
would be developed by the continued
excavation of sand and gravel in Cascade
Creek. It is estimated that the
development of the lake,in conjunction
with -the overall flood control project
for the city,would potentially decrease
the width of the floodway on this
property. The plan designated all of
this property north of the road to the
lake as suited for "Medium Density
Residential" use.
Existing Floodway-Flood Fringe maps
designate the majority of this property
lying north of Country Club Road in the
floodplain of Cascade Creek. Approximately
the northwest two-thirds of the property
north of the road is in the floodway, with
the only portion outside of the floodfringe
being a small strip along the road
above the elevation of 1013.6 MSL.
Lands lying south of the road would be
served by sewer and water extensions in.
Country Club Road from 23rd Avenue S.W.
located one -quarter mile east. North of
the road could be served with water from
Country Club Manor and sewer from the
trunkline on the north edge of this
property. Construction of the lake would
necessitate service being brought along
the south side of the lake from the West
Zumbro Addition.
Park & Rec.: See attached
Water Dept.: See attached
All other agencies responding: No objections
This property abuts the established municipal limits at the northern corner
of the tract described for a distance of 444.94 feet.
j
Page 3
f
ll
November 6, 1980
Orderly Annexation
,,The concerns and needs expressed by Curt Taylor of the Park and Rec.
Department should be taken into account by the owner and developer of
this property.
The owner of this property should also be made aware of the development
moratorium on recently annexed lands lying in.the floodplain. The Common
Council has agreed to adopt such a moratorium in order to give the staff
time to develop an ordinance controlling development in flood prone areas
(the undeveloped flood fringe).
Indications are that such an ordinance would allow filling in the flood
fringe only when the owner can provide technical information that the
proposed changes to the natural floodplain will not have an adverse impact
on downstream flooding, will not result in a net reduction of flood storage,
and will not adversely affect ground water recharge.
In September of 1978, the Common Council refused to initiate Orderly Annexation
proceedings on 32 acres of land northwest of this property across Cascade
Creek. At that time, the Council was concerned about the need to consider
the larger area,from Country Club Manor east to U.S. 52 between Highway 14
and Country Club Road,rather than just a small piece of the package. This
concept is sure to be resurrected with this request and would be desireable
to reconsider. The feasibility status of the lake concept and its
contribution to the flood control project is presently under study. This
information will be important to any decision on annexation of the larger area.
From'the standpoint of the legitimacy of this request and the ability of
the city to provide services in a reasonable period of time, initiation of
the orderly annexation proceedings is an appropriate step.
Attached: 1000 scale map
Zoning map
Future Land Use map
Cascade Creek Plan
R erral Letters
JAE/dmt/LK
FUR€ LAND USE MAP
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
�• • MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
'. NIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
C"LRC IAL
•�� INDUSTRIAL
NEOICAL FACILITIES
PUBLIC FACILITIES
j OPEN SPACE
FLOOD PRONE
R-1
L :1
B-aFF r
—00 rYr
Some
dING MAP ®
1"• 1000,
/A/±
AG
ESTATE A RESIOCNTIAL
E57AIL B RISIDENIIAL
C'4
SINGLE FAMILY VESICENTIAL
EON 0E 51TT 0.E
•••
-H
NAL
wr610 DENSITY LSID(IAL
;N GINSIIY SSCINTIAL
`-3
IOCNT1At BUSINESS
R-'
NCIGNCB0 OUSl:f55
CINIRAL USIFSS
;\
M-1
GENERAL BUINESS
IRAL BUSINESS
R_O
G
tIN
UGNI INOUSiRUt (�
'R-I
(t
G1INOUST0.IM
0
-2
INSTI 5TITU JUTIONAL
C-I
lL000 FkIMGE OY[ALAY
"%V
AtiliiE-
o
` M
r-z
aC
z
?
p
a
j
rz
xf
�m
y N �
n
r
m
313
#.
A
s
7
x r:
r,^jr
Y
0
p
n
rp-
rn
t!I
2
i
n
2
v
S
,
pL'L f
!1 49�! 9f 4q[[fY r c•. 1�
RADIC EL ' Fin �� �!/�� /
.gym ' '�� / r ••
N'['STWST �� 1 `��M si9jr
r1Ar M(
ra
I • "(f f i „ � ) cc P • COV NY CtUR 41AVORACM 2
t CAL
�';cs'�rl�xfl7PoN I
o.•r +.
`�JnI—nva MI
A
13
[ M1
1 J
. a\
- -._ -..... . I _
i
dchestcr
h U tiliti W s
October 28, 1980
CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: Mr. Jeffrey Ellerbusch
1421 3rd Avenue SE
Rochester, MN 55901
RE: Annexation 80-12
Dear Mr. Ellerbusch:
asj
506 FIRST AVENUE NE BOX 6057 [
ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55901 F
The Water Division has no objections to the referenced annex-
ation. Any land within the proposed annexation that is above
the 100' elevation could not be served with water at the present
time.
The Water Division will work with the owners regarding our needs
for watermain sizing, valving, fire hydrants, and utility ease-
ments.
Sincerely,
Harold E. Wobschall
Water Dept.
HEW/an
iGT 2 9I9';)
403 EAST CENTER
Rochester, Minn. 55901
October 31, 1980
Curllt L. TeVim
Supatlninulenl al Parks [, necrballon
@ruavl N Orku
[fiuv'Im UI ISeks
{IVgr'r f: LOWn
11rIP(Inr O} IlnCrl'dntNr
Cal Small
M1uWionuln Mdnagrr
irerl M {1PMpv
Onn t, OI Reeledlipn Comm
Clayton G Wem'um
non[lor of oo0
Peggy Ball
Bucclor of SM•eral Surr¢ee
TO: Jeff Ellerbusch
Consolidated Planning
FROM: Curtis L. Taylor
Park and Recreation Department
RE: ANNEXATION NO. 80-12
I question the configuration of the land proposed for annexation in
this petition. The pond area to the northwest of the subject property should
be included.
The property owner has been advised that future park consideration should
be worked into any future development plan. Public property should include
access to the ponds.
County Club Manor residents have been quite active in their concern
for safety in this area. The land owners should be required to take some
steps to insure against potential accidents.
I suggest they include fencing to restrict access, and re-signing to
warn trespassers of possible danger.
P hist` .; jj"h r{sa je 1> y—.k r.-.%
r5 ;r (: 1. ,
NOV 319ti0
��UI7:' l•.1•'t B.� kkir„iir'iy ;J ,..,.
cif. • r :: � i* o.,,. �• >.
Board of
Park Commissioners
I i�HEST e f? Ulf -IL C11- PL+ MEETING 11�17�80
AGENDA SECTION: CPIGINAT,ING DE PT:
Reports & Recommendations Consolidated Planning
ITEM& ITEM DESCRIPTION: Request to Initiate Orderly Annexations Wj��
N O ��/ Proceedings on the General Warehouse Property located at 2915
(m iVallevhinh Drive N.W.
r
November 13, 1980
City Planning and Zoning Commission Review:
The City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this petition by Claude
Glatzmaier, President of General Warehouse Corporation, requesting that
orderly annexation proceedings be initiated by the city to annex the existing
General Warehouse property.
The Planning Commission finds the property requested to be annexed does not
"touch" the city limits at any point and the platted and unplatted portions
owned by General Warehouse are separated by a 25 foot wide strip of railroad
right-of-way. The Commission recommends that the intervening railroad
right-of-way and the adjacent county right-of-way for Valleyhigh Drive N.W. to the
north be included in the ;petition so the municipal boundaries are more clearly
defined and the property would physically touch the city limits. (See staff
recommended annexation map)
With this recommendation for the additional railroad and highway right-of-ways
being included, the CP & ZC recommends the Council initiate the orderly
annexation proceedings.
Motion by Ward, seconded by Zollman to approve with the staff recommendation.
All voted in favor.
Consolidated Planning Department Recommendation:
See attached staff report dated November 7, 1980.
Council Action Needed:
1. If the Council wishes to proceed following the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, a motion is needed to instruct the City Attorney to prepare
a resolution, using the legal description as recommended by CP & ZC, initiating
proceedings in accordance with the Orderly Annexation Agreement with
Cascade Township. (If the Council follows the recommendation of the CP & ZC
a legal description prepared with the help of the applicant will be
submitted.)
If the Council decides to proceed with annexation proceedings on the
property as originally requested, a resolution reflecting such a decision
should be prepared using the legal description on the attached letter.
%;OU1 CIL ACTION: Mat -on br: Second 6v: � Io:
2915 VALLEY HIGH ROAD N.VY,
P. O. BOX 6338
Common Council
City Hall
Rochester, MN 55901
Gentlemen:
PHONE: 282-2757 ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA 55901
October 6, 1980
As per the orderly annexation agreement with Cascade Township, Olmsted County,
Minnesota, we respectfully request that the fellowina described property be
annexed to the City of Rochester:
A part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Ouarter of Section 21,
Township 107 North, Range 14 West, Rochester, Minnesota, described as
follows:
Commencina at the northwest corner of said Ouarter Quater Section: thence
South 00 degrees 45 minutes 29 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the
west line thereof, 186.80 feet to the centerline of County Road "U", (no
longer being traveled upon), for a point of beginning; thence South 8n
degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds East, along said centerline, 70.00 feet;.
thence North 05 degrees 39 minutes 31 seconds East, 50.00 feet to the
north right of way line of said County Road "U": thence South R4 degrees
20 minutes 29 seconds East, along said right of way line, 157.97 feet to
a point 12.50 feet southwesterly of, as measured radially'to the center-
line of the Chicano and Creat Western Railroad; thence southeasterly 290.00
feet, parallel with said centerline, along a nontangential curve, concave
to the northeast, central angle of 05 degrees 34 minutes 57 seconds, radius
of 2977.29 feet, and chord of said curve bears South 35 denrees 23 minutes
47 seconds East, 289.98 feet; thence South 38 degrees 11 minutes 16 seconds
East, parallel with said centerline 1147.71 feet to the south line of said
Quarter Ouarter Section; thence South 89 degrees 03 minutes 30 seconds West,
along said south line, 109.92 feet to a point which is 100.00 feet south-
westerly of, as measured at right angles to, the centerline of said Pailroad;
thence 38 degrees 11 minutes 16 seconds West, parallel with said centerline
326.92 feet; thence North 64 degrees 35 minutes 03 seconds Fest, Ra.55 feet
to a point which is 300.00 feet North of, as measured at right angles to,
the south line of said quarter Ouarter Section; thence South 89 denrees 03
minutes 30 seconds Vest, parallel with the south line of said quarter Ouarter
Section, 276.59 feet to a point on a line being 310.00 feet southwesterly of,
as measured at right angles to and parallel with the centerline of said
railroad; thence North 38 degrees 11 minutes 16 seconds West, along said line,
232.44 feet; thence South 89 %^frees 03 minutes 30 seconds West, parallel
with the south line of said 0uarter Quarter Section, 287.69 feet to the
Common Council '
October 6, 1980
Page Two
west line thereof; thence North 00 degrees 45 minutes 29 seconds West,
along said west. line, 644.28 feet to the point of beginning. Being subject
to a 33.00 foot easement over the most southerly boundary thereof.
Containing 9.85 acres more or less.
Also:
Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Replat of Lots 3 and 4, K.00ER'S SUBDIVISION.
Containing 4.28 acres more or less.
CC/BB
Respectfully submitted,
i
C. I. Clatzmaier
President
0
' County of Olmsted
CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1421 3rd Avenue S.E.
I2UCHESTER, MN 55801
Tom 0. Moore
• . -A Phone (507) 285-8232 Planning Director
serving the townships and communities of OGnsted County DIVISIONS
Administrative 28.5-8232
Long Range 285-8224
TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission Operational 285-8218
Technical services 285.8225
FROM: Jeffrey A. Ellerbusch, Planner
Operational Planning Division
DATE: November 7, 1980
RE: Request to Initiate Orderly Annexation Proceedings to
Annex 9.85 acres of unplatted land in the NWZ of the SWh
Section 21, Cascade Township, and Lots 1 and 2, Replat of Lots
3 and 4, Kocer's Subdivision.
The Planning Staff has reviewed the above described petition and finds
the following:
Name of Petitioner
Existing Land Use
Existing Zoning
Future. Land Use Plan
C. I. Glatzmaier, President
General Warehouse Corp.
2915 Valleyhigh Drive N.W.
Rochester, MN 55901
Warehouses
M-1, Light Manufacturing, under the
provisions of the Olmsted County
Zoning Ordinance.
The Future Land Use Map shows this
property in a planned "Industrial
Area" which extends from T.H. 52
west to 41st Avenue N.W. in this
vicinity.
Transportation Access to the property is provided from
Valleyhigh Drive N.W. (CSAH 4), an
arterial street as designated on the
"Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare
Plan". A 25 foot wide Chicago &
Northwestern Railway line splits this
property as requested to be annexed.
Sewer and Water Availability
The Public Services Department estimates
that the easiest extension of sewer
service would be from the stub end at
the Pace Dairy property located to the
south along Valleyhigh Drive. Water
service can also be provided by the
extension of a 12" watermain in place
Are Equal Oppurfunif-v / Afrrnahve Arttun Emptgver
Page 2 1
November 1, 1980
Orderly Annexation
Sewer and Water
� Availability (Continued)
Referral Agency Comment
Analysis
also at the Pace plant site. The water
supply available will be limited for
fire protection but satisfactory for
domestic use.
Water Department: See attached
As shown on the attached certificate of survey, the property does not
physically abut the established municipal limits at any point. However,
this property is only separated from the city limits by the intervening
right-of-way of Valleyhigh Drive N.W. State statutes define the word
"abutting" in the broad sense to include areas whose boundaries would
touch except for an intervening roadway, railroad, waterway, or parcel of
publicly owned land.
The staff recommends that the Valleyhigh Drive right-of-way and the 25
foot wide Chicago and Northwestern right-of-way he included by the property
owner in this petition. This will help avoid the potential confusion created
by the somewhat irregular city limits and will insure that the property
annexed does physically touch the municipallimits.
The staff recommends the city initiate orderly annexation proceedings
on this property and the intervening road and rail right-of-ways.
Attarhed: Location Map
Zoning Map
Future Land Use Map
Staff recommended Annexation Boundary Map
Referral Letter
JAE/dmt/LK
.4�
IL
V.
RFPLAT U-
KbcepS 5
FO C- Pv%l N EVARD N
11-=1 eln
G 2
I
IIL
it
l
}i
SRN iPRoepsm MK-
I I NG MAP K1_jY
["• r000•
[SIAI[ A R[SIUNTIAL
AG
[SIAI( 0 RLSIOENTIAt
SI[Kll [ANll1 at SJU NTIAL
ON tf N51T1 ROWEVIAl
R-l-H
N.1 O(NSIIT RI5;UC1711AL
• •
,1 OEI.l1T R[$IUNfiAI
..111NTl Al MIN 15
CENT AL
R-I
OUST ($11:i(15
t[n1aAL eusuitss
GD,fkAL BUSINL1S
L U:1nt S1
LICAI
IGNI LHO0i1NIAI
q
R-4
,
6[A(RAl INbUSINIhI
'lR1t1IUTIONAL
f1000 (RING! OY(NLAT
C- !
C
A",
WRE LAND USE MAP
LDW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
MEDIVF. DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
HIM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
KDICAL [ACILMIS
PUBLIC (ACILITILS
W11,14
.A.
ram/ Cwt NWK{r(
P
a�j
',C A�l�.
�
M O
,
�em�sao-a^OasmsY...sS ...rtiseW+tY/'ESY.w �..x+vama.w...d�^�KabSaeS `Td.ffi CEIRTIFICATE OF SURVEY
STABLISNED UMILIPAL
AmmONAL RcA.OWAY I RAILWAY • .
® : - fZEc.nK?AFQ,. TO PJti INELUDEb W F�F7t11o�1
N.L.✓f S«.yu SEG. 2f •/o7•/y
4
Z
OF LGTs 314
8 �HBOIvw
� " 1
(1Nf/�A7feC� LAfdp
p
� C
T
1 x"v1 w �l
1
t
w
� s
a
4�
w t
h
1
[
1 � �
� I
1
' �f•++. e.vy'4s« Y ,err. i/ 6 rb«ys.vY_A'od�
/"Nro�fnrw[ -� t-,p/w [,,..( �nN+•e •�aow Y!
5r C.a. r✓vv S✓✓v
•.r° tI. 1rP7rRr(W
Se4ee' if " 2oo r
5
0
N•7; A// mftwp'roIa rs Jr wr sfJr3 O ..Ra
laar0 %!'/.ioq (ir[!tr PrNlRwV!
ua rlO.
AM MµVMaM r! SNIYr✓ +^Nr!•ratf
S!f �J"Cn Plllb Pya7 trrrN
Rfs/t nvw rear N.r,.ael.� r/r tL.
O /i// 6L'AwrrS[ A!C A!S✓nilO.
P .'yod
3e w
V7
Public
utilities
October 2.2, 1980
CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: Mr. Jeffrey A. Ellerbusch
1421 3rd Avenue SE
Rochester, MN 55901
RE: Annexation 80-11
Dear Mr. Ellerbusch:
506 FIRST AVENUE NE BOX 6057
ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 559011
J
Water service can be provided to the referenced
annexation area by the extension of the 12" water -
main in place at the Pace Dairy Food plant site.
There will be adequate water available for domestic
use but a limited amount available for fire pro-
tection.
The Water Division will work with the developers
engineers as to our needs for watermain sizing,
alignment, valving, fire hydrant locations, and
utility easements.
Sincerely,
Harold E. Wobschall
Water Dept.
IM/an
MEETING 4i.
AGENDA SECTION: OPIGI14ATING DEPT:
Reports and Recommendations Public Services
ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPAREIJ BY;
Supplemental Agreement No. 1 for Project No.
N Og(7 7907-1-80 Seehusen Industrial Park R 4. Payne
r
The plans did not provide for rock excavation on Project No. 7907-1-80.
Rock was encountered by the Contractor during grading operations. The
consulting firm of Yaggy and Associates has prepared Supplemental
Agreement No. 1 for Project No. 7907-1-80 in the amount of $8,932.00
to provide for payment of rock excavation., The negotiated price for
rock excavation is in accordance with all applicable specifications.
The Department of Public Services has reviewed this supplemental
agreement and recommend approval.
Council Action Requested
Adopt a resolution authorizing payment for this additional work.
U
.,.,'@1NCIL ACTION: Mope„ �,Y, second 6Y to:
CITY OF ROCHESTER-- Stipp. to Contract No. -------
DEPARTMENT OF CITY ENGINEER No.____.._1__
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
enQaclor Fad Protect — Prolem No.'s
._ad Constructors, Inc. DGVL No. 1 8698
Addrecr
City Prgecl No.7907-1-80
North ate Shoain Center Seehusen Industrial Park sAPNe. This contract is amended as follows: SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO, i
WHEREAS: The plans provide for the grading of the drainage ditch between the frontage
5 road and the west bound lane of T.N. 14, and
r5rS tl WHEREAS: Initial grading has disclosed a ledge of sandrock in the proposed ditch
line, and
0. Q A WHEREAS: The existance of said rock is not indicated in the plans, and
A o WHEREAS: The Specifications for this project includes Divisions II and III of the
Minnesota Department of Highways "Standard Specifications for Highway
3 Construction", and
_ WHEREAS: Under Division II Section 2105.5 so states that if the proposal fails to
include a bid item for rock excavation or rock channel excavation, and
F o material is uncovered that is so classified, excavation of the rock will be
e ° ° paid for separately at the contract price for common excavation or common
on 3 channel excavation (as defined), plus $4.00 additional per cubic yard.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED THAT:
n 1. The removal of all sandrock will be paid for at the specified price of
G e U
m L
� $4.00 per cubic yard.
2. The quantity of rock shall be determined by cross sections taken prior
to the rock excavation and upon completion of the rock excavation.
n 3. The contractor will not make claim of any kind or character whatsoever
a o for any other costs or expenses which may have been incurred or which may
®o g� be hereafter incurred as a result of the work covered by this agreement.
d a
i b ESTIMATE OF COST
a a s d 2105.503 2233 C.Y. Rock Excavation @ $4.00 = $8,932.00
Index I I:en1
Amount Requested $
Original Contract
Prev. Additions
Class Qo
8,932.00
144,881.33
0.00
Total to Date $ 153,813.33
Percentage —increase —decrease 6.1
)proved as to form and .-xeoiinon A )•raved by Common Council
Re oliltion
Dat
City Aflornoy
1—CITY CI.ERR 2--CONTRACTOR 3
IWhito Original) (Pink)
Mayor ...._-....___.
Attest
City clerk
aTY ENGINEER 4—FINANCE DEP6
(GAdenrudl ICnn 1
Fund I County
Dated-------- - 19----
pp�� A;:Arava' y j�Faginee.r
Dated_/v _ 19GL) AAtL_dV 1zr4irf,'l_Zc
Acceple,1 iy ^ont:actor
By c) /Z
Dated /t'- Z%_ 19:SJ CCri✓� L^
Dated, _30190_-
Fund:: Ava..a:•lu
Dirwtrr �I F.nanco
��h" p� r: l r�f'q �rt •^gyp {`1 +��F
f, I:.�V.31_. ..I�� �'LY,4 �':X I�Y i� _I16-
AGLNDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT.
Reports and Recommendations Public Service
M� ITEM DESCkIPTION:
r� Supplemental Agreement No. 4 for Project
N o. �! No. 790401079 Radichel 1st Subdivision
F
The plans and specifications provide for the construction of a
temporary drainage structure. It has been determined by the
engineer that this structure will not be needed.
MEETING 7
The consulting firm of McGhie & Betts has prepared Supplemental
Agreement No. 4 for Project No. 7904-1-79 in the amount of
a decrease of $1,632.00
The Department of Public Service has reviewed this Supplemental
Agreement and recommend that this Supplemental Agreement be
approved.
Council Action Reoucsted
Adopt a resolution authorizing deletion of temporary drainage
structure.
PxL
,.,JUNCIL ACTION: Moron by, Second by: 107
PREPAPLD iY:
R. M. Paine
CITY 01' ROCIUSTER— supp. to Contract ---------
DEPARTMENT OF CITY ENGINEER No.___--4_-.________
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
onaactor Fed. Project Prowl No.'s
_Fraser Construction Company Dept. No. 1 868$
Tau ss — an `-- city Protect No. 7904-1-79
.�. Box 7119, Rochester %J1chel First Subdivision SAP No.
This contract is amended as follows:
WHEREAS: This contract includes a special inlet structure to be constructed at the south
a end of 37th Avenue N.W. to serve as a temporary storm sewer inlet until the
adjacent Westway Manor Subdivision is developed, and,
Asa
.bra
�U
a
Ge
a .c
_no
b
e°
aw
F e
a
a
e a
m
a�w
a
— o
o � �
�A+ y
a
d� $ a
4 3 w 5
,pi
WHEREAS: The construction plans for the public improvements within Westway Manor Sub-
division are proceeding in a manner which will result in prompt development of
the property,
NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed that:
1. The construction of the special inlet structure will not be required to be
constructed as part of the Radichel First Subdivision project.
2. Payment for Item No. S100.557 "Construct Special Inlet Structure" will
only be payment for furnishing and delivering to the job site the 6'x9'
No. 5 Re -Bar cage shown on sheet 2 of 2 of Plate No. 1516-P9.
3. Payment for Item No. 5100.557 "Construct Special Inlet Structure" will be
reduced to the negotiated unit price of $ 350.00 per structure.
4. The contractor will not make claim of any kind or character whatsoever for
any other costs or expense which he may have incurred or which may be
hereafter incurred, as a result of the work covered by this agreement.
ESTIMATE OF COST
Original Contract Item No. 5100.557
Re -negotiated Item No. S100.557
Net Decrease in Contract Amount
Index 1 Item I Class 1 Quarter
Amount Requested $-1,632.00
Original Contract 924,839.52
Prev. Additions _1 569.14
Total to Date $ 921,638.38
Percentage—increas�_ _ j 0.1 %
_ Less Than
ed as to form and execution Approved by Common Council
Resolutlon ---------
Dale
.-.__-------City AIle .may
Mayor ------------
Attest __________.-__
City Clerk
$1,982.00
350.00
$1,632.00
Fund I County
Dated-eT _Z/- 19X9 _ 7_7_7��_4
A��pp;��.11 by project
Faginer:
Accepted _Q6
By
Dated_/U _?-r 191v
l
Dated��1
crrrr.! ...
)proved City Engineer
Funds Available
Director of flnonce
MUTING
DAB E
AGENDA SECTION.' JO7PIGINAIING DEPT.,
UpsPublic Service
EMI IILM UESCRIPIION: PRL: ARED BY'
!, Supplemental Agreement for Project No. 5 1C 2)1e)."-,e
7904-1-79 Radichel 1st Subdivision R. M. Paine
r
The plans provide for construction of new streets & utilities in
Radichel 1st Subdivision. During grading operations, it has been
determinte by the engineer that the subgrade soil is unsatisfactory
for street construction.
The consulting firm of McGhie & Qetts'has prepared Supplemental
Agreement 15 for Project No. 7904-1-79 in the amount of $6,912.00
for the purpose of providing necessary subgrade conrrection.
The Department of Public Services has reviewed this Supplemental
Agreement and recommends that it be approved. Costs can be
made part of the assessment for this project.
Council Action Requested
Adopt a resolution authorizing payment for this additional work.
C�
COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by,�� Second by- to:
CITY OF ROCHMTEn— SupP. to Contract No.______________
DEPARTMENT OF CrrY ENGINEER No.-___5 ----- ----
SUPPLEMENTAL AGRECMENT
..aser Construction Co.
Location
te.
rst
Prolett No.'s
Dept. No. 1 8688
city Prolecl No. 7904-1-79
This contract is amended as follows:
WHEREAS: The present condition of the subgrade on portions of the concrete pavement
streets is not satisfactory for street construction, and,
r5 a WHEREAS: The Engineer deems it advisable to expedite construction by subcutting the
-1 z.s upper 6" of subgrade and replacing with oversized, crushed aggregate, and,
& a 1 NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed that:
.Ago
.£ s 1. The upper.6" of subgrade will be subcut and replaced with oversized, crushed aggre-
2 9U gate where directed by the Engineer.
U
2. Payment for this work will be made at the negotiated price of $8.65 per C.Y. (LV) for
$ 5 - Item No. 2105.508 "subgrade Excavation and Replacement".
a 3. Payment for Item No. 2105.508 will be payment for all labor, equipment, and materials
s 9 required to subcut the subgrade, to move, place and compact the excavated material as
a directed by the Engineer, and to furnish, place, and compact oversize, crushed
8 „ s aggregate in the subcut areas.
F $ 4. The -Contractor will not make claim of any kind or character whatsoever for other
gj
costs or expense which he may have incurred or which may be hereafter as a result
® of the work covered by this agreement.
a m ESTIMATE OF COST
s Add 900 C.Y. (LV) Subgrade excavation & replacement @ $8.65 $7,785.00
y s a0elete 900 C.Y. (LV) Common Borrow @ $0.97-873.00
o si a a
t 4et Increase in Contract Cost $6,912.D0
r,..r
Index ' Item I Clan IQuarter I Fund county
Amount Requested $
Original ConL•act
6,912.00
924,839.52
II Prev. Additions-3,201.14 (I
Toter!(to Date $ 928,550.38
Percentage ---increase- dues 0.7 °!o
rov-1 as to form and execution Approved by Common. Council
Resclulion -----------------------
Date
City Attorney Mayor ________________
Attest -----------------
City Clerk
-CITY CLERK 2—CONTRACTOR ]--CITY ENC1N]:Ckt i—FINANCE
Dated/— 1sA11
-zl--_- A�PiP�rav�ai by/Praijeectt Engineer
r�
By
Approved City Engineer
Dated �(� a''..�194__`'_ L__•�4 " <� ---
Funds Available
Director of Financo
M E E TIN(—,
DAl E :—
AGENDA SECTION:
OPIGINAIING DEPT:
LMs 1 IILM DESGHIPfIVN: PREPARLD BY:
Supplemental Agreement No. 2 for Project
N O �-d o No. 6300-N-80 Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to T.H. 63 North R. M. Paine
IN
The plans provided for construction of sanitary sewer across a
parcel of private property by means of a utility easement. The
City was unable to procure necessary easement and as a result
it is necessary to install additional sewer line and manhole
to accomplish the basic intent of the project.
Supplemental Agreement No. 2 in the amount of $1,322.00 has
been prepared by Yaggy & Associates to provide the additional
work.
The Dept. of Public Service has reviewed this Supplemental
Agreement and recommends approval of this agreement.
Council Action Requysted
Adopt a resolution authorizing work as outlined by Supplemental
Agreement No. 2 for Project No. 6300-N-80.
IWUNICIL �• A8IOiI: Mellon by: _ Second by. 10:
CITY__QF ROCIIESTER-- Supp. to Contract No.., --._-. -
_-.
DE ARTIMENT OF CITY ENGINEER No ------ 2_-__--�__
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
aaactor
Locavoa City PM)W Na
San. Sewer & Watermain Ext. Hwv. 63 N. iAP No.
This contract is amended as ioi',ows: SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 2
No.'S
WHEREAS:
The Contract provides for an easement across private property, Sta. 78 +'20
s z $
to 79 + 20 on sanitary sewer alignment, and
�5 o
WHEREAS:
Such easement was not obtained, and
a a
WHEREAS:
Sanitary sewer alignment will change, and
3 r
WHEREAS:
Said change will cause the placing of an additional
20' of 10" D.I.P. and
a " x
`u
Manhole Type 1, and
� w
3
WHEREAS:
The removal and replacement of 30' of 18" C.M.P.
a o
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED THAT:
A n o
1. The Contractor shall place an additional 20' of
10" D.I.P. and
q G
construct one additional Manhole Type 1.
Q a s
2. Remove and replace 30' of 18" C.M.P.
D �
ESTIMATE
OF COST
S1o0.524 F & I 10" D.I.P. C1. 50
a ' °
20 L.F. at 9.60
$ 192.00
G w a
S100.539 Construct M.N. Type 1 6' to 11' Deep
a
i a
1 Structure at $950.00
950.00
a <
Remove and replace 18" C.M.P.
p-�
30 L.F. Lump Sum
180.00
m ° '
a a
Net Increase to Contract
$ 1,322.00
Ii q n
D 3
° .D
C 3
Index I Item I Closs
Amount Requested $
1,322.00
Orlrjinal Contract 131,704.30
Prev. Additions 650.00
Total to Date $ 133,676.30
Percentage—increase—da- 49 0°
;,I - as .l fxni`111 i .�8 `lalnon 1
C,ty Ae.,:ney
A, r vmci i)y Common . in: it
F.o. �it cn
Date.
Mayor - ----
Attest
City Clerk
I —CITY CLERK 2--CONTRACTOR 3—CITY ENGINEER 44INANCE DEPT.
FL9rdb rl": e..11 tD:..LI r" _..J. 11 ...-. -..-.
Fund I County
Dated,/f-/_.9 1
Approv Enginc:--:
Accepled 11y C_nnaC1X
By----------------
Dated Ce7-041� 19 E v
AIAppn,ved City 15,dmocr
/
Dated ! a -'�o I97 �t (• � .yU
Funds Avatlu
Director of tirn-jnrn
// — /3—cc',_
AG[NDA SECTION: CPrGINATING DEPT:
Renorts and Recommendations _ Public Services/Eng.
=
11EM, ITEM DESCRIPTION, ReV �8
i .40.r; Special Assessment: Sidewalk Replacement #1 - 1979 J 8634
i
We recommend the preparation of the resolutions declaring the
costs to be assessed and ordering a hearing on the proposed
assessment regarding the following project:
"Sidewalk Replacement Project #1 - 1979 (08634)"
The total construction and expense of this project is $53,677.64.
We propose to currently assess $37,432.30, with the remaining
$12,857.06 City Share (1/2 long side corner lots; City corners;
mist: construction; J.U. City Electric Dept., $3,388.28).
Council Action Requested
1. Adopt the resolution declaring the costs to be assessed and
ordering preparation of the assessment roll.
2. Adopt the resolution ordering a hearing on the proposed
assessment.
PREPARED BY:
Al Toddie,
OUNCIL ACTION: Motion 6y, Second 6y: to:
Revised 11/3/M
ASSESSHENT DATAj
Sidewalk Replacement r tto. —1 4
Job No, Pro ect N1 - 1979 Dept.
Ve submit the following data for the Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed
and Ordering Preparation of the Proposed Assessment, for the following local.lmprove-
Replace concrete sidewalk in various locations. -Project M1 - 1979
The Construction costs are:
Contractor: Doyle Conner Co.
� 49 459 �4
The Expenses incurred in making said improvements are:
Engineering ---
Advertising and Publication
244.53
Bond Sale Expense
Supplies and Materials
R. 0.11.
Miscellaneous
I n to res t_$/?li/]_q
to 8/31/80 ( 377 days H U % Per Ann um)
377 x 559 592y00 x 6.18 -. $3,803.86
365
Total Expense S 4,218.30
TOTAL COISTRUCTIDA AID EXPEtSE
53,677.64
The distribution of the above costs are as follows:
TO RE PRESENTLY A55E55ED
DEFERRED ASSESSMENTS
J.V. Electric'Dept.,
City share (1/2 long side corner
lots, City corners, misc. construction
TOTAL
12 857.06
53.677.64 --
�"1pi"FS� r;'{^4^ r'�".. r•, �n�Fin,r.l n r/pq e MEFTING��_, �=.
L 1. 6�. �_-y �„�i._.�eE 1• r�! lr �r" .(..e\F- i:i.+k Bl_:"�',1 DA1{: / �._.
AGENDA SECTION: CVIGINATING DEPT:
Reports and Recommendations Public Services/Traffic
EPA: IrEM DESCRIPTION: PkEPAREo BY:
Parking removal in front of Pepsi -Cola
N o.�'�a Bottling Company Dave Rossman
This Department has received a request fromJ1r. Norm Gillette,
manager of Pepsi -Cola Bottling Company, located at 1904 14th
Street N.W., to remove parking, at all times, along the west
side of Valleyhiqh Drive N.W. adjacent to Pepsi -Cola. This
request is to allow a better sight distance for his vehicles
leaving the garage.
We are recommending that his request be approved which is for
a distance of 100 feet, more or less. (4 to 5 car lengths)
Council Action Requested
Adopt the prepared resolution adding paragraph (249.5) of Section
B, No Parking Zones, to read:
"(249.5) Valleyhigh Drive N.W. on the west side from 14th Street
to a point 100 feet, more or less, south of 14th Street,
At All Times."
t /`
%,oU CIL ACTION: ION: Moron by, Second by: la:
ti'��T!,.. .J k• fT fn�e C.'.�-e. i.,.. �e,✓�t._ .^:. .�44:'dl�
MEETING(-
DAl E.:..L��_
AGENLA SLCTIOrd. OPIG�NATING DEPT:
Re orts and Recommendations Public Services/Traffic
ITEM DESCRIPTIUN:
N v K) Parking space for County Coroner
r
This Department has investigated Dr. Paul Belau's request for an
on -street parking space for Olmsted County Coroner business and
suggest this stall be provided as requested on the west side of
3rd Avenue S.W. in the 100 Block near the curb mail box.
(Letter from Dr. Belau is attached.)
Council Action Requested
Adopt the prepared resolution covering the following items:
1. Delete paragraph (4) of Section C, Special Parking Zones.
PREPARED BY: i
r
Dave Rossman
2. Add paragraph (8) of Section C, Special Parking Zones, to read:
"(8) 3rd Avenue S.W. on the west side 150 feet, more or less, south
of 1st Street for a distance of 18 feet, more or less, for Olmsted
County Coroner (1 stall)"
0
QU4w CIL ACTION: ION: tlohon byz second b,. to
�� f�� sir �` r "r-`°✓►r.�/i;
Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota 55901 Telephone 507 284-2511
November 5, 1980 .
t- 1I1
7A-0
Mayor Chuck Hazama
Members of the Common Council
City Hall
Rochester, Minnesota 55901
Dear Sirs:
With my appointment as Coroner, it will be necessary that a parking
place next to the Mayo Building be made a reserved stall for my vehicle.
I have used Meter 650 on the south side of the Mayo Building for this
purpose with a temporary bag intermittently for the past ten years during
the time Doctor Wellner had a permanent stall alongside the First National
Bank Building. His stall has since been returned to full metered public
use and my request merely represents a trade -.off in that respect. I wish
to advise you that the Clinic does not have assigned reserve parking for
me and that my vehicle does not fit into the new Clinic staff ramp because
of its height. As you are aware, there are many situations when I must
respond to emergency situations and it is, therefore, necessary that the
vehicle be located in close proximity to my office.
I have discussed possible locations with Mr. Gary Hayden of Facilities
Engineering and also with Mr. Steve Molstad, the City Traffic Engineer, and
it is our feeling that Meter Number 819 located on the west side of Third
Avenue, Southwest, in the 100 block would be least disruptive to the loading
zones and traffic flow around the Mayo Building.
Therefore, at this time I respectfully request your approval of this
location and your authorization for me to request the appropriate sign to
secure the location. If any of you have any questions regarding this
request for the location, please do not hesitate to contact me at your
convenience.
Sincerely yours,
v�V .4Q_
Paul G. Belau, M.D.
Coroner
Olmsted County
PGB:sac
�� f'M"'"^ �4,,1 )% ,� MEETING
(("n.. tt � ryry4r tt ,t'�I?p �OC7 ir0)N ()AI E : - 11114 Pll
AGENDA SECTION;
CPIGINAONG DEPT:
Reports and Recommendations Public Services
., EM: ITEM DESCRIPIION:
No.. -2q Request For 36' Driveway at 902 7th St. N.W.- Northland Electric
IN
Northland Electric Supply, 902 7th St. M.W. has requested
permission to enlarge their west driveway from 22 ft to
36 ft. We have reviewed the request and agree that the
request is warranted to allow the egress of commercial
vehicles from the Northland property rather than on the
adjoining car wash driveway.
Council Action Requested
PREPARED BY.,
Adopt a motion approving a 36 ft. driveway at 902 7th St. N.W.
N,
COUNCIL ACTION: IOrV. MofiOn by: Second by. 10
Roger Plumb - <"
ME( IINC 11/1/,�I3U
DAT E :
AGENDA SECTION: OPIGINAIING DEPT:
Reports and Recommendations City Administrator
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
INo.C'a' Proposed Amendments to the Animal Control Ordinance
F
EPARED BY:
S. Y,venvold
The Committee of the Whole received the attached proposed recommendations
to the City's Animal Control Ordinance at their 11/10/80 Council meeting
and recommends their adoption, with the following changes:
I. That the licensing period be for two yeays instead of one year,
with a $10.00 licensing fee.
2. That the fine schedule under RCO Section 106.07 read $50.00 for
the fourth violation instead of the previously recommended $35.00
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Request a motion instructing the City Attorney to draft the recommended
ordinance amendments.
C U6 CIL ACTION: Mot,oi) I, Second bv: to
MEM*
October 30, 1980
TO: Stevan E. Kvenvold, City Administrator
FROM: Paul C. Utesch, Director of Finance
RE: Animal Control Ordinance -- Pound Fees
This memo is submitted in response to the recommendation made at the May 28,
1980 Committee of the Whole meeting that animal pound fees be reviewed.
City Poundmaster, Allen Gilman prepared the attached recommendation for
amendments to the Rochester Code of Ordinances, Chapter 106. The proposed
amend;�iants provide for fines in instances of violation of certain sections
of the ordinance.
The suggested changes should improve program efficiency, produce revenue to
offset rising operating costs, and provide better service to pet owners and
the citizens of Rochester.
The proposed license fee is $5.00 for all dogs and cats compared to the current
fee of $2.25 for a male or spayed female dog and $3.25 for the unspayed female
which has been in effect since August 4, 1958. The current cat license is
$1.50 approved Septerber 7, 1972. The poundmaster estimates the dog and cat
population to be 9,300 and 3,700 respectively. On the average about 3,500
dogs and 400 cats are licensed.
The 1981 Poundmaster budget is $48,910, supported by licenses and fees in the
amount of $15,000. If the proposed changes would result in the licensing of
7,000 dogs and 1,000 cats the pound operation would be substantially self-
supporting. It is noted that the recommendation removes the exception
allowing licensed cats to run at large.
Res ectfully submitted,
Paul C. Utesch
Director of Finance
c: Allen Gilman, Poundmaster
Fred Suhler, City Attorney
Carole Grinan, City Clerk
October 28, 1980
Department of Animal Control requests the following changes in Chapter 106, RCO
entitled Dogs, Cats and Other Animals.
Change 106.02, Subd. i
Change the licensing age for all dogs and cats from five months to six
months. This change is based on the vaccination procedure of the local
veteranarians who do not vaccinate for rabies until six months.
Chan a the licensing year from July 1 to June 30, to a calendar year
Jan. 1 to Dec. 31). This is more logical for the pet owner and provides
a better time for the City Clerk and the Poundmaster to handle the sale
and recording of licenses. To be effective January 1, 1982.
Provide for a $50.00 citation for harboring an unlicensed animal. Policy
would dictate a single 10 day warning followed by the $50.00 citation.
Change 106.03, Subd. 1
Change the license fee to a $5.00 fee for all dogs and cats. This would
eliminate charges of discrimination against unspayed females, and eliminate
the practice of the pet. owner lying about'spaying to save $1.00. It is
also a more realistic charge taking rising costs into account.
Provide for a $25.00 citation for harboring an unvaccinated animal. Current
policy is to collect the rabies shot price from the owner of an unvaccinated
animal we have apprehended. A receipt given to the pet owner is honored by
each veteranaries in the City who then vaccinates the animal and bills the
City. Although we keep records of these receipts we have no way of enforc-
ing compliance. The new policy would be to allow 10 days to get the
vaccination and then issue a $25.00 citation for failure to comply.
Change 106.05
cv�Remove the exception allowing licensed cats to run at large. We see no
apparent reason why licensed cats should have the allowance and we get
nearly as many calls about cats as we do about dogs.
Provide for a $50.00 citation for animals running at large. To be used in
cases of a dog or cat running that we are unable to catch. We can, in many
instances find out who the owner is. One warning would be given and on the
next occurance a $50.00 citation would be issued. This would also be used
in cases of a dog or cat that we can catch and have caught at least four
times in a short period of time when it is obvious no attempt is being made
to confine or restrain the animal. c°
Change 106.07 1 hoi
Charge from the current fine schedul�%($5.00-1st viol., S10.00-2nd viol.,
15.00-3rd viol., $20.00-4th viol.)/to the following $5.00-1st viol.,
$10.00-2nd viol., $25.00-3rd viol.,(435.00-4th viol. This schedule reflects
the feeling that the i and 2 time violator is not the major problem but
hits at the 3rd and Ath time violators. We would also have the option of
using the $50.00 citation provided for under 106.05. The current Olmsted
County fine. is $10.00, Stewartville is $15.00 and Byron is progressive at
$20.00, $30.00, $50.00.
Addition to 106.11
Provide for a $25.00 citation for interfering with the discharge of duty.
this would be used in cases when a citizen refuses to turn over to us a
dog or cat they picked up while running at large. It is our experience that
these animals are returned to their owners and while we are not averse to
this, it could be that this animal is a regular violator and some enforcement
is required. It is also our experience that these dogs are not properly
advertised and are recycled into the City usually unlicensed and unvaccinated
and require that we deal with the problem at a later date.
Addition to 106.18, Subd. 1 & 2
This section deals with condition of premises and the "poop scoop". In the
case of Subd. I we would inspect the premises and allow a ten day period
for cleanup if there is no compliance we would issue a $25.00 citation. In
the case of Subd. 2 we would give one warning and issue a'$25.00 citation
on the next violation that we see.
Using figures based on surveys for the Pet Food Institute by the Market Research
Corporation of America (1971) and National Analysts (1975) we estimate the dog
and cat population in Rochester to be 9,300 and 3,700 respectively. Our average
license sales for dogs and cats is 3,500 and 400 respectively. We feel that the
changes suggested will make our program more efficient, reflect rising costs, and
provide better service to pet owners and the general citizenry.
IT
REQ E-57 FOR C,C.U.',,cUL ACTION IO DATE MEC, 11I17It;o
AGENDA SECTION: I OPiGINAHNG DEPT':
Reports and Recommendations I City Administrator
ITEM: - I ITEM DESCRiPPON: -
,_ 7� Proposal to Develop a Merit Based Salary
N O`� Program for Exempt Employees
r
REPARED BY:
S. Kvenvold
Your approval is requested to retain the firm of Lawrence Leiter and Company
to develop a merit based salary administration program for the exempt employees
of the City, including the Public Utility (see attached proposal).
The Public Utility Board has recommended approval of the proposal, subject to
the concurrence of the Common Council. The study would be accomplished for a
minimum fee of $35,000 to a maximum of $36,200, of which the General Fund
would be responsible for 601J and the Utility Fund responsible for 40',% The
General Fund's share would be appropriated from the 1931 Contingency Account.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Request a motion approving the study as outlined. A formal
execution of contract documents may be needed later.
fi/i�'Aiiir
CGWl6' CIL ACTT yl'hV: Motion k,Y: Sccond t". Io :.. _�..�
(D C, TIE 'E iE R
October 30, 1980
TO: COm1110n Council -Mayor
FROM: Fred L. 4dagner--�%v
Director of Employee Relations
ppe lH ill k: Ilf�Sj f
r.
FRED L. WAGNER
Personnel Direclor
Room 107, City Fall
(507) 288-4721
Attached for your review is a copy of the proposal submitted by Lawrence
Leiter and Company - Consultants, Kansas City, Missouri.
This company, in my opinion, has the best approach to merit -based salary
administration because they create a system to fit the jurisdiction
rather than coming in with a system and making fit.
The Public Utilities board has approved the use of the company, however
made it contingent on the city's involvement.
I made a presentation to the Personnel Advisory Committee last week
and at their suggestion will be at your dinner meeting on Monday, November
3, 1980.
As I stated then, I feel there are three (3) questions we as a city must
ask and answer.
1. Where are we at?
2. Where do we want to be?
3. How do we get there?
With an operational budget of 18 million out of which 12 million is for
employee services, I feel it is worthwhile to consider answering these
questions and reviewing our system.
\I.AY, AFNCE-111 FIR AND COINAPANY
h1I.NAGLh5l.N1 CW0,ULTAINS
� 427 1'hst '1•K•clf;h Succt
Kansas Gty, hiu'OLIH 61105
1816) 474: k340
I•ROI'OS,'�L
70 DEVELOP A E P17.-B:,Si"]i &%L.+RY AUSINIMMATION PRO=%M
FOR WE hxUliPT 15APLOYE S
FOR
RMIESTER PUBLIC UTILITIES
IWD
THE CITY OF MCHESTER, IIIINE90TA
AUGUST, 1980
I. rRt_,lNT SrTUATION
At a meeting with Messrs. John A Cobb, General Manager of Rochester
Public Utilities; Mr. Fred Wagner, Personnel birector of the City of
Rochester; and Mr. Tom Plumberg of Lawrence -Leiter and Company the
following information was assembled relative to developing a merit
system of salary administration and performance appraisal for both
organizations.
A. Both the City and the Utility have a formal salary administration
program. However, while both organizations make every effort to
grant increases, supposedly based on the merit of individual em-
ployees, they do not have an effective means of providing differ-
ent amounts of pay that reflect the differing levels of perform-
ance of individual employees. _In effect, all employees who are
not terminated receive the same 4% "merit" increase, destroying
incentive for one employee to contribute significantly more than
any other employee.
B. Because of the variety of jobs in the organizations and the fact
that the Utility and the City are often competing in different
labor markets, it is important to develop an approach to salary
administration which will facilitate measuring the relative posi-
tion of the salaries in relation to the marketplace for each of
those particular groups of jobs (job families).
C. At the present time, job descriptions are completed for some of
the covered positions. It is important to the success of the
program to use accurate job descriptions to conform to the evalu-
ation method selected for each job family. It will be necessary
to rewrite job descriptions for the covered positions.
II. OHJF)CTIVES
The overall objective of this engagement is to develop and introduce
an effective merit program of salary administration which will pro-
vide internal equity and external competitiveness, along with a
method of analyzing the relationship of both organizations' salaries
to salaries in the appropriate labor markets in which they compete
for employees. Policies and procedures must be developed which will
provide documentation of the equitable treatment of all employees.
To reach the overall objectives, at least the following subordinate
objectives should be met during the course of the'project.
A. All covered jobs should be evaluated to determine their internal
relative value to the organization. In this step, internal
equity is established both vertically within each job family and
horizontally across the organization lines of the City and the
Utility.
B. Competitive salary ronger. must be developed for all covered jobs.
In thie prooesn the client's mannc;ciaent policy dectsions concern-
ing the desired competitive position of salaries is implemented
for each job family.
C. A system should be developed which will enable the client to mea-
sure the relationship: of its salaries to market salaries. The
information developed by this system will serve as a basis for
making salary policy decisions in the future. .
D. An effective means of performance appraisal should be developed
and performance ratings related to salary increases through a
system of Merit Increase Guidelines. To insure equitable treat-
ment of all employees and to provide ease of administration, sal-
ary administration policies and procedures must be developed to
cover at least the following topics.
1. Starting salary.
2. Amount and timing of salary increases.
3. Promotions and promotional increases.
4. Salary increases necessitated by' changing market conditions
as opposed to Consumer Price Index changes).
5. Performance appraisals.
6. Job evaluation.
III. WORT PLAN
To accomplish the above objectives and complete the project on a
timely basis, the follcraing work plan will be used as a guide:
A. Lawrence -Leiter and Company will work with the Personnel Director
of the City and the General Manager of the Utility to develop a
tentative schedule for completing the project, to keep the proj-
ect on target and to facilitate monitoring progress.
B. Lawrence -Leiter and Company will work with the client in develop-
ing a method for announcing the program to all affected employees.
C. Job families will be developed by Lawrence -Leiter and Company,
and the General Manager and the Personnel Director will work with
Lawrence-I•citer and Company to determine which job family is most
appropriate for each of the covered positions. (A job family is
a group of jobs which respond to the same general labor market
conditions.) The use of this job family approach will enable the
client to measure and respond to changing levels of pay in the
various labor markets in which they colapete. Tentatively, the
exempt jobs can be grouped into the following families:
1. Management and administrative positions.
2. Engineering and technical positions.
3. Operations positions.
-2-
The management and administrative positions will Include ouch po-
sitions as Director of Finance and Accounting, Assistant Purchas-
Ing Agent, Data Proce:;sing supervi;or, and Management Accountant
in the Utility as well as the non -elected exempt employed of the
City of Rochester. The operations positions will include those
positions such as Chief System Operator, Superintendent of Dis-
tribution and Transmission, and superintendent of Pcpdcr Produc-
tion in the Utility. The engineering job family will includn en-
gineers and engineering management positions as well as those
technical support positions such as Engineering Technicians.
D. The Utility and the Personnel Director subject to the necessary
approvals will appoint a project task force of not more than
seven (7) people whose primary responsibility will be to work
with Lawrence -Leiter and Company in the development of a point
system of job evaluation for the exempt non -elected positions in
the City, and the closely related business administration type
jobs in the Utility. Additionally, the task force will work with
Lawrence -Leiter and Company, the Personnel Director and the Gen-
eral Manager in developing the necessary policies and procedures
to keep the program in operation.
E. Lawrence -Leiter and Company will work with appropriate members of
Utility management in developing a classification system of job
evaluation for the engineering and operations job families.
F. Lawrence -Leiter and Company, working with the Personnel Director,
General Manager and the task force, will develop a recommended
salary structure for each of the job families. It is anticipated
that sufficient survey information will be available either in
the files of the client or Lawrence -Leiter and Company to permit
completion of this step. The cost of conducting a special salary
survey is not included as a part of this proposal.
G. Lawrence -Leiter and Company will develop a job evaluation manual
and forms based upon the job evaluation processes which will be
used in the ongoing evaluation of new or changed positions, and
for the initial evaluation of the jobs to be covered by a point
system of job evaluation.
H, Lawrence -Leiter and Company will develop a job description prepa-
ration manual and will design the necessary job description forms.
The client will complete the process of writing job descriptions
for the jobs to be covered by the program.
1. The task force and Lawrence -Leiter and Company will select a rep-
resentative group of jobs to be evaluated uning the pnint system.
Approximately 25 jobs at various levels will be appropriate.
Lawrence -Leiter and Company will work with the client to evaluate
these position:: using the point rystem of job evaluation. The
remaining evaluation of the positio:s will be the re.,ponnibility
of the task force. Since the consultant does not have the, in-
depth knowiv,lge of each position, it is much more efficient and
Cost-effective for the client to do the actual evaluation of the
remaining positions after having been traincri in the job evalua-
tion teehniquLn by working with the consultant on the key jobs.
J. Lawrence -Leiter and Company will develop a salary structure up-
date manual to enable.the clients to measure :salaries in relation
to the various labor markets in which they compete. The informa-
tion provided by this approach will provide the basis for future
salary policy decisions. '
K. Lawrence -Leiter and Company, the task force, the Personnel Direc-
tor and the General Manager will jointly develop a performance
appraisal and development system, and incorporate an overall per-
formance rating upon which increases can be determined based upon
the performance of the individual employees.
L. Lawrence -Leiter and Company will work with the Personnel Direc-
tor, the General Manager and the task force to develop merit in-
crease guidelines which take into account the following:
1. The performance of the individual employee.
2. The position of the client's actual salaries relative to the
marketplace.
3. The position of the individual incumbent's salary in the sal-
ary range to which the job is assigned.
M. Lawrence -Leiter and Company will make two one- to two-hour pre-
sentations directly to employees or managers to assist the client
in introducing the program once it is completed. Additionally,
this proposal includes the cost of one presentation each to the
Hoard of the Utility and the City Council to explain the salary
administration program.
IV. TIME, STAFF AND FEES
The close involvement of the City and the Utility management in the
project, and the necessity for merging the project tasks with their
existing workloads, does not permit establishing a firm date for the
completion of the project at this time. However, Lawrence -Leiter and
Company will be available to perform the necessary tasks to keep pace
with the client. It appears this project can be completed within a
time frame of three to six months. The major variables, of course,
are the time required for the completion of the necessary job de-
scriptions and the availability of the task force members for meet-
ings and for evaluation of positions. Task force members should plan
on attending approximately eight to ten four-hour meetings. Individ-
ual department managers will work with Laurence -Leiter and Company on
an occasional basis when their input is necessary for the success of
the project.
This enryagement will be conducted under the supervision of Mr. Thomas
Plumberg, Senior Consultant with Lawrence -Leiter and Company. lie may
be a -silted try Mr. Ronald V. Raine, Ms, Sandy MacDonald, Mr. Charles
Saunders: -White, Ms. Robin Muore or other members of the firm when in
the bust interests of the engagement. Biographical information re-
garding the named individuals is attached.
-4-
"v. kl...•31 1`v 1'{ 4u\/f1J'i.1 I- I,,,, 4 1 VIV VAIC ;
NUA SECIIUN: CYIGINAI:NO DEPT:
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS CITY ATTORNEY
e IIL/A DESCRI1111UN1 PRLPARLD BY:
F- Ordinances and Resolutions for November 17, 1980 Meeting, FS Suhler, Jr
F [1 UTILITY MATTERS
(a) Coal -Purchases:' Test Sampler for Environmental Compliance:
(i) Alley-Cassetty Coal Company - 1500 tons at
Y% $30.80 ton, F.O.B. Mine.
SSM Coal & Coke Company - 1500 tons at $48.90
v ton, F.O.B. Silver Lake Plant.
(iii) EEI Energy, Inc. - 1500 tons at $28.00 ton,
F.O.B. Mine.
(iv) SSM Coal & Coke Company - 1500 tons at $47.65 ton,
F.O.B. Silver Lake Plant.
(b) Supplemental Agreement - Fuel Oil Supply (Cascade Turbine)
extending, current•sunply agreement to September 30, 198t -
.Koch Fuels, Inc.
Agreement with Minnesota D.N.R. to establish canoe portage
around Lake Zumbro dam.
F 2.. -AFIRST READING OF ORDINANCES (as appropriate) \
�'P ? M1ur.e� M u �d �-E•-~z ^ ,(/fie �9)\
F 3. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
(a) Sewer Rate Increases
�pla (b) Building Code Amendments
o (c) PUD-R-5:) (Oakcliff) /
��"plAn (d) PUD-R-5# (Buena Vista - Bagne Project)
F 4. MISCELLANIEOUS
�,- (a) Owner Agreement. Watermain Extension - 37th Street - 9th
Avenue N.W. to proposed West River Road.
l (d) Owner Agreement. Basic Construction, Campud Village Subdivision.
{'JCIL tt �, 1 ��'/. ��: Al olion by,���y Second by. Io1
INFORMATION ITEMS
Notice of Claim - Elaine Hengel vs. City of Rochester
Referred to Insurance and City Attorney
05
C.o. �. I/,qP(
lm_
c�,�R f w6 t t)