The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06/19/1995_Regular_L &/zC jq "4 MEETING NO. 29 REGULAR ADJOURNED A) CALL TO ORDER B) HEARINGS PAGE (1-8) 1) (9-14) 2) (15-20) 3) (21-28) 4) (29-30) C) 1) (31-32) 2) (33-34) 3) (35-40) 4) -(41-44) 5) (45-46) 6) (47-48) 7) (49-50) 8) (51-52) 9) (53-64) 10) (65-68) 11) (69-72) 12) (73-82) 13) (83-88) 14) (89-92) 15) (93-96) 16) (97-98) 17) (99-100) 18) (101-102) 19) (103-104) 20) (105-106) 21) 9 CITY OF ROCHESTER 95 _�s COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 19, 1995 7:00 P.M. Vacation Petition by Mary Anderson to Vacate a Portion of the Utility Easement Located at 4314 13th Avenue NW Vacation Petition by Pamela and David Mittelstadt to Vacate a Portion of the Utility Easement/3975 Willow Heights Drive SW Construct Low Flow Concrete Flume in Be1Air Drainageway Revisions to Housing Code Ordinance CONSENT AGENDA/ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS Approval of Minutes Government Center Skyway - Authorization to Re -Bid Licenses and Bonds & Miscellaneous Activities Air Monitoring Site Lease Agreement with MPCA for Animal Pound Site Fireworks Displays - Fourth of July Sound Amplification Permit - Rochester Civic Music Concert During Fourth of July Celebration Sound Amplification Permit - Rochester Civic Music's Concert Series - Down by the Riverside 1995 Sound Amplification Permit - Essex Park Pig Roast Approval of Accounts Payable Appointment/Police Officer/Police Department Appointment/Police Officer/Police Department Appointment/Police Officer/Police Department Request to Set Public Hearing for Vacation Petition by City of Rochester to Vacate a Portion of 1st Street NW Request to Set Public Hearing for Vacation Petition by Michael Younge to Vacate a Portion of Gates Drive SW Request to Set Hearing for Vacation Petition by Steven J. DeMarco to Vacate a 5' Wide Utility Easement/2314 16th Ave. NW Request to Set Hearing for Vacation Petition by Dakota of Rochester to Vacate a 5' Wide Utility Easement Located on Lot 1, Block 3, King's Run 4th Subdivision Concrete Ditch Lining at Water Reclamation Plant Storm Sewer Reconstruction and Concrete Ditch Lining SE Designation & Deletions of Municipal State Aid Streets Overlay Bridge Deck, 14th Street NW Bridge. No. 55524 Over Cascade Creek Lease Agreement with Rochester City Lines Council Agenda June 19, 1995 page two _ (107-108) D) LETTERS AND PETITIONS (109-110) 1) Sandy Cookman Requests to be Heard RE: Community Youth Outreach E) REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (111-118) 1) City Administrator - Corps Project - Amendment No. 3 to Local Cooperation Agreement (119-120) 2) City Administrator - Agreement with State of Minnesota & Olmsted County Concerning Oronoco Landfill (121-126) 3) City Administrator - Second Amendment to the Riverbend Agreement (127-128) 4) City Administrator - Land Development Manual Text Amendment (129-130) 5) City Administrator - State Aid Agreement for the Replacement of Phone Cables (131-132) 6) Public Utilities - Consideration of Public Utility Board Action (133-134) 7) City Clerk - Sound Amplification Permit - Malibu Mania Sponsored by the Aviary (135-136) 8) Library - Award of Bids/Moving of Collection, Furniture, and •' Equipment (137-142) 9) Personnel - Music Contract/Rochester Symphony Music Director (143-146) 10) Planning Dept. - Wetland Replacement Plan/City of Rochester, 41st Street NW (147-152) 11) Public Works COE Flood Control Project/Fee Acquisition from Vrieze Property - Parcels 371 & 379 (153-154) 12) Public Works - COE Flood Control Project/City Rental Unit/815 6th Avenue NW (155-156) 13) Public Works - Feasibility Report/Extension of Sanitary Sewer & Watermain 23rd Avenue SW (157-158) 14) Public Works - Feasibility Report/Extension of Sanitary Sewer & Watermain in Riverview Subdivision (159-164) 15) Public Works - Reconstruct/Rehabilitate 1st Avenue SW (165-166) 16) Public Works - Parking Restriction/Greenview Drive (167-168) 17) Public Works - Parking Restriction/8-1/2 Street SE (169-172) 18) Public Works - Bids/Sidewalk Project No. 1-199S (173-174) 19) Public Works - Bids/Construct Pond EP-16 East of County Road #22 Near Rochester Community College (Mayc Run) (175-176) F) RESOLUTIONS AND G) TABLED ITEMS L(177-254) 1) Land Use Plan Amendment on the West Side of Highway 63 South of 40th Street SW • H) OTHER BUSINESS a, REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION PUBLIC HEARINGS I PLANNING ION: Vacation Petition #95-6 by Mary Anderson to Vacate a Portion a. Utility Easement Located at 4314 13th Avenue NW June 14,1995 Planning Department Review: Petitioner: Mary C. Andersen 4314 13th Avenue NW Rochester, MN 55901 MEETING 1 DATE: June 19. 1995 ITEM NO. '8-1 PREPARED BY: Jane Kansi-a '0 Location of Property: 4314 13th Avenue NW This property is legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Replat of Lots 3, 4, 5, Block 3, Innsbruck One. Requested Action: Vacation of a portion of the 10' wide utility easement located along the west lot line of the property described above. Reason for Request: The garage on this property encroaches into the easement. Referral Agency Comments: US West has commented that they have a buried cable running along the north/south property line. They have no objection to this vacation as long as the property owner agrees to guard and protect the cable, or to move it if it is not in the 6.3' of remaining easement. No other objections have been received from any of the referral agencies at this time. Planning Department Recommendation: The Planning staff would recommend approval of this request subject to the condition that the property owner agree to guard and protect the telephone cable, or to move it if it is within the area to be vacated. Council Action Needed: Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution vacating the utility easement. Attachments: 1. Location Map COUNCIL ACTION: Notion by: second by: S89°34b9t /00.87 - ' EA�fwENr ll J = 4 %� 'S : I" 3 �W. 5890.3, I ST Nwz h I I I '� Er/SnNG I co I ur-u_rr Re / I, E ENENr S89°34��E 5 E NvSaovucoRUC.f ONE I DU T! J SCALE. / INCH = 50 FEt 1 ` •I •I �a PIH'r-1�-1995 08:01 FPW EIIGF CtI ITEF • Ti i 9297, _ LEWL DESCRIPTION FOR PORTION OF 10 FOOT UTIUTV EASEMENT TO BE VACATED: iThe westerly 3.70 feet of the easterly 10.00 feet of the southerly 16.30 feet of Lot 3, Block 1, Replat of Lots 3. 4, S. Block 3; innsCruCk One, City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota. k%e 44 ve 4MA r f �flat i Saith 0" t.os 7 scar t irk . 10 yew • Oeeeree MaVrrdsel O owctoa Me.vnare Fv Loallon MM soar 1' . 30W' • Surrey For: Anderson CGOIRCATE 01 PAW I I+Mr army ed t * ■ roer wee OfaPmdkM one or ~ ar dea *4WvWar end estea. seer aa- fod tuwra under to toro at to aftalba soft Raa Fee 15229 Cedric Schutt LAND 00NSWANM a sa 4m %w#ema M W$f+e&N ml ftow"• Mmmem 36e71 W-210-W5 i ALL-AlmUU Cr Y IUI May 15, 1995 ROCHESTER TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 559044744 FROM: Department of Public Works LZ wF pp. Yin L GL DEPARTMENT OF PUBt1C WORKS: 1602 4th Street S.E. Rochester. WNJ 55904-4718 (507) 2815008 FAX *(507) 281-6216 RE: VACATION PETITION #95-6 BY MARY ANDERSON The Department of Public Works comments are as follows: • 1. Address of 4314 13th Avenue N.W. is correct. 2. Suggest a revokable permit for garage until forcemain is retired and easement no longer needed. _qs r ian lYluc rrnUNroa{ iA Canura.* is M loner Iicala2r - NAY 1 fi 19c6 A. E4-1OtMMt'a •bPlia J 4000 E. River Rd., N.E. Rochester, MN 55906-2813 507/280-1540 FAX! 507/280-1542 507/280-1505 May 10, 1995 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Vacation Petition 95-5 by Mary Anderson to vacate a portion of the • utility easement located along the east property line of the property located at 4314 13 Avenue NW legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Replat of Lots 3, 4, and 5, Block 3, Innsbruck One. Dear Ms. Decklever. Our review of the referenced vacation petition is complete and there are no comments. If there are questions, please contact us. Very truly yours, Harold E. Wobscball Senior Enginmxzmg Tecbniciaa _ Water Dhi&n _ _ 4000 E. River Rd., N.E. Rochester, MN 55906-2813 5071280-1540 FAX: 507/280-1542 507/280-1581 May 12, 1995 TO: Rose Decklever, Planning Division Consolidated Planning Dept. FROM: Roger Kanestadt, Supv. of Distribution Design Rochester Public Utilities SUBJECT: Vacation Petition #95-6 by Mary Anderson to vacate a portion of the ten foot wide utility easement located along the east property boundary of 431413th Avenue NW legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Replat of Lots • 3, 4, 5, Bk)ck 3, Innsbruck One. RPU's Power Division has no objection to this subject matter. Sincerely, Roger Kanestadt ks ,TT 9tf 1 MAY 1 5 - • ® 50% LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PORTION Of 10 FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE VACATED: F • • The westerly 3.70 feet of the easterly 10.00 feet of the southerly 16.30 feet of Lot 3, Block 1, Replat of Lots 3, 4, 5, Block 3, Innsbruck One, City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota. Survey For: Mary Anderson 4314 13th Avenue NN Scole: t Inch - 10 Feet • Denotes Monlnent Sr CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY O Dsrobs hlosmse Foufd 16,eby carN •td Rib array w PeePued by rn ar tacolan Map - Scde I" - 3OW ands my algal superblon and ttd I am a d•M wed Irnd RCAV W ands tO Iars of SO Slate of Iisi�b � '1 Roo O Ids Cedric Schutz Dam 4-24-95 .lob No, 10626-96 LAND CONSULTANTS 6 soulam � f _ IMe RO Av N.E. havdeota 559M --_ Rodudn. 507-2864865 SCity of Rochester, Minnesota (/ DATE: TO: Mayor and Common Council City Hall City of Rochester, Minnesota 55901 PETITION TO VACATE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OR UTILITY EASEMENT We, the undersigned, are the owners of the following described property located within the City of Rochester, Minnesota, and we constitute 50' or more of the owners of the property on the line of the public property herein described to be vacated: (Describe here or attach a separate list showing the legal descrip- tion and full ownership of each adjoining parcel.) OWNERS NAME (If in joint tenancy, both or all parties cyst sign) LEGAL DESCRIPTION We hereby petition the Common Council of the City of Rochester, Minnesota, to vacate the following described public property: The facts and reasons for such vacation are as follows: 1. 3 Sheet 1 of 2 FORMS #1920-38 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 19, 1995 4 4 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING S -A ITEM DESCRIPTION: Vacation Petition #95-5 by Pamela and David Mittelstadt to Vacate a PREPARED BY: Portion of the Utility Easement Located at 3975 Willow Heights Drive SW Jane June 14,1995 Planning Department Review: Petitioner: David and Pamela Mittelstadt 3975 Willow Heights Drive SW Rochester, MN 55902 Location of Property: 3975 Willow Heights Drive SW This property is legally described as Lot 6, Block 3, Willow Heights First Subdivision. Requested Action: Vacation of a portion of the 5' wide utility easement located along the west lot line of the property described above. Reason for Request: The garage on this property encroaches into the easement. Referral Agency Comments: US West has commented that they have a telephone cable within this easement. They have no objections to this vacation if the petitioners agree to guard, protect and move the cable at their own expense. No other comments or objections have been received from any of the referral agencies at this time. Planning Department Recommendation: The Planning staff would recommend approval of this request subject to the condition that the petitioners agree to guard, protect and move the telephone cable at their own expense. Council Action Needed: 1. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution vacating the utility easement. __ 11 nn$ Attachments:� 1. Location Map 2. Referral Letters (4 letters) 3. Copy of Petition COUNCIL ACTION: Malon ey secand by: to: i I Z.� Eq _petrol cradr David k P'nPla T. 155 i9- --.CE;;NO A-5R5Q jf�S,-CATS 4-l/-95 )Ns?5Y Ine Merrill e-aEETADCrE.S ^9 - '•'illoa Heigh`c n-ivP Gw. Ro h cr r. NN "ca&L DESCn!?-;GN Lnt ri R1 nrk i� willow Hpiahtc Fir-SL-lbd: _ Wt WrLJ- QLLocw Foe %hrS V�vC4tlOh PAr� CZ yces Tv �wai4,profed, gG MD&e Gable af- Then- ow.,,7 exP�"s�• Srf- ;Wi°J_ 0 0 O 67 el 1 i7 Estate Drawers :310 :,c T n :VENUE N,N. 50C•35-ems. Mti 55?:' the N ��r'r_ 6 g• 6� #�l 01 - �975 c,;,Lc�1J f!F��xlS dn.+E Sul -•P CGTi.�7tl�J/LT7 �'iJP. '"i: 'Y i�CA 0i�7^'J'l•!f - • f.i0 - %t i�P i': i ¢'^ f^4'9 Y � 4 e"::?s:' :e] - /'i�Y1Y��pG.*^nC1 '.'Y'f9f'--t^:C�"1 �.3'iSNK .J�::'S:'d'•f Y•']•-^l ��za-iasr_'G'•f fYi- 'w:'^YX.'�.^l�:9'e'k:" - :tr^[1C:iM•='�1Y 1I CAI i . I:T -S .1R :' �'!�i r4 '"Y• �. P: - CIS-'C":. • _ :E�%Y� "1. ^ • `S: e4i � .- _T Si .. AU -.CM • 111111 May 15, 1995 TO: FROM: RE: ROCHESTER /,qf 111 b•�pbl �l...n DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1602 4th Street S.E. Rochester, MN 55904.4718 (507) 281-6008 FAX *(507) 281-6216 Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-4744 Department of Public Works VACATION PETITION #95-5 BY DAVID & PAMELA MITTELSTADT • The Department of Public Works comments are as follows: 1. Address of 3975 Willow Heights Drive S.W. is correct. • In Eq..1 C�p ki.mly T5lk* e, ROCHESTER PUBLIC UTILITIES 507/280-1581 May 12, 1995 TO: Rose Decklever, Planning Division Consolidated Planning Dept. FROM: Roger Kanestadt, Supv. of Distribution Design Rochester Public Utilities 4000 E. River Rd., N.E. Rochester, MN 55906-2813 507/280-1540 FAX: 507/280-1542 • SUBJECT: Vacation Petition #95-5 by David and Pamela Mittelstadt to vacate a portion of the utility easement located along the west property line of the • property located at 3975 Willow Heights Drive SW and legally described as Lot 6, Block 3, Willow Heights First Subdivision. RPU's Power Division has no objection to this subject matter. Sincerely, Roger Kanestadt ks �I U 1r—��—_'_ { MAY t 5 iM i ® 50-4 Awyrl l l� 4000 E. River Rd., N.E. Rochester, MN 55906-2813 507/280-1540 FAX: 507/280-1542 507/280-1505 May 10, 1995 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 . REFERENCE: Vacation Petition 95-5 by David and Pamela Mittlestadt to vacate a portion of the utility easement located along the west property line of the property located at 3975 Willow Heights Drive SW and legally described as Lot 6, Block 3, Willow Heights First Subdivision. Dear Ms. Decklever: Our review of the referenced vacation petition is complete and there are no comments. I p If there are questions, please contact us. Very truly yours, T-Tamlij E. Wobschall Engineering Technician Division City of Rochester, Minnesota CI{ DATE: MAY 2, 1995 TO: Mayor and Common Council City Hall City of Rochester, Minnesota 55901 PETITION TO VACATE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OR UTILITY EASEMENT We, the undersigned, are the owners of the following described property located within the City of Rochester, Minnesota, and we constitute 50% or more of the owners of the property on the line of the public property herein described to be vacated: (Describe here or attach a separate list showing the legal descrip- tion and full ownership of each adjoining parcel.) OWNERS NAME (If in joint tenancy, both or all parties must sign) David R. and Pamela L. Mittelstadt LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 6, Block 3, Willow Heights 1st Subd. We hereby petition the Common Council of the City of Rochester, Minnesota, to vacate . the following described public property: That portion of the public utility easement described as follows: The easterly eighteen inches (18") of the westerly five feet (5') of the Northerly Thirty feet (30') of Lot 6, Block 3 Willow Heights First Subdivision. 655 h1t:Y`tk Si +,V2 cTL The facts and reasons for such vacation are as follows: 1. Petitioner mistakenly constructed his garage so that it encroached upon the utility easement. Petitioner is unable to refinance his property until he removes the garage from the easement or the underlying: easement is partially vacated. 3. It would be unreasonably ezneuaive to move the garage off the easement. Sheet 1 of 2 FORMS 01920-38 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEEnNG6/1�/S / DATE: AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. HEARINGS PUBLIC WORKS M DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT LOW FLOW CONCRETE FLUME IN BELAIR Pfj PARED BY: DRAINAGEWAY - PROJECT 6354-95 J-9346 ��/.MACGILLI This is a hearing to consider the following local improvement project: Project No. 6354-95 J-9346 ":Construct Low Flow Concrete Flume in BelAir Drainageway on North Line of Elton Hills North Third Subdivision" The estimated costs are: Grading & Concrete Flume $37,800 Engineering & Interest 7,560 Contingency 11900 $47,260 One half the construction costs would be specially assessed and the remainder plus engineering and interest would be borne by the City. Council Action Reauested If the Council wishes to proceed, a resolution could be adopted ,e I ordering the project to be made. Since the project was Council Action a 6/7th vote is required for adoption. initiated by. �UNCIL ACTION: motion by: second by: to: j� CONSTRUCT LOW FLOW CONCRETE FLUME% ELTON HILLS NORTH THIRD SUBDIVISION ESTIMATED COST $47,260 PROJ. NO. 6354-95 J-9346 3 z 38N ST 37M a 0 250 500 SCALE: 1" - 500' 3 RFf.NAT12 /N I / I� row 40th ST NV GAGE CLC T SLimmIT SQUARE 1 3sn+ 5 ST NW 37TH B IR 3 z R IE BR w V IL 3 I EL REPEAIAT > John Adam � Jr High School LEGEND PROJECT LIMITS LJ N L Report On Adequacy of Petition and Feasibility Of Proposed Local Improvement Project Project No. 6354-95 J No. 9346 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota A petition requesting "Construct Low Flow Concrete Flume in Bel Air Drainageway on North Line of Elton Hills North Third Subdivision" was referred to the Department of Public Works on May 15, 1995 for preparation of the Engineers Feasibility Report. The petition has been examined, checked and found to be in proper form and to be signed by owners of record representing in excess of 20% of the abutting frontage. A neighborhood meeting was held on May 9, 1995 to explain theproject to the abutting propoerty owners. (Meeting notice attached.) The project must be initiated by Council Action since Chapter 429 of the State Statutes does not authorize the use of a petition for improvements that are not within the public street right of way. Therefore, a resolution authorizing the project to be made must be approved by a 6/7th vote of the Council. Engineers Report We report the project is feasible and recommend its construction with the one half of the costs to be assessed against the abutting property served and one half by the City. The City sharing of costs for this type improvement were established by two similar projects in the this same drainageway, upstream of this project. The existing drainage channel is a natural drainage channel that was incorporated into the Elton Hills North Third Subdivision in 1978. Minor grading has occurred over the years to keep the drainageway flowing. This has produced marginal results due to the flat grade of the drainageway and the almost constant flow of water through the channel. Similar conditions existed upstream and projects of this same nature were constructed in 1981 and 1986 as abutting owners petitioned for relief from the over grown and wet channel in their rear yards. The proposed project would consist of reshaping the channel bottom, installation of a "V" shaped concrete flume and sodding the channel side slopes. E I The estimated costs of the project, made without completed plans or survey are as follows: Construction Cost Engineering & Interest Contingency $37,800 7,560 1,90 Total $47,260 Consistent with prior similar projects the City would pay 1/2 of the construction cost plus the engineering and interest. City Share $27,410 To Be Assessed $19,850 Assessable Rate = Assessable Cost/Assessable Frontage Assessment Rate = $19,850/1985' = $10.00/lin/ ft/ We recommend that assessments be levied against the abutting property served in accordance with the City's current assessment policy and that the City share be funded from the Future Construction Account. Donald J. MacGillivray Assistant City Engineer • .• BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT Project No.: 6354 -95 Date (Orig.) 5/15/95 J No.: 9346 Description & Location: Construct Low Flow Concrete Flume in Bel Air Drainageway on North Line of Elton Hills North Third Subdivision . Cost Cost Construction Project Final Budget Contract Grading, Concret Flume $37,800 Right -Of -Way Easements Engineering 126 Interest 8°s Contingency 506 Total Construction & Expense Distribution To be Presently ASSESSED City Funds - TOTAL 4,540 $47,260 $27,410 Make Initial Disbursement from P.I.R. Fund REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING a DATE 6/19/95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS BUILDING SAFETY :5 _ 4 "M DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: REVISIONS. TO HOUSING CODE ORDINANCE HOUSING BOARD The Housing Code Board of Appeals recommends and requests that the Council authorize amendments to the present and proposed Housing Code (as submitted by staff for the May 15, 1995, Council meeting), and as described on the following attachments. The proposal reflects revisions to 8 sections of the ordinance for the reasons outlined. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Authorization for consideration at the June 19, 1995, scheduled public hearing. OF > p ; o^" J ACTION: Motion by: second BUILDING SAFETY DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: June 14, 1995 TO: Stevan Kvenvold, City Administrator Terry Adkins, City Attorney Judy Scharr, Deputy City Clerk FROM: Dee Schemmel, Recording Secretary Housing Code Board of Appeals SUBJECT: Changes to Proposed Housing Code Amendments At recent meetings of the Housing Code Board of Appeals, members reviewed and discussed the proposed changes to the Housing Code recommended by staff on May 15, 1995. The Board . voted to accept the proposed changes as written for these sections, numbered as follows from the original draft: Item 1) RCO Section 32.03 Applicability and Scope Item 7) RCO Section 34.28 Identification Item 11-12) RCO Sections 38.06 Investigation and 38.07 Issuance and Posting of Registration Certificate Item 13) RCO Section 38.12 Certificate Renewal and Non -transferability Item 14) RCO Section 38.13 Fees The Board would like to recommend additional changes to be considered for the remaining sections, as shown on the attached sheets. Please note that each section has been retyped, with previous changes as submitted for the May 15th Council agenda included as part of the unmodified text. The Board's recommended deletions are lined out and additions are underlined and italicized. .0 • 0 �z3 June 14, 1995 Housing Code Board of Appeals Page 2 2) Amend RCO Section 32.04 for the following reasons: The Board concurred with the proposed updates in reference to the fire code, but felt the word "to" in the last sentence should be changed to "with". AMEND RCO SECTION 32.04 AS FOLLOWS: 32.04 Pre-existing Dwellings. Buildings built under and in full compliance with the codes in force at the time of construction and properly maintained and used for only such use as originally permitted shall be exempt from the following provisions of the housing code to the extent indicated: (1) Minimum floor area requirements in section 34.20 are reduced by 10%. (2) Minimum superficial floor area requirements in section 34.26 are reduced by 10%. (3) Existing means of exit or egress shall be acceptable if approved by the fire chief notwithstanding section 34.25 in accordance to with the applicable provisions of the fire code. 3) Amend RCO Section 34.07 for the following reasons: While the Board concurred with some of the changes, they felt much of the • language was archaic. Also, as the MPCA does,not allow incinerators in single family dwellings, any reference to incinerators should then be deleted. q AMEND RCO SECTION 34.07 AS FOLLOWS: 34.07 Rubbish and Garbage Storage Facilities. Every dwelling or apartment shall be supplied with adequate refuse storage facilities. All refuse containers shall be made of rust -resistant metal equipped with suitable handles and tight -fitting covers, or approved heavy duty plastic with suitable handles and tight -fitting covers, and shall be water -tight and vermin proof. with tapeFed side walls and rl PaAh ll have a eaparity of set less than 32 galleps. Refuse containers shall be kept by the responsible tenant in a neat, clean and sanitary condition so as to prevent insect breedings, nuisances and unsightly conditions. Such containers shall be maintained in good repair by the responsible tenant, or by the collector when supplied by the collector, ✓ or by the owner or management firm when supplied by them. , is theFeef: All refuse containers shall be kept as near the rear of the premises as practicable, at the alley if there be an alley at such place, and shall be located so as to be easily accessible to the collector. gush GeRtaiRer-s shall be kept at 1 . Containers may be placed at curbside if such be the pick-up point, only en the within 24 hours of the time of pick up. • June 14, 1995 Housing Code Board of Appeals Page 3 4-5) Amend RCO Sections 34.09 and 34.26 for the following reasons: • After consideration of the Fire Department's reasoning on the proposed changes, the Board concurred with enforcement of required exits under the provisions of the fire code, but felt that ordinance section should be specifically referenced. AMEND RCO SECTIONS 34.09 AND 34.25 AS FOLLOWS: 34.09 Exits. For required exits in every dwelling or apartment, exits aan_r_,n_rd:RRG,8 te see the applicable provisions of the fire code ordinance chanter R. C. O. 55.01. 34.25 Basement Apartments. A habitable room, apartment or rooming unit may be located in a basement when all of the following requirements are met: (1) The floor and walls are adequately sealed from leakage of underground and surface run-off water. (2) Proper ventilation is secured as required under 34.12. (3) All habitable rooms are entirely sealed off from the central heating plant with a one -hour fire separation or other means approved by the fire chief. The central heating plant is provided with a combustion air intake installed in accordance with the building code. (4) The basement shall have at least one outside doorway. • (5) For required exits in each rooming unit or apartment c~^" . a _ exits ;� asserdaase to see the applicable provisions of the fire code ordinance chanter R.C.O. 55.01.. 6) Amend RCO Section 34.17 for the following reasons: The Board concurred with a specific date for removal of screens, but felt screens on doors should only be required if the opening is required for light and ventilation purposes. AMEND RCO SECTION 34.17 AS FOLLOWS: 34.17 Screens. Every door opening directly from a dwelling or apartment to outside space, when required for light and ventilation purposes, and all openable windows shall be supplied with screens. Such screens shall have a mesh of not less than number 14 and shall be hung not later than June 1 of each year, and shall remain in place until at least October 15; provided, however that such screens shall not be required: (1) in rooms located more than 50 feet above ground level; (2) in rooms having mechanical ventilation connected directly outside. 0 June 14, 1995 Housing Code Board of Appeals Page 4 a3 S . 8) Amend RCO Section 35.05 for the following reasons: The Board concurs with the addition of language for life -safety purposes, but felt "porches" should be expanded to include exterior decks, landings, and floor levels also. Members also felt this section should not be retroactive as many of the rental properties are older construction and existing stairways, etc. have been approved under prior codes. AMEND RCO SECTION 35.05 AS FOLLOWS: 35.05 Stairways Exterior Porches and Decks. Landings, and Floor Levels. Every inside and outside stairway, every exterior porch and deck, landing and floor level and every appurtenance attached thereto shall be so constructed as to be safe to use and capable of supporting the load that normal use may cause to be placed thereon and shall be kept in a sound condition and in a reasonably good state of maintenance and repair. (1) Every flight of stairs and exterior porch and deck, landing and floor level shall be free of holes, grooves and cracks which are large enough to constitute a possible accident hazard. The construction, design and headroom of stairways, exterior porches and decks, landings. and floor levels shall conform to the building code. (2) Every stairwell and every flight of stairs which are four or more risers high shall have handrails not less than thirty inches nor more than thirty-four inches above the nosing of treads and every exterior porch and deck, landing, and floor level which is more than thirty inches above grade shall have handrails not less than thirty-six inches above the platform. The construction and design of handrail intermediates shall conform to the building code. (3) Every rail and balustrade shall be fastened and maintained in a workmanlike condition. No flight of stairs shall have settled more than one inch out of its intended position or have pulled away from supporting or adjacent structures. (4) No flight or stairs shall have rotten or deteriorated supports. The treads of every flight of stairs shall be uniform in height. Every stair tread shall be sound and securely fastened in position. (5) Every stair tread shall be strong enough to bear the load required by the building code. (6) Every exterior porch and deck, landing, and floor level shall have sound floor and supports. lI 0 June 14, 1995 Housing Code Board of Appeals Page 5 (7) All outside stairways, fire escapes and exitways shall be maintained unobstructed, and free of ice and snow. All outside stairways that serve as an entrance to an upper story apartment or rooming unit shall have a light located at the head of the stairway capable of lighting the entire stairway. This light may be controlled by 3-way switches, one at the bottom of the stairway, and one at the top, or it may be a sensor light, activated by motion or dusk. L1 This section shall not be retroactive as of the date of adoption. 9) Amend RCO Section 35.21 for the following reasons: The Board concurred with the amended language, but felt that mowing and weeds is already covered by RCO Section 72.08 by the Weed Inspector, and the part on keeping private walks, etc. clear was covered by previous amendment to RCO Section 35.05(7). AMEND RCO SECTION 35.21 AS FOLLOWS: 35.21 Open Areas. All open areas and parts of premises shall be maintained and kept in a reasonably clean and neat condition. This requirement shall include thedFives and steps removal of dead trees and brush; Is the removal of inoperable machines, appliances, fixtures and equipment so damaged, deteriorated or obsolete as to have no substantial value and which constitute junk; the removal of lumber piles and building materials not being used in actual construction and the premises unless such premises are being used by a business dealing in or requiring the use of such lumber and materials; and the removal of tin cans, broken, glass, broken furniture, mattresses, box springs, boxes, crates, cardboard, tires and other debris. Nothing in this section shall restrict the activities of duly established and licensed junk yards. 0 • June 14, 1995 Housing Code Board of Appeals Page 6 10) Amend RCO Section 35.22 for the following reasons: The Board concurred that the new language is better, but felt the primary responsibility for removal of a motor vehicle should be the owner's. AMEND RCO SECTION 35.22 AS FOLLOWS: 35.22 Non -conforming Motor Vehicles. Subd. 1. "Motor vehicle" means every �vr�\ vehicle which is self-propelled. �o Subd. 2. No person shall place, park, permit to remain, store or leave upon an open space area of any premises governed by the housing code, any motor vehicle unless it conforms with all of the following requirements: l (a) The vehicle must have affixed to it a valid current motor vehicle license; rr,3 (b) The vehicle must not lack essential parts that would render it inoperable; and (c) The vehicle must not be in a rusted, wrecked, partially dismantled or junked condition. dL/b&o& 0 Subd. 3. If a motor vehicle fails to meet any of the above requirements, the owneF Of the pFemises and the owner or possessor of the motor vehicle, shall be jointly- andseveFally responsible to remove the motor vehicle to a duly licensed junk yard or other authorized place of deposit or storage. In the event the owner or possessor of the motor vehicle cannot be located, then it shall be the responsibility of the owner of the premises to remove the motor vehicle to a dulylicensed •unk yard or other authorized place of deposit or storageyard or other authorized place of deposit or storage. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING�� DAB: 5/15/95 4 4 AGENDA SECTIO RIGINATING PT: EA�HAG RE TS RECO NDATIO BUILDIN ETY TEM CRIPT SIONS HOUSING DE ORD CER. The Housing Division staff of the Building Safety Department recommends and requests that the Council authorize several amendments to the present Housing Code as described on the following attachments. The proposal reflects revisions to 14 sections of the ordinance for the reasons outlined in the attached memos dated May 5, 1995. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Authorization to schedule a public hearing trycopsider the proposed amendment' OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: BUILDING SAFETY DEPARTMENT • MEMORANDUM DATE: May 5, 1995 TO: Stevan Kvenvold, City Administrator Official �+ Donald Wees, Building FROM: Robert Hague, Chief Housing Inspector SUBJECT: Housing Code Amendments Revisions to 14 Housing Code sections have been proposed and are recommended by staff for adoption by the City Council. Attached are copies of each of the proposals with new language underlined and deleted words lined out. Also included are the reasons for the changes. In general, the changes are justified in order to: 1) Update code language in a number of cases to ease . enforcement 2) Adjust code language to address field conditions 3) Increase penalty fee as noted for reinspection problems att: 2 0 May 5, 1995 Housing Code Amendments Page 2 • 1) Amend RCO Section 32.03 for the following reasons: The City Attorney's Office felt the term "inconsistent" should be further redefined to explain the intent of this section as indicated on his attached memo dated October 11, 1994. AMEND RCO SECTION 32.03 AS FOLLOWS: 32.03 Applicability and Scope. Every portion of a building or premises, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, except hotels, motels, rooming houses, rest homes, convalescent homes, hospitals, and nursing homes, shall comply with the provisions of the housing code irrespective of when such building has been constructed, altered or repaired, except as hereinafter provided, and any construction, alteration, or repair thereof or changes of use therein, which are required by the provisions of the housing code, shall be done in accordance with applicable provisions of the building code. If any provision of the housing code is inconsistent with a comparable and applicable provision of the building code, the provision of the building code shall govern to the extent of such inconsistency. As used in this section, the re,-... "-t-,f I, c677 r.Fcr cinnc wr, i Aro 2) Amend RCO Section 32.04 for the following reasons: The Fire Chief and Deputy Chief indicate that subsection (3) should be updated to make proper reference to the Fire Code and revised sections 34.09 and 34.25 as proposed below. AMEND RCO SECTION 32.04 AS FOLLOWS: 32.04 Pre-existing Dwellings. Buildings built under and in full compliance with the codes in force at the time of construction and properly maintained and used for only such use as originally permitted shall be exempt from the following provisions of the housing code to the extend indicated: (1) Minimum floor area requirements in section 34.20 are reduced by 10%. (2) Minimum superficial floor area requirements in section 34.26 are reduced by 10%. (3) Existing means of exit or egress shall be acceptable if approved by the fire chief eetzrlose_____ _g cc_-_c- 91.26 in accordance to the applicable orovisions of the Fire Code. 0 May 5, 1995 / UUU Housing Code Amendments Page 3 3) Amend RCO Section 34.07 for the following reasons: . The language in this section is archaic, dating back to 1967 when approved plastic containers were not readily available. The norm on residential used by the haulers is 60 gallon plastic for each SFD and appropriate upsizing for multi -family buildings. Plastic is more desirable than metal, will not dent, and has been approved by Olmsted County Waste Management. AMEND RCO SECTION 34.07, AS FOLLOWS: 34.07 Rubbish and Garbage Storage Facilities. Every dwelling or apartment shall be supplied with adequate refuse storage facilities. All refuse containers shall be made of rust - resistant metal equipped with suitable handles and tight- fitting covers, or approved heavy duty plastic with suitable handles and ti(7ht-fitting covers, shall be water tight and vermin proof, with tapered side walls, and each shall have a capacity of not anefe less than 32 gallons. Refuse containers shall be kept by the responsible tenant in a neat, clean and sanitary condition so as to prevent insect breedings, nuisances and unsightly conditions. Such containers shall be maintained by the responsible tenant, or by the collector when supplied by t`e se;4eete him, or by the owner or management firm, when supplied by them, in good repair, free of ragged or sharp edges or other defects likely to injure or hamper the person using the same or collecting the contents thereof. All • refuse containers shall be kept as near the rear of the premises as practicable, at the alley if there be an alley at such place, and shall be located so as to be easily accessible to the collector. Such containers shall be kept at least 12 inches above the ground, or on an impervious surface. point, only on the day of Dick -up. All garbage before being placed in containers, shall be drained of all free liquids and wrapped in paper. Garbage may be disposed of by means of garbage disposal units connected to the sanitary sewer system of the city. R-ubbish may be bispeeed e€ i9y means e�g an aei'eved ' ndeer self- €ieeh celled -�rd: -_ Any incinerator installation shall be 4-5) Amend RCO Sections 34.09 and 34.25 for the following reasons: The Fire Chief and Deputy Chief indicate that both sections which refer to the number and size of secondary exits should be deleted and proper reference made to the Fire Code which takes precedence over local housing ordinances. 0 • May 5, 1995 e Housing Code Amendments Page 4 AMEND RCO SECTIONS 34.09 AND 34.25 AS FOLLOWS: 34.09 Exits. Every dwelling or apartment shall have Prot�Whe a seeeeQav� eaez€ is a wiedew, __ shall exits in accordance to the applicable provisions of the Fire Code. {�? � mina':R%fa4i:mens;en s c3 i maxi tm 9r ;; heighe4 geee. le*e' The ese shall =ead to sage and epee eeaee ae-9ffarxnd as rejuli-ed by e �p� �4e - 34.25. Basement Apartments. A habitable room, apartment or rooming unit may be located in a basement when all of the following requirements are met: (1) The floor and walls are adequately sealed from leakage of underground and surface run-off water. (2) Proper ventilation is secured as required under 34.12 (3) All habitable rooms are entirely sealed off from the central heating plant with a one -hour fire separation or other means approved by the fire chief. The central heating plant is provided with a combustion air intake installed in accordance with the building code. (4) The basement shall have at least one outside door way. (5) Each rooming unit or apartment shall have t-we-means e€ eiei "eEe a seeendav9 e5 a is a winder+ 'e-shal_ �6e-o- exits in accordance to the applicable provisions of the Fire Code. (e) mami:R%m sill he'ghe--4-feee- (el) Easily epened4L-em ehe a- ..L_..e ,.L_�ise eE �eesT 6) Amend RCO Section 34.17 for the following reasons: The present language in this section had a starting date to hang screens but not a date at the end of the season when they could be removed. By October 15, insects are no longer a concern. Ar May 5, 1995 Housing Code Amendments Page 5 AMEND RCO SECTION 34.17, AS FOLLOWS: 34.17. Screens. Every door opening directly from a dwelling or apartment to outside space and all openable windows shall be supplied with screens. Such screens shall have a mesh of not less than number 14 and shall be hung not later than June 1 of each year, and shall remain in olace until at least October IS. provided, however, that such screens shall not be required: (1) in rooms located more than 50 feet above ground level; (2) in rooms having mechanical ventilation connected directly outside. 7) Amend RCO Section 34.28 for the following reasons: This language is essential for inspectors to be able to identify a property from the street for more efficiency and for legal reasons, as well as bringing the language up to par with Fire Code requirements to be able to properly identify buildings in an emergency. AMEND RCO SECTION 34.28, AS FOLLOWS: 34.28. Identification of Rental Facilities. ' _,_Lab_. ally. 8) Amend RCO Section 35.05 for the following reasons: The Housing Code is quite vague in this area on stairs and there are no parameters to aid the inspector in arriving at a decision, while the Building Code spells it out in detail. The new addition to Section 35.05(7) regarding stair obstruction and visibility is recommended for the safety and well-being of the tenants. r 1 L_J is May 5, 1995 Housing Code Amendments Page 6 . AMEND RCO SECTION 35.05, AS FOLLOWS: 35.05. Stairways and Porches. Every inside and outside stairway, every porch and every appurtenance attached thereto shall be so constructed as to be safe to use and capable of supporting the load that normal use may cause to be placed thereon and shall be kept in a sound condition and in a reasonably good state of maintenance and repair. (1) Every flight of stairs and porch shall be free of holes, grooves and cracks which are large enough to constitute a possible accident hazard. The construction, design and (2) Every stairwell and every flight of stairs which are four or more risers high shall have handrails not less than thirty inches nor more than thirty-four inches above the nosing of treads and every porch which is more than thirty inches above grade shall have handrails not less than thirty-six inches above the platform. The (3) Every rail and balustrade shall be fastened and • maintained in a workmanlike condition. No flight of stairs shall have settled more than one inch out of its intended position or have pulled away from supporting or adjacent structures. (4) No flight of stairs shall have rotten or deteriorated supports. The treads of every flight of stairs shall be uniform in height. Every stair tread shall be sound and securely fastened in position. (5) Every stair tread shall be strong enough to bear the load required by the building code. (6) Every porch shall have sound floor and supports. 0 May 5, 1995 Housing Code Amendments Page 7 9') Amend RCO Section 35_21 for the following reasons:. • Recommended added language to be more explicit concerning maintenance of open space areas. This added language covers most items the department received complaints on and is for the health and welfare of the tenants and the' general public. AMEND RCO SECTION 35.21. AS FOLLOWS: 35.21 Ooen Areas. All open areas and parts of premises shall be maintained and kept in a reasonably clean and neat condition. This requirement shall include the mowina of removal of dead trees and brush; the removal of inoperable machines, appliances, fixtures and equipment so damaged, deteriorated or obsolete as to have no substantial value and which constitute junk; the removal of lumber piles and building materials not being used in actual construction on the premises unless such premises are being used by a business dealing in or requiring the use of such lumber and materials; and the removal of tin cans, broken glass, broken furniture, mattresses, box springs, boxes, crates, cardboard, and other debris. Nothing in this section shall restrict the activities of duly established and licensed junk yards. 10) Amend RCO Section 35.22 for the following reasons: Present wording is too confusing in isolating provisions which would constitute a violation. Recommended by City Attorney's Office to change wording from "abandoned and junked automobiles" to "non -conforming motor vehicles". "Motor vehicle"means every vehicle which is self-propelled and spells out three provisions, any one of which would constitute a violation. _ R�l�_T_!i\!7MT_rR�'��►_�s[as^_�rsi�aT ffieeeE veAiele, aeL-tiees t�eree€ ei—gaL-es the € sm anelt ' ewee d eeeupant of e Fd stker atathort2ee—ghee of elepesie ev—im_ ` age. • May 5, 1995 Housing Code Amendments Page 8 [Entire section rewritten] 35.22. Non -conforming Motor Vehicles. Subd. 1. "Motor vehicle" means every vehicle which is self-propelled. Subd. 2. No person shall place, park, permit to remain, store or leave upon an open space area of any premises governed by the housing code, any motor vehicle unless it conforms with all of the following requirements: (a) The vehicle must have affixed to it a valid current motor vehicle license; (b) The vehicle must not lack essential parts that would render it inoperable; and (c) The vehilce must not be in a rusted,.wrecked, partially dismantled or junked condition. Subd. 3. If a motor vehicle fails to meet any of the above requirements, the owner of the premises and the owner of the motor vehicle, shall be jointly and severally responsible to remove the motor vehicle to a duly licensed junk yard or other authorized place of deposit or storage. Subd. 4. This section does not apply to a duly established . and licensed junk yard, nor to any motor vehicle stored in an enclosed structure such as a garage. 11-12) Amend RCO Sections 38.06 and 38.07 for the following reasons: Recommended by the City Attorney's Office to include language found in Sections 32.03 and 32.05 which refer to the Housing Code, including any provisions of the zoning, building, fire. safety, or health ordinances. AMEND RCO SECTIONS 38.06 AND 38.07, AS FOLLOWS: 38.06. Investigation. The director of building and safety shall investigate all applications for the registration certificate to verify that the dwellings, apartments, or rooming units offered for rent comply with the provisions of this code, including any provisions of the zoning, building, and 32.05. 38.07. Issuance and Posting of Registration Certificate. Whenever the investigation of an application indicates that the dwellings, apartments, or rooming units offered for rent comply with all provisions of this code, including any provisions of the zoning, building, fire safety, or health • ordinances applicable in sections 32.03 and 32.05, the director of building and safety shall issue a registration certificate. Every registrant of a dwelling, apartment or rooming unit offered for rent shall post the registration certificate in a conspicuous place. May 5, 1995 Housing Code Amendments Page 9 13) Amend RCO Section 38.12 for the following reasons: Recommended added language in Subd. (1) to correspond with same language found in Sections 32.03 and 32.05. Added new language in paragraph (2) to permit the department to suspend or revoke a Registration Certificate after issuance, if it is found at any time that the property as a whole or any of the units therein are not in compliance with the Code, and the owner has failed to make the necessary corrections to bring it into compliance. AMEND RCO SECTION 38.12, SUED. 1, AS FOLLOWS: 38.12 Certificate Renewal and Non -transferability. Subdivision 1. All registration certificates shall expire one year after date of issuance and must be renewed annually. All information required by Section 38.04 of this chapter must be submitted at the time of renewal. Whenever the applicant certifies that no change has been made in a registered dwelling, apartment, or rooming unit, a renewal registration certificate may be issued without reinspection by the Director of Building Safety, provided the units are in compliance with this code, including any provisions of the zoning building, and 32,05. • A registration may be suspended or revoked if it is found that at any time after issuance the rental property as a whole, or • any of the units therein, are not in compliance with this code including any provisions of the zoning, buildingr, fire safety, or health ordinances applicable in sections 22.03 and 32.05. 14) Amend RCO Section 38.13 for the following reasons: This additional language for a $30.00 second reinspection fee is an attempt to recoup partial expenses and to reduce some wasted time by inspectors who return time and time again to a certain location and find corrections not completed. It has worked well in other localities, and some of these charge a $50.00 fee for a second reinspection. AMEND RCO SECTION 38.13, AS FOLLOWS: 38.13. Fees. In addition to such other fees as may be imposed by this code, a non-refundable fee of $15.00 for each dwelling building containing less than 4 units, $20.00 for each dwelling building containing 4 to 8 units, $25.00 for each dwelling building containing 9 or more units, plus 510.00 for each apartment unit and each of the first four rooming units not occupied by the owner shall be paid when an application for a registration certificate or renewal is filed with the director of building safety as required by this chapter. If an application for renewal is not made within the time hereinabove limited, an additional fee of $2.50 per day shall be charged for each day thereafter up to 20 days or until the application is filed, whichever occurs first. In • May 5, 1995 Housing Code Page 10 Amendments addition to any other fee provided by this section, an owner may be assessed by the director of building safety an additional fee of $30.00 if, without reasonable cause, the owner fails to keep a scheduled appointment or for which registration is then pending. city director of finance. ds/hsgamend REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 06/19/95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY ADMINISTRATOR C-1-21 TEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS G. NEUMANN This RCA lists all the items which have been included in the consent agenda for this meeting. The Council can approve all of the items with a single motion to approve. The Council President will allow the Councilmembers an opportunity to state whether there are any of these items which you wish to have removed from the consent agenda approval and to have them discussed and acted upon separately by the Council. The consent agenda for this meeting consists of the following RCAs: C-1. Approval of Minutes C-2. Government Center Skyway - Authorization to Re -Bid C-3. Licenses and Bonds & Miscellaneous Activities C-4. Air Monitoring Site Lease Agreement with MPCA for Animal Pound Site C-5. Fireworks Displays - Fourth of July C-6. Sound Amplification Permit - Rochester Civic Music Concert During Fourth of July Celebration C-7. Sound Amplification Permit - Rochester Civic Music's Concert Series - Down by the Riverside 1995 C-8. Sound Amplification Permit - Essex Park Pig Roast C-9. Approval of Accounts Payable C-10. Appointment/Police Officer/Police Department C-11. Appointment/Police Officer/Police Department C-12. Appointment/Police Officer/Police Department C-13. Request to Set Hearing for Vacation Petition by City of Rochester to Vacate a Portion of 1st Street NW C-14. Request to Set Hearing for Vacation Petition by Michael Younge to Vacate a Portion of Gates Drive NW C-15. Request to Set Hearing for Vacation Petition by Steven J. DeMarco to Vacate 5' Wide Utility Easement Located at 2314 16th Avenue NW C-16. Request to Set Hearing for Vacation Petition by Dakota of Rochester to Vacate 5' Wide Utility Easement Located on Lot 1, Block 3, King's Run Fourth Subdivision C-17. Concrete Ditch Lining at Water Reclamation Plant C-18. Storm Sewer Reconstruction and Concrete Ditch Lining SE C-19. Designation & Deletions of Municipal State Aid Streets C-20. Overlay Bridge Deck, 14th Street NW Bridge No. 55524 Over Cascade Creek C-21. Lease Agreement with Rochester City Lines COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: ((i Qk Motion to approve consent agenda items. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 5( / , DATE: 6/19/95 r L AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Consent Agenda. City Admn/Development Dist C _A TEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: Government Center Skyway - Authorization to Re -Bid Doug Knott Staff is seeking authorization to re -bid the Government Center skyway. The estimated project cost is $2.0 million dollars. We anticipate an August 1, 1995 bidding with award made at the August 7, 1995 Council meeting. Construction should be complete by November 1, 1996. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Authorization to solicit bids for the Government Center skyway. OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 33 � DA TE 6/19/95 i r L 4 AGENDA SECTION: I ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA/ORGANIZATION BUSINESS CITY CLERK EM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED By: LICENSES AND BONDS AND MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES DONNA SCHOTT The following licenses and bonds and miscellaneous activities are submitted for the Council's approvals or disapprovals. All are pending departmental approvals, the required insurance, bonds, fees and all outstanding debts with the City of Rochester. GAMBLING Northland Children's Services, Inc. 850 2nd St. SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 Raffle 7/28/95 Willow Creek Golf Course 1700 48th St. SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 Eagles Aerie #2228 Auxiliary RENEWAL PREMISE PERMIT 409 1st Ave SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 CONSTRUCTION SIDEWALK Ron Ellefson Concrete 126 20th St. SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 STREET USE MISCELLANEOUS Rochesterfest Street Dance 6/24/95 1st Ave SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 Rochester Jaycees 4th of July Kiddie Parade 7/4/95 Central Park to Soldiers Field Rochester, Mn. 55901 Downtown Business Association Annual Sidewalk Sale Days 7/20/95 to 7/23/95 Downtown City Sidewalks Rochester, Mn. 55901 OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: L.CENSES AND BONDS & MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES % PAGE 2 JUNE 19, 1995 ACTIVITIES CONTINUED Mayo Medical School Section of the American Medical Association IOKM/2 Mi Walk & Run Silver Lake Park & Bike Path Rochester, Mn. 55904 A motion to approve or disapprove the above licenses and bonds and miscellaneous activities. 0 0 AGENDA SECTION: I ORIGINATING DEPT: Consent Agenda City Clerk k-EM DESCRIPTION: Air Monitoring Site Lease Agreement with MPCA for Animal Pound Site MEETING DATE: 06-19-95 ITECM PREPARED BY: Judy Scherr It is requested that the City of Rochester enter into a renewal equipment monitoring site agreement with Minnesota Pollution Control for lease of a spot at the existing Animal Pound facility. The term of the lease shall be July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996. The lease can be terminated by either patty by a 30-day written notice. A motion to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the renewal lease agreement with Minnesota Pollution Control for an equipment monitoring site at the Animal Pound facility. NCIL ACTION: Motion hv: Second 0 n L Expenditure Authorization: _ Original (NA40 & 44) _ Increase (NA41 & 44) _ Decrease (NA45) — Prior Year Encumbrance or Encumbrance Increase (NA46) AID Organization FY Req. Number Vendor Number Type 3A 00 036 "0 00 t V Terms/Source/Cost Codes ount Suffix Object t 0o.00 U1 `Y310 Transactions: NA40 _ NA41 / NA44 _ NA45 _ NA46 / Date Number Entered By Prior FY Req. Numbers Cumulative Total S MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Equipment Monitoring Site Agreement This Agreement is made by and between City of Rochester_City Hall. Rochester. Minnesota 55902 3192 hereinafter referred to as "LESSOR," and the state of Minnesota, Pollution Control Agency hereinafter referred to as "LESSEE." WITNESSETH: LESSOR and LESSEE, in consideration of the rents, covenants and considerations hereinafter specified, do hereby agree each with the other as follows: LEASED PREMISES AND TERM: LESSOR grants and LESSEE accepts the use of the following described premises in the city of Rochester , county of Olmstead Minnesota, to -wit: Installation of an ambient air monitoring building on the grounds of the Rochester Animal Control Pound. Rochester Animal Control Pound is located at; 105 Northwest Elton Hills Drive, Rochester, Minnesota. L 40 37 C� to be used as a pollution control monitoring site for the term of one (1) vear beginning July 1. 1995 through June 30. 1996 2. RENT: As payment for the above described Leased Premises, and in consideration for all covenants, representations and conditions of this Lease Agreement, LESSEE agrees to pay LESSOR the sum of fifly dollars (S50.00) for each month of the lease term, payable on the last day of each rental month. TERMINATION: This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon giving thirty (30) days prior written notice of such termination to the other parry. 4. DUTIES OF LESSOR: LESSOR shall furnish and provide for the use of LESSEE: a. access to the site b. electricity to operate monitoring equipment. The cost of any necessary electrical equipment and its installation shall be the responsibility of LESSEE. 5. LESSEE shall be responsible for payment of the costs of electricity used for the monitoring site. 6. DUTIES OF LESSEE: Except as otherwise provided herein, LESSEE shall furnish all materials and services required for its use of the Leased Premises, and shall maintain the Leased Premises in a reasonably good condition and state of repair during the continuance of its tenancy, and shall surrender the Leased Premises to LESSOR at the termination of such tenancy in such condition as the same was in at the commencement. of such tenancy, reasonable wear and damage by the elements excepted. At the termination of the Lease Agreement, LESSEE shall be responsible for any repairs to the Leased Premises caused by removal of its pollution monitoring equipment. m LIABILITY: LESSEE shall be liable for injury to or loss of property or personal injury or death caused by an act or omission of any employee of LESSEE in the performance of this contract, under circumstances where LESSEE, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant, in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 3.736. Nothing in this Lease Agreement is intended to be construed as a waiver of the Tort Claims Act, Minn. Stat. § 3.736 or any other law, legislative or judicial, limiting governmental liability. 8. OTHER CONDITIONS: a. Pursuant to Minn. Star. § 1613.06, subd. 4, the books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices of LESSOR relevant to this Lease Agreement shall be subject to examination by the state and/or Legislative Auditor during normal business hours and after reasonable notice to LESSOR. b. LESSOR agrees to provide and maintain the Leased Premises and the building of which the Leased Premises are a part with accessibility and facilities meeting code requirements for handicapped persons, pursuant to all applicable laws, rules, ordinances and regulations as issued by any federal, state or local political subdivisions having jurisdiction and authority in connection with said property. c. When applicable, LESSOR certifies that it has received a certificate of compliance from the Commissioner of Human Rights pursuant to Minn. Star. § 363.073, or that it has not had more than 20 full-time employees at any time during the previous 12 months and claims exemption from Minn. Stat. § 363.073. d. LESSOR agrees that in exercising its management responsibilities of the property - which the Leased Premises are a part, including the maintenance, repair, alterations and construction relating thereto, it shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, rules, ordinances and regulations, including but not limited to building code, disabilities access, zoning, air quality, pollution control, recyclable materials and prevailing wage requirements, as issued by any federal, state or local political subdivisions having jurisdiction and authority in connection with said property. e. LESSEE agrees to observe reasonable precautions to prevent waste of heat, electricity, water, air conditioning any other utility or any service, whether such is furnished by LESSOR or obtained and paid for by LESSEE. 0 3q Approved: LESS By AL L\` Title)E71 \� �FttDE1Z Date LESSEE PollutY i:it : B z Title DateS�z/9s Commissioner of Administration Delegateo4o By — Elaine Johnson Manager Title Adminian?" BnMtes DMala+ By V5 —(S -sib As to form and execution by the Attorney General ChMAUA.Lk,- By Assistant Attorney General Date 5-A3-gS Commissioner of Finance as to encumbrance ()dglnal signed BY By Cnariotte Even Title MAY 11 1995 cc: Fully -executed copy to Dept. of Administration, Real Estate Management Division GSE:Img REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 4(% DATE: 06-19-95 r AGENDA SECTION: Consent PDenda ORIGINATING DEPT: City Clerk ITEM NO. C Cj EM DESCRIPTION: Fireworks Displays - Fourth of July PREPARED BY: Judy Scherr Two separate businesses have requested approval for fireworks displays in connection with the Fourth of July Celebration. Both parties have Police Department approval and will have to follow Rochester Fire Code requirements as outlined to them. The Rochester Post Bulletin will hold the annual fireworks display at Silver Lake Park on the evening of July 4th; July 5th is the alternative weather date. Because the fireworks are held on and over public property, the City's Risk Manager, Jennifer King, has required that the City be listed as an additional insurer on their insurance policy. The Rochester Golf and Country Club will hold their annual fireworks display on July 3rd at the Country Club. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve the fireworks display sponsored by the Rochester Post Bulletin and the Golf and Country Club with requirements set forth as described above. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: 7 qce�-Nwsw .LLL-ANERICA CM III111 1. ROCHESTER FIREWORKS DISPLAYS DAVID A. KAPLER, Chief Rochester Fire Department Room 11. City Hall 224 - 1st Ave. SW Rochester, MN 55902-3129 (507) 285-8072 FAX #(507) 285-8256 ROCHESTER FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS: A Fire Department permit for a fireworks display must be obtained. RFC 78.103(a)2 2. Provide a diagram of the grounds on which the display is to be held showing the point at which the fireworks are to be discharged; the location of buildings, highways/streets; the lines behind' which the audience will be restrained; trees and other overhead obstructions, specify date and time of display(s). RRC 78.102(a)2 3. Will only Class C fireworks be used? If special fireworks are used, Article 77, Division III requirements are applicable. RFC 78.203(a) 4. Fireworks display operations shall be under the direct supervision of a pyrotechnic operator; indicate the name of this person and his/her experience and training. RFC 78.203(b) 5. Specify the amount of the bond or certificate of insurance. RFC 78Z03(c) 6. See attached copy of Section 78.203 for other requirements relating to fireworks displays. Include information sufficient to show conformance with applicable requirements; attach this information to the diagram requested in Item #2. Call for an inspection of the display site by the Fire Prevention Bureau 24 hours prior to the fireworks display. NOTE: FINAL APPROVAL BY THE ROCIIESTER CITY COUNCIL IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO FIRE DEPARTMENT PERMIT ISSUANCE. 0 An Equal Opportunity Employer r a'_G 18 First Ave. S.E. • P.O. Sox 6118 Post Bulletin Co. Rochester, 83esota 55903 6118 • Phone 507/285-7600 Minnesota's Largest Evening Newspaper CJ Common Council Rochester, MN The Post -Bulletin Company requests permission to hold the annual 4th of July fireworks display at Silver Lake Park on Tuesday evening July 4th or in case of bad weather Wednesday July 5th 1995. As usual safety precautions will be discussed with the Fire and Police departments. Thank you. John Withers - Promotions Director Post -Bulletin Company To"tPra Goo & Cowl Club P.O. Box 6877 Rochester, Minnesota 55903 Telephone 507/282-2708 • June 7, 1995 Dear Permiter: I am rebresenting the Rochester Golf & C.C. in asking the city of Rochester for a Fireworks Display Permit. We have celebrated the 4th of July with fireworks for many years. The supplier of our fireworks is Jim Freeman of Wasioja and a trained pyrotechnician sets off our display. Safety is a primary concern for us. This year we plan on displaying on the 3rd of July at dusk. Please give me a call if you need any more information. You can reach me at 281-3241. Thanks; J Gardner Golf Course Superintendent Rochester Golf & C.C. • V*01111--&1619—Urd MOMI• MEETING DATE: 06-19-95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: Consent Agenda City Clerk ITEM DESCRIPTION: Sound Amplification Permit - Rochester Civic Music Concert During Fourth of July Celebration ITEM NO. G -1p PREPARED BY: Judy Scherr Rochester Civic Music is requesting approval for a sound amplification permit to present their annual Fourth of July Concert prior to the fireworks start. The sound check will start about 8:00 P.M. with the actual concert running from 8:30 P.M. to the start of the fireworks (approximately 10:00 P.M.) Waiver from the 8:00 P.M. limitation is also requested. A motion to approve the sound amplification permit and waiver of time restriction for the Fourth of July Rochester Civic Music Concert. ACTION: Motion Second by: IN *0111• - • _ • MEETING q I / DATE: 06-19-95 r L_ AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Consent Agenda City Clerk G - -7 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Sound Amplification Permit - Rochester Civic Music's Concert PREPARED BY: Series - Down By the Riverside 1995 Judy Scherr Rochester Civic Music will be holding their "Down By the Riverside" concert series from Sunday, July 9th through Sunday, August 20th. The sound check will be held from 5:00 to 6:30 P.M. with the concert running from 7:00 to approximately 10:00 P.M. Therefore, they are requesting a sound amplification permit and waiver of the required time limitation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve the Sound Amplification Permit for Rochester Civic Music for their concert series entitled "Down By the Riverside" to be held from July 9th through August 20th. COUNCIL ACTION: motion by: Second by: to: ROCHESTER CIVIC MUSIC 0V_ Headliner: Johnny Clueless Opening Act: The Guys Downstairs Sunday, July 16: Park Band Music Rochester Civic Music Concert Band Chuck Blattner, Conductor Headliner: Jack Knife and the Sharps Opening Act: The Element Brothers • Sunday. July 30: Park Band Music Rochester Civic Music Concert Band Chuck Blattner, Conductor Headliner: Steve Vecchi and his Orchestra Opening Act: The Paulson -Warner Quintet 11_ •y. 1 I. r ' I Headliner: The Dixie Chicks Opening Act: Southern Cross Sunday. August 20: Rhythm and Blues Night Jimmy Johnson All concerts are free and begin at 7:00 p.m. in Mayo Park. . Telephone Civic Music at (612)285-8276 for more information. CITY HALL • ROOM 109 • ROCHESTER. MN ii9112 • WMINISTRATION (50-) 281-6AN)5 • TICKETS (50-) 285-80-6 • FAX (5U-) :Ni 8% MEETING ti/ / DATE: 06-19-95 AGENDA SECTION: Consent Agenda ORIGINATING DEPT: City Clerk ITEM NO. C ITEM DESCRIPTION: Sound Amplification Permit - Essex Park Pig Roast PREPARED BY: Judy Scheer Organizers of the third annual pig roast are requesting approval for this year's event, to be held on July 15th, at Essex Park. Friends and family of the organizers meet each year for a day of get-together. A band will play from 3:00 P.M. until dusk (approximately 9:30 P.M.) as they have done in past years; therefore, a waiver from the 8:00 P.M. restriction is requested as well. Lt. Al Fritsche of the Rochester Police Department has stated that there have been no problems in the past with the sound amplification. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve the Sound Amplification and waiver of time for the third annual pig roast to be held on July 15th at Essex Park from 3:00 P.M. to dusk. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: 8 May 18, 1995 Rochester City Council c/o city Clerk 224 First Ave SW Rochester MN 55902 City Council Members, As organizers of our third annual pig roast, we would like to request a noise amplifier permit for this year's event. The pig roast will be held on Saturday, July 15th at Essex Park from 12:00pm until dusk. Approximately 75 people will attend this event, they are friends and families of all ages. The noise amplification permit would be required from 3:00pm until dusk, during which time a local band will entertain the gathered guests. The city park has been reserved for this event and the proper permit has been obtained (Permit #4969). We will be glad to answer any questions or concerns that the council may have. Sincerely/,, . 11P Eric Warne 1916 24th St SE 282-9052 3i11 L 2408 18 1/2 AV NW 281-3187 Andy Streit 2415 62nd ST NW 287-0913 Catherine Andresen 13 Elton Ridge Ct NW 288-0559 0 MEETING e� I DATE: 06/19/95 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/19/95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING. DEPT: ITEM NO. ORGANIZATIONAL MAYOR C /Q I EM DESCRIPTION: APPOINTMENT - POLICE OFFICER - POLICE DEPARTMENT PREPARED BY: S. NORRIS AS A RESULT OF THE REORGANIZATION OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, TWO (2) CAPTAIN POSITIONS WILL BE ELIMINATED AND REPLACED WITH POLICE OFFICER POSITIONS. THIS WILL ENABLE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SHIFT AND STRUCTURE PROPOSALS. (SEE ATTACHED) THE RETIREMENT OF FRANCIS D. BURTON, CAPTAIN, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 1994 ULTIMATELY CREATES A VACANCY FOR THE POSITION OF POLICE OFFICER. (SEE ATTACHED) POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION APPROVED COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: SECTION 9.00 OF THE ROCHESTER HOME RULE CHARTER STATES THAT THE MAYOR APPOINTS ALL MEMBERS OF THE ROCHESTER POLICE DEPARTMENT. PURSUANT TO THAT AUTHORITY, THE MAYOR HAS APPOINTED GREGORY J. VANMOER TO THE POSITION OF POLICE OFFICER IN THE ROCHESTER POLICE DEPARTMENT CONTINGENT UPON SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF AN INDEPTH BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION, MEDICAL EXAMINATION AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION. THIS INFORMATION IS GIVEN TO THE COUNCIL SO THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE AWARE OF THE APPOINTMENT. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: eTq bad ALL- ROCHESTER aNERICA CM • POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION JOY FOGARTY RICHARD MAHLER ARNOLD HILL June 15, 1995 Honorable Mayor Hazama City Hall Rochester, Minnesota 55902 Dear Mayor Hazama: The retirement of Francis D. Burton, Captain, effective December 31, 1994 ultimately creates a vacancy for the position of Police Officer. The candidate who was appointed February 6, 1995 contingent upon successful 'completion of an indepth background investigation, medical and psychological examinations has failed the indepth background investigation. We respectfully request that you make one (1) appointment for the position of Police Officer from the following list of three (3) • names which stand highest on the Police Officer Eligibility Roster of qualified candidates: *1. Kurt P. Meyer *2. Wayne A. Quiram 3. Gregory J. VanMoer Police Chief Farrell desires to have this appointment effective as soon as possible subject to the candidate's successful completion and passing of an indepth background investigation, a medical examination and a psychological examination. Respectfully Submitted, t, 4J Richard Mahler Secretary Police Civil Service Commission * Does not desire to be appointed at this time • An Equal Oppartundy1,V ma6Ve Xtian Empbya ROCHESTER January 12, 1995 Fred Wagner, Dir. Labor Relations Personnel Department Room 107, City Hall Rochester, MN 55962 Dear Mr. Wagner; 01 �cNcs7rr..N,. S ��Tl!0.AUGUSt•S' PATRICK J. FARRELL Chef of Pokm 1440emer Poba Depwvwt 101 4th St. S1 PbOtlstm. MN 55904 3761 In a previous correspondence dazed November 28, 1994, we requested the filling of four vacancies in this department. (Copy attached) In that letter, we informed your office of the retirement or resignation of four sworn officers; Darr -all Burton, Ronald Johnston, Harold Algyer, and Clarence Schleusner. Please add to that list of retirees William Gordon, who will be leaving this organization on January 24, 1995. We are requesting the hiring of a new officer to fill this vacancy. This brings the number of replacement hires to five. As you know, we have been authorized by the Federal government to hire three additional officers under the provisions of the Crime Bill of 1994. Therefore, the total number of new hires contained within this request is eight. Sincerely, Patr1cZ Farrell, C FOCHRSTER POLICE DEPARTMENT R. %r! cpp vdy EuP ff ROCHESTER ��7FG.A000S' PATRICK J. FARRELL - Ow of Wice PM haler Pope Depertr wt 101 4th St. S.E. RDcheeler. MN 55904-3761 28 November 1994 Fred Wagner, Dir. Labor Relations Personnel Department Room 107, City Hall Rochester, MN 55902 Dear Mr. Wagner; We have received letters of resignation or retirement from four of o,ar sworn employees. Resigning is Harry Algyer, who will be leaving on January 1, 1995 to assume the position of Chief of Police for the City of Fairbault. Retiring are; Francis Darrell Burton, effective 12/31/94;• Clarence Schleusner, effective 1/2/95; and Ronald Johnston, effective 1/31/95. We have submitted a Letter of Intent Go apply for federal funds to assist in the employment of three additional police officers through the recently passed Crime Bill. If we are awarded federal funds, we must hire the additional people prior to the first re- uit class of 1995- We expect to receive notification of our eligibility and funding level early in December. Assuming.we will receive federal funds, we would be hiring seven (7) sworn officers early in 1995. We are requesting that your office prepare the appropriate number c' candidates so that we can begin the background examinations as soon as possible. S_ncerely, Patrick J. Farrell, Chief ROCHESTER POLICE DEPARTMENT a. zind 4r"- e! zK#q" i j�, I( •". 57 CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: October 4, 1994 TO: Mayor and Common Council FROM: Stevan E. Kvenvold� C SUBJECT: Police Department Shift and Structure Proposals 1. Police Department Shift Proposal The Police Department currently has two, 12 hour shifts. The shifts run from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. The highest number of care on the street during each one of these shifts is 16, although this number Is probably less due to Illness or vacation. The Police Department Is proposing a third middle shift from 3:00 p.m. to 3:00 a.m: This would reduce the staffing during the beginning and ending shift with Increased staffing during the 3:00 p.m. to 3:00 a.m. shift. The highest number of care on the street during the first and last shift would be 12, while the middle shift could have 22 care on the street. The cost of Initiating this proposal is approximately $90,000, spread over a two year period. The annual additional operating cost will be approximately $U,000. I will be recommending this in the 1995 budget. 2. Police Department Structure The department proposes to create Sergeant positions In order to improve upon first line supervisory capabilities and to provide more promotional opportunities within the department. i Police Department Shift and Structure Proposals October 4, 1994 page two The department has two Captain positions which will be retiring. The Captain positions would be abolished and replaced with two new Patrol Officer positions. Twelve top level Patrol Officers would be promoted to the new position of Sergeant There would not be any additional compensation created as a result of these changes. A position description will be prepared for the Sergeant position, and the Police Civil Service Commission will prepare criteria on how promotions will be made to the Sergeant position. c: G. Neumann P. Farrell F. Wagner D. Olson • • u sq Our personnel in the sworn classifications will be altered in • number as a result of our plan not to fill two captain vacancies by promotion, and creating a new Sergeant classification. The overall number of sworn staff members will not be changed is this process. CURRENT PROPOSED 1 CHIEF 1 2 DEPUTY CHIEF 2 6 CAPTAIN 4 13 LIEUTENANT 13 SERGEANT 12 9 DETECTIVE (SERGEANT) 9 69 OFFICER 59 How we position the sworn staff within the organization. will. be changed. The reduction of Lieutenant assignments in patrol operations will allow the reassignment of two people in that classification to other assignments. In this proposal, those other assignments will be Planning and Staff Inspections. One of the remaining captains in patrol operations would be assigned to a new division incorporating one of the new assignments for lieutenants, and a redistribution of units in the current Services Division. The Services Division would become two separate divisions. '25 July 1994 WHAT ARE THEY DOING TO THE PATROL DIVISION? • The patrol division has been structured around the concept of four platoons for many Years. Whether this was done to create promoted positions, or for some sound operational philosophy remains. unknown. But what is known is that it has produced more problems than it has solved. We all know the reality of the four police departments that exist within our department. Each platoon has operated with a level of autonomy that has produced a confused approach to policing the community. A problem in the community might be dealt with in a far different fashion depending which platoon was working at a particular time. That has given an unclear message to the citizens asking for service and assistance, and similar confusion for the person or persons causing the problem. This arrangement has also resulted in a level of confusion or just concern e minds of patrol staff. A common issue t on dealt with infour different ways, depending goon theplatoonin which the issue arises. This "four department" design has helped neither the community or - the staff who labor within that structure. Rather, it has produced counter -productive barriers to the completion of our obligations to the community and our employees. The proposed redesign of the Patrol Division will not, and never has been suggested as a solution for all issues affecting patrol • operations. But it will, I believe, address the obstructed flow of communications and impaired monitoring capacity that has plagued our agency. Even though the levels of reported Part I crime has been falling in recent years, there is a commonly held belief that the call load for our department is climbing. Whether or not the number of incidents are changing,.or the number of calls requiring more than one officer is rising, there is a sense of less time for problem - solving. Like so many other agencies, we have historically staffed field operations on a flat line over time, even though we all know that call load follows a bell shaped line. This response leaves excessive staff levels in times of low demand, and far too few in times of higher demand. To address these two concerns of management design and staffing strategy, we began an exploration of the Patrol Division with a major redesign in mind. The matter was brought forward at a Labor - Management meeting with a possible change to the staffing strategy. To attempt to broaden the input into this undertaking, the labor • group said they would do some polling of the affected people. • • • • The Bevenolent has sent representatives to all roll calls soliciting input into the design of how we may best achieve our desired end of increasing patrol strength during time of greatest need. The consensus drawn from their dialog was a "permanent" middle or power shift overlapping a day -night ,rotation the same as that existing today. Further, it was suggested that instead of being called Lead Officer, that proposed new position be titled Sergeant. It was clear that the patrol staff did not want the new Sergeants to be locked in an office doing paper work - they should be out on the street. These sound suggestions have been incorporated into the design currently being worked on. That design calls for: Patrol officers and Sergeants working 12 hour days, four on and four off. Two thirds would rotate as they -do today, days to nights to days, etc. One third of the patrol staff would be on "permanent" (one year) assignment to the middle shift. The Sergeants would be leaders of working field teams and would be assigned to a geographic area of responsibility similar to the assignment of the Patrol Officers. Further considerations are: The Sergeants position will be filled by competitive examination. The Sergeant will be responsible for the coordination of field planning, supervising his or her patrol officer staff, coach that staff, conduct performance evaluations, and correct erratic performance or behavior. The Sergeants would be compensated at the rate of pay and step advances received by our present Detectives. The Lieutenant, who will now be performing a more managerial responsibility, will handle as much of the paper work associated with staff accounting as is possible. The Division will be under the command of a single Captain. The Lieutenants will be working more closely with the single Captain as a management work team, and therefore will probably rotate differently than the field staff. The Lieutenant will be responsible to the Captain for maintaining adequate field supervision levels. �a,z we will further propose that: Present Detectives may opt to be included in the new classification of Sergeant at any time, making lateral • transfer possible for them and the organization. Once they join the Sergeant pool, they cannot return to the exclusive class of Detective. To be eligible for promotion to Lieutenant, a person must be or have been a Sergeant (for supervisory experience). In time, the position of Detective will be eliminated by attrition. The Investigative Division will ultimately be staffed by a Captain, two Lieutenants, and an as yet undetermined number of Sergeants, and an undetermined number of Patrol Officers. The remaining four Captains will be assigned to one of the following divisions: Patrol, Investigations, Technical Services, and Auxiliary Services. The Patrol Division will have six Lieutenants instead of the current eight. The two remaining Lieutenants will be assigned to new units, Planning, and Staff Inspections/Complaint Investigations. 0 In the future, the Lieutenants position in Communications will be "civilianized" and a new Lieutenant's position as Public Information Officer created. Some things are already under way to make these changes a reality. The fleet size is being adjusted, using some cars we would normally have cycled out. Next year, the whole fleet replacement cycle will be modified. Extra sirens, light bars, radios and other gear is being ordered. But such is left to be done before these plans can be implemented. Position descriptions have to be prepared for the new position of Sergeant, as well as changes to the current description for Lieutenant and Captain. But first, the plan and its parts must be presented to and approved by the City Administrator and the Common Council. The Civil Service Commission will have to review the position descriptions, approve them, and approve a test plan for promotions. We believe all this can be done before the first of the year. Certainly not all aspects will have been identified and accounted for by then, but in a change of this significance, we must be prepared to make adjustments on the fly. • (PS This won't "fix" everything, but it will certainly go a long way toward that direction, and put us in a better position to carry out our individual and organisational responsibilities. my thanks to everyone who was willing to offer their thoughts and ideas in moving us to this position. I hope you will continue your involvement as we work toward finishing the effort. 4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/19/95 SECTION: ORGANIZATIONAL ORIGINATING DEPT: MAYOR C-jl DESCRIPTION: APPOINTMENT - POLICE OFFICER - POLICE DEPARTMENT PREPARED S. NORRIS THE RETIREMENT OF WILLIAM J. GORDON, LIEUTENANT, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 24, 1995 ULTIMATELY CREATES A VACANCY FOR THE POSITION OF POLICE OFFICER. (SEE ATTACHED) POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION APPROVED SECTION 9.00 OF THE ROCHESTER HOME RULE CHARTER STATES THAT THE MAYOR APPOINTS ALL MEMBERS OF THE ROCHESTER POLICE DEPARTMENT. PURSUANT TO THAT AUTHORITY, THE MAYOR HAS APPOINTED LUCIAN R. KROHLING TO THE POSITION OF POLICE OFFICER IN THE ROCHESTER POLICE DEPARTMENT CONTINGENT UPON SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF AN INDEPTH BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION, MEDICAL EXAMINATION AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION. THIS INFORMATION IS GIVEN TO THE COUNCIL SO THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE AWARE OF THE APPOINTMENT. ACTION: Motion by: Second I h1p idw ROCHE TER iLl- k%tERIC.i CM POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION JOY FOGARTY RICHARD MAHLER ARNOLD HILL June 15, 1995 Honorable Mayor Hazama City Hall Rochester, Minnesota 55902 Dear Mayor Hazama: The retirement of William J. Gordon, Lieutenant, effective January 24, 1995 ultimately creates a vacancy for the position of Police Officer. The candidate who was appointed March 6, 1995 contingent upon successful completion of an indepth background investigation, medical and psychological examinations has failed the indepth background investigation. We respectfully request that you make one (1) appointment for the position of Police Officer from the following list of three (3) names which stand highest on the Police Officer Eligibility Roster • of qualified candidates: *1. Kurt P. Meyer *2. Wayne A.. Quiram 3. Lucian R. Krohling Police Chief Farrell desires to have this appointment effective as soon as possible subject to the candidate's successful completion and passing of an indepth background investigation, a medical examination and a psychological examination. Respectfully Submitted, 7 IqJL, Richard Mahler Secretary Police Civil Service Commission * Does not desire to be appointed at this time. • %& Equal Opportun8ylV matire khon Employer •�o`� .........:' .gin. ROC RESTER e�7(O.A000SS•�• ai�L�Ge'7:�1e'r�L PATRICK J. FARRELL Gvef of Police RpdWer Police DeperMwit 101 4th St. S.E. Rodbrter, LN 55904.3761 January 12, 1995 Fred Wagner, Dir. Labor Relations Personnel Department Room 107, City Hall Rochester, MN 55902 Dear Mr. Wagner; In a previous correspondence dazed November 28, 1994, we requested the filling of four vacancies in this department. (Copy attached) In that letter, we informed your office of the retirement or resignation of four sworn officers; Darrell Burton, Ronald Johnston, Harold Algyer, and Clarence Schleusner. • Please add to that list of retirees William Gordon, who will be leaving this organization on January 24, 1905. We are requesting the hiring of a new officer to fill this vacancy. This brings the number of replacement hires to five. As you know, we have been authorized by the Federal government to hire three additional officers under the provisions of the Crime Bill of 1994. l • Therefore, the total number of new hires contained within this request is eight. Sincerely, Patrickew Farrell, Chief POCHUTER POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Efrf O►Wd++s Tejlgn ROCHESTER c/��nNL1b� tpO�r[n.,iuccs:•`•n PATRICK J. FARRELL Chet of Police Rochester Pdice Deper&wwt 101 4th SI. S.E. Roahecter, HN 55904.3761 2B November 1994 Fred Wagner, Dir. Labor Relations Personnel Department Room 107, City Hall Rochester, MN 55902 Dear Mr. Wagner; We have received letters of resignation or retirement from four of our sworn employees. Resigning is Harry Algyer, who will be leaving on January 1, 1995 to assume the position of Chief of Police for the City of Fairbault. Retiring are; Francis Darrell Burton, effective 12/31/94;� Clarence Schleusner, effe--tive 1/2/95; and Ronald Johnston, effective 1/31/95. We have submitted a Letter of Intent to apply for federal funds to assist in the employment of three additional police officers through the recently passed Crime Bill. If we are awarded federal fund, we must hire the additional people Prior to the first re-uit class of 1995. We expect to receive notification of our e'_igibility and funding level early in December. Assuming we will receive federal funds, we would be hiring seven (7) sworn officers early in 1995. We are requesting that your office prepare the appropriate number of candidates so that we can begin the background examinations as soon as possible. Sincerely, Patrick J. Farrell, Chief ROCHESTER POLICE DEPARTMENT • E a. E,ed o""fewh ti.rap", MEETING 0 � DATE: 6/19/95 t AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. ORGANIZATIONAL MAYOR C EM DESCRIPTION: APPOINTMENT - POLICE OFFICER - POLICE DEPARTMENT PREPARED BY: S. NORRIS AS A RESULT OF THE REORGANIZATION OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, TWO (2) CAPTAIN POSITIONS WILL BE ELIMINATED AND REPLACED WITH POLICE OFFICER POSITIONS. THIS WILL ENABLE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SHIFT AND STRUCTURE PROPOSALS. (SEE ATTACHED) THE RETIREMENT OF RONALD E. JOHNSTON, CAPTAIN, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 31, 1995 ULTIMATELY CREATES A VACANCY FOR THE POSITION OF POLICE OFFICER. (SEE ATTACHED) POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION APPROVED COUNCIL ACTION REQLIESTED: SECTION 9.00 OF THE ROCHESTER HOME RULE CHARTER STATES THAT THE MAYOR APPOINTS ALL MEMBERS OF THE ROCHESTER POLICE DEPARTMENT. PURSUANT TO THAT AUTHORITY, THE MAYOR HAS APPOINTED TODD A. RUBIN TO THE POSITION OF POLICE OFFICER IN THE ROCHESTER POLICE DEPARTMENT CONTINGENT UPON SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF AN INDEPTH BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION, MEDICAL EXAMINATION AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION. THIS INFORMATION IS GIVEN TO THE COUNCIL SO THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE AWARE OF THE APPOINTMENT. OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: 10 era ROCHESTER ..+u-.+.Mwcr cm' POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION JOY FOGARTY RICHARD MAHLER ARNOLD HILL June 15, 1995 Honorable Mayor Hazama City Hall Rochester, Minnesota 55902 Dear Mayor Hazama: The retirement of Ronald E. Johnston, Captain, effective January 31, 1995 ultimately creates a vacancy for the position of Police Officer. We respectfully request that you make one (1) appointment for the position of Police Officer from the following list of three (3) names which stand highest on the Police Officer Eligibility Roster of qualified candidates: *1. Kurt P. Meyer *2. Wayne A. Quiram 3. Todd A. Rubin Police Chief Farrell desires to have this appointment effective as soon as possible subject to the candidate's successful completion and passing of an indepth background investigation, a medical examination and a psychological examination. Respectfully Submitted, Richard Mahler Secretary Police Civil Service Commission * Does not desire to be appointed at this time • • • An Equal Opportunityl�Umative Adion Emp%yee C CHT'1.i•... �J E 'TER ROCH S _ ti�i�:LGCKN.(Ii O�rF L.AUGlS�'�� PATRICK J. FARRELL Chef of Police Rochester Police Department 101 4th St. S.E. Rochester. MN 559043761 26 November 1994 Fred Wagner, Dir. Labor Relations Personnel Department Room 107, City Hall Rochester, MN 55902 Dear Mr. Wagner; We have received letters of resignation or retirement from four of our sworn employees. Resigning is Harry Algyer, who will be leaving on January 1, 1995 to assume the position of Chief of Police for the City of Fairbault. Retiring are; Francis Darrell Burton, effective 12/31/94;• Clarence Schleusner, effective 1/2/95; and Ronald Johnston, effective 1/31/95. We have submitted a Letter of Intent to apply for federal funds to assist in the employment of three additional police officers through the recently passed Crime Bill. If we are awarded federal funds, we must hire the additional people Prior to the firs the first re,:_uit class of 1995. We expect to receive notification of our eligibility and funding level early in December. Assuming we will receive federal funds, we would be hiring seven (7) sworn officers early in 1995. We are requesting that your office prepare the appropriate number c' candidates so that we can begin the background examinations as soon as possible. Sincerely, Patrick J. Farrell, Chief ROCHESTER POLICE DEPARTMEN^ AN 74-d C�Iiemwg) E,#"ff c1.e s - ROCHES TER ��Ls2COOGl 4"ren.Av cLsz' PATRICK J. FARRELL Chief of Ponce Rocrester Pohhce Department 101 4th St. S.E. Rochester, wN 55904 3761 January 12, 1995 Fred Wagner, Dir. Labor Relations Personnel Department Room 107, City Hall Rochester, MN 55902 Dear Mr. Wagner; Ir, a previous correspondence dazed November 28, 1994, we requested the filling of four vacancies in this department. (Copy attached) 'n that letter, we informed your office of the retirement or resignation of four sworn officers; Darrell Burton, Ronald Johnston, Harold Algyer, and Clarence Schleusner. Please add to that list of retirees William Gordon, who will be leaving this organization on January 24, 1995. We are requesting qwr the hiring of a new officer to fill this vacancy. This brings the number of replacement hires to five. As you know, we have been authorized by the Federal government to hire three additional officers under the provisions of the Crime Bill of 1994. Therefore, the total number of new hires contained within this request is eight. sincerely, PatricZ Farrell, C�— POCHRSTER POLICE DEPARTMENT 1e Fowl Oppvd t Emp4 + REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 1 3 DATE: June 19, 1995 CONSENT CALENDAR PLANNING DESCRIPTION: Request to Set a Public Hearing Date for Vacation Petition #95-7 I PREPA by the City of Rochester to Vacate a Portion of 1st Street NW Jane June 15, 1995 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: On June 14, 1995, the City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this petition to vacate a portion of the 1st Street NW right-of-way located in the West Zumbro Addition, west of 19th Avenue NW. This proposal is a part of the West Zumbro Addition buyout in conjunction with the flood control project. The City will eventually redevelop this area with a new street configuration. The Planning Commission found that there is no current need for the street right-of-way. The Planning Commission recommends approval of this request, subject to the condition that a utility easement be retained. Motion by Sulk to recommend approval of Vacation Petition #95-7 subject to the above condition; second by Schultze. The motion carried 7-0. Planning Department Recommendation: See attached staff report dated June 7, 1995. Council Action Needed: 1. If the Council wishes to proceed as petitioned, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution setting a hearing date of July 17, 1995, on this matter in accord with the provisions of the City Charter. 2. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution vacating the right-of-way as petitioned. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated June 7, 1995 Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk: List and labels attached 3. City Attorney: Copy of legal description is attached 4. Planning Department File 5. Applicant: This item will be considered by the Council sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, June 19, 1995, in the Council Chambers at City Hall. ACTION: Mown by, s•mm by:_ 1 J w 0 VACATED L^ II{ z I 2 c PREPARED 87 McGHIE a 3E I r7��• pNSULTING E"IGMEZF PL,1NNE..RS LNp SURVEYORS DAf'4FCTFM MINNESC' 7 s- poo.rliu.q A.u.,n iuq ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 5071285-8232 PLANNING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELLISEPTIC 507/285-8345 TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jane A. Kansier, Planne'�4 DATE: June 7, 1995 RE: Vacation Petition #95-7 to Vacate 1st Street NW, West of 19th Avenue NW Planninv Department Review. • Petitioners: Initiated by the Common Council by motion on May 15, 1995. Location of Property: This portion of 1st Street NW is located in the West Zumbro Addition, west of 19th Avenue NW to the vacant property. It is about one block in length and is adjacent to Lots 6-16, Block 1, and Lots 1-8, Block 6, of the West Zumbro Addition. Reason For Request: The street configuration will change when the property is replatted. Referral Comments: Comments from the RPU Water Division, Peoples Natural Gas, and the RPU Power Divsion are attached. Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (3 Letters) 2. Location Map 3. Copy of RCA Dated May 15, 1995 Staff Recommendation: This proposal is a part of the West Zumbro Addition buyout in conjunction with the flood control project The City has purchased the sbdeen houses located on this block of 1st Street NW, with plans to demolish the houses and fill the area so lt is no longer subject to flooding. The property will then be reptatted for new development The aligmrad of the existing street will probably charge as result of the new plat, so the City is requesUng the vacedw of the existing dghW-way.. The RPU Water divlsioo bps aated 69 a utility easement is needed for the pudic water main located • within the right-o(-"y. Paoples HaWM Gas has also noted that they need a utility easement for the rlplau gas i to this bcation. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY i AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 ly�n Vacation Petition #95-7 June 7, 1995 The Planning staff finds that there Is no current need for the existing street right-of-way. The inplace utilities can be protected with utility easements. The Planning staff recommends approval of this request . subject to the condition that a utility easement be granted for the existing utilities. Planning Commission Action Required: The Planning Commission must make a motion to recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial of this request. This recommendation will then be forwarded to the Council. The Council will hold a public hearing on this item at a later date. Reviewed b Date 0 77 4000 E. River Rd., N.E. Rochester, MN 55906-2813 507/280-1540 FAX: 507/280-1542 May 25, 1995 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Council Initiated Petition to Vacate 95-7 to vacate First Street NW west of 19 Avenue NW adjoining Lots 6 through 16, Block 1, and Lots 1 through 8, Block 6, West Zumbro Addition. This proposal is part of the West Zumbro buyout in conjunction with the flood control project Dear Ms. Decklever: • Our review of the referenced vacation petition is complete and our comments follow: 1. A portion of the area being petitioned for vacation will become a buildable lot and the public water main that exists will be removed. 2. If the remaining right-of-way is vacated a utility easement is needed for the public water main within the proposed street 3. The property may be subject to the current water availability fee. If there are questions, please contact us. Very truly yours, Ze5 461414 Harold E. Wobschall Senior EngineeringTec]tmcian Water Division __ 0 d i� p war z 6 PEOPLES NATURAL GAS If May 30, 1995 Rose Decklever Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, Mn. 55904 Re: Vacation petition # 95-7 In review of this matter, Peoples Natural Gas has determined there is two gas main parallelling 1st St NW on the south side of this property as shown on attached map.We will need to keep and maintain an easement for our gas mains. If you have any Questions regarding this matter please feel free to call me at 288-6721 ext.129. Sincerely, Mark Ernst Region Operations Admin Specialist 0 0 I I s iT NW Ra*6 a� "Sam I . ! Ya e�� I I I I I I I � I I I I I A 'ST T NW LLLI A ` A I au waaae �. m >T 5T ST SW - I "W , - In s I i . A nssi I DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FOR � SWIM TER ROCNESa YINNESOTA MURALES 480 CASCADE. TWO SW. V4 OF SECTION 34 O WOE YOl A aT f I I � atamm I mRI I aaf sara l 01p I I � I. aN' '• zoa �� 1f I i rA I I r ®a .e tVw I 1 I I I I I I I tt p a l s ROCHESTER PUBLIC UTILITIES 507/280-1581 May 26, 1995 TO: Rose Decklever, Planning Division Consolidated Planning Dept. FROM: Roger Kanestadt, Supv. of Distribution Design Rochester Public Utilities 4000 E, River Rd.. N.E. Rochester, MN 55906-2813 507/280-1540 FAX: 507/280-1542 MAY 3 0 V% SUBJECT: Council Initiated Petion to Vacate #95-7 to vacate First Street NW west of 19th Avenue NW adjoining Lots 6 through 16, Bock 1 and Lots 1 through 8, Block 6, West Zumbro Addition. This proposal is part of the West Zumbro buyout in conjunction with the flood control project. RPU's Power Division has no objection to this subject matter. Sincerely, AvaCJ3 Roger Kanestadt ks AGENDA FIVE - to • n:r As a part of the West Zumbro buyout in conjunction with the flood control project, the City will replat Lots 9 through 16, Bloch 1, Lots 12 through 14,'Block 2, Lots 1 through 3, Block S, and Lots 1 through 8, Tlock 6, in West Zumbro Addition. The strew configuration will be changed due to the replatting. Therefore, staff requests the vacation of Fast Stint NW west of 19th j Avenue NW contingent on the City dedicating right -of --way in the West Zumbro Fstares Plat. Utility easements will be created for costing utilities by the replae Staff is recommending Council initiate the vacation of Fast Street NW west of 19th Street NW. Approval to initiate the vacation of Fast Street NW west of 19th Avenue NW adjoining Lots 6 through 16, Block 1 and Lots 1 thtnugh 8, Block 6, West Zumbro Addition. OUNCGL ACTION: M.••w-r 88cm• •.: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING bl�6 -1 DATE: June 19. 1995 r_ L_ AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT CALENDAR PLANNING C 14 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Request to Set a Public Hearing Date for Vacation Petition #95-8 PREPARED BY: by Michael Younge to Vacate a Portion of Crates Drive SW Jane [{ansier Planner June 15, 1995 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: On June 14, 1995, the City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this petition to vacate a portion of Gates Drive SW, located west of 23rd Avenue SW. The area to be vacated includes approximately 1,000 linear feet of right-of- way. The petitioner plans to resubdivide this area in the future with a new road alignment. The Planning Commission found that there would not be a need for this right-of-way when the property is redeveloped. The Planning Commission recommends approval of this request, subject to the following conditions: 1. Access easements across the Younge property to the Holkestad and Vagt property must be prepared prior to approval of this request. These documents should be recorded with the resolution vacating the right-of-way. 2. Utility easements must be granted for the existing utilities located in the right-of-way. In order to avoid having to vacate the utility easements in the future, the petitioner may grant private easements to each of the utility companies. In this case, these documents should be recorded with the resolution vacating the right-of-way. 3. The petitioner must enter into the "Assessment/General Development Agreement' with the City before the resolution is recorded. The agreement must also include language about the maintenance of the vacated right-of-way until the new public road is built. Unless the City agrees to maintain this section of road, the petitioner will be responsible for all maintenance. 4. The resolution vacating this right-of-way should not be recorded until the petitioner has platted the right- of-way for the new street alignment. Motion by Beed to recommend approval of Vacation Petition #95-8 subject to the above conditions; second by Suk. The motion carried 7-0. Planning Department Recommendation: See attached staff report dated June 8, 1995. Council Action Needed: 1. If the Council wishes to proceed as petitioned, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution setting a hearing date of July 17, 1995, on this matter in accord with the provisions of the City Charter. 2. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution vacating the right-of-way as petitioned. COUNCIL ACTION: rwmn by: se:ond by: to: •l�MlsTl7. G} c 'Os�T[O.S000ST'S ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING HOUSING/HRA 5071285-8224 BUILDING CODE 5071285-8213 WELLISEPTIC 507/285-8345 TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jane A. Kansier, Planned J� DATE: June 8, 1995 7�J� RE: Vacation Petition #95-8 to Vacate the Portion of Gates Drive SW Located West of 23rd Avenue SW Planning Department Review: . Petitioners: Michael J. and Kay Cooper Younge 2909 Gates Drive SW Rochester, MN 55902 Location of Property: This part of Gates Drive SW is located about 200 feet west of 23rd Avenue SW to the Younge residence at 2909 Gates Drive SW. It is adjacent to Lots 24-28, 31-34, and 37, Hillcrest Addition, and an adjoining metes and bounds tract of land. Area: The area to be vacated includes approximately 1,000 linear feet of road. The tight -of -way is 66' wide, with the exception of a 200' strip of land and the west end of the road. This strip is 33' wide. Reason For Request: The petitioner is planning to resubdivide this area into larger lots. The proposed subdivision has a different road configuration than the existing right-of-way. Referral Comments: Comments from the Rochester Public Works Department and the RPL1 Water Division are attached. Report Attachments: 1. Referral Commerft (2 Letters) 2. Copy of Petition 3. Location Uap 4. Proposed Concept General Development Plan • 5. Proposed'Assessment/General Development Agreemerd' AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 t7 / Vacation Petition #9" f� June 8, 1995 Analysis: • The petitioner owns approximately 29 acres of land adjacent to Gates Drive SW. He is proposing to vacate this portion of Gates Drive in order to develop this land for single family residences. His proposal would provide access to this property from Fox Chase Road SW to the south. A concept general development for this area is attached to this report. This plan has not been submitted for any formal review and approvals at this time. There are presently five dwellings which take access from this portion of Gates Drive SW, three of which are owned by the petitioner. One of the parcels the petitioner does not own is the Hoikestad property, located north of Gates Drive and just west of 23rd Avenue SW. This lot is a landlocked parcel, so it is not directly adjacent to Gates Drive; access to Gates Drive is via a 33' wide easement across the Youngs property. The second parcel is the Vagt property, located at the northwest end of Gates Drive. There is a 33' wide strip of right-of-way adjacent to this parcel. If the street is vacated, this right-of-way would revert to the Vagt property. In addition, an access easement would be required for access to this parcel. The petitioner is also in the process of selling one of the dwellings he currently owns. The deed for this house must also include an easement for access until the proposed road is constructed. There are also several existing utility lines located within this right-of-way. The petitioner proposes to relocate these utilities at the time of development. There is also a 12" water main located within the existing right-of-way and north of the right-of-way to the development to the north. As part of the future development, this water main will have to be relocated. At that time the developer must vacate the existing utility easement. Staff Recommendation: . If the property is redeveloped as proposed on the general development plan, there will be no need for this right-of-way. To clarify his intention to develop this site, the petitioner has negotiated an 'Assessment/General Development Agreement' with the City. This agreement outlines the procedure and timelines for extending services to this site, and the payment of assessments for these services. If the Planning Commission finds that the right-of-way should be vacated, it should be subject to the following conditions: Access easements across the Youngs property to the Holkestad and Vagt property must be prepared prior to approval of this request. These documents should be recorded with the resolution vacating the right-of-way. 2. Utility easements must be granted for the existing utilities located in the right-of-way. In order to avoid having to vacate the utility easements in the future, the petitioner may grant private easements to each of the utility companies. In this case, these documents should be recorded with the resolution vacating the right-of-way. 3. The petitioner must enter into the "Assessment/General Development Agreement" with the City before the resolution is recorded. The agreement must also include language about the maintenance of the vacaftd right-of-way until the new public road is built. Unless the City agrees to maintain this section of road, the petitioner will be responsible for all maintenance. The Planning staff would also suggest that the petitioner file an application for a general development plan in order to expedite the official review and approval of his proposed general development plan. Page 3 vacation Petition #95-8 June 8, 1995 vr Plannina Commission Action Required: • The Planning Commission must make a motion to recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial of this request. This recommendation will then be forwarded to the Council. The Council will hold a public hearing on this Item at a later date. Reviewed by: Date 0 ROCHESTER June 6, 1995 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-4744 FROM: Department of Public Works �f 1Ii 0. �lal�'. •,• • DEPARTMENT OF PUBUC WORKS 1602 4th Street S.E. Rochester, MN 55904-4718 (507) 281-6008 FAX *(507) 281-6216 RE: VACATION PETITION #95-8 BY MICHAEL YOUNGE TO VACATE A PORTION OF GATES DRIVE LOCATED ALONG LOTS 24,25,26,31,32,33.34 AND 37, HILLCREST ADDITION The Department of Public Works comments are as follows: • 1. Create a cul-de-sac turn -a -round at the west end of the remaining public right-of-way. 2. Deeds should be checked to assure that this ROW can be vacated w/o the additional Q.C.D. 3. 12" watermain is located along North -South portion of ROW @ westerly end. Easement and access would have to be provided. 4. Turn around should be constructed on this narrow street at the new dead end. 5. Preliminary assessment and general development between the City of Rochester. Department of Public Works and Michael Younge has been previously worked on. Completion of the agreement which should include the previously mentioned concerns. The execution of the agreement should be a condition of the vacation of Gates Drive S.W. 0 ?6 Epd om-t-ay E■Pby- REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING R DATE. June 19, 95 4 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT CALENDAR PLANNING C -t S ITEM DESCRIPTION: Request to Set Public Hearing Date for Vacation Petition #95-9 by Steven J. PREPARED BY: DeMarco to Vacate a 5' Wide Utility Easement Located at 2314 16tb Jane Kansi Avenue NW Planner June 15, 1995 Planning Department Review: Petitioner: Steven J. DeMarco 231416th Avenue NW Rochester, MN 55901 Location of Property: 2314 16th Avenue NW This property is legally described as Lot 6, Block 3, Efton Hills Second Subdivision. Requested Action: Vacation of the 5' wide utility easement located along the northeasterly lot line of the property described above. Reason for Request: The garage on the property encroaches into the easement. Referral Agency Comments: No comments have been received from any of the referral agencies at this time. We will forward any comments to the Council at the time of the public hearing. Planning Department Recommendation: The Planning staff recommends that this Rem be scheduled for a public hearing on July 17, 1995. If the utility companies do not object to this request, the Planning staff would recommend approval of this request. Council Action Needed: 1. If the Council wishes to proceed as petitioned, R should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution setting a public hearing date of July 17, 1995, on this matter in accord with the provisions of the City Charter. 2. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, R should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution vacating the utility easement. Attachments: ate` 1. Location Map i COUNCIL ACTION: Mown by: Second by: to: Lot 6, 81ack 3, Elton Hills Second Subdivision, City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota. P�ENil ' Steven DeXarco2314 Avenue NW v0% Rochester, MR 55901 5 MOTE. Olmenslons relating house to lot are referenced rm to chard of curve shoas "Are 61.5.e 's• Based upon aonuments found there fe an encroachment of the garage into the utility easement. A detervinatign of the exact amount of encroachment Would require a boundary surrey This document does not constitute such a deterWination. USIU-tY gets 1-Story-Fraae 6 �l �{ Q `' s 10 C1E Y�D '0 A 'a LO IN i D Garage r 111018by CW&V Thal i clttlardm as --Wert Asnldrd V& dN3wA Pu4Oe ank. Abou M 0 NUNN* b pro tsr>MIWO nonr V S' Utili Easement 47.0 _ r_-.__�0 _r•.er �. 3�•J5 6 asaQotdis�ltsl -,c�:. - a - a6ontsaaflt fwld �5-�95 s�+`=.=s—:.. _ _ �--• ems== a T ILAND OONSLUANM OF� smaaaw600M 1416 FM *M We ILL 18878 �0 gem ;ity of Rochester, Minnesota � sir DATE: 05/25/95 • TO: Mayor and Common Council City Hall City of Rochester, Minnesota 55901 PETITION TO VACATE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OR UTILITY EASEMENT We, the undersigned, are the owners of the following described property located within the City of Rochester, Minnesota, and we constitute 50% or more of the owners of the property on the line of the public property herein described to be vacated: (Describe here or attach a separate list showing the legal descrip- tion and full ownership of each adjoining parcel.) OWNERS NAME (If in joint tenancy, both or all LEGAL DESCRIPTION parties must sign) Steven J. DeMarco Lot Six (6), Block Three (3) Elton Hills Second Subdivision, City of Rochester, Olmsted Countv, Minnesota. • We hereby petition the Common Council of the City of Rochester, Minnesota, to vacate the following described public property: Five foot (5') Utility Easement which runs along the Northeasterly (NEly) border of the subject property. The facts and reasons for such vacation are as follows: 7 There is a two (2) car garage built several years ago, that encroaches upon this easement as can be shown on the plat drawing recently prepared by Land Consultants, copy attached. 2. - _= - Sbeet 1 of 2 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING �3 DATE: June 19, 1995 ON ION: CONSENT CALENDAR PLANNING I C Request to Set Public Hearing Date for Vacation Petition #95-10 by Dakota of Rochester to Vacate a 5' Wide Utility Easement Located on Lat 1, Block June 15, 1995 Plannina Department Review: Petitioner: Dakota of Rochester 119 6th Street SW Suite B Rochester, MN 55902 Jane Location of Property: Lot 1, Block 3, Kings Run Fourth Subdivision This property is located on the east side of Kings Run Drive NW, south of 55th Street NW. Requested Action: Vacate the 5' wide utility easement located along the south property boundary of the properly described above. Reason for Request: The developer is proposing to place a building on the lot which will encroach into this easement. The easement itself is not large enough for utilities and there is no easement on the adjacent lot. Referral Agency Comments: No comments have been received from any of the referral agencies at this time. We will forward any comments to the Council at the time of the public hearing. Plannina Department Recommendation: The Planning staff recommends that this item be scheduled for a public hearing on July 17, 1995. If the utility companies do not object to this request, the Planning staff would recommend approval of this request. Council Action Needed: 1. If the Council wishes to proceed as petitioned, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution setting a public hearing date of July 17, 1996, on this matter in accord with the provisions of the City Charter. 2. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution vacating the utility easement. AC710N: I 1 -1 n by: second i5 oP� 0 �ry � 118.15 N 8758*59' W 0 110.00 N 8758'S8 W z c45,THU R i140.00 3 a-o� 44.2 , I� ir N E N. W. 3.56 11D.00 118.19 \ — —(� N 89'58'58" W 20' um a 2 g p aa+rr Corr ��s _ N F J u' V^C �• '� 123.98 z N 89'58'58" W p N R 2 WQU. s'ti�� m J3a p0 53 9� W 134.48 �o.00 S �539�p'f 189.00 aw58P25 w rH1�D NORTHDst Cory Affas pM °F McGhie etts *=No@ WL S--P� -_ _ wr so .c sc %+.IK a am x-s-a oi a qS City of Rochester, Minnesota DATE: June 12, 1995 • TO: Mayor and Common Council City Hall City of Rochester, Minnesota 55901 PETIIION TO VACATE PUBLIC :RIGHT-OF-WAY OR UTILITY EASEMENT We, the undersigned, are the owners of the following described property located within the City of Rochester, Minnesota, and we constitute 50%or more of the owners of the property on the line of the public property herein described to be vacated: (Describe here or attach a separate list showing the legal descrip- tion and full ownership of each adjoining parcel.) OWNERS NAME (If in joint tenancy, both or all parties must sign) Dakota of Rochester, Inc. LEGAL DESCRIPTION We hereby petition the Co=on Council of the City of Rochester, Minnesota, to vacate the following described public property: 5.00 ft wide utility easement along the southerly boundary of Lot 1, Block 3, Kings un Fourth, except the westerly 10.00 ft thereof which is adjacent to Kings Run Drive NW and xcept the easterly 5.00•ft thereof which is adjacent to the east line of Lot 1, Block 3, K'- Run Fourth. The facts and reasons for such vacation are as follows: 1. The easement is not large enough for utilities (5.00 ft vs. 10.00 ft). 2. The adjacent lot does not have corresponding 5.00 ft. easement. 3. c-- Sheet 1 of 2 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING a 1 / DATE: G/io/os AGENDA SECTION: DESCRIPTION: CONS'E<NT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPT: PUBLIC WORKS CONCRETE DITCH LINING AT WATER RECLAMATION ITEM NO. Cr-1-7 QP�REE�PARED BY: C D'.MACGILL This is a request7 for a resolution advertising for bids to be received until 11:00 AM, July 14, 1995 and considered by the Council on July 17, 1995 for the following projects: $rcject 9116-94 J-4360 "Concrete Ditch Lining at Water Reclamation Plant" Project 6354-95 J-9346 "Construct Low Flow Flume in Bel Air Drainageway on North Line of Elton Hills North Third Subdivision". The project at The Water Reclamation Plant was included in the 1995 Capital Improvement Budget (page 279)in the amount of $40,000. The Engineers Estimates is $55,000. The increase is due to an increase in the scope of work to include additional areas within the site that have exhibited erosion. The Bel Air Flume will be funded through Special Assessments and City funds. The Engineer's Estimate is $42,000. $47,260 was anticipated in the Feasibility Report. The Projects are being let as a single project for scheduling and economy of scale purposes. Council.Action Requested If the Council wishes to proceed a resolution could be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids. NOTE TO CITY CLERK: Advertisements should indicate that a single bid is requested for both projects. IFNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: AGENDA SECTION: DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORIGINATING DEPT: PUBLIC WORKS STORM SEWER RECONSTRUCTION AND CONCRETE DITCH MEETING DATE: ITEM NO. PARED BY: D.MACGILLI This is a request for a resolution advertising for bids to be received until 11:00 AM, July 14, 1995 and considered by the Council on July 17, 1995 for the following projects: Project 7502-95 J-2172 "Reconstruction of Storm Drain at Mayo Run from 13th Avenue S.E. to 19th Avenue S.E." Project 9306-94 J-2216 "Construct Concrete Low Flow Flume. Easement West Campus Village & East Side Homestead Trails from Approximately Village Drive to Mayo Run". Project 9011-95 J-2167 "Construct Concrete Flume through Pinewood School Property from South Park to Pinewood Road". These projects were included in the 1995 Capital Improvement Budget (pages 291, 277 & 278) respectively in the respective amounts of $126,000, $76,500 and $15,000. The Engineers Estimates are $102,949, $49,472.50 and $22,000 respectively. Funding for the Storm Drain project in Mayo Run is from Sales Tax (Flood Control). The flume projects are funded through tax levy. The Projects are being let as a single project for scheduling and economy of scale purposes. Council Action Requested If the Council wishes to proceed a resolution could be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise forbids. NOTE TO CITY CLERK: Advertisements should indicate that a single bid is requested for the three projects. isNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETiNG ID I / AGENDA SECTION: I ORIGINATING DEPT: CONSENT AGEPIDA _ i I PUBLIC WORKS DESCRIPTION: DESIGNATION & DELETIONS OF MUNICIPAL STATE UM 1 C. L4J-'�� ITEM NO. C-1 PARED BY: MACGILLI The Department of Public Works recommends that the following street be revoked as a Municipal State Aid Street subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Transportation. Recommended Designation Mileage 14th St. NE from 11th Ave. 0.33 NE to 0.20 miles east of 14th Ave. NE (S.A.P. 159-502-020,030) Justification Combined route being deleted from MSAS & included on CSAH The Municipal State Aid designation is being revoked to permit the County to draw full needs on this route. At present both the City and County draw partial needs. Council Action Reauested Adopt resolution revoking 14th Street NE as a Municipal State Aid Street. WNCIL ACTION: motion Second by: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING /QZ / y DATE: 6/19195 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. C�ISEhI AGENDA PUBLIC WORKS C ��`� DESCRIPTION: pP� PARED BY: OVERLAY BRIDGE DECK, 14TH ST. NW. BRIDGE NO. D MACGILLIZ aas�a nvF.R CASCADE CREEK This is a request for a resolution advertising for bids to be received until 11:00 AM, July 12, 1995 and considered by the Council on'July 17, 1995 for the following project: Project 6214-4-95A J-2108 "Overlay Bridge Deck on 14th Street N.W. Bridge No. 55524 over Cascade Creek" The project was included in the 1995 Capital Improvement Budget (page 252) in the amount of $58,800. The Engineers Estimate for the work is $51,311. Council Action Requested If the Council wishes to proceed a resolution could be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids. ACTION: Motion by: Second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING IO S / DATE: 6 f 19 / 9 5 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. 03NSENT AGENDA PUBLIC WORKS/TRAFFIC C-ot ITEM DESCRIPTION: LEASE AGREEMENT WITH ROCHESTER CITY LINES PREPARED PYA A. KN This is a request to enter into a lease with Rochester City Lines for operation and maintenance of three 1995 Model Gillig Phantom buses described as follows: Unit No. V.I.N. 211 15GCD2011S1085880 212 15GCD2012S1086150 213 15GCD2014S1086151 The lease will define the responsibilities of the Company and City in regards to maintenance, operation, licensing, insurance and final disposition. The suggested term of the lease is through December 31, 2001. (Typically Rochester buses are kept in service 15 to 20 years depending on condition). The lease will provide for either party to terminate with 30 days notice. The buses are to be used exclusively for public transit service. Three buses owned by Rochester City Lines will be taken off the fleet roster. These buses include one 1971 and two 1975 models. The City currently pays a use allowance plus maintenance for these vehicles. Council Action Requested Adopt the prepared resolution approving and authorizing execution of a lease agreement with Rochester City Lines for three 1995 Model Gillig buses Units Numbers 211, 212 and 213. .COUNCIL ACTION: notion by: Seoond by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION , MEETING lo- DATE: 6/ 19/95 4 4 I AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. LETTERS; PETITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS CITY ADMINISTRATOR D EM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: ETTERS, PETITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS S. KVENVOLD This agenda section is primarily for the purpose of allowing citizens to address the City Council on a topic of their choice. The following guidelines apply: ow This agenda section is limited to 30 minutes and each speaker is limited to 4 minutes. ow Any speakers not having the opportunity to be heard will be first to present at the next Council meeting. c� A citizen may only use this forum to address the Council on a maximum of one time per month. �r Matters currently under negotiation, litigation or related to personnel will not be discussed in this forum. a� Questions posed by a speaker will generally be responded to in writing. OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/ 19/95 i 4 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. LETTERS AND PETITIONS CITY ADMINISTRATOR r)- I EM DESCRIPTION: SANDY COOKMAN REQUESTS TO BE HEARD RE: PREPARED BY: COMMUNITY YOUTH OUTREACH S. KVENVOLD Sandy Cookman has requested to be heard regarding Community Youth Outreach to discuss the status of their work with high risk youths. a U � OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 1 1 1 ;, DATE: 6/19/95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CITY ADMINISTRATOR �. _1 M DESCRIPTION: CORPS PROJECT - AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO LOCAL PREPARED BY: COOPERATION AGREEMENT G. NEUMANN The Corps of Engineers has prepared an Amendment No. 3 to the Local Cooperation Agreement (LCA) which spells out the responsibilities of the federal government and the City for the Corps project. Amendment No. 3 revises the language of the agreement to provide for a separate accounting of the costs for the Stage 3B West Zumbro Addition acquisition and demolition project. The revisions allow the Corps to determine the final costs of Stage 3B, the West Zumbro Addition property acquisition and demolition project, separately from the remainder of the project. This would allow the Corps to reimburse the City for the federal share of that project in 1995, if there are no contractor claims to be resolved. If the amendment is not approved, the final accounting for Stage 3B would be included with the other portions of the project and would not be completed for several years. This is a significant change since the City is paying the largest share of the Stage 3B costs up front since the majority of the cost is for land acquisition while the Corps is contracting only for demolition. A previous Amendment No. 2 partially addressed this matter, but additional revisions are necessary. The only other change of substance is included in Section E-2. The Corps Central Office has included language which is not currently in the LCA which states that the Local Sponsor's contribution for recreation purposes can include land easements and rights of way. According to the Corps District Office, this is not intended to address any lands needed for the overall project and would only affect lands outside the project limits. There were a few such pieces of land for which it appears that the City could claim some additional credit. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: CC Approval of Amendment No. 3 to the LCA. ACTION: Motion by: second AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 TO THE LOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT • BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY AND THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FLOOD CONTROL SOUTH FORK ZUMBRO RIVER PROJECT AT ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA THIS AMENDMENT is entered into this day of .1995 by and between the DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY (hereinafter the "Government"), represented by the U.S. Army Engineer for the St. Paul District (hereinafter the "District Engineer"), and the City of Rochester, Minnesota (hereinafter the "Local Sponsor"), represented by its Mayor. WTTNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, on August 5, 1987, the Department of the Army and the City of Rochester, Minnesota entered into a Local Cooperation Agreement for the Construction of the South Fork Zumbro River Flood Control Project at Rochester, Minnesota, (hereinafter the "Agreement"); and WHEREAS, on October 14, 1994, the Department of the Army and the City of Rochester, Minnesota entered into Amendment Number 1 to the Agreement (hereinafter "Amendment 1"); and WHEREAS, on January 30, 1995, the Department of the Army and the City of Rochester, Minnesota entered into Amendment Number 2 to the Agreement (hereinafter "Amendment 2"); and WHEREAS, it is anticipated that the Local Sponsor's total contribution for non- structural features will exceed the Local Sponsor's share of the non-structural project costs by approximately $1,300,000, and the final project accounting may be delayed for several years because of pending contract claims pertaining to the structural features; and WHEREAS, the District Engineer and the Local Sponsor wish to clarify the language of the Agreement pertaining to the final accounting; and WHEREAS, the Government and the Local Sponsor have the legal authority and capability to perform as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, the Government and the Local Sponsor agree to amend the Agreement as follows: 1. Unless otherwise specified, all paragraph and Article references are to paragraphs and Articles in the Agreement as amended by Amendments Number 1 and 2. 0 . 2. ARTICLE I - DEFINITIONS a. Add "and recreation features" to the end of paragraph A. b. Delete "and will provide additional recreation resources for the area" in lines 5 and 6 of paragraph B. C. Replace ", and hiking and biking trails" with ", and fish and wildlife mitigation features" in lines 9 and 10 of paragraph B. d. Insert the following new paragraph at the end of Article I: "J. The term "recreation features" shall mean all Project features included to provide additional recreation resources for the area, including, but not limited to, biking and pedestrian trails and crossings, picnic shelters, and water accesses. K. The term "total recreation costs" shall mean that portion of the total Project costs allocated by the Government to the recreation features." 3. ARTICLE II - OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES Replace "total Project costs allocated to recreation" with "total recreation costs" in line . 3 of paragraph F. 4. ARTICLE VI - METHOD OF PAYMENT Delete paragraph D and replace it with the following paragraphs: "D. Not withstanding any other provision of this agreement the total structural costs and total recreation costs shall be accounted for and paid for separately from total non-structural costs. The accounting of the structural and the recreation features of the project shall be done simultaneously. E. Upon completion of the structural and recreation features and resolution of all contract claims or appeals which relate to or pertain to the structural or recreation features, the Government shall compute the total structural costs and total recreation costs and tender to the Local Sponsor a final accounting of its share of the total structural costs and the total recreation costs. 1. In the event the Local Sponsors total contribution (including lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, and dredged material disposal areas provided by the Local Sponsor and allocated to the structural features) is less than 25 percent of the total structural costs at the time of final accounting, the Local Sponsor shall, within 90 calendar days after receipt of written notice, make a cash payment to the Government of whatever sum is required to make its total contribution equal to 25 percent of the total structural costs. In the event the Local Sponsor has made cash contributions in excess of its required cash CF] 114 contribution under Articles ME and MG of this Agreement, the Government shall, within 90 days of the final accounting of the structural and recreation feature costs, subject to the . availability and allocation of appropriations, return said excess to the Local Sponsor; however, the Local Sponsor shall not be entitled to any refund of the 5 percent cash contribution required pursuant to Article ME of this Agreement. In the event the Local Sponsor's total contribution toward the structural features (including lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, and dredged material disposal areas provided by the Local Sponsor and allocated to the structural features) exceeds 50 percent of total structural costs at the time of the final accounting, the Government shall, subject to the availability and allocation of appropriations, refund the excess to the Local Sponsor within 90 calendar days of the final accounting of the structural and recreation costs; however, the Local Sponsor shall not be entitled to any refund of the 5 percent cash contribution required pursuant to Article ME of this Agreement. 2. In the event the Local Sponsor's total contribution toward the recreation features (including lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, and dredged material disposal areas provided by the Local Sponsor and allocated to the recreation features), is less than 50 percent of the total recreation costs at the time of the final accounting, the Local Sponsor shall, within 90 calendar days after receipt of written notice, make a cash payment to the Government of whatever sum is required to make its total contribution equal to 50 percent of the total recreation costs. In the event the Local Sponsor's total contributions for the recreation features (including lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, and dredged material disposal areas provided by the Local Sponsor and allocated to the recreation features) exceed 50 percent of the total recreation costs, the Government shall, subject to the availability and allocation of appropriations, return said excess to the • Local Sponsor within 90 days of the final accounting of the structural and recreation costs. F. Upon completion of the non-structural features and resolution of all contract claims or appeals which relate to or pertain to the non-structural features, the Government shall compute the total non-structural costs and tender to the Local Sponsor a final accounting of its share of the total non-structural costs. In the event the Local Sponsor's total contribution toward the non-structural features (including lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations; and dredged material disposal areas provided by the Local Sponsor and allocated to the non-structural features) is less than 25 percent of the total non-structural costs at the time of final accounting, the Local Sponsor shall, within 90 calendar days after receipt of written notice, make a cash payment to the Government of whatever sum is required to make its total contribution for non-structural costs. In the event the Local Sponsor's total contribution toward the non-structural costs (including lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, and dredged material disposal areas provided by the Local Sponsor and allocated to the non-structural features) exceeds 25 percent of total non-structural costs, the Government shall, subject to the availability and allocation of appropriations, refund the excess to the Local Sponsor within 90 days of the final accounting of the non-structural costs." 5. All terms and conditions of the Agreement and Amendments 1 and 2 shall remain in full force and effect, except as expressly modified herein. 3 • 0 • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment, which shall become effective upon the date it is signed by the Government. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY BY: JAMES T. SCOTT Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Engineer Mayor 4 CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA BY: CHUCK HAZAMA DATE: ATTEST: City Clerk 11� CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY 1 do hereby certify that I am the principal legal • officer of the City of Rochester, Minnesota, that the City of Rochester, Minnesota is a legally constituted public body with full authority and legal capability to perform the terms of this Amendment to the Agreement between the Department of the Army and the City of Rochester, Minnesota in connection with the South Fork Zumbro River Flood Control Project at Rochester, Minnesota, and to pay damages in accordance with the terms of the Agreement, if necessary, in the event of the failure to perform, as required by Section 221 of Public Law 91-611 (42 U.S.C. Section 1962d-5b), and that the persons who have executed this Amendment on behalf of the City of Rochester, Minnesota have acted within their statutory authority. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have made and executed this certification this day of 19 [TYPED NAME] [TITLE IN FULL] • Il? CERTIFICATION REGARDING LOBBYING • The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief that: (1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. (2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. (3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. • This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. • 1 9M CHUCK HAZAMA Mayor i71 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: Reports and Recommendations I City Administration DESCRIPTION: Agreement With State of Minnesota & Olmsted County Concerning Oronoco Landfill ITEM NO. e —� PREPARED BY: G. Neumann An agreement has been prepared for the State to take financial responsibility for the Oronoco landfill close out. The agreement resulted from a revision in State law which provided funding for the close out of permitted landfills and funding for most of the expenses incurred by the local government unit for required remedial investigation. The agreement has been negotiated between the State and Olmsted County. The only City of Rochester involvement in the agreement relates to agreeing as a party to the agreement that the State is able to pursue some cost recovery under insurance policies which were in effect for the City for the years in which it operated the Oronoco landfill. The agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and he has reviewed it with our legal consultants involved with insurance recovery for several contaminated sites. The agreement as revised based on this review is acceptable to the legal counsel for the City. A copy of the agreement will be available at the meeting in the event that there are any questions. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED. Approval of the agreement with the State of Minnesota and Olmsted County for the Oronoco landfill. oc ACTION: Motion by: Second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 'R I / DATE: 6/ 19/95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CITY ADMINISTRATOR e 3 M DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE RIVERBEND AGREEMENT D. OLSON The City Council and County Board have previously reached an informal agreement on a new cost sharing formula for the personnel costs for the Joint Dispatch Center of the LEC to reflect the integration of Fire Dispatch into the Joint Dispatch Center. This integration has recently been completed, and dispatching for the Fire Department was switched over to the Joint Dispatch Center approximately two weeks ago. The new, previously agreed to, cost share formula for personnel costs increases the City's share from 60% to 66.67%, and the County's share was reduced from 40% to 33.33%. In addition, the City agreed to pay 100% of the equipment costs for the integration of Fire Dispatch with future equipment and equipment maintenance costs being shared on a 50150 basis. The recommended effective date of this portion of the Second Amendment to the Riverbend Agreement is February 15, 1995. The other provision of the Riverbend Agreement that is proposed to be amended is the portion dealing with the Joint Council Chambers/Board Room. As part of the original agreement, the City and County shared equally in the cost of constructing the room, and the City funded 100% of the cost of the audio/visual equipment. In the future, it is suggested that the City and County share equally in the repair and/or replacement of any of this equipment. The County has previously informally agreed to this request. The County Board is scheduled to consider this Second Amendment to the Riverbend Agreement at their June 13, 1995, meeting. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: n K Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Second Amendment to the Riverbend Agreement V with Olmsted County. NCIL ACTION: motion by: second by: SECOND AMENDMENT TO RIVERBEND AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of , 1995, between . the Housing and Redevelopment Authority In and For Olmsted County (now known as the Olmsted County Housing and Redevelopment Authority) and the County of Olmsted (jointly referred to as "County") and the City of Rochester ("City") for the amendment of the agreement concerning the development and eventual use of property in the area known as the Riverbend in Rochester, Minnesota, as a Joint Government Center. WHEREAS, on September 10, 1991, and September 12, 1991, the County and the City, respectively, executed the Riverbend Agreement concerning the development and eventual use of the Riverbend in Rochester, Minnesota, as a Joint Government Center; and, WHEREAS, Section XV of the Riverbend Agreement allows for the amendment of parts of the Riverbend Agreement when the parties believe amendment is needed to fulfill the intent of the Agreement; and, WHEREAS, on February 4, 1992, and January 27, 1992, the County and the City, respectively, executed the First Amendment to Riverbend Agreement amending Sections XI and XIII of the Riverbend Agreement to fulfill the intent of the original Agreement; and, WHEREAS, the County and the City believe that amendments to Sections XI and XIV are needed to fulfill the intent of the original Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNTY AND CITY MUTUALLY AGREE that Sections XI • and XIV of the Riverbend Agreement shall be amended to read in their entirety as follows: The County Jail shall be situated within the Site in a building adjacent to the County Courthouse building in such configuration and on such floor or floors as the County Board in its sole discretion shall determine to be appropriate. The Law Enforcement Center ("LEC") is to be located directly above the county jail and in the immediately adjacent areas of the county courthouse. The LEC will house the principal offices of both the Rochester Police Department and the Olmsted County Sheriff's Department, certain common facilities for these departments as detailed in Attachment C, and a common garage, and shall include a joint dispatching/communications facility for these law enforcement agencies. Each party will have exclusive control over the design of the space it will exclusively use and occupy in the LEC. The parties will jointly determine and approve the design of commonly used and occupied areas. KKE will furnish design services for the entire LEC facility at County expense and the County will contract for all basic construction services for the LEC. 123 The County will pay for the actual construction costs of its own which has been estimated to be 20,962 gross square feet for the •space sheriff's space and 50% of the common area space. The City will pay the lump sum amount of two million seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($2,750,000.00) as full and complete payment for the following: a) 24,236 gross square feet for police space (as outlined in attachment AA); b) the common area space shared with the sheriff; c) 17,654 gross square feet of space in the LEC garage (as outlined in attachment AA); d) the City's 50% share of the construction expenses for the joint parking area, as shown on Attachment E of the original agreement, which shall include, but not be limited to, the City's share of the initial construction costs for the gravel or crushed rock base to be installed on top of the subgrade, the blacktop parking surface, the concrete medians and meter installations, the parking lot lighting, sidewalk within the parking lot and parking lot landscaping; e) the City's proportionate share of the costs resulting from those features necessary to accommodate the structural f) expansion of the LEC; stone facing, piston length, generator, code items, testing, and any other change order(s) item(s) approved by Olmsted q) County prior to this date; the City's share of the construction costs of the joint dispatching/communications facility; and h) the City's share of the installation costs of the landscape • improvements on the Joint Public Parking Area as identified on Attachment E. The parties agree to share equally in the future utilization of the parking spaces in the common LEC garage. If a parking area is constructed under the Jail area, this will be the location of the LEC garage as identified in Attachment D. The costs of the on -going operation and on -going maintenance (not including equipment maintenance) of the joint dispatching facility shall be shared on the basis of the City paying B -CD" of these costs and the County paying �3�3$ 4.8$ of these costs $1WL a 3�DE�Ct se 3 �7tu.e.ila main en costs shah be shared 'equally l`50$/50$). The dispatching communications functions will be administered by City personnel whose compensation shall be shared on the basis of the City paying 6{i�? 66 of these costs and the County paying 3�.3 46$ of these costs. This shall begin when the City Police Department and County Sheriff's Department occupy the new LEC space. The budget for the dispatching center will be prepared and adopted by the City subject to review by the County. upon execution of this Amendment, the City shall pay the County the lump sum amount of $2,750,000.00. "Construction costs" shall not •include land acquisition costs. The City shall provide maintenance services for those areas in the LEC which it occupies jointly or (0Iq exclusively, and shall bill the County for its share (50%) of such costs attributable to the common areas. Provision shall be made by KKE in the plans for the LEC for future expansion of the LEC into areas horizontally or vertically adjacent to it. Further, provision shall be made in the construction of the LEC building for structural and facility placement and for use of materials conducive to the most economical construction of future facilities within those designated expansion areas. Such features to accommodate structural expansion shall include foundations and footings which have a load bearing capacity sufficient to accommodate a vertical expansion which would at least double the size of the LEC as originally constructed, and which have load bearing walls, columns, and beams located where they will provide flexibility in the configuration and use of such vertical expansion areas. The City shall be responsible for the cost incurred for expansion of those portions of the LEC which will be solely used by the city's Police Department. However, the City shall not be responsible for any costs resulting from those features necessary to accommodate the structural expansion of the LEC, occurring in 1991- 1993, as these costs are covered in full by the. lump sum payment of $2,750,000.00. All costs associated with change orders directly affecting the police space, the shared space, or the LEC garage will be shared equally (50%/50%) between the City and the county provided that the change orders have the prior approval of the City Common Council prior to the commencement of the work. XIV. JOINT PUBLIC FACILITIES Provision shall be made in the design of the County's Courthouse facility for construction of certain meeting facilities which are of mutual benefit to the parties (hereafter "public areas"). Such public areas shall be located within those areas of the County's Courthouse building which are most closely adjacent to the areas designated on the Site Plan as the site of a potential future City Hall building constructed by the City. Such public areas shall include a common public entrance to the Government Center complex, a public foyer area, elevator and handicap access to the various levels of the facilities, public rest rooms, staff/public meeting rooms, and a common City Council Chambers/County Board room (hereafter "Council/Board room") to be utilized for the meetings of these governmental bodies which room shall contain seating for at least 140 members of the public in addition to containing seating and work area for at least eight elected officials and a minimum of sixteen administrative support staff. The design, construction, and any future physical alteration of the said Council/Board room shall be subject to the o g oint supervise n and annroval of the parties 1. '�x;�e YF.SU-3k 7.fll iisa 'F: st�a awra;,aww,nsa r --,.�. .:,., . a r e .w..�. suiistantial completion of any City Hall facility on the 51te adjacent to the County Courthouse and until otherwise agreed by the parties in writing, the City shall be entitled to control any and all use of the said County/Board room on Mondays, Wednesday, and alternating Fridays, • • 0 1�5 and the County shall be entitled to control any and all use of the said ubloc areas of the Courthouse Building, provision shall be ouncil/Board room at all other times. In the design and construcon �f the said p connection and access point made for the future construction o ctent al future skyway extending over to connect the Courthouse with a P tint shall be designed to the Zumbro River a h connectingn/rith accesshep downtown business district skyway system: public areas, as well as to facilitate pedestrian access to the safor use by the public for other areas of the two buildings designedparties. The County transaction of official business with either of the P shall be responsible for the costs of constructing such public areas. "Public areas" does not include skyways.. IT IS FURTHER AGREED that the remainder of the original Riverbend Agreement shall continue i effect unless and until it is modified by mutual agreement of the parties. CITY OF ROCHESTER BY CHUCK HAZAMA, MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK CAROLE GRIMM,41 Dated: OLMSTED COUNTY HOUSINGREDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY ITS CHAIRPERSON Dated: .nvive�d�[a�°• COUNTY OF OLMSTED BY BOARD CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: RICHARD DEVLIN, CLERK -ADMINISTRATOR Dated: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING /2 7 DATE: 6/ 19/95 r L AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CITY ADMINISTRATOR EM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: LAND DEVELOPMENT MANUAL TEXT AMENDMENT D. KNOTT L} The Planning Department is recommending an amendment to the Land Development Manual to define above and below grade swimming pools. The suggested definitions would clarify when fences are required around pools and are consistent with the County ordinance. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: y Initiate a change to the text of the Land Development Manual to define above and below grade G� swimming pools. OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: .TUN - 1 5- 9 5 T H U 1 6. 4 3 Rochester _ P l a n n i n v_ D w r• t P.02 Ap■uuitin��na aOvly'I�aNA� ! ♦-----------o��I�Oa�i�I 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904.4744 TO: Rochester Common Council ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING FROM: Terry 507/285-8224y A. Spaeth, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285.8213 DATE: June 15, 1995 WELL/SEPTIC 507/285-8345 RE: Request to Initiate a text amendment to the Land Development Manual defining "above" and "below" grade swimming pools for the purpose of administering those provisions of the Land Development Manual. Recently, a citizen brought up an argument that the way that the present language relating to private swimming pool fencing requirements is written, a fence would not be required for an above grade pool with walls less than 4' above grade. Based upon the existing language within the ordinance, that may be a valid argument, even though it certainly is not the intent behind the swimming pool regulations. Based upon the staffs concern that there are a number of these types of swimming pools ( with 3' side walls) being erected an properties within the City, the staff feels that a solution to the potential problem Is an amendment to the Land Development Manual that defines both above and below grade pools in the following manner. Swimming Pool, Above Grade: A swimming pool whose exposed sides have a height of four (4) feet or greater above the natural ground located adjacent to said swimming pool. Swimming Pool, Below Grade: A swimming pool whose exposed sides have a height of less than four (4) feet above the natural ground located adjacent to said swimming pool. We would like to request that the Council initiate such an amendment to preclude persons seeking permits for these types of pools and not having to meet the intent of the ordinance, which is to prevent uncontrolled access into swimming pools for safety reasons. The staff will be prepared to discuss the issue at the meeting. Thank you for your consideration of this item. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER • • • REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION IA4j' MEETING 6/19195 DATE: ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Reports and Recommendations Rochester Airport f, , Ca— ITEM cables. The Rochester Airport Commission recommends and requests Council authorization to: Enter into a State Aid Agreement with Mn/DOT for two-thirds funding on the replacement of underground phone cables between the Terminal Building and Service Building, and the Service Building and Weather Bureau Building. Project funding: 2/3 State, Agreement #73680, Mn/DOT 5501-95 1/3 Local 06916) This project was included in the 1995 CIP. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the o(L prepared State Aid Agreement and resolution. PREPARED BY: Steven Leqve COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second b)r to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Meeting Date 6 19 95 ING AGENDA SECTION: DEPT:Rochester Public Utilities I ReportsT& Recommendations I ITi N0._ ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: Consideration of Public Utility Board Action I Kathy Wilson The Rochester Public Utility Board has approved the following on June 13, 1995 and requests the Common Council's favorable consideration: to approve a resolution to approve a 5.4% average reduction in electric rates effective July 1, 1995 based on a cost -of -service rate decrease, and to adopt three new rates entitled Dual Fuel Rate, General Service Time -Of -Use Rate, and Medium General Service Time -Of -Use Rate as recommended in the May, 1995 electric rate study completed by R. W. Beck and Associates. P COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: 0 Second by: to: FOR BOARD ACTION Agenda Item # 9 Meeting Date: 6/ 13/95 SUBJECT: 1995 ELECTRIC RATE STUDY/ELECTRIC RATE DECREASE PREPARED BY: Bob Pawelski, RPU General Manager ITEM DESCRIPTION: The electric rate study authorized by the Board was completed by the consultant, R. W. Beck. A copy of this study dated May, 1995 was transmitted to the Utility Board under a separate cover. - Some of the highlights of the electric rate study include the following: A recommended 5.4% overall rate reduction. A projected freeze on electric rates through 1998. An approximate $3,600,000 rate reduction per year, or $12,700,000 over the 3.5 year time period from mid-1995 through 1998. At the request of staff, the rate consultant prepared three rate scenarios for the Board to consider. These include the following: 1. A cost -of -service rate decrease whereby electric rates would be decreased from approximately 3% up to 10.7%. 2. An across-the-board rate decrease whereby all rates would be decreased an average of 5.4%. 3. A combination rate decrease positioned midway between the cost -of -service decrease and the across-the-board decrease whereby rates would be decreased from approximately 4.2% through 8.1%. It should be noted that all rate decreases stated are an average for a given class of customers. Individual customers' rates can vary from that average. Mr. David Berg from R. W. Beck will be at the meeting to discuss the electric rate study and answer Board questions. UTILITY BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: It is recommended by RPU staff that the Board adopt the following: 1. A general 5.4% decrease in electric rates effective July 1, 1995. 2. One of the following rate adjustment scenarios: a. Cost -of -service rate decrease. b. Across-the-board rate decrease. C. Combination rate decrease. 3. The special rates noted in the electric rate study, namely: a. Residential dual fuel rate. b. General Service time -of -use rate. C. Medium General Service time -of -use rate. 6-9-9,f General Manager Date ROCHESTER PUBLIC UTILITIES REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 133 / DATE: U1 SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Reports & Recommendations City Clerk REM DESCRIPTION: Sound Amplification Permit - Malibu Mania Sponsored by PREPARED BY: the Aviary Judy Scherr Lorraine Beneke, owner of the Aviary, is requesting approval for a sound amplification permit for their annual Malibu Mania evening scheduled for Thursday, July 27, 1995. The band, Incognito, will be playing in the parking lot (facing the highway in the NW corner) from 8:00 P.M. to midnight. The event has been held for the past two or three years. However, last year, the Police Department, City Clerk's Office and City Administrator's Office received numerous calls from the neighborhood to the East of the Aviary complaining about the band, the extreme loudness of the music and the lateness of the hour. Therefore, the Council will need to consider approval of the sound amplification permit, the waiver of the time after 8:00 P.M.; and if approved, any conditions which might be placed on the business (such as only playing to 10:00 P.M.). Lorraine Beneke, owner, will be available at the Council meeting to answer any questions. A motion to approve or deny the request from the Aviary for a Sound Amplification Permit 07Lp� to hold Malibu Mania night on July 27, 1995. C,6�.0 , M0-Cv-,W� = u ACTION: Motion Second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING (357 / DATE: 6/19/95 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Rochester Public Library � — S M DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: OF BIDS/MOVING OF COLLECTION, FURNITURE, AND EQUIPMENT Judith Taylor Bids for moving the library's collection, furniture, and equipment were opened on June 7, 1995. Two moving companies from the Twin Cities were the only bidders. The low bid was from Gazda Mayflower. The bid breakdowns are as follows: Gazda Beltmann Phase) $16,060 $20,636 Phase II 40,390 48,652 Alternate A - Offsite Books Cleaned 1,300 1,600 Alternate B - In -Library Books Cleaned 6.500 1200 Total $64,250 $74,088 The construction budget contains $75,000 for moving expenses. $5,000 has been committed for the moving consultant. The low bid, with alternates, of $64,250 would be within the budget. The Library Board has reviewed the bids and recommends approval of the low bid of $64,250 from Gazda Mayflower. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 0Request a motion awarding the bid for moving the library's collection, furniture, and kequipment to Gazda Mayflower in the amount of $64,250. UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING q DATE: 6/19/9 / AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT fi. 19 EM DESCRIPTION: MUSIC CONTRACT - ROCHESTER SYMPHONY MUSIC PRWAAGEBY: DIRECTOR 1-7XL✓✓Iljjll The Music Board has submitted a contract for the services of Jere Lantz as the Rochester Symphony Music Director for the period from July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996 (see attached). The contract calls for Jere Lantz to be paid $34,300 from July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996. Jere Lantz is currently paid $33,216. The new salary reflects a 3.25% increase. Music Board has approved. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 01— Resolution authorizing Mayor and City Clerk to sign the contract. COUNCIL ACTION: Mouon by: Second EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT MUSIC DIRECTOR This Agreement is between the City of Rochester, acting by and . through its Music Board (hereinafter called Board) with the advice and Jere Lantz (hereinafter called consent of the Common Council, and Director). 1. The Board hereby employs Director and Director hereby accepts employment by Board as the Music Director and Conductor of the Rochester Symphony Orchestra and Chorale for the 1995/1996 season. 2. This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 1995, and expire on June 30, 1996. Services covered by this contract shall include all to the published 1995-1996 regularly, scheduled performances pursuant additional, extra, repeat, and run -out performances, Plus season and any he Director the Annual Rochester Symphony Orchestra Youth Concert(s). the regular benefits shall receive an annual salary of $34,300.00 and the City of Rochester including PERA, Family received by employees of Health, Family Dental and Life insurance coverage. The salary shall be this paid on an equal bi-monthly basis throughout the duration of contract. 3. Director shall perform those duties and satisfy those Position Description responsibilities outlined in the "City of Rochester Rochester Symphony Orchestra and Music Director and Conductor -- is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A and Chorale" which incorporated herein as a part of this Agreement. 4. The Director shall be supervised by and report directly to the . General Manager of the City Music Department (hereinafter called report indirectly to the Board. "General Manager"). The Director shall 5. The Director shall fulfill and implement the position of Music 1, 1995 Director and Conductor as a part-time position from September shall be defined as the until May 31, 1996. "Part-time position" duties and the satisfaction of those performance of those responsibilities described in Exhibit A for at least twenty hours per week. Performance of any duties or satisfaction of any responsibilities not be considered as work performed in not described in Exhibit A shall a part-time position. 6. Any additional performances not covered in paragraph 1 of this Board and the Director document may be contracted for between the at a rate of $500 per rehearsal and separately on a per service basis Payment shall be made within 30 days of the date of $1000 per concert. the event. The Board reserves the right to employ other conductors for -any such services. 7. The Director will be the final staff authority on artistic Chorale. The matters concerning the Rochester Symphony orchestra and acknowledge that although the position City of Rochester and the Board administrative duties, the position of Music Director includes certain is and fundamentally an artistic position. primarily 1 8. The Director shall not use equipment, supplies, property, facilities, or musical scores and parts belonging to the City of •Rochester or any of its offices, boards, commissions, or committees in the performance of duties or the satisfaction of responsibilities not identified in Exhibit A, except with the prior approval of the General Manager. 9. The Director shall be entitled to take twenty-one (21) days vacation leave during the period September 1, 1995, to May 31, 1996, to be scheduled by mutual consent of the Director and General Manager. The Director shall not earn nor shall the Board be obligated to grant any sick leave or compensatory time off. 10. The Director may request a leave without pay from regularly scheduled performance services so that he might pursue other conducting opportunities. The minimum such leave is for three services (two rehearsal services and one concert service). All requests must be made to the General Manager 45 days before the first service to be missed. Such leave is subject to the General Manager's approval. Director is responsible for reimbursing the City of Rochester for scheduled events which are missed and which the City must hire a substitute. For purposes of this provision, the value of these services shall be $500 per rehearsal service and $1,000 per concert service. Reimbursement must be made to the City within 30 days of notice provided by the City. 11. The Director shall spend not less than eight (8) hours per week in the Music Department offices during the period of September 1, .1995, until May 31, 1996. During such office hours, the Director will be available exclusively to the City to confer with the General Manger, his/her designee, and/or other staff, and to perform those tasks and/or satisfy those responsibilities identified in Exhibit A. It is understood that there may be weeks in which other conducting commitments will require alteration or adjustment of these hours. Such alteration or adjustment will be determined in advance by consultation between and the mutual approval of, the Director and General Manager. In no case does such alteration or adjustment relieve the Director from fulfilling the duties and tasks outlined in Exhibit A. 12. Whenever the name of the Rochester Symphony orchestra and/or Chorale is used officially--e.g., on stationery, in mailings, in promotional materials --the name of the Music Director will also appear. Whenever the Director conducts concerts by the Rochester Symphony orchestra and Chorale, his name shall appear in promotional materials in a type face as large and prominent as any other individual so enumerated. 13. Neither the City of Rochester nor the Board shall allow the broadcast of any type of recording of Rochester Symphony Orchestra or Chorale concerts conducted by the Director which do not satisfy the Director's artistic standards. The Director shall inform the Board in writing within five days of his opportunity to review such recording if the recording does not satisfy the Director's artistic standards. •14. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the personnel policies of the City of Rochester, the Civic Music Department, and the 2 iqo Board shall apply to the Director and the Board. 15. This agreement may be terminated by the Director if the Board • breaches the Agreement and fails to correct such breach within ten days after receipt of a written notice to correct the breach. 16. This agreement may be terminated by the Board for cause, resulting in the removal of the Director. "Cause" shall be defined as any violation of this Agreement, including the failure to perform those duties or the failure to satisfy those responsibilities described in Exhibit A. "Cause" also shall be defined to mean any pattern or history of inefficiency, misconduct, or breach of duty occurring in the performance of those duties or the satisfaction of those responsibilities described in Exhibit A. 17. Except as otherwise provided herein, the Board retains whatever rights and authority are necessary for it to operate and direct the affairs of the Board in all of its various aspects, including, but not limited to, the right to direct the working forces; to plan, direct, and control all the operations and services- of the department(s); to determine the methods, means, organization, and number of personnel by which such operations and services are to be conducted; to assign and transfer employees; to schedule working hours and to assign overtime; to determine whether goods or services should be made or purchased; to hire, promote, demote, suspend, discipline, discharge, or relieve employees due to lack of work or other legitimate reasons; to make and enforce reasonable rules and regulations; and to change or eliminate existing methods, equipment, or facilities. The exercise of the foregoing powers, rights, authority, duties, • and responsibilities by the Board, the adoption of policies, rules and regulations, and practice in furtherance thereof, and the use of judgement in connection therewith shall not be the subject of any grievance or arbitration proceeding except as specifically provided for in this Agreement. 18. Any notice required or authorized by this Agreement shall be properly given if mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following addresses or to such other parties or at such other addresses as either party may direct by similar notice delivered to the other party not less than ten days prior to the effective date of the address change: Board: Steven J. Schmidt General Manager Rochester Civic Music City Hall, Room 109 Rochester, MN 55902 Director: Jere Lantz 2835 West Road Woodland MN 55391 (612) 449-9766 19. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be • 3 I(q binding upon the parties hereto. Neither this Agreement nor any •interest therein shall be transferred or assigned by either party hereto. 20. Failure by either party to insist in any instance on strict conformance by the other to any term of this Agreement or .failure by either party to act in the event of a breach will not be construed as a consent to or waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or of any other term contained in this Agreement. 21. This Agreement is the final expression of the agreement of the parties and the complete and exclusive statement of the terms agreed upon. It supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings, agreements, and representations. No waiver, consent, modification, or change of the terms of this Agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and signed by both parties. Such waiver, consent, modification; or change, if made, shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose given. 22. The provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed severable. if any term or provision of this Agreement is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal or in conflict with any law, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions shall not be affected. The rights and obligations of the parties shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular term or provision held invalid. •23. This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed in compliance with, Rochester Code of Ordinances, Rochester Home Rule Charter, and Minnesota state law. 40 24. The Director has read the entire Agreement and understands its provisions. The Director possesses sole and exclusive authority to execute this Agreement on his own behalf. 25. Director shall retain copyright and royalty privileges for such custom arrangements, orchestrations, scores, and parts as may be required by the Director that are prepared by the Director during the term of this agreement. Director grants rights to the City to perform at no cost such custom arrangements, orchestrations, scores, and parts as may be required by the Director that are prepared by the Director during the term of this agreement. 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands this day of , 1995. BOARD By: President -Rochester Music Board CITY OF ROCHESTER, a Minnesota municipal corporation By: Its Mayor Attest: Its City Clerk THIS AGREEMENT PREPARED BY: office of the City Attorney Room 1, City Hall Rochester, MN 55902 e:\W\music\ia tzk.95 Fy DIRECTOR By: Jere Lantz 0 A • MEETING ` REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 6i19/95 )A SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: MPR REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PLANNING —::: )ESCRIPTION:Wetland Replacement Plan: City of Rochester, 41st St, NW June 14, 1995 Wetland Impact and Replacement Plan: The City iv Rochester has planned to build 41st St., land current western of end tas Trail and a larger area 1st Ave., NW to West Circle Drive. The construction will cross two separate between the Douglas Trail and West Circle Dr.. Neither wetland area could be avoided completely due to the size of the wetland and the necessary general alignment of 41 st St., NW. There is over 10 acres of wetland in the general area of the street allgmnent. The original street design caused the filling of 0.28 acres of Type 1 wetland east of the Douglas Trail and 1.08 acres of Type 1 and 2 wetlands between the Douglas Trail and West Circle Drive for a total of 1.36 acres. Design changes were made to avoid some wetland, however, 0.28 acres of Type 1 wetland and 0.79 acres of Type 2 wetland or a total of 1.02 acres of wetland will be filled. The replacement plan consists of the City purchasing 2 acres of wetland that is part of a as wetland ran epabmentbank for East ed in Waseca County. This is the same wetland bank used recently by Olmsted County Wasea County. Circle Drive. The wetland bank is a BW SR approved bank located in Blooming Grove Township, The Technical Evaluation Panel met in May and recommended approval of the revised wetland delineation report and the replacement plan. Planning Staff Recommendation: The planning Stall' recommends approval of the proposed replacement of the one acre of wetland with two acres from the approved wetland bank in Waseca County with the condition that the �� or o record that dits be purchased prior to the grading and construction that would fill the wetlands, and a letter of pumahse agr ws the city, has purchased the credits from the wetland bank Attachments: 1. Project location map 2. Wetland Impact maps V41 COUNCIL ACTION: mWon s000m lq4 Proposed Location Map WETLAND REPLACEMENT PLAT: CONSTRUCTION OF 41 ST STREET NA CITY PROJECT 6241-4-94 (J92950 i z� ` '' �' Lpta4io•. o� ' ' 11�` I C,V¢�laa.d s 1 IBM 1!, i Filled o �! x I i � ,SED iTZ42' NNT V ST ST ..W.1 I i 1811 I VNI.E'MIGH ROAla- FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION MAP .;. PAGE 5 I L w TT--TPE;;--1 TIC. WETL WETLAND REPLACEMENT PLAN (Rev. 6r7l95) CONSTRUCTION OF 41 ST STREET NW CITY PROJECT 6241-4-94 (19295) - =-- -------------- ---- ---� - s---` Tnu� ausa3_ O � t C63 I J I j � 1 I 11 I iYcc` 1 OD+tri ` FIGURE 6 (Rev. 6n195) REDUCTION OF WETLAND AREA FILLED DUE TO PAGE 13 REDESIGN REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/ 1 195 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS PUBLIC WORKS f -/ I EM DESCRIPTION: U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Flood Control Project - REPARED BY: Fee Acquisition from Vrieze Property - #371 & 379 WR. HALLING The City, as agent for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is required to purchase 2,748 square feet of flowage easement from two separate land'parcels owned by Paul Vrieze. The acquisition of the easements are from lands in Cumming's Addition for the Cascade Creek project. The City made an offer, based on our certified appraisal, in the amount of $500 for the easement taking. In the process of negotiation, Mr. Vrieze requested a trade that would have granted him title to 269 square feet of City land in exchange for fee title to the flowage easement lands. The City Council approved this trade at the December 8, 1993 meeting. In the process of reviewing title document and preparing the legal conveyances, it was discovered that the land the City intended to trade was owned by a third party. Therefore, as the flowage easements were not a pressing matter, our transaction was not actively pursued. Staff has negotiated with Mr. Vrieze to purchase the total easement area in fee title. The fee value of the land, as indicated in the certified appraisal, is $1,375. Staff recommends approval of the fee purchase from Mr. Vrieze in the amount of $1,375. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval to purchase fee title of 2,748 square feet of land identified as flowage easement in (1 Parcels 371 & 379, Cascade Creek Flood Control Project for $1,375 from Paul Vrieze. COUNCIL ACTION: motion by: I second by: 1460) SCALE: o I_ IQ' ,taeM -wee Lu 00 N nn \ O� / d O Qap arc � U 94° L' 19"E , 130, T O21UF41 LY NO p E GSflNEut �9Q' 2'S SvW W.LuE � 7441 AUE. uMl. 11.6. Loe. Lai la bL °V 16 Luuttm0C.6 Ago. PARCEL NO. 3-I I P.D,B. = POINT OF BEGINNING 1,110d OWNER; MAUL b. UQIE2E PERMANENT EASEMENT =e TEMPORARY EASEMENT = UCkJE FLOWAGE EASEMENT RESIDUE : BEARING ORIENTATION ; ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS EASEMENT REQUESTED BY: CITY nF Q04jlE51e2, GRID NORTH, MN STATE PLANE COORDINATE Miuur=60TA SYSTEM, SOUTH ZONE. FOR' CITY OF ROCHESTER, DEPT. OF PUBLIC SERVICES 1 hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by meor under my direct super- vision and that I am duly Registered Land rvayor under fha laws o the State of Minneso!o. - /'+ G�1�♦l.♦Haas cGhie BettsiInCG SCALE: _ co, swung Enai.w. I' Lsne Sur eyon DRAWN . py1e101e DATE: _ DATE; q "/ (47' ` J REG, NO.: 11622 t� LJ • to 0 • 0 FLOWAGE EASEMENT That part of vacated 4th Street NW (formerly 9th Street) lying between Blocks 14 and 15, CUMMINGS ADDITION TO ROCHESTER, Rochester, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of Lot 6 in said Block 15; thence North 00 degrees 40 minutes 07 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the west line of 7th Avenue NW, 34.50 feet; thence South 89 degrees 23 minutes 53 seconds West, parallel with the north line of said Block 15, a distance of 105.00 feet; thence North CO degrees 40 minutes 07 seconds West, parallel with the west line of 7th Avenue NW, 27.71 feet for the point of beginning; thence continue North 00 degrees 40 minutes 07 seconds West, along said parallel line, 12.79 feet; thence North 89 degrees 23 minutes 53 seconds East, parallel with the north line of said Block 15, a distance of 8.96 feet; thence South 34 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds West, 15.61 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 57 square feet, more or less. RESIDUE DESCRIPTION That part of vacated 4th Street NW (formerly 9th Street) lying between Blocks 14 and 15, CUMMINGS ADDITION TO ROCHESTER, Rochester, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of Lot 6 in said Block 15; thence North 00 degrees 40 minutes 07 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the west line of 7th Avenue NW, 34.50 feet for the point of beginning; thence South 89 degrees 23 minutes 53 seconds West, parallel with the north line of said Block 15, a distance of 105.00 feet; thence North 00 degrees 40 minutes 07 seconds West, parallel with the west line of 7th Avenue NW, 27.71 feet; thence North 34 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East, 15.61 feet; thence North 89 degrees 23 minutes 53 seconds East, parallel with the north line of said Block 15, a distance of 96.04 feet to the west line of 7th Avenue NW; thence South 00 degrees 40 minutes 07 seconds East, along said west line, 40.50 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 4,195 square feet, more or less. PARCEL NO. 311 OWNER: PD,L1L A. \Iu&zE EASEMENT REQUESTED BY: CisY 0 F 26, rAEs7Elz, 011JklEiSOTA McGhie Betts, inc. % Cc,nulling Eq.srs Lsne survwon pwm e SCALE : 1" - 50' �/ � 54R 23'S3 uJ L 1�a9 2353 _ / �743.03 'l • �o' v a , � � I � M. UuE y 53.2t, - 91,04 41 r- - — %5B4°Z jyE3 Tl• 6189. 2j 5i'E G..O. ` Zc; 4to' sTae.A 4fh a1,NI. SeWe2 Et.•,CIA (. VAceteo - w. fOQ4FP1t 91h ST.) 3 3 . � W r � I PARCEL NO. 31q P.O.B. = POINT OF BEGINNING OWNER: PAUL A. VQIEZE PERMANENT EASEMENT = 130UL TEMPORARY EASEMENT = H014- FLOWAGE EASEMENT = L,1Pg1 taK RESIDUE _ 7,2-61 5ar-r BEARING ORIENTATION: ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS EASEMENT REQUESTED BY: Cltr or KOLtfSrC�t GRID NORTH, MN STATE PLANE COORDINATE v1uulGhnrs SYSTEM, SOUTH ZONE. I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by me of under my direct super- vision and that I am a duly Registered Land p� p 1/ . Surveyor under the laws(if the State of Minnesota. DATE' / 1L - / REG. NO. J FORS SCALE: lot So' CITY OF ROCHESTER, McGhee Betts Ina c2M u" DEPT. OF PUBLIC SERVICES °o"''"aEngi^ears .nasurvero� DATE: q-15-q' P Acr.T Nn ! D0o"I l5! • • • FLOWAGE EASEMENT That part of CUMMINGS ADDITION TO ROCHESTER, being a part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 107 North, Range 14 West, Rochester, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of vacated 4th Street N.W. (formerly 9th Street) distant 171.04 feet westerly of the intersection of the north line of 4th street N.W. and the east line of 7th Avenue N.W. (formerly Grant Street); thence South 89 degrees 23 minutes 53 seconds West, along said north line of vacated 4th Street N.W., 53.26 feet; thence North 00 degrees 40 minutes 07 seconds West, parallel with the east line of Bth Avenue N.W., 40.00 feet; thence North 89 degrees 23 minutes 53 seconds East, parallel with said north line of vacated 4th Street N.W., 81.27 feet; thence South 34 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds West, 48.81 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 2,691 square feet, more or less RESIDUE DESCRIPTION That part of CUMMINGS ADDITION TO ROCHESTER, being a part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 107 North, Range 14 West, Rochester, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of vacated 4th Street N.W. (formerly 9th Street) distant 100.00 feet westerly of the intersection of the north line of 4th street N.W. and the east line of 7th Avenue N.W. (formerly Grant Street); thence North 00 degrees 40 minutes 07 seconds West, assumed bearing, parallel with said east line of 7th Avenue N.W., 40.00 feet; thence South 89 degrees 23 minutes 53 seconds West, parallel with said north line of vacated 4th Street N.W., 43.03 feet; thence South 34 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds West, 48.81 feet to said north line of vacated 4th Street N.W.; thence North 89 degrees 23 minutes 53 seconds East, along said north line, 71.04 feet to the paint of beginning. Containing 2,281 square feet, more or less. PARCEL NO. 3'9 OWNER: %JL. �.U21E26 EASEMENT REQUESTED BY: C 1TY Ul: OCiI$6fefC MWIJ�9oTA McGhie �; Betts, Inc. Caneulenq E^0�^ere 1 Lerw Surveyor Planer ' �4e rM •ten e• Myw W ,nw u� Te N�• REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS I PUBLIC WORKS DESCRIPTION: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Control Project City Rental Unit/815 6th Avenue NW MEETING 153 ITEM NO. f,-I41;k PREPARED BY: R. HALLING The City purchased 815 6th Avenue NW as a part of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Control Project on Cascade Creek. The City entered into a Lease Agreement in May 1994 with the current tenant. The rents were $350 per month until August 31, 1995. After August 31, the rents are to be returned to the fair market rent of $550 per month. The rents were reduced due to the work being done on the creek. The tenant currently receives a Section 8 Housing Certificate. The certificate guidelines require her to find housing below $500 per month. The renter has asked Staff to reduce future rents from $550 to $500 in order for her to stay in the unit. Staff recommends the rent be reduced to $500. The tenant has been an exceptional renter and rents have been paid on time Staff recommends approval of the rent reduction in order to meet Section Housing Certificate guidelines. COUNCIL ACTION REOUESTED: Adoption of prepared resolution authorizing execution of a lease agreement for the property @ 815 6th Avenue NW. Rent to be $500 per month. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING ( �� DATE: 6/19/95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. -1 3 REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PUBLIC WORKS L DESCRIPTION: FEASIBILITY REPORT: EXTENSION OF SANITARY PREPARED BY: �D SEWER &, WATERMAIN 23RD AVE SW MACGILLIV This is a request' -for a resolution ordering the preparation of a Feasibility Report for the Extension of Sanitary Sewer and Watermain in 23rd Avenue SW from 4th Street SW to Gates Drive, in 23rd Avenue SW 5th Street SW from 500 feet East to 650 feet West of and Gates Drive SW from 23rd Avenue SW to 200 feet West. Five property owners representing approximately 10 percent of the assessable frontage have petitioned for the extension of services. If a project were to proceed with only the petitioners being be assessed and immediately assessed approximately $30,000 would $265,000 would be deferred. The area is experiencing frequent pumping and odor problems from failing septic systems and one property owner is taking water via an above ground hose from a neighbor. Council Action Requested If the Council wishes to proceed a resolution (Form 2A) could be adopted ordering the preparation of the feasibility report. i 18PUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING /5 % AGENDA SECTION: REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DESCRIPTION: FEASIBILITY REPORT: EXTENSION OF SANITARY WATERMAIN IN RIVERVIEW SUB. ORIGINATING DEPT: SEWER PUBLIC WORKS ITEM NO. S -14 PREPARED BY: MACGI This is a request -for a'resolution ordering the preparation of a Feasibility Report for the extension of sanitary sewer and watermain in Riverside Drive NW, Erin Court NW and 27th Street NW all in the Riverview Subdivision Nine Property owners representing approximately 17 percent of the assessable frontage have petitioned for the extension of services. If a project were to proceed with only the petitioners being immediately assessed approximately $68,999 would be assessed and $317,000 would be deferred. Council Action Requested If the Council wishes to proceed a resolution (Form 2A) could be adopted ordering the prepartion of the feasibility report. 14 -:. 4) 1 IL ACTION: Motion by: second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING (Z:� DATE: c l i o AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PUBLIC WORKS �M DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: RECONSTRUCT/REHABILITATE 1ST AVENUE SW MACGILLI This is a feasibility report requested by the Council for the following improvement project: Project No. 6301-3-95 J-2248 "Reconstruct/Rehabilitate 1st Avenue S.W. from 1st Street SW to 3rd Street SW" The project is included in the 1995 Capital Improvement Budget (page 255). Watermain replacement is proposed between 2nd and 3rd Streets. Assessments are proposed to fund approximately one half the costs of the replacement watermain in accordance with current City policy and for the cost of a 36' wide, 9 ton thickness street. Council Action Requested If the Council wishes to proceed a resolution (Form 2A) could be L adopted ordering the feasibility report followed by a resolution V (Form 3A) receiving the report and ordering a hearing to be held on July 17, 1995. JIVNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second Feasibility of Proposed Local Improvement Project Project No. 6301-3-95 J No. 2248 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester Minnesota A resolution proposing "Reconstruct/Rehabilitation 1st Avenue S.W. from 1st Street S.W. to 3rd Street S.W." was referred to the Department of Public Works on June 5, 1995 for the preparation of the Engineers Feasibility Report. Engineers Report We report the project is feasible and recommend its construction. The project is included in the 1995 Capital Improvement Budget (page 255) and budgeted at $135,000. The project includes reconstruction of the pavement and replacement of the watermain between 2nd and 3rd Streets and rehabilitation of the pavement between 1st and 2nd Streets. The watermain is in excess of 50 years old, is of cast iron construction and is past its estimated service life. The existing concrete pavement was placed in 1954 and is in need of replacement. The estimated costs of the project, made without completed plans or survey are as follows: Grading, paving, Watermain Engineering Interest Contingency curb & gutter Total Assessment Basis for Grading and Paving $108,893 32,350 16,949 8,475 7,000 $173,667 Commercial and institutional property abutting a collector street would be assessed the cost of a 36 foot wide collector street consisting of an 8% inch thick concrete surface and a 5 inch thick gravel base. Estimated assessment rate = $51.00 per assessable foot. • 0 • June 12, 1995 page - 2 - Feasibility Report Project No. 6301-3-95 - J No. 2248 Assessment Basis for Watermain The existing watermain was placed prior to 1940. This is more than the 40 year service life of the pipe therefore the Water Department will pay for 50 percent of the cost of replacement in addition to the extra costs associated with the stubbing of new mains to the side streets. The total estimated cost of the watermain replacement is $36,388 with $11,628 proposed for assessment. The balance of $24,760 is the Water Department share. Estimated Assessment Rate = Assessable Cost/Assessable Frontage. Assessable Cost of Watermain = $11 628 = $18 63/Assessable Foot Total Assessable Frontage 624' • Service Connections Water service connections of lead jointed or galvanized pipe will be replaced in accordance with Water Department policy and will be assessed directly against the property owners. The estimated cost of service connections is $4,052. The total estimated Special Assessment for this project is $51,248. $24,670 would be funded by the Water Department and the remaining $97,749 from reserves and tax levy as proposed in the 1995 Capital Improvement Budget. $115,000 in reserves and tax levy was included in the 1995 Budget. Respectively submitted: Donald MacGillivray Assistant City Engineer (&&RECONS TRUCT/REHABILITATE I ST AVE. S. W. I ST ST. S. W. TO 3RD ST. S. W. WATERMAIN REPLACEMENT 2ND ST. S. W. TO 3RD ST. S. W. L 150 300 SCALE: 1" = 300' 4TH ST 5w ESTIMATED COST $173, 667 P1ROJ. NO. 6301-3-95 J-2248 3 0 O cn CD 4TH LEGEND 1ST EAST 1ST 2ND PROJECT Lti 166 BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT Project No.': 6301-3-95 Date (Orig.) 6/5/95 J No.: 2248 Description & Location: Reconstruct/Rehabilitation 1st Avenue S.W. from 1st Street S.W. to 3rd Street S.W. " Project Budget Final Cos Contract Cost Construction Date Grading Paving. $108 893 Concrete Curb & Gutter Watermain 32,350 Right -Of -Way Easements 0 Engineering 12% 16,949 Interest 6% Contingency 5% Total Construction & $173 667 Expense Distribution To be Presently Assessed Postponed Assessment City Funds - Water Dept. Tax Levy TOTAL $51 248 $24 670 $97 749 5173 667 Make Initial Disbursement from P.I.R. Fund 0 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 1015- 1 DATE: AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. V� l� ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: PARKING RESTRICTION - GREENVIEW DRIVE DMIL 1'"' This department has received several requests from residents in the Green Meadows area to restrict parking on portions, of Greenview Drive S.W. The recent opening of the IBM Credit Union is this subdivision has brought in substantial traffic. This along with the large curve has created a safety problem on this street. Staff recommends a restriction on the inside portion of the curve adjacent to Lot 2, Block 1, Green Meadows 6th Subdivision. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED r Adopt the prepared resolution adding Paragraph (307) to Section B "No Parking Zones of the Comprehensive Traffic & Parking Resolution Book to read: (307) Greenview Drive S.W. on the Northerly and Westerly side adjacent to Lot 2, Block 1 Green Meadows 6th Subdivision. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: � ig wv 0 Ck z K.I GREEN 2 � I MEADOW! N G W. . s I , GR 5 to s r T MEJ WS a 4 r a I • 1 a 11 10 f h 7 Is •» �• 2 • 1 5• • GREEN , . �� 3 > r 10 '•. MEADOWS \ I OF �° RN !NH/ �5 VIE Pw$ ? LAKE G ORA s w REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING /(p 7 / DATE: 6/ 19/95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS I E PUBLIC WORKS/TRAFFIC 7 �M DESCRIPTION: PARKING RESTRICTION - 81/2 STREET S.E. PREPARED t3Y• D. ROSSMAN This is a recommendation to restrict parking on the south side of 81/2 Street S.E. from 15th Avenue S.E. to a point 215 feet east of 15th Avenue S.E. This is made necessary by the traffic lanes approaching and leaving the new traffic signal at this location. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the prepared resolution adding Paragraph (169.85) to Section B "No Parking Zones of the Comprehensive Traffic & Parking Resolution Book" to read: (169.85) Eight and One Half Street (81/2 St.) S.E. on the South side from 15th Avenue S.E. to a point 215 feet east of 15th Avenue S.E.. - At All Times. �I UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: /' S S'r GRP ST BTH � KIN_ G� ST LN 1OTH ST sF � '2 S 14 0 8 1 /2 ST SE U U VILLAGE W SOUTH VILLAGE DR SE SOUriyCgrE C/RCLE riPfULER � 14 — 00 17,EAMOoD r ROAD i SE � + 1 - -i Cron�er- C,arEfsgr I�OB/LE h{pyED — - PARK 14TH ST SE T� sac✓ 1 STH \ .a W 48YZ SE /13oo REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING ! W 9 --- DATE: 6/19/95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. q,-/13 REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PUBLIC WORKS M DESCRIPTION: BIDS: SIDEWALK PROJECT NO. 1-1995 J-9335 PREPARED BY: MIKE COX Bids were received'and opened at 11:00 AM, June 14, 1995 for the following project: Sidewalk Project No. 1-1995 - J-9335 "New Sidewalk Construction Throughout the City" The following bids were received: E1 Bishop $36,143.15 (corrected amount) Doyle Conner Co. $30,304.95 Engineer Est. $21,685.00 (Abstract of bids attached) The Public Works Department recommends the rejection of the bids due to the disparity between the Engineers Estimate and the low bid. Council Action Requested Rejection of the bids. Adopt the resolution reordering bids to be made and receive them y' after 11:00 AM, July 12, 1995. Council to consider them on July 17, 1995. Attachment: Revised Budget and Assessment Schedule. UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: 10 BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT Project No.: No. 1-1995 Date (frig.) 6-19-95 J No.: 9335 Description & Location: New Sidewalk Project Various Locations Throughout the City Cost Construction: Date: Sidewalk 600 Lin. Ft. Right -Of -Way Easements Engineering 1216 Interest 8% Contingency Project Budget Final Contract Cost May 1, 1995 $31,230.00 $ 3,748.00 $ 2,498.00 Total Construction & Expense $37,476.00 Distribution To Be Presently ASSESSED Deferred Assessment State Funds City Fund City Funds TOTAL $21 126 00 $16 350.00 $37 476 00 Make Initial Disbursement from: P.I.R Fund r1 Li r7i DATE 06/14/95 C I T Y O F R 0 C H E S T E A PAGE A 6 S T R A C T OF BIOS CT 9335 SVLK.NO 1 95 NEW SIDEWALK VARIOUS LOCATIONS THROUGH OUT CITY ENGINEERS ESTIMATE 1 EL BISHOP 2 DOYLE CONNER CO LINE APPROXIMATE. UNIT UNIT UNIT NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT 1 FURNISH 8 INSTALL 301N REINFORCED S100.514 8.00 LIN FT 30.00 240.00 1500.00 12000.00 95.00 760.00 CONCRETE PIPE CLASS 3 *x**tt ****** 2 REMOVE 8 REINSTALL 30" RCP APRON S10O.565 1.00 EACH 100.00 100.00 220.00 220.00 150.00 150.00 **tit* *****t 3 COMMON BORROW (LVI 2105.523 65.00 CU YO 5.00 325.00 15.00 975.00 i2.00 780.00 Mitt t*tt** 4 CONCRETE SILL 0531,603 250.00 LIN FT 5.00 1250.00 5.35 1337.50 4.00 1000.00 *tit** t***xt 5 SODDING TYPE BLVD. 2575.505 45.00 SO YD 3.00 135.00 3.85 173.25 4.00 i80.00 t**tx* xtx*t* 6 CONSTRUCT SIN CONCRETE WALK C700.501 955.00 SO YO 18.00 17190.00 19.33 18460.15 25.39 24241.45 ***tit *t M 7 CONSTRUCT TIN CONCRETE WALK C700.501 50.00 SO YD 19.80 990.00 25.80 1290.00 29.00 1450.00 *tit** tt*x*x 8 SIN CONCRETE WALK REPLACEMENT C700.501 10.00 SO YO 28.80 286.00 32.13 321.30 26.50 265.00 tit*** *t**** PEDESTRIAN RAMP C700.502 1.00 EACH 100.00 100.00 65.00 65.00 100.00 00.00 isNISHING ****it **x*** 10 DRILL 8 GROUT NO. 4 REBAR C700.502 14.00 EACH 3.00 42.00 3.25 45.50 5.25 73.50 18' LONG ttxxt* t*xt** 11 EXTRA CHARGE FOR USE OF HIGH C700.503 10.00 CU YO LO.00 100.00 11.50 115.00 i0.00 100.00 EARLY STRENGTH CONCRETE t* M ****** i2 CONSTRUCT CONCRETE CURB (MOD) C700.504 10.00 LIN FT i0.00 100.00 15.05 150.50 20.00 200.00 *tit** **x*xt 13 REPLACE CONCRETE CURB (MOD) C700.504 31.00 LIN FT 20.00 620.00 25.10 ' 778.10 24.00 744.00 t* M it**** 14 CONCRETE SAWING C700.505 31.00 LIN FT 5.00 155.00 4.85 150.35 5.00 155.00 tit*** tit*** 15 CONCRETE REMOVAL C700.506 10.00 SQ YO 5.00 50.00 6.15 61.50 i0.00 100.00 x*xtit **xi*t SUBTOTAL 21585.00 36143.15 30304.95 GRAND TOTALS 21685.00 36143.15 30304.95 • REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 1 7 DATE: 6219 95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PUBLIC WORKS c -/ M DESCRIPTION: BIDS: Construct Pond EP-16 East of County PREPARED BY: D Vy tMACGILLIVRAY Road 422 Near Rochester Community College (Mayo Run) Bids were received and opened after 11:00 A.M., June 14, 1995 for the following local improvement project: Project No. 9409 J-4889 "Construct Pond EP-16 East of County Road #22 Near Rochester Community College (Mayo Run). The following bids were received: Rochester Sand & Gravel $315,499.00(low) Elcor Construction $357,683.00 Road Constructors $362,113.00 Fraser Construction $454,255.30 Engineers Estimate $279,000 The higher than estimated costs are due to the significant landscaping and unique plantings included in the project. A review with the low bidder and the consultant indicates that there was significant misunderstanding among the subcontractors for this work and led to much higher than anticipated costs (est. $45,000 higher).. We recommend that we award the bid to the low bidder. The grading items are within estimates. We will delete all the landscape and seeding items by contract change order after execution of a contract and prepare a separate contract for that work. This will reduce the contract amount by $92,651 for a total of $222,848.00. The low bidder has stated that they will waive their rights to additional compensation due to the decreases in the contract work. Rebidding the project will delay the work significantly and put it out of sequence with the adjacent road work which the low bidder is also constructing. This could lead to higher prices and delay the work beyond prime planting times this fall. Council Action Requested 1. If the Council wishes to proceed a resolution should be 1 y`j(Ibl, adopted awarding the contract to Rochester and Gravel. 2. If the Council awards the contract, permission is requested to advertise for bids for the landscaping and plantings, with bids to be received until 11:00 AM on July 12, 1995 and considered by Council on July 17, 1995. UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: a REQUEST FOR :COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/19/95 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS & RECOMTYMNDATIONS PUBLIC WORKS g EM DESCRIPTION: Easement Acquisition from Western Walls - Stage 3A PREPARED BY: US Army Corps of Engineers Flood Control Project R. HALLING The City is required to purchased flowage easements for flood water storage in the Cascade Lakes area. Western Walls, Inc. owns an approximate 60-acre tract that is affected by the project. The City is purchasing a flowage easement estate over 13.57 acres of this property. The easement encumbers land generally designated as floodway. Typically this type of land in the Cascade Lakes area has a transitional highest and best use for sand -gravel mining, and a future use for residential development. The City's certified appraisal found this land to have a value of $8,500 per acre. The appraisal found a nominal 5 % loss to the property from the imposition of the easement. The City's certified appraisal found the value and damages from the taking to be $6,500. A second appraisal made for the City found the value/damages to be $22,000. The owner has agreed to a negotiated settlement at $14,250. The basis for the negotiated settlement is the $8,500 per acre land diminished at approximately 12 % from fee value. This value lies well within what is typically found for a diminished fee value due to the encumbrance of a flowage easement. Staff considers this a reasonable transaction and is recommending Council approval of the purchase at $14,250. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: /II Adoption of a prepared resolution approving the purchase in flowage easement of 13.57 acres in `the SE'/4 of Section 33-107-14 from Western Walls, Inc. for a purchase price of $14,250. OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: CASCADE nvnwnCn PG-29 1107N. - R.1_4W- la {t 2 • Dellt Lt{.b'!yn ot 7&s " Ar/.n c 3a orJ,. . r S U � 112 . c 3� Heact hsd _ i� smYr" 11...n \ yff• 1. Jacedsat � sch //ZIJ 7"�naei{L /�1J 1!� uCCN w�. '�'-] Uiae la Pouben ro � North¢ ri b,un Em•/.e �drr/ L Sa/k _ 19Q ` 3J lCrr �r/�se// xuehn oae%em aa�� .3arny5 u0 Sobnsc�. Ketce JG. /29IL /b✓m/ YrN.n /772 :JZL i Cptl[kSMe 6296y t t • H7 rnC /ue!Lrer 'vi1r.G /h�1n • � 9 aA/ �!ank y s Y_£ :tiei .Mfg it bro IL 39 •.- ! 1 %j,f �v3 L9 G 1 ^ rPe{erl ep� SO ',::�r%�V z3lJr.pi�1 ]PSu6 314 J w f/:S \ "Y^µ�Da[ 3QAanf n' .ryrnra' W:vm l� %r y .C'mL 5 1- fh y/ .1'ffd Se3eepF irI q ti W.i.. r e�'b":4e ]'kn s ..'.,.lrreyC K 69zl •NQ%e lJu o2 C A '40 :rlaief ° • °le ✓e ler[ n :'t 'b6. .r ! I .mr. ro o a rr 6 ON l8J .. b !Z'45 CLe •Pn /Ond E �rx/ee b .J/ii(,n /'Jn[✓r[YC I� :r�0p ¢`gty' '� ^u S]i yQ Y f�� ✓ Gifu y a n Eb •L]C ///i/r '�]i'1 Y [r J' i..N.[1 ,r eY�e .I°e. L]9L rbb<JJ._ cy/ey Cv Fr/brr •Leona R/y / 6 +ei�i[n 9 / eb z: men fur Ne.da' //v L'fus bbmaan F ud _ t a vnW i:a n SS .F ryaf rrre. a. l 93P .J'/ Ji fJ9 rrh,A 60e �c$'j fe :I,6 ✓bld Y , rd LCa / • <�,,. Fe/ 1C .✓ . @ ty ILLS ) AG• Lbyne mn5 GG /[.L •� bS9S Z'/P ZH .: :zb • Lfs3[ude b�je � ./_w.:rc ,frnern L�, ■4h iYG F rr y c+ 9/IP ' a' ;k rcr/ �ek Yo f9 { i Z� ✓N iC t� 10 .: ue' �, 4."od .Lon,ebr.ry ,^, 0 r ,nae J • Z]al /!/n f./a/!l y4lt /SX?f L%byd C Zn ,� ! �• e. z GFbL, \ Nae/f!w/ne [. !ed<ocL r � Reas 13148 JS L. \ u%' Fss rv.• E✓!/yn KLdsbc<G 21y Ckxna btM.! 4�Y ° •' 16 S a,G'�L. tt2 '�r9 22e z9 9 /2n 22 £sera -FM1 .,-Dw ea /Pee/fy 4; ROCHE E /L •.' t ',r H] rJYdn/ey •£a.lrr9` y / y'C J42 Z•amelL •' 1LS o/ F • Chalnemee Rf• v _ Numb Z 7199 y0 J Marne W c JdJ La rf� ., ri!] ¢ li]i9lr any! N. f/4l n 3 �PbC .de✓e/ � CbeFl PH ! ��.. JJ � � � � rJc3� t 6dJ r F✓yQe/�Yn\,rfc 51 Pi a ^.\ ROCK STER P aAore rF/.za 6 ee/ T- TIiQQL SfO ✓ r ., 8ud. • /y0 JJ \ 22 /tBadoe/ v0 4927 _.�� Lw L aR 9re/.am m.r ., $ r.Lne GAME b ,. ,.L'r e, i • vn 26 25 -i R39P41 ,�M11e °3•Wp •Y Wlrl; 9 beCes+. LPo Jna] >�h 4qEe62 [6n•.e eta V36 fa K91L �y%p4 a2]Y. I a Schml 2 nl REFUGE 'rt. MQ - .. .... l e s✓ • , kn°r x4rx /[r. lt9 Peehn . x7 a 6K NY ] 6rrJ 66A a d 22 t6 7o irZf `J' L.. yy9 7osl Z/4I 11 VlrnCJ.Cn r.r. ru _. Ai!rl* Q 0 ��j 'News Office: (507) 285-7655 — FAX (507) 285-7666 Minnesota WATS: (800) 562-1758 — Midwest WATS: (800) 533-1727 18 First Ave. S.E. - P.O. Box 6118 • Rochester, MN 55903-6118 F•Cf S 89' 07' 11 " W 1257.50 i -�%3364.01,N,( Poo4-1 4 .- - � I= � N O CO �— In cp r O � i I � o' I Lo t 00 r-i O N _ 6-, PARCEL NO. 507 OWNER: WESTERN WALLS INC. • NE COR. OF SE 1/4 SEC. 33-107-14 O �CC) 00 t` N SCALE 1"= 400' � d- O O z N 88' 11' 57" j --- E 925.75 = ( 542.48 WI'�S 01' 38' 50" E i w �F. o poLo 0I /V O -- '7• 3� • V) 707 26„ 1 I + I 0 S'aN. 3q REVISED: 12-28-94 EASEMENT REQUESTED BY: CITY OF ROCHESTER, MN SE COR. SE 1/4 SEC. 33 P.O.B. = POINT OF BEGINNING PERMANENT EASEMENT - NONE TEMPORARY EASEMENT = NONE Vohl-uEv'. —. €WS".AG EASEMENT - 13.57 ACRES RESIDUE = 44.27 ACRES BEARING ORIENTATION: ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS GRID NORTH, MN STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, SOUTH ZONE. 1am[P1#1=-WT FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 0, .. AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Reports and Recommendations City Clerk ITEM DESCRIPTION: Sound Amplification Permit - Block Party PREPARED BY: Judy Scherr Tom Heimsness has requested a Sound Amplification Permit from the City for a block parry that he and some friends are planning on holding on July 1st to celebrate the Fourth of July with all of the neighbors. The block party will be held at 827 44th Avenue N.W. Live music will be featured from 4:00 to 9:00 P.M. Therefore, a permit plus waiver from the time restriction will need to be approved. Approval is pending satisfactory arrangements with the Traffic Department through Tony Knauer. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve the Sound Amplification Permit for Tom Heimsness for 827 44th Avenue N.W. for July 1st from 4:00 to 9:00 P.M. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: /% / REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING t DATE: 6/ 19/95 ORIGINATING DEPT: !PREEPARED AGENDA SECTION: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES BY:TEM DESCRIPTION: DKINS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES F. 1. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES, as appropriate. F. 2. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES (for adoption). Ordinance Amending and Reenacting Subdivision 1 of Section 50.01 of the Rochester Code of Ordinances, Relating to the Composition of the State Building Code Applicable within the City. Ordinance Annexing to the City of Rochester Approximately 20.07 Acres of Land Located in a Portion of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 106 North, Range 13 West, Olmsted County, Minnesota. (Said Property lying North and South of Pinewood Road Southeast). F.3. MISCELLANEOUS. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion Second MEETING (` -7/ DATE: . . 6JI9/95 Land Use F Street SW Kra 61-11"Ll" • al •i:'� PLANNING on the west side of Highway 63 south of G7 - r Jeffrey The applicant, N.A. Realty Inc., Franklin P. Kottschade, President, originally filed a Land use Plan Amendment (File #94-6) and a Zoning District Change (File #94-10) on November 28, 1994. The original petitions were scheduled for consideration at a public hearing before the City Planning and Zoning Commission on December 14, 1994. The staff reports to the City Planning and Zoning Commission dated December 9, 1994, evaluated the initial proposal which was to redesignate 97.69 acres as "Commercial' on the Future land Use Map and rezone from R-1 to B4 (General Commercial) 74.32 acres and redesignate 120.95 acres on the Plan for "Medium Density Residential" use and rezone to R-3 109.06 acres. At the hearing on December 14, 1994, the City Planning and Zoning Commission agreed to reschedule consideration of the matter until a later date (up to 60 days) at the request of the applicant. On January 25, 1995, at the request of the applicant, the Commission extended the date of the reconsideration until February 22, 1995. On February 8, 1995, the City Planning Commission agreed to reconsider the request on March 8, 1995, at the specific request of the applicant In a letter submitted to the City Planning and Zoning Commission dated February 3, 1995, the applicant amended the original petition by withdrawing the portion of the application concerning the "medium density" Land Use Plan Amendment and the rezoning from R-1 to R-3. On March 8, 1995, at a public hearing the City Planning Commission considered the revised request to designate 97.69 acres as "commercial' on the Future Land Use Map and rezone 74.32 acres of this area from R- 1 to B-4. The staff evaluated this revised request in a report to the City Planning Commission dated March 3, 1995. At the hearing on March 8, 1995, the applicant through testimony from Mr. John Uban, his land planning consultant revised the boundaries of the area proposed to be designated for commercial by dropping the area northerly of Willow Creek. Without the benefit of survey the staff estimates that the revised proposal would reduce the area proposed to be designated commercial by 8.16 acres for a total of 89.53. The applicant requested that the rezoning petition not be acted on at this time. The Commission moved to table the zone change request from R-1 to B-4 until their first meeting in June (June 14, 1995). The action of the Commission was then focused only on the land use plan amendment #94-6 to designate the property for commercial land use. After the close of the public hearing on March 8, 1995, the City Planning and Zoning Commission moved to request that the City Attorney prepare findings of fact concerning the land use plan amendment to support the proposition that the request does not meet the four criteria found in the text of the Land Use Plan for a regional ACTION: Motion by: second Igd ?2 CA April 13, 1995 shopping center. The substantial size of the requested commercial area by definition in the text of the Future Lanift Plan disqualified the proposal from being considered as a neighborhood (4 to 8 acres) or community shopping cente to 25 acres). On March 22, 1995, the City Planning and Zoning Commission considered the findings of fact prepared by the City Attorney, a copy of which was provided to the applicant prior to the meeting. The City Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-2 to adopt the findings recommending denial of the land use plan amendment. Motion by McGowan, seconded by Schultze. Voting in favor.- McGowan, Schultze, Bellinger, Haley and Richardson. Voting against - Wiesner and DeWitt A copy of the findings as adopted was sent by certified mail to the applicant. The Commission, in their consideration of the findings and the locational criteria against which the proposal was evaluated, noted that if the recemmendations of the US 63 Corridor Study, would result in Thoroughfare Plan amendments to reclassify 40th Street SW as an arterial, a reconsideration of a commercial designation on this site or a portion thereof could be made based on new information. The City Planning and Zoning Commission also noted that the criterion of having good pedestrian, vehicular and transit access would also be subject to reevaluation based on possible future improvements that would accompany actual development in the area Until an area develops, there is not generalh good transit or pedestrian access. The attached reports dated December 9, 1994, and March 3, 1905, outline the facts and issues surrounding the proposals as submitted. Please keep in mind that presently only Land Use Plan Amendment #94-6 as amended is t consideration and the rezoning request is not being considered at this time. A map showing the boundary o commercial redesignation request as revised by the applicant at the public hearing is also attached. 1. The City Clerk scheduled this Land Use PlanAmendment for a public hearing as required. Notice of the public hearing was mailed to property owners within 350 feet of this site and published in the Rochester Post Bulletin on Friday, April 7, 1995. 2. After the close of the hearing, the Council should, by motion, instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law supporting the consensus decision reached by the Council. After presentation of the prepared findings byy the City Attorney, the Council should move to adopt the findings. The f indings of fact would be br Cit back at the next Council meeting. 3. If the findings adopted are to approve an amendment to the plan, the Council should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution officially amending the Land Use Plan Map. 4. The Land Use Plan states that no application for an amendment will be accepted prior to one year after the date that any application concerning the same property was acted upon by the City Council. If the action is to deny the request_ the Council may wish to specify trader what conditions it will permit reapplication without a year waiting period. ATTAcx1 lvTs "! do -2cw gU�rr`/ G 2C�Dor7- �rory+ -�• 4�r�9 S' s7"i2�9 S' C-o, tc� u�a S • 1. Map of Revised Boundary for Land Use Plan Amendment #94-6 2. Staff Report dated March 3, 1995. 3. Letter from Applicant dated March 17, 1995. a M 77C r° e, Page 3 RCA April 13, 1995 4. City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of March 22, 1995 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of March 8, 1995 City Planning and Zoning Commission Findings of Fact 7. City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 14, 1994 8. City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1994 1. City Administrator 2. City Attorney 3. Planning Department File 4. Applicant: This item will be considered by the Council sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, April 17, 1995, in the Council Chambers at City Hall. 5. John Uban 6. McGhie and Betts c:lupfimkkowdl NOTE TO COUNCIL: THE INFORMATION FROM THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETINGS FROM DECEMBER 9TH AND 14TH WERE SUBMITTED TO . THE COUNCIL SEPARATE FROM THE AGENDA. INFORMATION PROVIDED BY FRANKLIN KOTTSCHADE DATED 3/17196 HAS BEEN ADDED AS ATTACHMENTS TO THIS COUNCIL AGENDA. OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY MEMORANDUM • BATE: June 13, 1995 TO: Stevan Kvenvold - City Administrator FROM: Terry L. Adkins - Rochester City Attorney SUBJECT: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order At the June 5, 1995, council meeting, the Council instructed me to prepare Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order with regards to the Revised Future Land Use Plan Amendment #94-6. Enclosed is that document. Thank you. • FINDINGS OF FACTS Franklin P. Kottschade Request for Land Use Guide Plan Change to Commercial (94-6) for Commercial Use Designation The following are suggested findings which support that change in the land use plan: 1. The Highway 63 South Corridor Study undertaken by ROCOG and MnDOT, considered the area of the requested change to be Commercial in the May 31, 1995 Publication. The traffic projections in the Highway Corridor study were based on the Commercial use. 2. The eventual development of the property, because of limitations of flood plain, wetlands, and future frontage road will not exceed 520,000 square feet, which was the amount of commercial square footage considered in the Highway 63 South Corridor Study. All of the options in the Highway 63 South Corridor Study show either signals at 40th Street or an interchange with Highway 63. All of the options available are consistent with the planning criteria for a Commercial designation on this property. 3. The requirement for intersecting arterials for Commercial designation is being met by the fact that a future frontage road will connect both 40th and 48th Street. The most probable arterial designation will be 40th Street with the frontage road connecting through meeting the access requirements and locational requirements for a Commercial location. The subject property has one-half (1/2) a mile frontage on T.H. 63 which is designated a freeway on the Transportation Plan and has one-half (1/2) a mile of frontage on an arterial which is County Road 147, 11th Avenue South West. The property also three-quarters (3a) of a mile of frontage along 40th Street which is proposed to have a major intersection with Highway 63. This type of street frontage provides a variety of opportunities for access to the property, all of which can support Commercial development as is being planned for in the Highway 63 South Corridor Study. The Commercial designation supports the business corridor concept to the airport along Highway 63. Commercial designation as proposed creates a deep parcel of property as a commercial "node" which cannot then develop as a "strip" commercial. 6. Commercial designation will strengthen a diverse business approach to Highway 63 by providing needed services to encourage new industrial park development along ,the corridor and strengthening of a diverse job base for the City of Rochester and County of Olmsted. 7. The planned land use request has been revised eliminating any commercial designation north of Willow Creek. This will provide a change in land use and/or buffer to residential areas north of 40th Street. 8. The land will not be developed until re -zoned, which will not take place until the Highway 63 South Corridor Study has identified specific improvements and a frontage road location. The owner has agreed to participate in the Corridor Study so that planning and infrastructure can be matched to the staging of future development. 9. Continuation of residential designation on this property would necessitate the public's spending a significant amount of money for noise attenuation to state standards for state highway improvements and increased highway traffic. In the Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area the locational criteria for low density residential uses are not met and the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning should be changed to a Commercial designation which is met based on a more complete adherence to the locational criteria for Commercial found in the Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area. The Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area recognizes not only location criteria but the demand for designated land use. The demand for Commercial development in this area along Highway 63 has expanded significantly with the announcement of the intentions to build a one (1) million to a one and one-half (llh) million square foot regional shopping center across the Highway. Such development changed the land use patterns on surrounding properties, especially when those fronting adjacent roads and interchanges. This proposed change in the area land uses creates need for many additional areas of ancillary Commercial uses brought about by the creation of the large magnet facility. The Cote property Commercial will complement and not compete with a regional shopping center. 10. Assessments have been placed on the property in anticipation of development which can only be reasonably born by Commercial development. 11. The anticipated tax difference between Residential and Commercial use is estimated to be between .7 and 1 million dollars per year. This tax base would be a significant benefit to the City of Rochester and the County of Olmsted. 12. Other tracts of land have been re -zoned to Commercial which exceeded forty (40) acres and were not located at the "intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with similar or higher level streets", i.e. Zone Change #94-1 (51 Acres Residential and 17 acres Industrial) and Zone Change 94-9 (59.94 Acres Residential). BEFORE THE COMMON COUNCIL CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA In Re: Revised Future Land Use Plan Amendment #94-6. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order On April 17, 1995, the Common Council of the City of Rochester conducted a public hearing, with notice to the public (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A, to hear the application of North American Realty, Inc., (hereinafter referred to as "Applicant") concerning 97.69 acres of land on the south side of 40th Street S.W. between llth Avenue S.W. on the west and U.S. Highway 63 on the east (hereinafter referred to as "Site"). The applicant originally made two requests: (1) amend . the Rochester Future Land Use'Map so as to redesignate the Site from "low density and medium density residential" to the "commercial" land use category; and, (2) rezone 74.32 acres of the 97.69 acreage from the R-1 designation (Mixed Single Family Residential) to the B-4 designation (General Business). At the March 8, 1995, Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing, Applicant amended its first request by removing from consideration that portion located north of Willow Creek. Applicant also asked that its rezoning request be tabled until June 14, 1995. Thus, the only issue before the Council is the amended request to change the Rochester Future Land Use Map so as to designate that portion of the Site lying south of Willow Creek as "commercial" land use. The Applicant's request to rezone that portion of the Site south of Willow Creek remains before the Planning and Zoning Commission and is not 0 before the Common Council. Applicant appeared at the April 17, 1995, hearing and. its President, Franklin P. Kottschade, spoke in favor of his request as amended. • During the hearing, the Council received and considered the March 24, 1995, Planning and Zoning Commission's Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendation with respect to the Future Land Use Map requested change. The Council also received and considered the Planning and Zoning Department's staff reports, an official letter from the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation, and an official letter from the City of Rochester Public Works Department. Following the April 17, 1995, public hearing, the Council closed the hearing and tabled the matter until June, 1995, to await the results of the ongoing ROCOG study of the Highway 63 south corridor. On June 5, 1995, the Council removed the issue from the table, directed the city attorney to prepare for its consideration proposed findings of fact and . conclusions of law in accordance with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendations, and gave the Applicant and all other adjacent property owners the opportunity to prepare proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law for the Council's consideration at the June 19, 1995, council meeting. At its June 19, 1995, meeting, the Council considered and discussed the entire matter, including all submitted findings of fact. In addition to the proposed findings of fact prepared by the city attorney, the Council received and considered proposed findings of fact submitted by (list those who submitted findings). Based upon that evidence which was presented at the April 17, 1995, hearing, the Council made the following 1q3 findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order. • FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On November 28, 1994, Applicant requested the amendment of the Rochester Future Land Use Map as to 218.64 acres of land located on the south side of 40th Street S.W. between llth Avenue S.W. on the west and U.S. Highway 63 on the east. At that time, the request was to change the designation of the west 120.95 acres of the subject property from the "low density residential" land use category to the "medium density residential" category and to rezone the 109.06 acres of the 120.95 acreage which lays within the city limits from R-1 (mixed single family residential) to R-3 (medium density residential). The applicant •requested that the Future Land Use Map for the remaining easterly 97.69 acres be amended from "low density residential" and "medium density residential" to "commercial" and to rezone 74.32 acres of the 97.69 acreage from R-1 (mixed low density residential) to B-4 (General Business). 2. On February 8, 1995, the Applicant amended his request by removing from consideration the 120.95 acre portion of the Site originally proposed for land use map designation as "medium density residential" and the 109.06 acre portion of the Site originally proposed for rezoning to R-3. As amended, the Applicant's request was to change the Future Land Use Map to designate the easterly 97.69 acreage to the "commercial" category and to rezone 74.32 acres of the 97.69 acreage from R-1 to B-4 (general business). (The 23.37 acres at 40th Street and Highway 63 has been sold by the applicant and will remain zoned R-1.) 1Q4 3. During the March 8, 1995, Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing, Applicant for the third time amended its request. Applicant asked that its rezoning request be tabled until June 14, 1995. Applicant also asked that its request to change the Future Land Use Map so that 97.69 acres be designated as "commercial" be further amended so as to remove from the 97.69 parcel all of that land lying north of Willow Creek. Attached and identified as Exhibit B is a map showing the revised boundary of the Applicant's request for a change to. the commercial land use designation. 4. The Applicant's President testified as to the intent to build a shopping center on the Site. 5. The Land Use Map reflects the policies and goals of the Land Use Plan. 6. Chapter II, Policies and Recommendations, of the Future Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area recommends ten Growth • Guidelines as part of the Recommended Growth Pattern which constitute the general policy basis of the Plan. The applicable guidelines are as follows: a) growth should occur in conjunction with community services and facilities and existing growth centers and should be exemplified by the illustration of the Multiple Growth Center Concept. b) all municipal service areas should be well defined and developed to accommodate and encourage new development. c) medium and high density housing should be developed in close proximity to commercial, industrial, and institutional centers and public facilities and services. d) commercial development should be concentrated in growth centers, with regional, community, and neighborhood shopping facilities provided in- the Rochester area and community commercial activities in the smaller growth centers. e) strip commercial development should be prohibited; commercial 0 1as development should be concentrated in clusters. f) where possible, growth patterns should be structured so as not to interfere with residential neighborhoods, prime agricultural land, and significant environmental areas; prime agricultural land should be preserved. 7. The text of the Future Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area lists four locational criteria applicable to a shopping center to be considered in determining whether to apply a commercial land use designation to the Site. Those criteria are: a) location at the intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with similar or higher level streets; b) having level terrain; c) having good pedestrian, vehicular, and transit access; and d) having at least 40 acres of land suitable for commercial development. 8. With respect to the specific locational criteria, the • Applicant's President and staff testified that the Site had level terrain and consisted of at least 40 acres of land suitable for commercial development. Thus, the specific locational criteria issues remaining for determination were whether the Site was located at the intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with similar or higher level streets and whether the Site had good pedestrian, vehicular, and transit access. There also remained the issue of whether the Applicant satisfied and complied with the ten Growth Guidelines for Recommended Growth Pattern contained in Chapter II, Policies and Recommendations, Rochester Future Land Use Plan. 9. The construction of retail shopping at this site would involve and affect the intersection of 40th Street S.W. and Highway 63. During the Planning and Zoning Commission's public hearing, Applicant's 0 representative, Mr. Uban, stated that Applicant intended to build a shopping center and a frontage road parallel to Highway 63 to accomplish the Applicant's development plans. • 10. The ROCOG ("Rochester -Olmsted Council of Governments") Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan designates Highway 63 as a future "freeway"; 40th Street S.W. and Highway 63 is not given the status of a highway interchange; llth Avenue S.W. (which is presently a gravel road) is given the status of an "arterial street"; a planned north -south road between 40th Street S.W. and 48th Street S.W. (running through the Site) are designated as collector streets; and 40th Street S.W. west of the planned north -south collector is designated as a collector street to llth Avenue S.W. 11. Applicant's proposed site has one sixty-six foot wide access opening to Highway 63 at the median opening at St. Bridgets Road. At the very southeast corner of the site, there is a shared access to Highway 63 with the adjacent property to the south. The property has . access potential to 40th Street S.W. Access east of the bridge on 40th Street can be extended into this site. Access west of the bridge cannot serve the site unless a bridge is built over Willow Creek. Access to the south on 48th Street S.W. is not available,as there are no access agreements with the relevant property owners. The City will be installing temporary traffic signals at the 40th Street S.W. and Highway 63 intersection sometime this year. 12. Assuming that a B-4 zoning district is ultimately approved for the site, and assuming a conservative floor area ratio of 0.30, there is the potential for 1,127,115 square feet of commercial building on this site. Applicant's President testified that the intention was to build a smaller shopping center of less than 560,000 square feet. • /S7 •Although the actual size of the commercial building ultimately built upon the Site may be smaller depending upon the developer's plans, there remains the potential for a 1,127,115 square feet commercial building located upon the Site should the Site's designation on the Land Use Map be changed to commercial. 13. Designation of the Site as commercial would allow the construction of a regional shopping center. Based upon information published in the 5th edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers information report "Trip Generation", and upon verification of those traffic numbers which occurred at Rochester's Apache Mall, a reasonable traffic generation rate is 40 trips per day per 1,000 square feet of floor area. This results in an estimated daily traffic generation potential for this site of 45,000 trips. For comparison • purposes, the estimated daily travel for 1990 on Highway 63 between 36th Street S.W. and 40th Street S.W. is 27,000 trips. 14. During the Planning and Zoning Commission's public hearing, Applicant's representative, Mr. Uban, testified that he anticipated the need for a frontage road. All of the City, State and Minnesota Department of Transportation corridor plans anticipate a frontage road, parallel to Highway 63 so as to provide access to the Site. Mr. Uban stated that currently there is no frontage road in place parallel to Highway 63 providing access to the Site. 15. During the Planning and Zoning Commission's public hearing, Applicant's representative, Mr. Uban, testified that development cannot overshadow the capacity of the highway and that there needs to be a staging of improvements with a staging of growth. 16. During the Planning and Zoning Commission's public hearing and the Common Council's public hearing, Applicant did not present any evidence or testimony which showed that: • a) anticipated growth resulting from a change to a commercial land use map designation for the Site would occur in conjunction with community services and facilities, and existing growth centers; b) municipal service areas were well defined and developed to accommodate and encourage the new commercial development; c) the requested change to a commercial land use map designation for the Site would not result in strip commercial development; or d) the requested change to a commercial land use map designation for the Site would not interfere with residential neighborhoods, prime agricultural land, and significant environmental areas; 17. Applicant's President testified that the requested change to a commercial land use map designation for the Site should be approved because the commercial designation results in a higher tax base for the City as compared to the current residential designation. He testified . that a residential development for the Site would provide $190,000 a year in property taxes (assuming 3.5 homes per acre with an average value of $90,000) while commercial development would provide from $875,000 to $1,250,000 a year in property taxes (assuming 450,000 square feet to 525,000 square feet of commercial development). 18. ROCOG, with support of MNDOT, is studying the Highway 63 south corridor from Highway 52 to Interstate 90 to determine: a) the long term character of the corridor relative to the type of travel service that should be provided (e.g., free flow or interrupted flow using either a freeway, expressway, arterial street design); b) a long term access management plan for the length of the corridor, considering potential development patterns within the area adjacent to the corridor as well as external travel growth; c) under a free flow freeway or expressway design, the number and . (gq location of interchanges needed to accommodate the crossing of major east -west roadway corridors and to provide adequate • access to lands in the Willow Creek area; d) verify or recommend changes to the ROCOG Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan as it relates to the local collector or arterial street system serving the local access needs of the - Willow Creek area; and, e) an interim traffic operations plan for the corridor from Highway 52 to St. Bridgets Road assuming that the speed with which the long term plan can be implemented will be affected by financial constraints at the state and local level. 19. Minnesota Department of Transportation testified by letter, with respect to Applicant's requests, and stated the following: a) although changing the zoning and the land use plan would have no immediate effect on the use of Highway 63 for transportation, subsequent activities as a result of these changes could create problems in implementing a long-range plan for Highway 63; and, b) the subject property lies at the intersection of Highway 63 and 40th Street S.W. (a major access point to Highway 63) and is in an area that will be addressed in the upcoming corridor study. Therefore, any steps taken toward development of this property may be premature in the fact that they may actually conflict with the corridor plan and hinder the development of the long-range plan for Highway 63; and, c) for these reasons, MNDOT believes any actions to develop land within the bounds of the Highway 63 corridor study should be postponed until completion of the study. 20. The City of Rochester Department of Public Works testified by letter and, with respect to the Applicant's request, stated the following: a) this request should be tabled pending completion of the T.H. 63 South Corridor Study currently being conducted by ROCOG. The study will define transportation needs and plans in this area. The land should not be rezoned until a plan for transportation is adopted; and, b) the alignment of future rights -of -way and alignment of the existing roadways should be determined prior to determination of a zoning change; and, . c) right-of-way for 40th Street S.W. realignment with St. Bridgets Road should be officially mapped and reserved on plat (qo map for highway purposes. 21. The study should result in final recommendations later this • year. Results of the study could be the basis for the development of land use controls in the Highway 63 corridor such as official maps or overlay zoning regulations. 22. The Highway 63 Corridor study is not yet complete and must be completed before any decisions relating to legislative determinations are considered, provided that such study will be completed within a reasonable time period. The process for consideration of amendments to the Land Use Map can begin upon completion of the Highway 63 Corridor study. 23. Although the Highway 63 Corridor study is not yet complete, it has reached preliminary conclusions. The Council received updates on that study on May 22 and June 5, 1995 (which were not prepared or presented in response to Applicant's request). Those updates indicate , that preliminarily the study will recommend that 48th Street S.W. remain the primary east -west arterial street, as indicated in the current ROCOG Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan, with a freeway interchange at Highway 63, and that 40th Street remain a collector street. 24. Since the results of the Highway 63 South Corridor study are not ,finalized and will require additional time to review and implement, it is proper to take affirmative action on Applicant's request based upon the existing Thoroughfare Plan, the Growth Guidelines and location criteria of the Future Land Use -Plan, and the evidence presented at the public hearing. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW s /ql 1. This matter is properly before the Common Council pursuant to • Minn. Stat. §462.355, subdivisions 2 and 3. 2. The Common Council of the City of Rochester determines that the Land Use Plan and Land Use Map should not be amended, upon consideration of the goals, objectives, strategies and policies of the current Urban Service Area Land Use Plan. The proposed Land Use Plan amendment is inconsistent with the existing Land Use Plan. 3. By the greater weight of the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, it is hereby determined by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that Applicant failed to satisfy the four locational criteria provided by the Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area in determining whether to apply the commercial land use designation to the Site and has failed to satisfy and meet the applicable Growth • Guidelines established by the Land Use Plan (guidelines 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7). 4. By the greater weight of the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, it is hereby determined by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the criteria for a regional shopping center applies to this Site, although the Applicant may intend .to build a smaller shopping center, because the "commercial" designation would allow a regional shopping center to be built on the Site. 5. By the greater weight of the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, it is hereby determined by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the property does not meet the locational criteria for a regional shopping center according to the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan because the site is not located at the • intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with a similar (q2-� or higher level street. The site is located at the intersection of a "collector" street (40th Street S.W.) and a freeway (Highway 63). 6. By the greater weight of the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, it is hereby determined by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the roadway system in the area currently does not provide the site with good pedestrian, vehicular, or transit access. ORDER The Common Council of the City of Rochester, pursuant to Minn. Stat. §462.355, subdivisions 2 and 3, does hereby Order that the applicant's request for an amendment to the Future Land Use Map for the Rochester Urban Service Area so as to designate as commercial a portion of 97.69 acres lying south of 40th Street S.W., south of Willow Creek, west of Highway 63 and east of 11th Avenue S.W. be in all things denied. Dated at Rochester, Minnesota this day of June, 1995. John Hunziker, President, Common Council • • 0 �EXHIBIT A 1q3 • NOTICE OF COUNCIL HEARING Notice is hereby given by the Common Council of the City of Rochester, Minnesota, that all persons interested in Urban Service Area Future Land Use Plan Amendment #94-6 by Franklin P. Kottschade on vacant land bounded by 40th Street SW on the north, TH 63 on the east, one quarter mile north of 48th Street SW and approximately 2,070 feet east of 11th Avenue SW. This property is proposed to be designated "Commercial' on the Future Land Use Map. The plan presently designates the majority of this property for "low density residential" land use and a small area of "medium density residential" at the southeast corner of the property may be heard at a meeting of the Common Council to be held in the Council Chambers in City Hall in said City at 7:00 p.m. on April 17, 1995. For further information or if you have questions regarding this matter please contact the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department at (507) 285-8232, 2122 Campus Drive SE, Rochester, MN 55904. Dated at Rochester, Minnesota, this 4th day of April, 1995. Carole Grimm City Clerk • DISTRRI lImox: Rochester Post Bulletin City Clerk Planning Department 0 U-. -M w sC; /ice/9S, FINDINGS OF FACTS Franklin P. Kottschade Request for Land Use Guide Plan Change to Commercial (94-6) for Commercial Use Designation The following are suggested findings which support that change in the land use plan: 1. The Highway 63 South Corridor Study undertaken by ROCOG and MnDOT, considered the area of the requested change to be Commercial in the May 31, 1995 Publication. The traffic projections in the Highway Corridor study were based on the Commercial use. 2. The eventual development of the property, because of limitations of flood plain, wetlands, and future frontage road will not exceed 520,000 square feet, which was the amount of commercial square footage considered in the Highway 63 South Corridor Study. All of the options in the Highway 63 South Corridor Study show either signals at 40th Street or an interchange with Highway 63. All of the options available are consistent with the planning criteria for a Commercial designation on this property. • 3. The requirement for intersecting arterials for Commercial designation is being met by the fact that a future frontage road will connect both 40th and 48th Street. The most probable arterial designation will be 40th Street with the frontage road connecting through meeting the access requirements and locational requirements for a Commercial location. The subject property has one-half ('h) a mile frontage on T.H. 63 which is designated a freeway on the Transportation Plan and has one-half (1h) a mile of frontage on an arterial which is County Road 147, 11th Avenue South West. The property also three-quarters (N) of a mile of frontage along 40th Street which is proposed to have a major intersection with Highway 63. This type of street frontage provides a variety of opportunities for access to the property, all of which can support Commercial development as is being planned for in the Highway 63 South Corridor Study. 4. The Commercial designation supports the business corridor concept to the airport along Highway 63. 5. -Commercial designation as proposed creates a deep parcel of property as a commercial "node" which cannot then develop as a "strip" commercial. 6. Commercial designation will strengthen a diverse business approach to Highway 63 by providing needed services to encourage new industrial park development along the corridor and strengthening of a diverse job base for the,City of Rochester and County • of Olmsted. 104;p 7. The planned land use request has been revised eliminating any commercial designation . north of Willow Creek. This will provide a change in land use and/or buffer to residential areas north of 40th Street. 8. The land will not be developed until re -zoned, which will not take place until the Highway 63 South Corridor Study has identified specific improvements and a frontage road location. The owner has agreed to participate in the Corridor Study so that planning and infrastructure can be matched to the staging of future development. 9. Continuation of residential designation on this property would necessitate the public's spending a significant amount of money for noise attenuation to state standards for state highway improvements and increased highway traffic. In the Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area the locational criteria for low density residential uses are not met and the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning should be changed to a Commercial designation which is met based on a more complete adherence to the locational criteria for Commercial found in the Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area. The Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area recognizes not only location criteria but the demand for designated land use. The demand for Commercial development in this area along Highway 63 has expanded significantly with the announcement of the intentions to build a one (1) million to a one and one-half (11h) million square foot regional shopping center across the Highway. Such development changed the land use patterns on surrounding properties, especially when those fronting adjacent.roads and interchanges. This • proposed change in the area land uses creates need for many additional areas of ancillary Commercial uses brought about by the creation of the large magnet facility. The Cote property Commercial will complement and not compete with a regional shopping center. 10. Assessments have been placed on the property in anticipation of development which can only be reasonably born by Commercial development. 11. The anticipated tax difference between Residential and Commercial use is estimated to be between .7 and 1 million dollars per year. This tax base would be a significant benefit to the City of Rochester and the County of Olmsted. 12. Other tracts of land have been re -zoned to Commercial which exceeded forty (40) acres and were not located at the "intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with similar or higher level streets", i.e. Zone Change #94-1 (51 Acres Residential and 17 acres Industrial) and Zone Change 94-9 (59.94 Acres Residential). 0 ►f- "._c'e : 17 SuV v.• (l2cQ lu-1�l �Itnlrov�u-cJ �� C�',�jO TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN RESPONSE TO YOUR REQUEST OF FINDINGS • OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT #94-6 PER YOUR SOLICITATION: THE PROPERTY BEING CONSIDERED FOR LAND USE AMENDMENT #94-6 IS SITUATED ON HIGHWAY 63 SOUTH, A PRIME COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR. THIS MAJOR ARTERY IS THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE CITY FROM THE SOUTH AND CARRIES HIGH TRAFFIC VOLUMES. PROPERTIES SITUATED ON THE NORTH AND EAST ARE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIALLY ZONED. IT APPEARS THAT THIS SITE IS MUCH BETTER SUITED FOR COMMERCIAL USES THEN ANY OTHER PARCEL ALONG THIS CORRIDOR WHICH HAS THE POTENTIAL FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE NEAR FUTURE. CLEARLY WHEN THIS PARCEL IS DEVELOPED IT WILL THROW OFF CONSIDERABLY MORE TAX REVENUE FROM A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THEN A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS NOT A ONE YEAR CASH DIFFERENTIAL - IT WILL CONTINUE FOR THE LONG TERM FUTURE. THE CITY OFFICIALS ARE APPARENTLY NOT AWARE THE IBM HAS INITIATED A VALUE AND TAX REVIEW ON THEIR FACILITIES WHICH MAY RESULT IN A REDUCTION IN TAXES PAID BY IBM BETWEEN $1,000,000 AND $1,600,000. OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE OR WILL ATTEMPT TO ABATED THEIR TAXES INCLUDING JIM SADLER, NORWEST AND MARQUETTE BANKS, TOYS R US AND OTHERS. APACHE MALL AND BARLOW'S HAVE ATTEMPTED TO REDUCE THEIR TAX BURDEN. DEVELOPMENT OF THE KOTTSCHADE PARCEL FOR COMMERCIAL USES WOULD IN PART OFFSET THIS ABATEMENT LOSS NOW AND IN THE FUTURE. OTHERWISE THE TAX BURDEN SHIFTS EVEN MORE HEAVILY ONTO THE EXISTING PROPERTY OWNERS IN ROCHESTER. THE CITY OF ROCHESTER IS SHORT OF COMMERCIAL LAND AT THIS TIME. THERE ARE A LIMITED NUMBER OF LARGE SCALE SITES AVAILABLE IN THE CITY OR IN ANNEXABLE AREAS. ATTEMPTING TO RELOCATE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT TO SECONDARY SITES IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE END USERS OR BY THE PLANNING STANDARDS OF EITHER THE LAND USE PLAN OR THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THIS PROJECT WOULD PROVIDE JOBS IN THE CONSTRUCTION FIELD , WHICH IS INCREASINGLY SLOW. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ALONG THIS CORRIDOR WILL PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT JOBS AND REVENUES FOR THE CITY IN THIS FUTURE. THERE IS DEMAND FOR RETAIL USES NOW AND IN THE FUTURE WHEN THE SOUTHWEST SECTION OF THE CITY EXPANDS. THERE ISN'T ANOTHER VIABLE CORRIDOR IN THE CITY WHICH IS AS READILY DEVELOPABLE FOR COMMERCIAL USES. SURE THERE ARE OTHER PROPERTIES SITUATED ALONG THIS CORRIDOR, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE UTILITIES TO THEM, ARE LOCATED OUTSIDE THE CITY, HAVE MAJOR SITE CORRECTION PROBLEMS OF ARE UNDEVELOPA13LE DUE TO TOPOGRAPHY OR FLOOD HAZARD. DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT PUTTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY DIRECTLY ON A MAJOR HIGHWAY IS THE BEST USE OF THIS LAND AND THE BEST FOR THE CITY? THE MOST SUCCESSFUL RESIDENTIAL. DEVELOPMENTS HAVE PROXIMITY TO THE ARTERIAL HIGHWAY SYSTEMS BUT ARE NOT LOCATED ON TOP OF THE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR. IS THIS REALLY THE BEST THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT CAN COME UP WITH? DOES THIS COUNCIL REALLY WANT TO GO DOWN AS THE ONE THAT PERMANENTLY LOST AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND THE TAX BASE AND JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY? LET THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA COMPETE IN THE MARKET FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND ZONE NOT ONLY THIS PROPERTY COMMERCIAL BUT THE PROPERTY THE TOM HEXUM IS BUYING AND THE GRAHAM PROPERTY AS WELL. PERHAPS IF YOU DO THIS YOU CAN AVOID ANOTHER COSTLY AND UNNECESSARY LAWSUIT CAUSED BY IT'S INTERESTING THAT THE CITIZENS OF THIS COMMUNITY ELECTED YOU TO LEAD AND ACT ON THEIR BEHALF. NOW YOU FEEL COMPELLED TO COVER YOUR TRACKS o PAGE TWO WITH WHAT AMOUNTS TO A REFERENDUM OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. OF COURSE TOM HEXUM IS AGAINST THIS REZONING - HE HAS A COMPETING LAND TRACT. DORSEY & WHITNEY IS ON RECORD AGAINST REZONING THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 63. (THEY REPRESENT NOT ONLY THE GRAHAMS, BUT APACHE MALL). OF COURSE THE GRAHAMS WOULD LIKE NOTHING BETTER THEN TO ELIMINATE COMPETITION FROM THE MARKETPLACE. THE PROPOSAL BY THE CITY TO MAKE THIS A RESIDENTIAL PARCEL IS VERY POOR PLANNING. IT IS INCONSISTENT WITH GENERAL PLANNING PRINCIPALS AND REPRESENTS POOR JUDGMENT IN BOTH THE SHORT AND LONG-TERM. YOU HAVE SEEN FIT TO REZONE OTHER PROPERTIES IN ROCHESTER WITH INCONSISTENT LAND USE PLANS TO COMMERCIAL AND OTHER ZONES. DON'T LET AN OUT OF DATE LAND USE PLAN BE THE GUIDING DOCUMENT TO RESULT IN A DECISION THAT WILL IMPACT THIS COMMUNITY FOR THE LONG-TERM FUTURE. THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD STAND FOR THE OVERALL GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY AND USE SOME COMMON SENSE IN THIS MATTER. THERE ARE SO MANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AREAS AVAILABLE AND SO FEW VIABLE COMMERCIAL SITES. DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE FOR RESIDENTIAL USES WOULD BE AT A COST TO THE CITY THAT THEY MAY NOT EASILY RECOVER FROM. THE EYES OF ALL EMPLOYERS AND DEVELOPERS ON THE CITY IN THIS ACTION. DON'T FOR ONE MINUTE THINK THAT THE EMPLOYERS AREN'T CONSIDERING THE ACTIONS OF THE COUNCIL ON THIS PROPERTY IN THEIR DECISIONS ON EXPANSION AND RELOCATION. IF GUS CHAFOULIAS OWNED THIS PROPERTY THERE WOULDN'T BE ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULDN'T GIVE HIM. PERHAPS YOU SHOULD STEP BACK FROM THIS RUSH TO JUDGMENT AND DO SOMETHING WILL LONG-TERM BENEFITS FOR THE CITY. IF THIS PARCEL WAS OWNED BY ANYONE OTHER THE FRANK KOTTSCHADE YOU WOULD BE WELCOMING THE ZONE CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL WHY DON'T YOU STOP CUTTING SECRET DEALS IN AN EFFORT TO DO IN SOMEONE YOU DON'T LIKE AND DO SOMETHING THAT IS GOOD FOR THE CITY AND THE REGION. THERE ISN'T AN EMPLOYER IN THIS AREA THAT ISN'T WATCHING THIS ONE AND THINKING THAT IF THIS IS THE WAY THEY TREAT THIS DEVELOPER, THAT THEY COULD TREAT ME THIS WAY. IF THIS IS THE BEST THE PLANNING STAFF CAN COME UP WITH DO WE REALLY NEED TO BE SPENDING MONEY ON THEM? RESIDENTIAL ON A MAJOR HIGHWAY CORRIDOR? THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO APPROVE THE REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT #94-6 AND ALLOW THIS PROPERTY TO BE REZONED FOR GENERAL COMMERCIAL USES. CC: MR. FRANK KOTTSCHADE ROCHESTER POST BULLETIN REP. DAVE BISHOP SUPT. JACK NOENNIG, JIM ROSSMAN DICK DEVLIN 0 TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jeffrey Ellerbusch, Planner DATE: March 3,1995 M ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE 09 / ROCHESTER MN 55904-47" ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING HOUSING/HRA 507/28"224 BUILDING CODE 5071285.8213 WELL/SEPTIC 507/285.8345 RE: Revised Future Land Use Plan Amendment #94-6 and Zoning District Change #94-10 Planning Department Review: Applicant: NA Realty, Inc. Franklin, P. Kottschade, President 3800 Highway 52 North Rochester, MN 55901 Consultants: McGhie and Betts, Inc. 1648 3rd Avenue SE Rochester, MN 55904 Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. 300 First Avenue North Suite 210 Minneapolis, MN 55401 On November 28, 1995, the present applicant N.A. Realty, Inc., submitted applications to amend the Rochester Future Land Use Map on 218.64 acres of land located on the south side of 40th Street SW between 11th Avenue SW on the west and U.S. 63 on the east. The request at that time was to redesignate the west 120.95 acres from the "low density residential- land use category to the 'medium density residential' designation and rezone the 109.06 portion in the present city limits from R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential). The remaining easterly 97.69 acres was requested to be amended from 'low density residential' and "medium density residential' to "commeralar and rezone 74.32 acres of the area (Mixed Low Density Residential) to B-4 (General Business) A 23.37 we parcel in the northeast comer of the property at the comer of 40th Street SW and U.S. 63 was not included in • the rezoning request to B-4 because the applicant indicated he was no longer the legal owner of this parcel. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY I AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 / n n/� Land Use Plan #94-6 & Zone Change #94-10 (/1`tJtJ March 3, 1995 The original Land Use Plan Amendment #94-6 and Zoning District Change #94-10 was • scheduled for a public hearing before the City Planning and Zoning Commission on December 14, 1994. The Planning Department in its report to the Commission suggested that plans with additional detail be presented by the applicant and that a predevelopment meeting to discuss the proposal would be necessary to clarify the original questions and concerns raised in the staff report so an informed decision could be made. N.A. Realty, Inc., requested that the Commission continue the public hearing to a later date to give an opportunity for an appropriate response. On•February 8, 1995, the applicant requested that the City Planning and Zoning Commission reschedule consideration of the matter on March 8, 1995. The applicant submitted a written report on the land use plan amendment and rezoning request and copies were distributed to the Planning Commissioners at their February 8, 1995 meeting. A complete copy of the submitted information is attached to this.report. The information submitted by N.A. Realty, Inc., on February 8, 1995, officially amended the original application by removing from consideration the portion of the site originally proposed for designation as "medium density residential" and rezoning to R-3. The proposal as it stands now is to amend the Future Land Use Map to designate the 97.69 acres (gross) to the "commercial". The present plan designations for this portion of the site are "low density" residential over all but approximately five acres of the site near the southeast corner where the "medium density residential" designation is shown. This "medium density" designation was shown on the plan because the Thoroughfare Plan indicates an interchange is planned at TH 63 and 48th Street. Medium density land use would be anticipated in close proximity to such an access location. The portion of the site subject to flooding from Willow Creek is shown as "Flood Prone" area which is treated for zoning purposes as an overlay land use designation. The rezoning request that accompanies this land use plan amendment includes only a subset of the entire acreage. Of the 97.69 acres proposed to be designated "commercial" 74.32 acres is requested to be zoned from R-1 to B-4 (General Business). The 23.37 acres at 40th Street and TH 63 that has been sold by NA Realty, Inc., will presently remain zoned R-1 (Mixed Single) Family. Adjacent Land Use Designations and Zoning: The following existing land uses and their respective plan designations and zoning districts lie adjacent to the property in question: East: U.S. 63 (South Broadway) a four lane, divided highway with at grade intersections designated as a "freeway" on the Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan. Across U.S. 63 from this site is the Petrol Pumper Truck Stop to the north of St. Bridget's Road zoned B-4 (General Business) and planned for "Commercial". South of St. Bridget's Road is vacant land zoned M-1 0 rage j Land Use Plan #94-6 & Zone Change #94-10 March 3, 1995 ZROI (Mixed Commercial Industrial) and planned for "Industrial" use. • To the south of the vacant M-1 lands are two parcels zoned B-4 (General Business) planned for "Commercial" and used as two dwelling sites and associated commercial businesses as a kennel and landscape & garden store. South: Farm and Farmstead zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) planned for "Medium Density Residential" and "Low Density Residential". West: The remainder of the N.A. Realty, Inc., property zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) and planned for 'Low Density Residential" use. North: 40th Street SW, a planned "collector' street. North of 40th Street from TH 63 west to Willow Creek the land is zoned M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial) and shown for "Industrial" use on the Future Land Use Map. There are several industrial shops in this area. West of the Creek on the north side of 40th Street is the Willowridge Mobile Home Community on Willow Ridge Drive SW and single family homes on Willow Heights Drive SW and Willow Ct. SW. The mobile homes are zoned R-2 (Low Density Residential) and the detached single family homes are zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family). These existing residential uses are planned in a "low density residential" area on the Future Land Use Map. Flood Plain: The Federal Emergency Management Agency has Prepared floodway and flood boundary maps that are being adopted by the City. These maps establish overtay zoning districts on this property. Of the 97.69 area proposed for commercial designation, 16.47 acres or 17 percent is in the floodway of Willow Creek where no structures are allowed. 30.79 acres of the site is in the 100 year flood fringe which for zoning purposes falls in the category of "Flood Prone" district (62.803 of the Zoning Code). Flood prone areas can be developed N elevated above the Flood Protection Elevation. Any filling in the Flood Prone area must meet the additional standards of 62.860 of the Zoning Code which require no net loss of storage of floodwaters on the site because of the development. The 74.32 acre area proposed to be zoned B-4 contains 10.6 acres of • Page 4 �aLand Use Plan #94-6 8 Zone Change #94-4.0 March 3, 1995 floodway (14% of the total area) and 13.29 acres of floodprone flood fringe. • Wetlands: The portion of this site outside the floodway has had wetlands delineated under the interim wetland rules through a study completed in December of 1993. We have been told by the consultant for the project that a new delineation is being prepared and will be submitted. According to the 1993 delineation, there are 16.73 acres of wetland along the frontage of US 63. All wetlands filled or drained must be replaced. The 1993 study said the plan was to drain or fill all the existing wetlands on the site. Transportation Access: This site has one 66' wide access opening to US 63 at the median opening at St. Bridgets Road. At the very southeast comer of the site this property has a shared access to US 63 with the adjacent property to the south. The property has access potential to 40th Street SW. Access east of the bridge on 40th Street can be extended into this property. West of the bridge on 40th Street and off 11th Avenue SW, access can only serve the portion of the site between the roadways and Willow Creek unless a bridge is built over Willow Creek. The property has no access agreements with the owners to the south, so access to 48th Street SW is not available. • . The City will be installing traffic signals at the 40th Street SW and US 63 intersection early this year. Thoroughfare Plan: The ROCOG Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan designates TH 63 as a future "freeway", 48th Street SW and TH 63 as the location of a highway interchange, 11th Avenue SW (presently a gravel road) as an arterial street, 40th Street and a planned north -south road between 48th and 40th Street SW as collector streets. (See attached map). A major study of the US 63 South Corridor from US 52 to Interstate 90 has been undertaken by ROCOG as lead agency with support from MN DOT. The study has the following elements: 1. Defining the long term character for the corridor in terms of the type of travel service to provide (Freeway, expressway, arterial). 2. Developing a long term access management plan for the length of the corridor, considering potential development pattems within the area adjacent to the . corridor as well as extemal travel growth. Page 5 Land Use Plan #94-6 & Zone Change #94-10 March 3, 1995 ;0 3 / • 3. Identifying the preferred location and provide preliminary design evaluation for an interchange in the vicinity of St. Bridgets Road between 40th and 48th Street SW. 4. Assembling a recommendation on the preferred local collector street system for the adjacent lands located in the core area of the corridor (the core area is defined as US 52 to St. Bridgets Road). 5. Developing an interim operations plan for the core area for implementation assuming that major upgrading will be limited by financial constraints at the local and state level. This study should result in final recommendations early this year. Results of the study could be the basis for the development of other land use controls in the US 63 corridor such as official maps or overlay zoning regulations. For the purposes of efficient analysis, the subject property has been included in the traffic forecast and modeling work being done in the study as potentially • commercial property. Zoning Ordinance Definitions: The requested zoning district is described in the zoning ordinance as follows: B-4 General Commercial District: This district is intended to provide for areas of concentrated commercial development outside the Central Development Core, oriented towards thoroughfare locations because of the access and visibility those locations provide, and consistent with the locational criteria for such uses in the Land Use Plan. Uses in the district are generally of a type providing service to the residents of the entire region or community. The staff attempted to evaluate the development potential of the site under several assumptions since no specific development plan has been submitted by the applicant. Wetland Assum ono: A wetland determination study of this property was 0 submitted to the City in December of 1993. The study aPage 6 Land Use Plan #94-6 S Zone Change f194-10 March 3, 1995 identified 24.91 acres of wetlands located on the • property outside of the floodway of Willow Creek. 16.13 acres of these wetlands are within the area now proposed to be designated "commercial" on the Future Land Use Map. The study stated that the owner planned on filling or draining all the identified wetlands and would replace the wetlands on site by excavating the uplands that lie within the floodway of Willow Creek. The study estimated that approximately 25% of the land area in the floodway is a jurisdictional wetland leaving about 47 acres of upland floodway available for wetland replacement area. Based on the conclusions of this study, the staff assumes all the wetland areas will be replaced before a development permit is requested and therefore these areas can be included in the net developable acreage calculations for the site. Zoning Assumptions: The present request is to rezone to the B-4 (General Commercial) Zoning District 74.32 acres of the97.69 acres of land that is proposed to be designated': "Commercial" on the Future Land Use Map. For purposes of analysis the remaining 23.37 acre area that is presently not petitioned fro rezoning from the R-1 district is assumed to also be zoned B-4, the same as • the adjacent petitioned property. Net Buildable Area: The proposal is to designate 97.69 acres of land as "commercial" on the Future Land Use Map. Applying the site capacity calculation procedures of Section 61.532 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual this 97.69 acre site has a "net buildable area" of 86.25 acres. This figure of net buildable area is used in the Zoning Ordinance to determine the extent to which a site can be utilized for development based on the Zoning Ordinance standards for permitted floor area ration. Development Potential: The B-4 zoning district request has a permitted floor area ratio of 0.50. As applied to the net buildable area of the property proposed to be designated "commerciar, a total of 43.125 acres or 1,878.525 square feet of permitted commercial floor area is allowed on the sift. This potential floor area would amount to two and a half Apache Malls. A realistic assumption is that this property would never develop at such a phenomenal rate. It is probably more reasonable to assume that the maximum potential commercial development of this site will be at a density similar to other shopping centers in the Rochester area. Page 7 Land Use Plan #94-6 & Zone Change 094-10 March 3, 1995 aril r� 0 If it is assumed that parking for the commercial use on the property will be in surface lots (not parking structures) and the site will develop with landscape area of 10 percent or more then the actual floor area ratio is closer to 0.30. This would result in 1,127,115 square feet of commercial building on this site, which is still one and a half Apache Malls. There are various reasons that the actual building square footage on this site would even be less than 1,127,115 square feet. For example, if the property developed more land intensive uses than a typical retail shopping center this would affect the maximum floor area. Or if a commercial park with needs for public streets or an open space oriented business/office park would also be styles of development that could reduce the overall commercial floor area. Without any knowledge of the developers specific intent for the site the public must evaluate the proposal from reasonably conservative assumptions. Trip Generation The estimates of the potential building on the site can be converted into estimates of daily traffic generated by such buildings. Assuming the development to be typical retail regional shopping center, a reasonable traffic generation rate is 40 trips/per day/per 1,000 square feet of floor area. This results in an estimated daily traffic generation for this site of 45,000 trips. The estimated acreage daily travel for 1990 on US 63 between 36th Street SW and 40th Street SW is 27,000 cars for comparison purposes. Based on the actual mix of commercial land uses the trip generation can vary When evaluating a proposal to amend the Future Land Use Map and rezone property there are two sets of criteria which should be used to reach a decision on the matters under consideration. The text of the Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area lists locational criteria for various land use designations. The plan would identify a single commercial area of the size proposed to be in the category of a 'regional shopping center. The plan document includes the following locational criteria for such uses. a} Located at the inteon of a major arterial or higher level street with similar or higher level streets. b) Having level tern kL c) Having good pedeabi vehicular, and transit access. Page 8 n n/_ Land Use Plan #94-6 & Zone Change #94-10 �ll�J March 3, 1995 d) Having at least 40 acres of land suitable for commercial development. . Section 60.338 of the Rochester Zoning ordinance and Land Development Manual states the policies for rezoning petitions and the findings that the City Planning and Zoning Commission and Council must address when considering a zoning district amendment. For map amendments (rezonings) the following findings addressing the relationship of the proposed rezoning to the following policies must be made: a) whether the area, -as presently zoned, is inconsistent with the policies and goals of the Comprehensive plan, or the land was originally zoned erroneously due to a technical or administrative error; or b) whether the area for which rezoning is requested has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to rezone so as to encourage redevelopment of the area; or c) whether permitted uses allowed within the proposed zoning district will be appropriate on the subject property and compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood; or d) whether the proposed amendment involves spot zoning. (Spot Zoning involves the reclassification of a single lot or several small lots to a district which is different than that assigned to surrounding properties, for reasons inconsistent with the purposes set forth in this ordinance, the state enabling legislation, or the decisions of courts in this state). Evaluating the proposed amendment and rezoning in light of the above listed criteria and policies the staff finds the following: The property does not meet the locational criteria for a regional shopping center according to the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan because the site is not located at the intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with a similar or higher level street. The site is located at the intersection of a "collector" street being 40th Street SW and US 63 a planned "freeway" as designated on the Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan. This site presently meets the locational criteria for a "neighborhood shopping center" of four to eight acres according to the locational criteria for commercial uses in the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan. 2..At the present level of improvements, the roadway system in the area does not provide the site with the good pedestrian, vehicular or transit access. The existing at grade field drive access locations, if developed to accommodate commercial traffic at a level that a site of this size could seriously reduce the level of service of US 63. 3. When considering the rezoning of this 74.32 acres the policy in Section 60.338 (1) (c) of the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual requires that the City evaluate whether the uses permitted in the requested zoning district (in this case the B-4 zone) are compatible with the adjacent properties and the neighborhood. The staff suggests that the portion of the rezoning area between Willow Creek and 40th Street SW across the road from the Willowridge Mobile Home Park and the single family homes in Willow Heights could permit Page 9 Land Use Plan #94-6 & Zone Change #94-10 March 3. 1995 ;Z67 / • 0 uses which would be incompatible with the adjacent residential uses. It also is found that the uses potentially permitted in the 84 zone could generate traffic demands that are incompatible with the present adjacent roads (property) being 40th Street SW and U.S. 63. The conclusions of the U.S. 63 corridor study may result in recommended modifications to the roadway classifications and improvements to the system which would then qualify this site or a portion thereof as a regional shopping center location. At the present time, "commercial" redesignation would perpetuate an extension of strip commercial development. At the present time the proposal as submitted does not adequately meet the locational criteria or rezoning policies and should be denied. Whatever the decision of the City Planning and Zoning Commission is on this petition, the Commission should request that their decision be stated as findings of fact with the assistance of the City Attorney. The findings can be reviewed by the Commission and voted on at the next meeting following the decision. For the information of the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council the staff requested that the City Attorney evaluate the options for establishing a moratorium on development applications that would have a direct effect in the area of influence of the US 63 corridor. A memo dated February 23, 1995, from the City Attorney is attached for your review. The establishment of a moratorium on development is a decision that would rest the City Council. The Commission may wish to discuss the efficacy of a moratorium. Attachments: 1. Applicant's Submittal 2. 600 Scale Location Map 3. Future Land Use Map 4. City Zoning Map 5. Flood Boundary Map 6. Thoroughfare Plan 7. Referral Comments from Public Works 8. Referral Comments from RPU Water 9. Referral Comments from RPU Electric 10. Referral Comments from MN Dot 11. Memo from the City Attomey W O O v - 3 - _ U �� L. Q= '- G R O C •O � a° <- G U_ [i U s R C> L U G v im (`J L w •� C •C U C ^ V h� F U O U U U _ Wc � R CD U m G U m i-- _ i L. U Ci 2_ T C- L u •= G u ` 0 •i - L- C R a - u U- p- L u U u •� m ]C V •G •y WCK �• 0- R - R R V C CI w U - - C G U - U U. u_` .� .`-v r V G Y. ` V R U r U p C L C-- L R- .� L ,` v r _ p 1! Y R U 7 V- T U C �+ •U R - R ^-, - m •�_' L. •L V E \ L T • O Z U f' - - V .R - v - U �f. = iC - •R i+ O^ R Cp c u•` m •O LO u a= p u R- N V T -_G L - W 1 U, 2 Wrn O c v a c 3 � � a OLO �NW� J U Z U W < W wOW < m Z= O 4nZ 0 o O W J inm0`� �T W W Y W Z— Z<Oam W W D W >:OOJi Z l Z 4W^ ONyZ OG W—"LU W L W a<= N O L Z • 0 � 171 � � � \ � 7 k 4 ::c �> £4£2a§ _.n_3071 s _,_weo mZ __dsa #_d_ __- J« \ \\\¢ \� \\\ƒ\ ROCHESTER December 5, 1994 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904A744 FROM: Department of Public Works ,pCN CSiCA•Ml1` �'Tc o::i ai ��.'•� • DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORK. 1602 4th Street S.E. Rochester. MN 55904-4718 (507) 281-6" FAX 1r(507) 281-6216 RE: URBAN SERVICE AREA FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT #94-6 & ZONING DISTRICT CHANGE #94-10 BY FRANKLIN P. KOTTSCHADE The Department of Public Works comments are as follows: 1. ASSESSMENTS J8868 Water Tower . $1,022.18 per acre, plus interest 07.5% from 2/22/89. $30.00 per foot direct connect to watermain on 40th St. S.W., plus interest 07.5% from 2/22/89. Trunkline Sanitary Sewer $1100 per acre (40 acres previously assessed in 1974). (30.44 acres Plat 5143 Parcel 01100, 9.56 acres Plat 5143 Parcel 00700). Direct Connect to Trunkline Sanitary Sewer $25.00 per foot. J8989 Wale 787 feet (T.H.63 Frontage) x $45.3309 per foot $35.961.15 Plus interest 07.5% from 6/19/89. 0 • Page - 2 2. This request should be tabled pending completion of the T.H.63 South Corridor Study currently being conducted by ROCOG. The study will define transportation needs and plans in this area. The land should not be rezoned until a plan for transportation is adopted. 3. The alignment of future rights -of -way and realignment of the existing roadways should be determined prior to determination of a zoning change. 4. Right-of-way for 40th Street S.W. realignment with St. Bridgets Road should be officially mapped and reserved on plat map for highway purposes. 4000 E. River Rd.: N.E. / Rochester, MN 55906-2813 FAX: 507/280 • FAX: 507/280-1542 December 2, 1994 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOL LDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Urban Service Area Future Land Use Plan Amendment 94-6 and Zoning District Change 94-10 by Franklin P. Kottschade on 218.64 acres lying along the south side of 40 Street SW, the west side of TH 63 South and the east side of 11 Avenue SW. The easterly 97.69 acres of this area is proposed to be designated 'commercial' on the land use plan and 7432 acres of this area to be rezoned from R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential) to B-4 (General Commercial). The westerly 120.95 acres is proposed to be designated for 'medium density residential" land use and the 109.06 acres of the area presently in the city limits is requested to be rezoned from R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential) to R-3 (Medium . Density Residential). Dear Ms. Decklever. Our review of the referenced petition/s complete and our comments follow: 1. The property is subject to assessments for the Willow Heights storage facilities. 2. The is a 12' water main in -place along the south side of 40 Street SW. 3. When the property develops there will be need for additional water mains and easements. if there are questions, please contact us at 280-1505. Very truly yours, G��e Harold F. Wobschall Senior Engineering Technician Water Division �tNN�oT 1OP December 13, 1994 Minnesota Department of Transportation District 6 2900-48th St. N.W. Box 6177 Rochester, Minnesota 55903-6177 Rochester -Olmsted Consolidated Planning Dept. Planning Division 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester. MN 55904-4744 ATTN: Rose Decklever. Planning 49(3 507/285-7353 RE: Urban Service Area Future Land Use Plan Amendment #94-6 and Zoning District Change #94.10 by Franklin P. Kottschade on 218.64 acres lying along the south side of 40'A Street SW. the west side of T.H. 63 and the east side of 11"' Avenue SW. Dear Ms. Decklever: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed zoning change and the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Plan. As the area considered lies adjacent to Trunk Highway (T.H.) 63, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has an interest in this matter. • Although changing the zoning and the Land Use Plan would have no immediate affect on the use of T.H. 63 for transportation, subsequent activities as a result of these changes could create problems in implementing a long-range plan for T.H. 63. As you know, a consultant is currently studying the T.H. 63 corridor in this area and is due to complete a Corridor Study report in early 1995. The recommendations of the T.H. 63 Corridor Study will lead to a Proposed Phasing Plan that could be completed by ROCOG in late March to mid -April. The subject property lies at the intersection of T.H. 63 and 40"' Street SW (a major access point to T.H. 63) and is in an area that will be addressed in the upcoming Corridor Study. Therefore, any steps taken toward development of this property may be premature in the fact that they may actually conflict with the Corridor Plan and hinder the development of the long-range plan for T.H. 63. For the reasons cited above. Mn/DOT feels that any actions to develop land within the bounds of the T.H. 63 Corridor Study (including the subject property) should be postponed until completion of the study in early 1995. If you have any questions or comments regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely. Dale A. Grove District Design Engineer 4n EQtw OPPorturufy Emdoyer BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA 0 In Re: Revised Future Land Use Plan Amendment 094-6 and Zoning District Findings of Fact, Change 194-10. Conclusions of Law, and Recommendation On March 8, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Rochester conducted a public hearing, with notice to the public, to hear the applications of North American Realty, Inc., (hereinafter referred to as "Applicant") concerning 97.69 acres of land on the south side of 40th Street S.W. between lath Avenue S.W. on the west and U.S. Highway 63 on the east (hereinafter referred to as "Site"). The applicant originally made two requests: (1) amend the Rochester Future Land Use Map so as to designate the Site to the "commercial" land use category;• and, (2) rezone 74.32 acres of the 97.69 acreage from the R-1 designation (Mixed Single Family Residential) to the B-4 designation (General Business). At the hearing, Applicant amended his first request so as to remove from the Site that portion located north of Willow Creek. Applicant also asked that his rezoning request be tabled until the Summer of 1995. Thus, the only issue before the Commission is the amended request to change the Rochester Future Land Use Map so as to designate that portion of the Site lying south of Willow Creek as "commercial" land use. Applicant appeared at the hearing and spoke in favor of his requests as amended. Applicant's consultant, John Uban of Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc., also appeared and testified in favor of the amended •requests. Following the hearing, the Commission considered the matter and, based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, made the following findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On November 28, 1994, Applicant requested the amendment of the Rochester Future Land Use Map as to 218.64 acres of land located on the south side of 40th Street S.W. between llth Avenue S.W. on the west and U.S. Highway 63 on the east. At that time, the request was to change the designation of the west 120.95 acres from the "low density residential" land use category to the "medium density residential" category and to rezone the 109.06 acres in the city limits from R-1 (mixed single family residential) to R-3 (medium density residential). The applicant requested that the remaining easterly 97.69 acres be amended from "low density residential" and "medium density residential" to "commercial" and rezone 74.32 acres of the area (mixed low density residential) to B-4 (General Business). 2. On February 8, 1995, the applicant amended his request by removing from consideration the portion of the site originally proposed for designation as "medium density residential" and proposed for rezoning to R-3. As amended, the applicant's request was to amend the Future Land Use Map to designate the 97.69 acres to the "commercial" category and to rezone 74.32 acres of the 97.69 acreage from R-1 to B-4 (general business). (The 23.37 acres at 40th Street and Highway 63 which has been sold by the applicant will remain zoned R-1.) 3. During the March 8, 1995, hearing, applicant again amended his request. Applicant asked that his rezoning request be tabled until the • Summer of 1995. Applicant also asked that his request to change the Future Land Use Map so that 97.69 acres be designated as "commercial" be further amended so as to remove from the 97.69 parcel that land lying north of willow Creek. 4. The Land Use Map reflects the policies and goals of the Land Use Plan. 5. The text of the Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area lists four criteria to be considered in determining whether to apply the commercial land use designation to the Site. Those criteria are: a) located at the intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with similar or higher level streets; b) having level terrain; 0 c) having good pedestrian, vehicular, and transit access; and d) having at least 40 acres of land suitable for commercial development. 6. The Applicant and staff testified that the Site had level terrain and consisted of at least 40 acres of land suitable for commercial development. Thus, the issues were whether the Site was located at the intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with similar or higher level streets and whether the Site had good pedestrian, vehicular, and transit access. 7. The construction of retail shopping at this site would involve and affect the intersection of 40th Street S.W. and Highway 63. During the public hearing, applicant0s representative, Mr. Uban, stated that there was a need to connect with 40th Street to accomplish the Applicant's development plans. • 8. The ROCOG ("Rochester -Olmsted Council of Governments") Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan designates Highway 63 as a future "freeway", 48th Street S.W. and Highway 63 as the location of a highway interchange, llth Avenue S.W. (which is presently a gravel road) as an "arterial street", and 40th Street and a planned north -south road between 40th Street S.W. and 48th Street S.W. (running through the Site) as collector streets. 9. Applicant's proposed site has one sixty-six foot wide access opening to Highway 63 at the median opening at St. Bridgets Road. At the very southeast corner of the site, there is a shared access to Highway 63 with the adjacent property to the south. The property has access potential to 40th Street S.W. Access east of the bridge on 40th Street can be extended into this site. Access west of the bridge cannot O-erve the site unless a bridge is built over Willow Creek. Access to the south on 48th Street S.W. is not available as there are no access agreements with the relevant property owners. The City will be installing temporary traffic signals at the 40th Street S.W. and Highway 63 intersection sometime this year. 10. Assuming that a B-4 zoning district is ultimately approved for the site, and assuming a conservative floor area ratio of 0.30, there is the potential for 1,127,115 square feet of commercial building on this site. The size of the commercial building may be smaller depending upon the developer's plans, but the potential for this size of commercial building remains. li. Designation of the Site as commercial would allow the construction of a retail regional shopping center. Based upon ace i information provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, and upon verification of those traffic numbers which occurred at Rochester's . Apache Mall, a reasonable traffic generation rate is 40 trips per day per 1,000 square feet of floor area. This results in an estimated daily traffic generation potential for this site of 45,000 trips. For comparison purposes, the estimated daily travel for 1990 on Highway 63 between 36th Street S.W. and 40th Street S.W. is 27,000 trips. 12. During the public hearing, applicant's representative, Mr. Uban, testified that he anticipated the need for a frontage road, and all of the corridor plans have anticipated a frontage road, parallel to Highway 63 so as to provide access to the Site. He stated that currently there is no frontage road in place parallel to Highway 63 providing access to the Site. 13. ROCOG, with support of MNDOT, is studying the Highway 63 south corridor from Highway 52 to Interstate 90 to determine: a) the long term character for the corridor in terms of the type of travel service that should be provided (e.g., freeway, expressway, arterial streets); b) a long term access management plan for the length of the corridor, considering potential development patterns within the area adjacent to the corridor as well as external travel growth; c) the preferred location and preliminary design evaluation for an interchange in the vicinity of St. Bridgets Road between 40th and 48th Street S.W.; d) the preferred local collector street system for the adjacent lands located in the core area -of the corridor (the core area is defined as Highway 52 to St. Bridgets Road); and, e) an interim operations plan for the core area for implementation assuming that major upgrading will be limited by financial constraints at the local and state level. 14. The study should result in final recommendations early this year. Results of the study could be the basis for the development of 0 Aq i land use controls in the Highway 63 corridor such as official maps or *overlay zoning regulations. 15. Minnesota Department of Transportation testified by letter, with respect to Applicant's requests, and stated the following: a) although changing the zoning and the land use plan would have no immediate effect on the use of Highway 63 for transportation, subsequent activities as a result of these changes could create problems in implementing a long-range plan for Highway 63; and, b) the subject property lies at the intersection of Highway 63 and 40th Street S.W. (a major access point to Highway 63) and is in an area that will be addressed in the upcoming corridor study. Therefore, any steps taken toward development of this property may be premature in the fact that they may actually conflict with the corridor plan and hinder the development of the long-range plan for Highway 63; and, c) for these reasons, MNDOT believes any actions to develop land within the bounds of the Highway 63 corridor study should be postponed until completion of the study in early 1995. 16. The Highway 63 Corridor study is not yet complete, and must be •completed before any decisions relating to legislative determinations are considered, provided that such study will be completed within a reasonable time period. The process for consideration of amendments to the Land Use Map can begin upon completion of the Highway 63 Corridor study. 17. The Department of Public Works testified by letter and, with respect to the Applicant's request, stated the following: a) this request should be tabled pending completion of the T.H. 63 South Corridor Study currently being conducted by ROCOG. The study will define transportation needs and plans in this area. The land should not be rezoned until a plan for transportation is adopted; and, b) the alignment of future rights -of -way and alignment of the existing roadways should be determined prior to determination of a zoning change; and, c) right-of-way for 40th Street S.W. realignment with St. Bridgets Road should be officially mapped and reserved on plat map for highway purposes. 18. During the public hearing, applicant's representative, Mr. . Uban, testified that development cannot overshadow the capacity of the highway and that there needs to be a staging of improvements with a staging of growth. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. This matter is properly before the Planning Commission pursuant to Minn. Stat. S462.355, subd. 2. 2. At the applicant's request, the request to rezone 74.32 acres of the 97.69 acreage from the R-1 designation (Mixed Single Family Residential) to the B-4 designation (General Business) is tabled until June, 1995. 3. The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Rochester determines that the Land Use Plan and Land Use Map should not be . amended, upon consideration of the goals, objectives, strategies and policies of the current Urban Service Area Land Use Plan. The proposed Land Use Plan amendment is inconsistent with the existing Land Use Plan and requires significant legislative determination. 4. By the greater weight of the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, it is hereby determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Rochester that Applicant failed to satisfy all four criteria provided by the Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area in determining whether to apply the commercial land use designation to the Site. 5. By the greater weight of the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, it is hereby determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Rochester that the criteria for a regional shopping center applies to this site, although the applicant may intend to build a smaller shopping center, because the "commercial" designation to this site would allow for such a shopping center. 6. By the greater weight of the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, it is hereby determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Rochester that the property does not meet the location criteria for aregional shopping center according to the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan because the site is not located at the intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with a similar or higher level street. The site is located at the intersection of a "collector" street (oath Street S.W.) and a freeway (Highway 63). 7. By the greater weight of the evidence and testimony presented • at the hearing, it is hereby determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Rochester that the roadway system in the area currently does not provide the site with good pedestrian, vehicular, or transit access. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Rochester, pursuant to Minn. Stat. S462.355, subd. 2, does hereby recommend to the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the applicant's request for an amendment to the Future Land Use Map for the Rochester Urban Service Area so as to designate as commercial a portion of 97.69 acres lying r -I u south of 40th Street S.W., south of Willow Creek, west of Highway 63 and east of filth Avenue S.W. be in all things denied. . 1� Dated at Rochester, Minnesota this y day of March, 1995. Robert DeWitt, President, Roch er Planning and Zoning Commission 0 Page 2 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: March 22, 1995 u Findings of Fact Regarding Land Use Plan 994-6 by Franklin Kottschade. Mr. Ellerbusch passed out to the Commission correspondence from Mr. Kottschade and copies of the proposed Findings of Facts and Conclusions as prepared by the City Attorney. The Commission should move, if they see fit, to adopt those findings and this application would then be forwarded to the Council. Ms. Wiesner stated that she was not part of the previous meeting, but she questioned the discussion of the retail center being next to an arterial or collector street. Mr. Ellerbusch explained that a retail center needed to be located next to two higher level streets. He stated that this criteria comes from the Rochester Urban Service Land Use Plan. Ms. Wiesner asked about Criteria #5(a) and stated that in a development the streets typically develop because of the type and size of development that is constructed. Mr. Wheeler stated that in 1980 the Land Use Plan was adopted. The . Thoroughfare Plan, which identifies the future street network and which locates the areas best suited for certain types of uses is what needs to be reviewed for this application. Shopping Centers are best located with higher level streets. He explained that this location is at the intersection of 40th Street which is not an arterial, and Highway 63 is somewhere between an arterial and an expressway. Mr. Wheeler stated that the staff based•their analysis on this property being used as commercial. Mr. DeWitz asked about frontage roads. Mr. Wheeler stated that the Land Use Plan does speak to frontage roads. That is a possibility, although there is not a frontage road at this time. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that. the Highway 63 Corridor study has not addressed - whether or not a frontage road would be here. Presently, 48th Street is planned for an interchange. Ms. Wiesner asked if this property was developed as 'offices', would the same type of logic be used for the street system pattern. She questioned why staff used a shopping center to analyze this property. 0 Page 3 / City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: March 22, 1995 Mr. Ellerbusch stated that staff has no control on what will be developedin an • area requested to be designated commercial and also requested to be rezoned B-4, thus we evaluated what would be a typical worse case scenario. Mr. Wheeler stated that the Land Use Plan directs staff to review plans in this fashion. He stated that the zoning would control the intensity. Ms. McGowan noted that Mr. Uban stated in previous testimony that this would be a shopping center. Mr. DeWitz stated that he eluded to square footage, and not necessarily a shopping center_ Ms. Haley asked when the Highway 63 Corridor Study is completed, and if it would make the access to this area a major roadway, at that point could the applicant come back and ask this request to be reconsidered. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that there would be a different situation of facts that would be presented, and a different conclusion could be made. The Commission discussed the Findings of Facts noting that this request does not meet the criteria of being located at the intersection of a major arterial or • higher level street with similar or higher level streets. The Commission noted that this property does have Level Terrain. It was noted that until an area develops, there is not good transit or pedestrian access. Ms. McGowan commented that there is a vehicular problem at 40th Street, it needs a traffic light in order to make this area safe. Ms. Schultze stated that she has read the findings and she agrees with all of them. Mr. DeWitz stated that he is addressing the findings for the Commissioners that were not present. The Commissioners felt that there is at least 40 acres of land suitable for Commercial Development. Ms. McGowan made a motion to deny the Land Use Plan #94-6 based upon the formal Facts of Findings as presented. Ms. Schultze seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-2. Ms. Wiesner and Mr. De1Mtz voting nay. 0 MINUTES OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER PLANNING COMMISSION 2122 CAMPUS DRIVE SE ROCHESTER MN 55904 Minutes of the regularly scheduled meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission held on Wednesday, March 8, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. at the Government Center, Council/Board Chambers, 151 4th Street SE, Rochester, MN. Members Present: Ms. Christine Schultze, Mr. Tom Bellinger, Vice Chair. Ms. Diane McGowan, Ms. Nancy Richardson Ms. Dorothy Haley, Mr. Bob DeWitz, Chair Members Absent: Ms. Lisa Wiesner, Mr. Don Beed Staff Present: Ms. Rose Decklever, Mr. Jeffrey Ellerbusch, Planner, Mr. Phil Wheeler, Planning Director, Mr. Charles Reiter, Transportation Planner Mr. DeWitz, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Bellinger made a motion to amend the minutes to have the meetings at 7:00 and if there was information that needed to be covered, then staff would request the meeting at 6:00 p.m. Ms. McGowan seconded the motion. The minutes from • February 22,1995 were approved unanimously as amended. Mr. DeWitz noted that Type 11 had been withdrawn. PILBLIC hEA,7,Ilk11cR: FutureUrban Service Area Land Use Plan Amendment :r .i i. Distric Change #94-10 by Franklin P. Kottschade on land lying along the south side o 40tidesignated as "Commercial" on the Land Use Plan and 74.32 acres of this area is requested to be rezoneda uu= Mr. Ellerbusch presented the staff report dated March 3, 1995. He noted that the original staff report on March 3, 1995, had been written as an official recommendation by staff. He would like to withdraw that recommendation. Mr. Ellerbusch explained that he would be explaining the information from the staff report to the Commission and the public, and he would descn'be the staffs concerns. He would withhold the official recommendation until after the hearing has been closed. He stated that the Commission could dose the hearing and instruct the staff to prepare Findings of Fact regarding the recommendation. He noted that this evening there was a revised application submitted on 2/8/95. This is to amend the Land Use Plan to designate 97.69 acres of land, the second part of the . application is a rezoning. He stated that the request at the present time is to rezone from the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) to the 84 (General Commercial) District. ^ „ ' Page 'oLv�jj�n City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: March 8, 1995 Mr. Ellerbusch showed to the Commission a 600 scale map which depicted the area. • He noted that there is 23.37 acres that has not been requested to be rezoned and would remain R-1. Mr. Ellerbusch addressed the landmarks of the area, giving the adjacent land use designations and the zoning. The petitioner owns the property to the west and it is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) and planned for "Low Density Residential" use. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that the property in question has Willow Creek flowing through it. He stated that the floodprone areas can be developed if elevated above the Flood Protection Elevation and the amount of flood storage on the site is retained. In addition, he noted that there are some identified wetlands on the site and the 1993 study said the plan was to drain or fill all the existing wetlands on the site. He stated that this project began during the interim rules, thus this would require a 1 to 1 replacement if completed before the expiration date. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that this site has one 66' wide access opening to US 63 at St. Bridget's Road and a shared access point on the common property line at the site's southeast comer. He stated that the property in the northeast comer is no longer in the ownership of the applicant. He stated that access from 40th Street would have to cross this property because the subject property's frontage on 40th Street SW is across Willow Creek. In addition, the creek acts as a natural barrier and a bridge would have to be built to access the property. The Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan indicates that Highway 63 is designated as a future freeway. 48th Street SW and TH 63 are planned as a highway interchange. He . informed the Commission that a major study is presently underway for Highway 63 Corridor from US 52,to Interstate 90. The results of the study could be the basis for other land use controls. The study is a bit behind schedule. Originally the decision on the long range plan was anticipated to be done sometime this month, now it looks that the earliest presentation will be May 26, 1995. He stated that this study will use detailed traffic modeling. He noted that this subject property has been potentially modeled as commercial property for the purposes of the corridor study. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that the staff evaluated the development potential on the property based on the zoning being requested. He stated that some assumptions had to be made. The petitioners estimated that approximately 25 percent of the land in the floodway is non -wetlands and the wetland would be replaced in these areas. For the purpose of analysis we assumed that the 23.37 acres would be rezoned to commercial. As for the net buildable area, the site has the potential of 86.25 acres of net buildable area according to Zoning Ordinance calculations. As applied to the property in question, 1,878,525 square feet of commercial floor area is allowed on the site. It would be realistic to assume that the property would never develop at such a phenomenal rate as two and a half Apache Malls. It is reasonable to assume that this site will be at a density similar to other shopping centers in the Rochester area. At a floor area ratio of 0.30 the site is large enough for 1,127,115 square feet of building. At the estimated development size of 1,127,115 square feet, the traffic generation rate for this site is 45,000 trips/day, based on a typical shopping center trip generation rate of 0 Page 3 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: March 8, 1995 • 40 trips per 1,000 square feet of building. Mr. Ellerbusch noted that the actual mix of commercial land uses and the trip generation can vary. The point that staff would like to make is that for guidance the text of the Rochester _ Land Use Plan gives locational criteria for such uses such as shopping center uses. He noted that the site in question has fairly level terrain, although there is an acre or so that has a slope of 20 percent. This site does have at least 40 acres of land for commercial development. The staff suggests that the site does not meet the locational criteria for a regional shopping center in the Rochester Urban Service Land Use Plan because it does not meet the major arterial requirement. 40th Street is a collector street. In addition, the present level of infrastructure does not provide good pedestrian & vehicular or transit access. Section 60.338 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual states that the Commission must address criteria a-d when evaluating a rezoning. Staff suggests that the portion of the rezoning -between Willow Creek and 40th Street SW, across the road from the Willowridge Mobile Home Park and the single family homes in Willow Heights, could permit uses that would be incompatible with the adjacent residential uses, which is a criteria found in Section 60.338 (c). Mr. Ellerbusch stated that the conclusions of the US 63 corridor study may result in • recommended modifications to the roadway classifications and improvements to the system which would then qualify this site or a portion thereof as a regional shopping center location. Mr. Ellerbusch displayed to the Commission a 1985 aerial photo of the area. Ms. Schultze asked about the ROCOG study, and questioned whether the study has taken into account this commercial development regarding the model. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that 580,000 square feet was used for the model for the area west of US 63 between 40th and 48th Streets. He noted that the model is trying to approximate some of the information that has been given by property owners in the corridor that came to light through the corridor study process, in addition to the potential commercial development within the City as a whole. Ms. Schultze asked for an explanation of the statement that this would encourage 'strip development'. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that if the site cannot be classified as a regional shopping center, neighborhood, or local center, the Land Use Plan, by definition, considers continued commercial development along a major highway to be strip commercial development. Mr. Bellinger asked Mr. Adkins regarding the moratorium provisions. Given the fad that this development could have the potential of a development to be 3 times the sae of what was used in the sturdy, he is concerned that the modeling is incorrect, and thus • could require the moratorium. le l i ru Page 4 / ,V �/ City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: March 8, 1994; Mr. Adkins stated that if the Commission does not believe that the right sets of numbers • were used for the modeling, that should be provided to ROCOG. However, the moratorium's validity would not be affected. He gave the examples of other cases involving moratoriums (billboards and signs over 50 feet). He noted that in all these cases all that the law required was that the study has to be in place or authorized prior to the establishment of a moratorium. He said that law does not dictate how the study should occur. Mr. DeWitz asked if the Commission can put a moratorium on this. Mr. Adkins explained that the Commission can recommend a moratorium ordinance to the Council. It is the Council who has the final action. Mr. Wheeler stated that the ROCOG study is looking at traffic along the main line of the Highway 63 Corridor. It is looking at this site in terms of the potential contribution to total commercial traffic demands for the entire corridor. It will show where signalized intersections, interchanges, etc., should be and how the road system can handle this. Mr. Frank Kottschade, the applicant, 4719 Walbrook Lane NW. stated that he felt that it was important to have some history of this property. Mr. Kottschade stated that he is here to work with the State, City and County entities. He visited with Mr. Mike Sheehan when he had the opportunity to purchase this property. Mr. Sheehan met with Mr. Reiter at that time. The study originated from that first meeting. He stated that with the spirit of cooperation, he has continued to monitor the traffic study, with anticipation of completion of about a year ago. He stated that unfortunately with the Federal Govemment involved, there are delays. Mr. Kottschade stated that the issue came up regarding land use and traffic, realizing the dilemma that the planners had regarding this property, it was important to initiate the land use and zone change to have that continued spirit of cooperation. He stated that they are trying to make this a reality as far as this project is concerned. He stated that he is motivated to go forward because of the deferred assessments on the property at an interest rate of 7 percent with costs of approximately $1,000tweek. Mr. Kottschade stated that he is working with all areas and with agencies to get all the proper permits for the development of this property. He introduced to the Commission one of the foremost land planners, in his mind, who works with both private and public entities, Mr. John Uban. Mr. John Uban, of the firm of Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, located out of Minneapolis, stated that they work with both private sector and community work. He stated that they have found a basic approach which works the best and that is the developer and the City working together, to have all of the goals seen by each other and come together for results that everyone is agreeable to. Mr. Uban stated that they anticipated that they wanted the Highway 63 Study to be a little further along, but they would still like to be able to work out systems that will work for both Mr. Kottschade and the City. The corridor study should not overshadow the development and vise versa. 0 Page 5 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: March 8, 1995 . He stated that he has suggestions on how they can amend the project and then they can continue with their planning aspects. Mr. Uban explained that they are offering to participate to bring information together. He stated that the important thing to realize is that this is an important place for commercial development. 0 0 Basically between 40th and 48th, this will be improved, there will be a Frontage Road System that will feed to this area similar to what has occurred to Highway 52. He stated that single family would not be appropriate to go right up to this area. Mr. Uban stated that there are a lot of constraints on this property and they cannot have full development potential on this property. He stated that this property does not have capacity to have a full regional shopping center. This really is a community center. This would be much smaller scale, and we would be well within the maximum square footage. We will be within the study of the corridor, presently we are less than the 560,000 square feet. The concept of commercial here supports the idea of corridor growth. This major highway collects agricultural traffic coming into this area, in addition, the airport as the southern anchor, this adds to the future growth. Mr. Uban stated that they would like to work with the City. They would like not to proceed with the rezoning. The traffic study will get into details this summer. He stated at that time, the corridor study will be completed and that can be coordinated with that study. He stated that they would like to proceed with the land use designation. He stated that they need to get the heart of what this property will be designated as, then they can move forward with their plans prior to rezoning Mr. Uban stated that with the Master Plan they will review the other lands that Mr. Kottschade owns. He stated that they would like to withdraw the area to the north along the Willow Creek floodway from consideration for the commercial designation. He stated that they have worked out an agreement to cross properties and use something similar to a frontage road. He stated that they need to decide if this is a reasonable place for commercial. He stated that everything that is around the creek would be for future residential areas, open space, park, pedestrian connections. They feel that this would be a good way to address the development. This will be an interior development, because of the depth, it offers enough space to do something quite well. We feel that the development will be on the flat portion of the property and the hill will be a backdrop. The wetlands have been reviewed. There are a lot of wetlands that have to be dealt with. A lot of the land cannot be developed. Mr. Uban showed to the commission a number of maps of the area. The maps showed that this area would support commercial growth. Overall they feel that the planning strategy is working quite well. He stated that they would like to have their first step approved. He stated that they could bring back in the future to request the rezoning. 3OPage 6 / City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: March 8, 1995 Mr. DeWitt was not clear as where the area was being requested to be designated. He • asked if it included the floodway. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that the floodway boundary is not a surveyed boundary. He stated that the centerline of the creek is easy to describe. Ms. Schultze asked about the proposed collector. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that the existing Thoroughfare Plan may be amended based on the conclusions of the corridor study. He noted that the dashed line is the approximate location of the potential collector road. He showed the Existing Thoroughfare Plan. This plan would be officially amended after the corridor study. The proposed stop light at 40th Street is a temporary interim solution for a problem that already exists. Mr. Bellinger asked about the proposed local collector or a frontage road to handle this type of development. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that they do not know enough about the project to give an exact response. Any specific development proposals on this property would be evaluated through a Traffic Impact Report. This would specifically evaluate the project when we know where the accesses would be. The TIR does limit the project from proceeding, it would point out what type of improvements would be needed based upon the private sector proposals. It is required to be done before a permit is issued if the development is of such a size of meeting the minimum thresholds of development. Mr. Dewtz asked about the zone change request — tabled? Mr. Uban stated that they would like it tabled, and it would be brought back this summer when the corridor study is complete. Mr. DeWitz stated that the study should be completed May 26, 1995. Mr. Uban stated that this would focus on a single solution. There is more study to be completed, we do not know -if June is right, or July is right. Mr. DeWitz stated that the Commission cannot table for more than 60 days without the applicant to request that Mr. Uban stated that they would like this tabled for 4 to 5 months. He stated that he would like to see the first step of the Land Use change. The Commission is then making a determination that this is 'probably' O.K. It you told us no, the Commission wants residential, then we would not proceed with the present plans. He would like a determination of the designation. Ms. McGowan asked if the proposal is dependent upon the frontage road being put. Mr. Uban stated that they will have to connect to 40th Street to do the development. He stated that this may be part of the corridor study. In order to eliminate access points, Page 7 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: March 9, 1995 . maybe the frontage road would have to be built. he stated that there are a lot of detailed questions that need to be worked with the task force. Mr. Bellinger asked why does the Commission need to proceed with the land use plan. If no development is occurring. Mr. Uban explained that land use is what the City designates for future development. He stated that this is the first step. The Commission needs to give recognition to this area. Thus, with the assurance, we can continue with our planning, this will keep the ball rolling. This allows Mr. Kottschade to spend more money with traffic studies, this would allow us to study more and allow us to move forward. Mr. Bellinger stated that it seems to boil down to either 40th or 48th Street being the major arterial. Mr. Uban stated that because of the hill on 48th, you would not want to put commercial there. He stated that 40th is more practical and 48th Street's hill would provide a buffer in a sense. Mr. Uban stated that they are anticipating that there will be a frontage road in this location. He explained to the Commission that they still hold a number of cards with not zoning this property. Ms. Haley stated that to postpone this request, will this not accomplish the same thing as a moratorium. Mr. Uban stated that in a sense it would. He stated that the moratorium could be in place if there were a number of developments. He stated that usually you do no place a moratorium for just one application. he stated that we are offering to postpone our actions, to continue to work cooperatively. Ms. Haley commented that if there was a flood of applications next week, the commission still could put a moratorium on this next week. Ms. Schultze stated that the concern she has about making this land use plan change, she feels inappropriate because they do not have any plans. This opens this up for anything to be done. Your idea sounds good, although it does open up a lot of potential problems. Mr. Uban stated that he understands the concerns of the Commissions, that is why they want to postpone the rezoning. He stated that the land use designation does not put constraints on the property. He stated that the study will answer the questions. Ms. Schultze asked what other zoning would be reviewed if B-4 is found inappropriate. Mr. Uban stated that a portion of the land may be zoned B-4 and have it fall within the confines of what would work with Highway 63. The Commission could then see how 0 a3� Page 8 i City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: March 8, 1995 much would be shopping center, how much wetland, how much frontage road system, • etc., Hopefully what the Commission will see how this will all work together. Mr. DeWitz asked staff to give some insight of the amended request. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that they have changed the land use plan request boundary by deleting the portion of the area that lies north of Willow Creek and south of 40th Street. The other issue is the rezoning and the request is to table. If the Commission would like to table the rezoning it should be done by motion and noting that this was at the request of the applicant and that it would be tabled until some date in the future and notices would be republished and remailed. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that staff is looking for direction from the Commission to come back with findings and a final recommendation on the land use plan amendment as amended by the applicant. Mr. DeWitz stated that staff is not providing a recommendation tonight. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that is correct. The Commission can discuss the findings, and then the recommendation can officially be voted on at the next meeting. We are not asking for you to make a specific vote tonight, but to make a recommendation as to how the findings should be prepared. Mr. Ellerbusch stated that the issues of land use plan and rezoning are two separate • issues. He stated that the zoning of the property does not have to conform. The designation of the land use plan does not require you to rezone the property a certain way based on findings. Mr. Adkins stated that the courts have indicated that a zoning decision not in compliance with the comprehensive land use plan can be justified, but the burden on the cities to show justification is more difficuft. Mr. DeWitz closed the public hearing. Mr. Bellinger made a motion to table the zone change request until the first meeting in June, seconded by Ms. Haley. The motion carried 6-0. The Commission addressed the findings as follows: a) Located at the intersection of a major arterial or higher level street wfth similar or higher level streets. It was the consensus of the Commission that the property is not located at the intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with similar or higher levels streets. b) Having level terrain. Page 9 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date; March 8, 1995 • It was the consensus of the Commission that this property does have level terrain. c) Having good pedestrian, vehicular, and transit access. It was the consensus of the Commission that this requirement is not met according to the present ROCOG Thoroughfare Plan. d) Having at least 40 acres of land suitable for commercial development. It was the consensus of the Commission that this property does meet this requirement. Ms. McGowan moved that the Planning Staff and City Attorney prepare Findings of Fact to support that this application does not meet the guidelines of the criteria, Ms. Richardson, seconded the motion. Mr. Bellinger stated that from a discussion standpoint, do we want to consider the moratorium. He stated that it does require a commitment for the City to proceed with the study. He stated that it will be difficult to address other development without the corridor study. He stated that he would like to recommend this to the City Council. Mr. Adkins stated that the adoption of the moratorium could be reviewed at the next • meeting, when the findings are reviewed. The motion carried 6-0. Mr. Ellerfliftstated that the consensus of the Coun � t the present ordinance is too cumbe o enforce and they would like th Tihated in some fashion. Ms. Richardson a if other communitie en reviewed for their requirements. Mr. Ellerbusch stated me co lea do more, others do less. He stated that the Council agreed that ' o enforce, although they did not give any enlightenment on how to en issue. We will be looking at how are we going to do this. We can require can have a grace period in the summer, etc. Mr. DeWitz asked to ow man are received for RV parking. Mr. Ellerbusch that we receive a of complaints on RV parking. The problem m s very fast because go to an area we have to inspect others in a that are violating the ord • 1OFFiger asked about permits and if it is violet n fine them $100.00 dollars. a33 i Suite 250 • 38W Highway 52 N. ' Rochester, Minnesota 55901-0108 • (507) 297-0909 • Fax (507) 288-0658 March 17, 1995 • Mr. Phil Wheeler Director of Planning, Olmsted/Rochester Department of Planning 2122 Campus Drive S.E Rochester, Minnesota 55904 Re: Land Use Plan Amendment #94-6 Dear Mr. Wheeler: We have presented to the city a request for Land Use and Zoning Amendment for property along Highway 63. We have worked with the Highway department and others over the past several years encouraging a study of the Highway's function in this area. The study is scheduled to be completed soon. In the spirit of cooperation, we have adjusted our plans and time table to better meet the derision process of the City. We have, at this point, made our presentation to the Planning Commission, who are in the process of preparing the findings to submit to the City Council. With dismay, we have read in recent newspaper articles that the decision to deny this request . has been made and the City attorney has been directed to produce findings of denial. It was in the spirit of cooperation that we had made several adjustments in our timing and staging of our requests and future development to meet City planning goals. We believe our direction on this property is a correct one, which will support a strong business corridor and future job diversification for the community. We have anticipated that the studied road improvements will be needed but staged, which would include the frontage road, as has been included in all of the various alternatives studied for Highway 63. We have kept our development proposals and requested land use changes within the guidelines of the studied traffic effects of the Highway 63 corridor analysis. In spite of all of this, we see that the recommendation to the Council has been predetermined to deny what we feel is reasonable and prudent planning. If the present guiding of the property and present zoning of the property is what the City wishes us to pursue, we will honor that planning decision of the City. We will continue in the spirit of cooperation and proceed with development that is in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning on the subject property, which is now residential. Because significant assessments are already placed upon the property, the development intensity will have to reflect that financial burden. Additionally, we foresee that the property tax base will be significantly less if developed as housing. A Residential development would provide $190,000 in yearly taxes, where Commercial development, as anticipated in the Highway 63 Corridor Study U a3s' Mr. Phil Wheeler Director of Planning, Olmsted/Rochester Department of Planning •March 17, 1995 Page Two ..... would provide between $875,000 to $1,250,000 of yearly property taxes. We believe this is an important fiscal decision for the City, but we will abide by their decision to have the property developed Residential if the Commercial request is denied. As we place Residential housing on the property, we anticipate that the City and the State will adhere to State Noise Standards as any regional or arterial road systems are improved and provide necessary quietude for residential development. Obviously, this would not be a concern if Commercial development were allowed on the property. We hope that the City considers all aspects of appropriate land uses in this area. The City should feel confident that we will maintain our spirit of cooperation and proceed immediately based on their decisions of our requested Land Use amendment. Sincerely, Franklin P. Kottschade . FPK:jgl Enclosures: 1. Suggested Findings of Fact which support Commission change in "Land Use Plan to Commercial Designation" 2. Rochester Post Bulletin News Article dated 3/9/95 3. Letter from Olmsted County Assessor dated 3/ 15/95 4. Anticipated Development Proposal for proposed land use as presented 11/3/95 at US Highway 63 Corridor Study Open House 5. Alternate Contingency Proposal for proposed land use as presented 11/3/95 at US Highway 63 Corridor Study Open House . _cc: Steven Kenvold, City Administrator, City of Rochester Richard Devlin, County Administrator, Olmsted County Kermit McRae, District Engineer, MN Department of Transportation Michael Sheehan, Highway Engineer, Olmsted County Public Works Richard Freese, Director of Public Works, City of Rochester Terry Adldns, City Attorney, City of Rochester Mayor and Common Council, City of Rochester Olmsted County Board of Commissioners • City of Rochester Ptammng and Zoning Commisioners FINDINGS OF FACTS / Franklin Kottschade Request for Land Use Guide Plan Change to Commercial (94-6) for Commercial Use Designation . The following are suggested findings which support that change in the land use plan: The Highway 63 Corridor Task Force, including consultants, considered the area of the requested change to be Commercial. The traffic projections in the Highway Corridor study were based on the Commercial use. The eventual development of the property, because of limitations of flood plain, wetlands, and future frontage road will not exceed 540,000 square feet, which was the amount of square footage considered in the Highway 63 Corridor Study. 3. The requirement for intersecting arterials for Commercial designation is being met by the fact that a future frontage road will connect both 40th Street and 48th Street. The most probable future designation arterial will be 40th Street and the frontage road connects through fulfilling the access requirements and locational requirements for a Commercial location. 4. The Commercial designation supports the business corridor concept to the airport along Highway 63. 5. Commercial designation as proposed creates a deep parcel of property which can not then develop as a "strip" commercial. 6. Commercial designation will strengthen a diverse business approach to Highway 63 by providing needed services to encourage new industrial park development along the corridor and strengthening of a diverse job base for the City of Rochester and County of Olmsted. 7. The planned land use request has been revised eliminating any commercial designation north of Willow Creek. This will provide a change in land use and/or buffer to residential areas north of 40th Street. 8. The land will not be developed until re -zoned, which will not take place until the Highway 63 Corridor Study has identified specific improvements and a frontage road location. The owner has agreed to participate in the Corridor Study so that planning and infrastructure can be matched to the staging of future development. 9. Continuation of residential designation on this property would necessitate the public's spending a significant amount of money for noise attenuation to state standards for roadway improvements and increase traffic. 10. Assessment's have been placed on the property in anticipation of development which can only be reasonably born by Commercial development. 11. The anticipated tax difference between Residential and Commercial use is estimated to be between .7 and 1 million dollars per year. This tax base would be a significant benefit to the City of Rochester and the County of Olmsted. The above findings are in support of the proposed land use amendment and represent a reasonable planning process and development commitment for the City. Future changes are anticipated for long term community • and business benefits to the City and the Highway 63 Airport Corridor. Pipe bomb case ��-7 , Youln. 'i `-rC2 In a pipe - Page 3B way tunas wm uc cut. sieirocrs Sama DUogCL can5lr; :ILS mlty pre- to L.U::': an, tnc State arc wadin„ through "Contract With venL Conteress Crom returning the has no stockpile cr ul;; tires and America" issues and don't expect funds and may cause Congress to would h;r:e to In: tl1.c:u rram other• to tackle transportation funding use more gas lax monies to buy states. Request for land developil I 1e.,r,,%1t change along U.S, 63 S. put off By Tamara Schonsberg The Post -Bulletin The Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission will vote later this month on Rochester developer Frank ICoLLschade's request to have nearly 75 acres of land along U.S. 63 South designated for commer- cial development Although commission menmlxn didn't indicate how they'll vole on March 22, they indicated that access to the site is inadequate. City Attorney ferry Adkins said he'll prepare formal frndirgs denying the request fur the next meeting, but con niissioners can amend whatever he submits. The property is on the west side of U.S. 63 South between 40Lh and 48th streets. It's now zoned for res- idential development_ Kottschade tried to make the proposal more accept- able to commissioners by pos.poning his request to rezone the property, seeking the more preliminary commercial designation instead. He also removed from consideration a chunk of !and along 40th Street Southwest, across the street from residential devel- opment But that left the question of adequate access. The parcel is large enough to accommodate a regional shopping center, according to city planners, who sug- gest it could be developed into a shopping center lmh to 2h times the size of Apache Mall. Under the city's land use plan, a development of that size needs to be at the intersection of at least two arterials, but 40th Street doesn't meet that dcscrip- tion, and the development doesn't stretch all the way south to 48th Street U.S. 63 v'ould be adequate and its future design, including access points, is under study. Kottschade spokesman John Uban, a land planner from Minneapolis, told comet dssioners the develop- ment won't be as large as city planners say. A true regional shopping center woucd need 200 to 300 acres, he said. "What this really is is a community (shop- ping) center." Uban also said he expects improvements to both 40th and 48th streets and believes the U.S. 63 study will indicate the need for a highway frontage road between those two streets. Kottschade agreed to postpone his rezoning request until early June, but wanted the commercial desig- 40th Street S Land proposed for commercial designation-:� >'7. �trr- �, .; j '== � �t +48th Street S.W.' PB graphic Kottschade agreed to postpone his rezoning request until early June, but wanted the commercial designation so he could proceed with development plans and studies. nation so he could proceed .r i'h ce:a :pn:ent plans and studies. Designating the land as sltitaJ;c .`or co;nmercial development isn't the same as :econin�g it and no development could begin withcut re_c:.i.. But some commissioners still balked at Lie `. s. step of desig- nation, saying it could make rejectia,g the rezoning request more difficult later. Adkins said courts have backed cities that reject a rezoning request that's compatible with the land's desigtiation. But those cities have had to come up witlt more proof that their decision wasn't arbitrary, he said. OLMSTED COUNTY ASSESSOR 151 4TH STREET SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-3716 50728"124 FAX 507R85-8100 March 15, 1995 TO: Frank Kottschade FROM: Dan Hall, County Assessor'* RE: Estimate of Tax, 40 acre development site Residential: 3.5 Homes per acres with average value of $90,000. Tax realized for site would be $190,000 Commercial/Retail: 450,000 Sq. Ft. to 525,000 -Sq. Ft Estimate tax 1.75 to 2.50 per Sq. Ft.. Tax realized for site commercial use $875,000 to $1,250,000. 0 11 0 AM eauAL oPmR7mnyjAFFrvmTNE ACTION EMPLOYER ■.. �\f:. 1 ��II '.ah �-....- cd Q CL cchl U l • • • 1 ! ! ' HIGHWAY 63 SOUTH PROPERTY ' South West Corner at 40th Street and Highway 63 ! iRochester, Minnesota r LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT and REZONING REQUEST o•1itIIvI it F8 -g __s Lj ROCHESTER DLAIM PLANNING DEPANTWO i m 0 LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT and REZONING REQUEST Prepared For the Parks Commission, Planning Commission & City Council of Rochester, Minnesota February 6,1995 0 Submitted by: Franklin P. Kottschade a3 c TABLE OF CONTENTS L COVER LETTER M LAND USE AND REZONING REQUEST III. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS IV. NATURAL FEATURES MAP V. LAND USE AND REZONING MAPS Franklin P. Kottschade 3800 E*way S2 North • Rochester, Minneson SMI • (507) 287 M • February 3, 1995 City Planning and Zoning Commission Rochester - Olmsted Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive South East Rochester, IvTrnnesota 55904 RE: Kottschade Property on highway 63 Dear Commissioners: We previously submitted an application in December, 1994 for a land use plan amendment and rezoning We postponed the review of that application to further study the land use issues as pointed out in the City staff review. We are amending our application to ask for the commercial land use designation on 97.69 acres and rezoning to B-4 on 74.32 acres of the re -guided area All the remaining land will be left unchanged with its present R-1 zoning. This application does not include any re -guiding or rezoning to medium density residential Our application includes additional mapping of natural features of the property and a narrative description of our proposal. I have also added to our consultant team John Uban, Consulting land Planner with the firm Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc., 300 First Avenue North, Suite 210, 14fmneapolis, Minnesota 55401. We are anticipating that after the land has been re -guided and rezoned to commercial we will be able to make the investment in more detailed development studies and prepare a development plan to bring forth to the City at a later date. These detailed plans will be developed based on the S-4 zoning. Once again, we must first have the property rezoned to the appropriate land use so that more detailed planning can commence. Sincerely,` Franklin P. Kottschade 0 i LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING REQUEST Mr. Kottschade owns about 200 acres adjacent to Highway 63 and 40th Street South West. The submitted plans that accompany this request are a recision to the plans previously reviewed by the City of Rochester for the planning of the Kottschade Property. The proposal to re -guide and rezone a portion of the property from single family residential to medium density multiple family has been i eliminated. The portion of the past proposal that was supported by the City was the re -guiding and rezoning to Commercial for the portion of land adjacent to Highway 63. The City has recently been ud}ing the FLghway 63 Corridor for improvements and for the potential land use changes between the airport and 40th Street. These plans have included several new areas for industrial and business growth to support this business corridor connection between the airport and downtown Rochester. Commercial facilities are also part of the studied land uses for this area. The proposed land use change of approximately 98 acres of Commercial includes two access points to Highway 63 and the potential for a secondary access for 40th Street. The commercial portion of the property is relatively flat except for the south .vest corner, which would be left intact as part of buffering to future residential development to the west. This Commercial area is appropriately located along the major arterial Highway 63 and has access to that arterial width will also allow good vehicular and transit circulation. The Commercial portion of the site is over 40 acres. This consolidated area of Commercial will allow for a variety of 1, development scenarios to take place and will also be flexible enough to preserve open space.and' provide for an attractive setting without creating a strip commercial area along the Highway. It is 1 important to have ample depth in a commercial area to accommodate a variety of new commercial uses. The proposed commercial area is between 800 feet to 1,200 feet in depth A 74 acre area is proposed to be zoned B4 which accommodates two access points out to Highway 63. Because of the projected growth that has been indicated in the Srghway 63 study, there is a distinct need for a consolidated Commercial area along the Highway corridor. This commercial area can serve the traveling public, and the growth of the southern area of Rochester. The airport is a main regional attraction which naturally stimulates industrial business and commercial growth. Also, the area serves a large rural traJe area to the south and will act as a new employment base which will further strengthen the overall'' economy of Rochester and Olmsted County. Wetland delineation for this property has been submitted to agency review and its final delineation will have been agreed upon by the end of February. Our general review of the wedand condition is that a portion of the Kottschade parcel has wetland designations that fall within the flood fringe area. These areas will be treated sensitively in any future development as regulated by the Corps of Engineers. We anticipate that there will need to be some amendments to the flood plain for the purpose of access roads and supporting structures. We will also use the environmental areas such as steep slopes, woods, wetlands, and flood plain to create site buffering and an aesthetic setting for the commercial business. 0 aq� Land Use Flan Amendment and Rezoning Request February 6, 1995 Page 2 Overall, we hope to elevate the general development standards for commercial buildings above what has previously been experienoed in Rochester. Our goal is to approach the land in a creative fashion which can best be studied after receiving appropriate re -guiding and zoning. Our emphasis will be on creating appropriate relationships to future adjacent land uses and a responsible design for the environmental concerns for the site. The end product will be a commercial area very supportive of regional growth patterns and complimentary to the overall Highway 63 strategies that will help build an excellent business corridor from the airport to downtown Rochester. i LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT EXHIBIT 3 N 40'25'54" W o 11130.32 DESCRIPTION: Qs2 R,551 SEE ATTACHED: �v� aEuaxcs� 0, 1 F _9 1'4i50 f I i J `1ay. .,,rr N je'29'4 •11„ 4 SCALE = 40C' :*:-�_Si� \ v pros L7.63 ACRES a c>•at e ;; � e >H a s•la-i COMMERCIAL _- 2637.74 _ --- 5 00'43'50" w - 324.38 ' N 89.24.45- E. LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL I I ' a ®nh/t e ®� ., ae slr•u s e- I I he•aaa onifr Uh t tlia alaYaf. Pia r f@W .aa fw"wpd by � a VWr XV dram wpm, ai011 aM that I a a d* Nayi I lam Sa•bal'a w.eo we 4.6 of the Fab d Ifnoaal6 DATE ?EL NO. 11622 1' - 400' wc ra FRANMAN. P. KIMSCHAOE MCGhie Betts'. 31- PROPERTECS ,,,..tom,., �, ,,�, aR -23-94 ROCHESTER. MINNESOTA A=. Na : 1009/2500 teas wb 25=== ua a .a. u o..r.. er fos_M-sn ru M 94-49A4 PROPOSED RE -ZONING R-1 TO B-4 EXHIBIT 3 DESCRIPTION: _ h 12d t7 !s" NOT R4SSEE ?P11 9EPoNCS ASSUMED 64 50 . T 5?'Ji 0' f00 8 �-- = SCALE 1" = 400' R-1 N 04' 4 W 74.32 ACRES B-4 -- /Y 0a•43'S0"-W - R-1 i1 araa FRANKLIN. F. KOT scHADE PROPERTIES ROCHESTER, MMNESOTA t MrebyMy,rw. plan. w mart tap MObybeu w my cfin [ en yW Nat 1 " a •* Rprtaraa lud $arrayar WWW tM toaa a the St•ta a IBnngata. McGhie • � %t Y V4a0 � 324.38 ' N 8724'45" E i }r•M � >p co 10 DATE REG NO. acac 1• 4W' iwwr ay Bwc Betts,ItK, am: 11-23-94 .acc n0.: 1009/250( rY1 .Y1 1.1 +9A3 fade W. 25.= low o w _ � A rE: nR" - 4oTM ST it a� PRope Pr Y BounInARY of OOTi RE W. A. ReaLV Lj(. ii , P_-WOA�l CE f�. a_ ul � Via_ - -- ".- •� _ .y a I R-1 Ti :. ii It C r y o -,AR r•r _ �t •? 7! aajjF f � 7 7j' r •: �4-f � a � N W_ ��` "� ROCOO bs `t CURRENTLY HELD VALID _ j LECE2fo THOROUGHFARE PLAN j '� for tht� a w w City of tch oester and e the Towmhips of '♦~ _ - F- r"'�"' •� �� Cascade, Marion, -- ..nr Haverhill, tochesier, `• J , and a portion of High Forest ADOPTED SMEMBEB, 1977 - i AMENDED IULY, 1982 r-- AMENDED IULY, 198S L ccwne*j