Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05/01/2000_Regular
CITY OF ROCHESTER COUNCIL AGENDA COUNCIUBOARD CHAMBERS GOVERNMENT CENTER 151 4T" STREET SE MEETING NO.9 REGULAR PAGE (1-2) A) OPEN COMMENT PERIOD B) CALL TO ORDER 00-09 MAY 1, 2000 7:00 P.M. C) LETTERS AND PETITIONS (3-4) 1) Gus Chafoulias Requests an Opportunity to Address the Council (5-6) 2) Ginny Smith Requests an Opportunity to Address the Council (7-8) 3) Petition for Basic Construction of Roadway, Sewer & Water/Circle 19 Plaza First (9-10) D) CONSENT AGENDAIORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS 1) Approval of Minutes (11-12) 2) Request for Funding/RADAR 9-Ball Classic (13-14) 3) Council Position on Internet Taxation (15-16) 4) Revisions to Curfew Ordinance to Address Emergency Situations (17-20) 5) Sale of Former Tropic Bowl Site to ISD #535 (21-30) 6) Orderly Annexation Agreement with Rochester Township for Southport Subdivision (31-32) 7) Donation of Old Council Chambers Cameras to ISD #535 (33-35) 8) Sale of City Owned Land (37-38) 9) Request to Advertise for Bids/Phase II Runway and Ramp Paving Projects (39-52) 10) Consideration of Public Utility Board Action (53-56) 11) Licenses, Bonds & Miscellaneous Activities (57-58) 12) On -Sale Wine & 3.2% Beer License/Trips, Inc. DBA Hawthorn Suites (59-60) 13) Approval of Accounts Payable (61-64) 14) Appointment to Citizens Advisory Committee on Transit (65-80) 15) Decision on Need for Environmental Impact Statement for Summit Pointe Development (81-88) 16) Annexation by Ordinance Petition by Larry Goodman to Initiate Orderly Annexation for Approx. 109.84 Acres in Part of S ''/:, NE '/. of Section 9 and NW %, NW '/. of Section 10, Cascade Township Council Agenda May 1, 2000 Page 2 (89-90) 17) Parking Management Contract with Republic Parking (91-92) 18) Storm Water Management Agreement for Payne Company for a Portion of Century Hills Development (93-94) 19) Owner Contract/Emerald Hills Second Subdivision (95-96) 20) Owner Contract/Avalon Cove/Phase II (97-98) 21) Owner Contract/South Pointe Fifth Subdivision (99-100) 22) Owner Contract/Watermain & Hydrant to Serve Touchless 2000 Carwash (101-102) 23) Owner Contract/The Gardens/Phase 1 (103-104) 24) Advertise for Bids/Sanitary Sewer Extension Along Portion of 18d' Avenue NW (105-106) 25) Advertise for Bids/Intersection Improvements and Signal System at 4155 Street NW and West Frontage Road (107-112) 26) Design Variance Request/Construction of 16'�' Avenue NW from Civic Center Drive NW to 7"' Street NW (113-118) 27) Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve Five Areas in Marion Township (119-120) 28) Advertise for Bids/Sanitary Sewer to Serve Marvale Addition and Whynaught's Subdivision (121-130) 29) Feasibility Report for Water Tower and Trunk Watermain in Southeast Service Area (131-132) 30) Advertise for Bids/Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve Baihly Woodland Subdivision (133-138) 31) Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve 3010 Valleyhigh Drive NW (139-142) 32) Amendments to RCO Chapter 72; Maintenance and Repair of Sidewalks (143-144) 33) Engineering Services for the Following Bike Path ProjectsNiola Road NE and West Circle Drive SW (145-146) 34) Reject Bids/2"d Street SW Bike Trail from 23 d Avenue SW to West Circle Drive (147-148) 35) Request Engineering Services/Pavement Resurfacing and Rehabilitation on TH 63 from 4"' Street to Northern Heights Drive (149-150) 36) Award of Bids for Reroofing Traffic Operations Building High Roof (151-152) 37) Permit Parking Petition from the Kutzky Neighborhood (153-154) 38) Purchase of Parking Control Equipment Council Agenda May 1, 2000 Page 3 E) HEARINGS (155-176) 1) (177-184) 2) (185-194) 3) (195-202) 4) (203-214) 5) (215-234) 6) (235-252) 7) (253-254) 8) (255-260) 9) (261-266) 10) (267-268) 11) (269-278) 12) (279-286) 13) (287-298) 14) (299-310) 15) (311-330) 16) (331-344) 17) Type III, Phase II, Amendment to Final Plan for PUD Apache Mall Shopping Center to Allow Expansion of 31,000 Sq. Ft. on West Side of Center & Reduce Parking Requirements from 5 Stalls/1,000 Sq. Ft. of Leasable Area to 4.5 Stalls/1,000 Sq. Ft. of Leasable Area Vacation Petition by General Growth Properties (Apache Mall) to Vacate 10 Foot Utility Easement Lying on Westerly Side and Parallel to the Mall Beginning at the Food Court thence Southerly to Approx. the North Edge of the Dayton's Property Type III, Phase I, Final Plat to be Known as Diamond Ridge Eighteen Vacation Petition by Professional Skaters Assoc. to Vacate Drainage and Utility Easement on Lot 4, Block 1, Country Club Estates Sub. Type III, Phase II, Preliminary Plat to be Known as Manor Woods West Twelfth Subdivision Type III, Phase II, Amendment to Final Plan for PUD B-24, which Covers Best Western/Midway Office Building and Free Standing Busine Southwest Comer of Property Type III, Phase 11, Preliminary Plat Subdivision CIC 166 Project Hearing/Reconstruction of 9"' to 4"' Street SW Plaza, to Allow a 8,985 Sq. Ft. 3s Sign to be Constructed on to be Known as Weatherstone Avenue SW from 2"d Street SW Assessment Hearing/Reconstruction of 9"' Avenue SW from 2Id Street SW to 4"' Street SW Project Hearing/Concrete Curb & Gutter and Overlay Northern Hills Court NE from Northern Hills Drive NE West to Cul-De-Sac Assessment Hearing/Concrete Curb & Gutter and Overlay Northern Hills Court NE from Northern Hills Drive NE West to Cul-De-Sac Final Plat to be Known as Essex Estates 5"' Subdivision Continued Hearing/Final Plat to be Known as Manorwood Lakes 5"' Subdivision Continued Hearing/Final Plat to be Known as Manorwood Lakes 6"' Subdivision Continued Hearing/Final Plat to be Known as The Gardens Preliminary Plat by BBB Development to be Known as Ridgeview Manor (Formerly Northern Trails) Type III, Phase III, Conditional Use Permit by Frank Kottschade to Allow for Fill within Flood Prone District to Facilitate Future Development Council Agenda May 1, 2000 Page 4 (345-370) 18) Type III, Phase 11, Incentive Development Conditional Use Permit and Variance by the Kendal Group to Allow Development of 4-Story, 68 Unit Apartment Bldg. and Associated Parking on Property Zoned B-1 (371-378) 19) Annexation by Ordinance Petition by Schoenfelders Southstar, Inc. to Annex Approx. 49.91 Acres, 19.66 Acres are Located Along E. Side of 23 d Ave. SE and 30.25 Acres are Located S. of 28"' St. SE (379-384) 20) Annexation by Ordinance Petition by County of Olmsted & Badger Development, LLC to Annex Approx. 4.92 Acres Along W. Side of West Circle Drive, S. of Valleyhigh Rd. NW & N. of 19" St. NW (385-394) 21) Land Use Plan Amendment by Olmsted County & Badger Dev., LLC to Amend Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan to Allow Approx. 4.92 Acres for "Commercial' Land Use Designation (395-402) 22) Zoning District Amendment by County of Olmsted & Badger Dev., LLC to Zone Approx. 4.92 Acres to M-1 District (403-434) 23) Preliminary Plat and Variance to be Known as Badger Ridge (435-468) 24) Type III, Phase II, Conditional Use Permit to Excavate Sand & Gravel & Type III, Conditional Use Permit to Place Fill and Construct Multi - Family Residential Building in Flood Prone District (469-480) 25) City Initiated Text Amendment to Amend Section 60.327 of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual Relating to Reviewing Development Proposals & Amending Approved Site/Development Plans within an SD Special District F) REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (481-482) 1) Police Department — Authorize Execution of Contract Addendum with New World Systems for Software and Hardware Related to Phase Two of Public Safety System Replacement Plan (483-484) G) RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES H) TABLED ITEMS (485-488) 1) Improve 50"' Avenue NW and Extend Sanitary Sewer & Water Service to Undeveloped Lands Along 50"' Avenue NW 1) OTHER BUSINESS J) ADJOURNMENT REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 5/ OPEN COMMENT PERIOD I CITY ADMINISTRATOR I A ITEM DESCRIPTION: OPEN COMMENT PERIOD 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: • This section of the agenda may not be used as a forum to continue discussion on an agenda item which has already been held as a public hearing. • This agenda section is limited to 15 minutes and each speaker is limited to 4 minutes. • Any speakers not having the opportunity to be heard will be first to present at the next Council meeting. • Citizens may only use this forum to address the Council on a maximum of one time per month. • Matters currently under negotiation, litigation or related to personnel will not be discussed in this forum. • Questions posed by a speaker will generally be responded to in writing. .. UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION LETTERS AND PETITIONS CITY ADMINISTRATOR ITEM DESCRIPTION: GUS CHAFOULIAS REQUESTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 511100 ITEM NO. C,-I PREPARED 8Y: S.KVENVOLD Gus Chafoulias has requested an opportunity to address the City Council about the proposed Time Square project. Mr. Chafoulias has indicated that several individuals will also address the City Council in support of the proposed project. / /( � r a.vJNCIL ACTION: Modon by: second by: niqp e7-1 Mayo Clinic of 200 First Street SW Rochester, Minnesota 55905 507-284-2511 April 28, 2000 Mayor Chuck Canfield Government Center 201 Fourth Street, SE Room 281 Rochester, MN 55904-3782 Dear Mayor Canfield: During the course of the debate concerning further development of downtown Rochester, we have received multiple inquiries asking for Mayo Clinic's point of view. Here's where Mayo Clinic stands on the issue. Our patients, and visitors who travel with those patients, frequently express appreciation for their experience in Rochester. They find Rochester to be a comfortable place, with friendly people and amenities that meet their needs during their stay. Our patients and visitors also express a desire for even more opportunities during their time in Rochester. Specifically, our patients would welcome more restaurants, more retail and more overall recreational opportunities in the downtown area. Patients and visitors also express a desire for a greater variety of accommodations, especially when their stay lasts over an extended period of time. Mayo Clinic supports further development of downtown Rochester. We feel additional development would bring new amenities and strengthen the overall experience of patients and visitors during their time at Mayo Clinic. We also feel that a more robust and vibrant community with even more amenities will increase the likelihood that patients and visitors will return for follow-up care and recommend Mayo Clinic and Rochester as a destination to others. We believe that a vibrant downtown Rochester also benefits all who live in our city and its neighboring communities. Sincerely, Hugh C. Smith, M.D., Chair Board of Governors Mayo Clinic Rochester Cc: Gus Chafoulias C4 CE TE E GALLERIA MERCHANTS' ASSOCIATION, INC. April 25, 2000 Mr. Chuck Canfield City of Rochester - Mayor's Office 201 4th Street SE Rochester. MN 55904 Dear Council Member: As retail tenants currently in the downtown area, we have been following the development proposal for Time Square with great interest. We feel that Mr. Chafoulias is, and always has been, a visionary in our community, and especially in reference to the development of downtown Rochester. We feel that the newly proposed project is a realistic vision to further developing our downtown - shopping district. A thriving and vibrant downtown is attractive not only to local consumers, but also to the visitors coming to Rochester. As retailers, we are well aware that a great amount of retail dollars spent by Rochester residents are not being spent within our City. We feel that an addition to the downtown would increase the local dollars kept within our community. Gus Chafoulias has been the only local developer that has taken the initiative to create and develop our downtown. Cities with vibrant downtown communities continually experience growth. Now is the opportune time for us to grow, as we observe the massive amount of development happening all around us in Rochester and the surrounding areas. The Galleria currently offers a distinctive downtown shopping experience. Over the past 10 years we have been constantly growing within, increasing our diversity of shops, as well as, having to turn away prospects interested in the Galleria due to lack of space. As merchants of the downtown area we welcome development and growth, many merchants have eagerly anticipated their own business expansion and growth potential. As the Board of Directors for the Centerplace Galleria Merchant Association we obviously cannot express the individual views of each merchant within the Galleria. What we are able to do is convey the general consensus. We hope that in your decision making process you keep in the forefront of your minds, that growth is positive. We also hope that whatever decision you do make will be for the betterment of our downtown and our community. Thank you for your time and consideration. The Centerplace Galleria Merchants Association Board of Directors Centerplace Galleria Merchants' Association, Inc. III South Broadway Rochester, Minnesota 55904 (507) 2814119 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 511100 AGENDASECTION: LETTERS AND PETITIONS ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY ADMINISTRATOR ITEM NO. 6 _ 01, ITEM DESCRIPTION: GINNY SMITH REQUESTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL PREPARED BY: S. KVENVOLD Ginny Smith, owner of Ginny's Fine Fabrics, has requested an opportunity to address the City Council about the proposed redevelopment projects in the area of her store. • UNCIL ACTION: Motion by Second by. to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 511100 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Letters & Petitions City Clerk C 3 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Petition for Basic Construction of Roadway, Sewer & Water - Circle PREPARED BY: 19 Plaza First Judy Scherr David Hartman, Hartman Farms, Inc. have submitted a petition requesting the City to initiate a public improvement project for Basic Construction for 26`h Street N.W. from the intersection with West Circle Drive to approximately 350 feet west, the proposed intersection with Deacon Drive N.W. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED motion to adopt the prepared resolution referring the petition from Hartman Farms, Inc. for ,"A asic Construction in Circle 19 Plaza First to the Public Works Department for a feasibility study. . wJNCILACTION: MoBonby: Second by: to: April 18, 2000 Michael Nigbur City of Rochester Department of Public Works 201 SE 4s' Street — Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904 Dear Mr. Nigbur: We, Hartman Farms, Inc., as owners of the property known as Circle 19 Plaza First, are hereby requesting a public improvement project for 261' Street NW from its intersection with West Circle Drive to approximately 350 feet west, its proposed intersection with Deacon Drive NW. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Sincerely HARTMAN FARMS, INC. David Hartman REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 5/1/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY ADMINISTRATOR D-1-38 ITEM 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: D-1. Approval of Minutes D-2. Request for Funding/RADAR 9-Ball Classic D-3. Council Position on Internet Taxation D-4. Revisions to Curfew Ordinance to Address Emergency Situations D-5. Sale of Former Tropic Bowl Site to ISD #535 D-6. Orderly Annexation Agreement with Rochester Township for Southport Subdivision D-7. Donation of Old Council Chambers Cameras to ISD #535 D-8. Sale of City Owned Land D-9. Request to Advertise for Bids/Phase II Runway and Ramp Paving Projects D-10. Consideration of Public Utility Board Action D-11. Licenses, Bonds & Miscellaneous Activities D-12. On -Sale Wine & 3.2% Beer License for Trips, Inc. DBA Hawthorn Suites D-13. Approval of Accounts Payable D-14. Appointment to Citizens Advisory Committee on Transit D-15. Decision on Need for Environmental Impact Statement for Summit Pointe Development d - D-16. Annexation by Ordinance Petition by Larry Goodman to Initiate Orderly Annexation for Approx. 109.84 0 Acres in Part of S %, NE'/. of Section 9 and NW'/4, NW '/. of Section 10, Cascade Township D-17. Parking Management Contract with Republic Parking D-18. Storm Water Management Agreement for Payne Company for Portion of Century Hills Development D-19. Owner Contract/Emerald Hills Second Subdivision D-20. Owner Contract/Avalon Cove/Phase lI D-21. Owner Contract/South Pointe Fifth Subdivision D-22. Owner Contract/Watermain & Hydrant to Serve Touchless 2000 Carwash D-23. Owner Contract/The Gardens/Phase I D-24. Advertise for Bids/Sanitary Sewer Extension Along Portion of 18th Avenue NW D-25. Advertise for Bids/Intersection Improvements and Signal System at 4l't Street NW and W. Frontage Rd D-26. Design Variance Request/Construction of 16th Avenue NW from Civic Center Drive NW to 7"' St. NW D-27. Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve Five Areas in Marion Township D-28. Advertise for Bids/Sanitary Sewer to Serve Marvale Addition and Whynaught's Subdivision (:UUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: (D Request for Council Action Approval of Consent Agenda Items May 1, 2000 Page 2 D-29. Feasibility Report for Water Tower and Trunk Watermain in Southeast Service Area D-30. Advertise for Bids/Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve Baihly Woodland Subdivision D-31. Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve 3010 Valleyhigh Drive NW D-32. Amendments to RCO Chapter 72; Maintenance and Repair of Sidewalks D-33. Engineering Services for the Following Bike Path Projects/Viola Road NE and West Circle Drive SW D-34. Reject Bids/2Id Street SW Bike Trail from 23 d Avenue SW to West Circle Drive D-35. Request Engineering Services/Pavement Resurfacing and Rehabilitation on TH 63 from 4 h Street to Northern Heights Drive D-36. Award of Bids for Reroofing Traffic Operations Building High Roof D-37. Permit Parking Petition from the Kutzky Neighborhood D-38. Purchase of Parking Control Equipment COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: n pQ Motion to approve consent agenda items. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 511100 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY ADMINISTRATOR D _� ITEM DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR FUNDING/RADAR 9-BALL CLASSIC PREPARED BY: S.KVENVOLD Representatives of the RADAR 9-Ball Classic have requested $1,260 in funding from the City of Rochester to pay for the rental expenses of the Mayo Civic Center Ballroom for the 2nd Annual RADAR 9-Ball Classic. The RADAR 9-Ball Classic is wheelchair pool for individuals with physical disabilities. The rental of the Ballroom is $420/day for the 4 day event, for a total of $1,260. The event will not be held until January 19-24, 2001, and the group representatives would like some indication of possible City funding support prior to making a formal commitment for the room. This request was forwarded through Councilmember Stobaugh, who recommends the Council's approval of the funding request. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Request a motion appropriating $1,260 from the 2000 Contingency Account for the 2001 RADAR 9-Ball Classic. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 1 DATE: 5/l/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY ADMINISTRATOR D- 3 ITEM DESCRIPTION: COUNCIL POSITION ON INTERNET TAXATION PREPARED BY: S. KVENVOLD The Internet Taxation Freedom Act of 1998 is set to expire in October, 2001, and legislation has been introduced in the U.S. Congress which would extend and expand the existing taxation moratorium. The Committee of the Whole discussed this matter at their 4/24/00 meeting and recommended the adoption of a resolution which would oppose any extension or expansion of the current moratorium, since this moratorium creates an inequitable taxation policy for community businesses. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Request a motion adopting the prepared resolution expressing the City Council's opposition to the extension or expansion of the Internet Taxation Freedom Act of 1998. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING ( 5 DATE: 5/1/00 AGENDASECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY ADMINISTRATOR r� D�- T ITEM DESCRIPTION: REVISIONS TO CURFEW ORDINANCE TO ADDRESS PREPARED BY: EMERGENCY SITUATIONS G. NEUMANN During the recent Twister 2000 emergency planning event, we had some discussions concerning whether the Mayor and City Council should take action to institute a curfew for this emergency planning scenario. In checking on provisions in our current curfew ordinance, we have determined that there are no provisions that would allow the elected officials to establish a curfew for an emergency. In addition, the adoption of an ordinance amendment at an emergency meeting of the Council would not be in effect until its publication. To rectify this situation, the City Attorney has prepared the attached draft amendment to the curfew ordinance to permit the Mayor to declare a curfew in all or a part of the City in an emergency. The publication of this ordinance amendment at this time will place this language in effect, such that the Mayor could declare a curfew in the event that an emergency occurs at some point in the future. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the ordinance to establish authority for the Mayor to declare a curfew in the event of an emergency in the community. L,utJNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: RP ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE CREATING AND ENACTING SECTION 85A.21 OF THE ROCHESTER CODE OF ORDINANCES, RELATING TO A CURFEW DURING A LOCAL EMERGENCY. THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER DO ORDAIN: Section 1. Section 85A.21 of the Rochester Code of Ordinances is hereby created and enacted to read as follows: 85A.21. Local Emergency Curfew. During the time a local emergency is in effect, as provided for in Minnesota Statutes Section 12.29, the Mayor may declare a curfew for all or any part of the City. The curfew shall continue during the duration of the local emergency or until it is rescinded by the Mayor. Section 2. This Ordinance shall become effective on and after the date of its publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS DAY OF 2000. ATTEST: PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL CITY CLERK APPROVED THIS DAY OF 2000. MAYOR OF SAID CITY (Seal of the City of Rochester, Minnesota) Ord2000185A.21 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 511100 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY ADMINISTRATOR D 5 ITEM DESCRIPTION: SALE OF FORMER TROPIC BOWL SITE TO ISD #535 PREPARED BY: G. NEUMANN The City staff and representatives of the Rochester Independent School District #535 have had discussions concerning a potential sale of the former Tropic Bowl site to ISD #535. The Tropic Bowl site includes approximately 4.75 acres of vacant land that was formerly the site of the bowling alley and the adjacent single family home at 502/504 5`h Avenue SE. The City had an appraisal conducted on these parcels and the resulting value established by the appraisal was $560,000, The attached letter from Paul Bourgeois, Director of Business Services for ISD #535, explains the proposed terms for the sale that have been agreed to by the District. The District would pay the sum of $500,000 for the properties payable in five equal yearly installments, with the first one due at closing. The sale of the property would be in an "as is" condition. Any obligations for relocation payments for tenants in the home would be the responsibility of the District. If this transaction is approved by the City, the property will be transferred to the District. While the favorable price and terms of the sale for the District may be somewhat less than the City could secure in the open market, this office believes that it is a reasonable price given the objectives of retaining an • elementary school in this area of the City. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval to sell the former Tropic Bowl property and the single family home at 502/504 5`s Avenue SE to ISD #535 for $500,000 payable in five equal annual installments as described above. UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Sewnd by to: The Rochester Public Schools Independent School District 535 615 SW 7th Street • Rochester, Minnesota 55902 • Phone (507) 285-8592 • Fax (507) 287-1344 Business Services January 27, 2000 Mr. Gary Neumann Assistant City Administrator City of Rochester 204 4th Street SE Room 266 Rochester, MN 55904 Dear Gary: At our luncheon meeting of December 17, 1999, Mayor Canfield, Administrator Kvenvold, Mr. Richard Lee of the Holmes/Hawthome Study Committee, Superintendent Noennig, you and I got together to discuss the possibility of ISD 535 acquiring property from the City of Rochester that is commonly known as the Tropic Bowl site for the purpose of constructing the first new elementary school in Southeast Rochester since Holmes Elementary was constructed in 1920. After reviewing the options for purchase and also reviewing possible District parcels that the City might be interested in, we came to a verbal agreement for the terms by which the School District could acquire the Tropic Bowl site. The purpose of this communique is to formalize the verbal agreement so that the respective governing bodies can take action approving or disapproving of those terms. The terms we verbally agreed at the meeting were that the City of Rochester would agree to sell the land and house with an appraised value of $560,000 to the School District for the amount of $500,000 cash, or for $400,000 cash and the trade of land the School District owns near University Center -Rochester for a credit to the School District of $100,000, In addition, the City also agreed to allow the District to pay for the purchase over a period of 5 years in 5 equal installments at no interest cost. I must take a bird walk here and state that the District is extremely appreciative of the very generous terms the City has offered to the School District. The discount on market value and allowing the District to spread the payments over five years means that the District will be able to pay for the purchase out of ongoing revenues. The District sees the acquisition of this land as crucial to future educational needs in near -downtown SE Rochester, and under these terms, we will be able to purchase the land regardless of the outcome of the bond issue. In fact, we would be very pleased to close the purchase before the April 11 referendum if possible. To be quite honest, if this bond issue fails, the new SE elementary school will be part of the next bond issue, I9 because it really is the only solution to elementary education needs in SE Rochester, and we will have the land in hand ready to build it. Back to the acquisition of the land. Subsequent to our meeting with you, Superintendent Noennig and the School Board met with area legislators on January 4, 2000 to talk about upcoming issues for the 2000 Legislative Session. In the course of that discussion, the idea of getting the covenant restriction removed from the land near University Center -Rochester came up. Senator Kiscaden and Representative Bishop in particular, along with the other members, strongly recommended that the District retain that land because there was a high likelihood that it might be needed by the University Center -Rochester in the near future for expansion of that facility. Based on that feedback, it is the District's offer to purchase the Tropic Bowl site and adjacent house for the straight $500,000 cash option, payable over 5 yearly installments, with the first one being due upon closing. The District again wants to thank the City for these beneficial terms, and we look forward to working with the City to bring a renaissance to Southeast Rochester with the construction of a new, state-of-the-art elementary school at the Tropic Bowl site. Please call me at 285-8592 if you have any questions. Si a ely, r L 6 Paul Bourgeois, CPA Director of Business ! Cc: The Honorable Charles Canfield Mayor Mr. Stevan Kvenvold City Administrator Dr. Jack Noennig Superintendent Mrs. Karen Hammill School Board President CONSENT AGENDA REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY ADMINISTRATOR ITEM DESCRIPTION: ORDERLY ANNEXATION AGREEMENT WITH ROCHESTER TOWNSHIP FOR SOUTHPORT SUBDIVISION MEETING a� DATE: 5/1/00 ITEM NO. 'D >-% PREPARED BY: G. NEUMANN The Rochester Township Board has approved an Orderly Annexation Agreement with the City of Rochester affecting the Southport Subdivision. A copy of the agreement is attached and is recommended for approval by this office. Under the provisions of this agreement, the City of Rochester could annex the Southport Subdivision area "no earlier than January 1" of the year five years after substantial completion of a water or sewer project providing water or sewer service to the area". This is the language that we have been using for the lands and subdivisions that are intended to have municipal services installed under the Water Quality Protection Program. The Council had previously discussed this provision and had agreed to permit the staff to negotiate agreements based on that provision'for the WQPP. The provision was intended as a concession by the City to provide some additional time for the property -owners and the township before the lands would be annexed to the City. Typically the City has required immediate annexation before the provision of water or sewer services. We have made an exception from this past practice for the WQPP. A provision of the agreement that required much discussion related to the fact that the agreement gives the City the authority to assume planning and zoning responsibilities for the area affected by the agreement. From the City staff perspective, the City could have required the immediate annexation of the land in order for the subdivision to receive municipal services. In that event, the area would have been immediately subject to the City's planning and zoning authority. The Township was concerned about this provision and wanted the planning and zoning authority to remain with the Township until the lands were annexed. As a compromise, the staff recommended that the provision allowing the City to take planning and zoning control should remain in the agreement. However, in this particular situation for Southport subdivision, the area is already fully developed. We are mainly concerned about taking this control over areas that remain to be developed.' That being the case, we are suggesting that the City continue to allow Rochester Township to exercise planning and zoning authority in this area, which would involve primarily action on variance requests. This simply means that the City would not adopt the resolution required to take over planning and zoning authority unless there seems to be a problem that we could address by assuming that authority. Other main provisions of the agreement provide as follows: - Rochester Township agrees not to file any objections to the annexation with State Planning. - Annexation can be initiated simply by adoption of a resolution by the City. - The City has exclusive control over the proposed installation of municipal sewer and water services. - The City will re -construct any roads disturbed by the sewer and water projects to City specifications. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of Orderly Annexation Agreement for Southport with Rochester Township. a.vuNCILACTION: Mown by: second to: Rochester Township 821 Parton Road S.W. Rochester, MN 55902 April 20, 2000 Gary H. Neumann Assistant City Administrator 201 4' Street S.S. Room 266 Rochester, MN 55904 Dear Gary: At the April Townboard meeting the Township Supervisors voted to accept the City of Rochester's proposal, dated April 10, 2000 for the Southport Orderly Annexation Agreement with one brief word change and with follow-through on your suggestion for dealing with planning and zoning issues as referenced in your cover letter. The word change involves deleting the words "at or" from lime 7 in section 12 on page 4. Our road maintenance supervisor is concerned about the road surface settling around manholes. Since there is no mention in the annexation agreement of the Water Quality Protection Program we assume that the City will use sales tax revenue to subsidize the cost of sewer and water to Southport as the residents understood when they signed their petition. The Townboard also discussed the remaining petitioned areas. We would like to work with the city to facilitate annexation agreements for these petitioned areas similar to the Southport orderly annexation agreement. Sincerely, Brenda Dicken, Chairman Rochester Townboard BEFORE THE MINNESOTA STATE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN THE MATTER OF THE DESCRIPTION OF AN UNICORPORATED AREA IN ROCHESTER TOWNSHIP AS IN NEED OF ORDERLY ) JOINT RESOLUTION FOR ANNEXATION AND CONFERRING JURISDICTION ) ORDERLY ANNEXATION OVER SAID AREA IN THE MINNESOTA ) (ROCHESTER AREA #4) MUNICIPAL BOARD OR ITS SUCCESSOR ) PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA ) STATUES §414.0325, Subd. 1 ) WHEREAS, the City of Rochester (hereinafter "City") and Rochester Township (hereinafter "Township") agree that given the potential health threat from individual sewage treatment systems within the area designated in Exhibit A, there is a need for municipal sanitary sewer and water services; and WHEREAS, the City and Township agree that orderly annexation and extension of municipal sanitary sewer or water services to areas needing such service would benefit the public health, safety and welfare of the entire community, and the City currently has authority to collect local sales tax funds to pay a portion of the costs for the extension of sewer or water services to developed areas within the Township; and WHEREAS, the City and Township agree that there is a public need for the coordinated, efficient and :ost effective extension of City sewer and water in accordance with existing and future needs to promote the public health and safety by protecting the region's ground water supply and surface waters; and WHEREAS, the property described in the attached Exhibit A lies within the Urban Service Area of Rochester, is presently urban or suburban in nature and predominantly small lots with pre-1970 septic systems and the City is capable of providing public sanitary sewer, water and storm water facilities within a reasonable time; and WHEREAS, the extension of public sanitary sewer and water by the City can only be provided in prioritized phases if the process and timing of annexation is clearly identified and jointly agreed upon in advance of the capital planning, commitment and expenditure necessary on the part of the City; and WHEREAS, the establishment of a process of orderly annexation of said lands will be of benefit to the residents and owners of said lands, and permit the City to extend necessary municipal services in a planned and efficient manner; and WHEREAS, for the areas designated in Exhibit A, the City and the Township desire to accomplish the orderly annexation of said areas and the extension of municipal services in a mutually acceptable and beneficial manner without the need for a hearing before the State Planning Department (reference to the State Planning Department is intended to include this or any other agency succeeding the Minnesota Municipal Board) and, with the purpose of avoiding a dispute over the annexation of the property described in said Exhibit A, enter ito this joint resolution for orderly annexation pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §414.0325, Subd. 1. t aq NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Rochester and the Rochester Township as follows: 1. The City and Township hereby designate that property situated in Rochester Township, County of Olmsted, State of Minnesota, which is legally described on the attached Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by reference, as in need of orderly annexation pursuant to Minnesota Statues §414.0325. For ease of reference, the area legally described in Exhibit A is shown on the attached map, Exhibit B. 2. Rochester Township hereby withdraws any objections filed and agrees to not file any objections with the State Planning Department, concerning the City's desire or request to annex any of the property described on the attached Exhibit A. Rochester Township further agrees that if it has filed any objections with the State Planning Department, to the annexation to the City of any of the property described in attached Exhibit A, the filing of this Joint Resolution with the State Planning Department shall constitute sufficient notice of the withdrawal of the objections. This agreement shall terminate if the City does not provide sewer and water services to the area by January 1, 2007. 3. The lands designated in Exhibit A attached hereto shall be subject to future annexation to the City pursuant to the terms and conditions of this joint resolution and shall constitute the "orderly annexation area" otherwise described in this joint resolution. The City and Township agree that the area legally described in Exhibit A is designated as in need of orderly annexation and contains approximately 42.8 acres. 4. Any part or all of the lands described in Exhibit A may, except as otherwise provided, be annexed to the City no earlier than January 1 of the year five years after the substantial completion of a water or sewer project providing water or sewer service to the area. Substantial completion shall be when City issu-- ° initial certificate of acceptance to the sewer and water contractor, a copy of said certificate to be provided t Rochester Town Board. The contractor's two-year maintenance obligation conunences with the issuance or rms initial certificate of acceptance. 5. Annexation under this joint resolution shall be initiated by the adoption of a resolution by the City. No review by or recommendation from the City of Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the adoption of a specific annexation resolution is necessary, except as is hereinafter provided. 6. Upon the occurrence of any event triggering annexation as provided in sections 4 and 7 of this Joint Resolution for the area designated in Exhibit A or any portion thereof, the City may initiate annexation of any area designated in Exhibit A by submitting a resolution so providing, along with a copy of this Joint Resolution, to the State Planning Department, Rochester Township, and the Olmsted County Auditor/Treasurer. The resolution for annexation shall contain the boundary description of the area to be annexed and, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 414.01, subd. 14 and Section 414.0325, subd. la, shall contain the City's estimates of the population and number of households contained in the area to be annexed and the estimate of electrical service cost differences at the time of annexation. The City and Township agree that no alteration of the stated boundaries is appropriate, that no consideration by the State Planning Department is necessary, and that all terms and conditions for annexation of the area legally described in Exhibit A, or any portion thereof, are provided for in this Joint Resolution. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 414.0325, upon receipt of a resolution of any signatory to the Joint Resolution for annexation of the area described in Exhibit A, or any portion thereof, the State Planning Department may review and comment, but shall, within thirty (30) days of receipt of said resolution, order the annexation of the described in the resolution in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Joint Resolution. 2 aL.D 7. Notwithstanding the annexation time line set forth in paragraph 4, any lands contained in the orderly annexation area may be annexed to the City prior thereto upon adoption by the City of a resolution Following the procedures as prescribed in paragraph 6 and whenever: (a) a landowner abuts the City limits and said landowner files a petition for annexation with the City. In such instance, review by the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission shall not be required prior to the City acting upon said petition; (b) a landowner seeks to develop a residential, commercial, industrial, or governmental use on land which is platted or subdivided or which is proposed to be platted or subdivided for development at a density of more than one unit per 40 acres. In such instances, the City may immediately annex the area proposed to be developed and the adjacent necessary land which, in the City's discretion, is needed to extend municipal sewer or water service to the area to be annexed; or Provided further, that the parties hereto may revise the annexation schedule otherwise set forth in paragraph (4) upon the recommendation of the Olmsted County Health and Planning Departments that the continued use of private sewer systems in the orderly annexation area present an immediate threat to public or private water supplies. 8. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes §414.0325, Subd. 5, the Township agrees to exclude the area identified in Exhibit A from its zoning and subdivision controls prior to annexation upon the City's extension of its municipal planning and land use controls to the property, and agrees not to object when the City seeks County exclusion of its planning and land use controls in this area. To establish its municipal planning and land use controls, the City shall adopt a resolution identifying the boundaries of the real property ubject to municipal controls and the specific zoning district(s) classification(s) of the subject lands as defined ender the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. A copy of the resolution shall be filed with the Township, the Olmsted County Administrator, and the Olmsted County Recorder's Office. 9. Lands ordered annexed pursuant to this joint resolution shall not be subject to any differential taxation as referenced in Minnesota Statutes §414.035. Property taxes payable on annexed land shall continue to be paid to the Township for the entire year in which the annexation becomes effective. If an annexation becomes effective on or before August I of a levy year, based on the date specified in the order from the State Planning Department, the City may levy on the annexed area beginning with that same levy year. If the annexation becomes effective after August I of a levy year, the Township may continue to levy on the annexed area for that levy year. Thereafter property taxes on the annexed land shall be paid to the City. 10. The City shall, in appropriate circumstances, provide notification that the cost of electric utility service to the customers on the property subject to this joint resolution may change when the land is annexed to the City if and when the provider of electrical service is transferred from People's Cooperative Power Association to Rochester Public Utilities. As of the date of this joint resolution, the estimate of the difference in overall electrical service costs between the two providers is minimal. A resolution of the City to annex certain property subject to this joint resolution, as referenced in paragraph 7, shall contain a cost estimate of any change in electric utility services, including rate changes and assessments resulting from the annexation. It. It is the City's intention to provide only sanitary sewer and/or water service to developed lands in the annexation area prior to annexation pursuant to this joint resolution. Thereafter, any other or additional )cal improvements may be installed by the City in an annexed area: (a) upon a petition brought pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, by the benefited property owner or owners; or, 3 A( (b) when three -fourths (3/4) of the City Council determine that it is in the public interest of the residents of the City and of any lands to be assessed to construct such local improvement; or, (c) when the City and Township enter into an Intergovemment Agreement providing for the sharing of costs for the local improvement where the sharing of costs is based on the number of years the improvement shall be in the Township as compared to the improvement's life expectancy. 12. The City shall have exclusive control over the nature and extent of the installation of municipal sewer or water. This includes the design and construction of any sewer or water system serving an area of the Township prior to annexation. The Township, by this agreement, does hereby authorize the City to enter upon the Township roads for the purpose of constructing, installing, and maintaining any and all sewer and water facilities, without the need for any further permit or easement. The City agrees to reconstruct any township roads disturbed by the sewer and watermain construction to the same width and elevation applying City construction specifications. Manhole castings shall be set at an elevation at or below the final street grade. The City shall reimburse itself for the cost of installing municipal services by entering into connection agreements with individual property owners. The City and Township recognize that the connection agreements will require payments by the property owners prior to annexation of the property into the city, and that the payments are appropriately levied as unpaid charges pursuant to Minn. Star. Chapters 429 and. 444. The City shall furnish to Township by November 15`h of each appropriate year a list of properties subject to connection agreements and the amount of special assessments to be collected from each property. The City shall also provide a list of those properties for which delinquent water and sewer bills are outstanding. The Township shall certify, on behalf of the City, these amounts to the Olmsted County Auditor/Treasurer for inclusion in the Real Property Tax Statement due and payable in the following calendar year. The certification shall direct the Olmsted Countv Auditor/Treasurer, to collect and disburse the assessment amounts directly to the City of Rochester. lr event the County Auditor/Treasurer is unwilling to disburse the funds to the City, the Township shall r....... these funds to the City within 30 days of its receipt of the funds from the County. The City shall assume the responsibility for certification of the special assessments and service charges upon annexation of the properties into the City. 13. Nothing in this joint resolution shall relieve the Township of its responsibilities for the regular and normal maintenance of the existing infrastructure of roads, drainage facilities, and street signs until the property described in the attached Exhibit A has been annexed into the City. 14. Disputes and Remedies. The City and Township agree as follows: a. Negotiation. When a disagreement over interpretation of any provision of this Joint Resolution shall arise, the respective City and Township will direct staff members as they deem appropriate to meet at least one time at a mutually convenient time and place to attempt to resolve the dispute through negotiation. b. Mediation. When the parties to this Joint Resolution are unable to resolve disputes, claims or counterclaims, or are unable to negotiate an interpretation of any provision of this Joint Resolution, the parties may mutually agree in writing to seek relief by submitting their respective grievances to non -binding mediation. C. Adjudication. When the parties to this Joint Resolution are unable to resolve disputes, Clain counterclaims, are unable to negotiate an interpretation of any provision of this Joint Resoh or are unable to agree to submit their respective grievances to non -binding mediation, either party may seek relief through initiation of an action in a court of competent jurisdiction. In 2 addition to the remedies provided for in this Joint Resolution and any other available remedies at law or equity, in the case of a violation, default or breach of any provision of this Joint Resolution, the non -violating, non -defaulting, or non -breaching party may bring an action for specific performance to compel the performance of this Joint Resolution in accordance with its terms. 15. Modification/Amendment. This Joint Resolution shall not be modified, amended, or altered except upon the written joint resolution of the City and the Township duly executed and adopted by the City Council and Township Board of Supervisors and filed with the State Planning Department. 16. Governing Law: Severabilitr. This Joint Resolution for Orderly Annexation is made pursuant to, and shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. In the event any provision of this Joint Resolution is determined and adjudged to be unconstitutional, invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Joint Resolution shall remain in full force and effect, and the parties hereto shall negotiate in good faith and agree to such amendments or modifications of or to this Joint Resolution or other appropriate actions as shall, to the maximum extent practicable in light of such determination, implement and give effect to the intentions of the parties hereto. 17. Entire Azreement. The terms, covenant, conditions, and provisions of this Joint Resolution, including the present and all future attachments, shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties, superseding all prior agreement and negotiations, regarding the annexation area. This Joint Resolution shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the respective successors and assigns of the City and Township. 18. Effective Date: Termination. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon its adoption by parties and its filing, by the City and Township, with the State Planning Department. The obligations of the rties to one another according to the terms of this resolution shall terminate at such time that the entire area designated in Exhibit A has been annexed to the City, or at such time that the City and Township mutually agree in writing that this joint resolution shall be terminated. 19. Notices. Any notices required to be sent under the terms of this agreement shall be considered sufficient notice if mailed by first class U.S. mail to the City of Rochester, City Administrator's Office, 201 4`s Street SE, Rochester, MN 55904, and to Rochester Township, Rochester Township Clerk, _, Rochester, MN 5590_. 5 A PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA THIS DAY OF 12000, PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED THIS DAY OF 2000. MAYOR OF SAID CITY (Seal of the City of Rochester, Minnesota) PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE ROCHESTER TOWNSHIP, OLMSTED COUP MINNESOTA, THIS DAY OF 12000. ATTEST: TOWN CLERK Zoneorder.annex.ROCHESTER.southport.dm CHAIRMAN OF TOWN BOARD 6 ]5 ST SE ST 3, ST EE t S4 SE 1 I � I IT SE t t Exhibit "A' 1t ST 5S Rochester Township Orderly Annexation Y Area #4 I I M E 0 250 500 Feet IS �— Annexation Area Currently in City 0 Rochester Township 1 ` I It Uv orc 522US S my Sam 1E9906wtl C"m Par"Oa mapt. itmmwdd REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 3 / DATE: 5/1/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY ADMINISTRATOR D - r7 ITEM DESCRIPTION: DONATION OF OLD COUNCIL CHAMBERS CAMERAS TO PREPARED BY: ISD 535 T. SPAETH Late last fall, we had the cameras in the Council Chambers replaced with new cameras. The old ones were hauled down into the basement for storage and remain there still. Recently, I was asked by Grag Darbo (ISD 535 RITS TV Studio Technician) if the cameras could be utilized by the School District for educational purposes in the RITS Studio. I contacted Jenny King about this matter, and Jenny has indicated that Council approval would be needed prior to donating the property. As I see it, the cameras would be of little, if any value to anyone other than the School District for educational purposes. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Counci authorization to donate the old Council Chambers cameras to the School District RITS Studio. • UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CONSENT AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: SALE OF CITY OWNED LAND ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY ADMINISTRATOR MEETING 33 DATE: 511100 ITEM NO. D-6 PREPARED BY: D. KNOTT DK-^ The City received an offer in the amount of $11,000 from Historic Riverside Partners for the purchase of a 25' x 60' strip of land that we own. The parcel lies south of the former Harold's Auto Electric and north of Hazama Park. The City leased this property to Mr. Boutelle (the owner of Harold's) for parking for his business. The lease was strictly for the benefit of Mr. Boutelle and was structured to terminate upon the sale of Harold's to anyone outside of Mr. Boutelle's family. Early this year, Historic Riverside Partners acquired Mr. Boutelle's property. They would like to purchase the City owned parcel to provide off-street parking for the three buildings they own in the area. A copy of the offer was forwarded to the Public Works Department and the Park Department. We have no municipal need for the property. Staff believes that the suggested purchase price is reasonable. Staff supports the sale subject to several conditions. There are currently two adjacent driveway openings on to Broadway. One is on the Boutelle property and one is on the City property. The right of access to the City parcel would be terminated as a condition of the sale. Secondly, Historic Riverside Partners would be prohibited from erecting any billboards on the City parcel. Finally, we would prohibit the use of the property for adult oriented businesses. These conditions would be incorporated into deed restrictions that would run with the land. These restrictions have been discussed with the buyers and they do not object to them. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval to sell the property described above to Historic Riverside Partners under the terms and conditions outlined in this RCA. Authorization for the Mayor and Clerk to execute a purchase agreement and any documents necessary for the transfer of ownership of the property. %,wJNCIL ACTION: Motion bv: Second 3q BINS LAW OFFICE Suite 201 Riverside Building 400 South Broadway Rochester, MN 55904 RICHARD H. BINS TELEPHONE: (507) 288-7402 March 14, 2000 FAX: (507) 288-7547 Doug Knott City of Rochester City Administrator's Office 204 4th Street SE, Room 266 Rochester, MN 55904 Re: Historic Riverside Partners Purchase of Property Dear Mr. Knott: Historic Riverside Partners, a limited partnership, will offer $11,000 for purchase from the City of a small strip of land. The strip is approximately 25 feet in width and 60 feet deep. It lies on South Broadway immediately north of Hazama Park and south of Harold's Auto Electric. While you are familiar with this property, since others must make the decision, I thought it might help to provide some background information. Over 100 years ago when this area was originally platted, there was a 75 foot east -west dedicated street, which would be about 5th Street South in the present system. This was a very short street running from Broadway to the river. When a bridge was built over 4th Street, it was not likely a bridge would ever be built for 5th Street so this stub street was abandoned, and reverted to the adjoining owners. The north side of the vacated street was acquired by the adjoining lot owner whose platted lot had 31 feet of frontage. This is the site of the building known as Harold's Auto Electric. The south half of the vacated roadway accrued to the adjoining owner on that side, which was last used by a car rental agency. In 1992, incident to the flood control project, the City acquired the southerly 37 %x foot strip of the vacated road and the abutting lot. The flood control project also required a taking of the westerly portion of the Boutelle property. I believe the City was willing to pay $6,700, however, Boutelle wanted to use some of the City property for parking. Thus there was a 20 year lease between Boutelle and the City of the northerly 25 feet of the City property, with the first eight years rent free. Beginning November 2000, Boutelle would be paying rent. The balance of the City property was used for Hazama Park. The lease provided that it could not be assigned. Apparently the City was willing to lease to Boutelle to prevent interruption of his existing business operation, but did not want to be obligated to lease if his business were sold. 3; Boutelle used the leased property to provide better access to his service bays, but was able to rent six parking places to outside parties, several to our tenants in the Riverside Building. We were concern that if a tenant terminated the parking arrangement with Boutelle, he might rent it to someone, and eventually we would be in a difficult position if we had tenants requiring parking. Therefore about two years ago we offered to buy the City strip, subject to the Boutelle lease. Boutelle also expressed an interest in purchasing, perhaps to preserve his opportunity to sell his business as a going concern. To avoid hard feelings, we believe the city decided not to sell the property at that time. As of January 3, 2000, Historic Riverside Partners purchased the Boutelle property. Boutelle auctioned his equipment. We thought this would be a opportune time to again make an offer to purchase this property from the City. We do not believe the City has any prospective use for this property, other than a possible expansion of Hazama Park, however, that would add to the parking problem now existing in the area. Our intention is to maintain the strip as it is presently used, namely parking. We already have two large parking lots accommodating over sixty cars for tenants and customers. That has been adequate until recently, when we obtained full occupancy of our commercial buildings. We believe we are offering a fair price for this property bearing in mind its limitations. It is too small for commercial development, particularly if on site parking is to be provided. The strip is too narrow for parking since the cars cannot exit the parking lot without either backing on our property or into South Broadway. If we cannot purchase the City strip, we could reconfigure parking on the Boutelle property to replace most of the lost 6 spaces, but that would create a more congested parking area than we would prefer. A question has been raised whether we should pay rent to the City for the parking places we are now using because the lease was not assignable. However since Boutelle had in affect paid the rent through November 2000, the City is not losing any money by permitting us to use the property until the purchase can be resolved. Sincerely yours, BINS LAW OFFICE /10/✓� Richard H. Bins RHB/jcb 19 D -JP z Q Lc= / v `}Ljf7 o r' m �)erce���111l o o'l ST S IIAPO g MAFA ho YCGOvernmo '( enter 0 �-.. Fth.ROG.DS Aarb etsamic. SU B jer,T P'.DPT4r H4Z.d K4A 'RA7A REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 3? DATE: 511100 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Rochester International Airport -C>--q ITEM DESCRIPTION: Request to advertise for bids Phase H runway and ramp paving projects. PREPARED BY: Steven W. Legve The Rochester Airport Commission recommends and requests Council authorization to: Advertise for bids on Phase II runway and ramp paving projects at the Rochester International Airport. This project is in the Airport CIP. (J6911) Funding: 90% Federal 10% Local COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Resolution authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids. 1NCIL ACTION: Mefianby: second by: to: Meeting REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date 5/l/00 3ENDA SECTION ]ROCHESTER ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. V CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC UTILITIES ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: Consideration of Public Utility Board Action Kathy Wilson The Rochester Public Utility Board has approved the following on April 25, 2000 and requests the Common Council's favorable consideration: to approve a resolution to approve a purchase order agreement with Ziegler Power Systems for the rental of two diesel generating sets for the period from June 15 through September 15, 2000. The amount of the purchase order agreement to be $129,300.00 and Ziegler Power Systems being lowest responsible bidder. to approve a resolution to approve the RPU Open Access Transmission Tariff. Such tariff shall become effective immediately. GENERAL MANAGER: �jA.Wr � //// :OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by✓✓✓✓: Second by: to: Agenda Item # 5 FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 4/25/00' SUBJECT: PURCHASE ORDER AGREEMENT RENTAL OF DIESEL GENSETS PREPARED BY: Wait Lorber, Director of Operations ITEM DESCRIPTION: Per previous Board action, RPU has made arrangements for generating capacityto meet the forecasted summer electric load above the contract rate of delivery (CROD) from SMMPA. Any energy purchased from that capacity will be priced using market rates. At the times that RPU expects to be purchasing energy above the CROD amount of 216 MW, market prices can be expected to be anywhere from $50 to $5000 per MWH. Marketers are projecting an average price of $600-700 per MWH for the hottest days this summer. RPU expects to need approximately 1000 MWH above the CROD. As a hedge against high market prices, staff recommends the rental of diesel generators. On April 17, 2000, two bid proposals were received for the rental of portable generating equipment. An evaluation of the bids based on the forecasted need of 100 hours against an average market price of $650/mWh of operation produces the following costs/savings: Savings of Gensets Vendor Capacity (KWL Avg Price/MWH vs. Market Ziegler 3650 $439 $76,950 Aggreko 5000 630 10,200 Based on the forecasted need, Ziegler's proposal provides the best value. With prices at $5000/MWH, either proposal could save RPU several million dollars. Other advantages gained from the installation of the gensets is 1) increased reserves to cover temperature extremes, 2) load relief for a substation transformer that is expected to be overloaded this summer, and 3) increased internal generation to support Rochester load in the event of possible transmission contingencies. Staff recommends that the Board request the Common Council to approve a purchase order agreement with Ziegler Power Systems for the rental of two diesel generating sets for the period June 15 - September 15, 2000, at a price of $129,300.00, per the terms and conditions of Ziegler's bid proposal. earal Manager Date 4 4 qt FOR BOARD ACTION Agenda Item # 7 Meeting Date: 4/25/00 SUBJECT: RPU Open Access Transmission Tariff PREPARED By: Wait Lorber, Director of Operations �IF����1�3�1�1lKi2J# On March 27, 2000, staff presented a draft Open Access Transmission Tariff (GATT) for Board consideration. In accordance with Board policy, public notice was given of the Board's intent to further consider and adopt an OATT at the April Board meeting. As noted in March, RPU is a non -jurisdictional utility (not governed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), but is required to offer a tariffupon request by an entity seeking electric transmission service. In addition, the potential merger of Mid-continent Area Power Pool with the Mid -America Interconnected Network and/or the Midwest Independent System Operator may require RPU to file the tariff. . The.attached OATT rates were developed by R.W. Beck. ,UTILITY BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: It is recommended that the Public Utility Board request the Common Council to approve the Open Access Transmission Tariff, including the attached rates. d-d'La '� ✓LL'I ��G �e LC' Gc#d Manager Date Rochester Public UtilitiesOpen Access Transmission Tariff Draft: February 18, 20000riginal Sheet No. 38 q 3 diligence to expand or modify its Transmission System to provide the requested Firm Transmission Service, provided the Transmission Customer agrees to compensate the Transmission Provider for such costs pursuant to the terms of Section 28. The Transmission Provider will conform to Good Utility Practice in determining the need for new facilities and in the design and construction of such facilities. The obligation applies only to those facilities that the Transmission Provider has the right to expand or modify. 16.5 Deferral of Service: The Transmission Provider may defer providing service until it completes construction of new transmission facilities cr upgrades needed to provide Firm Point -To -Point Transmission Service whenever the Transmission Provider determines that providing the requested service would, without such new facilities or upgrades, impair or degrade reliability to any existing firm services. 16.6 Other Transmission Service Schedules: Eligible Customers receiving transmission service under other agreements may continue to receive transmission service under those agreements until such time as those agreements may be modified. 16.7 Real Power Losses: Real Power Losses are associated with all transmission service. The Transmission Provider is not obligated to provide Real Power Losses. The Transmission Customer is responsible for replacing losses associated with all transmission service as calculated by the Transmission Provider. The applicable Real Power Loss is 1.7%. 17 Transmission Customer Responsibilities 17.1 Conditions Required of Transmission Customers: Point -To -Point Transmission Service shall be provided by the Transmission Provider only if the following conditions are satisfied by the Transmission Customer: a. The Transmission Customer has pending a Completed Application for service; b. The Transmission Customer meets the creditworthiness criteria set forth in Section 10; c. The Transmission Customer will have arrangements in place for any other 44 SCHEDULEI Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch Service This service is required to schedule the movement of power through, out of, within, or into a Control Area. This service can be provided only by the operator of the Control Area in which the transmission facilities used for transmission service are located. Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch Service is to be provided directly by the Transmission Provider (if the Transmission Provider is the Control Area operator) or indirectly by the Transmission Provider making arrangements with the Control Area operator that performs this service for the Transmission Providers Transmission System. The Transmission Customer must purchase this service from the Transmission Provider or the Control Area operator. The charges for Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch Service are to be based on the rates set forth below. To the extent the Control Area operator performs this service for the Transmission Provider, charges to the Transmission Customer are to reflect only a pass -through of the costs charged to the Transmission Provider by that Control Area operator. Rochester Public Utilities is in the Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's control area. Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's charges will be passed on to the transmission customer by Rochester Public Utilities. ql�;_ SCHEDULE2 Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service In order to maintain transmission voltages on the Transmission Provider's transmission facilities within acceptable limits, generation facilities under the control of the control area operator are operated to produce (or absorb) reactive power. Thus, Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service must be provided for each transaction on the Transmission Provider's transmission facilities. The amount of Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service that must be supplied with respect to the Transmission Customer's transaction will be determined based on the reactive power support necessary to maintain transmission voltages within limits that are generally accepted in the region and consistently adhered to by the Transmission Provider. Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service is to be provided directly by the Transmission Provider (if the Transmission Provider is the Control Area operator) or indirectly by the Transmission Provider making arrangements with the Control Area operator that performs this service for the Transmission Provider's Transmission System. The Transmission Customer must purchase this service from the Transmission Provider or the Control Area operator. The charges for such service will be based on the rates set forth below. To the extent the Control Area operator performs this service for the Transmission Provider, charges to the Transmission Customer are to reflect only a pass -through of the costs charged to the Transmission Provider by the Control Area operator. Rochester Public Utilities is in the Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's control area. Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's charges will be passed on to the transmission customer by Rochester Public Utilities. q(4V SCHEDULE3 Regulation and Frequency Response Service Regulation and Frequency Response Service is necessary to provide for the continuous balancing of resources (generation and interchange) with load and for maintaining scheduled Interconnection frequency at sixty cycles per second (60 Hz). Regulation and Frequency Response Service is accomplished by committing on-line generation whose output is raised or lowered (predominantly through the use of automatic generating control equipment) as necessary to follow the moment -by -moment changes in load. The obligation to maintain this balance between resources and load lies with the Transmission Provider (or the Control Area operator that performs this function for the Transmission Provider). The Transmission Provider must offer this service when the transmission service is used to serve load within its Control Area. The Transmission Customer must either purchase this service from the Transmission Provider or make alternative comparable arrangements to satisfy its Regulation and Frequency Response Service obligation. The amount of and charges for Regulation and Frequency Response Service are set forth below. To the extent the Control Area operator performs this service for the Transmission Provider, charges to the Transmission Customer are to reflect only a pass -through of the costs charged to the Transmission Provider by that Control Area operator. Rochester Public Utilities is in the Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's control area. Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's charges will be passed on to the transmission customer by Rochester Public Utilities. ��*7 SCHEDULE4 Energy Imbalance Service Energy Imbalance Service is provided when a difference occurs between the scheduled and the actual delivery of energy to a load located within a Control Area over a single hour. The Transmission Provider must offer this service when the transmission service is used to serve load within its Control Area. The Transmission Customer must either purchase this service from the Transmission Provider or make alternative comparable arrangements to satisfy its Energy Imbalance Service obligation. To the extent the Control Area operator performs this service for the Transmission Provider, charges to the Transmission Customer are to reflect only a pass -through of the costs charged to the Transmission Provider by that Control Area operator. The Transmission Provider shall establish a deviation band of +l- 3.0 percent (with a minimum of 2 MVO of the scheduled transaction to be applied hourly to any energy imbalance that occurs as a result of the Transmission Customer's scheduled transaction(s). Parties should attempt to eliminate energy imbalances within the limits of the deviation band within thirty (30) days or within such other reasonable period of time as is generally accepted in the region and consistently adhered to by the Transmission Provider. If an energy imbalance is not corrected within thirty (30) days or a reasonable period of time that is generally accepted in the region and consistently adhered to by the Transmission Provider, the Transmission Customer will compensate the Transmission Provider for such service. Rochester Public Utilities is in the Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's control area. Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's charges will be passed on to the transmission customer by Rochester Public Utilities. qq SCHEDULES Operating Reserve - Spinning Reserve Service Spinning Reserve Service is needed to serve load immediately in the event of a system contingency. Spinning Reserve Service may be provided by generating units that are on-line and loaded at less than ------- output. The Transmission Provider must offer this service when the transmission service is used to serve load within its Control Area. The Transmission Customer must either purchase this service from the Transmission Provider or make alternative comparable arrangements to satisfy its Spinning Reserve Service obligation. The amount of and charges for Spinning Reserve Service are set forth below. To the extent the Control Area operator performs this service for the Transmission Provider, charges to the Transmission Customer are to reflect only a pass -through of the costs charged to the Transmission Provider by that Control Area operator. 2 SCHEDULE 6 Operating Reserve - Supplemental Reserve Service Supplemental Reserve Service is needed to serve load in the event of a system contingency, however, it is not available immediately to serve load but rather within a short period of time. Supplemental Reserve Service may be provided by generating units that are on-line but unloaded, by quick -start generation or by interruptible load. The Transmission Provider must offer this service when the transmission service is used to serve load within its Control Area. The Transmission Customer must either purchase this service from the Transmission Provider or make alternative comparable arrangements to satisfy its Supplemental Reserve Service obligation. The amount of and charges for Supplemental Reserve Service are set forth below. To the extent the Control Area operator performs this service for the Transmission Provider, charges to the Transmission Customer are to reflect only a pass -through of the costs charged to the Transmission Provider by that Control Area operator. Rochester Public Utilities is in the Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's control area. Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's charges will be passed on to the transmission customer by Rochester Public Utilities. SCHEDULE7 Long -Term Firm and Short -Term Firm Point -To -Point Transmission Service The Transmission Customer shall compensate the Transmission Provider each month for Reserved Capacity at the sum of the applicable charges set forth below: 1) Yearly delivery: $6.76/kW of Reserved Capacity per year. 2) Monthly delivery: $0.56/kW of Reserved Capacity per month. 3) Weekly delivery: $0.13/kW of Reserved Capacity per week. 4) Daily delivery: $0.026/kW of Reserved Capacity per day. The total demand charge in any week, pursuant to a reservation for Daily delivery, shall not exceed the rate specified in section (3) above times the highest amount in kilowatts ofReserved Capacity in any day during such week. 5) Discounts: Three principal requirements apply to discounts for transmission service as follows (1) any offer of a discount made by the Transmission Provider must be announced to all Eligible Customers solely by posting on the OASIS, (2) any customer -initiated requests for discounts (including requests for use by one's wholesale merchant or an affiliate's use) must occur solely by posting on the OASIS, and (3) once a discount is negotiated, details must be immediately posted on the OASIS. For any discount agreed upon for service on a path, from point(s) of receipt to point(s) of delivery, the Transmission Provider must offer the same discounted transmission service rate for the same time period to all Eligible Customers on all unconstrairted transmission paths that go to the same point(s) of delivery on the Transmission system. 1 The Schedule 7 charges are derived using peak demand at Poini(s) of Delivery. .5 SCHEDULES Non -Firm Point -To -Point Transmission Service The Transmission Customer shall compensate the Transmission Provider for Non -Firm Point -To -Point Transmission Service up to the sum of the applicable charges set forth below': 1) Monthly delivery: $0.56/kW of Reserved Capacity per month. 2) Weekly delivery: $0.13/kW of Reserved Capacity per week. 3) Daily delivery: $0.026/kW of Reserved Capacity per day. The total demand charge in any week, pursuant to a reservation for Daily delivery, shall not exceed the rate specified in section (2) above times the highest amount in kilowatts of Reserved Capacity in any day during such week. 4) Hourly delivery: The basic charge shall be that agreed upon by the Parties at the time this service is reserved and in no event shall exceed $1.33/MWH. The total demand charge in any day, pursuant to a reservation for Hourly delivery, shall not exceed the rate specified in section (3) above times the highest amount in kilowatts of Reserved Capacity in any hour during such day. In addition, the total demand charge in any week, pursuant to a reservation for Hourly or Daily delivery, shall not exceed the rate specified in section (2) above times the highest amount in kilowatts of Reserved Capacity in any hour during such week. 5) Discounts: Three principal requirements apply to discounts for transmission service as follows (1) any offer of a discount made by the Transmission Provider must be announced to all Eligible Customers solely by posting on the OASIS, (2) any customer -initiated requests for discounts (including requests for use by one's wholesale merchant or an affiliate's use) must occur solely by posting on the OASIS, and (3) once a discount is negotiated, details must be immediately posted on the OASIS. For any discount agreed upon for service on ' The Schedule 8 charges are derived using peak demand at Point(s) of Delivery. 6�� a path, from point(s) of receipt to point(s) of delivery, the Transmission Provider must offer the same discounted transmission service rate for the same time period to all Eligible Customers on all unconstraino transmission paths that go to the same point(s) of delivery on the Transmission System. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 153 DATE: 5/1/00 SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. 7AGENDA CONSENT AGENDA CITY CLERK D ( I ITEM DESCRIPTION: LICENSES, BONDS & MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES PREPARED BY: DONNAJSCHOTP The following licenses, 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 — PREMISE PERMIT Dover Fire Relief Association PO Box 65 Dover, Mn. 55929 PREMISE AT: Wright Stuff Restaurant 7600 Helgerson Dr SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 GAMBLING —RAFFLES •Turn In Poachers 607 19`b St NW #21 Rochester, Mn. 55901 Raffle at Holiday Inn South 4/28/00 1630 S. Bdwy Rochester, Mn. 55904 Waiver of 30 Day Waiting Period Soldiers Field Veterans Memorial, Inc. Raffle at City Hall 201 4" St. SE Rochester, Mn. 55904 HAVC CONTRACTOR Snell Mechanical, Inc. 8850 Wentworth Ave. South Bloomington, Mn. 55420 UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: LICENSES, BONDS AND MISCELLANEOUS STREET USE PAGE 2 MAY 1, 2000 MASTER INSTALLER Earl E. Snell 6304 Aldrich Ave. South Richfield, Mn. 55423 MOVING PERMIT — HOUSE Roger Crews BA Crews House Moving RT 3, Box 145 Austin, Mn. 55912 House from 1832 16`h Ave NW to LeRoy, Mn. 5/2/00 2:00 AM Progressive House Movers, Inc. 6463 50`h St. SE Rochester, Mo. 55904 House from 1836 16`h Ave NW to 8015 50'h st. SE, Eyota Mn. OUTDOOR DINING Victoria's Restaurant 21 2od St. SW Rochester, Mn. 559902 Hypat Investments, Inc. DBA O'Neill's Pizza Pub 7-2 n1 St. SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 SEWER & DRAIN Joseph Wingert DBA Heartland Excavating Inc. Rt 1, Box 37 Plainview, Mn. 55964 SIDEWALKS — CEMENT Shoreline Cable 3207 Daisy Ave Davenport, Ia. 52808 SOUND AMPLIFICATION Dr. John & Nancy Gross 3212 Fox Hollow Ct. SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 Neighborhood Teacher Retirement Party 6/3/00 6:00 PM to 10:00 PM (Please Waive 8:00 time Period) Million Mom March Rally Rally for Sensible Gun Laws Peace Plaza 5/7/00 1:00 PM to 4:00 PM LICENSES, BONDS AND MISCELLANEOUS STREET USE PAGE 3 MAY 1, 2000 Victim Services Victim Rights week Rally & Candlelight Vigil Mayo Civic Center Park 4/15/00 6:00 PM — 8:30 PM (Prior Approvals given on 4/14/00 by: M Marcoux, J McConnell, D. Hanson & D Senjem) St. John's Catholic Church The Procession of the Cross Civic Center to St. John's Church 4/21 /00 4:00 PM to 5:30 PM (Prior Approvals given on 4/18/00 by: W Stobaugh, M Evans, M Marcoux, & D Hanson) Evangel United Methodist Church 2645 North Broadway Rochester, Mn. 55906 Live Outdoor Concert 6/4/00 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM Church Parking Lot Famous Dave's Restaurant 431 16w Ave NW Rochester, Mn. 55901 3 Piece Blues Band on Patio Monday Nights MISCELLANEOUS STREET USE Million Mom March Rally Rally for Sensible Gun Laws Peace Plaza 5/7/00 1:00 PM to 4:00 PM Park & Recreation 2014" St SE Rochester, Mn. 55904 Centurion Bike Ride 8/8/00 5:30 AM to 6:00 PM Veterans Memorial Association Memorial Day Parade 5/29/00 Central Park to Soldiers Field 9:15 AM to 11:45 AM COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve the above licenses, bonds and miscellaneous street use permits. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING S% i DATE: 511100 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY CLERK D _ t QZ ITEM DESCRIPTION: ON SALE WINE & 3.2% BEER LICENSE FOR TRIPS, INC DBA PREPARED BY: HAWTHORN SUITES DONNA J SCHOTT Application for an On Sale Wine and 3.2% Beer License has been received from Gerald A. Nelson for Trips, Inc. DBA Hawthorn Suites located at 2829 43`d St. NW. The approximate date of opening is May 29, 2000. Issuance of the license is pending all departmental approvals, the required insurance, fees and any Outstanding debts with the City of Rochester. A confidential investigative report has been completed and satisfied. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve the On Sale Wind and 3.2% Beer License for Hawthorn Suites. . wJNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 5/1 /00 Consent Agenda Approval of Accounts Payable Finance Department Respectfully request a motion to approve payment of Accounts Payable (submitted separately) in the amount of $2,122,157.82. Less: Any exceptions JNCIL ACTION: motion by: second by: to: -(3 Dale Martinson REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION: ( ORIGINATING DEPT: Consent agenda/ Organizational Business Mayor's Office ITEM DESCRIPTION: Appointment to Citizens Advisory Committee on Trans MEETING 5/i/ 0 DATE: ITEM NO. D-I� PREPARED BY: I hereby submit for your approval the following appointment to the Citizens Advisory Committee on Transit: Kaye Fenske 820 8th Avenue SE Ms Fenske will fill the unexpired term of Susan Nelson. The term runs to 12/31/2002. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: tc: e1 - —?- M pN�o *fo: sucusi NAME: ADDRE Mayor Chuck Canfield blag 201 4th Street SE - Room 281 Au,-AMERICA Crn Rochester, MN 55904-3782 Phone: (507) 285-8080 Fax: (507) 287-7979 W�e CITY OF ROCHESTER VOLUNTEER APPLICATION �WWOM111.10411111 PHONE: BUS Zs(�a. HOME 90SS0 DO YOU RESIDE WITHIN ROCHESTER CITY LIMITS? YES N0_ PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT: I AM SEEKING VOLUNTARY SERVICE ON I BECAUSE: i. aM— 1,�3 wAe yl Ytk 7 C zle M OVA ha�� �� „�;�r, d� ghd ��c a�a � 11uu scs�pvtt —�i L 4SE PP.O IDE BACKGROUND INFOFLN.4TION (Euuc TI 1, S.EC,IAL LiNTERESTS, ACHIEVEMENTS, PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT, COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT) Attach additional information, if desired. DATE SUBMITTED:-J� Return to: Office of the 201 4th Street Rochester, MN 55904-3782 _-YY't �U4?1G:R4 �7�24'V'kl�i .�}tiS�E�i�i�1PS -M \eay`, araarYa*�rri#ri rrray,:ra#aY#a##**i***}#aii*##}a*ai#i*ti#*Y****#i+i DATE OF APPOINTMENT: TERM EXPIRATICN: OTHER DATA: 63 becauv... Cam. 'em ra wit 1 e p, evi mac, is ab(o --b yncul,� ylp.c{� wdlk�7 ZIPS, /���ia� S�fp�{ (�+ �J che�,# /pSrcz.nc4 feglard".-I �L'�.'r l� 1 (��C(�i:ir. � rr Jti F-C �2t.� (4.tLi r5 !I (9 T 9 FM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING �J DATE: 5-1-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NA CONSENT AGENDA PLANNING ITEM DESCRIPTION: Decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the PREPASummit Pointe Development. Bren April 26, 2000 An EAW was prepared for the Summit Pointe development in March 2000 to determine the potential environmental effects of this development that included 144 acres south of 65 Street NW, east in 50'h Avenue NW. The 30 day comment period on the EAW expired on April 19, 2000. Three comment letters were received (see attached). Responses to the written comments from MCPA, MN DNR and MN Historical Society are enclosed. Minnesota Rules require that a decision on this matter must be made by the RGU (Common Council) no later than 30 days after April 19, 2000 (end of comment period). Council Action Needed: Adoption of a resolution setting forth the City's declaration on the EAW adequacy. The resolution should include specific findings. This resolution will be transmitted by the Planning Department to the Environmental Quality Board. ichments: 1. Copy of April 27, 2000 memo from Planning Staff which includes a copy of the Summit Pointe EAW, comment letters received and responses to the agency comments. Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Administrator 3. City Attorney 4. Planning Department File 5. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, May 1, 2000 in the Council/Board Chambers at the Rochester -Olmsted Government Center Building 6. McGhie & Betts, Inc. A COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Rochester Common Council Brent Svenby, Planner ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285.8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ MAPPING HOUSINGMRA April 26, 2000 BUILDING CODE WELL/BEPTIC Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for Summit PointVx Background: The 1973 Minnesota Environmental Policy Act, administered statewide through the Environmental Quality Board, is the basis for the present Environmental Review Program of the State of Minnesota. Minnesota Rules 4410.0200 - .7900 were promulgated to administer the mandates of the Policy Act, spell out the specific environmental review procedures, and define when and how they must be employed. The intent of the environmental review program is identify early the potential impacts of a project and provide time for the decision makers to require that mitigative measures are incorporated into the project design before local permits are granted. The first level of environmental review under the program is known as an Environmental Assessment Worksheet or "EAW". The specific content, environmental scope, and procedures for an EAW are specified in Minnesota Rules. The rules mandate what type of projects must go through the EAW process and who will act as the responsible unit of government to determine if additional environmental review is necessary in the form of a much more detailed Environmental Impact Statement or "EIS". The Summit Pointe development project exceeds a mandatory EAW category in that it will eventually result in the permanent conversion of 80 or more acres of agricultural land to a more intensive use (Minnesota Rules 4410.4300 Subp. 36). The rules assign the responsibility for the EAW preparation and determination of adequacy to the local unit of government which is charged with the responsibility to approve or deny permits for the project to proceed. In this case, the local responsible governmental unit would be the Rochester Common Council. EAW Process: The Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Summit Pointe was transmitted to the Environmental Quality Board on March 13, 2000. The Planning Department notified and provided a copy of the EAW to the various state and federal agencies prescribed by Minnesota Rules. Copies of the EAW were made available to the City Clerk, County Administrator, and Public Library for public display, as well as a copy at the Planning Department. A press release was made to the Rochester Post Bulletin which explained the procedures for submitting comments. 507/285-8232 507MS-8224 507/285-8213 5071285.8345 5071287-2275 z �7Summit Pointe EAW On March 20, 2000, the notice of availability was published in the EQB Monitor. The 30-day comment period expired on April 19, 2000. The following comments were received regarding this EAW: 1. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (see attached) 2. Minnesota Pollution Controt Agency (see attached) 3. Minnesota Historical Society (see attached) Rochester's Responsibilities in the Process: Under Minnesota Rules the City of Rochester is the responsible governmental unit (RGU) to determine the need for further environmental review of a project by preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The decision facing the City is whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects and compare the impacts that may be expected to occur from the project with four criteria outlined in the rules (and listed below). This report could act as a record of the findings made by the City and a basis for the decision that is made. The City must make either a negative or a positive declaration, if a negative declaration is made on the need for an EIS, then the City must notify all persons or agencies that originally received copies of the EAW. The Environmental Quality Board shall publish the decision in the EQB Monitor. If a positive declaration is made, meaning an EIS must be prepared, then it should include the scope of what specific issues must be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. A positive declaration should include the time, date and location of the public meeting to discuss the scope of the EIS. Response to Comments: Under the environmental review process, the RGU's record must provide written response to substantive comments received during the EAW comment period, in this instance we received written comments from those agencies listed above. The comments received generally related to: 1. Wetlands 2. Erosion Control/Water Quality 3. Cumulative Impacts 4. Visual impacts Please see the attached letter from McGhie & Betts, Inc. dated April 26, 2000 for responses to the concerns and issues raised by the MN DNR and MCPA. Criteria for Determining Significant Environmental Effects: In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the City must consider the following factors as outlined in Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 subp. 7: A. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects; B. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects; C. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority; and Summit Pointe Fr4W D. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EIS's. Findings: The Planning Staff recommends that based on the following findings that the City makes a negative declaration on the need for an EIS for the Summit Pointe Development and that the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects: 1. The anticipated environmental effects of this project are found to be the same as those experienced with any residential development in the City of Rochester. This site has no unique environmentally sensitive features which warrant more detailed investigations. 2. Water quality of surface waters from the runoff or waste waters from the site should not be significantly degraded because of this project. Erosion and water quality of runoff will be controlled by the installation of stormwater detention ponds and sediment traps. The Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual provides for an ongoing regulatory authority of the City over erosion control practices. Wastewater from this project will be treated at the City of Rochester Wastewater Treatment Plant which is capable of accepting the estimated amounts of wastewater generated by this project. 3. The potential for groundwater contamination is found to be reduced by the use of a stormwater collection system which employs detention basins as compared to the existing unrestricted overland flow in the property's present state. Spills on the ground surface will have the potential to be intercepted in the stormwater detention areas before they leave the property. 4. The anticipated cumulative loss of agricultural lands within the urban service area of the City of Rochester (where sewer and water service is available) to urban land uses is an anticipated effect of the orderly growth of the City. Land use policies direct development to growth centers such as Rochester to reduce the pressure on agricultural lands in the outlying area to be converted to residential uses. The more efficient use of land for residential purposes where increased densities can be realized because of sewer and water availability is expected to help conserve truly prime agricultural areas. 5. Dust and noise, which will be generated because of the construction of this project, will be no more than typical for any residential development. The City of Rochester has a noise ordinance which will protect nearby residents from unreasonable noise from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Methods for controlling dust will need to be implemented by the developer. Detailed grading and drainage plans will need to be approved by the City prior to construction and will need to incorporate erosion control measures. 6. This property is within the City of Rochester 25 year Urban Service Area according to the Olmsted County Land Use Plan. Cumulative effects of development within the Urban Service Area will include the loss of prime farmland and wildlife habitat. The loss of terrestrial habitat and prime farmland caused by this development should actually help the efforts to retain more significant habitats and farmlands in less developed areas of the County by removing residential pressures and concentrating them in planned areas where the density of development creates a more efficient use of land. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Summit Pointe EAW 2. Letter from Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 3. Letter from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 4. Letter from Minnesota Historical Society 4-26-200 4:15PM FROM P. 2 41 , McGhie Betts Environmental Services, Inc. 1648 Third Avenue S.E., Rochester, MN 55904 507-289-3919 Fax 507-289-7333 April 26, 2000 Mr. Brent Svenby Senior Planner Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 Re: EAW Comments for the Proposed Summit Pointe Development; MBI #1204/9561 Dear Mr. Svenby: Thank you for forwarding the comments you received regarding the Summit Pointe EAW. Our response to these comments follows. Response to Minnesota Pollution Control Agency comments: EIS requirements: The proposed Summit Pointe .Development is independent of any other Potential projects within this rapidly growing area of Rochester. The City of Rochester Comprehensive Land Use Plan and the facility plan, identify the Summit Pointe Development within the 25- year urban service area. These plans have anticipated and have accounted for the growth and associated impacts that are now occurring within this area of Rochester. Item 8: A dewatering permit was listed in the EAW because there is the potential that dewatering may be necessary during utility line installation. No water was encountered when soil borings were completed on the site, but not every portion of the site was reviewed. The project developer felt it best to disclose the possibility of needing to dewater portions of the site during construction rathei than omitting mention of the possibility and risk criticism of not anticipating the environmental impacts, Item 11: Stormwater will be released to the onsite wetlands at the same rate that currently exists so there should be no great fluctuation of the water levels within the wetlands. In addition, the wetlands are on slopes so any excess water would have little residence time within the wetlands and would not likely alter the vegetation communities or habitat. Item 16; No comment. Item 17: The proposed development is located at the top of a subwatershed with only three acres firrther upstream. As specified in the City of Rochester, Draft Surface Water William E. TQMIM Ct f, President Jemee E. Swanson. RLS. 5ectstary David t. WWII, PE, Tmm wnr .hen MY 8. atoberg, CPC, Vice PreaiGent Bruce Campbell George Pdo11 Lanon F. Marken Cerrilied Enrimnmemal Auailce CV10140 501 Sc4ntist r...... nantsl LPeuidlisl HeQlabrstl tnvnenmemet Mandgpr 4-26-200 4:16PM FROM �O P. 3 Management Plan, two regional stomnwater facilities will be constructed and maintained on this site to treat and detain the generated surface water runoff, both for the development and the very small area upstream of the development. Item 26: (a) A wildlife corridor will be maintained through the central portion of the site by the maintenance and preservation of wetlands and drainageways. (b) The Douglas Trail, within the vicinity of the proposed Summit Pointe Development, is heavily wooded along both sides of the trail. The proposed Summit Pointe Development is approximately 2,000 feet from the Douglas Trail and there is an existing subdivision between the trail and proposed development. Due to the woods along the trail and the existing subdivision between the trail and proposed development, the view from the trail will not be altered. Item 29: In accordance with the City of Rochester requirements, the stormwater facilities for the Summit Pointe Development have been designed as regional facilities and will be dedicated to the City, The City of Rochester through implementation of the Surface Water Management Plan will address any additional runoff generated by off -site improvements. Response to Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Comments: Item 6: The number of proposed units varies between the EAW and the site plan because the site plan shows the maximum number of dwelling units possible on the site based on the acreage and density requirements. The number of units is lower and approximate in the EAW because it is known that some lots/units will be lost to road design, other design features of the site and regulatory requirements. The 416 units are the maximum possible; 350 to 400 units are more feasible. Item 12: Figure 4 attached to the EAW represents the original survey of the delineated wetland boundaries. Subsequent to the survey, the developer's wetland specialist reviewed the site with the Rochester Local Government Unit - Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP), and at the request of the TEP, the wetland boundaries were revised and resurveyed. The revised and resurveyed wetland boundaries are shown on Figure 3 of the EAW. In accordance with the City of Rochester Parks Department, the proposed trail must be 10 feet wide and paved. The trail will cross the on -site wetlands in two locations; one wetland crossing is approximately 25 feet long and the other more than 100 feet. Bridges constructed to span this length of wetland are cost prohibitive. However, other measures can be employed to minimize the wetland impacts including the installation of appropriately sized and spaced culverts to provide for a continuum of natural flow, substrate, and wildlife movement. The fill material should be kept to a minimum height 4-26-200 4:16PM FROM P. 4 and width to minimize the area of impact and appropriate erosion control measures should be installed and maintained throughout the construction period. For those impacts that are unavoidable, wetland replacement will be proposed on site in accordance with the Wetland Conservation Act requirements, Item 17: The stormwater runoff will be pretreated in sediment basins prior to its release into the wetlands. The sediment basins will be located landward of the on -site wetlands, Thank you for the opportunity to reply to the comments you received regarding the HAW. If you have any questions regarding our reply or you need additional information, please call me at 289-3919. Sincerely, McGH1E & BETTS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVTCBS, INC. m�� Lenore Marken Environmental Coordinator C: Larry Frank, Arcon Development, Inc. 0 q� = April 14, 2000 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Mr. Brent Svenby, Planner City of Rochester 2122 Campus Drive Southeast Rochester, MN 55904 RE: Summit Pointe Development Environmental Assessment Worksheet Dear Mr. Svenby: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Summit Pointe Development Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), in the city of Rochester, Olmsted County. Based on the information contained in the EAW, the Environmental Review staff believes that significant effects related to Minnesota Pollution Control Agency may occur as a result of the project. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) may be warranted to address the cumulative environmental effects that result from this project and any impacts that may result due to the proximity of this project to the to other development projects. Also to be considered are the comments listed below. Item 8: Permits and Approvals Required For a residential subdivision, why is there a need for a dewatering permit? Would the permit be issued to draw down wetlands? The EAW does not adequately explain the need for this permit or the potential drawbacks of any work that may require a dewatering permit. Item 11: Fish. Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources The EAW does not adequately explain the effects of 60 acres of new impervious surface on the adjacent wetlands. Will some of the stormwater be routed through these existing wetlands and the bounce in the wetlands be greatly changed? Using the existing wetlands for drainageways, for new impervious surface runoff, may considerably alter the habitat and water quality functionality of the wetlands. Item 16: Erosion and Sedimentation The MPCA appreciates that the development will be phased to only disturbing 15 acres at any given time. This will help considerably in the management of sediment and erosion control during grading and construction. r 520 Lafayette Rd. N.: St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (651) 296.6300 (Voice); (651) 292-5332 (TTY) t. Paul Brainerd fiwrrnir I akas n::l: ah a nen.,L-4... n......k..0 _ o--`--'-- - �.,:::---- - _. - _ ?3 , Mr. Brent Svenby, Planner Page 2 Item 17: Water Quality: Surface Water Runoff The EAW is vague on exactly how much stormwater storage is proposed for both on -site and off -site. Or if it is clearly understood with the city how much detention is specifically set aside for by the city for this project. Item 26: visual Impacts A. If there is going to be a detrimental affect that this site will no longer provide for a suitable wildlife corridor as it did as a farm field/wedand area, then where is the alternative corridor for this wildlife to use in the vicinity of this development? B. If there is going to be a visual impact on the Douglas Trail and additional vegetation and corridor enhancements are recommended for this trail, then there should be a plan in place (with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) or the Park Board) to carry this out and not just leave this as a conceptual problem. Item 29. Cumulative Impacts This development, along with neighboring development, will have the secondary effect of adding more impervious surfaces through the stated necessary road upgrades. Additional stormwater concerns will be generated off -site by this project that will have to subsequently be managed by the city of Rochester. We look forward to receiving the required responses to our comments, and your decision on the need for an EIS. If you have any questions regarding our comment letter, please call (651) 297-8236. Sincerely,'' Denise Leezer Project Manager Operations & Planning Unit North and South District DL:lk cc: Dave Morrison, MPCA, Rochester Subdistrict Office Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 5Dfl Lafayette Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-40 April 14, 2000 Brent Svenby City of Rochester 2122 Campus Drive South Rochester, Minnesota 55904 Re: EAW for Summit Pointe Development Dear Mr. Svenby: The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) has reviewed the above -referenced document and provides the following comments for your consideration. Item 6. Project Description The number of housing units in the project description does not match the site plan shown in Figure 3. The project description indicates 250+ housing units and 100+ town houses will be built while the site plan indicates 180 townhouses and 236 housing units will be built. Item 12. Physical Impacts to Water Resources The wetland boundaries shown on the site plan in Figure 3 do not match the wetland boundaries on the map in Figure 4. The wetland impacts which will result from trail crossings can be minimized by the use of bridges instead of fill. Item 17. Water -Quality - surface water runoff This project will create 60 acres of impervious surface, resulting in the site being over 40% impervious surface. This will lead to higher peak discharges and increased nutrient runoff into existing wetlands, which will degrade them. Treatment of stormwater prior to discharge into existing wetlands needs to be incorporated into the project design, which would best be done by constructing retention basins in upland areas between the existing wetlands and the residential development. DNR Information: 651-296-6157 • 1-888-646-6367 • TrY: 651-296-5484 • 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer }fy Printed on Recycled Paper containing a Who Values Diversiry 0 -11. w Thank you for the opportunity to review this document. Based on the information provided, we see no need for further environmental review on the project. We look forward to receiving your Record of Decision and responses to comments. Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, subparts 4 & 5, require you to send us your Record of Decision within five days of deciding this action. Please contact Ken Wald of my staff at (651) 296-4790 if you have questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor Environmental Planning and Review Section Office of Management and Budget Services c: Joe Oschwald Con Christianson LarryNelson Don Nelson Jon Larsen, EQB Russ Peterson, US F&WS eaw Summit Pt let.wpd 20000568-0002 n MINN'ESOTa HISTORICAL SOCIETY STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE April 12, 2000 Mr. Brent Svenby Rochester -Olmsted Planning Dept. 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 RE: EAW — Summit Pointe Development Cascade Twp., Olmsted County SHPO Number: 2000-1874 Dear Mr. Svenby: Thank you for providing this office with a copy of the EAW for the above -referenced project. It has been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given to the Minnesota Historical Society by the Minnesota Historic Sites Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act and through the process outlined in Minnesota Rules 4410.1600. There are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. Therefore, in our opinion, the "no" response to question 25a is appropriate. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the assisting federal agency. Please contact Dennis Gimmestad at (651)296-5462 if you have any questions regarding our review of this project. Sincerely, Britta L. Bloomberg U Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer :ASCADE a Conrad ' w T.107N. - RAW 1-4 INOCO PG l4 12 NMIb • • narwn 1 .J./in r i a1 lY I 11 fpaeR es p fiufr r ` aJ�i6 fr.J, a ' i ,f•efrr•r L�y w....y y Y Jo' yvy llxl A✓N,y14 r h6 fw a 3M� JkJlG rmft SCe11 yi/r .Ifnn.HJ MS yy Jb✓a/ab ri • yr n L1.Zf a alrr Iralyrl JA�-a • fnu(, llfM f J r' K •• Pew /L ,f,,Jn SITE . ; °�` n „ I, ,;,�.: ,'� #; J 4'� .mJ✓m ,.. epJ v p^ a9J^c9 ,fr:,/ ea xh .. ... � a �� �.p.. 2•r+.•✓y.//, J xaY/ �� tl ✓+, uuu • .IA. J a• II.2 ri w JL� r vJ] • J'Jl f I q •ia Jl•'�! . rone I P/irahJM .JobN In Jwr p 1.�[ 1 J: anley ' - • - w Y • iu+•+ �A'! AA • R.p/ry y a�u Owla . t Nunn ,t r•rl ' b....•. .r { y .ar' I%l J �� : IriN , ` f, FSlhef JJef.re J✓r6 • fwwdrnon SVAr m •+ L xem tllo �a � h •/ � ..I _-.__ , J^• •� • ilrra UynJ I im f a1 JLva 1f.Y1 p • ,J I r •LI J61 �'�q,,.l.•l J' .Ji, .tf. • JJ r,L fvwb J�/•wN I • • 'WV.M ✓ JrawJ r w .�.o an •~ s. l•M)V� •.J y Err. /n<: nil. v' m ii.0 Y � IH •1 ~ .0 '••` ,n Caro! • >Vaa 241.2J r..r• '- ar � , e..r rrarwf ]rar,.lu ... arrw r°"• :.• : a• r w✓ Jaa•a. sY ' 9! m• •.� '.i • Jw...i ... 1 Hwy ' A .'. y.' TIN • `p; ..= • • _ ` f- Llay!d / J. m . ]x'rr i award •., rC '!Iran tLeer fJwYARsaf XNy"�y r, 1EL1 1.J m �' • ' w rK4 � Xrrdfovh .iw J �• • l/n'IiAanfaf R,�r ire ��� . .{G-�„ 12 GV •. �` 16ry yy,., If1 H 0.t (N•J •- 1 L I a • Jy f � I m• ROCHE ER • y i 1•J rz'1 LnxrJf 2a]1I '•f`•- 11 rf s I b JIr` IrLY rryrtlrn • • - {i.a - • y caner M �Ir.d W J T fu 'ro ✓emu S �� l'.1 norm a vnr }} • \ u 4fu �f `_ ljJ.rYssc Nl to 1}yPI urf �/ E II ' y J• - f Zwo 1 ].. J zJa r FfIN • r • b s o y'• N Wl 14 GAME f Cr IrliuoeM •e ✓'••r JY ywJ ro r.-a- Jn' Cm'oe. 7- "r -r,,,d ROCHESTER a � � C S LaWy n f`4rdddna a,.aJL , lMuwfn J y. 1 'ar r� -252 �., y ,.Myx !M•JJ 'i" REFUGEly p ~ 1 1xn 10 Rabehl •IV Gua ryyfy I _ au ]f.b 1yy°1' na Jaf •.y, •• Jun �G"�5..... 1Y.+aryr I Jw• w~~ I nw Aaarb ROCNESTER 1 JL? BRUCE BUCKNELL CONST. JENSEN REALTY CO. RR1, BOX 112 Farms -Acr ag s-HORS Commercial E RACINE, MN 55967 112 7th St. N.E. - Suite 15 - Rochester, MN 55901 OFFICE: (507) 289-9008 (507) 533-8830 Merle Moehnke - Broker 727 27th St. N.W. - Rochester Dozer - Backhoe, Road Building MULTIPLE (507) 289-3239 LISTINGS Soil Conservation, Building Site, Etc. APPRAISALS a6hltoa �•- \ — — '^ �`l_ °'�" �_ --1O\ ss . .^ira� �'` O _ � - route-� j1 _ ✓ _ I - 1 rose' `` � ~•• _�`� � �—,+-.—�= .`— i.lL T._ ....-- /. a— �� , / �`�� \.! - tt.��: r Y'vr�'S� _-' � psi � �,-•r - ��. .•� � lr,y`••\ � .•'r;�'.� "vMi.. iil0li � _16�: 1•d +. 21 SITE IZI _ -;.�'� � . .� i ,'., --•} :-•� � � .. — �- � r �''�:-•yam-�.c ;;-tq• �,; 7' 00J4ESTER~ J - ' �} C �- i �� r. �': �•1�"S rid -� �} \ �' _ :�� 3 � -� 1, '�,-�'� ' f -c`..._ _.ice..%�,� ♦=" '"pia.._ _f.. —' = !�' _. �1 • • _ �_ rr i -, y '� ... • ��✓ ' � _ � �- ~�..� r30�`�r '� J!1 J�\ ��� �� � - - era � .-. •�• _ 'I -�}`-• Property Description: All of the Northwest Ouarfer of Section U. Township 107 North, Range 14 West, Olmsted County, Minnesota O-COPI: Camnencing of the southwest corner of said Northwest Quarter; than.. NOO'00'00 C. assumed bearing, along the west tine of said Northwest Ovarter, 500 feel for a point of beginning; lhonce continue NO0'00'00"£, 990.00 Joel; thence N90'00'00 C. 660.00 fact; Ihence 500'00'00"W, 990.00 feel; !hence S90'00'00•W. 660.00 feel 10 the point of beginning. Doing subiecl to an easement for the Township Rood right of ways over the northerly and westerly boundary thereof. Containing 144.54 acres, more or less. C.I.M. AT NW CDR NW1/4 SEC 8 TlO7N [ TOI NSiiIP ROAD OL MSTED CO MON AT NE COR NWl/4 SEC (N.LIN£ NWI/4 SEC 8) 1i07H R14W 263. JJ 'f7/W LINE ]J. 00zNOT£: tR14W THE WETLANDS WERE IDENTIFIED DY R/W OIIIERS AND LOCATED 06Z SQ.FL RY SURVEYOR. P.848 ACRES Z NSQ fT. U�27.0 J9950AND wiry0. 00f1. 00'00"E144, 467 ACHES I/?"PIPE FALL 538 ACRES IJ'WFST OF N- r W36078 SQ. FT. ) FENCE (TOTAL ACRES) `:u °j J.ZZ7 ACRES ROAD R/N (140336 SQ. .3..� • EX6EPT/ON 3 PZ. JPO ACRES 1lF. TLANOS o (J80J83 SQ. Fr. ) 0 118.731 ACRES c o (517453 5l74535 SO. Fr.) m (EXCLUDING ROAD R/W AND WF RANDS) S 90'00'00� 660.00 SCALE: I "=400' 627.0 REARING SYSTEM 15 J3.00 ASSUMED DATA WETLAND C ' 7J3760 SQ.FT. WETLAND R I 6.744 ACRES 1J771J SQ. Pr. N R/W 4.30J ACRES 0.373 ACRES Ali 00 �_ — -- — —S 89'23' I6 _W 2677. 98— -- -- —' (S.LINE NW)/4 SEC 8) I.M. Al SW COR SE CORNER NWI/4 1/4 SEC 8 11D7N e.DENOTF.5 FOUND I 1 PfPES SECTION B 4W UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED TIO7N R14W IVICFNITR MAP ]CALL 1'-3000'1111 -POUND MONUMENT Q.3LT 1/7-PIPE WITH LS N0.146ee n 14 w Ot MSTED nnuwTY SURVEY FOR: ROLANU UIfAVG.S SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY, PL OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT 1 AM A DULY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. V, - ') - - DATE . iNCMA8 f'� VINCENT AN LS.NO.14088 PINE '' IISLAND.MN na AWN nY• R.ZIEMAN _ �P OATS: _ �•E�. 99-145 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 8 1 1--� DATE: 05-01-00 AGENDASECTION: CONSENT l�tr(D� ORIGINATINGDEPT: ITEM NO. PLANNING Z� _ A0 .. _M DESCRIPTION: Annexation by Ordinance Petition #00-08 by Lary Goodman to initiate PREPARED BY: Orderly Annexation for approximately 109.84 acres of land located in part of the S1/2, Theresa Fogarty, NE114 of Section 9 and NW1/4, NW1/4 of Section 10, Cascade Township. The property is planner located north of 62"d Street, east of Sandal Road NW. April 27, 2000 This property is in the orderly annexation area for Cascade Township approved in 1976. The City Attorney's Office has prepared the amendment to the joint resolution, which requires the signature of both the City and Cascade Town Board. The Township has stated that they will not sign the agreement unless it is amended to include the following language "Cascade Townboard moved to amend the resolution to add a 5 year deferred annexation for the Harvest Hill Baptist Church Property on Sandal Road NW unless the property owner petitions for annexation". This annexation would make the church property 100 percent surrounded. The City should decide if they are willing to add the language request by the Town Board or if they want to sign the agreement as prepared by the City Attorney's Office, without the signature of the Cascade Town Board and forward it to the MMB. If the City signs the amendment, as prepared by the City Attorney's Office, without the signature of the Township the annexation will be scheduled for a hearing before the MMB (MN Planning). City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this annexation request on April 26, 2000. Motion by Petersson to approve Orderly Annexation #00-08, seconded by Burke. The motion carried 5-0. Property Taxes: As part of the Orderly Annexation agreement, the City agreed to pay taxes to the Township as if this were an annexation by Ordinance. The property taxes payable in the year an annexation is effective will be paid to the Township. For the five years following annexation, the City will make a cash payment to the Township equaling 90%, 70%, 50%, 30% and 10% of the Townships share of the taxes in the year the property was annexed. The 1999 Township portion of the taxes, on the property to be annexed, is $104.18. Council Action Needed: 1. Should the Council wish to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare an amendment to the Cascade Township Orderly Annexation Agreement indicating that the 109.84 acres located north of 62"d Street NW and east of Bandel Road NW should be annexed. 2. The signed amendment should be transmitted to the MN Planning /Office of Strategic and Long Range Planning by the City Cleric (attached is a filing fee for the application in the amount of $200). COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: 2 r NNE1,ATidN E-I I N ----- ------ see Nsi't6'00'E 70.27 ACRES N WW10' 1325.34 Lr Fp 61 st ST N.Yby 60tN ST Q59TH �re�PG 6�TH �iy p\Pt�j ��L N mcS ST NW N58TH ST 5V T op 1ST ST ?6ry I N LEY 5m� ET5 56TH ST N p V) s D tour+ rIAVE CERS LN c�i TH ST NW DESCRIPTI SEE ATTACH / 515T ST a � <` ti �211ir'sL-- N 51 ST ST SOTH ST ° NW SOTH SS z 49 1/2 LN 49 1/2 ST a 18i v� it FOR : • N SC4.C' 1000' DRAWN Sr M8 ARCON DEVELOPMENT, INC. Bette mc. MciGbieV.e. a47F' 10/27/99 7625 METRO BLVD. SUITE 350 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55439 �,�, „„, Lam,,,Luna Survgon 16M 31! NVL S.E. R.mts,, MM. 35W 507-259-3919 ACCT. RD.: 1204/9561 CADD NO.. : • 55TH I-'y .1 TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission �.�6 yiiiea�i��n��� I44rill ��op f 1 �J r:;� , ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSING(HRA 5071285-8224 FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELUSEPTIC 507/285-8345 DATE: April 18, 2000 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Annexation Petition #00-08 by Larry Goodman to initiate Orderly Annexation for approximately 109.84 acres of land located in part of the S112, NE1/4 of Section 9 and NW1/4, NW1/4 of Section 10, Cascade Township. The property is located north of 62"d Street NW, east of Bandel Road NW. Planning Department Review: Applicants/Owners: Estate of Leona Goodman Larry Goodman, Personal Representative c/o Ryan & Grinde, Ltd. P.O. Box 6667 Rochester, MN 55903-6667 Location of Property: The property is located north of 62"d Street NW, east of Bendel Road NW in part of the S112, NE1/4 of Section 9 and NW1/4, NW1/4 of Section 10, Cascade Township. Existing Land Use: The property is vacant and undeveloped land. Size: The property proposed for annexation is approximately 109.84 acres of unplatted land. Existing Zoning: The property is zoned A-4 (Agricultural Urban Expansion) District on the Olmsted County zoning map. Future Zoning: Upon annexation, the property will be zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential) district on the Rochester Zoning map. Land Use Plan: According to the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use this property is designated for "low density residential' uses. Adjacency to the Municipal The area is adjacent to the city limits along its southern Limits: boundary. Sewer & Water: The property under consideration can be served with city sewer and water, which can be extended from their present locations to serve the property. �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 April 19, 2000 �L Utilities: This area is serviceable from the Northwest High Level Water System which will be within 112 mile of the area once the Orchard Ridge Development is serviced. Townboard Review: The applicant has met with the Cascade Townboard regarding this orderly annexation. The Townboard has not signed the amendment to the orderly annexation agreement. General Development Plan: There is no General Development Plan for this area. Report Attachments: 1. Annexation Map 2. Location Map 3. Referral Comments ( 2 letters) Staff Recommendation: • The staff recommends that the City pursue an amendment to the orderly annexation agreement with Cascade Township which would state that the property should be annexed to the City without a hearing before the Minnesota Municipal Board. IMA ROCHESTER Minnesota 4/10/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 41h Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507.287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for ANNX00-08 on the Goodman property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: This property can be served with municipal utilities. C:\TEMP\ANNEX00-08.doC rpu ve pledge, ive deliver April 5, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 9i / REFERENCE: Annexation Petition #00-08 by Larry Goodman to initiate Orderly Annexation for 109.84 acres of land located in a part of the S %z, NE % of Section 9, Cascade Township. The property is located north of 62nd St. NW and east of Bandel Rd. NW. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced petition is complete and our comments follow: 1. The property maybe subject to the water availability fee, connection fees or assessments. The Land Development Manager (507-281-6198) at the Public Works Department determines the applicability of these fees. 2. Due to the elevation of this property it is only serviceable from the Northwest High Level Water System, which is currently available approximately one mile to the west at the North Park Water Tower. There are approved plans however to extend this water system to the east with the Orchard Ridge Development, which would bring it approximately %z way to this property. 3. Coordination with the connections to adjacent properties is critical in this area to provide adequate fire protection and water quality. 4. We will work with the applicant's engineering firm to develop the necessary water system layout to serve this area. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly you(rrss,- o.- •///1 "04 RjJL, Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention McGhie & Betts, Inc. Larry Goodman c/o Ryan & Grinde Ltd. Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA _REQUEST FC?R COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 9 DATE: 5-1-00 ORIGINATING DEPT! ITEM NO. Public Works D - (1 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Parking Management Contract with Republic Parking I PREPARED BY: R. Freese i Republic Parking System has completed their first full year as the management company for the City parking facilities. This is a 5-year contract for the five City parking ramps and the three surface lots. Republic's strengths are that they are a well experienced, small, friendly company with good staff training, high standards of house keeping, and quality service instead of profit -directed policies. We have established a very positive, strong relationship with the RPS Company and their staff. They brought in a well -experienced manager for the Rochester System. Their regional manager travels to Rochester each month to review the monthly report. Their corporate officials visit on a regular basis to provide staff training, facility inspection, equipment upgrade recommendations, policy recommendations, etc. Republic has proven to be very flexible in operating the City of Rochester's parking system. The system presently operates at a very high occupancy level. Together, the City and Republic have developed several operating policies to deal with the high level of occupancy. Republic provides a comprehensive monthly report of each facility. The report contains a high level of operating data that is used to manage the system. Republic is currently advising the City on replacement of the revenue control system with modem state-of-the-art equipment in both the ticket customer area and in monthly contract parking. We are looking forward to a long relationship with Republic in the management of the City's parking system. The agreement between the City and Republic provides for an adjustment in the management fee for Year 2 of the contract. The recommended management fee for Year 2 (April 1- March 31, 2001) is as follows: • Base fee: $49,800, plus, • 6% of net operating revenue from $0- $500,000, plus, • 4% of net operating revenue from $500,000- $940,000, plus, • 10% of net operating revenue over $940,000. If budgeted expenses and revenue are realized, the Republic management fee for the Budget Year 2000 would be $97,400. Republic will not be entitled to any additional compensation in 2000 in the event that the City raises parking rates and increased revenues result. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the prepared resolution authorizing City officials to sign an amendment to the 5-year management contract, with Republic Parking System of Chattanooga Tenn. to allow an adjustment in the management fee for Contract Year 2 (April 1, 2000- March 31, 2001). COUNCIL ACTION: Motion bv: Second bv: to: Is g) that no vehicle whatsoever will be permitted to be parked thereof free of charge, except upon written direction of the City, or as provided in subparagraph (i) of this section. H) that neither the Operator nor any of its employees shall at any time remove from the premises any automobile placed thereon for parking .purposes, except when following the towing policy established. I) that if the Operator permits it employees to park at no charge in a Facility while working, said parking will occur in the area of parking system with low public occupancy, and shall also offer its employees an alternative method of getting to work, such as providing a transit pass, and a car pooling incentive. ARTICLE III. MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS OF CITY 3.1 City agrees to maintain and pay for the following: a) Extraordinary repair and maintenance costs for any facility and its equipment. For equipment extraordinary repair is that which exceeds 25% of the original value. b) Necessary major repairs to the structure, plumbing, elevators, lighting, air conditioning and heating systems of facility. "Major repair" is defined as one costing S 1,000.00 or more. c) All painting of the facilities & equipment, excluding pavement markings, and curbs, and bollards. ARTICLE IV. PAYMENTS TO OPERATOR 4.1Monthly Management Fee a) In addition to receiving reimbursement for certain operating expenses as otherwise provided in this Article, the Operator shall receive as compensation for its services hereunder a Management Fee. b) Management Fee for year 1 is a fixed fee Of $79,185.30 paid in monthly increments of $6,598.53. N! c) Management Fee for years 2-5 of the Agreement: a base fee of $49,800 and an additional percentage incentive fee schedule to be negotiated before the end of each year. In the event the City and Operator can not mutually agree on an incentive fee schedule prior to each anniversary date of the Management Agreement, then the management Fee for the next year shall be a percent of the net operating revenue equal to: 10% from $0 to $500,000 5%from $500,001 to $1,000,000 10% over $1,000,001 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING q( DATE: 5/1100 ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Public Works D_1 8 a portion Century Hills Development PREPARED BY: #h M. Nigbur;** I The City and the Developer of Century Hills have agreed to jointly construct a Regional Storm Water Management Facility located on a portion of the Owner's property. This agreement requires the fallowing: • Owner agrees to construct the regional facility. • Owner shall dedicate the land and necessary easements. • City shall pay for completing the design of the facility to meet the standards for a regional facility. • City shall reimburse the Owner $9,400.00 for the incremental cost to enlarge the storm water facility to meet the standards for a Regional facility. Staff recommends the Council approve the Storm Water Management Agreement with Payne Company. The developer has executed the agreement. Funding for this project will be made available from the Regional Storm Water Management Account J. 2137 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Storm Water Management Agreement with Payne Company. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING q3 DATE: 511 /00 ORIGINATING DEPT: I ITEM NO. Public Works D— PREPARED BY: A-� M. Baker Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • Emerald Hills Second Subdivision — Fred Schmidt (Owner) & Elcor Construction (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9674 consisting of "Basic Construction to Serve Emerald Hills Second Subdivision". COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9674 "Basic Construction to Serve Emerald Hills Second Subdivision" .. JNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: Owner C REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works —Avalon Cove — Ph II (J9671) MEETING rr t�S DATE: 5/1/00 ITEM NO. D-Z-10 PREPARED Bl rR!> M. Baker Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • Avalon Cove — Ph II — Bouquet Builders, Inc. (Owner) & Elcor Construction (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9671 consisting of "Watermain to Serve Avalon Cove — Ph II". COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9671 "Watermain to Serve Avalon Cove — Ph II" t.JUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: g-7, 511 /00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works b _ C� I ITEM DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — South Pointe Fifth Subdivision (J9633) PREPARED BY: M. Baker Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • South Pointe Fifth Subdivision —All Pointe Development (Owner) & Elcor Construction (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9633 consisting of "Basic Construction to Serve South Pointe Fifth Subdivision". COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9633 "Basic Construction to Serve South Pointe Fifth Subdivision" .,JUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Wate 2000 Carwash (J9679) ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works MEETING DATE: 5/1 /00 ITEM NO. PREPARED BY: +th M. Baker Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • Watermain & Hydrant to Serve the Touchless 2000 Carwash (Lot 2, Block 1, Wood Lake Park) - Touchless 2000 LLC (Owner) & JECH Excavating (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9679. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9679 "Watermain & Hydrant to Serve the Touchless 2000 Carwash (Lot 2, Block 1, Wood Lake Park)" a.vUNCIL ACTION: motion by second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING (o 1 DATE: 511/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENTAGENDA Public Works D 3 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — The Gardens — Ph I (J9647) PREPARED BY: �M. Baker �'^' Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: The Gardens — Ph 1. - The Gardens Manufactured Home Community LLC (Owner) & Elcor Construction (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9647 consisting of "Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve The Gardens — Ph 1". N COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9647 "Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve The Gardens —Ph I" . JUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE t d3 5/1/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENTAGENDA Public Works �.�� ITEM DESCRIPTION: ADVERTISE FOR BIDS: "Sanitary Sewer Extension along a PREPARED BY portion of 18th Ave NW' (J 9634) D. Nelson 71 This is a request for a resolution to advertise for bids for the following project: Project No. M013 (J-9634). "Sanitary Sewer Extension along a portion of 18' Ave NW" This project is proposed to be funded (engrs. est. $45,000) with Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) funds. This project was not included in the 2000 - 2005 Capital Improvements Program. This project includes public improvements required to be completed to facilitate future development to the north of 55" Ave NW. Royal Plaza development located at the corner of 551" St NW & 181" Ave NW will provide the utility easement necessary to accommodate this utility extension project. Approximately 600 ft of 30" sanitary sewer will be installed adjacent to 18' Ave NW. Work will coincide with Royal Plaza construction efforts. Accomplishing this construction at this time will prevent future disruption to newly constructed sections of 18' Ave and Royal Plaza. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: A resolution should be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids and conduct a bid opening for Project No. M013 (J-9634), "Sanitary Sewer Extension along a portion of 1$1" Ave NW' ,. JNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: Io5 5/1/00 "^ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA 71 Public Works D�-Wa s ITEM DESCRIPTION: ADVERTISE FOR BIDS: "Intersection Improvements and Signal PREPARED BY: System at 41 st St NW and W. Frontage Rd" (J-6397) D. Nelson �nP This is a request for a resolution to advertise for bids. The bids will be received until 11:00 AM at the office of the City Clerk on May 31, 2000 and considered by the Council on June 5, 2000 for the following project: Project No. M051 (J-6397). "Intersection Improvements and Signal System at 41st St NW and W. Frontage Rd" This project was proposed to be funded with Municipal State Aid funds. It is included in the 2000 - 2005 Capital Improvements Program, pg. 30 (item 9) and pg. 36 (item 11). This project includes public improvements required to be completed by the City and MnDOT related to the Rochester Marketplace Development located along the south side of 41" St NW and west of TH52. MnDOT required that the existing TH52 West Frontage Rd north of 41" St be relocated 100 feet west for greater vehicle stacking between signals. This project will involve the placement of a traffic control signal system at the relocated intersection of 41' St NW and TH52 West Frontage Rd. Additionally, it will include concrete curb/gutter, bituminous roadway construction, storm sewer and associated sidewalk construction relocated due to the widening of 41" St NW between the west TH 52 ramps and the relocated 410 St / W. Frontage Rd intersection. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: A resolution should be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids and conduct a bid opening on May 31, 2000 at 11:00 AM for Project No. M051 (J-6397), "Intersection Improvements and Signal System at 41st St NW and W. Frontage Rd" Note to City Clerk; Advertise 3 times in the Post Bulletin and Construction Bulletin beginning May 5, 2000. t,uUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: RE S.P. 5508-96 And City Pro. A1051- J-6397 r `4 sl SM 159-131-04 159-126-11 END STA. Moo 196+50 SAP 139-131-04 BE9MNIN S A. 0+68 i SAP 179-126-I1 9EOMNMo STA. IBB+BD j REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: ice) 5/1100 " 3ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENTAGENDA Public Works D-P6 ITEM DESCRIPTION: DESIGN VARIANCE REQUEST: "Construction of 16th Ave NW PREPARED BY: from Civic Center Dr NW to 7th St NW' (J2261). D. Nelson A design variance is needed from the Commissioner of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Transportation for the following public improvement project: Project No. 6316-4-97 J 2261 S.A.P. 159-112-07 "Construction of 16'h Ave NW from Civic Center Dr to 7ei St NW" A variance from the "Low Speed Urban Horizontal Curve Design Chart" as issued in MnDOT Technical Memorandum 00-SA-02, dated March 8, 2000 is required. Due to the physical constraints of the area, the proximity of the railroad crossing, and existing development considerations, the proposed horizontal alignment of the road section was selected. The alignment meets all design parameters with the exception of the outside lane horizontal curve radii. For the given speed of 30 mph, the outside lanes should have a radii of 300 ft. It is designed with 250-ft radii. 250-ft radii would meet a design speed of 28 mph versus the standard design speed of 30 mph. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution seeking the Commissioner of Transportation's approval for a design variance for the Construction of 161h Ave NW from Civic Center Dr to 7' St NW. t.VUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: t APR 25 'eO 02:21PM YAGGY Cot -BY ASSOCIATES P.7 1 16a' AVENiUE NW ROCHESTER,MINNESOTA Federal Project No. STP 5500(255) State Projeet No.159-113-07 DESIGN ELEMENT VARIANCE JUSTIFICATIONS 1. The 10 Avenue NW project in Rochester consists of road construction on new right-of-way. The project provides an important link between Civic Center Drive (M.S.A.H. 114), which is classified as an expressway, and 7 h Street NW, which is classified as an arterial roadway. The project was identified during development of the 1996 EIS for the T.H. 14152 project. At that time, it was determined that this project could partially mitigate the negative traffic impacts created by the T.H. 14/52 project in this commercial district. The total length of the proposed Urban Collector project is approximately 290 meters (950 feet). A variance from the "Low Speed Urban Horizontal Curve Design Chart", as issued in Technical Memorandum 00-SA-02 dated March 8, 2000, is hereby requested. For a 50 km/h (30 MPH) design speed, the design chart requires a 76.2 m (250 feet) radius curve for e= 0.02 and a 91.4 m (300 feet) radius curve for c -0.02. The proposed center line radii for two horizontal curves on the project are 76.2 m (250 feet). Since the project typical section includes normal crown at 2%, the outside lanes in these curves do not meet the minimum radius of 91.4 m (300 feet) for e= -0.02. 2. Location Map and Typical Section — ATTACHED. 3. The proposed roadway corridor passes through a commercially developed area for its entire length. It also passes across an operating railroad right-of-way. The proposed alignment was selected to minimize the right-of-way impact on the existing properties while providing acceptable approaches to the at -grade railroad crossing. The effects associated to the difference between the design standard and the proposed design, in regards to impacts on properties, pedestrians, and vehicular traffic would not be substantial. The proposed horizontal curves meet a design speed of approximately 45 km/h (29 MPH) versus the standard design speed of 50 km/h (30 MPH). 4. The critical design element is the radius of curves for the horizontal alignment. The proposed design includes two horizontal curves with center line radii of 76.2 m (250 feet). The typical section for these curves includes a normal crown at 2%. The design Page - 1 APR 25 '00 02.21PM YRGGY COLBY ASSOCIATES P.811 1cq standard for this project requires 76.2 in (250 feet) radius for emo.02 and 91.4 m (300 feet) radius for e--0.02. With normal crown, the outside lanes of the curves are at e= 0.02. 5. The horizontal alignment for this project was established during preliminary design in 1998. At that time, the project was considered to be a State -Aid project. The horizontal alignment is the most challenging aspect of the project design. Alignment options were restricted by a number of factors. The roadway's south termini was established by an existing intersection. The north termini was established by the only parcel of property that would be economically feasible to acquire. The corridor in- between would require full right-of-way acquisition, so minimizing impacts to existing commercial property was important. And finally, the alignment needed to provide acceptable approaches to the at -grade rail crossing included in the project. Given these constraints, the proposed alignment was determined to be feasible in terms of cost and acceptable in terms of design standards. The difference between the Design Standard horizontal curve radius and the proposed horizontal curve radius is not great. Therefore, the construction cost differential between the two is not great. However, as previously stated, this project was initiated as a State -Aid project and as such, a great deal of time and effort has been expended in establishing final design and right-of-way needs. In addition, the proposed design meets an approximate design speed of 45 km/h (28 MPH) for the outside lanes. Revising the project alignment could introduce shorter tangents between curves and greater skew approaching the railroad crossing. These undesirable outcomes may more than onset the benefit of increasing design speed through the horizontal curves by 5 km/h (2 MPH). 6. Since the proposed roadway is a new road, there is no available accident data. 7. Year 2000 traffic is expected to be 9,763 ADT. Year 2020 traffic is expected to be 13,807 ADT. S. The south terminus of the proposed roadway is an existing signalized intersection at Civic Center Drive. Civic Center Drive is posted at 40 MPH. Existing 16* Avenue NW, south of Civic Center Drive, is posted at 30 MPH. The north termini of the proposed roadway is a new T-intersection with 7n' Street NW. 70' Street NW is currently posted at 35 MPH west of the proposed intersection and 30 MPH east of the proposed intersection Page - 2 APR 25 '00 02:22PM YAGGY COLBY ASSOCIATES P.9 (ID 9. There ate no future improvements planned for the proposed roadway itself. There is a parcel of property along the corridor that is currently vacant. Some type of commercial development is expected on this parcel. 10. The characteristics of the roadway corridor will inherently serve to control vehicle speeds. At the north termini, the T-intersection will limit the speed of all vehicles entering the corridor. At the south termini, the existing signalized intersection will limit the speed of the majority of vehicles entering the corridor. The at -grade rail crossing will serve to calm traffic within the corridor, as will the commercial drives along the corridor. Safety features will include fully striped traffic lanes and cross -walks, concrete curb and gutter, and roadway lighting. Signage for curves and advisory speed plaques could also be incorporated. Page - 3 APR 25 '00 02:20PM YAGGY COLBY ASSOCIATES RRR�� P.5 4• f tq 4 16TH AVENUE NORTHWEST ROCHISTER, MINNESOTA ..a s PROPOSED ALIGNMENT AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer a Five Areas in Marion Township, J9601 Public Works MEETING l l DATE: 5/1/00 ITEM �� NO, ✓'C�l PREPARED BY: U-1 J. Loehr i This is the Feasibility Report requested by the City Council for the extension of sanitary sewer to serve Marvale Addition and Whynaught's Subdivision in a project described as follows: Project No. M004. J9601 "Sanitary Sewer to Serve Nelson's & Christopher Courts Subdivisions and the South Side of Marion Road SE; and Sewer and Water to Serve 20"' Street SE from Marion Road SE to 200 Feet East of 37" Avenue SE & Samelians Subdivision". The estimated construction costs and expense of this project are as follows: Sanitary Sewer and watermain $ 745,904 Service Connections 109,038 Engineering/interest/Contingencies 256,483 Total Estimated Project Cost $1,111,425 The project is proposed to be funded from the following sources: 1. Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Connection Charges included in future Utility Connection Agreements. 2. Sales Tax revenue appropriated for the Water Quality Protection Program. 3. Water Utility for oversize watermain costs. An Orderly Annexation Agreement between the City of Rochester and Marion Township is finalized. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adopt a resolution accepting the Feasibility Report. 2. Adopt a resolution establishing a Project Hearing for June 5, 2000. Attachment: Feasibility Report %,uUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: rrs REPORT ON THE FEASIBILITY OF PROPOSED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SANITARY SEWER TO SERVE NELSON'S& CHRISTOPHER COURTS SUBD AND THE SOUTH SIDE OF MARION ROAD SE; AND SEWER AND WATER TO SERVE 2 0 T H STREET SE FROM MARION ROAD SE TO 200 FEET EAST OF 37TH AVENUE SE & SAMELIANS SUBDIVISION April 26, 2000 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota Petition for the extension of sanitary sewer to serve the project area were forwarded by the City Council at their meeting of April 5, 1999, May 3, 1999 and July 7, 1999 to the Public Works Department for the preparation of Feasibility Reports. The petitions were checked and found to be in proper form and were signed by 89 of 140 property owners of lots containing a single-family residential dwelling or a developed commercial property. This represents 63.4 percent of the developed lots within project area that are eligible to participate in the City of Rochester, Water Quality Protection Program adopted by the City Council on December 21, 1998. Feasibility Report We report that the above referenced project is feasible and recommend its construction. The location of this project is within an area of existing single family residential and commercial development that is currently served by public watermain, but lacks public sanitary sewer. A majority of the septic systems within project area were constructed prior to the State of Minnesota and Olmsted County having any requirements or standards for construction of septic systems and wells. The lots are typically under''/3 acre in size and are unable to absorb the nitrates created from the septic systems. There is an increasing threat of contamination to the City of Rochester's ground water supply as the existing septic systems and wells begin to fail. This project would allow property owners of lots containing an existing single-family residential dwelling or a commercial building to connect to public sanitary sewer and watermain rather than replacing their old systems when they fail. The costs of this project are proposed to be recovered through Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Connection Charges (Utility Connection Agreements) and from Sales Tax revenue appropriated to the City of Rochester, Water Quality Protection Program, and the water Utility for oversize watermain costs. The proposed project consists of the extension of the following public sanitary sewer and watermain: 8" sanitary sewer in Nelson's Subdivision 32 properties 8" sanitary sewer connecting Christopher Courts Subdivision to 20th St. sub-trunkline 48 properties 8" sanitary sewer & 12" watermain on the south side of Marion Road SE 11 properties 12" watermain in 20th Street SE 16 properties 10" sanitary sewer and 8" watermain in Samelians Subdivision 33 properties Number of properties being served by this project 140 properties icy Related proiects required to serve this project area are as follows: 1. Trunkline sanitary sewer to serve this area (project J9598) is under construction in 2000. 2. Water tower (project J9603 is scheduled for construction in 2000-2001. 3. Portions of trunk watermain to serve this area (project J9604) are scheduled for construction in 2000. The estimated construction costs and expenses for the vroiect made without completed plans or survey are as follows: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain $ 969,675 Sewer Service Connection Stub -Outs $750 per service x 140 services $ 105,000 Water Service Connection Stub -out $750 per service x 49 services $ 36,750 Estimated Cost of Project $1,111,425 The estimated Qroiect costs for the project are proposed to be funded as follows: Utility Connection Agreements $ 641,214 Water Utility (oversize watermain costs) $ 39,429 Sales Tax Revenue (see below) $ 430,782 Estimated Project Costs $1,111,425 Amount of sales tax revenue required for construction of Proiect Sales Tax (Rate Cap and per Lot Cap) $ 289,032 Sales Tax (Sewer Service Connection Stub -Out Allowances) $ 105,000 Sales Tax (Water Service Stub -Out Allowances) $ 36,750 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Funding Required for Construction of Project $ 430,782 Estimated additional sales tax revenue required for work on private property The 140 developed lots within the project area are eligible for Allowances through the Water Quality Protection Program as follows: Sewer Service Lateral 140 lots x $1,000 per lot $ 140,000 Water Service Lateral 49 lots x $1,000 per lot $ 49,000 Well Closure 49 lots x $1,000 per lot $ 49,000 Septic Closure 140 lots x $ 500 per lot $ 70,000 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Allowances $ 308,000 For Work on Private Property Estimated sales tax revenue required for construction of Proiect and Allowances Estimated Amount Sales Tax Revenue for Construction of Project $ 430,782 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Allowances $ 308,000 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Construction of Project and $ 738,782 Allowances for Work on Private Property ir-7 We recommend that the necessary funding to construct sanitary sewer, watermain and service connections in the project area be done so in accordance with the City of Rochester's existing sanitary sewer and watermain connection charge policies and the Water Quality Protection Program. Property owners that desire to participate in the Water Quality Protection Program and the benefits contained therein, are required to: 1. Enter into a Utility Connection Agreement with the City within three (3) years of the date the City initiates the project. 2. Connect the existing single family residential dwelling to the public sewer and water systems within five (5) years of the date of project initiation. 3. Consent to annexation of their property no sooner than five (5) years from the date sanitary sewer and watermain is available to serve their property. Submitted for your consideration: VJa es Loehr, Project Manager ater Qbality Protection Program Doug Nelson, PE Manager of Engineering A BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Project No: M004 Date (Orig.) 4/26/2000 J No: 9601 Description: Sanitary Sewer to Serve Nelson's Subdivision, Christopher Courts Subdivision. and Samelians Subdivision. Construction Sanitary Sewer & Watermain Service Connections Engineering/interest/Contingency Total Construction & Expense Cost Distribution Anticipated Utility Connection Agreements Sales Tax Funding Water Utility Share (oversize watermain) TOTAL Make Initial Disbursement from P. I. R. Fund Project Contract Final Budget Cost Cost $ 745,904 109,038 256,483 $1,111,425 $ 641,214 430,782 39,429 $1,111,425 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 1119 5/1100 ' IENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works Via a ITEM DESCRIPTION: Advertise for Bids: Sanitary Sewer to Serve Marvale Addition and PREPARED BY: Whynaught's Subdivision, J9600 J. Loehr This is a request for a resolution to advertise for bids. The bids will be received until 1:00 PM at the office of the City Clerk on May 26, 2000 and considered by the City Council on June 5, 2000 for the following project: Project No.M0031J96001 "Sanitary Sewer to Serve Marvale Addition and Whynaught's Subdivision" The project is proposed to be funded with Sanitary Sewer Connection Charges, and Sales Tax Revenue appropriated to the Water Quality Protection Program (WQPP). The Marvale Addition and Whynaught's Subdivision project involves the extension of sanitary sewer to serve one hundred twenty four developed lots that contain a single-family residential dwelling, ten undeveloped residential lots, and one commercial property. Public watermain currently serves the area. The developed lots within the project area are eligible to participate in the WQPP under the terms and conditions of the Program. The undeveloped lots are not eligible to participate in the WQPP. The commercial property is eligible to participate in the WQPP subject to the provisions of an amendment to the WQPP adopted by the City Council on July 7, 1999 to include commercial property. The project also includes approximately 2,338 feet of trunk watermain along the east line of the project limits, from the north line of Marvale Addition to Nelson Court. At the completion of project J9600 the trunk watermain costs will be appropriated to project J9604 "Intermediate Level Trunk Watermain in Southeast Service Area from New Water Tower to Pinewood Road Area." COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: t A resolution should be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids and conduct a bid opening on May 26, 2000 at 1:00 PM. Note to City Clerk; Advertise 3 times in the Post Bulletin and Construction Bulletin beginning May 5, 2000. Aft: Location Map Notice of Bid COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: 157 .:m . SE MAYN_?LL ST SE I ! 1 S i 5 4 3 z ! !9 al7)6158L9 Y ST SE2j2' ` I I I 3 J 4 ! I 9 i 8 1 7 6 1 5 IQ'� 3 5 i 4 )' 1 1 14131E1t 708 1 9 j? (1 ; CDY ST Lzz I I 2 7 1 a 3. Al i3i2i" 7y^i I4 i ! r 3 2 A j6/7 1 6 1 I 1 i 1 ''7 1 1 � a j ! I a 7 4'6 i�4. 23122 I' i I ; �r q�q •� i 12 I? I4 27 20111 ,1f I4 3 6 J� \ as, I8 `'3 : - i 'll'9 118 1 8 I 4 1 :C j u j :2 ` - I n I i 7 17 5 9 io 1c f i j j 1 I 1 I \ 9 a y A g 7 8} 9 1 in 31 12 I I3 � 14 a i i ' I 3 4 S 6 i! 8 , I j �♦ 2 w- 'I UGh'T C'1 S � M ` S TRAILER COURT \ 1 9 W n t4 2 j 13 EXHIBIT A WHKS k Co.L PROPOSED VATER MAIN SCALE IN FEET ��"®°�""'m�"1p "`•'maw PROPOSED SANITARY SEVER --t- 14Y QI1, M V14C Y 16 M RO61K 1. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 1,�_( DATE: 5/1 /00 AraENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works b —e2q ITEM DESCRIPTION: Feasibility Report for Water Tower and Trunk Watermain in PREPARED BY: Southeast Service Area, J9603 and J9604 K J. Loehr This is the Feasibility Report for the construction of a water tower and trunk watermain to serve the southeast service area in Marion Township in projects described as follows: Project No. M006, J9603 "Water Tower to Serve Southeast Service Area (Rose Harbor Site)" The estimated project costs are as follows: Water Tower $575,000 Engineering, Interest. Contingencies & Site Acquisition 175,000 Estimated Construction Cost and Expenses $750,000 Project No. M007, J9604 "Trunk Watermain in Southeast Service Area" The estimated project costs are as follows: Watermain $728,300 Engineering, Interest, Contingencies 218,490 Estimated Construction Cost and Expenses $946,790 The projects are proposed to be funded from the following sources: 1. Sales tax eligible Water Availability Charges (WAC) included in future Utility Connection Agreements. 2. J6201 previously collected WAC charges in the water tower service district. 3. Water Utility for oversize watermain costs. 4. Internal borrowing to be recovered from Water Availability Charges (WAC) included in future Developer Agreements and/or City -Owner Contracts. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adopt a resolution accepting the Feasibility Report. Attachments: Feasibility Reports Finance Department Statement of Funding — WQPP Projects %,u JNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: � a.3 REPORT ON THE FEASIBILITY OF PROPOSED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WATER TOWER TO SERVE THE SOUTHEAST SERVICE AREA (ROSE HARBOR SITE) April 24, 2000 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota Petitions for sanitary sewer and watermain to serve properties in Marion Township were previously presented to the City Council for consideration. Projects are tentatively scheduled for Marion Township in the years 2000-2002. The installation of a new 500,000 water tower is necessary to provide adequate water pressure and volume of water to serve the properties in Marion Township that are included in these petitions. The construction of this water tower is intended to serve properties that are located within the current Urban Service Area. Developed properties affected by the water tower project are eligible to participate in the City of Rochester Water Quality Protection Program adopted by the City Council on December 21, 1998. Feasibility Report We report that the above referenced project is feasible and recommend its construction. This water tower project is proposed to be constructed within privately owed land. Site acquisition is required for the construction of this project. A majority of the septic systems and wells within the water tower district were constructed prior to the State of Minnesota and Olmsted County having any requirements or standards for construction of septic systems and wells. The lots are typically under %2 acre in size and are unable to absorb the nitrates created from the septic systems. There is an increasing threat of contamination to the City of Rochester's ground water supply as the existing septic systems and wells begin to fail. This project would facilitate the extension of watermain within the petition areas to allow property owners of developed lots to connect to public watermain rather than replacing their old wells when they fail. The proposed project will also provide for future water service to undeveloped property within and adjacent to the petition areas. The proposed project consists of constructing a 500,000-gallon pedestal spheroid water tower in the Rose Harbor area. The estimated construction costs and expenses for the project made without completed plans or surveys are as follows: Water Tower $575,000 Engineering. Interest. Contingencies & Site Acquisition 175,000 Estimated Construction Cost and Expenses $750,000 The project costs are proposed to be recovered according to the attached Finance Department Statement on Funding-WQPP Projects. A separate Feasibility Report is prepared for trunk watermain (J9604) to serve the Marion Township petition areas and undeveloped properties with in these petition areas. The Finance Department Statement on Funding-WQPP Projects combines the water tower and trunk watermain funding, as each project's costs are recovered from the same source, Water Availability Charges (WAC). A new well and well house is proposed for construction at Marion Road SE south of 20th Street SE. The costs for site acquisition, drilling of a well and construction of the well house is the expense of Rochester Public Utilities. Therefore, these costs are not included in the Finance Department Statement on Funding-WQPP Projects. We recommend that the necessary funding to construct the Water Tower to Serve the Southeast Service Area project be done so in accordance with the Finance Department Statement on Funding— WQPP Projects and the Water Quality Protection Program. Submitted for your consideration: J es . Loehr, ater uality Protection Program Project Manager Doug Nelson, PE Manager of Engineering REPORT ON THE FEASIBILITY OF PROPOSED iag LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TRUNK WATERMAIN IN SOUTHEAST SERVICE AREA April 24, 2000 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota Petitions for sanitary sewer and watermain to serve properties in Marion Township were previously presented to the City Council for consideration. Projects are tentatively scheduled for Marion Township in the years 2000-2002. The installation of trunk watermain is necessary to provide adequate water pressure and volume of water to serve the properties in Marion Township that are included in these petitions. The construction of this trunk watermain is intended to serve properties that are located within the current Urban Service Area. Developed properties affected by the trunk watermain project are eligible to participate in the City of Rochester Water Quality Protection Program adopted by the City Council on December 21, 1998. Feasibility Resort We report that the above referenced project is feasible and recommend its construction. This trunk watermain project is proposed to be constructed within existing public right-of-ways, Olmsted County Marion Road right-of-way, and in easement acquired for the construction of this project. A majority of the septic systems and wells within the trunk watermain project area were constructed prior to the State of Minnesota and Olmsted County having any requirements or standards for construction of septic systems and wells. The lots are typically under %z acre in size and are unable to absorb the nitrates created from the septic systems. There is an increasing threat of contamination to the City of Rochester's ground water supply as the existing septic systems and wells begin to fail. This project would facilitate the extension of trunk watermain within the petition areas to allow property owners of developed lots to connect to public watermain rather than replacing their old wells when they fail. The proposed project will also provide for future extension of watermain to serve undeveloped property within and adjacent to the petition areas. The proposed project consists of constructing a 12-inch and 16-inch trunk watermain at the following locations: 1. 12" main level watermain in the south right of way of Marion Road from to 30th Avenue SE. 2. 12" High level Main South of Pinewood Road SE (Mulholland Property) 3. 8" High level Main at Upper End of Area South of Pinewood Road SE 4. 12" High Level Main on 30th Avenue SE 5. 12" Intermediate Level Main Extending to Rose Haven Subdivision 6. 12" High Level Main 20th Street SE to Marion Road SE 7. 12" High Level Main Provides Service to Pressure Reducing Station 8. 12" High Level Main Rose Harbor Tower to Marion Road SE 9. Pressure Reducing Station (Creates Intermediate Zone Serving Rose Haven Area & East) (A* The estimated construction costs and expenses for the project made without completed plans or surveys are as follows: 1. 12" Main Level Tie on 30th Avenue SE $206,400 2. 12" High level Main South of Pinewood Road SE (Mulholland Property) 80.500 3. 8" High level Main at Upper End of Area South of Pinewood Road SE 22,400 4. 12" High Level Main on 30th Avenue SE 88,000 5. 12" Intermediate Level Main Extending to Rose Haven Subdivision 72,000 6. 12" High Level Main 20th Street SE to Marion Road SE 30,000 7. 12" High Level Main Provides Service to Pressure Reducing Station 30,000 Serving Rose Haven Area & East 8. 12" High Level Main Rose Harbor Tower to Marion Road SE 189,000 9. Pressure Reducing Station (Creates Intermediate Zone Serving 10,000 Rose Haven Area & East) Sub -Total $728,300 Engineering Interest, Contingencies 218,490 Estimated Construction Cost and Expenses $946,790 The project costs are proposed to be recovered according to the attached Finance Department Statement on Funding-WQPP Projects. We recommend that the necessary funding to construct the Trunk Watermain in Southeast Service Area project be done so in accordance with the Finance Department Statement on Funding — WQPP Projects and the Water Quality Protection Program. Submitted for your consideration: 4 d Tat . Loehr, ater uality Protection Program Project Manager Doug Nelson, PE Manager of Engineering BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Project No: M006 M007 J No: 9603 9604 Date (Ong.) 04/24/2000 Description: J9603 Water Tower to Serve the Southeast Service Area (Rose Harbor Site) J9604 Trunk Watermain in Southeast Service Area Construction Water Tower Trunk Watermain Enoineerin.oll nterest/Contincencv Total Construction & Expense Cost Distribution Sales Tax Eligible WAG Charges Previously Collected WAC in Water Tower District Water Utility Oversize Watermain Costs MY VVI-M Project Contract Final Budget Cost Cost $ 575,000 728,300 373,490 $1,676,790 $1,038,080 175.000 Undeveloped Property Share Internal Borrowing 388,655 (Recovered from Future WAG Charges) TOTAL Make Initial Disbursement from P. I. R. Fund $1 676,790 I A U Finance Dept Statement on Funding - WQPP Projects Sewer and water projects undertaken as part of the City's Water Quality Protection Program (WQPP) will be funded by a combination of sources depending upon the ultimate repayment source for the expenditure as defined in the program. Sources include sales tax revenues, sales tax bonds, internal borrowing, general obligation special assessment bonds, and available sewer and water access charge reserves. Sales Tax Eligible Expenditures - Sales Tax Revenues / GO Sales Tax Revenue Bonds For those expenditure items or proportionate shares that are eligible for sales tax funding under the WQPP, the funding would be sales tax revenues, if available. If insufficient sales tax revenues exist at the time of contract award, proceeds from GO sales tax revenue bonds authorized under the sales tax extension legislation, would be the source of funding with repayment from sales tax revenues. Eligible items for developed property include: • Water Service Connection Allowance $750/lot • Sewer Service Connection Allowance $750/lot • Water Service Lateral Allowance $1,000/lot • Sewer Service Lateral Allowance $1,000/lot • Well Closure Allowance $1,000/]ot • Septic System Closure Allowance $1,000/lot • Sewer availability charges (SAC)(') $1,500/lot • Water availability charges (WAC)(') $2,000/lot • Caps - Amount over maximum sewer and water connection charges per lot - (maximums set at $8,160 up to 1/2 acre, $8,160 + $.1873/sq. ft. between 1/2 and 1-1/2 acres and $16,320 for lots over 1-1/2 acres) • The unpaid interest that accrues from date of project expenditure until the end of the three year sign-up grace period. Note: (1) SAC and WAC collections are used to pay for trunkline sewer and water tower transmission mains. Connection Charge Eligible Expenditure - Temporary Internal Borrowing / GO/SA Bonding For the portion of project costs that will ultimately be repaid through connection charges to property owners, the City intends to borrow internally for cash flow purposes. Once the three year window for sign-up in the program has expired, we would anticipate issuing GO special assessment bonds for this portion of project costs since, by then, we will have a known level of participation in the program. Any portions not covered by future special assessment payments would be the responsibility of the respective water and sewer utilities in proportion to original costs. Amounts collected under new connection agreements signed after the issuance of bonds would be tumed over to the utility, or used to reduce the utilities' payments on the bonds. Undeveloped Property Trunkline Sewer, trunk water or water Tower Costs - SAC and WAC Reserves / Internal Borrowing The City will first utilize sales tax monies for those developed properties share of SAC and WAC charges. For undeveloped areas, the City will borrow internally from either the sewer utility or other cash reserves in an amount equal to that which we calculate recoverable from future development based upon current SAC and WAC rates. Once these undeveloped areas develop, SAC and WAC charges paid by developers will repay internal loans plus interest and replenish existing fund reserves. Any costs not recovered at this point will be charged directly to o-q the sewer enterprise for trunkline sewer projects or water enterprise for trunk water and water tower projects. We anticipate internal borrowing of approximately $5.0 million for this purpose. Project, No M006, J9603 "Water Tower to Serve Southeast Service Area" $ 946,790 Project, No M007, J9604 "Trunk Watermain in Southeast Service Area" S 750,000 Applying the funding plans and WQPP guidelines noted above, the following provides sources and uses of funds for these specific projects. Total Project Uses (Engineer's Estimate): Project Sources: Sales Tax Eligible WAC Charges Pinewood Road SE Area $147,500 Marvale Addition and Whynaught's Subdivision 124,000 South Side Marion Road SE 22,000 22nd Street SE (Samelian's Subdivision) 30,000 20s' Street SE 24,000 Nelson's Subdivision 36,000 Christopher Courts Subdivision 46,000 Rose Haven Subdivision 46,000 Cedar Park Subdivision 12,000 Kahoun's Subdivision 44,000 Crystal Springs Subdivision Area 106,000 Thomas Subdivision Area 73,500 Vandal's Subdivision Area 74,000 S 1,696,790 Sunnydale 113,340 Southport 140,040 Total Sales Tax Funding $ 1,038,380 Available WAC Balances (J8201) Previous WAC in Water Tower District Eastwood Hills Subdivision 45,166 East Ridge Subdivision 9,130 Rose Harbor Estates 20,759 Total WAC Balances Applied to Projects J9603 and J9604 $ 75,055 Water Utility Oversize Watermain Costs $ 175,000 Undeveloped Property Share Internal Borrowing 388,655 Total Undeveloped Property Share $ 388,655 Total Project Sources: $ L676,970 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE r3f 5/1/00 ar,ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM5E?DB CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D ITEM DESCRIPTION: Advertise for Bids: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve PREPBaihly Woodland Subdivision, J9599 Vf t This is a request for a resolution to advertise for bids. The bids will be received until 11:00 AM at the office of the City Clerk on June 1, 2000 and considered by the City Council on June 5, 2000 for the following project: Project No.M002 09599) "Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve Baihly Woodland Subdivision" The project is proposed to be funded with Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Connection Charges, Sales Tax Revenue appropriated to the Water Quality Protection Program (WQPP), and the Sewer and Water Utilities. The Baihly Woodland project involves the extension of sanitary sewer and watermain to serve twenty- one developed lots that contain a single-family residential dwelling, one undeveloped residential lot, and one large parcel that is proposed for development. The developed lots within the project area are eligible to participate in the WQPP under the terms and conditions of the Program. The undeveloped lot and the larger parcel are not eligible to participate in the WQPP. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: A resolution should be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids and conduct a bid opening on June 1, 2000 at 11:00 AM. Note to City Clerk; Advertise 3 times in the Post Bulletin and Construction Bulletin beginning May 5, 2000. Att: Location Map Notice of Bid uudNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: Watermain Project No. M002, J9599 a Sanitary Sewer and Watermain CR 75w to Serve Baihly Woodland Subd. AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewi 3010 Valleyhigh Drive N.W., J9595 Public Works MEETING t J 3 DATE: 5/1/00 ITEM NO. D- 31 PREPARED BY: %y-or J. Loehr f This is the Feasibility Report requested by the City Council for the extension of sanitary sewer and watermain to serve 3010 Valleyhigh Drive N.W. in a project described as follows: Proiect No. 9918, J9595 "Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Extension to Serve 3010 Valleyhigh Drive N.W." The estimated project costs and expense of this project are as follows: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain $ 87,441 Service Connections $ 5,769 Engineering/Interest/Contingencies $ 27,963 Total Estimated Project Cost $121,173 The project is proposed to be funded from Utility Connection Agreements, Sales Tax Revenue appropriated for the Water Quality Protection Program, Water Utility share for watermain crossing of Valleyhigh Drive NW, and Sewer Availability Charges for sewer crossing of Valleyhigh Drive NW, COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adopt a resolution accepting the Feasibility Report. 2. Adopt a resolution establishing a Project Hearing for June 5, 2000. Attachment: Feasibility Report 4vUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: W W O �3 zz Qw �> x� w� HQ 3� Qx z �, ¢w a � '� w 3� w v� o � o �J M Q H i--' z REPORT ON THE FEASIBILITY OF PROPOSED lAe; LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN TO SERVE 3010 VALLEYHIGH DRIVE N.W. April 25, 2000 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota A petition for sanitary sewer and watermain to serve 3010 Valleyhigh Drive N.W. was forwarded by the City Council at their April 19, 1999 meeting to the Public Works Department for the preparation of a Feasibility Report. The petition was checked and found to be in proper form and was signed by 1 of the 5 property owners of lots containing a single-family residential dwelling, a multi -family dwelling, or a commercial or industrial development. This represents 20 percent of the lots within proposed project area that are eligible to participate in the City of Rochester, Water Quality Protection Program adopted by the City Council on December 21, 1999. Feasibility Report We report that the above referenced project is feasible and recommend its construction. The location of this project is within an area of 2 lots that contain single-family residential dwellings, 1 lot that contains a multi -family residential dwelling and 2 lots that contains a commercial development that currently lack public sanitary sewer and watermain. The petitioner for the project owns the property containing the multi -family residential dwelling. The Fire Department has instructed the petitioner to install a fire sprinkler system within the dwelling or the property cannot be used for multi -family housing any longer. In addition the petitioner's property has a septic system that is inadequate and the owner is currently relying on a holding tank to provide for the dwellings sewage needs. The holding tank requires frequent pumping as the septic system (drain field) does not provide adequate service for the dwelling. The septic systems and wells within the Area were constructed prior to the State of Minnesota and Olmsted County having any requirements or standards for construction of septic systems and wells. The lots are less than 1-1/2 acres in size and are unable to absorb the nitrates created from the septic systems. There is an increasing threat of contamination to the City of Rochester's ground water supply as the existing septic systems and wells begin to fail. This project would allow the five property owners to connect their property to public sanitary sewer and water systems rather than replacing their old systems when they fail. The costs of this project are proposed to be recovered through sanitary sewer and watermain connection charges (Utility Connection Agreements), from Sales Tax Revenue appropriated to the City of Rochester, Water Quality Protection Program, and from the Water Utility (Valleyhigh Drive NW watermain crossing).. The proposed project consists of the installation of approximately 850 feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer and 110 feet of 8-inch watermain. Public sanitary sewer is currently available at the south end of the project limits and watermain is located within the Valleyhigh Drive ROW. Therefore, an extension of a trunkline sanitary sewer main or trunk watermain is not required to serve the project area. 13& The estimated construction costs and expenses for the project made without completed plans or survey are as follows: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain $113,673 Sewer Service Connection Stub -Outs $750 per service x 3 services $ 3,750 Water Service Connection Stub -out $750 per service x 3 services $ 3,750 Estimated Cost of the Project $121,173 The estimated proiect costs are proposed to be funded as follows: Utility Connection Agreements $ 60,814 Water Utility (water crossing of Valleyhigh Drive NW) $ 17,836 Sewer Availability Charges (SAC) (sewer crossing of Valleyhigh Drive NW) $ 7,785 Sales Tax Revenue (see below) $ 34,738 Estimated Project Costs $121,173 Amount of sales tax revenue required for the proiect construction Sales Tax (Rate Cap and per Lot Cap) $ 27,238 Sales Tax (Sewer Service Connection Stub -Out Allowances) $ 3,750 Sales Tax (Water Service Stub -Out Allowances) $ 3,750 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Funding Required for Construction of Project $ 34,738 Estimated additional sales tax revenue required for work on private property The 5 - lots within the project area contain commercial or multi -family development. These lots are eligible for Allowances through the Water Quality Protection Program as follows: Sewer Service Lateral 5 lots x $1,000 per lot $ 5,000 Water Service Lateral 5 lots x $1,000 per lot $ 5,000 Well Closure 5 lots x $1,000 per lot $ 5,000 Septic Closure 5 lots x $ 500 per lot $ 2,500 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Allowances $ 17,500 For Work on Private Property Estimated sales tax revenue required for construction of Proiect and Allowances Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue for Construction of Project $ 34,738 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Allowances $ 17,500 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Construction of Project $ 52,238 Allowances for Work on Private Property, and SAC & WAC We recommend that the necessary funding to construct sanitary sewer, watermain and service connections in the Valleyhigh Drive NW Area be done so in accordance with the City of Rochester's existing sanitary sewer and watermain connection charge policies and the Water Quality Protection Program. Property owners that desire to participate in the Water Quality Protection Program and the benefits contained therein, are required to: (3'1 1. Enter into a Utility Connection Agreement with the City within three (3) years of the date the City initiates the project. 2. Connect the existing single family residential dwelling to the public sewer and water systems within five (5) years of the date of project initiation. Submi d for your consideration: . 4 Jame ehr, Project Manager Doug Nelson, PE Wate Qua 'ty Protection Program Manager of Engineering l n BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Project No: 9918 Date (Orig.) 03115/2000 J No: 9595 Description: Sanitary Sewer & Watermain Extension to Serve 3010 Valleyhinh Drive NW Project Contract Final Budget Cost Cost Construction Sanitary Sewer & Watermain $ 87,441 Service Connections 5.769 Encineerino/lnterest/Contingency 27,963 Total Construction & Expense $ 121,173 Cost Distribution Anticipated Utility Connection Agreements Water Utility Sewer Availability Charges (SAC) Utility Connection Agreements Sales Tax Funding Ito] f1q Make Initial Disbursement from P. I. R. Fund $ 60,814 17,836 7,785 34,738 $ 121,173 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: Sidewalks In REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 1 J7 DATE: 511100 ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Public Works D - 5Qi PREPARED The Public Works Department proposes the following change to the notice requirements in RCO 72. RCO Chapter 72 authorizes the City Engineer to make inspections of public sidewalks to determine if they are kept in repair and safe for pedestrians. The City Engineer is to serve notice to the abutting property owner of needed repairs to the sidewalk. RCO Chapter 72 also sets a maximum time of 30 days for the property owner to complete the repairs upon receipt of notice from the City that repairs are needed. With the ongoing high level of construction activity in Rochester and specifically in the home building area, there is a limited availability of contractors to complete sidewalk repairs. Many property owners have commented to staff that they are unable to complete sidewalk repairs with the 30-day period required in the RCO Chapter 72. The reason typically given by the property owners is that they cannot lineup a contractor in the time allotted. The property owner will be given a 60-day notice that indicates that the sidewalk abutting the property is in need of repair. If the Department of Public Works does not have a permit application on file within 30 days, the property owner will be given a second notice/reminder of the work required. Both notices will be accompanied with a return postcard for response. On the postcard, the owner property owner can indicate his/her intended action. Three actions are possible; (1) complete the repair using a City Licensed sidewalk contractor, (2) complete the repair themselves, or (3) have the city complete the repair work. If the city is indicated as the preferred choice to complete the repairs, the unit prices set for that year are noted in the letter. If in response to the first notice, the owner indicates that the city should conduct the work, no second notice will be sent and the work at that address will be added to the work list for the Street Maintenance Division. Upon indication that the owner wants the city to do the repair or that the 60-day period elapses, the work at that address will be added to the Street Maintenance Division's work list and the work will be conducted in the most efficient manner possible. Periodically through the year an assessment hearing will be requested and the individual sidewalk repair assessments amounts will be mailed to the property owners. The heating will be held and the council will be asked to enact the assessments. This assessment hearing will be after the work is complete and will follow the process used in the past for sidewalk assessments. Staff recommends that RCO 72 be amended as attached, establishing a 60 days period for property owners to complete sidewalk repairs after receipt of notice from the City instead of the 30 days now required. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the proposed revisions to RCO Chapters 72. Suspend the rules and adopt the revision to RCO Chapter 72 at this City Council meeting. �%jUNCIL ACTION: Motion bv: Second by: _ to: 10 CHAPTER 72, MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF SIDEWALKS 72. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF SIDEWALKS 72.01. Definitions. The term "current service" as used in this chapter means one or more of the following: snow, ice, or rubbish removal from sidewalks; repair of sidewalks; or cutting and removal of weeds and grass. 72.02. Responsibility. All snow, ice, dirt, and rubbish remaining on a public sidewalk more than 24 hours after its deposit thereon is a public nuisance. The owner and the occupant of any property adjacent to public sidewalk shall use due diligence to keep such walk safe for pedestrians. No such owner or occupant shall allow snow, ice, dirt or rubbish to remain on the walk longer than 24 hours after its deposit thereon. 72.03. Removal by City Engineer. The city engineer may remove from all public sidewalks all snow, ice, dirt, and rubbish beginning 24 hours after any such matter has been deposited thereon or after the snow has ceased to fall. The city engineer shall keep a record showing the cost of such removal adjacent to each separate lot and parcel and shall deliver such information to the city clerk. 72.04. Owner to Repair Sidewalks. The owners of any property within the city abutting a public sidewalk shall keep the sidewalk in repair and safe for pedestrians. Repairs shall be made in accordance with the permit requirements of Chapter 70 and the standard specifications approved by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk. 72.05. Inspections by City Engineer. The city engineer shall make such inspections as are necessary to determine that public sidewalks within the city are kept in repair and safe for pedestrians. If the city engineer finds that any sidewalk abutting on private property is unsafe and in need of repairs, the city engineer shall physically mark the portion or portions of sidewalk that need repair and cause a sidewalk repair notice to be served, by certified mail or by personal service, upon the record owner of the property and the occupant, if the owner does not reside within the city or cannot be found therein. The notice shall advise the owner that it is owner's responsibility to repair the marked sidewalk panels and shall order the owner to obtain a sidewalk repair permit within 30 days and to complete the repairs within 60 days. The notice shall also state hnvPthRmW&mF;al repaired and made safe within 30 days and stating that if the owner fails to make the needed repair within the time given de re, the city engineer will do so on behalf of the city at owner's expense. Finally, the notice shall state that the cost of any sidewalk repair work performed by the city shall be billed to owner and shall be that the expeRse thereof must be paid by the GWReF, and that if unpaid It will hA made a special assessment against the property benefited thereby eenceMed if not paid by owner. December 31, 1999 - Update 147 14t ROCHESTER CODE OF ORDINANCES 72.06. Repair by City Engineer. If the sidewalk is not repaired within 30 60 days after receipt of the notice, the city engineer shall repair the sidewalk and make it safe for pedestrians or order the work done by contract in accordance with law. The total cost of the repair attributable to each lot or parcel of property shall be reported to the city clerk. 72.07. Public Nuisance. All weeds and grass greater than ten inches in overall height extending over an area of not less than 144 contiguous square feet and located within 500 feet of any residence, constitute a fire hazard and potential harborage for rats and are declared to be a public nuisance. - No owner shall permit weeds and grass to be a public nuisance, but shall abate the nuisance by cutting the weeds and grass and removing the clippings. 72.08. Inspections by Weed Inspector. The weed inspector shall make such inspections as are necessary to determine whether weeds and grass constitute a public nuisance. Upon finding such public nuisance, the weed inspector shall cause a notice to be served by certified mail or by personal service upon the record owner of the property ordering such owner to abate the nuisance by cutting the weeds and grass and removing the clippings within 5 days of receipt of the notice and stating that if the owner fails to do so, the city will cause the weeds and grass to be cut and the clippings removed and the expense thereof, if unpaid by the owner, assessed against the property concerned as a special assessment. 72.09. Abatement by City. If such nuisance is not abated within 5 days after the owner receives the notice, the weed inspector shall cut and remove the weeds and grass, or order the work done by contract in accordance with the law. The total cost of the abatement attributable to each parcel of property shall be reported to the city clerk. 72.10. Owner Liability for Cost. The owner of property on which or adjacent to which a current service has been performed shall be personally liable for the lesser of the actual cost of such service or such other service charge that the council may approve from time to time by resolution. As soon as the service has been completed and the cost determined by the city clerk with the assistance of appropriate city staff, a bill shall be prepared and mailed to the owner and thereupon the amount shall be immediately due and payable at the office of the city clerk. December 31, 1999 - Update 148 jqa- CHAPTER 72. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF SIDEWALKS 72.11. Assessment of Cost. On or before October 15 of each year, the city clerk shall list the total unpaid charges for each type of current service against each separate lot or parcel to which they are attributable under this chapter. The council may then levy spread the charges against property benefited as a special assessment under Minnesota Statutes, section 429.101 and other pertinent statutes for certification to the county auditor and collection the following year along with current taxes. (1133, 3(7/62; 1770, 7/1/74; 3293, 11/16/99) December 31, 1999 - Update 149 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING ! �3 DATE: 511 /00 erENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D 33 JJ ITEM DESCRIPTION: Engineering Services for the the following Bike Path Projects: Viola Road NE (J-4940) and West Circle Drive SW (J-4941) PREPARED BY: K. Harm j74 The Department of Public Works solicited proposals from Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates for the preparation of project memorandums and preliminary designs for the following Bike Path Projects: Viola Road NE from 14' Avenue NE to Parkwood Hills Drive (J4940) West Circle Drive SW from 2"d Street SW to Bamber Valley Road (J-4941) The cost for the preparation of a project memorandum and preliminary design for the Viola Road NE Bike Path Project is $12,230. The cost for the preparation of a project memorandum and preliminary design for the West Circle Drive Bike Path Project is $20,502. The final design costs for these two Bike Path Projects will be determined after the project memorandums and preliminary designs are completed. A separate Engineering Services Agreement will be drafted for the final design at that time. The Bike Path on Viola Road NE from 14' Avenue NE to Parkwood Hills Drive (J-4940) will be funded with City funds (J-4940) and through the TEA-21 Program Enhancement Grant. The Bike Path on West Circle Drive from 2nd Street SW to Bamber Valley Road (J-4941) will be funded with City funds (J4941) and through the TEA-21 Program Enhancement Grant. Both of these Bike Path projects are listed in the Minnesota Department of Transportation's State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) for construction in Fiscal Year 2001. The staff proposes to bid these two projects in August 2000 and give the bidders the option of constructing the projects in Fall 2000 or in 2001. This should result in the most favorable bidding option for all interested contractors and result in the lowest bids for the City. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Engineering Services Agreements with Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates for the preparation of project memorandums and preliminary designs for the Bike Path Projects on Viola Road NE (J-4940) and West Circle Drive SW (J-4941). COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: (qq Viola Road NE from 14`h Avenue NE to Parkwood Hills Drive (J-4940) Bike Path Project West Circle Drive SW from 2"a Street SW to Bamber Valley Road (J-4941) Bike Path Project REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING ' Y,;- DATE: 5/1 /00 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENTAGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: Reject Bids: "2ntl Street SW West Circle Drive" (J-4950) ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Public Works D -. PREPARED BY: K. Harms? Bids were received and opened after 11:00 a.m., March 22, 2000 for the following local improvement project: Project No. 6202-3-98 (J4950) "2ntl Street SW Bike Trail from 231 Avenue SW to West Circle Drive" The following bids were received: 1. Elcor Construction......................$238,792.50 (Low) 2. Rochester Sand & Gravel............ $243,411.75 3. Road Constructors.....................$278,551.00 4. Environmental Associates ............ $449,304.00 Engineers Estimate.....................$215,900.00 This project was included in the 1999 - 2004 Capital Improvement Program, pg 36, item #10. Budget for the project was approved at $95,000 in the CIP. This project was to be funded with a Department of Natural Resources "Cooperative Trail Grant" in the amount of $43,850, and city reserve funds of $51,400, The Public Works Department has reviewed these bids and recommends that the bids for this project be rejected. The low bid submitted by Elcor Construction was $22,892.50 higher than the Engineers Estimate. The high bids can be attributed to the high bituminous mixture prices and the extensive amount of retaining wall needed along the south side of the path. The Public Works Department has submitted a letter to the Department of Naturals Resources requesting a one year extension to the "Cooperative Trail Grant" . The current DNR deadline for the trail completion is May 1, 2001. If the DNR approves the extension, the City would have until May 1, 2002 to complete the trail project. This project could be rebid next year at the same time that the West Circle Drive Path (2"tl Street SW to Bamber Valley Road) is bid. Bidding these two bike trail projects at the same time may reduce the costs of both projects. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution rejecting all the bids for the 2ntl Street SW Trail Project (J-4950). t.VUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: 40 2nd Street SW from 23rd Avenue to West Circle Drive (J-4950) Bike Trail Project EW LN NW ,— i�— REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT! ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC WORKS D — 3 5 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Request for Engineering Services for: PREPARED BY: itv Pavement Resurfacing and Rehabilitation on R. Kelm' Trunk Highway 63 (North Broadway) from 4th Street to Northern D� Heights Drive (J9689) Project Number 6300-N-00 (J9689) State Project 5510-74 Proiect Name "Pavement Resurfacing and Rehabilitation on Trunk Highway 63 (North Broadway) from 4th Street to Northern Heights Drive". Project Description The length of the state project on North Broadway (TH 63) from 4h Street to Northern Heights Drive is 1.49 miles. Resurfacing with 3" grind and overlay will include adjusting casting on the entire length. New curb and gutter, driveway aprons and sidewalk replacement is proposed for the entire length. The section from 41h to 6th street will be widened to provide a continuous left turn lane. The project is proposed for construction in 2001. Project Cost Distribution The estimated cost of the project is $1,000,000 in the 2001 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) with 80% Federally funded and 20% Locally funded. The City and MnDOT will enter into a Cost Share Agreement for the non -Federal share of the final project costs. Project Assignment The City has agreed to provide the design engineering services for the state project. City staff will perform this design work. Field survey work is currently needed and neither MnDOT nor the City have survey crews available to complete the field work within the next month. Staff recommends that authorization be approved to enter into a Professional Services Agreement for surveying services with Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates (BRAA) for preparation of preliminary plans. Other qualified consultants were contacted but only BRAA had survey crews available at this time. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates for surveying services for preparation of preliminary plans in an amount not to exceed $25,200. UNCILACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE 1q 5/1/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D - 36 ITEM DESCRIPTION: AWARD OF BIDS FOR REROOFING THE TRAFFIC PREPARED BY: OPERATIONS BUILDING HIGH ROOF J-2005 D. Rosman Bids were received for City Project 9501 B (J-2005) "Reroofing The Traffic Operations Building High Roof" at 11:00 am Tuesday, April 25, 2000. The bids received were: Base Bid Alt. # 1 Alt. #2 Total 1. Interstate Roofing & WTP, Inc. $ 88,863 $ 6,390 $ 4,935 $ 100,888 2. Kiker Brothers Inc. $ 73,596 $ 10,200 $ 5,410 $ 89,206 3. Nieman Roofing $ 72,471 $ 8,000 $ 5,000 $ 85,471 4. Schwickert's of Rochester, Inc. $ 91,808 $ 9,355 $ 5,052.50 $ 106,215.50 5. WHV Inc. $ 99,976 $ 8,995 $ 5,703 $ 114,674 The project estimate was $107,200, Alternate #1 includes the replacement of the 10 existing skylights. Alternate #2 provides for the installation of 5 skylights in new locations. The bid prices for the altemates do not effect the selection of the low bidder. The work is to be completed within a 30-day period from start to finish, with a contract completion date of October 1, 2000. The low bid of Nieman Roofing is 20% below the Engineers Estimate. Staff has reviewed the bids with Nieman Roofing. They are confident in their bid and are willing to proceed. Nieman is just finishing a project at the Water Reclamation Plant. They are ready to schedule a crew to complete this project during the month of May. This project is funded in the 1999 and 2000 city budgets with an appropriation of $90,000 from the general fund, tax levy, and retained earnings from the Parking Enterprise Fund. (The Parking Meter Shop is located in the Traffic Operations Building.) Staff recommends proceeding with the bid of Nieman Roofing. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Accept the bid of Nieman Roofing of P.O. Box 64 New Prague, Minnesota 56071 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the contract for project J-2005. �%jUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING (5- 1 DATE: 5-1-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works (D . 3q ITEM DESCRIPTION: Permit Parking Petition from the Kutzky Neighborhood. PREPARED BY: h—U. Rossman The City has received four petitions from the residents and property owners in this neighborhood requesting the City to establish Permit Parking on their streets, to control all day parking in their neighborhood. The following streets and avenues are included: 1. West Center Street on both sides of the street from 9th Avenue to 11'" Avenue 2. 2' Street NW on both sides of the street from 6`' Avenue to 7`" Avenue. 3. 3`d Street NW on both sides of the street from 6' Avenue to 8th Avenue 4. 4' Street NW on both sides of the street from 6' Avenue to 7' Avenue. 5. 7'" Avenue NW on both sides of the street from 2nd Street to 4th Street The area is shown on the attached map. These petitions are from the Kutzky neighborhood where Permit Parking has already been established in three locations. The petitions have been reviewed as to meeting the requirements of R.C.O. #138 and staff finds that all conditions are met. The streets requested are impacted heavily by all day parking Monday thru Friday from a source outside the neighborhood. There are various parking restrictions inplace. The notes explain what is recommended for each of these. The blocks involved are all zoned for residential use. The petition has signed by the following percentage of abutting property owners or residents: Block streettrow width # of signers # of buildings % signing Notes W. Center St/ 900 block 30/75 7 8 87 % (1) W. Center St/ 1000 block 30/75 5 11 45 % (1) Subtotal 12 19 63 % 2°d Street / 600 block 35/75 5 5 100 % (1) 3' Street / 600 block 27/66 4 9 44 % (2) 3`d Street / 700 block 27/66 11 13 84 % (2) 4'hStreet / 600 block 36/66 10 13 76 % 7th Avenue / 200 block 27/66 4 10 40 % (2) 7th Avenue / 300 block 36/66 8 10 80 % Grandtotal 54 79 68 % All conditions are met, therefore staff would recommend in favor of the petition. A public hearing is recommended for all blocks. The following notes are on the existing restrictions. (1) Replace existing alternating restriction with a one -day restriction on each side for street maintenance. (2) No Parking Restriction inplace on one side due to the street width. This is to remain. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the prepared resolution calling for a public hearing on June 5, 2000 to consider establishing Residential Permit Parking Zone #8 ( Kutzky Neighborhood) on the following streets, between the hours of 7:00am to 5:00am, Monday thru Friday; 1. West Center St. on both sides of the street from 9' Avenue to 11" Avenue 2 2°d Street NW on both sides of the street from 6'" Avenue to Th Avenue. 3. 3'd Street NW on the north side of the street from 6`" Avenue to 8" Avenue 4. 4' Street NW on both sides of the street from 6" Avenue to 7" Avenue. 5. 7' Avenue NW on the east side of the street from 2°d Street to 3'd Street. 6. 7' Avenue NW on both sides of the street from 3'd Street to 4'" Street COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: r EA E EN NOV.19421 4 sIr N. W. to AT 65 - --- - - ;VACATED; ---------- t-I 4 Amw > w - ------ — ui41 > cn" 2 ST. N. W.- CITY OF ROCHESTER, MN. PERMIT PARKING ZONE UPM Lj CITY OF ROCHESTER, PERMIT PARKING ZONE # — — ----- REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING (6 3 DATE: 5-1-00 A ^GNDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. i CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D-38 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Purchase of Parking Control Equipment PREPARED BY: D. Rossma This is a recommendation to advertise for bids for City Project 8215-35 2000 J-2574 "Upgrade Parking Ramp Revenue Control System" in the City's 5 parking ramps. This project is shown on page 345 of the year 2000 city budget. Republic Parking System has completed their review and analysis of the City of Rochester's parking ramp revenue control equipment. They are recommending a multi -year package of upgrading the equipment. The initial emphasis needs to be on the Fee Computers and Fee Display units. These are the oldest of the parking revenue control equipment and are failing fast. The fee computers are several years beyond their expected life span. Replacement parts are no longer available. Only 4 of the eight units are operating. These four units will be retained as spares for as long as they last. The project for year 2000 includes the following items: 1. Replace 8 Fee Computers to a Magnetic Ticket Style. 2. Replace 8 Fee display units. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adopt the prepared resolution authorizing bids to be advertised for City Project 8215-35 2000 J-2574 Upgrade Parking Revenue Control System. Bids are to be received at 11:00 am on Wednesday May 24, 2000 COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: REQUEST FOR COUNCaL ACTION MEETING DATE: 05-01-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. JBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING e, -1 0 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase D Amendment to the Final Plan for the PUD Apache Mall PREPARED BY: Shopping Center, to allow an expansion of 31,000 square feet on the west side of the center and to Theresa Fogarty reduce the parking requirements from 5 stalls per 1,000 square feet of leasable area to 4.5 stalls per planner 1,000 square feet of leasable area. The plan also shows signage for the proposed expansion and the removal of the movie theatre. The property is located north of W Street SW, west of Apache Drive SW and east of IIighway 52. April 24, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: On April 12, 2000, the City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this request to amend the final plan for Apache Mali Shopping Center, to allow an expansion of 31,000 square feet on the west side of the center, reduce the parting requirements to 4.5 stalls per 1,000 square feet of leasable area and signage for the proposed expansion and removal of the movie theatre. Staff commented that condition number 1 can be dropped, but should remain as a note to the applicant that future expansion would have to go through the same process. Ms. Lisa Callahan of General Growth Properties, the owners of Apache Mall, addressed the Commission. She referred to the parking study from ULI and ICSC, which recommends 4.5 parking stalls per 1000 square feet for shopping centers over 600,000 square feet. She noted that her company has built two shopping centers in the past two years and both were approved by cities and stores (tenants) at the 4.5 per 1000 square foot ratio. Ms. Callahan explained that the parking lot on the east side of Apache Drive will mainly be used as employee parking during the Christmas season and they may provide a shuttle to and from the lot. Ms. McGowan asked if they are addressing how traffic will flow out of the mail onto 161" Street. She noted that during the holiday season. Ms. Callahan explained that they are studying the issue, but it is not par of this final plan. Mr. Quinn moved to approve Amendment to the Final Plan for Apache Mall, with staff -suggested conditions, noting condition number one is to be dropped at the suggestion of staff. He stated his motion includes approval of reducing the parking requirements to 4.5 parking stalls per 1000 square feet of gross leasable area. Mr. Burke seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-2, with Ms. McGowan and Mr. Werven voting nay. Conditions: 1. The approval of the proposed expansion is contingent upon the applicant developing the parking facility located on Apache Court SW. The proposed parking facility will need to go through the site development process. 2. The proposed expansion is contingent upon the theatre be removed and the area being reconfigured for parking. 3. The proposed expansion is contingent upon the applicant vacating the existing utility easement In the proposed expansion area and dedicating a new 20 foot utility easement for the relocated public water main. The owner must enter into a City Owner Contract with the City for the Installation of the public water main and the water service to the movie theatre be abandoned properly at the water main. Planning Department Review and Recommendation: See attached staff report, dated April 6, 2000. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: sewnd z0blillHilill NW-ld MUS1� QI!, I111 n 'Id QRd -mvi V allowcfv 1 �i'l it pl I. vao rooAdy gvll {% S II 'S 'M'S 3A1l10 M MEMN �l�-G\U\URRIRO ne.^�F 11 i 1 B\H\\\\\HNOwe p,`/`,,6\\\Y\,/,,,/,N\J`/1/\h`1L1'',,MM ; III 11 PW IA AN 11' " 6\\\\\\�\\N�\`ZkZ`8 r � B%/HNHN011"A "1 ° naa xml n..r.r..nmrr ruon L �\\�RNMR\\l{ 11 ,II 11s: • aka\v ph V.O { . P V O I II :� L ;_ ; u.P i e 1 6Yi//H///6L - ;8 1- - 1 II R a7�a ntRRRUUW ._ c WAWAy� \U •uvaw ri M=F{1[i l TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 5071285-8232 PLANNING GISIADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELUSEP71C 507/285-8345 DATE: April 6, 2000 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Type III, Phase 11 Amendment to the Final Plan for the Planned Unit which covers the Apache Mall Shopping Center, to allow an expansion of 31,000 square feet on the west side of the center and to reduce the parking requirements from 5 stalls per 1,000 square feet of building area to 4.5 stalls per 1,000. The plan also shows signage for the proposed expansion and the removal of the movie theater. The property is located north of 16`h Street SW, west of Apache Drive SW and east of Highway 52. Planning Department Review: Petitioners: General Growth Properties, Inc. 110 North Wacker Chicago, IL 60606 SurveyorlEngineer: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 SE 3r° Avenue Rochester, MN 55904 Referral Agency Comments: RPU - Water Division, Planning Department — Transportation, Rochester Public Works Department, MnOOT, RPU — Operations Division, Rochester Building Safety Department. Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (4 letters) 2. Approved Plans 3. Reduced Copy of Proposed Amendment PUD Summary: The Apache Mall Shopping Center PUD was approved in July of 1971. The Apache Mall Shopping Center was amended in 1985 allowing the addition at the northwest corner of the J.C. Penney building and 1990 for the Sears Addition providing a total of 733,135 square feet of gross floor area, �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER 04/06/00 Apache Mall PUD Amendment Page 2 of 9 In 1990 the total Gross Lease Area (GLA) was 742,151 which included the Department Stores (J.C. Penney's, Wards, Daytons and Sears), the Mall Shops and Theatres. There are also plans for future expansion consisting of a total of 151,135 square feet. Amendment Summa Proposed Use: The applicant is proposing to expand the tenant space to incorporate two new retail shops. This Mall expansion project will increase the size of the current facility by 31,000 square feet and the need for additional parking stalls. The applicant also shows the theater being removed. The proposed amendment will include a total Gross Lease Area (GLA) of 754,135 square feet, as follows: Floor Area (1990 GLA): 733,135 square feet less theaters-13,000 square feet add for new addition 31,000 square feet add for kiosks 3,000 square feet TOTAL (2000 GLA) 754,135 square feet The applicant is proposing to provide a total of 3,763 parking stalls. Of the 3,763 parking stalls, 3,547 are on site and the remainder of 216 are off- stie. A total of 3,770 parking stalls are required, using the ratio 5 stalls/1000 square feet. The applicant is requesting that the parking ratio be calculated at 4.5 stalls/1000 square feet. Analysis: The Apache Mall was originally approved under the Community Shopping Center Plans provisions of Paragraph 64.504 of the Zoning Code. When the current Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual was adopted in 1992, it eliminated these provisions. The manual, however, does provide for amendments to existing plans. Section 60.326 states that the term Planned Unit Development shall also include Community Shopping Center Plans. According to Section 60.326, amendments to a PUD shall be processed through the Type III, Phase II, hearing process, and according to the regulations applicable to the criteria for restricted developments. The underlying zoning for Apache Mall is the B-4 district. Under the manual, the closest type of development to the existing PUD is a business center. A comparison of the existing development, the proposed amendment and a business center is shown in the table below: 04/06/00 Apache Mall PUD Amendment Page 3 of 9 Proposed Future Amendment Business Expansion Existing Total GLA Center Total GLA Total Floor Area 733,135 sf 754,135 sf 754,135 869,270 GLA Required Parking 3,666 3,770 3,770 4,346 5 stalls/1000 GLA Parking Provided 3,666 stalls 3,547 on -site NA NA 216 off -site 3,763 Required parking 3,394 stalls 3,912 stalls 4.5 stallsl1000 GLA The applicant is removing approximately 13,000 square feet of building area from the site and is increasing the GLA by 21,000 square feet. The increase of GLA will requires 3,770 parking stalls using the 5 stalls / 1000 square feet or 3,394 parking stalls using the 4.5 stalls / 1000 square feet and the proposed amendment will provide 3,763 parking stalls. The total number of parking stalls required and being provided does not include any future expansions of the GLA and any future expansion would require an amendment to the PUD. The applicant proposes to reduce the parking requirements from 5 stalls per 1000 square feet of gross lease area to 4.5 stalls per 1000 square feet. The applicant proposes to develop land they own to the east, adjacent to the river, as a parking facility. The proposed parking facility lies within 600 feet of the Malls' east entrance enabling this parking facility to be considered off -site parking. Development of this off -site parking facility will require approval through the site development plan process. There may be a couple of days during the year when there may not be enough parking spaces to accommodate the parking needs of the mall. The CPZC and Council should include in their motion if they agree that the parking requirements should be calculated at 4.5 stalls per 1000 square feet of gross lease area. The applicant proposes to remove the existing theater structure located in the southwest corner of the site and reconfiguring the parking in that area. A water main and its respective utility easement will require relocation. The location of the existing easement would lie within the proposed building footprint. The applicant has filed a petition to vacate approximately a 500' utility easement located along the western boundary of Apache Mall, the area beginning at the Food Court continuing to the south to approximately the west side entrance of the Daytons building. A new easement will be required to be dedicated for this relocation. The Rochester Public Utilities - Water Division provided the following comments: 1) to minimize future costs and system shutdowns it may be desirable at this time to relocate additional water main at the north end of the project to a point beyond the future expansion area designated at this time; 2) a 20' minimum public utility easement will need to be dedicated for the relocated public water main; 3) the owner is required to enter into a City Owner Contract with the City for the installation of the public water main. Final water main construction plans will need to be prepared: and 4) the water service to the movie theater building will need to be abandoned properly at the water main. The underlying B-4 zoning district criteria allows one wall business sign per exterior facade not to exceed 20 percent of the area of the facade. The wall business signs proposed on the expansion meet the B-4 zoning district criteria. fSI ((Jo 04/06/00 / Apache Mall PUD Amendment Page 4 of 9 The applicant has also submitted a plan to change the existing freestanding business sign located on the north side of the property. The proposed modifications would be allowed as a Type I staff approval without a public hearing. The overall square footage and height of the sign is not changing. The proposed amendment is to add an additional tenant name and a message board to the sign. A message board is a permitted sign type for a business center, Review Criteria and Suggested Findings: Amendments to an existing PUD are processed according to the regulations applicable to a conditional use permit and restricted developments. Paragraph 61.146 lists the standards for conditional use permits as follows: 61.146 Standard for Conditional Uses: The zoning administrator, Commission, or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a conditional use unless one or more of the following findings with respect to the proposed development is made: 1) provisions for vehicular loading, unloading, parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and onto adjacent public streets and ways will create hazards to safety, or will impose a significant burden upon public facilities. The provisions for vehicle loading, unloading, vehicular and pedestrian circulation should not create hazards. The applicant is requesting that the parking requirements be based on 4.5 stalls11000 square feet of GLA instead of the current 5 stalls/1000 square feet GLA. 2) The intensity, location, operation, or height of proposed buildings and structures will be detrimental to other private development in the neighborhood or will impose undue burdens on the sewers, sanitary and storm drains, water or similar public facilities. The construction of the a one story retail building will be not detrimental to other private development in the neighborhood. 3) The provision for on -site bufferyards and landscaping does not provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development. The proposed amendment should provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features. The proposed amendment does include a landscaping plan and it appears to meet the 10% requirement of the B-4 District. 4) The site plan fails to provide for the soil erosion and drainage problems that may be created by the development. The proposed amendment should not create any drainage problems. The Public Works Department will need to be contacted regarding if the proposed amendment requires a storm water management plan. 5) The provisions for exterior lighting create undue hazards to motorists traveling on adjacent public streets or are inadequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site or such provisions damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties. 04/06/00 Apache Mail PUD Amendment Page 5 of 9 Not applicable. 6) The proposed development will create undue fire safety hazards by not providing adequate access to the site, or to the buildings on the site, for emergency vehicles. The building is accessible from two roadways and the parking lot. 7) In cases where a Phase I plan has been approved, there is a substantial change in the Phase II site plan from the approved Phase I site plan, such that the revised plans will not meet the standards provided by this paragraph. Not applicable 8) The proposed conditional use does not comply with all the standards applying to permitted uses within the underlying zoning district, or with standards specifically applicable to the type of conditional use under consideration, or with specific ordinance standards dealing with matters such as signs which are part of the proposed development, and a variance to allow such deviation has not been secured by the applicant. The proposed amendment to the Apache Mall PUD does comply with all the standards of the B-4 District with the exception of the parking requirements 5 stalls/1000 square feet. Since this is a PUD, different standards can be approved for the development. The applicant is requesting to reduce the required number of parking stalls to 4.5 stalls/1000 square feet of GLA. 61.147 Conditions on Approval: In considering an application for a development permit to allow a Conditional Use, the designated hearing body shall consider and may impose modifications or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance with the criteria of paragraph 61.146. 62.708 Criteria for Type III Developments: In determining whether to approve, deny, or approve with conditions an application, the Commission and Council shall be guided by the following criteria: 1) Preliminary Development Plan Criteria: a) Capacity of Public Facilities: The existing or future planned utilities in the area are adequate to serve the proposed development. The existing utilities are adequate to sere the addition. The Rochester Public Utility Department is working with applicant on relocating an additional water main at the north end of the proposed project area. The applicant has petitioned to vacate a utility easement which runs through the proposed addition. The applicant will need to relocate the water main and dedicate new utility easements prior to the vacation of any existing easements. In addition, a Final Water Main Construction Plan must be prepared and submitted for approval and the water service to the movie theater building will need to be abandoned properly at the water main. b) Geologic Hazards: The existence of areas of natural or geologic hazard, such as unstable slopes, sinkholes, floodplain, etc., have been identified and the development of these areas has been taken into account or will be addressed in the Phase It plans. 04/06/00 Apache Mall PUD Amendment Page 6 of 9 Not applicable. c) Natural Features: For developments involving new construction, the arrangement of buildings, paved areas and open space has, to the extent practical, utilized the existing topography and existing desirable vegetation of the site. Not applicable d) Residential Traffic Impact: When located in a residential area, the proposed development: 1) Will not cause traffic volumes to exceed planned capacities on local residential streets; 2) Will not generate frequent truck traffic on local residential streets; 3) Will not create additional traffic during evening and nighttime hours on local residential streets; The scale of the proposed expansion is not of a magnitude to require the preparation of a traffic impact study. e) Traffic Generation Impact: Anticipated traffic generated by the development will not cause the capacity of adjacent streets to be exceeded, and conceptual improvements to reduce the impact of access points on the traffic flow of adjacent streets have been identified where needed. The scale of the proposed expansion is not of a magnitude to require the preparation of a traffic impact study. f) Height Impacts: For developments involving new construction, the heights and placement of proposed structures are compatible with the surrounding development. Factors to consider include: 1) Will the structure block sunlight from reaching adjacent properties during a majority of the day for over four (4) months out of the year; 2) Will siting of the structure substantially block vistas from the primary exposures of adjacent residential dwellings created due to differences in elevation. The proposed construction of a one story retail building is compatible with the surrounding development. g) Setbacks: For developments involving new construction, proposed setbacks are related to building height and bulk in a manner consistent with that required for permitted uses in the underlying zoning district. The proposed building meets the required setbacks and is consistent with permitted uses in the B4 District. h) Internal Site design: For developments involving new construction, the preliminary site layout indicates adequate building separation and desirable orientation of the buildings to open spaces, street frontages or other focal points. 04/06/00 f �� Apache Mali PUD Amendment �C Page 7 of 9 The proposed project appears to meet adequate building separation to the orientation of the existing buildings, open spaces, and street frontages. Screening and Buffering: The conceptual screening and bufferyards proposed are adequate to protect the privacy of residents in the development or surrounding residential areas from the impact of interior traffic circulation and parking areas, utility areas such as refuse storage, noise or glare exceeding permissible standards, potential safety hazards, unwanted pedestrian/bicycle access, or to subdue differences in architecture and bulk between adjacent land uses. The proposed amendment does provide a landscaping plan that meets the requirement of the B-4 District. j) Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development includes adequate amounts of off-street parking and loading areas and, in the case of new construction, there is adequate landscaped area to meet ordinance requirements. The current parking requirements for the approved PUD, requires 5 stalls11000 square feet of Gross Lease Area. The applicant has requested that the parking ratio for the development be calculated at 4.5 stalls1100 GLA. The applicant does own a parcel to the east of Apache Mail and is showing it being used for 216 stalls of off-street parking. This parcel is located within 600 feet of Apache Mall. The proposed parking lot will need to be approved through the Site Development Plan process. k) General Compatibility: The relationship of the actual appearance, general density and overall site design of the proposed development should be compared to the established pattern of zoning, the character of the surrounding neighborhood and the existing land forms of the area to determine the general compatibility of the development with its surroundings. The proposed retail use expansion is compatible with the existing uses on the property and the surrounding properties. 2) Final Development Plan Criteria: a) Public Facility Design: The design of private and public utility facilities meet the requirements and specifications which the applicable utility has adopted. The applicant has petitioned for vacation of a utility easement that runs through the proposed expansion area. New utility easements will need to be dedicated prior to the vacating of the existing utility easement. Prior to development, construction plans for utilities will need to be approved and a City Owner Contract will need to be executed. b) Geologic Hazard: Engineering means to deal with areas of geologic hazard have been incorporated into the development plan or such areas have been set aside from development. Not applicable. c) Access Effect: Ingress and egress points have been designed and located so as to: 04/O6/00 Apache Mall PUD Amendment Page 8 of 9 1. Provide adequate separation from existing street intersections and adjacent private driveways so that traffic circulation problems in public right-of-ways are minimized; 2. Not adversely impact adjacent residential properties with factors such as noise from accelerating or idling vehicles or the glare of headlights from vehicles entering or leaving the site. In addition, where the preliminary development plan identified potential problems in the operation of access points, plans for private improvements or evidence of planned public improvements which will alleviate the problems have been provided. The scale of the proposed expansion is not of a magnitude to require the preparation of a traffic impact study. d) Pedestrian Circulation: The plan includes elements to assure that pedestrians can move safely both within the site and across the site between properties and activities within the neighborhood area, and where appropriate, accommodations for transit access are provided. Not applicable. e) Foundation and Site Plantings: A landscape plan for the site has been prepared which indicates the finished site will be consistent with the landscape character of the surrounding area. Proposed project does meet the landscaping requirements of the underlying B-4 District. f) Site Status: Adequate measures have been taken to insure the future maintenance and ownership pattern of the project, including common areas, the completion of any platting activities, and the provision of adequate assurance to guarantee the installation of required public improvements, screening and landscaping. Not applicable. g) Screening and Bufferyards: The final screening and bufferyard design contains earth forms, structures and plant materials which are adequate to satisfy the need identified in Phase I for the project. Not applicable. h) Final Building Design: The final building design is consistent with the principles identified in preliminary development plan relative to Height, Setbacks, and Internal Site Design. Not applicable. i) Internal Circulation Areas: Plans for off-street parking and loading areas and circulation aisles to serve these areas meet ordinance requirements in terms of design. The applicant had indicated the development of an off site parking facility. Development of this parking lot will need to be approved through the Site Development Plan process. 04/06/00 Apache Mall PUD Amendment Page 9 of 9 j) Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development is consistent with the requirements of the underlying zoning district for similar uses in regards to signage and other appearance controls, and with general standards such as traffic visibility and emergency access. The proposed development is consistent with the underlying zoning district B-4 with the exception of the number parking stalls being provided. Staff Review and Recommendation: The Planning staff has reviewed this request based on the above criteria. The staff finds that this proposal is generally consistent with the above criteria. The CPZC and Council should include in their motion if they are in agreement with the parking requirements being calculated at 4.5 stallst1000 GLA. The staff recommends approval of this request with the following conditions: 1. Any future expansions will require the PUD to be amended. It's possible that the applicant will have to provide an alternative to providing additional parking stalls, such as a parking ramp or deck parking, if any of the future expansion projects are completed. 2. The approval of the proposed expansion is contingent upon the applicant developing the parking facility located on Apache Court SW. The proposed parking facility will need to go through the site development plan process. 3. The proposed expansion is contingent upon the theater be removed and the area being reconfigured for parking. 4. The proposed expansion is contingent upon the applicant vacating the existing utility easement in proposed expansion area and dedicating a new 20-foot utility easement for the relocated public water main. The owner must enter into a City Owner Contract with the City for the installation of the public water main and the water service to the movie theater be abandoned property at the water main. 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. NOTE: The Rochester Public Works Department has indicated that the traffic signs should be updated to conform to the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. r+z, :40 !I a 1 �! NVId 311S € V1os3Nww'a31saH3oa F-- NVId and a3aN3WV ° ggi IIVW 3HJVdV � 7& i s !i 4 A e 3 , iJ. i ps qqp33q ; i < °u e�j� • ���• pl•[i•i� (� MIT lid 1 'M'S 3AJMa 3HOYdV �ll.1llf r� ;r 5 • g a �� 5 i i:5iiia � w uw•1'••••M .. •,:iii iii i i i Cdi:iL: Z i' NNE Nsm • NVId 3JVNJIS (INV ONldVDSCT `q el v10S3NNlw'H S3HJoa I- „ NVId and C13aN3WV _ llVW 3HJVdV � d Z W E 1 is W i 9 e � T T � �yl i f � � 4is.�r a•, I ^la r ' r: I HER12V CIATIFr TYAT TMH PLAN, SPECIVICATIOM 00 d- I AM DULYUNDER A A ppY�I�f AND 711kfAy me AR E RED MMY RE SC t}ie ENOClpBR UMOGA THS LAM& OfOF t+i PPOFM & Lo TA. Q � a-- 4 OA1@,�j�.C•� Z _ REMSTMATION 140. 2V94 ._ l� gx*�' ".? s�. P Q,-L A . Al 9TOP2 3k3f4 OZc-A 5'-41It! cw4 MR5 FecTTINC : Re .944- I- CAWWO L.iNP- 0 APACHE MALL PYLON SIGN L ' Wm. Graves, Inc., Architects �It •D A L L A S, T E x A S. .+:e W. } APAtHE MALL PYLON SIGN ""' "`j aE:lt fWi as-s -83� £0Q 0£b'ON 85056Bz105T E NSI5 3ssoe n 50:b'T 000Zi£7/Z0 3'-411— yroposa SnA4g-a. Newrm C-WeA04 To ApuL Wt41LL gDdC E owl co,,- is jw bmi if. - OFA b, 07 Aaurgm!-Jfie Irfelmr-71f1 -C 19'- 9" Sd.ld4 S. P. hf.C. TENANT � r 69 S.P. L =,.,.DAYTONS D9S.P. JC PENNEY 69 S.F. WARDS 59 S.F. SEARS of lo -----'---------------'-----'� L - - - - - INP k' ° w : ra" ena r: uPmr vmc�nR �a" 66'- 0" 13'- ID" I 1ACROM SM CC ff(ll: irsi`a�misgisier.ee! ,.r kOCHESTER Minnesota 3/30/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the application for an amendment to Final Plan for the Apache Mall property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: Dedication of all required new utility easements shall take place prior to vacation of any existing utility easements. 2. If extension of Public Utilities , and / or additional Hydrants are needed, execution of a City / Owner Contract may be required. 3. The parking ratio of 4.5/1000 may be low based on past use. 4. The Traffic Signs should be updated to conform to the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. i CATEMPRRevised Final Plan Apache Mall 3-o0.doc rve pledge, we deliver March 23, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Type III, Phase II Amendment to the Final Plan which covers Apache Mall Shopping Center, to allow an expansion of 31,000 SF on the west side of the center and to reduce the parking requirements from 5 stalls per 1000 SF of building area to 4.5 stalls per 1000. The plan also shows the removal of the movie theater building. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced application is complete and our comments follow: 1. To minimize future costs and system shutdowns it maybe desirable at this time to relocate additional water main at the north end of the project to a point beyond the future expansion area designated on the plan. 2. A 20' minimum public utility easement will need to be dedicated for the relocated public water main. 3. The owner is required to enter into a City Owner Contract with the City of Rochester for the installation of the public water main. Contact the Land Development Manager (507-281-6198) at the Public Works Department for details. Final water main construction plans will need to be prepared by a civil engineer and conform to standard City of Rochester requirements. 4. The water service to the movie theater building will need to be abandoned properly at the water main. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yours, D.-j- 06-jux Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Mike Glenzinski, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Yaggy Colby Associates General Growth Properties, Inc. Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 TRANSPORTATIONS DEVELOPMENT APPI Jurisdiction Anolicat 16T 111TOOV1QtIt1 lq3 County ZC 00-2 No comments on the Zone Change Radcliffe- Raygor Comments on the General Development Plan: I. At the time of platting an Environmental Corridor easement similar to the casements provided on Country Creek Subdivision and other subdivisions to the east should be provided to allow for future development of a public non - motorized trail along the Bear Creek floodplain corridor. This trail would be developed as part of facility envisioned to tie Chester Woods Park into the Ciry of Rochester trails stem City Amend Final No comment Plan Midway Motor Lodge City Amend Apache The proposed expansion represents an increase in floor area in retail area of Mall Shopping approximately 3.5% and a net floor area change in the shopping center of about Center Plan 2%. The scale of proposed change is not of a magnitude to require the preparation of a traffic impact study. The transportation staff has no other comments on the proposal City Incentive Dev The proposed development does not require the preparation of a Traffic Impact Cond Use 00-6 Report to analyze intersection operations. There are two potential access design Kendall Group issues which have been discussed with the consultant for the applicant that should be reviewed (with the Public Works Department) to determine whether the access design is adequate. These are: 9 The sight distance at the access points to the development should be checked to insure that adequate sight lines exist to provide for safe ingress and egress to the site 9 While not needed at this time, the growth of through traffic past the site on 3'a Ave in the future may make it desirable to stripe a left turn bay for inbound traffic from the north on 3rd Ave. The current roadway width and alignment should be reviewed to determine if this can be accommodated on the current roadway or whether provisions for additional right of way should be made to accommodate it in the future. City Prel Plat 00-12 No comment Northern Trails City PRD 00-5 No comment Freedom Senior Housing City LUP and ZC Under Section 61.320 of the Land Development Manual the proposed Land Use 00-5 Badger the proposed site would trigger the need for a Rezoning Traffic Analysis. The Traffic Impact Report prepared for the Badger Ridge development assumed development of this site and has adequately analyzed traffic flow through intersections adjacent to the site. Issues related to access for this site are being discussed as part of the General Development Plan and the first Preliminary Plat for the Badger Ridge development. City Annex 00-6 No comment Badger City Manor Woods No comment West 12 Pre[ Plat City GDP 152 Under Section 61.520 of the Land Development Manual the proposed ABBCO Co development is subject to the requirements for Traffic Impact Studies due to the liq PROJECT STATEMENT General Growth Properties, Inc., current owners of Apache Mall Shopping Center, wish to amend the Planned Unit Development Plan adopted in 1990. The shopping center wishes to expand tenant space to incorporate two new retail shops. This Mall expansion project will increase the size of the current facility by 31,000 square feet. General Growth plans to remove the existing theater structure located in the southwest comer of the site and reconfigure parking in that area. In addition, a water main and its respective utility easement will require relocation. The location of the existing easement would lie within the proposed building footprint as shown on the attached plan, sheet 3. A new easement will be dedicated as required by this relocation. This proposed easement is also depicted on sheet 3 of the attached plans. An exact legal description has not been determined at this time, but will be determined in the water main design process. Also, as part of this amendment, General Growth proposes to reduce the parking requirements from 5 stalls per 1000 square feet of building area to 4.5 stalls per 1000. A report on parking requirements, in support of the reduction, prepared by the Urban Land Institute is also enclosed for your review and consideration. As a final item, General Growth proposes to incorporate the land they own to the east, adjacent to the river, to construct a parking facility. These parking stalls will be used in the parking counts shown on the site plan attached. The proposed parking facility lies within 600 feet of the Mails' east entrance enabling this parking facility to be considered as off -site parking. p 0WR-i � i MAR 15 �Ol'7 j ; Page 10 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 M5_ Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated April 6, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Svenby stated that staff recommends approval based on their suggested findings and with conditions listed in the report. He told the Commission that they should include in their motion whether or not they are in agreement with the 4.5 parking stalls required per 1000 square feet of gross lease area. He commented that condition number 1 can be dropped, but should remain as a note to the applicant that future expansion would have to go through the same process. Mr. Slaver asked where the figure of 4.5 stalls per 1000 square feet came from. Mr. Svenby explained that figure was proposed by the applicant. The applicant submitted a report on parking requirements, in support of the reduction. He noted that the 4.5 stalls per 1000 sf appears to be consistent with other malls. Mr. Quinn asked if they would have to come before the Commission again for the construction of the parking lot east of Apache Drive. Mr. Svenby stated that would require a Site Development Plan, which is staff approved. It would be sent to six different referral agencies, but would not come before the Planning Commission. Mr. Quinn asked how persons would cross Apache Drive. Mr. Nigbur explained that Public Works will look at this design during the site review process, and will require a sidewalk. Mr. Brede agreed that would be a concern because there currently aren't pedestrians paths along Apache Drive. He noted that the studies on parking numbers that come from malls in the south wouldn't have to take into consideration that there are snow piles in the parking lots for four months out of the year. Mr. Suk pointed out that the owner will be the one who suffers if there is a shortage of parking spaces. Lisa Callahan of General Growth Properties, the owners of Apache Mail, addressed the Commission. She referred to a parking study from ULI and ICSC, which recommends 4.5 parking stalls per 1000 square feet for shopping centers over 600,000 square feet. She noted that her company has built two shopping centers in the past two years and both were approved by the cities and stores (tenants) at the 4.5 per 1000 square feet ratio. Ms. Callahan explained that the parking lot on the east side of Apache Drive will mainly be used as employee parking during the Christmas season and they may provide a shuttle to and from the lot. Page 11 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Ms. Petersson noted the elevations showing trees in the parking lot. She asked if the trees will definitely be included. Ms. Callahan stated they hadn't planned on including those trees, but they will do some landscaping near the buildings. Ms. Petersson strongly suggested they include the trees shown in the parking lot. Ms. McGowan asked if they are addressing how traffic will flow out of the mall onto 16t' Street. She noted that last holiday season, police had to direct traffic at times. Ms. Callahan explained they are studying that issue, but it is not part of this plan. Flo Sandck, 1516 16" Avenue NE, addressed the Commission. She stated that as a consumer and shopper, she looks for parking spots with shade from trees. She feels the trees are critical and should be part of the plan. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Suk closed the public hearing. Mr. Quinn moved to approve Amendment to the Final Plan for Apache Mall, with staff - suggested conditions, noting condition number one is to be dropped at the suggestion of staff. He stated his motion includes approval of reducing the parking requirements to 4.5 parking stalls per 1000 square feet of gross leasable area. Mr. Burke seconded the motion. Ms. Petersson made a strong recommendation for trees in parking lot. The motion carried 6-2, with Ms. McGowan and Mr. Werven voting nay. Conditions: 1. The approval of the proposed expansion is contingent upon the applicant developing the parking facility located on Apache Court SW. The proposed parking facility will need to go through the site development plan process. 2. The proposed expansion is contingent upon the theater be removed and the area being reconfigured for parking. 3. The proposed expansion is contingent upon the applicant vacating the existing utility easement in proposed expansion area and dedicating a new 20-foot utility easement for the relocated public water main. The owner must enter into a City Owner Contract with the City for the installation of the public water main and the water service to the movie theater be abandoned property at the water main. Final Site Plan Amendment #00-01 for the Arboretum Special District. The applicant. Wal-Mart, is proposing to add approximately 97,500 so. ft. onto the existing store in REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MacfVUH or%. 1 IUM. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING MEETING 1 / 0-) '-� DATE: 05-01-00 ITEM NO. I— ,)— ITEM DESCRIPTION: Vacation Petition #00-01 by General Growth Properties (Apache Mall) to PREPARED BY: vacate a 10 foot utility easement lying on the westerly side and parallel to the mall beginning at the Theresa Fogarty, Food Court thence southerly to approximately the north edge of the Daytona property. Length of Planner easement Is approximately 500 feet. The property Is located south of Highway 14, west of Highway 52 and north of 16' Street SW. yJ April 24, 2000 Planning Department Recommendation See attached staff report dated April 24, 2000. Council Action Needed. - Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution to approve the vacation petition as submitted. 41ttachments: I. Staff Report dated April 24, 2000. Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 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, May 1, 2000. in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: 112 TO: City Council FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner DATE: April 24, 2000 fr■..-,wf..�.. of A+�a�.m�'Ia>fnii �l ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATIOW 507/285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSINGIHRA 507/285-a224 BUILDING CODE 5071285-8213 WELLISEPTIC 507/285-6345 FAX 5071287-2275 RE: Vacation Petition #00-01 by General Growth Properties (Apache Mall) to vacate a 10 foot utility easement lying on the westerly side and parallel to the mall beginning at the Food Court thence southerly to approximately the north edge of Daytons property. Length of easement is approximately 500 feet. The property is located south of Highway 14, west of Highway 52 and north of 16"Street SW. Planning Department Review: Petitioner(s): General Growth Properties, Inc. Lisa Callahan, Representative 110 North Wacker Chicago, IL 60606 Reason to Vacate: The petitioner is requesting to vacate the 500 foot easement due to proposed expansion of Apache Mall. The existing easement, which lies under the proposed addition, will be relocated. Referral Comments: Peoples Natural Gas City Public Works Rochester Public Utilities - Water Division Report Attachments: 1. Vacation Petition 2. Location Map 3. Referral Comments - 3 letters �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITYIAFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Staff Recommendation: Upon review of this request staff recommends approval of this vacation petition with the following conditions: 1. A new public utility easement, a minimum of 20' in width, shall be dedicated for all utilities that need to be relocated, prior to recording of this vacation petition. The relocation must stay to the right of the existing building addition. 2. The existing 120 public water main and fire hydrants that need to be relocated shall be placed in service prior to site demolition or construction of the building addition. l 7, '23- 1 21' Urn.. EASEMENT —� I -IV U.E. \�\ II \\ III I sa = II � ail PROPOSED EASEMENT-1L/i z lil 1 III � -IIf 'u°sEw' E»r EV UTI EASEMENT M v I I vnovaseo � EHT EAS U11L Z I I �ENT ; 0 EXISTING EASEMENT =TO BE VACATED III � i yC o SCALE WARDS Q Q w 4 ir IL _ 00 N 200 IT I I IN -j E-3i' ENT III u NVId .ullxUMNN"y�I * � l NYId C3nd a3GN3WV IIVW 314-VdV 111 e ROCHESTER Minnesota 4/10/00 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4`" Street SE Room 108 TO: Consolidated Planning Department Rochester, MN 55904.3740 2122 Campus Drive SE 507-287-7800 Rochester, MN 55904 FAX — 507.281.6216 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for Vacation #00-01 on the General Growth Properties (Apache Mall) property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. New easements shall be dedicated for all utilities that need to be relocated, prior to approval of this vacation request. Q: TEMPWAC*00-01.000 lk3' we pledge we deliver April 19, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Vacation Petition #00-01 by General Growth Properties (Apache Mall) to vacate a portion of the 10' utility easement on the westerly side from the food court south to the north edge of the Daytons property. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced petition is complete and our comments follow: 1. This 10' utility easement contains a 12" public water main along with fire hydrants that will need to be relocated and placed in service prior to any site demolition or construction of the proposed building addition. If this easement is vacated prior to the necessary relocation we will still need to keep the right to maintain this water main. 2. A 20' minimum public utility easement will need to be dedicated for the relocated public water main. 3. The owner is required to enter into a City Owner Contract with the City of Rochester for the installation of the public water main. Contact the Land Development Manager (507-281- 6198) at the Public Works Department for details. Final water main construction plans will need to be prepared by a civil engineer and conform to standard City of Rochester requirements. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have any questions. Very truly yours, 06440� R .- Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Bureau Yaggy Colby Associates General Growth Properties Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING ' Q s / DATE: 05-01- 00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. BLIC HEARINGS PLANNING E,3 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase I, Final Plat #00-16 to be known as Diamond Ridge PREPARED BY: Eighteen. The plat proposes to subdivide 6.46 acres of land into 26 lots for single family Theresa Fogarty, residential development. The plat dedicates the right-of-way for one public roadway. The Planner property is located south of Highway 14, north of Valley Drive NW. April 25, 2000 Plannina Department Review: 1. See attached staff report dated April 25, 2000. Council Action Needed: 1. A resolution approving the plat can be adopted. Enclosures: (To be submitted separately to the City Clerk by the Planning Staff upon receipt from the applicant) City Clerk's Copy of Applications Recording Statement 3. Treasurer/Auditors Statement n (�N 4. Recording Fee OI Icy 5. Title Opinion 6. 1 Original Plat Mylar 7. 2 Mylar Copies of Plat �+( Distribution:� " 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 3. City Attorney 4. Planning Department File 5. Planning Department, GIS Division 6. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, May 1, 2000 in the Council Chambers at the Rochester I Olmsted County Government Center. 7. McGhie & Betts JNCIL ACTION: Motion by. second by. to: hawk IrA. k.: • �$ �qy !41 ie HIS 00 \ Io wto ow C i yF rn Gi I �z m S N Nr.ln� �- TO: Rochester Common Council �'III��lL��q/per e/oee•�\�,e��, N� lottnill ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GISWADORESSING( 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSINGMRA 507/285-8224 FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELUSEFTIC 507/285-8345 DATE: April 25, 2000 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Type III, Phase I, Final Plat #00-18 to be known as Diamond Ridge Eighteen. The plat proposes to subdivide 8.46 acres of land into 26 lots for single family residential development. The plat dedicates the right-of- way for one public roadway. The property is located south of Highway 14, north of Valley Drive INK Planning Department Review., Applicants/Owners: Surveyors! Engineers: Referral Comments: Western Walls, Inc. 604 NW 111 Avenue Rochester, MN 55901 McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 BE 3rd Avenue Rochester, MN 55904 1. Rochester Public Utilities - Water Division 2. Rochester Public Works 3. Rochester Park & Recreation Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (3) 2. Copy of Final Plat 3. Copy of approved General Development Plan 4. Vicinity Map Plat Data: Location of Property: The property is located south of Highway 14, north of Valley Drive NW. Existing Zoning: The property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) district on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. Proposed Development: This development consists of 8.46 acres of land to be subdivided into 26 lots for single family residential development. �� AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITYIAFFIRMAnVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 Final Plat 00-18 Diamond Ridge 18" Subdivision ApH1 26, 2000 Roadways: The plat dedicates right-of-way for one new roadway. This roadway is a cul-de-sac, an extension of "Ruby Lane NW", to the north, curving to the east. This roadway is classified as a "local" street and is designed with a 50' right- of-way and a 51' cui-de-sac radius. The proposed roadways meet the minimum standards as outlined in the Thoroughfare Plan and the Land Development Manual. Wetlands: The Soil Survey and National Wetland Indicator maps were reviewed for the presence of wetlands. These maps do not indicate the presence of wetlands or hydric soils on this site. Public Utilities: Water and sewer can be extended from their present location. The 20 foot easement identified as "Utility" between Lots 10 & 11, should be identified as "Drainage and Utility Easement". Revisions to the utility plans are needed to meet MN Department of Health requirements. Pedestrian Facilities: Pedestrian facilities are required for this development along the entire frontage of Ruby Lane NW. Drainage: Grading and drainage plans for this plat were reviewed at the time Diamond Ridge 15 was platted. Spillover Parking: As per Section 63.426 of the LDM, all residential development must provide spillover parking for service vehicles and visitors. This development requires 32 spillover parking stalls. It appears as though the additional parking can accommodated on the roadways and most likely within private driveways, as well. Parkland Dedication: The City Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via dedication of .84 acres of land at the site of the 2ntl Diamond Ridge neighborhood park (Outlot A Diamond Ridge 1 e). General Development Plan: This property is included within the Diamond Ridge General Development Plan, which was most recently revised in 1998 with the approval of the preliminary plat for Diamond Ridge 15 Subdivision. Preliminary Plat: A preliminary plat for this property was approved by the City Council on February 1, 1999 with the following conditions: t. That a grading plan be submitted to the Public Works Department at least 2 weeks prior to seeking final plat approval. 2. The final plat show controlled access along 7' Street NW. Page 3 Final Plat 00-18 Diamond Ridge 180 Subdivision April 26, 2000 3. The easement located between Topaz Lane to 10" Street be increased to provide for 10 feet on each side from the cenferilne of the proposed utilities. 4. The roadway named 'Topaz Lane" be changed to a unique name not currently used (Onyx, Lapis, Gamet, Tigereye and Turquoise are all unique). 5. The developer agrees to parkland dedication requirement of 5.1 acres as outlined in a letter from Park and Recreation Department, dated January 21, 1999. The applicant also agrees to deed Outlot A to the City either 1) once the ponds are constructed and accepted by Public Works or 2) the park department wishes to begin development of the park and to grade the park accesses as outlined in said letter from the Rochester Park & Recreation Department. 6. The soils survey Indicates the presence of hydric soils in the northwest portion of the site (Outlot A). No grading, till or land disturbance activity shall occur within Outlot A prior to Investigation of wetlands and approval a delineation, no -foss certificate or other appropriate permits by the Local Goveming Unit (LOU). Staff Recommendation: The preliminary plat for this property was approved prior to the adoption of the new subdivision regulations, which became effective May 15, 1999. Since this final plat application was filed prior to May 15, 2000, the subdivision regulations by which this final plat is reviewed are those which were in effect prior to May 15, 1999. The Planning Staff has reviewed the submitted final plat and finds that it is consistent with the approved preliminary plat. The staff would then recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to recording of the final plat, the utility plans be revised to meet MN Department of Health requirements. 2. The 20 foot utility easement between Lots 10 8 11 be Identified as drainage and utility easement. REMINDER TO APPLICANT. • Prior to development, the property owner will need to execute a City Owner Contract for construction of the public Infrastructure and utilities to serve this plat. 194, ROCHESTER Minnesota 4/25/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive 5E Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur i DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287.7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for Final Plat #00-18 on the Diamond Ridge Eighteen property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. Grading & Drainage Plans for this plat were reviewed at the time Diamond Ridge 15 was platted. 2. Pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development, along both sides of the entire frontage of Ruby Ln NW. 3. A City / Owner Contract must be executed prior to development of this property to address the construction of all public infrastructure and utilities to serve this plat. 4. Controlled access is required along the entire frontage of T.H. 414, as shown on the plat. 5. The 20 foot easement identified as "Utility", between Lots 10 & 11, should be identified as a "Drainage and Utility Easement". The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property: ❖ Trunkline Sanitary Sewer 18619 @ $665.1598 per acre plus Interest @ 7.0% from 6/25/80 (10yr max) = $1,130.77 per acre. CCM Water Tower J8251 @ $900.88 per acre plus Interest @ 7.0% from 7/2/79 (10 yr max) = $1,531.50 per acre ❖ Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division: (1) Street Ends Sign C:\TEMMFP#00.18.doc i ROCHESTER PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 12, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning RE: Final Plat #00-18 Diamond Ridge 1 e Acreage of plat.......................................................... Number of dwelling units ............................................. Dwelling unit density ................................................... Densityfactor............................................................ Dedication............................................................... 8.46 acres 26 units 3.07 units / acre .10 .84 acres The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via dedication of .84 acres of land at the site of the 2nd Diamond Ridge neighborhood parts (Outlot A Diamond Ridge 15th ) as identified on the Diamond Ridge GDP. The applicant has deferred the following dedication: Diamond Ridge 12th........... 1.09 acres Diamond Ridge 14th........... .55 acres Diamond Ridge 15th........... 1.59 acres Diamond Ridge le ........... 1.40 acres Diamond Ridge Ir........... 1.80 acres Diamond Ridge le.............84 acres 7.27 acres Based on the approved drainage plan for Diamond Ridge 15 Outlot A, the applicant will have established credits of approximately 9.0 acres once Outlot A is deeded to the City. Final determination of the amount of credits to be established for the outlot will be determined once the detention pond and drainage easement construction is completed. Applicant westem walla Inc 60411 Ave NW \1CITY OF ROCHESTER\CITYHALL\PARK\DSTOTZ\2000\DEDICATION\NW 2898\DIAMOND RIDGE 1B.D0C we pledge, we delayer April 19, 2000 Rochester-Ohnsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Type III, Phase I, Final Plat #00-18 to be known as Diamond Ridge Eighteen. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced final plat is complete and we have no objections, per the final utility plan review, revisions to the utility plans are needed to meet Minnesota Department of Health Requirements. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yourss,• Q.-.�I 0644�( 1 `c�►�"�'�' Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 RE' IEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 5-1-001 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING 'q- -i f „ EM DESCRIPTION: Vacation Petition 900-03 by Professional Skaters Association to vacate a PREPARED BY: Drainage and Utility Easement located on Lot 4, Block 1, Country Club Estates Subdivision. The Mitzi A. Baker, applicant is proposing to vacate the existing easement and record anew easement on the same lot. Senior Planner The property is located south of 2 St. SW, west of Wimbledon Hills Drive. April 26, 2000 Planning Department Recommendation: See attached staff report dated April 26, 2000. Council Action Needed. 1. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution to approve the vacation petition as submitted subject to one condition. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated April 26, 2000. Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 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, May 1, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. 6. Yaggy Colby Associates COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: WIMBLEDON HILLS DR. �CC U j e! r. .�.• N II H i P.S.A. 710H PLAN ROQfSSEA, AW�SOTA '�� a� VACATE UTILITY EASE' 'ENT EXHIBIT 19? PART OF LOT 4, . "OCK 1 COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES iai rtil.lr� ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA ZNQ L = 45.00 Q= 51-33'58" R = 50.00 CH = 43.50 p CHB = F S 51'17'09" E L = 50.00 6= 57-17'45.......... R = 50.00 CH = 47.94 CHB = S3'10'27" W L = 50.00 0= 5T17'45T::1............. R = 50.00 CH = 47.94 CHB = S 60'31'26" W Jr VACATE UTILITY EASEMENT s 15 . L . ISCZ1y •,•..�. yr• u.E. K51'50' to R Must Cc 15.50 ae . $525' 55r R NN A. uto. 4• . BE COIL y W 1/4 35-1a7-14 0 °z X. 0 50 100 200 SCALE IN FEET MONUMENTS SET 1/2" REBARS o SET 3/4` IRON PIPES s FOUND MONUMENTS (PIPE, ROD, ETC...) All monuments set have a plastic cap stamped L.S. 20703 BEARINGS Bearings are azimuths measured to the right from an assumed north. Vacate a permanent utility easement over, under, and across that part of Lot 4, Block 1 m of Country Club Estates, according to the plot thereof on file at the County Recorder's office, Olmsted County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Lot 4; thence on an assumed bearing of North along the east line of said Lot 4, a distance of 42.00 feet; thence North 55 degrees 54 minutes 57 seconds West 130.00 feet; thence North 31 degrees 10 minutes 56 seconds West 75.00 feet; thence North 09 degrees 23 minutes 49 seconds West 70.00 feet; thence westerly 15.04 feet on a nontangential curve concave northerly, having a radius of 60.00 feet, a central angle of 14 degrees 21 minutes 50 seconds, and a chord bearing of South 80 degrees 28 minutes 53 seconds West to the westerly line of said Lot 4; thence South 09 degrees 23 minutes 49 seconds East along sold westerly line 182.04 feet to the southwest corner of said Lot 4; thence South 65 degrees 13 minutes 29 seconds East along the southwesterly line of said Lot 4, a distance of 157.50 feet to the point of beginning. 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THATTHIS SURVEY, PLAN OR ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PROIECT NUMBER 6379 REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SURVEYORS+ PLANNERS DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS DATEOFSLRVEY 4/7/99 OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. 717 THIRD AVE. S.E. SURVEYED BY D. OLIVE ROCHESTER+MN 1 507•21111-4464 1 SURVEYED FOR PSA MASON CRY, IA 50401 J )QX TO: City Council ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 5071285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 5071285.8232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELUSEPnc 507/285-8345 DATE: April 26, 2000 FAX 5071287-2275 RE: Vacation Petition #00-03 by Professional Skaters Association to vacate a Drainage and Utility Easement located on Lot 4, Block 1, Country Club Estates Subdivision. The applicant is proposing to vacate the existing easement and record a new easement on the same lot. The property is located south of 2nd St. SW, west of Wimbledon Hills Drive. Planning Department Review: Petitioner(s): Professional Skaters Association 1821 2ad Street SW Rochester, MN 55902 Consultant: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 3r° Ave. SE Rochester, MN Reason to Vacate: The petitioner is requesting to vacate a utility and drainage easement located over part of Lot 4, Block 1 of Country Club Estates Subdivision. A Conditional Use Permit was approved by the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission in May 1999 to allow for an office building for the Professional Skaters Association to be constructed. The CUP was approved with a condition that "Retaining walls, structures, and large plantings shown within utility and drainage easements must be move outside of the easements (the applicant may want to consider petitioning to vacate a portion of the drainage easement along the south side of the property)" `-'� .0 cni gel noonor n.uwlealcunTlVr A"ION FMPLOYFR (9q Referral Comments: Rochester Public Works (see attached) RPU Water Division (see attached) Report Attachments: 1. Vacation Petition 2. Location Map Staff Recommendation: As long as new easements are dedicated to the satisfaction of the Rochester Public Works Department and RPU, the easement may be vacated. Staff recommends approval to vacate the drainage and utility easement as proposed, subject to new easements being dedicated to the satisfaction of the Rochester Public Works Department and RPU Water Division prior to recording of the vacation. New easements dedicated must also address conveyance of surface water across this property from the storm outlet ant the easterly line of Lot 4. ROCHESTEtt Minnesota 4/25100 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur M DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4t' Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX— 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for Vacation #00-03 on the Professional Skaters Association property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: t. In addition to dedicating the new easement description as proposed, the conveyance of surface water across this property from the storm outlet at the easterly line of Lot 4 needs to be addressed. Q\TEMPWAC#00-03.D0C r use we pledge. we dedwer April 20, 2000 Rochester-Ohnsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Vacation Petition #00-03 by Professional Skaters Association to vacate a drainage and utility easement located on Lot 4, Block 1, Country Club Estates Subdivision. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced petition is complete and our comments follow: &I 1. The existing easement can be vacated as long as the new easement provides for a minimum of 10' of coverage to the east from the existing 12" water main. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have any questions. Very truly you"40C., rs,6440l Dorm Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Bureau Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 W Date: 4114t:'000 ram• To: Mayor and Common Council City Hall City of Rochester, Minnesota Ity of Rochester, Minnesota 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 description and full ownership of each adjoining parcel.) Owners Name (if in joint tenancy, both or all parties must sign) Leaal Description Lot 4. Block 1. Courrtii-Club RFtnteg We hereby petition the Common Council of the City of Rochester, Minnesota, to vacate the following described public property: The utility easement over that part of Lot 4. Block 1 of Country Club Estates as shown in attached Vacate Utility Easement Exhibit by the area shatled. The facts and reasons for such vacation are as follows: • fl • L . L �• . • ! • t • • • NI 'I 1 • • Y'! We propose to connect to the existing pond outlet pipe and carry the drainage flows within proposed subsurface pipes. 2 Relocation of easement wiU reduse effects to proposed We features such as retaining walls at paved concrete surfaces on the south end of the building. 3. By conducting storm flows through subsurface pipes, we reduce the effects of erosion within the project site. f AGENDA ULU I IUN: LIC HEARINGS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORIGINATING DEPT: PLANNING MEETING O1 a 3 DATE: 05-01-00 fi ^ 5" ITEM DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase U, Preliminary Plat #00-11 to be known as Manor Woods West Twelfth PREPARED BY: Subdivision. The Plat proposes to subdivide 6.43 acres of land into 20 lots for single family resid,=sl development Theresa Fogarty and 2 outlots The Plat proposes to dedicate right-of-way for one new roadway (Manor Park Drive NW). The property is located south of 5a Street NW, north of 4" Street NW and allows for the continuation of Manor Park Plazlnef Drive NW. April 24, 2000 CitkPlanning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on April 12, 2000 to consider this preliminary plat. Mr. Bill Tointon of McGhie & Betts, Inc. representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. He stated that the density is 3.1 acres per unit per acre and meets all the requirements of the Land Development Manual. He referred to the conditions and indicated they are in agreement and pointed out that the applicant has provided their own stormwater detention . He also pointed out that the applicants are contributing to the construction of 7tl1 Street NW, which will be completed this fall. Mr. Joel Krueger addressed the Commission with concern about Public Works statement that no traffic signs are needed. He noted the road is very steep and straight and feels a stop sign is needed at the bottom. Mr. Nigbur, explained that stop signs have a specific requirement for when and where they can be placed. He noted this Will be looked at, and if traffic warrants, a stop sign would be required, but is not warranted at this time. .As. Connie Dalzell also addressed the Commission regarding the number of trees that have been destroyed during the development of this area and asked that consideration be given to preserving as many trees as possible as further development occurs. The Planning Commission found that this preliminary plat conforms to the criteria listed in the Land Development Manual and recommends approval of this preliminary plat with the following modifications or conditions: 1. Grading Plans and Drainage Plans must be approved prior to submittal of the final plat; pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development, along both side of Manor Park Drive NW, Including along the Outlots. 2. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwater management, park dedication, traffic Improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 3. Two additional fire hydrants be added to the proposed water system layout according to the locations referred to by Public Utilities - Water Division. 4. The applicant agrees that this Subdivision will have an impact on the City's need for parkland and that the cash in lieu of land will meet this need. Mr. Burke moved to approve Preliminary Plat WO-11, to be known as Manor Woods West 12s' with staff suggested conditions. Ms. Petersson seconded the motion. The motion carried 8 0. Planning Department Recommendation: See attached staff report dated April 4, 2000. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by; Second by: to: ��P • AMENDMENT � IRroYec. 4.20 1 F `x, p ol j aYd woji �w 00PE- ML i +J p� Nye y d i fato I I r � iI r �III�1►D��II�O�� r , ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission MAPPNGESSING/ 507/285-8232 HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELUSEPTIC 507/285-8345 DATE: April 4, 2000 FAX 5071287-2275 RE: Type III, Phase II, Land Subdivision Permit #00-11 (Preliminary Plat) to be known as Manor Woods West Twelfth Subdivision. The Plat proposes to subdivide 6.43 acre of land into 20 lots for single family residential development and 2 outlots. The Plat also proposes to dedicate right-of-way for one new roadway (Manor Park Drive NW). The property is located south of 5`h Street NW, north of 4`h Street NW and allows for the continuation of Manor Park Drive NW. Planning Department Review: Applicant/Owner: Surveyors/Engineers: Forbrook-Bigelow Development P.O. Box 247 Byron, MN 55920 McGhie & Betts 1648 Third Avenue SE Rochester. MN 55904 Referral Comments: 1. Public Utilities, Water Division 2. Planning Staff - John Hanford, Wetlands 3. City Public Works 4. City Park and Recreation Department Report Attachments: 1. Land Development Manual Excerpts 2. Referral Comments (4 letters) 3. Copy of Preliminary Plat 4. Copy of GDP Development Review: Location of Property: The property is located south of 5" Street NW, north of 41h Street NW and NW of Manor Park Drive NW. �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 Manor Woods West 12'' Subdivision April 4, 2000 Zoning: Proposed Development: Roadways: Pedestrian Facilities: Parkland: a61 The property is currently zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) District on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. This development consists of 6.43 acres of land to be subdivided into 20 lots for single family residential development and 2 outlots. This plat proposes to dedicate right-of-way for one roadway. The roadway is a northwesterly extension of Manor Park Drive NW to the northern border of this development. This roadway is designed with a 44' roadway on an 80' right-of-way. Pedestrian facilities shall be constructed along both sides of Manor Park Drive NW, including along the outlots. The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: Cash in lieu of land. Drainage: This area of this plat is somewhat rolling with the elevations of this site ranging from 1080' in the SE portion, 1090' in the SW portion to 1160' in the NW portion of the plat. Grading and drainage plans will need to be approved by the City Public Works Department for this development. Stormwater will need to be directed toward the existing stormwater detention pond for Manorwoods West development. Wetlands: A Wetland Replacement Plan has been approved for the Manor Woods West area by the City. This plat does not include any wetland replacement area and the wetland area fill by the proposed Manor Park Drive NW is part of the approved wetland replacement plan. Public Utilities: Sanitary sewer and water lines will be extended from the existing Manor Park Drive to accommodate this development. Two fire hydrants need to be added to the proposed water system layout. Public Utilities, Water Division, have provided the engineering firm with the locations. General Development Plan: In 1998, the city approved an amended general development plan that included this property. The proposed plat is generally consistent with the approved General Development Plan. Page 3 Manor Woods West 12'" Subdivision April 4, 2000 Staff Review and Recommendation: Section 61.225 of the Land Development Manual lists the findings which must be considered by the Planning Commission and the Council when reviewing a land subdivision permit application. This section is attached for your information. The Planning staff has reviewed this preliminary plat request under the provisions of Section 61.225 of the LDM, effective May 15, 1999. The staff recommends approval with the following conditions / modifications: 1. Grading Plan and Drainage Plans must be approved prior to submittal of the final plat; pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development, along both sides of Manor Park Drive NW, including along the Outlots. 2. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwater management, park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 3. Two additional fire hydrants be added to the proposed water system layout according to the locations referred to by Public Utilities -Water Division. 4. The applicant agrees that this Subdivision will have an impact upon the City's need for parkland and that the cash in lieu of land will meet this need. REMINDER TO APPLICANT: Prior to development, the property owner will need to execute a City Owner Contract for construction of the public roadways and utilities. This Plat is subject to the Subdivision regulations which became effective May 15, 1999. Approved grading, drainage and construction plans and an executed Development Agreement will need to be submitted with the final plat application, if the applicant intends to record the final plat documents prior to completion of infrastructure improvements. a� ROCHESTER PARK AND CREATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHETER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 27, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning RE: Manorwood West 12"' Preliminary #00-11 Acreage of plat.......................................................... Number of dwelling units ............................................. Dwelling unit density..... .............................................. Density factor............................................................ Dedication............................................................... Fair market value of land ............................................. 6.43 a 20 units 3.11 units/a .0244 .16 a $12,000/a The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: Cash in lieu of land \\CITY OF ROCHESTER\CITYNALL\PARK\DSTOTZ\2000\DEDICATION\NW 2898\MANORWOOD WEST 12TH.DOC r . p-- v we pledge, we deliver March 20, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Preliminary Plat #00-11 by Forbrook-Bigelow Development to be known as Manorwoods West Twelfth Subdivision. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced preliminary plat is complete and our comments follow: 1. The property may be subject to the water availability fee, connection fees or assessments. The Land Development Manager (507-281-6198) at the Public Works Department determines the applicability of these fees. 2. Two fire hydrants need to be added to the proposed water system layout. We have provided the applicant's engineering firm with the locations. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yours, n "OA 1 u Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Bureau McGhie & Betts, Inc. Forbrook-Bigelow Development Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 ROCHESTER Minnesota 3/27/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur a<< DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 2010 Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for a Preliminary Plat Request #00-11 on the Manor Woods West 12th property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: A Grading Plan and Drainage Plan must be submitted and approved for this development. Proper grading on this site that directs stormwater toward the existing stormwater detention pond for the Manorwoods West GDP should adequately address stormwater management for this property. 2. A City / Owner Contract must be executed prior to development of this property, to address the construction of all public infrastructure and utilities to serve this subdivision. 3. Pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development, along both sides of Manor Park Dr NW, including along the Outlots. 4. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to; stormwater management, park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property: 0• J8619 Trunkline Sanitary Sewer @ $665.1598 per acre, plus 7.0% interest from 6/25180 (10 year max.) ❖ J8251 Elevated Water Tower West Service Area @ $900.88 per acre plus 7.0% interest from 7/2/79 (10 year max.) ❖ Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division; NONE CATEMPT13#00-11.doc Page 7 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 1. There would appear to be a public need for this amendment developing a procedure to amend an approved site/development plan be reviewed under Section 61.148 and Section 62.708, 1) and 62Z98, 2) if a two phase review is required. 2. The proposed amendment may serve to accomplish purposes of this ordinance in that it requires amendmenNequesfs to an approved site/development plan be reviewed under Section4 / 48 and Section 62.708, 1) and 62.708, 2) if a two phase review is required. 3. The proposed amendment would be lawful. Preliminary Plat #00-11 to be known as Manor Woods West Twelfth Subdivision. The 4'" Street NW and allows for the continuation of Manor Park Drive NW. Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated April 4, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. He stated that staff recommends approval with the four conditions listed in the report. Representing the applicant, Bill Tointon of McGhie & Betts, Inc., addressed the Commission. He presented a map of the GDP and explained the location. He stated the density is 3.1 units per acre and that it meets all the requirements of the Land Development Manual. He referred to the conditions and indicated they are in agreement and pointed out that the applicant has provided their own stormwater detention. He also pointed out that the applicants are contributing to the construction of 7"' Street NW, which will be done this fall. Mr. Tointon stated they would have preferred condition number 2 simply says that a development agreement will be required between the applicant and the City of Rochester. Joel Krueger, 4558 Manor Park Drive NW, addressed the Commission. He is concerned about Public Works statement that no traffic signs are needed. He noted the road will be very steep and straight and he feels a stop sign is needed at the bottom. Connie Daizell, 474 45' Lane NW, addressed the Commission. She stated that there have been a lot trees destroyed during development of this area, and she asked that consideration be given to preserving as many trees as possible as further development occurs. With others wishing to speak, Mr. Suk closed the public hearing. Mr. Burke moved to approve Preliminary Plat #00-11, to be known as Manor Woods West 12", with staff -suggested conditions. Ms. Petersson seconded the motion. Ms. Petersson suggested the developer attempt to preserve as many trees as possible. Mr. Brede asked for staff comments on traffic signs. Mr. Nigbur explained that stop signs have a specific requirement for when and where they can be placed. He noted this will be looked at, and if traffic warrants, a stop sign would be required, Page 8 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 ac3 but is not warranted at this time. He pointed out that this plat is part of an overall plan that was started many years ago and had modifications made several years ago that applied some traffic calming measures. The motion carried 8-0. Conditions: 1. Grading Plan and Drainage Plans must be approved prior to submittal of the final plat; pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development, along both sides of Manor Park Drive NW, including along the Outlots. 2. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwater management, park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 3. Two additional fire hydrants be added to the proposed water system layout according to the locations referred to by Public Utilities - Water Division. 4. The applicant agrees that this Subdivision will have an impact upon the City's need for parkland and that the cash in lieu of land will meet this need. This item was tabledvarlier in the meeting. SW. Mr. Svenby presented the sta eport, dated Apr , 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester- mated Planning Department. Mr. Svenby stated that staff recommends approval h the conditions listed in the'staff report. He suggested revising condition number 3 aving the first sentence as written, d then to state, "If on -site detention is not provided, applicant must participate in the City, s re Zi stormwater management plan and pay a stormwater management fee." Mr. Quipd asked where is the existing sign stump is located Mr venby pointed it out on the plan. He noted they have not heard from applicant if they re planning to use this stump, but if they aren't, they will need to remove it. Rgreferred to a condition that notes the posts may be within an easement, and if that is the case, they would have to be moved outside of the easement. Al7C114UA Oru r run; TILIC HEARINGS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORIGINATING PLANNING MEETING R/5 DATE: O5-01-00 ITEM NO. i~ 'rO ITEM DESCRIPTION: Type DI, Phase II Amendment to the Final Plan for the PUD B-24, which PREPARED BY: covers the Best Western / Midway Office Plaza, to allow a 8,985 square foot building and free standing Theresa Fogarty business sign to be constructed in the southwest corner of the property. The property is located north of Planner 16' Street SW, east of Greenview Drive SW. April 24, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: On April 12, 2000, the City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this request to amend the final plan for the PUD B- 24 to allow a 8,985 square foot building and free standing business sign to be constructed. Mr. Pete Schuller, AB Systems, addressed the Commission. Mr. Schuller stated they have reviewed the conditions and they have no issues with them and plan to adhere to them. He explained that they plan to use the existing sign posts and if one of them falls within an easement, it will need to be relocated. Mr. Suk asked if they had any objections to moving the ingress. Mr. Schuller stated that is no problem and explained they will have the one-way in and traffic egress from the main entrance. Mr. Brede moved to approve Amendment to the Final Plan for PUD B-24, with staff -suggested conditions, as amended by staff. Ms. Petersson seconded the motion. The motion carried 8-0. Conditions: 1. A lighting plan must be submitted and approved meeting the criteria of the underlying B-4 District. 2. Provide information regarding the use of the existing sign posts. 3. Stormwater management shall be provided for this development. If on -site detention is not provided, the applicant must participate in the City's regional stormwater management plan and pay the stormwater management fee. 4. The proposed driveway opening onto Greenview Drive shall be shifted to the north approximately 10 feet to align with the in -place driveway to the west of this property. This access will be limited to inbound traffic only and shall be no more than 14 feet In width. 5. All portions of the proposed sign shall be kept outside of the utility easement. 6. A revocable permit for the utility enclosure structure and utility boxes must be obtained prior to, or concurrent with the PUD approval. Elevations of these facilities shall not block the overland drainage in this easement area. 7. The Interior sidewalk along the building shall be connected to the public sidewalk along Greenview Drive. 8. Prior to development, grading and drainage plans must be approved by the City See attached staff report, dated April 5, 2000. COUNCIL ACTION: Moron by: second by: to: 1k 0 LLW� F P! a$ I rn N 11; ■o•r i �i{, n ! f I T&GMIDWAY LLG I"� ■� OFFICE BUILDING r R0O9M MR863OTA X ■1 S ��1 � �fHI A �iiu��D�9rr►A� d�crr+p�nnelA I fb..e211s...��ff I, , ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission MAPPIINGESSINGI 507/285-8232 HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WEWSEPTIC 5071285-8345 DATE: April 5, 2000 FAX 5071287-2275 RE: Type III, Phase II Amendment to the Final Plan for the Planned Unit Development B-24, which covers the Best Western/Midway Office Plaza, to allow a 8,985 square foot building and free standing business sign to be constructed in the southwest corner of the property. The property is located north of 16th Street SW, east of Greenview Drive SW. Plannina Department Review: Petitioners: A.B. Systems, Inc. Peter Schuller 209 Wood Lake Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 Surveyor/Engineer: Referral Agency Comments: Report Attachments: PUD Summary: PUD Summary (Continued): A.B. Systems, Inc. 209 Wood Lake Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 Rochester Public Works; RPU Water Division 1. Referral Comments (2 letters) 2. Location Map 3. Reduced Copy of Proposed Amendment The Hoffman House PUD was first rezoned to a PUD in 1975 to allow for the hotel and office complex. A future motel addition of 40 additional rooms at the northeast corner of the main building was included in those plans, but has not been built. In 1984, a proposal to add a health and racquetball club was proposed and approved and also has not been built. Other amendments that have been approved include revisions to exterior business signage to identify uses within the office complex. Most recently, February, 1999, a request to allow AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER �[ $ 04/05/00 / Hoffman House PUD Amendment Page 2 of 9 the construction of two advertising signs, one in the northeast corner of the property and the other in the southwest comer of the property. This request was denied by the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. Amendment Summa Proposed Use: The applicant is proposing to construct an 8,985 square foot office building that will accommodate two independent office uses, one being 5,060 square feet and the other 3,925 square feet. The building will be located in the SW corner of the existing PUD, along 16`" Street SW and Greenview Drive SW. In addition to the office building, the applicant is proposing to install a 60 square foot, 18 feet in height, free-standing sign, double sided with back lights. The sign will be located west of the proposed office building, near the SW comer. Analysis: The Hoffman House (Best Westem/Midway Office Plaza) PUD was approved in 1975 under the planned unit development provisions of the 1972 Zoning Code. When the current Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual was adopted in 1992, it eliminated these provisions. The manual, however, does provide for amendments to an existing PUD. Section 60.326 states that amendments to a PUD shall be processed through the Type III, Phase II, hearing process, and according to the regulations applicable to the criteria for restricted developments. The underlying zoning for Hoffman House is the B-4 district. According to the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual (LDM), a comparable type of development to the existing PUD is a business center. A comparison of the original PUD standards, the existing development, the proposed amendment and a business center is shown in the table below: Original PUD Requirements Existing Proposed Amendment Business Center Requirement Total Floor Area 1,881,792 sf 206,000 sf 8,985 sf NA Parking 465 stalls NA NA 465 -Required -parking Provided 393 stalls 537 stalls 524 stalls NA The applicant is removing approximately 9,000 square feet of building area from the site. The site currently has 537 parking stalls and the proposed amendment will continue to provide 524 parking stalls. The loss of 13 parking stalls, in the proposed PUD amendment, will not have an impact because the number of parking stalls exceed the required parking stalls. The total floor area including the proposed PUD amendment is well below the requirements of the original PUD. If approved, the PUD amendment will utilize a total of 214,985 square feet of the allowed 1,881,792 square feet with the original PUD. 04/05/00 Hoffman House PUD Amendment Page 3 of 9 The proposed amendment also includes installation of a free standing sign and proposed signage location on the building. The signage request appears to be consistent with Section 63.227, as follows: "Each individual tenant within a business center shall be permitted one wall business sign per exterior facade not to exceed 20 percent of the area of the facade. in addition, one free standing sign meeting the regulations of the underlying zoning district is permitted at each entrance to the center". The requirements of the B-4 District are used as guidelines for the square footage, height and lighting. It should be noted that there already exists two sign posts in the approximate location of where the applicant proposes to place the new sign. The applicant should indicate if the existing sign posts will be used. If not, the existing sign posts shall be removed. Review Criteria and Suggested Findings: Amendments to an existing PUD are processed according to the regulations applicable to a conditional use permit and restricted developments. Paragraph 61.146 lists the standards for conditional use permits as follows: 61.146 Standard for Conditional Uses: The zoning administrator, Commission, or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a conditional use unless one or more of the following findings with respect to the proposed development is made: 1) provisions for vehicular ioading, unloading, parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and onto adjacent public streets and ways will create hazards to safety, or will impose a significant burden upon public facilities. The proposed amendment should not affect the current parking situation on the property since the number of parking spaces being provided still exceeds the number of parking spaces required by 131 spaces. 2) The intensity, location, operation, or height of proposed buildings and structures will be detrimental to other private development in the neighborhood or will impose undue burdens on the sewers, sanitary and storm drains, water or similar public facilities. The construction of the a one story office building will not be detrimental to other private development in the neighborhood. Several existing buildings in the neighborhood are two stories in height. 3) The provision for on -site bufferyards and landscaping does not provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development. The proposed amendment should provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features. The proposed amendment does include a landscaping plan and it appears to meet the 10% requirement of the B-4 District. a� 04l05/00 Hoffman House PUD Amendment Page 4 of 9 4) The site plan fails to provide for the soil erosion and drainage problems that may be created by the development. Stormwater management must be provided for this project. If on -site detention is not provided, a stormwater management fee will apply for voluntary participation in the City's Regional Stormwater Management Plan. 5) The provisions for exterior lighting create undue hazards to motorists traveling on adjacent public streets or are inadequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site or such provisions damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties. The proposed amendment does not include any additional free standing lighting, but may include exterior building lighting accessories. A lighting plan was not submitted. If the PUD amendment is approved, the exterior lighting plan must be submitted and meet the requirements of the B-4 District. 6) The proposed development will create undue fire safety hazards by not providing adequate access to the site, or to the buildings on the site, for emergency vehicles. The building will be accessible from Greenview Drive and the parking tot. At this time, the Planning Department has not received any information from the Fire Department indicating concerns related to access or safety. 7) In cases where a Phase I plan has been approved, there is a substantial change in the Phase II site plan from the approved Phase I site plan, such that the revised plans will not meet the standards provided by this paragraph. Not applicable 8) The proposed conditional use does not comply with all the standards applying to permitted uses within the underlying zoning district, or with standards specifically applicable to the type of conditional use under consideration, or with specific ordinance standards dealing with matters such as signs which are part of the proposed development, and a variance to allow such deviation has not been secured by the applicant. The proposed amendment to PUD B-24 does comply with all the standards of the B-4 District with the exception of submitting and receiving approval for the lighting plan. The applicant will be required to submit an approved lighting plan. 61.147 Conditions on Approval: In considering an application for a development permit to allow a Conditional Use, the designated hearing body shall consider and may impose modifications or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance with the criteria of paragraph 61.146. 62.708 Criteria for Type III Developments: In determining whether to approve, deny, or approve with conditions an application, the Commission and Council shall be guided by the following criteria: 1) Preliminary Development Plan Criteria: 04/05/00 Hoffman House PUD Amendment Page 5 of 9 a) Capacity of Public Facilities: The existing or future planned utilities in the area are adequate to serve the proposed development. Utilities are available at the SW corner of the property to serve this development. b) Geologic Hazards: The existence of areas of natural or geologic hazard, such as unstable slopes, sinkholes, floodplain, etc., have been identified and the development of these areas has been taken into account or will be addressed in the Phase II plans. Not applicable c) Natural Features: For developments involving new construction, the arrangement of buildings, paved areas and open space has, to the extent practical, utilized the existing topography and existing desirable vegetation of the site. Not applicable d) Residential Traffic Impact: When located in a residential area, the proposed development: 1) Will not cause traffic volumes to exceed planned capacities on local residential streets; 2) Will not generate frequent truck traffic on local residential streets; 3) Will not create additional traffic during evening and nighttime hours on local residential streets; Not applicable e) Traffic Generation Impact: Anticipated traffic generated by the development will not cause the capacity of adjacent streets to be exceeded, and conceptual improvements to reduce the impact of access points on the traffic flow of adjacent streets have been identified where needed. The proposed development should not cause the capacity of adjacent streets to be exceeded. The proposed driveway to this property will need to be shifted approximately 10 feet to the north and will be limited to inbound traffic only and will be restricted to no more than 14 feet in width. f) Height Impacts: For developments involving new construction, the heights and placement of proposed structures are compatible with the surrounding development. Factors to consider include: 1) Will the structure block sunlight from reaching adjacent properties during a majority of the day for over four (4) months out of the year; 2) Will siting of the structure substantially block vistas from the primary exposures of adjacent residential dwellings created due to differences in elevation. The proposed construction of a one story office building is compatible with the surrounding development. aa� 04/05/00 Hoffman House PUD Amendment Page 6 of 9 g) Setbacks: For developments involving new construction, proposed setbacks are related to building height and bulk in a manner consistent with that required for permitted uses in the underlying zoning district. The proposed building meets the required setbacks and is consistent with permitted uses in the B-4 District. h) Internal Site Design: For developments involving new construction, the preliminary site layout indicates adequate building separation and desirable orientation of the buildings to open spaces, street frontages or other focal points. The proposed project appears to meet adequate building separation to the orientation of the existing buildings to open spaces, street frontage, etc. i) Screening and Buffering: The conceptual screening and bufferyards proposed are adequate to protect the privacy of residents in the development or surrounding residential areas from the impact of interior traffic circulation and parking areas, utility areas such as refuse storage, noise or glare exceeding permissible standards, potential safety hazards, unwanted pedestriantbicycle access, or to subdue differences in architecture and bulk between adjacent land uses. The proposed amendment does provide a landscaping plan that meets the requirement of the B-4 District. j) Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development includes adequate amounts of off-street parking and loading areas and, in the case of new construction, there is adequate landscaped area to meet ordinance requirements. The original PUD required 393 parking stalls, but currently 537 parking stalls are being provided. The proposed amendment will cause the loss 13 parking stalls, leaving a balance of 524 parking stall. The number parking stalls available is exceeded by 141 of the required parking stalls approved with the original PUD. k) General Compatibility: The relationship of the actual appearance, general density and overall site design of the proposed development should be compared to the established pattern of zoning, the character of the surrounding neighborhood and the existing land forms of the area to determine the general compatibility of the development with its surroundings. The proposed office building and free standing sign is compatible with the existing uses on the property and the surrounding properties. 2) Final Development Plan Criteria: a) Public Facility Design: The design of private and public utility facilities meet the requirements and specifications which the applicable utility has adopted. Prior to development, construction plans for utilities will need to be approved and a City Owner Contract will need to be executed. b) Geologic Hazard: Engineering means to deal with areas of geologic hazard have been incorporated into the development plan or such areas have been set aside from development. J 04/05/00 �2 3 Hoffman House PUD Amendment Page 7 of 9 Not applicable. c) Access Effect: Ingress and egress points have been designed and located so as to: 1. Provide adequate separation from existing street intersections and adjacent private driveways so that traffic circulation problems in public right-of-ways are minimized; 2. Not adversely impact adjacent residential properties with factors such as noise from accelerating or idling vehicles or the glare of headlights from vehicles entering or leaving the site. In addition, where the preliminary development plan identified potential problems in the operation of access points, plans for private improvements or evidence of planned public improvements which will alleviate the problems have been provided. The proposed driveway to this property will need to be shifted approximately 10 feet to the north and will be limited to inbound traffic only and will be restricted to no more than 14 feet in width. d) Pedestrian Circulation: The plan includes elements to assure that pedestrians can move safely both within the site and across the site between properties and activities within the neighborhood area, and where appropriate, accommodations for transit access are provided. The site plan identifies sidewalk adjacent to the west property line. The interior sidewalk along the building should be connected to the public sidewalk along Greenview Drive. e) Foundation and Site Plantings: A landscape plan for the site has been prepared which indicates the finished site will be consistent with the landscape character of the surrounding area. Proposed project will meet the landscaping requirements of the underlying B-4 District. f) Site Status: Adequate measures have been taken to insure the future maintenance and ownership pattern of the project, including common areas, the completion of any platting activities, and the provision of adequate assurance to guarantee the installation of required public improvements, screening and landscaping. A Restated Reciprocal Access/Parking Easements Agreement was submitted with the PUD Amendment Request. This agreement does include the parcel located in the SW comer of the PUD. g) Screening and Bufferyards: The final screening and bufferyard design contains earth forms, structures and plant materials which are adequate to satisfy the need identified in Phase I for the project. Not applicable. h) Final Building Design: The final building design is consistent with the principles identified in preliminary development plan relative to Height, Setbacks, and Internal Site Design. Pq / 04I05100 Hoffman House PUD Amendment Page 8 of 9 Construction of a one story office building is not in conflict with the principles identified in the original PUD approval. i) Internal Circulation Areas: Plans for off-street parking and loading areas and circulation aisles to serve these areas meet ordinance requirements in terms of design. A Restated Reciprocal AccesslParking Easements Agreement was submitted with the PUD Amendment Request. This agreement does include the parcel in the SW corner of the PUD. j) Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development is consistent with the requirements of the underlying zoning district for similar uses in regards to signage and other appearance controls, and with general standards such as traffic visibility and emergency access. The proposed development is consistent with the underlying zoning district B-4. Staff Review and Recommendation: The Planning staff has reviewed this request based on the above criteria. The staff finds that this proposal is generally consistent with the above criteria. The staff recommends approval of this request with the following conditions: 1. A lighting plan must be submitted and approved meeting the criteria of the underlying B-4 District. 2. Provide information regarding the use of the existing sign posts. 3. Stormwater management shall be provided for this development. if on -site detention is not provided, a Stormwater Management fee will apply for voluntary participation in the City's Regional Stormwater Management Plan, 4. The proposed driveway opening onto Greeview Drive shall be shifted to the north approximately 10 feet to align with the in -place driveway to the west of this property. This access will be limited to inbound traffic only and shall be no more than 14 feet in width. 5. All portions of the proposed sign shalt be kept outside of the utility easement. 6. A revocable permit for the utility enclosure structure and utility boxes must be obtained prior to, or concurrent with the PUD approval. Elevations of these facilities shall not block the overland drainage in this easement area. 7. The interior sidewalk along the building shall be connected to the public sidewalk along Greenview Drive. 8. Prior to development, grading and drainage plans must be approved by the City. 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. rp.U. N" p<edye, ive deliver March 23, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Type III, Phase II Amendment to the Final Plan for the PUD #B-24, which covers the Best Western/Midway Office Plaza, to allow an 8,985 SF building and free standing business sign to be constructed in the southwest comer of the property. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced amendment is complete and our comments follow: 1. The property may be subject to the water availability fee, connection fees or assessments. The Assessments Manager (507-281-6004) at the Public Works Department determines the applicability of these fees. 2. If additional on -site fire hydrant(s) are required by the Fire Prevention Bureau, water mains connecting to and including any fire hydrant are considered public and need to be within a 20' minimum public utility easement. The owner is required to enter into a City Owner Contract with the City of Rochester for the installation of the public water main. Contact the Land Development Manager (507-281-6198) at the Public Works Department for details. Final water main construction plans will need to be prepared by a civil engineer and conform to standard City of Rochester requirements. 3. We will need information on the projected flows to determine if a small diameter copper service is necessary, along with the planned fire service to provide adequate domestic water quality. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yours, 06-M RlaL Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Bureau AB Systems, Inc. T & G Midway, LLC Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 �4 kOCHESTEIt Minnesota 3/30/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the application for an amendment to PUD B-24.on the Best Western/Midway Office Plaza property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. Stormwater Management needs to be provided for this project. If on -site detention is not provided, a Stormwater Management Fee will apply for voluntary participation in the City's Regional Stormwater Management Plan. 2. The proposed driveway should be shifted to the north (approx. 10 feet) to align with the in -place driveway to the west of this property. This access will be limited to inbound traffic only, and shall be no more than 14 feet wide. 3. All portions of the sign shall be kept out of the utility easement. 4. A revocable permit for the utility enclosure structure and utility boxes must be obtained prior to, or concurrent with the PUD approval. Elevations of these facilities shall not block the overland drainage in this easement area. 5. The interior sidewalk along the building should be connected to the public sidewalk along Greenview Drive, 6. Grading and Drainage Plan approval is required separate from this application process. The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property: ❖ Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) @ $1605.50 per acre X 0.72 acres = $1,155.96 ❖ Water Availability Charge (WAC) @ $1605.50 per acre X 0.72 acres = $1,155.96 B• Stormwater Management Fees, if on -site detention is not provided. C:ITEMPIPUD B-24 Amendment3-00.doc IMI gil o IIIRL- I; � IIlO b T&GMIDWAY LLC. I[�[ 4p !L[i OFFICE BUILDING ijM�t D [it 'rYY• < z T 9G MIDWAY L.L.C. FFICE BUILDING Dn OMIMMMwsorA (11Al1F I II!,' � e or T&GMIDWAY LLC 5 �1111 p `�+i a3a� i F DOUBLE 51DED SIGNS w/ BACK LIGHTS p 1 ' nwEsrMrxr SERVICES rn INVESTMENT BANKING �mtixs��c m SPRINT EXISTING 5"x&" P05T5 O I N 10'-0" T & G MIDWAY L. r. G; OFFICE BUILDA..IS ROCHESTER, MN JOB# 20057 Pag City 8 r City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 33 Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 but is not warranted at this time. He pointed out that this plat is part of an overall plan that was started many years ago and had modifications made several years ago that applied some traffic calming measures. The motion carried 8-0. Conditions: 1. Grading Plan and Drainage Plans must be approved prior to submittal of the final plat; pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development, along both sides of Manor Park Drive NW, including along the Outlots. 2. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwater management, park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 3. Two additional fire hydrants be added to the proposed water system layout according to the locations referred to by Public Utilities - Water Division. 4. The applicant agrees that this Subdivision will have an impact upon the City's need for parkland and that the cash in lieu of land will meet this need. Preliminary Plat #00-12 to be known as Northern Trails The Plat proposes to subdivide •C 19 i,__�e_a_. •w ,a • a This item was tabled earlier in the meeting. ine property. i ne property is located north of 16,n Street SW east of Greenview Drive Sw. Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated April 5, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Svenby stated that staff recommends approval with the conditions listed in the staff report. He suggested revising I condition number 3, leaving the first sentence as written, and then to state, Olf on -site detention is not provided, the applicant must participate in the City's regional stormwater management plan and pay the stormwater management fee," Mr. Quinn asked where is the existing sign stump is located. - Mr. Svenby pointed it out on the plan. He noted they have not heard from the applicant if they are planning to use this stump, but if they aren't, they will need to remove it. He referred to a condition that notes the posts may be within an easement, and if that is the case, they would have to be moved outside of the easement. Page 9 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Mr. Quinn asked for clarification on the entrance that would be moved. Mr. Svenby pointed this out on the plan, and noted that Public Works made the comment that this should be moved 10' to the north to align with the entrance to the AAA Travel office. Public Works also would like the opening to be 14' and limited to inbound traffic only. He noted traffic will exit out of the main entrance. Representing the applicant, Pete Schuller, AB Systems, addressed the Commission. Mr. Schuller stated hey have reviewed the conditions and they have no issues with them and plan to adhere to them. He noted they plan to use the existing sign posts and if one of them falls within an easement, it will need to be relocated. Referring to condition number 3, Mr. Schuller stated they are planning to participate in the stormwater management plan and will pay the fee. Mr. Suk asked if they had any objections to moving the ingress. Mr. Schuller stated that is no problem, and explained they will have the one-way in, and traffic will egress from the main entrance. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Suk closed the public hearing. Mr. Brede moved to approve Amendment to the Final Plan for PUD B-24, with staff - suggested conditions, as amended by staff. Ms. Petersson seconded the motion, which carried 8-0. Conditions: I. A fighting plan must be submitted and approved meeting the criteria of the underlying B-4 District. 2. Provide information regarding the use of the existing sign posts. 3. Stormwater management shall be provided for this development If on -site detention is not provided, the applicant must participate in the City's regional stormwater management plan and pay the stormwater management fee. 4. The proposed driveway opening onto Greenview Drive shall be shifted to the north approximately 10 feet to align with the in -place driveway to the west of this property. This access will be limited to inbound traffic only and shall be no more than 14 feet in width. 5. All portions of the proposed sign shall be kept outside of the utility easement. 8. A revocable permit for the utility enclosure structure and utility boxes must be obtained prior to, or concurrent with the PUD approval. Elevations of these facilities shall not block the overland drainage in this easement area. 7. The interior sidewalk along the building shall be connected to the public sidewalk along Greenview Drive. 8. Prior to development, grading and drainage plans must be approved by the REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION NDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ORIGINATING DEPT: PLANNING ITEM DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase 11, Preliminary Plat #00-09 to be known as Weatherstone Subdivision CIC 166. April 26, 2000 MEETING DATE: 5-1-00 ITEM NO.. S — f Mitzi A. Baker, City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on April 12, 2000 to consider this preliminary plat. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Preliminary Plat #0049, subject to the following modifications and conditions. Petersson moved, Stever seconded, the motion carried 8-0. 1. The Plat shall be revised as follows: • To dedicate easements for all utilities with adequate width provided on both sides of the utilities to allow for access and maintenance of the utilities. • To dedicated an easement to the City for a Bus Stop site. • To provide controlled access along the entire length of 50'" Ave. NW, with the exception of the roadway opening for Weatherstone Drive. Controlled access shag also be provided along Weatherstone Drive within 200 feet of the Intersection with 500' Ave. NW. 2. Traffic calming shag be Incorporated in to this developmen4 the design of which shall be approved by Rochester Public Works and the Planning Department Transportation Division. Additionally, the applicant shall provide bus stop locations per Rochester Public Works. Veatherstone Drive, at the southeast corner of the Plat, provides for only partial right-of-way dedication. Prior to or concurrent with final plat submittal, the applicant shall provide documentation to the Planning Department demonstrating that Section 64.128 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual will be met This Section prohibits partial right of way dedication "except where the remainder of the necessary right-of-way has already been platted, dedicated or established by other means". 4. Storm water management must be provided for this development The preliminary plat Indicates a public detention pond being constructed by the developer (Outiot A). This detention facility must be constructed and sized to meet City requirements. Oudot A, containing the pond, shall be dedicated to the City. 5. Pedestrian facilities are required along both sides of aA public roadways, Including the west side of 50f° Ave. NW. Since se Ave. is being planned for reconstruction In the near future, execution of a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement will be required prior to recording the final plat. Said agreement will address the developer" obligation for the future construction of pedestrian facilities along 50eAve. NW. 6, The applicant agrees to meet parkland dedication requirements via deferred land dedication. Land to be dedicated is Identified as a 8.5 acre park on the approved Weatherstone GDP. Dedication Is to occur when either park area Is platted or Veark Department is ready to begin development of the park. nor to submittal of a final plat application for this property, the applicant shall provide the LGU with additional Information related to wetlands, Including detail of the wetland area and boundary, and shall obtain any required permits from the LGU that maybe necessary for this plat to proceed. 8. Prior to final plat submittal, the applicant shall execute a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwatermanagement, park dedication, traffic Improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure for the Weatherstone GDP and this Plat 9. The development must be phased so that 50'" Ave. NW, north of 55'" St NW, does not exceed approximately 3,000 average illy trips unless the Council has approved a public Improvement project to upgrade 50'" Ave. NW. A contribution will be quired for the reconstruction of 50" Ave. NW, and 65the St NW. The City is currently considering a Traffic Improvement _:strict in this area for improving 50w Ave. NW, and 65h St NW, and establishing the developers proportional share of the COUNCIL ACTION: Molon Second I f IjAl 4 U. �s rmn ob N--- Z / , C I '. I ' / F a �• 1P i / rr oO • / rr ri ,P � _-----_ AV 4 'R50th AV£NUEVV. R. yp --- b �1yV = o i }p C d3 9 TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner DATE: April 6, 2000 ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GIVADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSINGIHRA 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WEWSEPTIC 5071285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Preliminary Plat #00-09 to be known as Weatherstone CIC #166 Subdivision. The Plat proposes to subdivide 22.50 acres of land into one Outlot, two common lots and 122 townhome lots. The Plat also proposes to dedicate right-of-way for 50`h Ave. NW and one new public roadway. The property is located west of 50`h Ave. NW, north of the Douglas Trail. Planning Department Review: Applicant/Owner: White Oaks Development of Rochester, Inc. 1201 Meadowlark Ct. SW Rochester. MN 55902 Surveyors/Engineers: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Referral Comments: Rochester Department of Public Works; Rochester Park & Rec. Dept.; Wetlands LGU; RPU Water Division; Rochester Fire Department; Report Attachments: 1. Land Development Manual Excerpts 2. Referral Comments (5 Letters) 3. Copy of Preliminary Plat Development Review: Location of Property: This plat is located west of 501h Ave. NW, north of the Douglas Trail. Zoning: The property is zoned R-2 (Low Density Residential). Proposed Development: This development consists of 22.50 acres to be subdivided for townhome style development, including 122 townhome lots, two common lots and one outlot. The Plat also proposes to dedicate right- +w.� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 April 6, 2000 of -way for 501" Ave. NW and also for anew roadway "Weatherstone Drive NW". Streets: The Plat also proposes to dedicate right-of-way for 50`h Ave. NW and also for anew roadway "Weatherstone Drive NW". "Weatherstone Drive" will be designed to incorporate traffic calming that may include physical modifications to the roadway such as narrowing of the roadway and a median at the intersection with 50" Ave. NW. The portion of "Weaterstone Drive" located at the south line of the property, includes only partial right- of-way dedication. Prior to final plat submittal, it will be necessary for the applicant to provide documentation to the City demonstrating that Section 64.128 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual will be met. Utilities: Utilities can be extended to serve this property. Sidewalks: In accordance with current City policy, sidewalk is required along the streets being dedicated in this plat. Pedestrian facilities are also required along 50`h Ave. NW, which is planned for reconstruction in the near future. Drainage: The property generally drains to the south and east. Outlot A is planned for a stormwater detention pond, consistent with the GDP for this property. Specific grading and drainage plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to submittal of a Final Plat application. Wetlands: Hydric soils exist on the site according to the Soil Survey. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands on the property and submitting the information as part of this application. Spillover Parking: Spillover parking for this Plat will be approximately 97 spaces which will be reviewed with an application for a Performance Residential Development Permit. Parkland Dedication: The Park & Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be satisfied by dedication of land (see attached referral comment). General Development Plan: This property is included within the Weatherstone GDP which was approved by the City Council in December 1999, and amended through a Type 1 application in March 2000. This Plat is consistent with the approved GDP, as amended. RV APPage 3 April 6, 2000 The General Development Plan for this property (Weatherstone) was approved by the City Council in December 1999 subject to the following conditions or modifications: 1. Storm water management must be provided for this development. The design, size and location of storm water facilities shall be consistent with the City's plans for this area. 2. The property shall be platted. When platted, controlled access shall be provided along the entire length of 50Ave. NW, with the exception of the two public and one private road accesses. In addition, 60 feet of right-of-way shall be dedicated for 501' Ave. NW. 3. The number and location of bus stops will be determined by the Rochester Public Works Department based on the final approved site layout. 4. Right or left turn lanes will be required for each roadway access to south bound 5d" Ave. NW. 5. Traffic calming shall be incorporated into the final site plans for this property, and approved by the City. 6. The development must be phased so that 5dh Ave. NW, north of 5e St. NW, does not exceed approximately 3,000 averagge daily trips unless the Council has approved a public improvement project to upgrade 50i6 Ave. NW. A contribution will be required for the reconstruction of 5d° Ave. NW, and 65the St. NW. The City is currently considering a Traffic Improvement District in this area for improving 50'h Ave. NW, and 65h St. NW, and establishing the developers proportional share of the cost. 7. Temporary turn -a -rounds shall be provided for the two public road segments that end at the north property line, at the time of platting. 8. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City that identifies the applicants responsibilities and contribution obligations toward traffic improvements in the area attributable to this project. 9. A Wetland Delineation for the site must be filed with the LGU. if the development proposes to impact Wetlands, appropriate permits must be secured from the LGU or the development design must be revised to avoid those areas. 10. All curves within the internal public roadways shall meet a minimum 30 mph design speed. Staff Recommendation: The Planning staff has reviewed this preliminary plat request under the provisions of LDM Sections 61.225 (effective 5/151199). In order to meet the criteria, approval of this plat should require the following conditions or modifications: 1. The Plat shall be revised as follows: • To dedicate easements for all utilities with adequate width provided on both sides of the utilities to allow for access and maintenance of the utilities. • To dedicated an easement to the City for a Bus Stop site. • To provide controlled access along the entire length of 50t6 Ave. NW, with the exception of the roadway opening for Weatherstone Drive. Controlled access Page 4 April 6, 2000 shall also be provided along Weatherstone Drive within 200 feet of the intersection with 50'h Ave. NW. 2. Traffic calming shall be Incorporated into this development, the design of which shall be approved by Rochester Public Works and the Planning Department Transportation Division. Additionally, the applicant shall provide bus stop locations per Rochester Public Works, 3. Weatherstone Drive, at the southeast corner of the Plat, provides for only partial right- of-way dedication. Prior to or concurrent with final plat submittal, the applicant shall provide documentation to the Planning Department demonstrating that Section 64.128 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual will be met. This Section prohibits partial right of way dedication "except where the remainder of the necessary right-of-way has already been platted, dedicated or established by other means". 4. Storm water management must be provided for this development. The preliminary plat indicates a public detention pond being constructed by the developer (Outtot A). This detention facility must be constructed and sized to meet City requirements. Outtot A, containing the pond, shall be dedicated to the City. 5. Pedestrian facilities are required along both sides of all public roadways, including the west side of 50'h Ave. NW. Since 50'" Ave. Is being planned for reconstruction in the near future, execution of a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement will be required prior to recording the final plat. Said agreement will address the developer" obligation for the future construction of pedestrian facilities along 50eAve. NW. 6. The applicant agrees to meet parkland dedication requirements via deferred land dedication. Land to be dedicated 1s identified as a 8.5 acre park on the approved Weatherstone GDP. Dedication Is to occur when either park area is platted or the Park Department is ready to begin development of the park. 7. Prior to submittal of a final plat application for this property, the applicant shall provide the LGU with additional information related to wetlands, including detail of the wetland area and boundary, and shall obtain any required permits from the LGU that may be necessary for this plat to proceed. 8. Prior to final plat submittal, the applicant shall execute a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwater management, park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure for the Weatherstone GDP and this Plat. 9. The development must be phased so that 50"' Ave. NW, north of 55'h St. NW, does not exceed approximately 3,000 average daily trips unless the Council has approved a public improvement project to upgrade 50'h Ave. NW. A contribution will be required for the reconstruction of 50'h Ave. NW, and 65the St. NW. The City is currently considering a Traffic Improvement District in this area for improving 50'" Ave. NW, and 65h St. NW, and establishing the developers proportional share of the cost. Page 5 1111 April 6, 2000 REMINDER TO APPLICANT: • This Plat is subject to the Subdivision regulations which became effective May 15, 1999. Approved construction plans and an executed Development Agreement will need to be submitted with the final plat application, if the developer wishes to record the Plat prior to completion of improvements. • Prior to development, the property owner will need to execute a City Owner Contract that requires the developer to construct the public roadways and utilities. CRITERIA FOR LAND SUBDIVISION PERMIT (PRELIMINARY PLAT) Effective May 15, 1999 61.225 Findings for Land Subdivision: The Zoning Administrator, Commission or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a land subdivision if all of the following findings with respect to the proposed development are made: A. The proposed land subdivision conforms to all relevant requirements of this ordinance and variances have been granted to permit any nonconformance. B. That the proposed water system and sanitary sewer system are adequate to serve the normal and fire protection demands of proposed development and to provide for the efficient and timely extension to serve future development. C. That the plan for soil erosion and stormwater management meets the adopted standards of the City of Rochester and is consistent with the adopted Stormwater Management Plan or adopted drainage or stormwater policies. D. That the vehicular and non -motorized system is consistent with adopted transportation plans and is consistent with the street layout standards listed in Section 64.120 and traffic service standards in Section 61.526. E. That the lot and block layout provide for safe and convenient vehicular, service and emergency access, efficient utility service connections, and adequate buildable area in each lot for planned uses. F. That the proposed land subdivision has taken into account the current 6-Year and other Long - Range Capital Improvements Programs and the elements listed therein in the design of the subdivision. G. That the proposed subdivision, if in a residential zoning district, —addresses the need for spillover parking consistent with the requirements of Section 63.426. H. That right-of-ways and easements of adequate size and dimension are —provided for the purpose of constructing the street, utility, and drainage facilities needed to serve the development. Page 6 a �3 April 6, 2000 I. That the proposed parks, trail thoroughfares and open space dedications are consistent with adopted plans, policies and regulations. J. That the proposed subdivision will not have off -site impacts on the street, drainage, water or wastewater systems that exceed adopted standards. K. That the proposed subdivision will not have adverse impacts on the safety or viability of permitted uses on adjacent properties. L. That the proposed land subdivision is designed in such a manner as to allow for continued development in an efficient manner on adjacent undeveloped lands; M. That the soils, topography and water tables have been adequately studied to ensure that all lots are developable for their designated purposes. N. That the proposed land subdivision is consistent with the standards of the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. O. That any land located within Zone A as shown on the currently adopted Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps of the Flood Insurance Study, Rochester, Minnesota, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is -determined to be suitable for its intended use and that the proposed subdivision adequately mitigates the risks of flooding, inadequate drainage, soil and rock formations with severe limitations for development, severe erosion potential, or any other floodplain related risks to the health, safety or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision in a manner consistent with this ordinance. a � _PM, me pledge, we dalivar March 2, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Preliminary Plat #00-09 to be known as Weatherstone CIC #166 Subdivision. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced preliminary plat is complete and our comments follow: 1. The property maybe subject to the water availability fee, connection fees or assessments. The Land Development Manager (507-281-6198) at the Public Works Department determines the applicability of these fees. 2. Minor revisions to the proposed water system layout are required. We have provided the applicant's engineering firm with these comments. 3. Some of the easement widths are not shown in this submittal. The minimum easement width for the public water main is 20' Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly you(rss,. Q---�- ",AA R141 Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Bureau McGhie & Betts, Inc. White Oaks Development of Rochester, Inc. Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 02Ks- Application Number: �/Lt Ppp t� % No hydric soils exist on the site based on the Soil Survey v Hydric soils exist on the site according to the Soil Survey. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands on the property and submitting the information as part of this application. A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and is on file with the Planning Department A wetland delineation is on file with the Planning Department and a No - loss, Exemption, or Replacement Plan has been submitted to the Planning Department. A wetland related application has been approved by the City. This plan incorporates the approved wetland plan. _ No hydric soils exist on the property based on the Soil Survey. However, due to the location in the landscape the property owner should examine the site for wetlands. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands. From John Harford Wetlands LGU Representative ROCHESTER PARK AND .REATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHETER MINNESOTA 65904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: February 28, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning RE: Weatherstone CIC #166 Preliminary Plat #00-09 Acreage of plat.......................................................... 22.5 a Number of dwelling units ............................................. 122 units Dwelling unit density ................................................... 5.42 units/a Density factor............................................................ .0244 Dedication............................................................... 2.98 a The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via deferred dedication of land. Land to be dedicated is identified as 8.5 acre park on GDP. Dedication to occur when either park area is platted or Park Department is ready to begin development of the park. Applicant: white Oaks Development of Rochester 1201 Meadowlark Crt SW N:\PARK\DSTOM2000\DEDICATION\NW 2898\WESTHERSTONE CIC 166.DOC ROCHESTER Minnesota 3/14/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur ay? DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507.281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the application for Preliminary Plat #00- 09.on the Weatherstone CIC #166 Subdivision property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. Storm Water Management must be addressed for this development. The preliminary plat indicates a public detention pond being built by the developer. This detention facility must be constructed and sized to meet City requirements. The Outlot containing the pond should be dedicated to the City. 2. A temporary turn around will be required at the northerly end of Weatherstone Drive NW. 3. Easements are required for off -site utility extensions, and for the temporary turn around. 4. Pedestrian facilities will be required concurrent with development of this subdivision along both sides of Weatherstone Dr NW, 5. Pedestrian Facilities are also required along the west right-of-way of 50u' Ave NW. Since it is planned that 501h Ave NW will be reconstructed in the near future, execution of a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement will be required prior to recording the final plat. Said agreement will address the developer's obligation for the future construction of pedestrian facilities along 50'h Ave NW. 6. A City / Owner Contract must be executed, prior to development of this property, to address the construction of all public infrastructure and utilities to serve this subdivision. C:\TEMP\PP#00-09.doc ROCHESTER Minnesota 3/14/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4' Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 7. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwater management, park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 8. Outlot 'A' shall be dedicated to the City. 9. An easement needs to be dedicated to the City for the Bus Stop site. The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property (rates are subject to annual review and change): •:• Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) @ $1,605.50 per acre X 22.50 acres Water Availability Charge (WAC) @ $1,605.50 per acre X 22.50 acres A Contribution for Reconstruction of 50" Ave NW of $30.00 per foot of frontage, plus a T.I.D. capacity component to be outlined in the Development Agreement for this Subdivision. Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division. 1 Stop Sign 1 Speed Limit 30 Sign 1 Trucks Prohibited Sign 1 Dead End Sign 2 Street Name Signs CATEMP\PP#00-09.doc Page 4 -- City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Preliminary Plat #00-09 to be known as Weatherstone CIC #166 Subdivision. The Plat Douglas Trail. Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated April 6, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. He stated that staff recommends approval with the nine conditions listed in the report. Mr. Werven referred to the condition number 2, which deals with traffic calming. He noted that in some developments the residents paid for the traffic calming, but in this case, the developer will be paying. Mr. Svenby explained that the development will be designed and built with the traffic calming measures included, and the costs will be paid by the developer. He noted that when residents have had to cover the costs, it was to have traffic calming measures added to existing roadways. Mr. Nigbur gave the example of the North Park area where residents wanted the roads narrowed and they will be paying the costs of traffic calming measures. New developments will look at traffic calming up front and incorporate them into the design and they will be constructed with the measures in place, and be paid for by the developer. Mr. Werven asked if this will be a standard condition for new developments. Mr. Nigbur stated they will look at what will be required on a case -by -case basis and they will assist the developer with the right method for traffic calming. Ms. Petersson asked if the wetland delineation has been done. Mr. Svenby stated the applicant has received a no -loss for this piece of the property, and they are in the process of working on a delineation for the entire site. Representing White Oaks Development of Rochester, Andy Masterpole, McGhie & Betts, Inc., addressed the Commission. He explained the property is zoned R-2 and they are proposing 122 townhomes, for a density of 5.4 units per acre. He noted the townhomes will be sold and priced for the affordable housing market. Mr. Masterpole pointed out that the outlot will be a regional detention pond dedicated to the City; and that utilities can be extended to serve the property. He addressed condition number 3 and noted that the portion of Weatherstone Drive mentioned is owned by the property owner to the south and a development agreement has been written, but not signed, with the developer of the property to the south. This agreement states that the land will be dedicated to the City and Public Works will allow them to plat the remaining portion of the roadway and use a portion of that area for the overflow outlet for the detention pond that would drain underneath 50"' Avenue. Mr. Masterpole stated this will be taken care of by the time of the final plat. Regarding condition numbers 5 and 9, Mr. Masterpole noted the developers have gotten together with Public Works and have come to an agreement on how to share the cost of improvements for 50'h Avenue NW. He explained it will be based on acreage and that the A5b e 5 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Council will act on this Monday night. If it is approved, the conditions dealing with the 3000 trip per day limit will be lifted. He commented that on condition number 5, the details of the agreement still need to be worked out. Mr. Masterpole addressed condition number 7 and explained they have filed for and received a no -loss certificate for this plat. He pointed out there are wetlands north of this phase and their environmental staff is working on the mitigation. Mr. Masterpole made himself available for questions. Mr. Werven asked for a ballpark figure on the cost of the townhomes. Mr. Masterpole stated the developer quoted a price range of $99,000 to $119,000. Mr. Brede asked about the timetable for the 50'h Avenue NW upgrade. Mr. Masterpole stated that if the Council approves it on the 17t°, they are hopeful the grading of the road can be done this fail and the paving work done next year. He commented that once the Council approves the project, the 3000 trips per day limit will be lifted. He pointed out that he doesn't think it would even be possible to approach the 3000 trips per day this year because there is not time to construct that many units. Neil Busacker, 5521 65a' Street NW, addressed the Commission. He feels the plan and timetable for 50•' Avenue should be in place before this plat goes forward. Mr. Busacker stated that if the Council is so close to approving the 500' Avenue upgrade, he thinks the plat should wait and then the condition can be removed. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Suk closed the public hearing. Ms. Petersson moved to approve Preliminary Plat #00-09, to be known as Weatherstone CiC #166 Subdivision, with staff -suggested conditions. Mr. Staver seconded the motion, which carried M. Conditions: f. The Plat shall be revised as follows: • To dedicate easements for all utilities with adequate width provided on both sides of the utilities to allow for access and maintenance of the utilities. • To dedicated an easement to the City for a Bus Stop site. • To provide controlled access along the entire length of 5e Ave. NW, with the exception of the roadway opening for Weatherstone Drive. Controlled access shall also be provided along Weatherstone Drive within 200 feet of the Intersection with 500 Ave. NW 2. Traffic calming shall be Incorporated Into this development, the design of which shall be approved by Rochester Public Works and the Planning Department Transportation Division. Additionally, the applicant shall provide bus stop locations per Rochester Public Works. 3. Weatherstone Drive, at the southeast comer of the Plat, provides for only partial right-of-way dedication. Prior to or concurrent with final plat submittal, the applicant Page 6 C 1 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 shall provide documentation to the Planning Department demonstrating that Section 64.128 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manuel will be met. This Section prohibits partial right of way dedication "except where the remainder of the necessary right-of-way has already been platted, dedicated or established by other means". 4. Storm water management must be provided for this development The preliminary plat Indicates a public detention pond being constructed by the developer (Outlot A). This detention facility must be constructed and sized to meet City requirements. Outlot A, containing the pond, shall be dedicated to the City. 5. Pedestrian facilities are required along both sides of all public roadways, including the west side of 50"' Ave. NW. Since W' Ave. is being planned for reconstruction in the near future, execution of a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement will be required prior to recording the final plat Said agreement will address the developer" obligation for the future construction of pedestrian facilities along 50eAve. NW. 6. The applicant agrees to meet parkland dedication requirements via deferred land dedication. Land to be dedicated Is Identified as a 8.5 acre park on the approved Weatherstone GDP. Dedication is to occur when either park area Is platted or the Park Department Is ready to begin development of the park. T. Prior to submittal of a flnal plat application for this property, the applicant shaft provide the LGU with additional information related to wetlands, Including detail of the wetland area and boundary, and shall obtain any required permits from the LGU that may be necessary for this plat to proceed. S. Prior to final plat submittal, the applicant shall execute a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwater management, park dedication, traffic Improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure for the Weatherstone GDP and this Plat 9. The development must be phased so that 5e Ave. NW, north of 55ei St NW, does not exceed approximately 3,000 average daily trips unless the Council has approved a public improvement project to upgrade 500 Ave. NW. A contribution will be required for the reconstruction of 500 Ave. NW, and 65th St NW. The City Is currently considering a Traffic Improvement District in this area for Improving 500 Ave. NW, and 65h St NW, and establishing the developers proportional share of the cost. District. (public hearing) Mr. Svenby presented the staff port, dated Marc , 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rocheor-Olmsted Planning ndlVment. He stated that staff has suggested findings, and, b d on those findings, recomffVds approval. r REQUEST FOP COUNCIL ACTION MEETING CQ53 DATE: 5/1 /00 I AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Works F, -8 ITEM DESCRIPTION: PROJECT HEARING: "Reconstruction of 9th Avenue SW from PREPARED BY: 2nd Street SW to 4th Street SW" (J9524) R. Kelm This is a Hearing to consider the following local improvement project: Project Number 6309-3-99, (J9524) Protect Name "Reconstruction of 9th Avenue SW from 2nd Street SW to 4th Street SW" Estimated Project Costs Project Cost Distribution Grading & Paving, Curb & Gutter $98,000 Sidewalk Replacement $7,000 Storm Sewer Repairs/Upgrades $10,000 atermain Replacement $55,000 Sanitary Replacement $30,000 Engineering, Interest, Contingencies $60,000 otal $260,000 Special Assessments — Frontage $38,501.40 Special Assessments — Sidewalk $6,416.25 Special Assessments — Service Replace $1,600.00 Water Utility Funds $58,310.00 Sewer Utility Funds $37,485.00 City Share $117,687.35 OTAL $260,000.0 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the resolution ordering the project to be made. ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: aJ Concrete Curb & Gutter in Reconstruction of 9th Avenue SW from 2"d Street SW to Street SW Project No. 6309-3-99 J-9524 AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING a�;s DATE: 5/1 /00 ORIGINATING DEPT! Public Works from 2nd Street SW to 4th Street SW" (J9524) ITEM NO_ q PREPARED BY: R. Kelm 9-k- This is a Hearing to consider levying of the proposed assessments regarding the following local improvement project: Protect Number 6309-3-99, (J9524) Project Name "Reconstruction of 9th Avenue SW from 2nd Street SW to 4th Street SW" Estimated Proiect Costs Gradin & Paving, Curb & Gutter $98,000 Sidewalk Replacement $7,000 Storm Sewer Repairs/Upgrades $10,000 atermain Replacement $55,000 Sanitary Replacement $30,000 Engineering, Interest, Contingencies $60,000 [Total $260,000 Project Cost Distribution Special Assessments — Frontage $38,501.40 Special Assessments — Sidewalk $6,416.2 Special Assessments — Service Replace $1,600.00 Water Utility Funds $58,310.00 Sewer Utility Funds $37,485.00 City Share $117,687.35 OTAL $260,000.00 Assessment Period: All special assessments may be levied for a period of ten years with interest charged at a rate of 7.5% annually on the unpaid balance, or they may be paid in full when levied. The project is scheduled for construction in 2000. No payments of the assessments are required until the project is substantially completed. Assessment Notices (invoices) will be sent to the owners of the property abutting the project at that time. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: �Zr „✓°NV Adopt the resolution levying the proposed assessments. IUNCIL ACTION: Notion by: r second by: to: a� Concrete Curb & Gutter in, Reconstruction of 9th Avenue SW from 2"d Street SW to 4t' %`-:, Street SW Project No. 6309-3-99 J-9524 Report On Feasibility Of Proposed Local Improvement Project Project No. 6309-3-99 J. 9524 Reconstruction of 9th Avenue SW from 2nd Street SW to 4th Street SW Date: March 20, 2000 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota A resolution proposing certain request for "Reconstruction of 9th Avenue SW from 2nd Street SW to 4th Street SW" was referred to the Public Works Department on January 19, 2000 for preparation of the Engineer's Feasibility Report. Engineers Report We report the project is feasible and recommend its construction. Record plans of the existing street are unavailable. Watermain construction in this section is dated 1887 and 1949. The entire length is due for resurfacing. We recommend that the project be constructed and funded in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Pavement Management Strategy (CPMS). The CPMS is an objective, cost-effective program for the )reservation, rehabilitation and reconstruction of the City s infrastructure. The most cost-effective strategy at his time for this street, which has a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating of 20, is reconstruction. Work includes grading, watermain, sewer, resurfacing of the street, the addition of concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk and appropriate storm water drainage structures. The property owners direct contribution for reconstruction is $30.00 per assessable foot (Residential), and $48.00 per assessable foot (Commercial) frontage. The estimated costs for the street reconstruction, made without completed plans or survey are as follows: Gradin & Paving, Curb & Gutter $98 000 Sidewalk Replacement $7,000 itSewer RepairsAJpgrades $10,000 atemtain Replacement $55,000 anitary Replacement $30,000 Engineering, Interest, Contingencies $60,00 otal $260,000 .,.... .,.._ ._...r asp , Assessment Basis for Reconstruction The cost of reconstruction as established by City Council Policy is: �, $30.00 per assessable foot (Residential) $48.00 per assessable foot (Commercial) Assessment Basis for Service Replacement It is expected that water line services may be replaced as part of the project. Replacement of watermain is funded 100% by the Water Utility. However, the City of Rochester's Watermain and Sewermain Policy adopted by the City Council on October 20, 1997, requires than any lead or galvanized water services must be replaced with copper as part of watermain replacement. Cost of service replacement charges for water and/or sewer will be billed directly to the property owner. If the service replacement charge is unpaid the City may levy the unpaid charge against the property as a special assessment. Payment of this assessment is required over a period not to exceed 5 years. Interest is charged at 7.5% annually from the date the service replacement is billed to the property owner at the following rates: Water 5/8'' 1" Is 800 1 '1/2% 3" J$1,000 Sewer 4-- 6" 1 $ 800 8" —12" 1$1,209 The estimated assessable cost based on (2) properties in the area that may require a V water service connection is $1,600. Assessment Basis for Sidewalk Replacement Replacement sidewalk is assessed by the square foot of sidewalk replaced and is assessed directly to the abutting property owner at the following rates: 4' Sidewalk (residential) $5.00 per square foot 5" Sidewalk (commercial) $5.75 per square foot 6' Sidewalk (at residential drive approaches) $6.50 per square foot 7' Sidewalk (at commercial drive approaches) $7.00 per square foot ' Sidewalk residential 1,053.21 SO. FT $5.00 $5,266.0 "Sidewalk commercial 0.00 SO. FT $5.75 $0.0 " Sidewalk at residential drive approaches) 176.96 So. FT $6.50 $1,150.21 ' Sidewalk at commercial drive approaches) so. FT $7.00 $0.00 ub Total Sidewalk $6,416.2 MAY 01 '00 02:18PM ROCNESTER READY MIX P.2 May 1, 2000 City Administration City Government Center 210 4a' Street SE Rnchester, MN 55904 ��4m 6-"1/ RE: City Project If 6309-3-99 (J9524) "Reconstruction of 9s, Avenue S.W. from 2n4 Street S.W. to 0 Street S.w SUBJECT. Assessment Rate Dear Sir or Madam - am the Chsirnuof the Facilities Committee at the Ronald McDonald House The Ronald n 4COM d House is a non-profit orgeniration and I am writing to see if there is latitude in the ASSESSMENT RATE It 4 my understanding from the City En&=' a Office that there may he pae0s" foe annuing at the CDC- ResidcmW Rate rather than The CDC — Commercial rate that is iedltlid p)t t L I have enclosed a copy of these letters for our (2) petjppptjifbeeted it s5o Zed Street S W. and 212 9m Avenue S W. 'MOA—.� '. 104-fiOryWr Cl ..9135 (CELL). Sl Don J �y� Facilities Chairman Ronald McDonald House If you world have say questions, please call me at 2894022 (W) <4 / � A 6,t�sa�o atemenI �Rohald MC 6ori' d f-fduse of Rochester, Minnesota Provides a home away from home.... . And gives support to families seeking medical care for their children. 850 2nd Street S. W., Rochester, MN 55902 • 507-282.3956 • Fax 507-252.2160 =01 Assessment Basis for Drive Approach — Extra Widths All drive approaches will be replaced (at the existing width) with a concrete drive approach meeting current design standards. Additional width is assessed by the square yard and is assessed directly to the property owner at the following rates: 6" Concrete Drive Approach (Residential) $31.68 per square yard 7" Concrete Drive Approach (Commercial) $34.95 per square yard Since the extra width of the drive approach upgrade is entirely at the property owner's request, only the rates are given. Total Estimated Funding Distribution "- [-!— Russell Kelm, PE Design Engineer Special Assessments — Frontage $38,501.4 Special Assessments — Sidewalk $6,416.2 Special Assessments — Service Replace $1,600. Water Utility Funds 8,310. Sewer Utility Funds 7,485.0 City Share 7,687.3 ]$260,000. OTAL Doug Nelson, PE Manager of Engineering REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: a*( 5/1 /00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Works S -/c) ITEM DESCRIPTION: PROJECT HEARING: "Concrete Curb & Gutter and Overlay PREPARED BY: Northern Hills Court NE from Northern Hills Drive NE West to Cul-De-Sad' (J9622) R. Kelm This is a Hearing to consider the following local improvement project: Project Number 6921-00, (J9622) Project Name Concrete Curb & Gutter and Overlay Northern Hills Court NE from Northern Hills Drive NE West to Cul- De-Sac Estimated Project Costs Grading & Paving, Curb & Gutter $100,000 Storm Sewer Repairs/Upgrades $ 15,000 Engineering, Interest, Contingencies 34,500 Total $149,500 Project Cost Distribution Special Assessments — Frontage .............. $ 26,766.15 Special Assessments — Sidewalk .............. $ 4,705.80 City Share ................................................. $118,028.05 Total......................................................... $149,500.00 Assessment Period All special assessments may be levied for a period of ten years with interest charged at a rate of 7.5% annually on the unpaid balance, or they may be paid in full when levied. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the resolution ordering the project to be made. ICY ` UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: Report On Feasibility Of Proposed Local Improvement Project Project No. 6921-00 J. 9622 Concrete Curb & Gutter and Overlay Northern Hills Court NE from Northern Hills Drive NE West to Cul-De-Sac Date: March 20, 2000 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota A resolution proposing certain petition requesting "Concrete Curb & Gutter and Overlay Northern Hills Court NE from Northern Hills Drive NE West to Cul-De-Sac" was referred to the Public Works Department on January 19, 2000 for preparation of the Engineer's Feasibility Report. Engineers Report We report the project is feasible and recommend its construction. The existing street was constructed with bituminous curbing in 1970 and is due for resurfacing. We recommend that the project be constructed and funded in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Pavement Management Strategy (CPMS). The CPMS is an objective, cost-effective program for the reservation, rehabilitatlon and reconstruction of the City's infrastructure. The most cost-effective strategy at its time for this street, which has a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating of 36, is rehabilitation. Work includes resurfacing of the street, the addition of concrete curb and gutter and appropriate storm water drainage structures. The property owners direct contribution for rehabilitation is $15,00 per assessable foot (Residential), and $22.50 per assessable foot (Commercial) frontage. The estimated costs for the street rehabilitation, made without completed plans or survey are as follows: Grading & Paving, Curb & Gutter $100,000 Storm Sewer Repairs/Upgrades $ 15,000 Engineering, Interest, Contingencies 34,500 Total $149,500 Assessment Basis for Rehabilitation The cost of rehabilitation as established by City Council Policy is: $15.00 per assessable foot (Residential) $22.50 per assessable foot (Commercial) Estimated assessable Residential frontage (1,784.41') x $15.00 per foot $26,766.15 Estimated assessable Commercial frontage (0') x $22.50 per foot $0.00 Total frontage assessments $26.766.15 Assessment Basis for Sidewalk Replacement Replacement sidewalk is assessed by the square foot of sidewalk replaced and is assessed directly to the abutting property owner at the following rates: 4' Sidewalk (residential) $5.00 per square foot 5" Sidewalk (commercial) $5.75 per square foot 6' Sidewalk (at residential drive approaches) $6.50 per square foot 7' Sidewalk (at commercial drive approaches) $7.00 per square foot Estimated assessable 4' Sidewalk = 913.60 x $5.00 per square foot $4 568.00 Estimated assessable 5' Sidewalk = 0 x $5.75 per square foot $0.00 Estimated assessable 6' Sidewalk = 21.20 x $6.50 per square foot $137.80 Estimated assessable 7" Sidewalk = 0 x $7.00 per square foot $0.00 Total Sidewalk assessments $4 706.80 Assessment Basis for Drive Approach Upgrades -Extra Widths Upgrading of drive approach width is assessed by the square yard and is assessed directly to the property owner at the following rates: 6" Concrete Drive Approach (Residential) $31.68 per square yard 7" Concrete Drive Approach (Commercial) $34.95 per square yard Since the extra width drive approach upgrade is entirely at the property owner's request, only the rates are given. Total Estimated Funding Distribution Special Assessments — Frontage Special Assessments — Sidewalk City Share Total P-WV1 (c. ", Russell Kelm, PE Design Engineer $26,766.15 $4,705.80 $118,028.05 $149,500.00 Doug Nelson, PE Manager of Engineering BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE�� FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Project No: 6921-00 J No: J9622 State Aid Project No Date: March 20, 2000 Description: Concrete Curb & Gutter and Overlay Northern Hills Court NE from Northern Hills Drive NE West to Cul-Oe-Sac Project Budget Contract Cost Final Cost Construction: Grading, Paving, Curb & Gutter $100,000 Storm Sewer Repairs/Upgrades $15,000 Watermain Replacement En ineedn , Interest, & Contingencv $34,500 Total Construction & Expense 1 $149,500 Distribution: Special Assessments — Frontage $26,766.15 Special Assessments — Sidewalk $4,705.80 Special Assessments — Service Replace Water Utility Funds City Share $118,028.05 TOTAL $149,500.00 Notes: Make Initial Disbursement from P. I. R. Fund REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 02(,4? DATE: 5/1100 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Works �& 41 ITEM DESCRIPTION: ASSESSMENT HEARING: "Concrete Curb & Gutter and Overlay PREPARED BY: Northem Hills Court NE from Northern Hills Drive NE West to R. Kelm Cul-De-Sad' (J9622) Q'1� This is a Hearing to consider levying of the proposed assessments regarding the following public improvement project: Project Number 6921-00,(J9622) Project Name Concrete Curb & Gutter and Overlay Northern Hills Court NE from Northern Hills Drive NE West to Cul- De-Sac Estimated Project Costs Grading & Paving, Curb & Gutter $100,000 Storm Sewer Repairs/Upgrades $ 15,000 Engineering, Interest, Contingencies 34,500 Total $149,500 Project Cost Distribution Special Assessments — Frontage .............. $ 26,766.15 Special Assessments — Sidewalk .............. $ 4,705.80 City Share ................................................. $118,028.05 Total......................................................... $149,500.00 Assessment Period All special assessments may be levied for a period of ten years with interest charged at a rate of 7.5% annually on the unpaid balance, or they may be paid in full when levied. The project is scheduled for construction in 2000. No payments of the assessments are required until the project is substantially completed. Assessment Notices (invoices) will be sent to the owners of the property abutting the project at that time. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the resolution levying the proposed assessments. vVil COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION mucnuA ae1, r iun: PUBLIC HEARINGS ING DEPT: PLANNING MEETING ;�� � DATE 5-1-00 ITEM NO. -1 ca- 0 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #99-24 to be known as Essex Estates 5" Subdivision PREPARED BY: Brent Svenby, April 27, 2000 Planning Department Review: See attached Staff Report dated April 27, 2000. Council Action Needed: 1. A resolution approving the plat can be adopted EnClosures: (To be submitted separately to the City Clerk by the Planning Staff upon receipt from the applicant) 1. City Clerk's Copy of Applications 2. Recording Statement 3. Treasurer/Auditor's Statement 4. Recording Fee 5. Title Opinion 6. 1 Original Plat Mylar 7. 2 Mylar Copies of Plat Attachment: Staff Report dated April 27, 2000. Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Attorney 3. Planning Department File 4. Planning Department - GIS 5. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday May 1, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. 6. Yaggy Colby Associates Y COUNCIL ACTION: Mo9on by: Second by: LN 1�1 10 ' ST NW �® e St NW —i- A' CT NW Z NW WFS\ R��FRRo 55 ST NE Final Plat #99-24 Essex Estates 5th 950' Notification Distance Ward 3 (McConnell) 04/19/00 UNPL477M r Y moo I..'l' 1 fYw a !I� a S 3E r -aa gji TO: Rochester Common Council FROM: Brent Svenby, Planner DATE: April 27, 2000 �/fculP�N�aaH� fvw. MWl�,cmcF1� ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 5071285-8232 PLANNING GISIADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOU8INGMRA 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 5071285-8213 wELL/SEPTic 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Final Plat #99-24 to be known as Essex Estates 5th Subdivision. Planninq Department Review: Applicant(Owner: Franklin Kottschade 3800 Highway 52 North, Suite 130 Rochester, MN 55901 Surveyors/Engineers: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 Third Avenue SE Rochester, MN 55904 Referral Comments: 1. Park and Recreation Department 2. Planning Department— Wetland LGU 3. Planning Department —Addressing 4. RPU Operations Division 5. RPU Water Division & Rochester Public Works Department Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (3 Letters) 2. Location Map 3. Copy of Preliminary Plat 4. Copy of Final Plat Plat Data: Location of Property: The property is located east of Essex Parkway NW, north of the Aldrich Memorial Nursery School and the Realife Cooperative. Zoning: This property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) district in the City of Rochester. Proposed Development: This development consists of 28.2 acres of land to be subdivided into 71 lots for single family development and 2 outlots. T an, cni �a� naonan innrv:e cnor,.envo arT,nu ceeoi nvca Page 2 1 Essex Estates 5`" Subdivision April 27, 2000 Streets: This plat dedicates right-of-way for six roadways. The first roadway is the continuation of Londonderry Drive NW. The roadway ends as a cul-de-sac. It is designed with a 32' roadway on a 56' right-of-way. The cul-de-sac is also designed with a 52' cul-de-sac bulb radius. The second roadway is Kingston Lane NW which is a cul-de-sac. This roadway extends off of Londonderry Lane NW. The roadway is designed with a 29' wide surface on a 50' right-of-way. The cul-de-sac is also designed with a 52' cul-de-sac bulb radius. The third roadway is the continuation of Brighton Drive NW. The roadway ends as a cul-de-sac. It is designed with a 33' wide surface on a 56' right-of- way. The cul-de-sac is designed with a 52' cul-de- sac bulb radius. The fourth roadway is Buckingham Drive NW, which connects Brighton Lane and Londonderry Lane. It is designed with a 33' wide surface on a 56 right-of-way. The fifth roadway is Picadilly Lane, which is a cul-de- sac extending east off of Buckingham Drive NW. The roadway is 29" wide surface on a 50' right-of-way. The cul-de-sac is designed with a 52' cul-de-sac bulb radius. The sixth roadway is Portsmith Drive NW which extends to the east off of Buckingham Lane NW. This roadway will stop currently at the property boundary but will continue to the east when the property is developed. The roadway is 33' wide surface on a 56' right-of-way. Sidewalks: in accordance with current City policy, sidewalk is required along both sides of all roadways. Drainage: The elevations of this site range from 990' in the northwest comer of the plat to 1,020' in the southern portion of the plat. The plat is designed to convey storm water to the detention pond located in the outlots. Wetlands: The Soil Survey and National Wetland Indicator maps were reviewed for the presence of wetlands. The maps do not indicate the presence of wetlands on this property. Public Utilities: Water and sewer will be extended from an existing line in Cornwall Drive NW. A 10-foot utility easement is shown on the front of each lot on the plat. Spillover Parking: The spillover parking requirements for this Page 3 Essex Estates a Subdivision April 27, 2000 development would be 84 parking spaces. The proposed roadways should be adequate to accommodate the required spillover spaces. Parkland Dedication: There is no parkland located within this plat. Parkland dedication for this area was met in a 1990 agreement between the City and North American Realty. General Development Plan: The land involved in this preliminary plat was part of the concept plan for a Planned Unit Development approved by the council on July 16, 1990. The final plat is generally consistent with the preliminary plat approved for the area. Preliminary Plat. A preliminary plat for this property was approved by the City Council on July 19, 1999 with the following conditions: 1. The preliminary plat be revised to loop the Londonderry and Buckingham cut -de -sacs roads together. 2. The applicant dedicates Oudot B to the City of Rochester. 3. The storm water management plan for this property needs to address the impacts on the downstream residents. Any ponds serving less than 50 developable acres are considered private and will need ownership and maintenance agreements. 4. The roadway names "Buckingham Lane NW" and "Brighton Lane NW "be changed to "Buckingham Place NW" and `Brighton Drive NW'; 5. The Rochester Public Utilities Water Division approves the needed locations for utility easements for water main extensions and water main looping. 6. The One hydrant locations on the cul-de-sac be located closer to the 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock positions to ensure that they are not obstructed by snow removal piles. Planning Staff and Recommendation. The preliminary plat for this property was approved prior to the adoption of the new subdivision regulations, which became effective May 15,1999. Since this final plat application was filed prior to May 15, 2000, the subdivision regulations by which this final plat is reviewed are those which were in effect prior to May 15, 1999. The Planning Staff has reviewed the submitted final plat and finds that it is generally consistent with the approved preliminary plat. The staff would then recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the recording of the t1nal plat documents, a Stormwater Maintenance and Ownership Agreement must executed by the Owner for the stormwater facilities proposed on Oullot A. A drainage easement be provided over Outlots A & B. 2. The applicant dedicates Outlot B to the City of Rochester. a7s a� Page 4 Essex Estates 5°t Subdivision April 27, 2000 3. An easement for a temporary turn -around at the easterly end of Portsmith Drive NW must be executed with the City Public Works Department prior to the recording of the final plat documents. 4. Prior to the recording of the final plat documents, the grading and drainage plan must be approved by the City of Rochester Public Works Department. 5. The roadway names be revised as follows: • Add the directional of NW to Picadilly Lane. • Reposition text on the plat to illustrate Brighton Lane NW east of Buckingham Drive NW, and Brighton Drive NW west of Buckingham Drive NW. • Reposition text on the plat to illustrate Londonderry Lane NW east of Buckinghan Drive NW, and Londonderry Drive NW west of Buckingham Drive NW. 04/27/00 12:20 FAX 507 287 2275 ROCK OLM PLANNING DEP, a CTY .ADMIN. IaOO2 ROCHESTER Minnesota 4/27/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur OM DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX - 507-281.6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for Final Plat #99-24 on the Essex Estates Fifth Subdivision property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. The storm water facility located on Outlot B shall be dedicated to the City of Rochester as was previously discussed with the Owner. 2. Prior to recording of the Final Plat, a Stormwater Maintenance & Ownership Agreement is required to be executed by the Owner, for the stormwater facilities proposed on Outlot A. 3. Construction of pedestrian facilities is required at the Owner's expense along the entire frontages of both sides of all public roads within this subdivision (including Outlots). 4. A City / Owner Contract must be executed prior to development of this property to address the construction of all public infrastructure and utilities to serve this plat. 5. A temporary turn -around is required at the easterly extent of Portsmith Dr NW. The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property: ❖ Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre. Water Availability Charge (WAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre. + Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division (10) Street Name Signs (1) Street Ends Sign C:�TEMPIFP#99-24.dec a1$ ,.ck & Recreo�%OII Park and Recreation Department City of Rochester 201 Fourth Street SE • Room 150 • Rochester, MR 55904 (507) 281.6160 • FAX (507) 281-6165 April 21, 2000 To: Suzanne LaPalm Consolidated Planning From: Rochester Park and Recreation RE: Essex Estates e Final Plat #99-24 Acreage......................................................................... 28.2 acres Number of Dwelling Units ............................................ 70 units Dwelling Unit Density ................................................... 2.48 units/acre DensityFactor............................................................ .10 Dedication Requirement .............................................. 2.82 acres The parkland dedication requirements for this plat have been met via the September 20, 1990 agreement between the City and North American Realty. This agreement included the dedication of 7.0 acres of land to the City by the applicant. The applicant has contacted the Park Department regarding the need to grade 30' of park property adjacent to Lots 13-17 Block 3 in order to provide a better property line transition. The grading of park property will be permitted via temporary obstruction permit issued by the park department Applicant. Frank KofSschade North American Really 3800 Highway 52 North I f REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING p?� 5-1-00 A+ PrNUA x4I rurv: CONTINUED HEARING ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PLANNING ( 3 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #00-19 to be known as Manotwood Lakes 5th PREPARED BY: Subdivision. I Mitzi A. Baker, April 27, 2000 NOTE: This Final Plat application is subject to the Subdivision Regulations effective prior to May 15, 1999. Council Action Needed. If the Council wishes to proceed a resolution approving the plat can be adopted Enclosures: (To be submitted separately to the City Clerk by the Planning Staff upon receipt from the applicant) 1. City Clerk's Copy of Applications 2. Recording Statement 3. Treasurer/Auditor's Statement 4. Recording Fee 5. Title Opinion 6. 1 Original Plat Mylar 7. 2 Mylar Copies of Plat Attachment. Staff Report dated April 27, 2000 Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Attorney 3. Planning Department File 4. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday May 1, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. 5. McGhie & Betts, Inc. J ,.vUNCIL ACTION: Motion by*_Second by: X", /� A a �i Q oil fill it Ij bj all I MR! ;'s F d8 ;7 3 3 i Jill d i Jill, a81 i TO: Rochester Common Council +Mist �in.6 +inrFrf��.nr",ti �Mi�Ipip��J - r. , ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GISIAODRESSING/ MAPPING FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner HOUSING/HRA BUILDING CODE DATE: April 27, 2000 WELLSEPTIC FAX RE: Final Plat #00-19 to be known as Manorwood Lakes 5th Subdivision. Plannina Denartment Review: ApplicantiOwner: Western Walls, Inc. 604 111h Ave. NW Rochester, MN 55901 Surveyors/Engineers: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 3r° Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Park & Recreation (see attached) 2. Rochester Public Works (see attached) 3. Rochester Fire Department (see attached) Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (3 Letters) 2. Location Map 3. Copy of Final Plat 5071285-8232 507/285-8224 5071285-8213 507/285-8345 507/287-2275 Plat Data: Location of Property: This plat is located south of T.H. 14, east of 341h Ave. NW, Zoning: The property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family). Proposed Development: This development consists of 2.45 acres to be subdivided into 7 lots for single family residential development. Streets: Roadways adjacent to this Plat have already been dedicated. Sidewalks: In accordance with current City policy, sidewalk is required along both sides of the roadways. �Y ea eni,., noonon uuwre¢,er.. eTvv ecT,nu euo, nvice Page 2 April 27, 2000 Drainage: The property generally drains to the east. An Outiot was platted with Manorwood Lakes Fourth Subdivision for a stormwater pond. Wetlands: Minnesota Statutes now require that all developments be reviewed for the presence of wetlands or hydric soils. There do not appear to be Wetland issues within this Final Plat. Public Utilities: Sewer and water services are available to serve the property. Electric power to this site is provided by RPU. Spillover Parking: This development requires approximately 8 spillover parking spaces. The roadways adjacent to this plat should be adequate to accommodate the spillover parking. Parkland Dedication: Rochester Park and Recreation recommends that dedication requirements be met via cash in lieu of land in the amount of $2,125. General Development Plan: There is no General Development Plan approved for this property. This property is part of the approved preliminary plat for Manorwood Lakes 2ntl' Preliminary Plat: This Final Plat was part of the Preliminary Plat for Manorwood Lakes 2nd. The Preliminary Plat for Manorwood takes 2nd Subdivision (#96-8) was approved by the City Council May 6, 1996 subject to the following conditions or modifications: 1. The 100 year flood elevations and the Ordinary Nigh Water Level Elevation must be shown on the final plat. 2. A grading and drainage plan for this property must be submitted with the final plat documents. 3. The presence of hydric soils in the southeast comer of the site must be veered and delineated prior to development of this areas. If necessary, a mitigation plan must be prepared and approved. 4. The applicant must provide an easement along the common lot lines of Lots 8, 9, 16, and 17, Block 1, and extend an 8" waterline to the north boundary of the plat. 5. If the development is phased, the watermain in Lake Street should be extended to the common lot line of Lots 6 and 7, Block 2, as per the memo of the RPU Water Division. 6. The name of Lake Street Court should be changed to a name unique to the street naming system. The main concern with this name is the fact that if is too confusing to have two road classifications ("street" and "court) in one road name. a83 A� Page 3 111 April 27, 2000 7. Alf cul-de-sacs should be designated as "lanes". B. In order to make house numbering easier, Lake Meadow Drive should be given separate names, and each should be designated as a "street' If Lake Meadow Drive remains as is, it should be designated as a "court". 9. Temporary tum-a-rounds should be provided at the end of the dead end streets. Easements must also be provided for these turn -a -rounds. 10. The developer agrees that this subdivision will have an impact upon the City's needs for parkland and that a cash dedication in lieu of land will meet this need. 11. Prior to construction of structures, accessibility for fire vehicles shall be present and maintained, and water supplies shall be present and available for fire fighting. Planning Staff and Recommendation: NOTE: This application is subject to the Subdivision Regulations effective prior to May 15, 1999. The Planning Staff has reviewed this final plat in accordance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual, and would recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1. A temporary turn -a -round shall be provided at the easterly extent of Lake Vista Drive NW. 2. Parkland Dedication requirements shall be met via cash in lieu of land in the amount of $2,125 per the Rochester Park and Recreation memo dated April 12, 2000. 3. Pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development, along the entire frontage of both sides of all public roadways within this platted area. DATE: TO: RE: C28S ' ROCHESTER PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 56904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 April 12, 2000 Suzanne LaPalm Planning Manorwood Lakes 5" Final Plat #00-19 MEMORANDUM Acreage of plat.......................................................... 2.45 acres Number of dwelling units ............................................. 7 units Dwelling unit density ................................................... 2.86 units /acre Density factor............................................................ .10 Dedication............................................................... .25 acres Fair market value of land ............................................. $8,500/acre* * value established with Manorwood Lakes 2nd preliminary in 1996 The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via cash in lieu of land in the amount of $2,125 (.25 a X $8500/acre) Applicant: Westem Walls Inc 60411 Avenue NE P1:\PARK\DSTCTZ\2000\DEDICATION\NW 2898\MANORKOOD LAKES 5TH.DOC E ROCHESTER Minnesota 4/25/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4' Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for Final Plat #00-19 on the Manorwood Lakes Fifth property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. Sanitary Sewer lines should be extended to the east property line. 2. Pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development, along the entire frontage of both sides of all public roadways within this platted area.. 3. A City / Owner Contract must be executed prior to development of this property to address the construction of all public infrastructure and utilities to serve this plat. 4. A temporary turn -around is required at the easterly extent of Lake Vista Dr NW The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property: -* Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division i C:ITEMPTP#00-1 Moe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING a(/� 5-1-00 O AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONTINUED HEARING PLANNING e , lq EM DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #00-20 to be known as Manorwood Lakes 6th PREPARED BY: Subdivision. Mitzi A. Baker, April 27, 2000 NOTE: This Final Plat application is subject to the Subdivision Regulations effective prior to May 15, 1999. Council Action Needed: 1. !f the Council wishes to proceed a resolution approving the plat can be adopted. Enclosures: (To be submitted separately to the City Clerk by the Planning Staff upon receipt from the applicant) 1. City Clerk's Copy of Applications 2. Recording Statement 3. Treasurer/Auditor's Statement 4. Recording Fee 5. Title Opinion 6. 1 Original Plat Mylar 7. 2 Mylar Copies of Plat Attachment: 1. Staff Report dated April 27, 2000 Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Attorney 3. Planning Department File 4. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on ay 1, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. ;Monday 5. McGhie & Betts, Inc. _ -)UNCIL ACTION: MoBon by: Semna by: to: JIMIn�1111711111111 I 0 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 28, 2000 TO: Mayor and Common Council FROM: Michael Nigbur RE: Hearings E-3 and E-14 CC: Public Works Department has reviewed the final conditions on these two plat applications. The following are requested changes to the conditions of these plats: o Diamond Ridge 18 (E-3) — Condition #2 should be removed. Staff has reviewed the requested change to the easement and have found that it is not needed. o Manorwood Lakes 6 (E14) — Condition #4 should be removed. Staff believes the information related to possible parking restrictions is important for the developer to understand. However, after reconsideration, staff does not think this issue should be condition of a final plat approval due to possible changes in the Bikeway plan that may remove this parking restriction in the future. ROCHESTER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT LAND DEVELOPMENT SECTION -- aJrmma— NPI �A— HaMi of anr-� \ l�—I 7i1 N_ \ M OTJi , earn E I \ w 1 ' 1 a P r I IV , r L�. ca ` OO:Will E 1 O Ill ® Xy6 L 4 r� *War OCOOW E n2 a enrar O 1 ♦ a co — — — — E-4 N i a a. • r a r_a r r W ■ I m b w 11_{{�� w w rchi ai ® osxsIII w i a 14ATCS 130VE 1 SEE m y \ b \ w 1 LIP • 1 Y Ni x a , ` i. NT `A' ; Ii�I \\OTCS 13ELO)l II� 1, CV9 I: rN ■na. : 9r'11• E (Hill S "W E i■■i, i E79 1 ■ ®itI i i e y w IN w _ � t• N / Cv � -- - S 0.Sao'� E : for •aes�;y„r $ ... ` m COCM \ C to O w N! N x ei ■ a r ar.r • + r � it �/a•5 ��� `1` N w c 11• E Lug 4 4�b 7 h r J , 2+ • yy .Vo icy q N t N � \ � � M� ♦ W � p�5 W y �SS s • x Win• vo M N b i W ® N A r • •9 s N p� a 1 v 1 � cz � r• c� � ■�i —I— .4 ♦ M T L_ �C �If1%SlL���1%�1\1 r �II/I}r�1�f1�11f1� r ROCHESTER-OLMSTE❑ PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ PLANNING TO: Rochester Common Council GIS1ADDRESSINGI MAPPING HOUSINGlHRA FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner BUILDING CODE WELUSEPTIC DATE: April 27, 2000 FAX RE: Final Plat #00-20 to be known as Manorwood Lakes 6th Subdivision. Planning Department Review., Applicant/Owner: Western Walls, Inc. 604 11" Ave. NW Rochester, MN 55901 Surveyors/Engineers: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 3" Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Park & Recreation (see attached) 2. Rochester Public Works (see attached) 3. John Harford, Planning Department & Wetlands LGU (see attached) 4. Planning Department, GIS Division (see attached) 5. Rochester Fire Department (see attached) Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (5 Letters) 2. Location Map 3. Copy of Final Plat 5071285-8232 507/285-8232 507/285-8224 5071285-8213 507/285-8345 507/287-2275 Plat Data: Location of Property: This plat is located south of T.H. 14, east of 30 Ave. NW. Zoning: The property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family). Proposed Development: This development consists of 18.11 acres to be subdivided into 79 lots for single family residential development. r V' l Page 2 April 27, 2000 Streets: Roadways adjacent to this Plat have already been dedicated. Sidewalks: In accordance with current City policy, sidewalk is required along both sides of the roadways. Drainage: The property generally drains to the east. An Outlot was platted with Manorwood Lakes Fourth Subdivision for a stormwater pond. Wetlands: Minnesota Statutes now require that all developments be reviewed for the presence of wetlands or hydric soils: A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and the applicant previously applied for an Exemption. The TEP concluded that sufficient information had not been provided to make a determination and the exemption was not issued. The applicant will need to submit a replacement plan for the small area located in the northeast comer of the site, along 7t° St. Public Utilities: Sewer and water services are available to serve the property. Electric power to this site is provided by RPU. Spillover Parking: This development requires approximately 94 spillover parking spaces. The roadways adjacent to this plat should be adequate to accommodate the spillover parking. Parkland Dedication: Rochester Park and Recreation recommends that dedication requirements be met via cash in lieu of land in the amount of $27,520. General Development Plan: Preliminary Plat. There is no General Development Plan approved for this property. This property is part of the approved preliminary plats for Manorwood Lakes 2nd and Manorwood Lakes 3'° Subdivisions, This Final Plat was part of two different Preliminary Plats. The Preliminary Plat for Manorwood Lakes a Subdivision (#96-8) was approved by the City Council May 6, 1996 subject to the following conditions or modifications: 1. The 100 year flood elevations and the Ordinary High Water Level Elevation must be shown on the final plat. 2. A grading and drainage plan for this property must be submitted with the final plat documents. 3. The presence of hydric soils in the southeast comer of the site must be verified and delineated prior to development of this areas. If necessary, a mitigation plan must be prepared and approved. 4. The applicant must provide an easement along the common lot lines of Lots 8, 9, 16, and 17, Block 1, and extend an 8" water line to the north boundary of the plat. Page 3 April 27, 2000 5. If the development is phased, the watermain in Lake Street should be extended to the common lot line of Lots 6 and 7, Block 2, as per the memo of the RPU Water Division. 6. The name of Lake Street Court should be changed to a name unique to the street naming system. The main concern with this name is the fact that it is too confusing to have two road classifications ("street and "court') in one road name. 7. All cul-de-sacs should be designated as lanes". 8. In order to make house numbering easier, Lake Meadow Drive should be given separate names, and each should he designated as a "street" If Lake Meadow Drive remains as is, it should be designated as a court'. 9. Temporary tum-a-rounds should be provided at the end of the dead and streets. Easements must also be provided for these tum-a-rounds. 10. The developer agrees that this subdivision will have an impact upon the City's needs for parkland and that a cash dedication in lieu of land will meet this need. 11. Prior to construction of structures, accessibility for fire vehicles shall be present and maintained, and water supplies shall be present and available for fire fighting. The Preliminary Plat for Manorwood Lakes a Subdivision (#97-25) was approved by the City Council September 3, 1997subject to the following conditions or modi8cadons. 1. A 20' minimum utility easement is needed between Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, for the placement of an 8" wafer main. This water main was determined necessary to serve the property to the west during the review of Manorwoods Lakes Second Subdivision. 2. The developer shall construct 7th Street NW to an urban section (curbtguttedstorm sewer/sidewalk) along the limits of the entire plat as per Public Works' comment. 3. A8 outlots shall have sidewalks installed along the R.O.W. by the developer and shall be dedicated to the City of Rochester. 4. This area is identified for a regional facility for storm water management. The developer shall work with Public Works to establish the amount of work required or fees to be paid to fulfill the requirements of this project. 5. Verification and the potential correction of contours on the site must be made prior to submittal of any final plats. 6. The developer needs to provide an overall grading plan to determine the impacts on the adjacent property. This grading may also impact the developer's final street profile. 7. Other conditions related to gradingldrainagelconstnuch'on plans may be placed upon the final plat due to information included in those plans. 8. As per the Public Works comment, the developer must coordinate the timing of direct access by lots and access via new streets to 71h Street NW with the Rochester public Works Department and MnDOT. 9. As per the Rochester Park and Recreation comments, access to the future neighborhood park to the east and the anticipated trail system around the lake needs to be addressed in this plat. 10. As per the Rochester Park and Recreation comments, in the absence of an approved general development plan for the area, the Park Department suggests that concept plans for development of the property to the area east of this plat be prepared and submitted by the applicant. The 04/27/00 12:47 FAX 507 287 2275 ROCH OLM PLANNING DEPT. + CTY ADMIN. Z 002 10 Page 4 April 27, 2000 concept should indicate the park, pedestnan and vehicle access to the park, and general street layout for the area. 11. In order to conform to the street naming conventions for the City of Rochester, Lakeview Street NW should be changed to Lakeview Drive NW. 12, The proposed portion of lake Street NW does not connect to the existing Lake Street NW, which may cause difficulties for emergency response units. Signs signifying address ranges, therefore, must be erected at each end of each Lake Street segment. 13. A routine wetlands delineation will need to be completed on this site to determine if wetlands are present. 14. The floodway and flood prone areas must be delineated on the preliminary plat. Planning Staff and Recommendation: NOTE. This application is subject to the Subdivision Regulations effective prior to May 15, 1999. The Planning Staff has reviewed this final plat in accordance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual, and would recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1. A temporary turn -a -round shall be provided at lips easterly extent of Lake Vista Drive NW. 2. The elevation 1008.0 Is identfMed on Manorwood Lama 5ei Subdivision as the 100 year flood elevation. The preliminary plat included in this application showed an elevation of 1008.0 along the easterly portion of Lots 9 and 10, Block 2 (of this plat). This Final Plat shall be revised to identify the 100 year Mood boundary (floodway). 3. Pedestrian facilities shalt be constructed concurrent with this development, along the entire frontage of both sides of all public roadways within this platted area. 4. There is a "No Parking" restriction along both sides of a ST. NW, to facilitate bike lanes. 5. Parkland Dedication requirements shall be me via cash in lieu of land in the amount of $27,520 per the April 13, 2000 memo from the Rochester Park and Recreation Department. 6. A Wetland Delineation has been carried out for this property, and the applicant previously applied for an exemption. The TEP informed the applicant that sufficient Information had not been provided to make a determination, therefore no exemption was issued. The applicant shaft submit a replacement, and receive approval from the LGU, for the Wattand located within Block 3 of this Final Plat along r St NW, prior to recording the final plat documents (mylars) or grading of the area whichever Is First ass ROCHESTER PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 65904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 13, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning RE. Manorwood Lakes e Final Plat /l00-20 Acreage of plat ................ Number of dwelling units... Dwelling unit density......... Densityfactor............................................................ Dedication............................................................ Fair market value of land 1 value established with Manorwood Lakes 2nd preliminary in 1996 (4.33 a of this plat) 2 value established with Manorwood Lakes 3'd preliminary in 1997 (13.76 a of this plat) 18.11 acres 79 units 4.36 units /acre .12 2.17 acres $8,500/acre' $14,00/acre2 The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via cash in lieu of land in the amount of $27,520 . Payment due 12 months from approval of plat by Council. 4.33 acres X .12 = .52 acres X $8500/acre......... $ 4,420 13.78 acres X .12 = 1.65 acres X $14,000/acre....... $23.100 TOTAL ............... $27,520 Applicant Western Walls Inc :r:\PARK\DSTOTZ\2000\DEDICATION\NW 289e\MANORWOOD LAKES 6TH.DOC r. ROCHESTER Minnesota 4/26/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur REVISED 4/26/00 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4"' Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for Final Plat #00-20 on the Manor -wood Lakes Sixth property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. Sanitary Sewer lines should be extended to the west property line. 2. Pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development, along the entire frontage of both sides of all public roadways within this platted area-,Awkh-the exeegtten of F'sSt ?-AV. Final Plat Said Agreement will ie.f h n m .eleper's obligation %i >_ 1' w. 4. A City / Owner Contract must be executed prior to development of this property to address the construction of all public infrastructure and utilities to serve this plat. 5. A temporary turn -around is required at the easterly extent of Lake Vista Dr NW 6. There is a "No Parking" restriction along both sides of 7d' St NW, to facilitate bike lanes. The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property: J8650 Watermain in 7" St NW @ $20.4786 per foot, plus interest Qa 8.0% from 2/2/81 (10 year max) x 1,365,59 fit = $50,337.67 ❖ A substandard street reconstruction contribution will be required for improvements to 70' St NW to provide adequate driveway access and road width to serve this development. ❖ Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division: (4) Street name Signs (1) Stop Sign (2) Street Ends Signs C:\TEMP\FP#00-20 Revised 4-26.doc aq?/ PLAT REFERRAL RESPONSE DATE: 4-20-00 TO: Suzanne LaPalm FROM: Planning Dept. Addressing Staff CC: Mike Wiebusch, Ed Kuisle RE: MANORWOOD LAKES SIXTH NOTE: Seventh Street NW as illustrated on this plat, and as platted in Manorwood Lakes Third is of immediate concern to the Rochester/Olmsted County Planning Department; GIS Division addressing staff. This roadway may be renamed in the near future because it has been identified as an addressing and Emergency Response issue. i Appiication Number rrrna-MQ jz�'(29-7-p No hyddc soils exist on the site based on the Soil Survey Hydric soils exist on the site according to the Soil Survey. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands on the property and /submitting the information as part of this application. ✓ A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and is on file with the Planning Department A wetland delineation is on file with the Planning Department and a No - loss, Exemption, or Replacement Plan has been submitted to the Planning Department. A wetland related application has been approved by the City. This plan incorporates the approved wetland plan. No hyddc soils exist on the property based on the -Soil Survey. However, due to the location in the landscape the property owner should examine the site for wetlands. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands. ���•�r ti , II �� From John Harford Wetlands LGU Representative t REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION � SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: PUBLIC HEARINGS- Continued Item I PLANNWG . —MI DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #00-10 to be known as The Gardens April 26, 2000 Planning Denartment Review: See attached Staff Report dated April 26, 2000. Council Action Needed: MEETING DATE $-1-00 ITEM NO. PREPARED BY: Brent Svenby, 1. A resolution approving the plat can be adopted. Enclosures: (To be submitted separately to the City Clerk by the Planning Staff upon receipt from the applicant) 1. City Clerk's Copy of Applications 2. Recording Statement 3. Treasurer/Auditor's Statement 4. Recording Fee 5. Title Opinion 6. 1 Original Plat Mytar 7. 3 Mylar Copies of Plat Attachment. 1. Staff Report dated April 26, 2000. Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Attorney 3. Planning Department File 4. Planning Department —GIS 5. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. 6. Yaggy Colby Associates - - JNCIL ACTION: Motion Second by. May 1, 2000, in the Council/Board Q ST Sw 3 N M ST Sw / C 48 r Hwy 52 Final Plat #00-10 The Gardens 2,700' Notification Distance Ward 1 (Hanson) 03/31 /00 '� 45 ST SE 1 ' CO i Sw "� O I I jjjjjj ==J$J$ FF]]� MMQ�FX�Mn B� .� of ::4 1086.81 ACCESS O NOW E M"IM Li cwxi THE GARDENS DEVELOPMENT A E ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA 8 if g PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APA�Ia�+=Q D low s° g W . .% 9� t A � s 3� i3g$g THE GARDENS PHASE 1 ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA TITLE SHEET x C m cn m Z m to 0 11 P 1111 1 1i 11i1 7 a aq� c�1 1101 ' 935z1 IS€1� ��� 363 u i • v PP W ��k to i a 28745'30• 1314.90 . u. MA wa 401X SIBEEf it 4 t,1V WVl Y Y y 2 y �o„ °� G e5 b o a m �i 19 LJ Y I N ' ��I n V • II I I Iip Ej j I �j- �I� nnir y Ii1 z r it r ��'Ij c+• �� III E "1 �r � (1r z f� �` r—� � � • .�I w 16 i 1 � � I ' _�`.�' R........_...,. 481X SIREET_S.G.... .....5......... aa•�f f. 1•f�af •• .. rn- ao- yQ�1 1 0 „g ev �by W TO: Rochester Common Council FROM: Brent Svenby, Planner DATE: April 26, 2000 RE., Final Plat #00-10 to be known as The Gardens. Planning Department Review: Applicant/Owner: The Gardens LLC Attn: Tom Hexum 1002 Broadway North Rochester, MN 55906 �III�►L� II/►►►�1 �t�►{r�4un{N� i ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 wELusEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 Surveyors/Engineers: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 3rd Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Referral Comments: 1. Park and Recreation Department 2. Planning Department - Wetland LGU 3. Planning Department — Transportation 4. Planning Department — Addressing 5. RPU Operations Division 6. RPU Water Division 7. Rochester Fire Department 8. MnDOT 9, Olmsted County SWCD 10. Rochester Public works Department Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (7 Letters) 2. Location Map 3. Copy of Restricted Development Plan 4. Copy of Final Plat Plat Data: Location of Property: The property is located north of 451h Street SE, east of St. Bridget Road. Zoning: This property is zoned M-1 (Mixed Commercial - Industrial) district in the City of Rochester. �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 The Gardens April 26, 2000 Proposed Development: This development consists of 79.50 acres of land to be subdivided into 1 lot for a manufactured housing development and 7 outlots. Streets: This plat dedicates right-of-way for three public roadways. The first dedicated right-of-way is that of the north half of 45 h St. SE (Co. Rd. 101). The applicant is dedicating 60 feet of right-of-way. The plat also dedicates right-of-way for the future alignment of St. Bridget Road and 40'' St. SE. Both of these dedications are 60 feet from the center of the proposed road. Private roadways will serve the manufactured housing development. The private roadways will be within the utility easements. The no parking will be allowed on the two hammerhead tum-arounds. Sidewalks: According to the restricted development plan approved for this site, a pedestrian lane will be provided on one side of the roadway. Drainage: The properly generally drains to the north. According to the approved grading plan, outlot F will be a stromwater detention pond. Wetlands: Minnesota Statutes now require that all developments be reviewed for the presence of wetlands or hydric soils. A wetland delineation plan has been approved for this site. The wetlands are being avoided during the first phase of development. Public Utilities: Water and sewer can be extended from their present ends to serve this property. There is a 12" watermain and 10" sanitary sewer line located just west of this plat. Spillover Parking: Spillover parking requirements were reviewed at the time the Restricted Development Plan was approved for this development. Parkland Dedication: Based on previously submitted plans, the required public park dedication is projected to be 7.59 acres. Outlot G, 4.19 acres, will be dedicated to the City. Access to the park will need to be via a public easement over the private entrance road and private parking lot that will serve the office area. The applicant will also grade and construct an 8' bituminous trail along the east property line; Outlot E will be dedicated to the City. General Development Restricted Development:nt: The applicant does have an approved Restricted 36.5 ' ;0( Page 3 The Gardens April 27, 2000 Development Preliminary Plan on the entire site and an approved Restricted Development Final Plan on the first phase of the project. Development of the first phase is subjected to the conditions of approval listed in the resolution. Preliminary Plat: A preliminary plat was not submitted for this plat. Planning staff agreed that the requirements for a preliminary plat could be waved in accordance with Section 61.221. The applicant is dedicating the right-of-way for two roadways to be constructed in the future when the interchange is constructed at 40s' Street. The roadways within the plat are all private. Planning Staff and Recommendation: The Planning Staff has reviewed the submitted final plat and would recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat be revised to include the following: • At a minimum a 1 D' utility easement along all public roads. • Easements for any public facilities within the property be provided on the plat documents. 2. The applicant dedicates Outlot D to the City, for Regional Stormwater Management, as required in the Development Agreement. 3. The applicant dedicates OuHot G and E to the City for public parkland. The dedication must occur once the grading, seeding and installation of the trail is complete. Prior to the recording of the final plat documents, a public access easement must be granted to the City providing access to the public park over the private entrance road and private parking lot that serves the office area. 4. The developer post "No Parking — Fire Lane" signs in the two hammerhead turn- arounds and along one side of the private roadways. It's the developer's responsibility to enforce these regulations. S. The pedestrian facilities, located along the north, east and south property lines, shall be constructed concurrent with this development. 6. Prior to the recording of the final plat documents, a Stormwater Maintenance and Ownership Agreement must executed by the Owner for the stormwater facilities proposed on Outiot F. ROCHESTER Minnesota 4/11/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street BE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for Final Plat #00-10 to be known as The Gardens . The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. A Development Agreement has been executed for this development. 2. A Grading Plan has been approved for this development. 3. The Owner shall dedicate Outlot D to the City, for Regional Stormwater Management, as required in the Development Agreement. 4. Stormwater Management will be provided on -site. 5. Dedication often (10) foot wide easements for pedestrian facilities is needed on the North, West, and South sides of the property. The pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development. 6. This Plat should include the dedication of 120 feet of ROW width for St. Bridget Rd SE, from 40th St SE to 451h St SE. 7. Easements for any public facilities within the property must be provided concurrent with the plat of the property. 6. Prior to construction of Public Infrastructure to serve this development, the property owner shall execute a City Owner Contract that requires the developer to construct the public roadways and utilities. 9. Utilities must be extended to the North, East and South property lines, as determined by the City, to facilitate the orderly extension of public utilities to adjacent property. Charges and fees associated with this development are addressed in the executed Development Agreement, with the exception of Traffic Control Signs as follows: 2 Street Name Signs 1 Stop Sign C:1TEM P1FP#00-10.doc ROCHESTER PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: April 3, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning FROM: Denny Stotz SUBJECT: The Gardens Final Plat #00-10 Based on previously submitted unit layouts, the required public park dedication is projected to be 7.59 acres. The Park Department recommends that parkland dedication for the development knows as 'The Gardens" be met as follows: The site plan includes a 4.19 acre public park along the future St Bridget Road SE. The park location is indicated as Outlot G. The applicant should grade the park to meet dedication standards. Access to the park will be via a public easement over the private entrance road and private parking lot that will serve the office area. The applicant will own, construct and maintain the parking lot and the office building to be located in Outlot C but will permit via easement the public use of the lot for the purpose of accessing the adjacent park. The applicant will be given parkland dedication credits for the public use of the parking lot. The credits are to be calculated once the parking lot is constructed. The park to be dedicated to the City once the site is graded, seeded and accessed via private street and access easements are recorded. The applicant will grade and construct a 8' bituminous trail along the east property line. The trail corridor, identified as Outlot E is 1.21 acres in size will be deeded to the City and will qualify for parkland dedication credits. The outlot should be dedicated to the City once the grading, seeding and installation of trail is completed. The remaining dedication requirement of t 2.19 acres will be met during the final phase of the development. If the as of yet undetermined alignment 40 Street SW remains as shown on the plan, the dedication will be in the form of cash. If the alignment of 40 Street SW moves slightly to the north, the final dedication will be in the form of dedication of the unused ROW adjacent to the trail corridor. Applicant The Gardens LLC 1002 North Broadway Rochester \\CITY OF ROCHESTER\CITYHALL\PARK\DSTOTZ\2000\DEDICATION\SE 2995\THE GARDENS FINAL.DOC ROCHESTER ./�iizrte�o�a August 20, 1999 TO: Suzanne LaPalm, Planning From: Lyle Felsch, Deputy Chief DAVID A. KAPLER, Chief Rochester Fire Department 201 4th Street SE, Room 10 Rochester, MN 55904-3726 (507) 285-8072 FAX #(507) 285-8256 Subj: Type 111, Phase I, Final Plat Plan #00-10, The Gardens, north of 45th Street SE and east of St. Bridget's Road SE. The project I more than one minute beyond the 4 minute response standard of the Rochester Fire Department and will be developing 79.5 acres into manufactured housing development. With regard to this project, the fire department has the following requirements. An adequate water supply shall be provided for fire protection, including hydrants properly located and installed in accordance with the specifications of the Water Division. Hydrants shall be in place prior to commencing building construction. Specific hydrant locations were not shown on this plan. 2. Fire department access streets and roadways shall be as provided in accordance with the fire code, RCO 31 and the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual including approved cul-de-sac dimensions and street widths. All fire department access roadways shall be serviceable prior to and during building occupation. The two hammerhead turn-arounds shown appear to be satisfactory, provided a minimum of 20' fire lane access is maintained by posting and enforcement of "No Parking — Fire Lane" signs in accordance with the fire code. 28' foot roadways shown on previous submittals will allow parking on one side only. No residential parking can be allowed in the actual hammerheads. Off street parking must be provided for resident's vehicles. All fire lane signs, sign height, and locations shall be in accordance with specifications of the Public Works, Traffic Division. 3. All street, directional and fire lane signs must be in place prior to occupancy of any residential buildings. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION PUBLIC HEARINGS MEETING cJ( r DATE 5-1-00 ING DEPT: I ITEM NO. PLANNING Fi „'(o ITEM DESCRIPTION: Preliminary Plat #00-12 by BBB Development to be known as PREPARED BY: Ridgeview Manor (formerly Northern Trails). The Plat proposes to subdivide 16.23 acres of Brent Svenby. land Into 43 lots for single family residential development and 1 outlot. The Plat also Planner proposes to dedicate right-of-way for 50d' Avenue NW and 6 new public roadways. The property Is located along the west side of 50d' Avenue NW and south of 65d' Street NW. April 27, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on April 26, 2000 to consider this preliminary plat for the property. The proposed subdivision consists of 16.23 acres to be subdivided into 43 lots for single family residential development and 1 outlot. Andy Masterpole, McGhie & Betts, Inc., addressed the Commission. He reviewed the plat and the staff recommended conditions. He stated that they are in agreement with the staff recommended conditions. The Planning Commission found that this preliminary plat conforms to the criteria listed in the Land Development Manual and recommends approval of this preliminary plat with the following modifications or conditions: 1. The plat be revised as follows: • The 20' utility easement shown between Lots 4 & 5, Block 1 must be relocated to be between Lots 5 & 6, Block 1 and Lots12 & 13, Block 1. In the event that the grade difference is lessened this loop should be moved back to its original position. • Dedicate the entire right of way for 50d' Avenue NW as shown in GDP 4144 via easement or plat. • Change the name of the plat and roadways to meet the standards of the LDM as stated In the letter dated 3- 31-00 from the Planning Department Addressing Staff. 2. Prior to the submittal of the final plat, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to; storm water management; park dedication; traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 3. The development must be phased so that 50ei Ave. NW, north of 551" St. NW, does not exceed approximately 3,000 average daily trips unless the Council has approved a public improvement project to upgrade 50ei Ave. NW. A contribution will be required for the reconstruction of 50ei Ave. NW, and 65e' St. NW. The City is currently considering a Traffic Improvement District in this area for improving 50d' Ave. NW, and 65h St. NW, and establishing the developers proportional share of the cost. 4. A temporary turnaround is required at the westerly and of "Conrad Place NW", "Middlebrook Drive NW" and "Florence Drive NW". Easements for these turnarounds, as well as for any utilities located outside of the plat boundary must be executed with the City prior to be recording of the Final Plat documents. 5. Since reconstruction of 50t° Ave. NW is proposed in the near future, the developer must execute a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement with the City prior to the recording of the final plat. Said agreement will address the developer's responsibility to provide pedestrian facilities along the west side of 50t° Ave. NW. 6. Storm water management facilities intended to serve this subdivision must be constructed concurrent with the Initial stages of development. A stormwater declaration andlor wetland declaration is needed for Outlot A. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: 'age 2 f MCA 1 1pril 27, 2000 � - 7. The applicant agrees that this subdivision will have an impact on the need for Parkland and that the deterred dedication of land will meet this need. Such dedication of land will occur when the park is assessed via road or the Park Department wishes to begin development of the park. 3. Prior to the submittal of the final plat, the applicant must submit a wetland delineation and obtain the necessary permits from the LGU that may be necessary for this plat to proceed. Motion by Burke to approve Preliminary Plat 000-12 to be known as Ridgeview Manor (formerly Northern Trails), with the staff suggested conditions; seconded by Brede. The motion carried 8-0. until Action Needed: �- 1) The Council mavapprove,.approve with conditions; or-deaythe [and aubdivisioa pe nit^ The Councl[ musmake ftndings of fact based on file crterla inciutied in tie stafFreort. .; motion to denymust include supporting reasons for aconc(usion that at leastone om`-"'a fifteen ffndIhji.fordenlailn Para" ra h 61r?25.can be. made: Attachment 1. Staff Report dated April 20, 2000 Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 3. City Attorney 4. Planning Department Fie 5. Planning Department GIS Division 6. Applicant: This Rem will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, May 1, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. 7. McGhie & Betts, Inc. i IE1� M8� (I It t *1 ........... - qm; � 0 C040 WW Z it W O N 42 jt WN: cli > ,4z d W ! d r 1 • N A _, 009 TO: FROM DATE: RE: City Planning and Zoning Commission Brent Svenby, Planner April 20, 2000 ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRAnaw 507/285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING Hou9INGMRA 5071285-8224 BUILDING CODE 5071285-8213 WELUSEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 5071287-2275 Type III, Phase II, Land Subdivision Permit #00-12 (Preliminary Plat) to be known as Northern Trails. Planninq Department Review: ApplicanUOwner: SurveyorsfEngineers: Referral Comments: Report Attachments: Development Review: Location of Property: Zoning: BBB Development PO Box 247 Byron, MN 55920 McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 P Avenue SE Rochester. MN 55904 RPU Water Division RPU Operations Division Park and Rec. Dept. Planning Dept. —Transportation Staff Planning Dept. — John Harford Planning Dept. — Addressing Staff Rochester Public Works Department MnDOT 1. Land Development Manual Excerpts 2. Referral Comments (5letters) 3. Location Map 4. Copy of GDP 5. Copy of Preliminary Plat 6. MN DNR Letter The property is located along the west side of 50" Avenue NW, south of 65 Street NW. The property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) district on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. in Page 2 Northern Trails April 20, 2000 Proposed Development: Streets: This development consists of 16.23 acres of land to be subdivided into 43 lots for single family residential use and one outlot. This plat dedicates right-of-way for six new roadways and also dedicates the right-of-way for 50`h Avenue NW. Some roadway names need to be changed. The applicant will need to coordinate with the City and Planning Department GIS staff to determine appropriate names. A portion of Middlebrook Drive NW and all of Outlot A is on the neighboring property. A letter is needed by the neighboring property owner that they are in agreement with the plat. The roadway is consistent with what is shown on the Weatherstone and Ripley General Development Plans. Sidewalks: In accordance with current City policy, sidewalk is required along both sides of all of the new streets in the subdivision. A 5' sidewalk will also be required along the west side of 50`h Ave. NW. Drainage: The elevations of this site range from 1,110' in the northern portion of the plat to 1,070' in the southern portion of the plat. The property generally drains to the south. Specific grading and drainage plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to submittal of a Final Plat application. Wetlands: The Soil Survey and National Wetland Indicator maps were reviewed for the presence of wetlands. Hydric soils exist on the site. The applicant will need to submit a wetland delineation and obtain approval for a replacement plan for the wetlands being displaced by this plat. Public Utilities: Water and sewer will need to be extended to serve this property. A 10-foot utility easement is shown on the front of each lot on the plat. Spillover Parking: As per Section 63.426 of the LDM, all residential development must provide spillover parking for service vehicles and visitors at a rate of 1.2 spaces per dwelling unit, in addition to the required off-street parking. This additional parking may be provided either off-street or on -street. This development requires 52 spillover parking spaces. The right-of-way and road widths appear adequate to meet this requirement. 311 gPage 3 Northern Trails April 20, 2000 Parkland Dedication: There is no parkland included within the boundaries of this plat. The Rochester Park and Recreation Department recommends that the parkland dedication requirements for this plat be satisfied by the deferred dedication of land for the neighborhood park identified on the GDP. Dedication to occur when the park is accessible via road or the Park Department wishes to begin development of the park. General Development Plan: On March 20, 2000, the city approved the general development plan for this property. The proposed plat is generally consistent with the approved General Development Plan. Staff Review: The applicant's consultant has reviewed this preliminary plat with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to determine if it would have an impact on Wetland A shown on the GDP. There could be a possibility that Wetland A is a calcareous fen. It is expected that the determination will be made in June. According to the letter dated March 14, 2000 from the MN DNR and a conversation with James Cooper, MN DNR Regional Hydrologist, the development of this plat will have minimal or no impacts to Wetland A. Currently 501h Avenue is designed to carry approximately 3,000 vehicle per day. With the proposed developments along 501h Avenue, from 551h Street to 65th Street, phasing of the developments will need to be limited so that the total number of trips do not exceed approximately 3,000 average daily trip unless the Council has approved a public improvement project to upgrade 501h Avenue NW. Half of the right of way of the southerly most roadway (Middlebrook Drive NW) and outlot A is on land not owned by the applicant. This property owner will need to be in agreement with this roadway and outlot and will need to sign the final plat documents. The location of this roadway is consistent with the approved Weatherstone and Ripley General Development Plans. The proposed name of the preliminary plat is similar to other plats in Olmsted County. This could be confusing to emergency responders and could impact their response time. There are a number of plats with the name "Northern" in the NE quadrant of the City. These plats consist of the Northern Heights and Northern Slopes developments. The applicant will need to work with addressing staff to determine appropriate roadway names and plat name. Staff Recommendation: The Planning staff has reviewed this preliminary plat request under the provisions of LDM Sections 61.225 and 61.226. The staff recommends that the following modifications or conditions be imposed on this preliminary plat in order to insure that the above -mentioned criteria are met: The plat be revised as follows: • The 20' utility easement shown between Lots 4 & 5, Block 1 must be relocated to be between Lots 5 & 6, Block 1 and Lots12 & 13, Block 1. In the event that the grade difference is lessened this loop should be moved back to its original position. • Dedicate the entire right of way for 501h Avenue NW as shown in GDP #144. • Change the name of the plat and roadways to meet the standards of the LDM as stated in the letter dated 3-31-00 from the Planning Department Addressing Staff. Page 4 Northern Trails April 20, 2000 2. Prior to the submittal of the final plat, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to; storm water management; park dedication; traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 3. The development must be phased so that 50'h Ave. NW, north of 55" St. NW, does not exceed approximately 3,000 average daily trips unless the Council has approved a public improvement project to upgrade 50'h Ave. NW. A contribution will be required for the reconstruction of 50th Ave. NW, and 651h St. NW. The City is currently considering a Traffic Improvement District in this area for improving 50'h Ave. NW, and 65h St. NW, and establishing the developers proportional share of the cost. 4. A temporary turnaround is required at the westerly end of "Conrad Place NW", "Middlebrook Drive NW" and "Florence Drive NW". Easements for these turnarounds, as well as for any utilities located outside of the plat boundary must be executed with the City prior to be recording of the Final Plat documents. 5. Since reconstruction of 50'h Ave. NW is proposed in the near future, the developer must execute a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement with the City prior to the recording of the final plat. Said agreement will address the developer's responsibility to provide pedestrian facilities along the west side of 50'h Ave. NW. 6. Storm water management facilities intended to serve this subdivision must be constructed concurrent with the initial stages of development. A stormwater declaration and/or wetland declaration is needed for Outlot A. 7. The applicant agrees that this subdivision will have an impact on the need for Parkland and that the deferred dedication of land will meet this need. Such dedication of land will occur when the park is assessed via road or the Park Department wishes to begin development of the park. B. Prior to the submittal of the final plat, the applicant must submit a wetland delineation and obtain the necessary permits from the LGU that may be necessary for this plat to proceed. REMINDER TO APPLICANT: Prior to development, the property owner will need to execute a City Owner Contract for construction of the public roadways and utilities. • This plat is subject to the Subdivision regulations which became effective May 15, 1999. Approved grading, drainage and construction plans and an executed Development Agreement will need to be submitted with the final application if the applicant intends to record the final plat documents prior to completion of infrastructure Improvements, 3(1 imp ROCHESTER ZONING ORDINANCE AND LAND DEVELOPMENT MANUAL EXCERPT 61.225 Findings for Land Subdivision: The Zoning Administrator, Commission or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a land subdivision if all of the following findings with respect to the proposed development are made: A. The proposed land subdivision conforms to all relevant requirements of this ordinance and variances have been granted to permit any nonconformance. B. That the proposed water system and sanitary sewer system are adequate to serve the normal and fire protection demands of proposed development and to provide for the efficient and timely extension to serve future development. C. That the plan for soil erosion and stormwater management meets the adopted standards of the City of Rochester and is consistent with the adopted Stormwater Management Plan or adopted drainage or stormwater policies. D. That the vehicular and non -motorized system is consistent with adopted transportation plans and is consistent with the street layout standards listed in Section 64.120 and traffic service standards in Section 61.526. E. That the lot and block layout provide for safe and convenient vehicular, service and emergency access, efficient utility service connections, and adequate buildable area in each lot for planned uses. F. That the proposed land subdivision has taken into account the current 6-Year and other Long -Range Capital Improvements Programs and the elements listed therein in the design of the subdivision. G. That the proposed subdivision, if in a residential zoning district, -addresses the need for spillover parking consistent with the requirements of Section 63.426. H. That right-of-ways and easements of adequate size and dimension are -provided for the purpose of constructing the street, utility, and drainage facilities needed to serve the development. That the proposed parks, trail thoroughfares and open space dedications are consistent with adopted plans, policies and regulations. J. That the proposed subdivision will not have off -site impacts on the street, drainage, water or wastewater systems that exceed adopted standards. K. That the proposed subdivision will not have adverse impacts on the safety or viability of permitted uses on adjacent properties. FM Effective 5115/99 L. That the proposed land subdivision is designed in such a manner as to allow for continued development in an efficient manner an adjacent undeveloped lands; M. That the soils, topography and water tables have been adequately studied to ensure that all lots are developable for their designated purposes. N. That the proposed land subdivision is consistent with the standards of the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. 0. That any land located within Zone A as shown on the currently adopted Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps of the Flood Insurance Study, Rochester, Minnesota, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is determined to be suitable for its intended use and that the proposed subdivision adequately mitigates the risks of flooding, inadequate drainage, soil and rock formations with severe limitations for development, severe erosion potential, or any other floodplain related risks to the health, safety or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision in a manner consistent with this ordinance. Effective 5/15/99 e" ROCHESTER Minnesota 3/28/00 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 TO: Consolidated Planning Department Rochester, MN 55904.3740 2122 Campus Drive SE 507-287-7800 Rochester, MN 55904 FAX — 507-281.6216 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for a Preliminary Plat Request #00-12 on the Northern Trails (P/O Ripley GDP#144} property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. The stormwater detention facilities intended to serve this subdivision should be constructed concurrent with the initial stages of development. 2. A Stormwater Declaration is needed for Outlot A. 3. All of the 50th Ave NW ROW in GDP#144 shall be dedicated in this plat or an easement provided to the City prior to plat approval. 4. Controlled access, as indicated on the preliminary plat along 50th Ave NW, shall be shown on the final plat. 5. A temporary turn -around, is required at the westerly extent of Conrad Place NW, Middlebrook Dr NW, and Florence Or NW. 6. Easements are required for off -site utility extensions, and for the temporary turn arounds. 7. Construction of pedestrian facilities including pedestrian ramps, is required concurrent with development of this subdivision, along both sides of all new streets, including along Outlots. C:\TE MP\P P#00-12.doc ROCHESTER Minnesota 3/28/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4' Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 8. Since reconstruction of 50'h Ave NW is proposed in the near future, the Owner shall execute a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement, drafted by the City, to address the Owner's responsibility to provide pedestrian facilities along the west side of 501h Ave NW. 9. A City / Owner Contract must be executed prior to development of this property, to address the construction of all public infrastructure and utilities to serve this subdivision. 10.The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to; stormwater management, park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 11.The capacity of 50u' Ave NW is limited to 3000 trips by its current condition. Development along this corridor is limited to no more than 3000 average daily trips until a commitment has been made by the City to reconstruction 50th Ave NW to provide additional trip capacity. 12.The Owner shall execute a Contribution Agreement, drafted by the City, to address the Owner's proportional cost share of the reconstruction of 50th Ave NW. The Contribution Agreement must be signed by the Owner before the City will initiate a public project to reconstruct 50th Ave NW. C:\TEMP\PP#00-12.doc 3�4 ROCHESTER Minnesota 3/28/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 40 Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property: Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre ❖ Water Availability Charge (WAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre ❖ Stormwater Management Fee for participation, at the City's discretion, in the City's Regional Stormwater Management Plan @ $1983.50 per acre A proportional share of the cost for reconstructing 50� Ave NW to provide additional trip capacity. The Owner's share of the reconstruction cost will be addressed in a Contribution Agreement that is required for this subdivision. •:• Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division; 4 Stop Signs 3 Dead End Signs 14 Street Name Signs 2 Trucks Prohibited Signs 2 Speed Limit Signs C:%TEMPtP P#00-12. dcc rpu we pledge, we deleiler March 22, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 3;5 REFERENCE: Preliminary Plat #00-12 by White Oaks Development to be known as Northern Trails. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced preliminary plat is complete and our comments follow: 1. The property maybe subject to the water availability fee, connection fees or assessments. The Land Development Manager (507-281-6198) at the Public Works Department determines the applicability of these fees. 2. Due to the extreme grade difference between Veryl Lane and Florence Drive the water main loop along with the 20' public utility easement from the cul-de-sac on Veryl Lane will need to be moved to run between Lots 5 & 6, and 12 & 13, Block 1. In the event that this grade difference is lessened this loop should be moved back to its original position. 3. Other minor revisions to the proposed water system layout are required. We have provided the applicant's engineering firm with these comments. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yours, 06MA R- Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Bureau McGhie & Betts, Inc. BBB Development Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 10 024k 8 ROCHESTER PARK AND R_.;REATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHETER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 20, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning RE: Northern Trails Preliminary Plat #00-12 Acreageof plat.......................................................... 16.23 a Number of dwelling units ............................................. 43 units Dwelling unit density ................................................... 2.65 units/a Densityfactor............................................................ .0244 Dedication............................................................... 1.05 a The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: Deferred land dedication. Dedication of land for the neighborhood park identified in the GDP to occur when the park is accessed via road or the Park Department wishes to begin development of the park. Appgmnt. BBB Development P U Box 247 Byron MN 559M h1:\PARK\DSTOTZ\2000\DEDICATION\NW 2898\NORTHERN TRAILS IST.DOC l Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 2300 Silver Creek Road NE Rochester, MN 55906 (507)285-7421 March 14, 2000 Mr. Jeff Broberg, Vice President McGhie & Betts Environmental Services 1648 3rd Avenue SE Rochester, MN 55904 Dear Mr. Broberg: RE: RIPLEY PROPERTY PRELIMINARY PLAT Thank you for taking the time to meet with us yesterday afternoon. We appreciated the information you provided on development of the Ripley property. We understand you are developing a preliminary plat for Phase I of the Ripley property, and inquired as, to which areas could be included without potential impacts to Wetland A. We discussed the extensive grading that may occur on the property and the relationship of this project to the rebuild of 50th Avenue. Based on our discussion, it appears there is considerable uncertainty at this time on the amount of regrading that will be necessary to meet the grades on the rebuilt 50th, Avenue. It is clear there will be considerable alteration of grades, particularly on the north end of the properly. The area on the south side of the property needs minimal regrading, and will be developed first. We are confident that the development of blocks 1, 2, and 3 as shown on the draft preliminary plat map provided at our March 13th discussion can proceed with little potential for impacts to Wetland A. The lots on the north side of the unnamed east -west street in blocks 5 and 6 may also be developed with minimal impact to Wetland A. We have some questions on the amount of fill required to bring that east -west street up to the level of 50th Avenue and the development of the adjacent lots as well as the likely source of fill. As one moves further north on the property, there is greater likelihood that the grades will change greatly to accommodate development. We recommend waiting on development of these areas until a determination can be made this summer on whether Wetland A is a calcareous fen. DNR Information: 651-296-6157 a 1-888-646-6367 a 7TY:651-296-5484 a 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer I�� Printed on Recycled Paper containing a Who Values Diversity Sir Minimum of 10:6 Post -Consumer Waste ar r Mr. Jeff Broberg, Vice President McGhie & Betts Environmental Services March 14, 2000 Page Two We appreciate you bringing to our attention the extensive earth moving that may be required to match the grades when 50th Avenue is rebuilt. We also recognize that the rebuild may include deep cuts on 50th Avenue near the top of the hill. This road cut would also have the potential to intercept groundwater flow that may impact Wetland A. Thanks again for taking the time to get our feedback on the preliminary plat for this property. We look forward to continuing to work with you to resolve the matter of whether Wetland A is a calcareous fen. Please call if you have any questions. 7MES ly, F. COOP R Regional Hydrologist DNR Waters JFC/dn/dsl c: Don Nelson Bob Bezek John Harford Terry Lee H:VIMVbrober9r602. wpd Application Number. ✓ , . �t , f 00-I Z. xe,di�J No hydric soils exist on the site based on the Soil Survey Hydric soils exist on the site according to the Soil Survey. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands on the property and submitting the information as part of this application. A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and is on file with the Planning Department A wetland delineation is on file with the Planning Department and a No - loss, Exemption, or Replacement Plan has been submitted to the Planning Department. A wetland related application has been approved by the City. This plan incorporates the approved wetland plan. No hydric soils exist on the property based on the Soil Survey, However, due to the location in the landscape the property owner should examine the site for wetlands. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands. • / •� _�, t �jA � /.�<I � ►ram From John Harford Wetlands LGU Representative Jo PLAT REFERRAL RESPONSE DATE: 3-31-00 TO: Suzanne LaPalm FROM: Planning Dept. Addressing Staff CC: RE: NORTHERN TRAILS A review of the preliminary plat has turned up the following address related issues: 1. Plat name Northern Trails is very similar to Northwood Trails. 2. Northern Trails Drive NW is too long and the use of trail in the name is not permitted. 3. Veryl Lane NW is confusing due to the spelling. 4. Garold Court NW is confusing due to the spelling, and the roadway type is incorrect. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Change plat name, there are to many NORTHERN plats and the use of Northern Trails is too similar to Northwood Trails found in section 3 of Cascade Township. This could be very confusing to Emergency Responders and could impact their response time. 2. The use of Northern Trails is fifteen characters in length, and fourteen is the limit. Also the use of TRAIL in a roadway name is not permitted because TRAIL is used specifically for the use of Bike Trails and Walkways. 3. & 4. Unique Spelling of VERYL and GAROLD will cause confusion, which will lead to a delay with timely response in an emergency situation. Use common spelling when naming roadways. Also the roadway type of Court used with Garold should be changed to a Place. i ACG 11 V N: ITEM April 24, 2000 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION PUBLIC HEARINGS ORIGINATING DEPT: PLANNING MEETING � DATE: 5/1/00{ Type III, Phase III Conditional Use Permit #00-07 by Frank Kottschade to 1PREPARED allow for fill within the Flood Prone District to facilitate future development. I John Harford, City Plannine and Zoning Commission Recommendation: On April 12, 2000 the CP&ZC discussed this application. A public h g is not required at the CP&ZC for a Type Ill, Phase III process. The applicant proposes to fill an area north o=reek and north of the proposed ponds from a previous conditional use permit, and south of 40d' St, SW and east of 1 ld' Ave., SW for future development. This application proposes to allow fill to be placed in a Flood Prone District that requires that any fill will cause no net loss of capacity for surface water storage of flood waters. No fill will be placed within the Floodway District according to this proposal. The applicant submitted a site plan indicating that 2-6' of fill will be placed on the site. The Polaris Group, a consulting firm, conducted a hydrologic study of the site specifically to determine if the proposal would meet the standards of Section 62.860 of the zoning ordinance. The consultant determined that this proposal would meet the standards of the ordinance if the ponds are constructed by the applicant as previously approved in a conditional use permit by the city. Polaris Group stated that there will be an excess of 86 acre feet of flood storage on the site with the construction of the ponds south of the proposed fill based on the information provided to them by the --licant. The CP&ZC discussed the application and had no specific comments for the City Council. They voted to approve the proposal with the staff conditions. Plannine Department Recommendation: See the attached staff report dated March 27, 2000. Staff recommends approval with two conditions: 1. The applicant shall adjust the site plan to meet the 3 conditions requested by the Rochester Public Utilities -Water Division. 2. The applicant must meet the grading plan requirements for controlling erosion on the site during and after construction is complete. Council Action Needed: The Council should pass a resolution appr ving the conditional use with the staff conditions. Attachments: 1. Staff report dated March 27, 2000 and attachments. 2. Minutes of the CP&ZC meeting of April 12, 2000 cuUNCILACTION: Moeonby: sewndby: to: 19-w TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: John Harford, Plan DATE: March 27, 2000,40M 'Pi[ii►y��imP ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRAnON/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GISIADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 5071285-8224 BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELLISEPTIC 5071285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Type III, Phase III Conditional Use Permit 00-07 by Frank Kottschade to allow for fill within the Flood Prone District to facilitate future development. The property is located along the south side of 40rh St., SW, east of 11`h Ave., SW. Planning Department Review. Applicant/Owner: Engineer I Consultant: Frank Kottschade 3800 Highway 52 North Rochester, MN 55901 McGhie and Betts, Inc. 1648 3 0 Ave., SE Rochester, MN 55904 Requested Action: The applicant is requesting a Type III, Phase III Conditional Use Permit to allow for fill to be placed within the Flood Prone District in preparation fro future development. The intended filling of the flood prone district, which includes the entire area under this conditional use permit application and outside of the floodway district, is to prepare the site for future development. Currently the applicant has submitted a general development plan and a zoning district amendment for this property. Location of Property: The property is located east of 11 `h Avenue SW, and south of 40"' Street SW and north of Willow Creek and the floodway. Zoning: The property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Residential) district on the City of Rochester zoning map at this time. A �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 Conditional Use Permit 00-07 — Frank Kottschade April 5, 2000 rezoning is in process to the R-2 district. Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Public Utilities (see attached) 2. Rochester Public Works (see attached) 3. John Harford, Planning Dept./Wetlands LGU 4. US West— No objection assuming there are no relocation costs. Standards for Approval: Conditional use permits in the Flood Prone district are subject to the same standards as every conditional use (see Section 61.146), and some specific conditions related to the Flood Prone areas (Section 62.824 and 62.860). Report Attachments: 1. Sections 61.146, 62.824 and 62.860 from the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. 2. Referral Comments (5) No comments were received from MNDNR. 3. Location Map/FIRM 4, Engineers Certification Analysis and Recommendation: The applicant is proposing to place fill within the flood prone district as part of the proposed future development. The proposal based on the zone change and general development plan will consist of townhouses. The general development plan indicates that the applicant has plans for townhouses at a density of 5.5 to 6 units an acre. A grading plan has been submitted by the applicant and reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and has been reviewed by this office. The grading plan indicates that the elevation of the easterly portion of the property will be filled to an elevation of 1056' MSL. The fill will be at an elevation of 1068' MSL at the western edge of the property in Rochester Township. A separate conditional use permit will be required by the township for this proposal. The base flood elevation (100 year flood) for the site ranges from 1056.7' MSL to 1062.2" MSL. The required minimum flood protection elevation is 1' higher than the base flood elevation. The fill elevations proposed will raise the site to elevations higher than the flood protection elevations for the site. The applicant will need to certify the ground and building elevations in order to meet the requirements of the ordinance for building in the floodplain. The applicant has supplied information from the Polaris Group, an engineering consulting firm, that reviewed the fill of the flood prone district. The engineer stated that the "proposed grading (of the ponds created by the sand and gravel extraction) will result in a net increase of approximately 86 acre-feet of the flood storage. This is consistent with earthwork quantities which indicate that more material will be excavated from below the 100 year flood elevation than will be placed below the flood elevation." This assumes that filling will take place after or concurrent with the sand and gravel extraction for the site. The engineer is of the opinion that the proposal meets the minimum requirements of Section 62.860. The Rochester Public Works Department has requested that the fill on the site match the proposed profile for 40" St., SW. The City Public Works Department and the applicant's consultant have reported that this request will require 17 feet of fill on the west end of the property 333r 35qPage 3 Conditional Use Permit 00-07 — Frank Kottschade April 5, 2000 near 11 th Ave., SW. The grading plan shows that the applicant will place 4'-6' of fill on the westerly end of the site. The applicant would be required to place an additional minimum of 11'- 13' of fill to meet this requirement. The reason for this request by Public Works has to do with the future reconstruction of 401" St., SW. The road will need to be raised to improve the grades near 11" Ave., SW, requiring that this site create similar grades to match that of the road or the city will need to obtain a construction easement for the construction of the road at a later date. This recommendation is made based on a preliminary design for 40i6 St. The Planning Staff has reviewed this request in accordance with the provisions of Section 61,146, 62.824 and 62.860 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. The staff finds that this proposal fills no more than necessary and that this activity will not result in an increase in erosion potential or flood hazard. Planning staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall adjust the site plan to meet the 3 conditions requested by Rochester Public Utilities -Water Division. 2. The applicant must meet the grading plan requirements for controlling erosion on the site during and after construction is complete. Planning Commission Action Needed. Conditional use permits of this sort require Council approval. The Planning Commission should make a recommendation to approve, approve with conditions, or deny this request to be forwarded to the Council. The Council will hold a public hearing at a later date. Page 4 Conditional Use Permit 00-07 — Frank Kottschade April 5, 2000 61.145 Matters Under Consideration: The review of a conditional use is necessary to insure that it will not be of detriment to and is designed to be compatible with land uses and the area surrounding its location; and that is it consistent with the objectives and purposes of this ordinance and the comprehensive plan. 61.146 Standards for Conditional Uses: The zoning administrator, Commission or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a conditional use unless one or more of the following findings with respect to the proposed development is made: 1) provisions for vehicular loading, unloading, parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on he site and onto adjacent public street and ways will create hazards to safety, or will impose a significant burden upon public facilities. 2) The intensity, location, operation, or height of proposed buildings and structures will be detrimental to other private development in the neighborhood or will impose undue burdens on the sewers, sanitary and storm drains, water or similar public facilities. 3) The provision for on -site bufferyards and landscaping does not provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development. 4) The site plan fails to provide for the soil erosion and drainage problems that may be created by the development. 5) The provisions for exterior lighting create undue hazards to motorists traveling on adjacent public streets or are inadequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site or such provisions damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties. 6) The proposed development will create undue fire safety hazards by not providing adequate access to the site, or the buildings on the site, for emergency vehicles. 7) In cases where a Phase I plan has been approved, there is substantial change in the Phase 11 site plan from the approved Phase I site plan, such that the revised plans will not meet the standards provided by this paragraph. 6) The proposed conditional use does not comply with all the standards applying to permitted uses within the underlying zoning district, or with standards specifically applicable to the type of conditional use under consideration, or with specific ordinance standards dealing with matters such as signs which are part of the proposed development, and a variance to allow such deviation has not been secured by the applicant. 339, i 33 Page 5 J Conditional Use Permit 00-07 — Frank Kottschade April 5, 2000 62.824 Conditional Use Permits - Standards for Approval: When deciding on Conditional Use Permits in any of the flood district, the following factors, in addition to the standards of Paragraph 61.146 shall also be considered: 1) The danger of life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments. 2) The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of others. 3) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these systems to prevent disease, contamination, and unsanitary condition. 4) The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner. 5) The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community. 6) The need for a waterfront location for the facility. 7) The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the proposed use. 8) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development anticipated in the foreseeable future. 9) The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and flood plain management program for the area. 10)The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles. 11) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site. 12) Such other factors which are relevant to the purposes of Paragraph 62.800. 62.860 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS IN THE FLOOD PRONE DISTRICT The requirements applicable in the Flood Fringe District, as defined in Section 62.840 shall apply in the Flood Prone District and, in addition, the deposition of any fill or spoil from dredging of sand and gravel operations, the construction of any structure, or the grading or paving of any areas shall require certification by a registered professional engineer or hydrologist that the following conditions have been met: 1) Fill deposited in the flood prone area shall be no more than the minimum amount necessary to conduct the use. Page 6 Conditional Use Permit 00-07 — Frank Kottschade April 5, 2000 2) No net loss of capacity for surface storage of flood waters shall result from the activity. 3) The effect of such activities in the flood prone area shall not result in an increase in erosion potential on the site. 33�? UNIAMAW Mo. ma Ns a nwdtw, .. • C<A I C-4 CL Zoe, U.1111HIMPRIM, '1111CI! xf r�u pledge, we deliver March 24, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 3�f i REFERENCE: Type III, Phase III Conditional Use Permit #00-07 by Franklin Kottschade to allow filling within the Flood Prone district to facilitate future development. The property is located on the south side of 40th St. SW east of I Ith Ave. SW. Dear Ms. LaPahn: Our review of the referenced application is complete and our comments follow: L The culvert for the proposed driveway entrance into the site should be moved slightly to the east to avoid a conflict with the existing hydrant and hydrant valve box. 2. Insulate the existing hydrant leads in the ditch area if the re -grading reduces the depth of cover to less than 6'. 3. Adjust existing hydrants and valve boxes to finished grade. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yours, n 064A 1 L&' Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention McGhie & Betts, Inc. Franklin P. Kottschade Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 ROCHESTEx Minnesota 3/28/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for CUP #00-07 to fill within the Flood Prone district of Willow Creek, on the Franklin Kottschade (40�h St SW) property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. Grading on the site shall match the proposed profile of 40th St SW. 2. Improvements to 40th St SW for truck traffic, as outlined in the previous CUP approvals, are also applicable to this application. C:1TEM RCUP#00-07. doc Page 25 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 proposed lots exceed the minimum lot size and lot width of the applicable zoning district standards. MINIMUM VARIANCE: The minimum variance that would be necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship would be a variance to allow the minimum sum of the side yards equal 12' instead of 16'. This finding would not pertain in the case of denial. TYPE III PHASE III CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated March 27. 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Svenby stated that staff recommends approval with the two conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Staver asked why Mr. Nigbur's comments on grading weren't included in the conditions. Mr. Svenby stated it is probably because the applicant is simply requesting a conditional use permit to allowing filling in the floodprone district to allow residential development on the property and staff didn't feel that Public Works' recommendation was necessary to allow the permit to be approved. Mr. Quinn asked if there is a preliminary design for 40' Street that can be followed in these recommendations in regards to the height. Mr. Nigbur stated that the numbers are approximate. Mr. Burke moved to approve Conditional Use Permit #00-07 by Frank Kottschade, with staff -suggested conditions. Ms. Petersson seconded the motion, which carried 8-0. Conditions: 1. The applicant shall adjust the site plan to meet the 3 conditions requested by Rochester Public Utilities -Water Division. 2. The applicant must meet the grading plan requirements for controlling erosion on the site during and after construction is complete. OTHER BUSINESS: Development District #15 and Tax Increment Financing District #15-1 (Weatherstone): Mr. Svenby explained that the Commission will need to decide if this is consistent with the Land Use Plan. 3Y3 RE%.,tdEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION PUBLIC HEARINGS MEETING S s DATE: 5/1/00 e -!8 'M DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase H Incentive Development conditional Use Permit #00-6 and PREPARED BY: Variance #00-5 by the Kendal Group to allow for the development of a four John Harford, Sera story, 68 unit apartment building and associated parldng that would be located Planner on property zoned B-1(Restricted Commercial). The apartment building is proposed to be located along the east side of 3nd Ave., NW, south of Elton Hills Drive and west of the Zumbro River. April 25, 2000 4A.` ING DEPT: PLANNING On April 12, 2000 the CP&ZC held a public hearing on the Kendal Group conditional use and the related variance. The CP&ZC voted unanimously to approve the conditional use permit with the following conditions: 1. The building and building fagade be constructed as shown on the elevation drawings, including the structural brick, hardboard siding, shutters, roof pitch, parches, windows, and building shape and size as shown on the drawings. 2. The site plan be revised to identify the bufferyards and landscaping to meet the minimum requirements for the "8" and "C" bufferyards. The applicant correct the labeling of the plant material "CKM" on the landscaping plan, sheet C-8 or include it in the planting schedule on sheet C-7. 3. Due to the probable removal of existing vegetation along the 3rd Ave. sidewalk abutting the retaining wall the applicant shall provide landscaping to screen the parking area and drive aisle by providing a planting of evergreen shrubs to form a screen. The plantings must be planted at 5' on center spacing at the top of the retaining waft adjacent to the sidewalk. A fence 4' in height must be located at the top of the retaining wall that is closest to the sidewalk on 3 d Ave. as a safety precaution due to the 8' 12' drop to the drive aisle adjacent to the building. 4. Meet all of the requirements of the Public Works Department in a memo from Mike Nigbur dated 3131100. 5. Receive approval of a "substandard access location" from the City Engineer for the north driveway access prior to City Council action on this development proposal. 6. Provide cash in lieu of land to meet the parkland dedication requirements as requested by the Park and Recreation Department. 7. Staff recommends that the applicant replace all trees removed that have a 4-inch diameter or larger, at a point 2 feet off the ground. Each tree should be replaced with two trees, one canopy tree and one understory tree, as identified in the Appendix D of the Land Development Manual. The applicant will need to conduct an inventory of trees to be removed for the utility line construction and must submit that information along with the grading plan and the replanting plan. The CP&ZC also held a hearing on Variance #00-5 and voted unanimously to approve a variance of 2,151 square feet to the floor area ratio allowable in the B-1 district with the following findings: a. Extraordinary conditions or circumstances: The 2 lots contain 2.23 acres of resource protection lands (water surface, drainageways, and steep slopes) that reduce the allowable buildable acreage to 1.93 acres. b. The variance is not necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property. It is zoned B-1 and could be built to other B-1 standards and uses. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second 3�The variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare of materially injurious to other property due to the location and design of the building, underground parking, landscape area and bufferyard requirements, and avoidance of grading and construction on the steep hillside abutting the river. The applicant is proposing an incentive development that may minimize impacts on the surrounding properties. d. The applicant has not provided information to substantiate that the request is the minimum necessary to provide for a reasonable economic use. The extraordinary conditions are not due to the applicant's actions but are part of the site constraints. Planning Department Recommendation: See the attached staff report dated March 28, 2000. Council Action Needed: The Council should pass a resolution approving the conditional use with the CP&ZC conditions. A separate motion and resolution for the variance is required. Attachments: 1. Staff report dated March 28, 2000 and attachments. 2. Minutes of the CP&ZC meeting of April 12, 2000 Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Attorney 3. City Administrator 4. Planning Department File r s r TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: DATE RE: John Harford, Senior March 28, 2000 �Is¢o�a►ltan�'+l 1►�� iii:��I� .ii'�9 i ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 5071285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 5071285-8213 WEwSEPTIC 507/285.8345 FAX 507/287-2275 Incentive Development Condklonal Use Permit #00-06 and Variance #00-5 by the Kendal Group to allow the development of 4 story, 68 unit apartment building that is 2,151 square feet over the permitted floor area ratio. Planning Department Review.- Applicant/Owner: Kenneth Miller - 4513 Milky Way Rd. Waukesha, WI 53186 Consultant: TDI Associates, Inc. 1285 Sunnyridge Road Pewaukee, WI 53072 II Referral Comments: Public Works (see attached) IIII�t'' Park and Recreation (see attached) Building Safety (see attached) Public Utilities (see attached) Report Attachments: 1. Land Development Manual Excerpts 2. Project Narrative 3. Site Plan and elevations 4. Referral Comments Development Review: Location of Property: The property is located west of the Zumbro River, south of Elton Hills Drive, NW and east of 3r° Ave., NW. Zoning: The property is zoned B-1 (Restricted Commercial) on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. This area is exempt from the shoreland provisions of the zoning ordinance (Sec. 62.1001). IIIIII P AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER ..ww 3ij y Page 2 t C•� Kendal Group - Incentive Development April 4, 2000 Property Size The total site is 182,905 square feet or 4.2 acres in three parcels. One parcel is city right of way. The two lots that can be included for site capacity calculations and floor area ratio are a total of 182,905 square feet or 4.19 acres. Proposed Development. This site is currently vacant land. The project consists of one apartment building, 4 stories in height at the front building elevation and 5 on the rear elevation facing the Zumbro River and consisting of 68 units. The ordinance allows for multiple unit residential buildings that meet the requirements of the "least restrictive residential zoning district adjoining the are zoned B-1 which is within 750 feet of the property'. The Valhalla PUD is located within this distance and the underlying zoning is R-3. Therefore, this proposal is reviewed under the R-3 standards. The floor area calculated by the applicant is 80,699 square feet(does not include the parking level). The applicant is proposing tour levels above grade and one level below grade on the street side of the property. On the Zumbro River side of the property the elevation shows five stories. Residential units are located on the top 4 floors with an underground parking area in the bottom floor. The footprint of the building is approximately 21,600 square feet. The applicant plans indicate that the building will include 40 two -bedroom units and 28 one -bedroom or efficiency units. The R-3 district allows a "maximum units with a bonus" of 43.56 units per acre. This property is 4.19 acres in size excluding the city property. The maximum floor area ratio in this district for multi -family housing is 0.92 for Incentive Development. The site capacity calculation must be applied for this proposal and affects the net buildable area. The applicant has calculated the "resource protection lands" at 2.23 acres. The total acreage minus the resource protection lands equals the net buildable area which is calculated at 1.96 acres. The net buildable area times 43.56 units an acre equals 85.4 units. The floor area allowed based on the net buildable area is calculated to be 78,548 square feet. The building meets the minimum yard requirements based on the height of the building. The landscape area requirement for the site is 30% and for this site is calculated at a minimum of 54,872 square feet. The proposal shows a total landscape area of 105,946 square feet. The recreation area requirement is 9% for this use in the R-3 district. The applicant must provide a recreation area of 7,253 square feet. The applicant is proposing a recreation area of 7,684 square feet. The recreation area proposed is located adjacent to the building on the south side and is one contiguous area that measures about 160' by as much as 70' in width. The recreation space consists of a landscaped area on separate levels and including two patio areas. The building elevations indicate that the building will be 58' in height from the peak to the ground level on the 3 Ave. side of the site, and 67.5' in height in the river side of the site. The height as measured according to the ordinance is slightly less at 48' and 58'. The building is constructed of hardboard siding and structural brick. The structural brick covers thearage level on the river side and the first floor around the entire building. The siding on the 2 through 5`" floors will be hardboard siding. Porches are provided for all units, with support columns made of brick. The exterior stairwells are entirely clad in brick. All of the units have an interior entry. Entry/exit to/from the building is through the garage or three sets of doors on the first floor level facing 3rtl Ave. An elevator is provided in the main entry area of the building. Based on the current elevations and building height the building will sit 10' below the street on the south end of the property so approximately 57' or more of the building will be visible from the street level, not accounting for any landscape screening. Page 3 3 �q /11 Kendal Group - Incentive Uevelopment April 5, 2000 The applicant is providing a total of 99 parking spaces. There will be 52 underground parking spaces and 47 surface parking spaces. Based on the number of units and size the applicant meets the minimum parking requirements for this development proposal. Access to the site is provided by two driveways, one on the south property line and one on the north side, The driveway on the north side will be half on the city ROW land and half on the applicants property. The driveways are over 400' apart as required by the LDM. However, the north driveway is less than 480' to the intersection with Elton Hills Dr., which will require the City Engineer to waive this provision of the ordinance. Bufferyards are required on the north, west and south sides of the parcel. A bufferyard "B" is required for the north and west sides of the parcel (requires a minimum 10' width and 3 plants per 1 00'of length). A bufferyard "C" is required for the south side (requires a minimum 10' width and 6 plants per 100' of length). Existing trees may be used to meet the minimum requirements. The applicant will need to show how these bufferyard standards will be met and the site plan adjusted to meet these bufferyard requirements. The applicant proposes new landscaping as foundation planting around the building as well as adjacent to the stormwater pond, in the recreation area, and along the west side of the property by 3rtl Ave.. Landscaping also will include a combination of hardscape materials. In order to handle the substantial change in grade from the street to the property the applicants have proposed several retaining walls on all sides of the building. Individual walls are 2' to 6' in height. The applicant proposes to control stormwater runoff from the hard surfaces on the site with a detention pond to be located, with the agreement of the city Public Works Department, on the public right-of-way north of the applicant's property. The pond will serve the dual purpose of controlling runoff during storm events and also capturing sediment from the hard surfaces before flowing to the Zumbro River. Incentive Development: The Incentive Development provisions of the Land Development Manual allow for a higher intensity development when certain actions are taken by the landowner to make the development more attractive and publicly acceptable. These actions may include additional open space amenities, traffic and pedestrian amenities and/or design features. The Incentive Development approval procedure is a two step process consisting of a preliminary plan and a final development plan. The preliminary plan is reviewed under a Type III, Phase 11, procedure with a public hearing before the Planning Commission and a public hearing before the Council. The final plan is reviewed under the Type III, Phase 111, procedures. The Council does have the authority to waive the final plan. The applicant has requested that this plan be considered the final plan with no further review after the CPZC and City Council hearings. The criteria to be considered when reviewing an Incentive Development are listed in Paragraph 62.630 (1), which is attached for your review. This section looks at both the suitability of the area and the site design. The preliminary and final plans may be approved if it is found that the development has addressed and satisfied all of the criteria, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest can be incorporated into the design. The development is proposing an increase in floor area above the maximum in Section 62.441, the R-3 standards. The maximum allowable floor area ratio with a bonus within the R-3 district is 0.92 for a Type III permit, This site would allow for a 78,548 sq. ft. building and 43.56 units per acre as a Type III development. The applicant is proposing a 80,699 sq, ft. building, which is a F.A.R. of approximately 1.03 and 68 units, which is less than the allowable 85.4 units on the site. In addition to the Incentive Development the applicant proposes variances to the F.A.R. and to 3%0 Page 4 Kendal Group - Incentive Development April 5, 2000 building height. Sections 62.652, 62.657, and 62.658 (see attached) list the criteria that may be considered for granting bonus density. The criteria that apply in this case are: Section 62.652 #2 "Energy Conservation" - Regarding subpart "b" the building is setback from 3rtl Ave. a minimum of 50'. The ROW is 75' wide and the land to the west is a steep hillside. Shading of adjacent property and ROW will take place in the early morning hours only. The building will shade only ROW land to the north. Section 62.657 #1 "Proximity to Neighborhood Facilities" - Meets all requirements except distance to a nursery school which is about 2200 feet to the south. #2 "Dedication of land" - None proposed. #3 "Bus shelter" - This site is within about 700' of a shelter. #4 "Noise buffers"- No noise buffers have been provided between 3r° Ave. and the building. #5 "Site Plannind' - Due to the elevation differences the applicant must construct retaining walls that will minimize the view of the parking lot from the street. The building fagade visible from the street provides for a varied roof line, and exterior fagade due to the entry, porches, brick/hardboard siding, and L-shaped building. Site lines from the units is to ROW and the river. #8 "Housing for Low Income Households" - Does not apply. #7 "Storm Shelter" - A storm shelter is required for this facility and can be located in the parking area in the lower level. Section 62.658 #1 "Storm Water Management" - The applicant must meet the minimum requirements of the ordinance and has provided a detention basin on the adjacent ROW to serve this property. #3 "Flood control oroiect or river bank" - The applicant proposes to avoid any construction on the steep portion of this site which is adjacent to and highly visible from the river. None of the existing vegetation will be removed from the steep hillside adjacent to the river. #6 "Integrated Planning" - This site is more than one acre in size and is infill development in an established district. #7 "Increase in Landscape Area Ratio" - The amount of landscape area provided is 105,946 square feet. The minimum requirement is 30% or 54,871 square feet. The applicant provides a ratio of 1.94 rather than 0.3. #8 "Access points" - The applicant proposes 2 access points and cannot share points because there is no adjacent development east of Yd Ave., NW. Variances: The applicant has requested variances to the building height and to the floor area ratio covered in Section 62.241, and also to the minims "shes the guidelines for a variance as follows: a. Extraordinary conditions or circ \I /�t� JJ resource protection lands (water surfac 111 U! iuce the allowable buildable acreage to 1 b. The variance is not necessary tc zoned 13- 1 and could be built to other B-1 c. The variance will not be detrimr � � to other �b A property due to the location anc �2 Z-� ,o indscape area and bufferyard requireme n on the steep hillside abutting the river. ` - I vent that may minimize impacts on the su=� wl Page 5 Kendal Group - Incentive Development April 5, 2000 d. The applicant has not provided information to substantiate that the request is the minimum necessary to provide for a reasonable economic use. The extraordinary conditions are not due to the applicant's actions but are part of the site constraints. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above findings, the Planning staff recommends approval of this incentive development, with the following conditions: 1. The building and building fagade be constructed as shown on the elevation drawings, including the structural brick, hardboard siding, shutters, roof pitch, porches, windows, and building shape and size as shown on the drawings. 2. The site plan be revised to identify the bufferyards and landscaping to meet the minimum requirements for the "B" and "C" bufferyards. The applicant correct the labeling of the plant material "CKM" on the landscaping plan, sheet C-8 or include it in the planting schedule on sheet C-7. 3. Due to the probable removal of existing vegetation along the 3Id Ave. sidewalk abutting the retaining wall the applicant shall provide landscaping to screen the parking area and drive aisle by providing a planting of evergreen shrubs to form a screen. The plantings must be planted at 5' on center spacing at the top of the retaining wall adjacent to the sidewalk. A fence 4' in height must be located at the top of the retaining wall that is closest to the sidewalk on 3'd Ave, as a safety precaution due to the 8=12' drop to the drive aisle adjacent to the building. 4. Meet all of the requirements of the Public Works Department in a memo from Mike Nigbur dated 3131100. 5. Receive approval of a "substandard access location" from the City Engineer for the north driveway access prior to City Council action on this development proposal. 6. Provide cash in lieu of land to meet the parkland dedication requirements as requested by the Park and Recreation Department. Reviewed by Date 3Sa- ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FROM: JOHN HARFORD, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: INCENTIVE DEVELOPMENT — KENDAL RE: APRIL 11, 2000 The proposal includes the construction of utility lines from the base of the slope by the river to the top of the hill to connect existing city services to the proposed building. As a result hillside vegetation will need to be removed to construct the utilities. Staff overlooked this matter. Staff recommends that an additional condition of approval be added to the list of conditions. Staff recognizes that the hillside will need to be re -vegetated to control erosion and that requirement will be covered by the grading plan. Staff recommends that the applicant replace all trees removed that have a 4 inch iameter or larger two feet above the ground. Each tree should be replaced with two trees, one canopy tree and one understory tree as identified in the Appendix D of the Land Development Manual. The applicant will need to conduct an inventory of trees to be removed for the utility line construction and must submit that information along with the grading plan along with the replanting plan. FA 9q 0l'1<Mg1Q,irVm �l' 35�TRANSPORTATION STAI DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REVIEW DATABASE - 1998 MARCH 2O00 County ZC 00-2 No comments on the Zone Change Radcliffe- Raygor Comments on the General Development Plan: 1. At the time of platting an Environmental Corridor easement similar to the easements provided on Country Creek Subdivision and other subdivisions to the east should be provided to allow for future development of a public non. motorized trail along the Bear Creek floodplain corridor. This trail would be developed as part of facility envisioned to tie Chester Woods Park into the City of Rochester trails stem City Amend Final No comment Plan Midway Motor Lodge City Amend Apache The proposed expansion represents an increase in floor area in mmil area of Mall Shopping approximately 3.5% and a net floor area change in the shopping center of about Center Plan 2%. The scale of proposed change is not of a magnitude to require the preparation of a traffic impact study. The transportation staff has no other comments on the proposal City Incentive Dev The proposed development does not require the preparation of a Traffic Impact Cond Use 00-6 Report to analyze intersection operations. There are two potential access design Kendall Group issues which have been discussed with the consultant for the applicant that should be reviewed (with the Public Works Department) to determine a-bether the access t.., design is adequate. These are: ➢ The sight distance at the access points to the development should be checked to insure that adequate sight lines exist to provide for safe ingress and egress to the site ➢ While not needed at this time, the growth of through traffic past the site on Yd Ave in the future may make it desirable to stripe a left turn bay for inbound traffic from the north on Yd Ave- The current roadway width and alignment should be reviewed to determine if this can be accommodated on the current roadway or whether provisions for additional right of way should be tstde to accommodate it in the future. City Prel Plat 00-12 No comment Northern Trails City PRD 00-5 No comment Freedom Senior Housing City LUP and ZC Under Section 61.520 of the Land Development Manual the proposed Land Use 00-5 Badger the proposed site would trigger the need for a Rezoning Traffic analysis. The Traffic Impact Report prepared for the Badger Ridge development assumed development of this site and has adequately analyzed traffic floe- through intersections adjacent to the site. Issues related to access for this site are being discussed as part of the General Development Plan and the fast Preliminary Plat for the Badger Ride development. City Annex 00.6 No comment Baditer City Manor Woods No comment West 12 Prel Plat City GDP 152 Under Section 61.520 of the Land Development Manual the proposed ABBCO Co development is subject to the requirements for Traffic Impact Studies due to the ROCHESTER Minnesota 3/31/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur 3G07 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 20140 Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281.6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the application for Incentive Development CUP #00-06 & VAR #00-05,on the River Place (Kendal Group) property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. Development of this property should require platting. 2. A grading and drainage plan must be provided and approved for this development, and Storm Water Management must be provided. The applicant is proposing to construct a detention pond on the City's land adjacent to the subject property. A fee will apply for participation in the City's Regional Stormwater management Plan, in addition to the applicant constructing the facilities. 3. Pedestrian facilities shall be constructed concurrent with this development, at the Develo�ter's expense, along the entire frontage of both the City's and Developer's parcels abutting 3' Ave NW. 4. A City / Owner Contract must be executed prior to development of this property to address the construction of all public infrastructure and utilities to serve this project. 5. Controlled access is required along the entire frontage of 3rd Ave NW, with the exception of the private drive access shown on the plan. 6. The applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City, prior to approval of the Incentive Development, that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwater management, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 7. A Revocable Permit is required for use of City property for this development. 8. The Developer should construct curb & gutter along 3rd Ave NW. C:ITEMP\IncentiveDev CUP #00.06 VAR#00-05.doc 3� ROCHESTEtZ Minnesota 3/31/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 20140 Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904.3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre. Water Availability Charge (WAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre. r Water Main Connection Charge @ $36.05 per foot of frontage on 3rd Ave NW X 602.95 feet = $21,736.35 Stormwater Management Fees for Water Quality & Trunk Facilities. C:ITEMP1lncendveDev CUP #00-06 VAR#00.05.doc ROCHESTER PARK AND :CREATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHETER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6166 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 27, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning RE: Kendall Group / River Place NW Acreage of plat.......................................................... 4.2 a Number of dwelling units ............................................. 68 units Dwelling unit density ................................................... 16 units/a Density factor............................................................ .0158 Dedication............................................................... 1.07 acres Fair market value of land ............................................. $22,000 The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: Cash in lieu of land 1\CITY OF ROCHESTER\CITYHALL\PARK\DSTOTZ\2000\DEDICATION\NW 2898\RIVER PLACE.DOC ru_ _I' . we pledye, we deliver March 23, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Type III, Phase II Incentive Development Conditional Use Permit #00-06 and Variance #00-05 by the Kendal Group, to allow for the development of a four-story 68 unit apartment building on property zoned B-1. The property is located east side of Yd Ave. NW south of Elton Hills Dr. NW. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced application is complete and our comments follow: 1. The property may be subject to the water availability fee, connection fees or assessments. The Assessments Manager (507-281-6004) at the Public Works Department determines the applicability of these fees. 2. Main System Level water service is available to this site. Preliminary computer water system modeling indicates that adequate flow will be available for fire protection for this type of use with the looped system as shown. The static water pressure at the approximate first floor elevation of 1027 will be approximately 60 PSI. 3. The Fire Prevention Bureau will need to comment on the location of the proposed fire hydrants. Water mains connecting to and including any fire hydrant are considered public and need to be within a 20' minimum pub] utility easement. The owner is required to enter into a City Owner Contract with the City of Rochester for the installation of the public water main. Contact the Land Development Manager (507-281-6198) at the Public Works Department for details. 4. Final water main construction plans will need to be prepared by a civil engineer and conform to standard City of Rochester requirements. 5. The stone sewer and or water main alignment will need to be adjusted to provide the minimum 10' horizontal separation required by the Minnesota Department of Health. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yours, RI _' "UA Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention TDI Associates Kenneth Miller Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 EXCERPTS FROM THE A !ESTER ZONING ORDINANCE 8 LAND DE )PMENT MANUAL I 62.630 CRITERIA FOR INCENTIVE DEVELOPMENTS: In determining whether to approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application, the Commission and Council shall be guided by the following criteria: 1) Preliminary Development Plan Criteria: a) Suitability of the Area: The Commission and Council shall find that the proposed site is suitable as the location for an Incentive Development based on consideration of the following factors: 1) The proposed use is compatible with the existing land uses in the area or the pattern of zoning within 1,000 feet of the property boundaries. 2) The natural characteristics of the site under consideration, including topography and soil characteristics, necessitate increased density to allow for economic development of the site. b) Site Design Criteria: The Commission and Council shall find that the preliminary development plan design is consistent with the following guidelines: 1) Capacity of Public Facilities: The existing or future planned utilities in the area are adequate to serve the proposed development. 2) Geologic Hazards: The existence of areas of natural or geologic hazard, such as unstable slopes, sinkholes, floodplain, etc., has been identified and the development of these areas has been taken into account or will be addressed in the final development plan. 3) Natural Features: For developments involving new construction, the arrangement of buildings, paved areas and open space has, to the extent practical, utilized the existing topography and existing desirable vegetation of the site. 4) Traffic Generation Impact: Anticipated traffic generated by the development will not cause the capacity of adjacent streets to be exceeded, and conceptual improvements or the need for improvements to reduce the impact of access points on the traffic flow of adjacent streets have been identified where needed. 5) Height Impacts: For developments involving new construction, the heights and placement of proposed structures are compatible with the surrounding development in the following manner: a) The structures will not deny adequate sunlight to surrounding properties; b) The siting of the structures will not destroy views from the primary exposures of adjacent residential dwellings; 3� EXCERPTS FROM THE R IESTER ZONING ORDINANCE & LAND DE )PMENT MANUAL 6) Setbacks: For developments involving new construction, proposed setbacks are related to building height and bulk in a manner consistent with that required for permitted uses in the underlying zoning district. 7) Internal Site Design: For developments involving new construction, the preliminary site layout indicates adequate building separation and desirable orientation of the buildings to open spaces, street frontages or other focal points. 8) Screening and Buffering: The conceptual screening and bufferyards proposed are adequate to protect the privacy of residents in the development or surrounding residential areas from the impact of interior traffic circulation and parking areas, utility areas such as refuse storage, unwanted pedestrianibicycle access, or to subdue differences in architecture and bulk between adjacent land uses. 9) Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development includes adequate amounts of off-street parking and loading areas and, in the case of new construction, there is adequate landscaped area to meet ordinance requirements. BONUS DENSITY 62.658 All Development: The criteria in this paragraph may be considered for granting bonus density in all developments: 1) Storm Water Management: The developer provides on -site or off -site improvements to stormwater facilities that will minimize existing flooding, erosion or siltation problems resulting from obsolete or non -existing stormwater facilities up or downstream from the tract in question; or the developer provides improvements such as over -sized retention basins, channel improvements, or recharge facilities which reduce or eliminate existing flooding, erosion or siltation caused by urban development either up or downstream. The City Council shall determine that the existing problems are sufficient to grant the bonus, based upon the recommendation of the City Engineer. 2) The development proposes to integrate the reuse of an existing structure which has been vacant for twenty four consecutive months. 3) Easements consistent with the proposed flood control project are provided, or other bank treatment or river beautification which will result in increased usage of the area along existing streams for walking, sitting, or other means of passive recreation are developed. 4) Street improvements normally provided by the City of Rochester are constructed, dedicated or paid for by the developer. Examples include the provision of right-of-way for arterial streets beyond that normally required to EXCERPTS FROM THE F IESTER ZONING ORDINANCE & LAND DE 7PMENT MANUAL 3� 3 l be dedicated, or the construction or payment for turn lanes, signal lights, increased pavement depths, etc. 5) Utility Service: The development of the site will lead to increased efficiency in the existing public utility delivery system or the more efficient use of already existing utilities. This means, a) that the necessary utilities already exist on the property to be served, or b) the development of the property will provide a necessary link or connection to complete the system or improve service. 6) Integrated Planning: The proposed development involves the integrated development of a site which is a minimum of one acre in size and located in an established district. 7) Each four (4) percent increase in the landscape area ratio above the minimum required shall be considered as meeting the criteria for bonus density/floor area or an increase in plant materials so as to exceed minimum requirements. 8) The proposed development minimizes access points by utilizing shared access points with adjacent developments, resulting in a reduction in the number of driveway openings on a collector or higher level street. 9) Parking lot landscaping for the purpose of screening residential areas and/or right-of-way areas from concentration of vehicles. 60.417 Findings for Variances: In taking action on a variance request, the approval r authority shall make findings supporting the decision based on the following L_ . guidelines: 1) The approval authority may grant a variance to the provisions of this ordinance if it finds that: a) there are extraordinary conditions or circumstances, such as irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of the lot or exceptional topographical or physical conditions which are peculiar to the property and do not apply to other lands within the neighborhood or the same class of zoning district; and b) the variance is necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property involved; and c) the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or materially injurious to other property in the area, is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this ordinance, and will not adversely affect implementation of the Comprehensive Plan; and d) the variance as granted is the minimum necessary to provide reasonable economic use of the property, The extraordinary conditions or circumstances shall be found not to be the result of an action by the applicant or property owners who have control of the property. In addition, the approval authority shall find that development of the parcel in question cannot be integrated with development of adjacent parcels under the same ownership in such a manner so as to provide for the reasonable economic use of the total site in a manner consistent with the provisions of this ordinance. 2) The Board may grant a variance to the literal provisions of this ordinance if it finds that: a) there has been substantial and detrimental reliance in good faith by an applicant who has received a permit or certificate issued in error by the administrative official charged with enforcement of this ordinance, and b) the mistaken issuance of the certificate or permit is not the result of an action on the part of the applicant, the property owner, or any other person or party who has had control of the property, to provide misleading or incorrect information, or to knowingly withhold information necessary for the administrative official to accurately review the permit or certificate request. 3) The Board shall under no circumstances grant a variance that will allow a use otherwise not permitted within the zoning district or any variance of the elevation or levels for flood protection. PAGE 54 December 27, 1999 C� Page 12 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 2. The p being 3. The propose4 easement in p for the relocai Contract with service to the expansion is cor ured for parking. upon the theater be removed and the area expansion is ontingent upon the applicant vacating the existing utility posed exyllinsion area and dedicating a new 20-foot utility easement aVublicaterma.The ownermust enter into a City Owner the installat(on of the public water main and the water er be abandoned property at the water main. This item was tabled earlier in the meeting. Type III, Phase Il Incentive Deve(coment Conditlonal Use Permit *00-6 and Variance #00-5 by the Kendal Group, to allow for the development of a four-story. 68-unit apartment building and associated parking that would be located on property that Is zoned B-1 (Restricted Commercial). The apartment building Is proposed to be located along the east side of 3 Avenue NW south of Elton Hills Drive and west of the Zumbro River. Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated March 28, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. He stated that staff recommends approval with the six conditions listed in the staff report and an additional condition contained in John Harford's memo, which was distributed to the Commission. The applicant will address the variance. He stated that the Commission will need to make two motions, one on the Incentive Development and one on the variance. Mr. Quinn asked for clarification as to which part of the memo is to be included as a condition. Mr. Svenby read the condition, "The applicant replace all trees removed that have a 4-inch diameter or larger, at a point 2 feet off the ground. Each tree should be replaced with two trees, one canopy tree and one understory tree, as identified In Appendix D of the Land Development Manual. The applicant will need to conduct an inventory of trees to be removed for the utility line construction and must submit that information along with the grading plan and the replanting plan." Mr. Suk asked if a condition is needed noting that this is final plan. Mr. Svenby explained that only the Council has the authority to waive the requirement of a final plan, so the Commission doesn't need to address it. . Mr. Brede asked about the rationale for a traffic study not being needed at this point. p4age 13 - City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Mr. Nigbur explained that at this point in time, with the capacity of the current roadway, it was felt that a traffic study wasn't needed and that they would not do anything differently with the roadway. Ms. McGowan asked if this property was before the Commission a while ago for rezoning. Mr. Svenby clarified that was the property to the south. Nancy Miller, TDI Associates, Pewaukee, Wisconsin, addressed the Commission. She explained they did a traffic assessment that concluded if all traffic was moving at 10 mph over the speed limit, there would still be sufficient time to react, and in all cases, it met the traffic requirements. She pointed out they will be discussing this will Charlie Reiter. Ms. Miller stated they feel this is an appropriate location for this type of development; it is close to many things and fills a great need for apartments in Rochester. She noted this is infill development and they have been working with the City to obtain the right-of-way as part of this project in order to add a bus shelter and stormwater management. Ms. Miller explained the recreation area and landscaping, pointing out there will be a gazebo. She commented that 3rd Avenue is 14' higher than the site, then it plateaus, and then there is a steep incline to the river, so from the road you won't see the building as a 4-story building, and from the back side across the river, the hill will be filled with landscaping so not as much of the building will be seen. She explained that parcel B provides an extra entrance and access point to the site and they felt that was important for fire access. Ms. Miller stated they have discussed the development agreement with Public Works and it was drafted today. She commented they have no problems with the conditions. She noted hey feel this is a good use for the site. Ms. Miller made herself available for questions. Ms. McGowan asked where the bus shelter will be located Ms. Miller explained they are not quite sure, and they are discussing that with Public Works, but it will be on their property. Mr. Nigbur stated they will do a site review with the developer. He noted that more than likely the location will be surrounding the northerly driveway. Ms. McGowan asked if someone is heading south and needs to make a left-hand turn into the complex, would there be enough room for cars to get passed them during the morning rush hour. Mr. Nigbur stated there is adequate room; noting the roadway is 36' wide and there is no parking along the roadway. Ms. McGowan expressed concerns about where the bus would stop. Mr. Nigbur commented that buses frequently stop on roadways like this. Ms. McGowan asked about the sight distance for oncoming traffic. Mr. Nigbur stated that Public Works feels the capacity is there. He mentioned the possibility of a free -flow right turn lane near the intersection of Elton Hills Drive and 3'o Avenue NW. Page 14 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April I2, 2000 Ms. Petersson asked to see the color rendering. Ms. Miller presented it. Mr. Werven asked the difference between an efficiency and a one -bedroom unit. Ms. Miller explained the efficiency has one large living area and the one -bedroom has a closed off bedroom. Mr. Werven asked what the rents would be. Kenneth Miller of the Kendal Group addressed the Commission and stated the rents would be $675 for the efficiency units and up to $950 for the two bedroom units. Mr. Werven asked what that is based on. Mr. Miller explained those figures were arrived at by studying the rental market in the City of Rochester. Mr. Werven stated he thought this was to be classified as affordable housing. Mr. Svenby clarified that was one of the possible incentives, but it is not applicable to this development. Mr. Werven commented that a great need has been identified, but people would be paying half of their monthly income for rent. He feels this is a wonderful project, but he was ill-informed on the affordability. Jeff Bolin, 1735 Td Avenue NW, addressed the Commission. He expressed concerns about traffic, crime, and pollution. He also feels there will not be enough on -site parking, and asked what would happen with the parking overflow. Mr. Svenby referred to the memo of March 31, 2000 that is mentioned in condition number 4. This memo is on page K-21 of the packet and number 1 of memo should be reworded to say "The property must be platted." He stated that number 8 on that same memo should say, "The developer must provide curb & gutter along 3 d Avenue NW." Mr. Nigbur noted that many of the items in that memo are being incorporated into the development agreement. With no others wishing to address the Commission, Mr. Sulk closed the public hearing. Ms. McGowan asked for clarification of condition number 5. 34? Mr. Svenby explained that according to Section 64.143 of the LDM, a separation distance of 480' from Elton Hills Drive to the first entrance is required, but is not met. The ordinance allows the City Engineer to waive that provision, and the condition requires they obtain the waiver. Mr. Nigbur stated they will be receiving that waiver. Ms. McGowan commented that she likes the concept, but has concerns about access and doesn't think she can support it because it jeopardizes safety. JgPage 15 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Mr. Burke asked if there is adequate width to the right-of-way to provide a right turn lane or restripe for a left turn into the project. Mr. Nigbur answered yes. He agreed it is a busy roadway, but it is meant to be a busy roadway. He noted that safety concerns will be taken into consideration. He pointed out there are alternatives if there are traffic problems. Mr. Burke asked if the proximity of the retaining walls to the right-of-way interfere with adjusting the roadway. Mr. Nigbur answered no. He stated they are not proposing to widen the roadway. Mr. Quinn asked if the motion should include the variance. Mr. Svenby explained there should be two separate motions, one for the variance and one for the incentive development. Ms. Petersson moved to approve Incentive Development Conditional Use Permit #00-06 by the Kendal Group, with the 7 conditions as revised by staff. Mr. Quinn seconded the motion. The motion carried M. Conditions: 1. The building and building fagade be constructed as shown on the elevation drawings, Including the structural brick, hardboard siding, shutters, roof pitch, porches, windows, and building shape and size as shown on the drawings. 2. The site plan be revised to Identify the bufferyards and landscaping to meet the minimum requirements for the `S" and "C" bufferyards. The applicant correct the labeling of the plant material "CKM" on the landscaping plan, sheet C-8 or include it in the planting schedule on sheet C-7. 3. Due to the probable removal of existing vegetation along the a Ave. sidewalk abutting the retaining wall the applicant shall provide landscaping to screen the parking area and drive aisle by providing a planting of evergreen shrubs to form a screen. The plantings must be planted at 5' on center spacing at the top of the retaining wag adjacent to the sidewalk. A fence 4' In height must be located at the top of the retaining waft that is closest to the sidewalk on a Ave, as a safety precaution due to the 8 42' drop to the drive aisle adjacent to the building. 4. Meet all of the requirements of the Public Works Department in a memo from Mike Nigbur dated 3131100. 5. Receive approval of a "substandard access location" from the City Engineer for the north driveway access prior to City Council action on this development proposal. 6. Provide cash in lieu of land to meet the parkland dedication requirements as requested by the Park and Recreation Department. Page 16 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 7. Staff recommends that the applicant replace all trees removed that have a 4-inch diameter or larger, at a point 2 feet off the ground. Each tree should be replaced with two trees, once canopy tree and one understory tree, as identified in the Appendix D of the Land Development Manual. The applicant will need to conduct an inventory of trees to be removed for the utility line construction and must submit that information along with the grading plan and the replanting plan. Mr. Quinn moved to approve Variance #00-05, by the Kendal Group, based on staff' suggested findings. Mr. Brede seconded the motion, which carried 8-0. Findings: 1. Extraordinary conditions or circumstances: The 2 lots contain 2.23 acres of resource protection lands (water surface, drainageways, and steep slopes) that reduce the allowable buildable acreage to 1.93 acres. 2. The variance is not necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property. It is zoned B-1 and could be built to other B-1 standards and uses. 3. The variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or materially injurious to other property due to the location and design of the building, underground parking, landscape area and bufferyard requirements, and avoidance of grading and construction on the steep hillside abutting the river. The applicant is proposing an incentive development that may minimize impacts on the surrounding properties. 4. The applicant has not provided Information to substantiate that the request is the minimum necessary to provide for a reasonable economic use. The extraordinary conditions are not due to the applicant's actions but are part of the site constraints.. Mr. Suk called a break and reconvened the meeting after 10 minutes. Mr. Svenby presented the is on file at the Rochester. Mr. Svenby stated discussed further, action is taken on staff recommends report, ftd April 7, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report some issues relateaV this development staff feels need to be the stormwater pond, Ntrail, and the second access, before He noted that if the ConXission wishes to proceed with the GDP, ms contained in the staff re rt. AGENDAS 'UBLIC HEARINGS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION PLANNING ITEM DESCRIPTION: Annexation by Ordinance Petition #00-07 by Schoenfelders Southstar, Inc. to annex approximately 49.91 acres of land, 19.66 acres are located along the east side of 23r0 Avenue SE in part of the NE1/4 of the SW1/4 of Section 18 and 30.25 acres are located south of 281" Street SE in the SW1/4 of the SW1/4 of Section 18, Marion Township. April 27, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: MEETING ✓ / DATE: 05-01-00 ITEM NO. REPAIRED BY: Theresa Fogarty, Planner The City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this annexation request on April 12, 2000, The Commission found that this property is adjacent to the city limits and can be served by City services. The Planning Commission therefore recommends approval of this request. Motion by Ms. Petersson to approve Annexation Petition #00-07 by Schoenfelders Southstar. The motion was seconded by Mr. Ardell. The motion carried 6-0. Planning Department Recommendation: See attached staff report, dated April 18, 2000. Minnesota Statutes now specify that the property taxes payable in the year an annexation is effective shall be paid to the Township. For the five years following the annexation, the City must make a cash payment to the Township equaling 90%, 70%, 50%, 30% and 10% of the Townships share of the taxes in the year the property was annexed. The Township Taxes on this property for 1999 is $76.55. Council Action Needed: 1. Following the public hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed as petitioned, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to be adopted and transmitted to the MN Planning /Office of Strategic and Long Range Planning. Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 3. City Attorney: Legal Description Attached 4. City Finance Director. Tax Information Attached 5. Planning Department File 6. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime Rochester / Olmsted County Government Center. 7. GGG Engineering after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, May 1, 2000 in the Council Chambers at the COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second 307()- 3�3 Q c(z G I TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 5071285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELL/SEPTIC 5071285-8345 DATE: April 18, 2000 FAX 5071287-2275 RE: Annexation Petition #00-07 by Schoenfelders Southstar, Inc. to annex approximately 49.91 acres of land, 19.66 acres are located along the east side of 23rd Avenue SE in part of the NE1/4 of the SW1/4 of Section 18, and 30.25 acres are located south of 281h Street SE in the SW114 of the SW114 of Section 18, Marion Township. Planninq Department Review: Applicants/Owners: Shoenfelders Southstar, Inc. Bernadine Stevens, CEO 1635 Greenview Drive SW Rochester, MN 55902 Location of Property: The property is located along the east side of 2V Avenue SE in part of the NE1/4 of the SW114 of Section 18, consisting of 19.66 acres and south of 28" Street SE in the SW1/4 of the SW114 of Section 18, consisting of 30.25 acres, all in Marion Township. Existing Land Use: The property is vacant and undeveloped land. Size: The property proposed for annexation is approximately 49.91 acres of unplatted land. Existing Zoning: The property is zoned A-4 (Agricultural Urban Expansion) District on the Olmsted County zoning map. Future Zoning: Upon annexation, the property will be zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential) district on the Rochester Zoning map. Land Use Plan: According to the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use this property is designated for "low density residential' uses. Adjacency to the Municipal The area consisting of 30.25 acres is adjacent to the city limits Limits: along its northern boundary and the area consisting of 19.66 acres is also adjacent to the city limits along its north boundary. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER 2 / Page 2 J �� April 18, 2000 Sewer & Water: The property under consideration can be served with city sewer and water, which can be extended from their present locations to serve the property. Utilities: This area is within the Main Level Water System Area and preliminary indications are that in the easterly portion adequate flows are available for fire protection, but pressures will be on the low side. In the westerly portion the static pressures are adequate for residential use, but flows for fire protection will be below the minimum required by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The planned future networking of the water system within the Qiunstar development to the east or within the Southport area to the west would provide the required flows for this area. The above referral comment from the Rochester Public Utilities, Water Division has been noted and will be addressed during the preliminary plat process. Townboard Review: Minnesota State Statutes require that the Townboard members receive a written notice, by certified mail, 30 days prior to the public hearing. The City Council will hold a public hearing on this item on May 1, 2000. The City Clerk has sent the certified notice 30 days prior to the hearing date. General Development Plan: The General Development Plan for Quinstar does include this parcel. Report Attachments: 1. Annexation Map 2. Location Map 3. Referral Comments ( 2 letters) Staff Recommendation: This property is adjacent to the City limits and can be'served by city services upon extension of the sanitary sewer and water lines from their present ends. The Planning staff recommends that the City proceed to adopt an ordinance annexing the property according to Minnesota Statutes 414.033, Subdivision 2 (3). rpu we pledge, we deli✓cr April 4, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Annexation Petition #00-07 by Schoenfelders Southstar, Inc. to annex 49.91 acres of land located within the Quinstar GDP area. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced petition is complete and our comments follow: 1. The property may be subject to the water availability fee, connection fees or assessments. The Land Development Manager (507-281-6198) at the Public Works Department determines the applicability of these fees. 2. This area is within the Main Level Water System Area. Preliminary computer water system modeling indicates that in the easterly portion adequate flows are available for fire protection, but pressures will be on the low side ranging from the upper 30's to lower 40's PSI. We recommend provisions for this pressure should be made with the service sizing and the plumbing installation in the homes at the higher elevations of this site. In the westerly portion the static pressures will be in the mid 50's PSI range, which is adequate for residential use, but flows for fire protection will be below the minimum required by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The planned future networking of the water system either within the Quinstar development to the east or within the Southport area to the west would provide the required flows to this area. 3. We will work with the applicant's engineering firm to develop the necessary water system layout to serve this area. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yours, 0614A R Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Geoffrey Griffin, GGG Engineering Quinstar M Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280.1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 327 IZOCHESTER Minnesota 4/10/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for ANNX00-07 on the Schoenfelders Southstar. Inc property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: This property can be served with municipal utilities. Q: TEMPl4NNEX00-07.doc REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 3� DATE: 05-01-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. 3LIC HEARINGS PLANNINGa(j ITEM DESCRIPTION: Annexation by Ordinance Petition #00-06 by County of Olmsted and PREPARED BY: Badger Development, LLC to annex approximately 4.92 acres of land located along the Theresa Fogarty, west side of West Circle Drive, south of Valleyhlgh Road NW and north of 19`" Street NW. Planner The property is located in the SE114 of Section 20, Cascade Township April 26, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this annexation request on April 12, 2000. The Commission found that this property is adjacent to the city limits and can be served by City services. The Planning Commission therefore recommends approval of this request. Motion by Mr. Burke made a motion to approve Annexation Petition #00-06 by Olmsted County and Badger Development. Mr. Brede seconded the motion, which carried 8-0. Planning Department Recommendation: See attached staff report, dated April 4, 2000. Minnesota Statutes now specify that the property taxes payable in the year an annexation is effective shall be paid to the Township. For the five years following the annexation, the City must make a cash payment to the Township equaling 90%, 70%, 50%, 30% and 10% of the Townships share of the taxes in the year the property was annexed. This property is recorded as right-o&way by Hmsted County, therefore, there are no taxes paid on this property. Council Action Needed. 1. Following the public hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed as petitioned, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to be adopted and transmitted to the MN Planning /Office of Strategic and Long Range Planning. The motion shall also include that the property be zoned to be consistent with the zoning district amendment #00.05. Attachments: 1. Minutes from the April 12, 2000 GP&ZC meeting. 2. Staff report dated April 4, 2000. Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 3. City Attorney: Legal Description Attached 4. City Finance Director, Tax Information Attached 5. Planning Department File 6. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, May 1, 2000 in the Council Chambers at the Rochester! Olmsted County Government Center. 7. Yaggy Colby Associates COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: i BADGER PROPERTY PART OF St=0, T107N, RUW- ROCHESTER, OLMSTED COUNTY, MINNESOTA } 11 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN �� 311'i��lL��yt1�� II•c ��t•�pa�h� PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission M PPNGESSING/ 507/285.8232 HOUSNG/HRA 507/285-8224 FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 wELVSEPTIC 507/285.8345 DATE: April 4, 2000 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Annexation Petition #00-06 by Olmsted County and Badger Development, LLC to annex approximately 4.92 acres of land located along the west side of West Circle Drive, south of Valleyhigh Road NW and north of 19th Street NW. The property is located in the SE 1/4 Section 20, Cascade Township. Planning Department Review: Applicants/Owners: Olmsted County 515 SE 4h' Street Rochester, MN 55904 Badger Development, LLC 400 South Broadway Rochester, MN 55904 Location of Property: The property is located along the west side of West Circle Drive, south of Valleyhigh Road NW and north of 191h Street NW. Existing Land Use: This property is vacant and undeveloped land. Size: The property proposed for annexation is approximately 4.92 acres of unplatted land. Existing Zoning: The property is zoned A-4 (Agricultural Urban Expansion) District on the Olmsted County zoning map. Future Zoning: A land use plan amendment and zoning district amendment are being considered concurrent with this Annexation request. Zoning of this property, upon annexation should be consistent with Zoning District Amendment #00-05. Land Use Plan: According to the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, this parcel is shown as being designated for "Low Density Residential'. The applicant has petitioned to amend OGGr7 �� the Rochester Area Service Land Use Plan to allow for AN EQUAL OPPORTUNIYIAFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER 3 age 2 14, 2000 "Commercial" land use designation. This request will be considered by the Council at their May 1, 2000 meeting. Adjacency to the Municipal The property is adjacent to the city limits along its southern Limits: boundary and will be contiguous along its western and northern boundaries, once Annexation Petition 00-01 and 00-02 are approved by the Minnesota Planning Office. Sewer & Water: The Northwest High Level Water System service is currently available to this property at the southeast corner. Townboard Review: Minnesota State Statutes require that the Townboard members receive a written notice, by certified mail, 30 days prior to the public hearing. The City Council will hold a public hearing on this item on May 1, 2000. The City Clerk has sent the certified notice 30 days prior to the hearing date. General Development Plan: The General Development Plan for Badger Ridge does include this parcel. Report Attachments: Staff Recommendation: 1. Annexation Map 2. Location Map 3. Referral Comments ( letters) This property is adjacent to the City limits and can be served by city services upon extension of the sanitary sewer and water tines from their present ends. The Planning staff recommends that the City proceed to adopt an ordinance annexing the property according to Minnesota Statutes 414.033, Subdivision 2 (3). Staff also recommends that zoning of this property, upon annexation to the City, be consistent with Zoning District Amendment #00-05 (request to zone this property M-f, Mixed Commercial - Industrial). Page 3 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 �353' 4. No excavation, movement, or disposal of buried debris, on site, shall occur prior to obtaining approvals and permits required by the MN Pollution Control Agency for the activity, or any other agency that may require permits for such activity. If the applicant proceeds with excavation, movement or disposal of buried debris, proof of approvals and permits from other agencies must be filed with the Rochester -Olmsted ANNEXATIONS: Annexation Petition #00-04 by Seneca Food Corporation to annex approximately 175 09 acres of land located south of 20" Street SE. east of Highway 63 and north of Hi , hway 52, in Section 13, Rochester Township. Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated April 4, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file with the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Svenby stated that staff recommends approval and suggests it be put into the "H" (Holding) zone because it is likely to be rezoned in the future. Ms. Petersson moved to approve Annexation Petition #00-04 by Seneca Food Corporation and that it be placed in the "H" zone. Mr. Staver seconded the motion, which carried 8-0. Annexation Petition #00-06 by Olmsted County and Badger Development, LLC to annex approximately 4.92 acres of land located along the west side of West Circle Drive soutt of Valieyhigh Road NW and north of 19" Street NW. The property is located in the SE 1) Section 20, Cascade Township. Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated April 4, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Svenby stated that staff recommends approval. Mr. Suk asked if the GDP has been revised to include this piece of property. Mr. Svenby responded that it has been. Mr. Burke made a motion to approve Annexation Petition #00-06 by Olmsted County and Badger Development. Mr. Brede seconded the motion, which carried 8-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Preliminary Plat #00-09 to be known as Weatherstone CIC #166 Subdivision. The Plat Douglas Trail. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING J O DATE: 05-01-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. BLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ?,- oZ1 i t eM DESCRIPTION: Land Use Plan Amendment #00-03 by Olmsted County and Badger PREPARED BY: Development, LLC to amend the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan to allow for Theresa Fogarty, approximately 4.92 acres for "Commercial" land use designation. The property is located along the Planner west side of West Circle Drive, south of Valleyhigh Road NW and north of 19' Street NW April 25, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on April 12, 2000, to consider the land use plan amendment request for the property. The applicant is requesting to amend the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan to designate 4.92 acres for "Commercial" uses. The Land Use Plan currently designates this property as appropriate for "Low Density Residential" types of uses. The Commission reviewed the land use amendment request based on the criteria as included in the staff report and recommended approval, with staff suggested findings. Ms. McGowan moved to approve Land Use Amendment #00-03 by Olmsted County and Badger Development, LLC based on staff -suggested findings. Mr. Brede seconded the motion, which carried 8-0. Planning Department Recommendation: See attached staff report dated April 4, 2000. 'ouncil Action Needed: 1. The Council may approve or deny this petition. The Council's decision must be supported by findings based on the criteria in the Land Use Plan listed in the staff report If the Council wishes to proceed with the land use amendment as petitioned, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution that can be adopted supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated April 4, 2000 2. Minutes of the April 12, 2000 CPZC Meeting I Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Administrator 3. City Attorney: Legal Description attached 4. Planning Department File 5. Planning Department -GIS 6. Applicant This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, May 1, 2000 in the Council I Board Chamber at the Rochester -Olmsted Government Center Building 7. Yaggy Colby Associates COUNCIL ACTION: Mcton by: Second by: to: ✓ V MM NVld1N3WdOlM3a.lVN3N30'. n7:7 viosi mm uNf1W 03t o *Po MKU NLOWO ddy � ....'• t A.113dObd'd3r,,a0 i �III6SID��I1�\��� ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission GISIADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232MAPPING HOUSINGIHRA 507/286-8224 FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WEUJSEPTIC 507/285.8345 DATE: April 4, 2000 FAX 5071287-2275 RE: Land Use Plan Amendment #00-03 by Olmsted County and Badger Development, LLC. The applicant is requesting to amend the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan to allow for approximately 4.92 acres of "commercial" land use designation. The property is located west of West Circle Drive and south of Valleyhigh Road NW and north of 191h Street NW. Planning Denartment Review: Petitioner: Olmsted County 515 SE 4`h Street Rochester, MN 55904 Badger Development, LLC 400 South Broadway #100 Rochester, MN 55904 Consultant: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 Third Avenue SE Rochester, MN 55904 Location of Property: The area includes approximately 4.92 acres of land located south of Valleyhigh Road NW, west of West Circle Drive (CR 22) and north of 19t6 Street NW. Requested Action: The applicant is requesting to designate approximately 4.92 acres of land for commercial land uses. According to the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, this parcel of land is identified for "Low Density Residential" types of uses on the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan Map. The applicant has filed an annexation petition for the 4.92 acres. A zone change petition is also being reviewed concurrent with the Land Use Plan Amendment. The zone change is requesting M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial). AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER i OF Page 2 LUPA 00-03 April 4, 2000 A General Development Plan, known as Badger General Development Ridge, was recently approved for 235.64 acres by the Plan applicant. This parcel was not included in the GDP since the applicant did not have control of the property, but has since been included. Existing Land Use: The property is currently undeveloped. Proposed Land Use: The applicant has submitted a concurrent Zoning District Amendment. The applicant would like to use this site for commercial -industrial uses. Adjacent Land Use and North: The property to the north was just recently Zoning: zoned to M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial). South: The property.to the south, included in the Hartman Farms GDP, is zoned M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial) and R-2 (Low Density Residential) district on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. East: Across West Circle Drive are the Circle Drive Corporate Park Subdivisions and the Rochester Technology Park Subdivisions. This land is zoned M- 2 (Industrial) on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. There is one lot zoned M-1 in the Circle Drive Corporate Park. West: The adjacent property to the west was recently zoned M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial). Transportation Access: As previously reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council, in the Badger Ridge GDP,. Access to this site would be from Valleyhigh Road and West Circle Drive. A Traffic Impact Study was completed for the proposed Badger Ridge GDP. The Transportation Staffs review of this report (see attached) indicates that their position in planning for the development of the traffic system for this site has been to provide future improvements that could respond to higher than expected levels of traffic. This will provide the ability to respond if growth in the area or traffic generation at the site exceeds expectations. The Review of the Traffic Analysis is divided into two sections: 1) Discussion of issues related to the perimeter thoroughfare street system, 2) Discussion of issues related tot he internal development layout of the site. Based upon the Traffic Impact Study prepared for the GDP, this development in conjunction with the anticipated development of other properties in the travelshed of Valleyhigh Road will require the Page 3 LUPA 00-03 April 4, 2000 Wetlands: Referral Comments: Report Attachments: upgrading of Valleyhigh Road to fully accommodate future traffic demand. While there is available capacity in the existing roadway system to accommodate some development generated traffic, full build -out of the Badge Ridge site would cause the traffic volumes to exceed the capacity of the existing roadway. The ultimate facility could include four through lanes between West Circle Drive and 50'h Ave., left and right turn lanes, along with necessary boulevard or ditch area, potentially space for a median and space for a bike trail. It also appears that at some point in the future the access location for the proposed commercial area would need to be signalized. The first entrance, west of West Circle Drive, has inadequate sight distance for east bound traffic approaching. A decision will need to be made whether this problem should be corrected immediately. The review lists a number of conclusions regarding the development. According to the Olmsted County Soil Survey no wetlands exist on this parcel. 1. Planning Department — Transportation 2. RPU Water Division 3. City of Rochester Public Works Department 1. Approved General Development Plan Map 2. Proposed Land Use Designation Map 3. Referral Comments Analysis for Land Use Plan Amendment: The Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan was recently amended designating approximately 52.52 acres in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of West Circle Drive (CR 22) and Valleyhigh Road NW (CSAH 4) as being designated for "Commercial" types of uses. This request will be a continuation of the approved land use designation. This parcel was not included in the amendment request for the 52.52 acres because the applicant did not have control of the property. Since that time, the applicant has secured a purchase agreement and proposes to develop this parcel with the existing 52.52 acre parcel, zoned M-1. According the Land Use Plan "commercial' areas are intended primarily for uses related to retail trade, temporary lodging, business and personal services, finance, insurance. Real estate, and office uses of a similar character. Commercial uses range in intensity from professional offices which may differ little in noise level, traffic volume, and appearance from residential uses, to high activity uses such as fast food restaurants, shopping centers, major office buildings, hotels, and gas stations. "Industrial' areas are intended primarily for manufacturing, transportation related facilities, communications related facilities, privately owned utilities, warehousing and outside storage of materials and equipment, and uses of similar character. Typically, industrial uses are characterized by relatively high levels of truck traffic and noise. Page 4 LUPA 00-03 April 4, 2000 Staff Suggested Findings for the "Commercial" Designation The Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan states that regional shopping centers are most suitable in areas with the following characteristics: a) Located at the intersection of a major arterial or higher level street with similar or higher level streets. This site is bounded by West Circle Drive (CR 22). West Circle Drive is classified as an expressway on the ROCOG Thoroughfare Plan. Access to this parcel will be from Valleyhigh Road NW which is classified as an arterial street on the ROCOG Thoroughfare Plan and West Circle Drive. This piece of land, plus the additional 52.52 acres to the north, is located at the intersection of an expressway and an arterial roadway. b) Having level terrain. The site does have fairly level terrain. c) Having good pedestrian, vehicular, and transit access. The site does have access to an expressway and arterial roadway. The Planning Department's Transportation Staff has indicated that this proposed development in conjunction with the anticipated development of other properties in the travelshed of Valleyhigh Road will required a number of traffic improvements to the adjacent roadways. The traffic analysis includes immediate traffic improvements as well as accommodations for further improvements necessitated by growth. There is inadequate sight distance for eastbound traffic approaching this site. The inadequate sight distance could be dealt with on an interim basis until reconstruction of Valleyhigh Road is done. The future reconstruction of Valleyhigh Road and additional improvements at the intersection of Valleyhigh Drive and West Circle will increase the vehicle access to the site. When the property is developed trail facilities will be required along all perimeter roadways. d) Having at least 40 acres of land suitable for commercial development. This site is approximately 4.92 acres in size but will be developed with the adjacent parcel to the north and west, consisting of 52.52 acres. The Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan identifies location criteria for "Industrial" types of uses as follows: a) Having level terrain (less than 5% slope). The site does have fairly level terrain. b) Having excellent access to transportation facilities, including direct access to a freeway, expressway, or arterial. Access to either rail or air transportation is also desirable. This parcel has frontage along West Circle Drive (CR 22) which is classified as an expressway on the ROCOG Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan. Since this parcel will be developed with the adjacent parcel to the north and west, access to this parcel will be off of Valleyhigh Road NW, which is classified as an arterial roadway on the ROCOG Currently Held Valid Thoroughfare Plan. The Planning Department's Transportation Staff has indicated that the proposed development in conjunction with the anticipated development of other properties in the travelshed of Valleyhigh Road will required a number of traffic improvements to the adjacent roadways. The traffic analysis includes immediate traffic improvements as well as accommodations for further improvements necessitated by growth. There is inadequate sight distance for eastbound traffic approaching this site. The inadequate sight distance could be dealt with on an interim basis until reconstruction of Valleyhigh Road is done. c) Having adequate area available for industrial expansion, providing adequate space for buffer areas, where needed, to protect adjacent residential use designations. This site is approximately 4.92 acres in size but will be developed with the adjacent parcel to the north and west, consisting of 52.52 acres. The existing topography of the overall area does restrict there being areas available and suitable for industrial expansion unless there is major excavation activity done to cut and fill the site. The parkland will act as a natural buffer between the residential areas and commercial -industrial areas. Page 5 LUPA 00-03 April 4, 2000 d) Served by utilities and public facilities. Water and sewer will need to be extended to serve this property. The Northwest High Level water system will be available for connection with the completion of the planned Circle 19 Plaza (Hartman Farms development), to the south. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above -mentioned findings and the previously approved land use plan amendment for the parcel contiguous along the north and west of this parcel, staff is recommending approval of this land use amendment request. Plannina Commission Action Required: The Planning Commission must make a motion to recommend approval or denial of this request. The Planning Commission must also make findings to support this recommendation. This recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council and heard at a later public hearing. r Mt)-- ROCHESTER Minnesota 3/28/00 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 TO: Consolidated Planning Department Rochester, MN 55904-3740 2122 Campus Drive SE 507-287-7800 Rochester, MN 55904 FAX — 507-281-6216 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for Land Use Plan Amendment #00-03 & Zone Change Petition #00-05 on the Badger Development LLC & Olmsted County property. The following are Public Works comments on these proposals: Access to this parcel should be limited. No access should be permitted to CSAH 22. In addition, no access should be allowed to 300 St NW due to the close proximity to CSAH 22. Access to 26th St NW shall be no less than 300 feet west of the CSAH 22 ROW. C:ITEMP\LUPA#00-03.doc TRANSPORTATION S' REVIEW DATABASE - 1998 MARCH 2O00 County ZC 00-2 No comments on the Zone Change Radcliffe- Raygor Comments on the General Development Plan: I. At the time of platting an Environmental Corridor easement similar to the easements provided on Country Creek Subdivision and other subdivisions to the east should be provided to allow for future development of a public non - motorized trail along the Bear Creek floodplain corridor. This trail would be developed as part of facility envisioned to tie Chester Woods Park into the City of Rochester trails stem City Amend Final No comment Plan Midway Motor Lodge City Amend Apache The proposed expansion represents an increase in floor area in retail area of Mall Shopping approximately 3.5% and a net floor area change in the shopping center of about Center Plan 2%. The scale of proposed change is not of a magnitude to require the preparation of a traffic impact study. The transportation staff has no other comments on the proposal City Incentive Dev The proposed development does not require the preparation of a Traffic Impact Cord Use 00-6 Report to analyze intersection operations. There are two potential access design Kendall Group issues which have been discussed with the consultant for the applicant that should be reviewed (with the Public Works Department) to determine whether the access design is adequate. These are: > The sight distance at the access points to the development should be checked to insure that adequate sight lines exist to provide for safe ingress and egress to the site > While not needed at this time, the growth of through traffic past the site on P Ave in the future may make it desirable to stripe a left turn bay for inbound traffic from the north on 3rd Ave. The current roadway width and alignment should be reviewed to determine if this can be accommodated on the current roadway or whether provisions for additional right of way should be made to accommodate it in the future. City Prel Plat 00-12 No comment Northern Trails City PRD 00-5 No comment Freedom Housin City LUP d ZC Under Section 61.520 of the Land Development Manual the proposed Land Use -5 Badger the proposed site would trigger the need for a Rezoning Traffic Analysis. The Traffic Impact Report prepared for the Badger Ridge development assumed development of this site and has adequately analyzed traffic flow through intersections adjacent to the site. Issues related to access for this site are being discussed as part of the General Development Plan and the first Preliminary Plat for the Badger Ridge development. City Annex 00-6 No comment Badger City Manor Woods No comment West 12 Pre] Plat City GDP 152 Under Section 61.520 of the Land Development Manual the proposed ABBCO Co development is subject to the requirements for Traffic Impact Studies due to the 30 , Page 20 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Mr. Svenby pointed out that if the Commission denies this, it still goes an to the City Council. He noted another option is that the Commission could recommend this be continued and have the developer and consultant meet with Mr. Lee and Planning staff to work out other options for the property. Ms. Petersson asked if the Commission can request an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for this property. Mr. Svenby stated he will look into that. Ms. Petersson stated she feels strongly this should not be approved the way it is. Mr. Burke agreed. Ms. Petersson amended her motion to continue General Development Plan #152, to be known as Northern Heights Village, to the May 10, 2000 meeting. Mr. Werven seconded the amended motion. The motion carried 8-0. Mr. Slaver commented that it is dismaying that this kind of information came in at the 11"' hour. Land Use Plan Amendment #00-03 and Zone Change Petition #00-05 by Olmsted County and Badger Development, LLC. The applicant is requesting to amend the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan and Official Zoning Map to allow for approximately 4.92 acres of "commercial' land use designation and M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial) zoning. The property is located along the west side of West Circle Drive, south of Valleyhigh Road NW and north of 191h Street NW. Mr. Svenby presented the staff reports, dated April 4, 2000, to the Commission. The staff reports are on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Svenby stated that staff has suggested findings, and based on those findings, recommends approval of the Land Use Plan Amendment and the Zone Change. Mac Hamilton, Badger Development, LLC, addressed the Commission. He referred to a letter in the packet from Mr. Nigbur regarding access control on 300 Street. Mr. Suk noted that is an issue that should be addressed in the next hearing, which will be the preliminary plat. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Suk closed the public hearing. Ms. McGowan moved to approve Land Use Plan Amendment #00-03 by Olmsted County and Badger Development, LLC, based on staff -suggested findings. Mr. Brede seconded the motion, which carried 8-0. Ms. McGowan made a motion to approve Zoning District Amendment #00-05 by Olmsted County and Badger Development, LLC based upon staff -suggested findings. Mr. Burke seconded the motion carried 8-0. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTIOn AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATIN( JBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ITEM DESCRIPTION: Zoning District Amendment M00-OS by County of Olmsted and Badger Development, LLC to zone approximately 4.92 acres to the M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial) District. The property is located along the west side of West Circle Drive, south of Valleyhigh Road NW and north of W Street.NW I April 25, 20DO itv Planning and Zonincl_Commiss omRocommendation: MEETING 3Rq% DATE: 05-01-00 ITEM NO. f, '.2a Theresa Fogarty, Planner The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on April 12, 2000, to consider a zone change request to zone 4.92 acres to the M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial) district. The Commission reviewed the zone change request based on the criteria as included in the staff report and recommended approval, with staff suggested findings. Ms. McGowan moved to approve Zoning District Amendment #00-05 by Olmsted County and Badger Development, LLC based upon staff` -suggested findings. Mr. Burke seconded the motion, which caned M. Planning Deoariment Recommendation: See attached staff report dated April 5, 2000. Council Action Needed: 1. The Council may approve or deny this petition. The Councils decision must be supported by findings based on the criteria listed in the staff report if the Council wishes to proceed with the zone change as petitioned, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance that can be adopted supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law, Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated April 5, 2000 2. Minutes of the April 12, 2000 CPZC Meeting (y plstdbudon: V/ I. City Clerk 2. City Administrator 3. City Attorney: Legal Description attached 4. Planning Department File 5. Planning Department - GIS 6. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on Monday. May Rochester -Olmsted Government Center Building 7. Yaggy Colby Associates COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: ___ second by I'U PA 2000 in the Council f Board Chamber at the 3R(4P i ER PROPERTY C.20. T107N, R14W fOOIS?>:R. O MnW COUNTY, MINKSOTA GETAPAL',DiMOPMENT PLAN I .1 1 J, I PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS l i _ .IL Ws TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner DATE: April 5, 2000 1,40 wpn.ai�iaravi7 �`� vi �I•��ai i��1 ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PUNNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 5071285-8232 MAPPING HOUSINGMRA 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 5071295-8213 WELL/SEPriC 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Zoning District Amendment 000-05 by Badger Development, LLC to zone approximately 4.92 acres to the M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial) District. The property is located along the west side of West Circle Drive, south of Valleyhigh Road NW and north of 19t6 Street NW. _Planning Department Review: Petitioner/Owner: Olmsted County 515 SE 4" Street Rochester MN 55904 Badger Development, LLC 400 South Broadway #100 Rochester. MN 55904 The area includes approximately 4,92 acres of land Location of Property: located along the west Side of West Circle Drive, Street south of Valleyhigh Road NW and north of 19th NW The petitioner is requesting that approximately 4.92 Requested Action: be zoned to the M-1 (Mixed Commercial - acres Industrial) District. A General Development Plan known as Badger Ridge General Development was recently approved for the annexation of the 235.64 acres by the applicant. This parcel was not Plan: Included In the GDP since the applicant did not have control of the property but has since been included. This property is currently undeveloped. Existing Land Use: AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY!AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER mow. Page 2 Zone Change 00-05 April 5, 2000 Proposed Land Use: The applicant has submitted a concurrent Land Use Plan Amendment. The applicant would like to use this site for commercial -industrial types of uses. The accompanying General Development Plan for this site indicates the proposed roadway patterns throughout to the property, lot layouts, drainage patterns, zoning classifications, parkland location. Transportation Access: As previously reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council, in the Badger Ridge GDP: Access to this site would be from Valleyhigh Road and West Circle Drive A Traffic Impact Study was completed for the proposed Badger Ridge GDP. The Transportation Staff's review of this report (see attached) indicates that their position in planning for the development of the traffic system for this site has been to provide future improvements that could respond to higher than expected levels of traffic. This will provide the ability to respond if growth in the area or traffic generation at the site exceeds expectations. The Review of the Traffic Analysis is divided into two sections t) Discussion of issues related to the perimeter thoroughfare street system, 2) Discussion of issues related tot he internal development layout of the site Based upon the Traffic Impact Study prepared for the GDP, this development in conjunction with the anticipated development of other properties in the travelshed of Vatleyhigh Road will require the upgrading of Valleyhigh Road to fully accommodate future traffic demand. While there is available capacity in the existing roadway system to accommodate some development generated traffic, full build -out of the Badge Ridge site would cause the traffic volumes to exceed the capacity of the existing roadway. The ultimate facility could include four through lanes between West Circle Drive and 50`h Ave., left and right turn lanes, along with necessary boulevard or ditch area, potentially space for a median and space for a bike trail. It also appears that at some point in the future the access location for the proposed commercial area would need to be signalized The first entrance, west of West Circle Drive, has inadequate sight distance for east bound traffic approaching. A decision will need to be made whether this problem should be corrected immediately. The review lists a number of conclusions regarding the development. Wetlands: According to the Olmsted County Soii Survey no wetlands exist on this parcel. qC0 Page 3 Zone Change 00-05 April 5, 2000 Referral Comments: Report Attachments: Analysis and Staff Suggested Findings: 1 Planning Department - Transportation 2 City of Rochester Public Works Department 1 Proposed Zoning District Map 2 Proposed General Development Plan Map 3 Referral Comments The Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan was recently amended to designate approximately 55.34 acres of land for "commercial" uses and approximately 40.17 acres of land for "medium density residential" uses south of Valleyhigh Drive NW and west of West Circle Drive. This property was not included in that petition, since the property was owned by the County at that time. The land use designation for the property included in this petition is "low density residential". The applicant is requesting to designate approximately 4.92 acres of land for "commercial' uses on the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan The applicant has submitted a concurrent Land Use Plan Amendment and Zone Change. Recent revisions to the Land Development Manual require that a General Development Plan (GDP) be submitted with any Land Use Plan Amendments or with certain "upzonings". in this case, both a Land Use Plan Amendment and a proposed zoning to the M-1 district trigger the need for a GDP. A General Development Plan for the Badger Property, which was revised to include this parcel, was recently approved by the City Council. This proposal is consistent with the approved GDP. Under the provisions of Paragraph 60.338 of the Rochester Land Development Manual, the Commission shall recommend for approval and the Council shall approve, an application requesting an amendment to the zoning map if the amendment satisfies the following criteria: 1) The criteria of this subdivision apply to those amendments to the zoning map filed by formal petition. An amendment need only satisfy one of the following criteria: a) The area, as presently zoned, is inconsistent with the policies and goals of the Comprehensive Plan; b) The area was originally zoned erroneously due to a technical or administrative error; c) While both the present and proposed zoning districts are consistent with the Plan, the proposed district better furthers the policies and goals of the Comprehensive Plan as found in Chapters 2 and 3 of the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, Chapter 3 of the Housing Plan, and Chapter 10 of the ROCOG Long Range Transportation Plan; or d) The area has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to rezone so as to encourage development or redevelopment of the area. if the accompanying Land Use Plan Amendment to "Commercial' designation is approved for this site, the proposed zoning of the property to the M-1 (Mixed Commercial -industrial) district would make the zoning of the property consistent with the Plan. Employment projections show the most growth in commercial types of uses (office, business services, retail trade, etc.). With these employment projections there would appear to be a need for land that is zoned for commercial to allow for expansions of employment center. 2) The criteria of this subdivision also apply to those amendments to the zoning map filed by formal petition. However, an amendment must satisfy all of the following criteria: I Page 4 Zone Change 00-05 April 5, 2000 a) the permitted uses allowed within the proposed zoning district will be appropriate on the subject property and compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood; and The permitted uses allowed in the M-1 (Mixed Commercial - Industrial) zoning district would be appropriate on the subject property and compatible with the uses designated on the approved General Development Plan. Development of the property will require that the performance standards within the M-1 district be met. These performance standards should be adequate to mitigate the Impacts certain uses within the M-1 zoning district may have on the surrounding undeveloped properties. Adjacent land to the west was recently re -zoned to the M-1 district, properly to the south Is also zoned M-1. A Traffic Impact Study has been submitted and reviewed for the entire Badger Ridge GDP. The review of the study indicates improvements and modifications (now and In the future) are necessary to the adjacent roadways to accommodate project traffic volumes from the whole GDP. b) the proposed amendment does not involve 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). The proposed amendment does not involve spot zoning since it would be consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, especially If the concurrent Land Use Plan Amendment is approved. Adjacent land to the west was recently re -zoned to the M-1 district, property to the south is also zoned M-1. Staff' Recommendation: The ability to consider the Land Use Plan Amendment and Zone Change concurrently allows the City to consider this development proposal as a package. If the Commission and Council approve Land Use Plan Amendment #00-03, staff would recommend that approval to zone this 4.92 acre parcel M-1 (Mixed Commercial -industrial) upon annexation to the City. Planning Commission Action Reauired: The Planning Commission must make a motion to recommend approval or denial of this request. The Planning Commission must also make findings to support this recommendation. This recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council and heard at a later public hearing. Vol REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 03 DATE 5-1-00 `NDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING „'p 3 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Preliminary Plat #00-13 and Variance #00-6 to be known as Badger PREPARED BY: Ridge. The Plat proposes to subdivide 136 acres of land Into 109 lots for single family Brent Svenby, residential development, 3 lots for uses permitted in the R-3 zoning district, 27 lots for Planner commerciallindustrial uses and 1 outlot. The Plat also proposes to dedicate right-of-way for Valleyhigh Road NW and a number of new public roadways. The applicant is also requesting a variance to vary the total side yard setback from 16' to 12' on the entire subdivision. The property is located along the south side of Valleyhigh Road NW, west of West Circle Drive. April 26, 2000 NOTE: The stricken language in condition 1 has been met. Based on the revised plat submitted staff would recommend one additional condition. 14. A 30' park access be located in the general vicinity of Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 and the public street adjacent to the park be constructed at the developer's expense. City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on April 12, 2000 to consider this preliminary plat and variance request for the property. The proposed subdivision consists of 136 acres to be subdivided into lots for single family residential, multi -family development, commercial/industrial uses and 1 outlot to be developed as a park. The Planning Commission found that this preliminary plat conforms to the criteria listed in the Land Development Manual and recommends approval of this preliminary plat with the following modifications or conditions: 'he plat be revised as follows: 940 St. WN � 3 g 1111ti e ef 26 a West-C;irFle • Verification that single unit trucks can make right -turn without crossing the centerline and driving on the pedestrian ramps. 2. Prior to the submittal of the final plat, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to; storm water management; park dedication; traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 3. .Prior the submittal of a final plat, issues regarding cost contribution towards needed traffic management improvements, turn lanes and traffic control measures work needs to be worked out. A decision must also be made regarding the timing of these improvement projects along Valleyhigh Road and 50th Avenue. These decisions will include a determination of whether an interim upgrade will be constructed or whether programming of the full corridor upgrade should be initiated. This will require the applicant to work with the Olmsted County Engineer, the City Engineer and the Transportation Division of the Planning Department. 4. A temporary turnaround is required at the westerly end of "Ashland Place NW", "Tomah Place NW", "Manrce rive NW", and "River Falls Drive NW". Easements for these turnarounds, as well as for any utilities located utside of the plat boundary must be executed with the City prior to be recording of the Final Plat documents. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: age 2 q2P CAprii 26, J 5 Pedestrian facilities are required along both sides of all new public roadways and along existing right-of-ways (' wide bituminous path along Valleyhigh Road NW and West Circle Drive). Pedestrian facilities must be completed by the owner concurrent with development. If it is determined by the City that it is not practical to construct the required pedestrians facilities concurrent with this development, the owner shall execute a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement with the City to address the timing and responsibility for the future construction of said facilities. `- Stormwater management must be provided for this development either through on -site detention or participation in the City's Regional Stormwater Plan. Any facilities serving 50 or less developable acres will remain private and will require execution of long term maintenance agreements and easements. Prior to the submittal of the final plat, the applicant must submit a wetland delineation and receive the necessary approvals from the LGU. The applicant agrees that this subdivision will have an impact on the need for Parkland and that the dedication of land and cash will meet this need. The applicant agrees to grade 8 acres at a slope of 4% or less. The grading and dedication of the 8 acres plus the dedication of the adjacent more steeply sloped area will meet approximately 16 acres of the dedication requirement. q. Approved access permits will be required from Olmsted County Public Works Department, including additional lanes, turn lanes and traffic signal revisions. A free flow leg will be required in the SW quadrant of Valleyhigh Road and West Circle Drive. 10. The access to West Circle Drive located 950' north of the south property line be limited to a right-in/right-out only. 11. Improved roadway capacity is needed for this development. The City is currently considering the creation of Traffic Improvement Districts (TID) to address reconstruction of collectorlarterial roadways. The area included in this subdivision may be included within a TID designated for 50`h Avenue NW in the future. If a TID is approved, an r charge for the future reconstruction of 50th Ave. NW may apply to this property. 12. The applicant must obtain RPU Water Division approval in creating fire flows that meet the Fire Prevention Bureau standards for this development. 13. The applicant shall grade the property in a matter that is consistent and compatible with the Valleyhigh Road (CSAH 4) plan profile and cross sections established by the County Engineer. lotion by Burke to approve Preliminary Plat #00-13 to be known as Badger Ridge, with the 13 staff suggested onditions and the stipulation that the applicant submits a revised plat prior to the City Council meeting. Petersson econded the motion. The motion carried 8-0. Variance The City Planning and Zoning Commission also held a public hearing on Variance #00-6. The applicant requested a variance to Jay the total side yard setback from 16' to 12'. Section 60.417 (attached) lists the findings required to approve a variance. In this ase the staff suggests denial with the following findings: EXTRAORDINARY CONDITIONS: There would appear not to be extraordinary circumstance or conditions that would apply to this property that would not apply generally to other properties in the area. The applicant is requesting a blanket variance to the entire development during the platting stage when all of the proposed lot sizes exceed the minimum lot width and lot size requirements for the zoning districts applicable to the property. REASONABLE USE: The granting of this variance is not necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property. There are many examples in Rochester that demonstrates that the minimum lots and setback standards indicated in the zoning c t accommodate quality/affordable building sites. The proposed lot widths exceed the minimum lot width requirements f zoning districts applicable to the property. Section 62.280 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual does allow unique yard or setback regulations for certain types of residential developments which could be applied to this development without granting a variance. The applicant has not provided information to substantiate that the request is the minimum necessary to provide for a reasonable use. 'age 3 ?CA ,pril 26, 2000 SENCE OF DETRIMENTAL: The granting of this variance request does not appear to be materially detrimental to the puolic welfare or to other property in the area. However, the granting of this variance request would be detrimental to the intent and purpose of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual in that the minimum sum of the side yards would be reduced providing less open space. The proposed lots exceed the minimum lot size and lot width of the applicable zoning district standards. In Staver moved to deny Variance #00-06, by Badger Development, LLC, based on staff -suggested findings. Ms. 7cGowan seconded the motion, which carried 8-0 :ouncil Action Needed 1) The Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the land subdivision permit. The Council must make findings of fact based on the criteria included in the staff report A motion to deny must include supporting reasons for a conclusion that at least one of the fifteen findings for denial in Paragraph 61.225 can be made. 2) A separate motion on the variance is needed. The Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the Variance. The Council must adopt a resolution with findings of fact based on the criteria included in the staff report. Attachment. 1. Staff Report dated April 7, 2000 Minutes of the April 12, 2000 CPZC Meeting Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 3. City Attorney 4. Planning Department File 5. Planning Department GIS Division 6. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. M on Monday, May 1, 2000, in the Council/Board Yaggy Colby Associates 'k5 41-7 a, -� S L v -d Q-x -J- /11 41:0 ■INS E�E II3 NVId 1N3WdOl3A3a 1"3N30 e } tl 9 II Y1053NNIW'ALNnOJ 03LSW O'aUS3H70 6g� r MYta'N[OLL'OCAS 301aYd 6 �@ US3dONd N3!)f]V9 lIm qDg is 3 EM 1!1111 All" 1,111"! i 1Z Q <Z C J W Cie (L LJJ V D LU U D Q m 1V1d ASVNIW1131id VIOUNNIW'N31MDOII 300111113DOV9 I o ' ' 3� �tt#gtp[e ' ldld kdVNI1Nlll11d ' [ !' �liFg� V1OS3NNIW S1 3H3OS a Cyst i EBE3EE : . Evc13�. i 3D(]la 11304V8 q(t) tMillai'll"i 1Vld AMVNIwn3adVL053NNIW'N3153HJOM III 3Dalb SMV8 sss� a;93„ 1V1d AdYNIWI13bd VLO53NNIW IRS3HMS TDO'dS3JaVS �r f + a`p�ays Ilk n ap.v 1Vld AUVNIWll32ld Ivaatly � e ii 33 �� v gigg V1OS3NNIW `H3lS3H]OM Lr) R • 1 9 � �iiii9: 30GRI SMOV8 �i o LJ R 9 v a A ,_--' '� __-+ ,fir----• If I OD TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Brent Svenby, Planner DATE: April 7, 2000 drawn up, Yana�4,1 ME �200 +1V���I,`p�In r ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GISIADDRESSINGI 5071205-8232 MAPPING HOUSINGIHRA 507/285-0224 BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELLISEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Type III, Phase II, Land Subdivision Permit #00-13 (Preliminary Plat) to be known as Badger Ridge Subdivision and Variance #00- 06. Planninq Department Review: Applicant/Owner: Badger Development LLC 400 South Broadway #100 Rochester, MN 55904 Surveyors/Engineers: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 3 ° Avenue SE Rochester, MN 55904 Referral Comments: RPU Water Division RPU Operations Division Park and Rec. Dept. Planning Dept. —John Hanford Planning Dept. — Addressing Staff Rochester Public Works Department Olmsted County Public Works Department MnDOT Report Attachments: 1. Land Development Manual Excerpts 2. Referral Comments (6 letters) 3. Location Map 4. Copy of GDP 5. Copy of Preliminary Plat Development Review: Location of Property: The property is located along the west side of West Circle Drive and along the south side of Valleyhigh �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER ��� Page l ` Badger Ridge Subdivision April 7, 2000 Road NW. Zoning: Approximately 55 acres will be zoned M-1 (Mixed Commercial — Industrial), 40 acres R-3 (Medium Density Residential) and 41 acres R-2 (Low Density Residential) on the City of Rochester Zoning Map once the annexations are approved by the Minnesota Municipal Board. Proposed Development: This development consists of approximately 136 acres of land to be subdivided into 109 lots for single family residential uses, 3 lots for uses permitted in the R-3 zoning district, 27 lots for commerciallindustrial uses and one outlot to be dedicated for parkland. Streets: This plat dedicates right-of-way for a number of new public roadways and also dedicates right-of-way for Valleyhigh Road NW. The roadway names need to be revised. The applicant will need to coordinate with the City and Planning Department GIS staff to determine appropriate names. Sidewalks: In accordance with current City policy, sidewalk is required along both sides of all of the new streets in the subdivision. A 10' wide bituminous pedestrian path will also be required along the west side of West Circle Drive and along the south side of Valleyhigh Road NW. Drainage: The elevations of this site range from 1,140' in the southwest portion of the plat, 1,080' in the southeast, and 1,150' in the northern portion of the property. The property generally drains to the drainageway running through the center of Outlot A. Stormwater management must be provided for this development either through on -site detention or through participation in the City's Regional Stormwater Management Plan. Specific grading and drainage plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to submittal of a Final Plat application. Wetlands: The Soil Survey and National Wetland Indicator maps were reviewed for the presence of wetlands. Hydric soils exist on the site. The applicant will need to submit a wetland delineation and will need to obtain the necessary approvals from the LGU prior to the submittal of the final plat. Public Utilities: Water and sewer will need to be extended to serve this property. Preliminary computer water system modeling indicates that fire flows to the M-1 area at this time will be below the minimums set by the Fire Prevention Bureau for this type of use. The modeling also indicated that initially the fire flows for the R-3 area are Page 3 Badger Ridge Subdivision April 7, 2000 marginal depending on the building types and sizes in this area. The flows will however increase to both of these areas with future planned networking elsewhere in the system. Spillover Parking: As per Section 63.426 of the LDM, all residential development must provide spillover parking for service vehicles and visitors at a rate of 1.2 spaces per dwelling unit, in addition to the required off-street parking. This additional parking may be provided either off-street or on -street. This development requires 123 spillover parking spaces. The right-of-way and road widths appear adequate to meet this requirement. Spillover parking requirements for the R-3 zoned lots will need to be reviewed at the time development is proposed for the individual lots. Parkland Dedication: The Rochester Park and Recreation Department recommends that the parkland dedication requirements for this plat be satisfied by the combination of cash and deferred land dedication with the land to be dedicated once the applicant had completed the grading of the park area. The grading and dedication of the 8 acres at a slope of 4% or less, plus the dedication of the adjacent more steeply sloped area will meet approximately 16 acres of the dedication requirement. General Development Plan: On March 6, 2000, the city approved the general development plan for this property. The proposed plat is generally consistent with the approved General Development Plan. Staff Review: Lots 1-67, Block 1; Lots 1-14, Block 2; Lots 1-15, Block 3 and Lots 1-6, Block 4 are zoned R-2 (Low Density Residential). Lots 7-13, Block 4; Lots 1-2, Block 5 and Lot 1, Block 6 are zoned R-3 (Medium Density Residential). Lots 1-16, Block 7; Lots 1-8, Block 8 and Lots 1-3, Block 9 are zoned M-1 (Mixed Commercial -industrial). In the R-3 zoning district, detached single family dwellings are permitted only on lots platted prior to 1992. This means single family detached dwellings can not be built on Lots 7.13, Block 4. The R-3 zoning district does allow duplexes and townhomes to be built on lots this size provided that the zoning district standards can be met. On March 22, 2000, the applicant, applicant's consultant, staff from Olmsted County Public Works Department, City Public Works Department and the Planning Department met to discuss the potential infrastructure improvements required for this development. One of the major issues that stills needs to be determined is the amount of right-of-way that needs to be dedicated for the reconstruction of Valleyhigh Road NW. The existing profiles of Valleyhigh Road NW need to be reviewed to determine amount of right-of-way that is needed. The applicant's consultant was going to review this information and meet with the County Engineer to determine the amount of right-of-way needed. At this time, the applicant's consultant has not provided the County Engineer with the typical cross sections of what is needed for Valleyhigh Road and no determination has been made regarding the amount of right-of-way needed. A condition placed on the general development plan required that issues regarding the required right-of-way for Valleyhigh Road needs to be determined prior to platting. Negotiations will need to be conducted regarding cost contribution towards needed traffic management improvements including turn lanes, traffic control Y/.s Page 111 Y� Badger Ridge Subdivision April 7, 2000 measure and trail improvements. Another conditions placed on the general development plan required that decisions must be made regarding the timing of improvement projects along Valleyhigh Road and 50'' Avenue. These decisions will include a determination of whether an interim upgrade will be constructed or whether programming of the full corridor upgrade should be initiated. Both of these conditions have not been met and the plat should not proceed forward until an understanding of the necessary right-of-way width, improvements and cost contribution is determined. Variance The applicant has also requested a variance to vary the total side yard setback from 16' to 12'. Section 60.417 (attached) lists the findings required to approve a variance. In this case the staff suggests the following findings: EXTRAORDINARY CONDITIONS: There would appear not to be extraordinary circumstance or conditions that would apply to this property that would not apply generally to other properties in the area. The applicant is requesting a blanket variance to the entire development during the platting stage when all of the proposed lot sizes exceed the minimum lot width and lot size requirements for the zoning districts applicable to the property. REASONABLE USE: The granting of this variance is not necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property. There are many examples in Rochester that demonstrates that the minimum lots and setback standards indicated in the zoning district accommodate quality/affordable building sites. The proposed lot widths exceed the minimum lot width requirements for the zoning districts applicable to the property. Section 62.280 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual does allow unique yard or setback regulations for certain types of residential developments which could be applied to this development without granting a variance. The applicant has not provided information to substantiate that the request is the minimum necessary to provide for a reasonable use. ABSENCE OF DETRIMENTAL: The granting of this variance request does not appear to be materially detrimental to the public welfare or to other property in the area. However, the granting of this variance request would be detrimental to the intent and purpose of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual in that the minimum sum of the side yards would be reduced providing less open space. The proposed lots exceed the minimum lot size and lot width of the applicable zoning district standards. MINIMUM VARIANCE: The minimum variance that would be necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship would be a variance to allow the minimum sum of the side yards equal 12' instead of 16'. This finding would not pertain in the case of denial. Staff Recommendation: Since findings cannot be made to support a variance and the proposed lot sizes exceed the minimum requirements for the applicable zoning districts, staff recommends denial of the variance to allow the total side yard setback to vary from 16' to 12'. Since additional information is needed to determine the right-of-way needed for Valleyhigh Road, staff would recommend that this plat be continued until a determination has been reached regarding the amount of right-of-way that is needed based on the ultimate cross section of Valleyhigh Road NW. If the Commission wishes to move forward with this plat, staff would recommend that the City Council not take action on the plat until the revisions as requested by staff have been made and revised plans filed with the Planning Department. Page 5 �t Badger Ridge Subdivision April 7, 2000 If the Commission moves this plat forward, staff would recommend the following conditions or modifications to ensure that the criteria of Section 61.225 are met: 1. The plat be revised as follows: • Controlled access be provided along frontage of Valleyhigh Road NW & West Circle Drive (with the exception of the approved street accesses), along the entire north and south frontages of 281" St. NW, along the entire west lot line of Lot 1, Block 7, along the westerly lot line of Lot 1, Block 8, along the entire south line of Lot 3, Block 9, and within 200 feet from intersection (measured from the ROW line) of all proposed roads intersecting with existing roadways. • Roadway names and types shall be revised and approved by the City and Planning Department GIS Division. • To include the land in the northeastern portion of property, adjacent to West Circle Drive. • To dedicate the adequate amount of right-of-way for Valleyhigh Road NW based on the ultimate cross sections of the roadway. • Verification that single unit trucks can make right -turn without crossing the centerline and driving on the pedestrian ramps. 2. Prior to the submittal of the final plat, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to; storm water management; park dedication; traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 3. Prior the submittal of a final plat, issues regarding cost contribution towards needed traffic management improvements, turn lanes and traffic control measures work needs to be worked out. A decision must also be made regarding the timing of these improvement projects along Valleyhigh Road and 50v' Avenue. These decisions will include a determination of whether an interim upgrade will be constructed or whether programming of the full corridor upgrade should be initiated. This will require the applicant to work with the Olmsted County Engineer, the City Engineer and the Transportation Division of the Planning Department. 4. A temporary turnaround is required at the westerly end of "Hamilton Drive NW", "Reynolds Drive NW", "Badger Drive NW", and "Shandley Drive NW". Easements for these turnarounds, as well as for any utilities located outside of the plat boundary must be executed with the City prior to be recording of the Final Plat documents. 5. Pedestrian facilities are required along both sides of all new public roadways and along existing right-of-ways (10' wide bituminous path along Valleyhigh Road NW and West Circle Drive). Pedestrian facilities must be completed by the owner concurrent with development. If it is determined by the City that it is not practical to construct the required pedestrians facilities concurrent with this development, the owner shall execute a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement with the City to address the timing and responsibility for the future construction of said facilities. 6. Stormwater management must be provided for this development either through on -site detention or participation in the City's Regional Stormwater Plan. Any facilities serving 50 or less developable acres will remain private and will require execution of long term maintenance agreements and easements. Prior to the submittal of the final plat, the applicant must submit a wetland delineation and receive the necessary approvals from the LGU. q` U Page 6 Badger Ridge Subdivision April 7, 2000 8. The applicant agrees that this subdivision will have an impact on the need for Parkland and that the dedication of land and cash will meet this need. The applicant agrees to grade 8 acres at a slope of 41!6 or less. The grading and dedication of the 8 acres plus the dedication of the adjacent more steeply sloped area will meet approximately 16 acres of the dedication requirement. S. Approved access permits will be required from Olmsted County Public Works Department, including additional lanes, turn lanes and traffic signal revisions. A free flow leg will be required in the SW quadrant of Valleyhigh Road and West Circle Drive. 10. The access to West Circle Drive located 950' north of the south property line be limited to a right-in/right-out only. 11. Improved roadway capacity is needed for this development. The City is currently considering the creation of Traffic Improvement Districts to address reconstruction of collectorlarterial roadways. The area included in this subdivision may be included within a TID designated for 50ei Avenue NW in the future. If a TID is approved, an area charge for the future reconstruction of 50`h Ave. NW may apply to this property. 12. The applicant works with the RPU Water Division to create fire flows that meet the Fire Prevention Bureau standards for this development. REMINDER TO APPLICANT: • Prior to development, the property owner will need to execute a City Owner Contract for construction of the public roadways and utilities. • This plat is subject to the Subdivision regulations which became effective May 15, 1999. Approved grading, drainage and construction plans and an executed Development Agreement will need to be submitted with the final application if the applicant Intends to record the final plat documents prior to completion of infrastructure improvements. Page 7 Badger Ridge Subdivision April 7, 2000 CITY OF ROCHESTER ZONING ORDINANCE AND LAND DEVELOPMENT MANUAL EXCERPTS 60.417 Findings for Variances: In taking action on a variance request, the approval authority shall make findings supporting the decision based on the following guidelines: 1) The approval authority may grant a variance to the provisions of this ordinance if it finds that: a) there are extraordinary conditions or circumstances, such as irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of the lot or exceptional topographical or physical conditions which are peculiar to the property and do not apply to other lands within the neighborhood or the same class of zoning district; and b) the variance is necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property involved; and c) the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or materially injurious to other property in the area, is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this ordinance, and will not adversely affect implementation of the Comprehensive Plan; and d) the variance as granted is the minimum necessary to provide reasonable economic use of the property. The extraordinary conditions or circumstances shall be found not to be the result of an action by the applicant or property owners who have control of the property. In addition, the approval authority shall find that development of the parcel in question cannot be integrated with development of adjacent parcels under the same ownership in such a manner so as to provide for the reasonable economic use of the total site in a manner consistent with the provisions of this ordinance. 00 Page 8 Badger Ridge Subdivision April 7, 2000 CITY OF ROCHESTER ZONING ORDINANCE AND LAND DEVELOPMENT MANUAL EXCERPTS 61.225 Findings for Land Subdivision: The Zoning Administrator, Commission or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a land subdivision if all of the following findings with respect to the proposed development are made: 1) The proposed land subdivision conforms to all relevant requirements of this ordinance and variances have been granted to permit any nonconformance. 2) That the proposed water system and sanitary sewer system are adequate to serve the normal and fire protection demands of proposed development and to provide for the efficient and timely extension to serve future development. 3) That the plan for soil erosion and stormwater management meets the adopted standards of the City of Rochester and is consistent with the adopted Stormwater Management Plan or adopted drainage or stormwater policies. 4) That the vehicular and non -motorized system is consistent with adopted transportation"plans and is consistent with the street layout standards listed in Section 64.120 and traffic service standards in Section 61.526. 5) That the lot and block layout provide for safe and convenient vehicular, service and emergency access, efficient utility service connections, and adequate buildable area in each lot for planned uses. 6) That the proposed land subdivision has taken into account the current 6-Year and other Long -Range Capital Improvements Programs and the elements listed therein in the design of the subdivision. 7) That the proposed subdivision, if in a residential zoning district, -addresses the need for spillover parking consistent with the requirements of Section 63.426. 8) That right-of-ways and easements of adequate size and dimension are -provided for the purpose of constructing the street, utility, and drainage facilities needed to serve the development. 9) That the proposed parks, trail thoroughfares and open space dedications are consistent with adopted plans, policies and regulations. 10) That the proposed subdivision will not have off -site impacts on the street, drainage, water or wastewater systems that exceed adopted standards. 11)That the proposed subdivision will not have adverse impacts on the safety or viability of permitted uses on adjacent properties. Page 9 Badger Ridge Subdivisiuu April 7, 2000 12) That the proposed land subdivision is designed in such a manner as to allow for continued development in an efficient manner on adjacent undeveloped lands; 13)That the soils, topography and water tables have been adequately studied to ensure that all lots are developable for their designated purposes. 14)That the proposed land subdivision is consistent with the standards of the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. 15) That any land located within Zone A as shown on the currently adopted Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps of the Flood Insurance Study, Rochester, Minnesota, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is determined to be suitable for its intended use and that the proposed subdivision adequately mitigates the risks of flooding, inadequate drainage, soil and rock formations with severe limitations for development, severe erosion potential, or any other floodplain related risks to the health, safety or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision in a manner consistent with this ordinance. 61,226 Conditions on Approvals: In considering an application for a development permit to allow a land subdivision, the approving body shall consider and may impose modifications or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance with the criteria of Section 61.225. (CW r qa� kOCHESTER Minnesota 4/7/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur REVISED 4-7-00 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for a Preliminary Plat Request #00-13 on the Badger Ridge property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: A Grading Plan and Drainage Plan must be submitted and approved for this development. 2. Stormwater Management must be provided for this development either through on -site detention, or through participation in the City's Regional Storm Water Plan. 3. Utilities must be extended to adjoining properties. 4. Controlled access must be shown on the Final Plat along the entire frontage of Valleyhigh Rd NW, & West Circle Drive (with the exception of the approved street accesses), and along the entire north and south frontages of 28tI' St NW. Additional controlled access is required to be shown along the entire west line of Lot 1, Block 7, the entire westerly line of Lot 1, Block 8, the entire south line of Lot 3, Block 9, and within 200 feet from intersection (as measured from the ROW) of all proposed roads with any existing roadways. 5. Staff would suggest that the proposed access to West Circle Drive, located approximately 950 feet north of the south property line (28`h St NW), be limited to right in and right out only, or eliminated completely. This issue will be decided by the ROCOG Access Management Study currently in process. 6. All corner radii should be reviewed to verify that single unit trucks can make right -turns without crossing the centerline, and without driving on the pedestrian ramps. CATEMP1PP#00-13 Rev Comments 4-7-00.dcc ROCHESTER Minnesota 4ni00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur ya3 el DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 20140 Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904.3740 507-287.7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 7. "No Parking" signs should be posted along the first 200 feet at the entrance of Badger Ridge Drive NW, Badger Dr NW, Deacon Dr NW, & 28"' St NW. 8. Pedestrian facilities will be required along both sides of all new public roads, and along all existing rights -of -way. The Developer is required to construction of a 10 foot wide bituminous pedestrian path along the south side of Valleyhigh Road NW, and the west side of West Circle Drive. The paths should be located within the ROW where possible to avoid conflicts with other utilities in the area. 9. Construction of required pedestrian facilities shall be completed by the Owner at its expense, concurrent with this development. If it is determined by the City that it is not practical to construct the required pedestrian facilities concurrent with this development phase, the Owner shall execute a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement, drafted by the City, that outlines the timing and responsibility for the future construction of said facilities. 10.Temporary turn-arounds are required at the westerly end of Hamilton Dr NW, Reynolds Dr NW, Badger Dr NW, and Shandley Dr NW. 11.Easements shall be provided by the owner for all off -site utilities, and temporary turn-arounds. Additional easements may be required if on - site stormwater detention facilities are constructed for this development. 12. Execution of a City / Owner Contract will be required prior to construction of any public infrastructure to serve this development. C:\TEMPIPP#00-13 Rev Comments 4-7-OO.doc I/ ROCHESTEK Minnesota 4/7/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-374D 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 13.The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwater management, park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 14.Improved roadway capacity is needed for this development. The Developer shall provide turn lanes for all intersections with existing roads. The City is also currently considering the creation of Traffic Improvement Districts to address reconstruction of collector/arterial roadways. The area included in this subdivision may be included within a TID designated for 50th Ave NW in the future. If a TID is approved, an area charge for the future reconstruction of 501h Ave NW may apply to this property. The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property (rates are subject to annual review and change: ¢• Sanitary Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre. :• Water Availability Charge (WAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre ❖ Storm Water Management Fee (if on -site detention is not provided). ❖ Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division 26 Street Name Signs 4 Stop Signs 4 Trucks Prohibited Signs 1 Street Ends Sign 24 No Parking Signs C:ITEMPIPP#00-13 Rev Comments 4-7-00.doc Yes ROCHESTER PARK AND. -CREATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHETER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: April21, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning RE: Badger Ridge 1 °' Preliminary Plat #00-13 'REVISED Acreageof plat.......................................................... 136 a' Number of dwelling units ............................................. 1,423 units 2 Dwelling unit density..................................................1 13.78 units /acre Density factor............................................................ .0158 Dedication............................................................... 22.48 acres Residential and public lands only Maximum number of permitted units in R2 & R3 areas The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: Combination of cash and deferred land dedication with the land to be dedicated once the applicant has completed the grading of the park area. The grading plan for the park area should be submitted and approved by the Park Department. The approved GDP indicates t 8.0 acres of parkland to be graded to slope of 4% or less. The grading and dedication of the 8 acres plus the dedication of the adjacent more steeply sloped area will meet approximately 16.0 acres of the dedication requirement. The public street adjacent to the park (Superior Drive NW) should be constructed at the developer's expense. The design for the street should permit parking on the south side of the street adjacent to the park. A 30' park access should be located in the general vacinity of Lots 1-2 Block 1 (Monroe Drive). The access could be used to create a buffer between the single family / townhome areas along Monroe Drive. The development will likely not contain the maximum number of dwelling units that could be built on the property. Parkland dedication requirements can be more accurately calculated once the plans for the R3 property are submitted. It is quite likely that the dedication will be less than the 22.48 acres indicated in the above calculations. Applicant: Badger Development 400 South Broadway ROCHESTER DATE: April 19, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm, Planning From: Lyle Felsch, Deputy Chief ,,ocµESTEq. DRAi[D.ROGLST.a.�• DAVID A. KAPLER, Chief Rochester Fire Departrnent 201 4th Street SE, Room 10 Rochester, MN 55904-3726 (507)285-8072 FAX #(507) 285-8256 Subj: Preliminary Plat #00-13 and Variance #00-6, Badger Ridge, located west of West Circle Drive and south of Valleyhigh Road NW. This project will add over 109 residential lots, 27 commercial lots and 3 additional lots on 136 acres that is a full 2 minutes beyond the 4 minute response time standard of the Rochester Fire Department and will increase the departments fire and life safety responses. With that regard, the fire department has the following requirements: 1. An adequate water supply shall be provided for fire protection including hydrants properly located and installed in accordance with the specifications of the Water Division. Hydrants shall be in place prior to commencing building construction. The initial water supplies noted in my memo of January 26, 2000 regarding this project remain a concern and will require the water main connection near 50th Avenue NW and 55'h Street NW to be completed prior to construction of commercial structures at the higher elevation. 2. Fire department, access streets and roadways shall be as provided in accordance with the fire code, RCO 31 and the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual including approved cul-de-sac dimensions and street widths. All fire department access roadways shall be serviceable prior to and during building construction. 3. All street, directional and fire lane signs must be in place prior to occupancy of residential buildings. 4. All buildings are required to display the proper street address number on the building front, which is plainly visible and legible from the street fronting the property. c: Donn Richardson, RPU, Water Division Yaggy Colby Assoc. 717 3ro Avenue SE, Rochester, Mn. 55904 Badger Development LLC, 400 South Broadway, Rochester, Mn. 55904 Mill PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 5071285-8231 April 5, 2000 Brent Svenby Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 Dear Brent: The Public Works Department has reviewed Preliminary Plat Request #00-13 on the Badger Ridge property and has the following comments: 1. Access control will be required along Valleyhigh Dr. NW (CSAH 4) with the exception of the approved public street access openings. 2. The access to CSAH 22 west located 950 feet north of the south property line (28ih St. NW) will be limited to a right in or right out only. A final decision will be made after the Access Management Study is completed. 3. Free flow leg will be required in the SW quadrant of CSAH 4122. 4. Approved access permits will be required from Olmsted County Public Works Department, including additional lanes, turn lanes and traffic signal revisions. 5. Additional right of way will be required to provide for alternate roadway section and pedestrian facilities along CSAH 4 and 22. Sincerely, �� 1 6 Michael Sheehan County Engineer MTS:ss glen g indoclplanzo n e. d o c 'C](� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Administration Buildina Maintenance Sunrevina and Mannino Enainaarinn Hinhwnv Maintananra Parke A Anriridt, SnliA Waeta 0'r P u we pledge, we deliver March 22, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Preliminary Plat #00-13 and Variance #00-6 by Badger Development, LLC to be known as Badger Ridge. Dear Ms. LaPalm: Our review of the referenced preliminary plat is complete and our comments follow: Preliminary computer water system modeling indicates that fire flows to the M-1 area at this time will be below the minimums set by the Fire Prevention Bureau for this type of use. The modeling also indicated that initially the fire flows for the R-3 area are marginal depending on the building types and sizes in this area. The flows will however increase to both of these areas with future planned networking elsewhere in the system. The fire flows in the R-2 areas will be adequate with the current system. 2. Revisions to the proposed water system layout are required. We have provided the applicant's engineering firm with these comments. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yours,(� �� %J "40a 1"�*N L-1 Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Bureau Wade Dumond, Yaggy Colby Associates Badger Development, LLC Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906.2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 Page 21 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Mr. Svenby presented the staff reports, dated April 4, 2000 a Commission. The staff reports are on file the Rochester -.Olmsted Planning rtment. Mr. Svenby stated that staff has suggested findi s, and based on those findin ecommends approval of the Land Use Plan Amendment an\Nlg ne Change. Mac Hamilton, Badgopment, LL ddressed the Commission. He referred to a letter in the packet from Mr regardi access control on 30'h Street. Mr. Suk noted that is an issued !'should be addressed in the next hearing, which will be the preliminary plat. n With no others wishin speak, Suk closed the public hearing. Ms. McGowan mov to approve Lan se Plan Amendment #00-03 by Olmsted County and Badger Dave pment, LLC, based o toff -suggested findings. Mr. Brede seconded the motion, whi carried 8-0. Ms. McGole made a motion to approve Zonl District Amendment #00-05 by Olmsted County andger Development, LLC based up staff -suggested findings. Mr. Burke secondedmotion carried 8-0. development. 3 lots for uses permitted in the R-3 zoning district. 27 lots for subdivision. The property is located along the south side of Vallevhigh Road NW, west of West Circle Drive. Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated April 7, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Svenby noted that originally staff recommended the plat be continued until the cross section of the future Valleyhigh Road is determined by the County Engineer. He stated that he met with the County Engineer this afternoon and the plat does show the right-of-way dedication for Valleyhigh Road 100' from the center line and beyond that right-of-way, an additional 10' being a trail. The County Engineer is comfortable allowing the plat to move forward if the applicant is willing to dedicate 110' of right-of-way from the centerline of Valleyhigh Road and within the 110', include the 10' trail. Mr. Svenby explained that the applicant indicated today that he has a client for the northwest comer of the plat. This portion of the plat shows a cul-de-sac and 14 lots, but it is likely the cul-de-sac would be removed and that would become one large lot if the deal is finalized with this client. Mr. Svenby stated that if the applicant is willing to submit a revised plat showing the roadway being removed and shifting the alignment of the other roadway, prior to the Council meeting, staff would recommend approval with conditions. Page 22 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Mr. Svenby referred to the conditions and explained that the applicant met with Richard Freese and Gary Neumann this afternoon. Based on information Mr. Freese provided in an e-mail this afternoon, Mr. Svenby suggested revisions to some of the suggested conditions: staff suggests revising the first bullet on condition number 1 to state "...portions of the north and south frontages of 28"' Street NW, extending 130' feet from West Circle Drive/CSAH 22 right-of-way, along the entire west lot line of lot 1, block 7, along the westerly lot line of lot 1, block 8, and within 200 feet from intersection (measured from the ROW line) of all proposed roads intersecting with existing roadways along portions of the north side of 26"' Street NW, extending 300' from the West Circle Drive (CSAH 22) right-of-way." Delete the 4"' bullet of condition number 1, and add a bullet stating, "Dedicate up to 110' of right-of-way, if necessary, from the Centerline of Valleyhigh Road." Mr. Svenby suggested rewording condition number 12 to state, "The applicant must obtain RPU Water Division approval in creating fire flows that meet the Fire Prevention Bureau standards for this development." Mr. Svenby noted that Mr. Freese also suggested an additional condition: "The applicant shall grade the property in a manner that is consistent and compatible with the Valleyhigh Road (CSAH 4) plan profile and cross sections established by the County Engineer. He noted that staff recommends approval if the applicant is agreeable to submitting a revised plat that addresses the issues in condition number 1 and showing the revised layout to the NW corner, before the Council meeting. Mr. Svenby explained that based on staffs suggested findings, contained in the staff report, denial of the variance is recommended. Mr. Suk noted that it is difficult to have the conditions change at the last minute without having a hard copy of the changes at which to look. Mac Hamilton, Badger Development LLC, 400 South Broadway, addressed the Commission. He is not sure at this point in time if the 110' feet of right-of-way will be necessary, but if it is they will agree. He explained they will submit revised plans prior to the Council meeting. Mr. Hamilton stated they have an option from a company that would employ 700 to 800 people and if this is finalized, they would move the roadway in the northeast portion of the property and realign it. That area would become one common site. He referred to condition number 5 and stated that he didn't think sidewalks were necessary, but Mr. Nigbur states they are required. Mr. Hamilton noted they would like the opportunity to discuss the need for sidewalks with staff prior to the Council meeting. Regarding condition number 8, Mr. Hamilton stated they will need to meet with the Park Department and may have a slight modification to the configuration of the parkland. He commented that condition number 11 isn't applicable to this plat and will take place in the future. Mr. Hamilton expressed agreement with the remaining conditions. Mr. Hamilton explained that the variance was requested because of the outcry in the community for affordable housing, so they could plat smaller than typical lots to try to get the lot prices lower. He noted that some people will build on the smaller lots and their homes will comply with the 16' side yard, but in other areas, they will build bigger homes and will want double garages, thus the need for the variance. He pointed out that the neighbors stated they wanted the people to have the opportunity to have garages. Mr. Hamilton stated that if the Commission denies the variance, they won't be able to accomplish the objective of delivering affordable housing, but they will live by the Commission's decision. Mr. Werven asked the cost of the houses. Page 23 �3r City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Mr. Hamilton explained that originally they were hoping to be part of the Fair Housing program, but they weren't accepted. Scott Lecy, , 1010 Canterbury Lane NW, addressed the Commission. He stated that originally the prices of the homes were in the $95,000 to $110,000 range, but now they will be in the $120 to $130,000 range, depending on whether or not they include garages. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Suk closed the public hearing. Mr. Burke made a motion to approve Preliminary Plat #00-13, to be known as Badger Ridge, with the 13 staff -suggested conditions and with the stipulation that the applicant submit a revised plat prior to the City Council meeting. Ms. Petersson seconded the motion. The motion carried 8-0. Conditions: 1. The plat be revised as follows: • Controlled access be provided along frontage of Valleyhigh Road NW & West Circle Drive (with the exception of the approved street accesses), along portions of the north and south frontages of 2e St NW, extending 130' from the West Circle Drive/CSAH 22 right-of-way, along the entire west lot line of Lot 1, Block T, along the westerly lot line of Lot 1, Block 8, and within 200 feet from intersection (measured from the ROW line) of all proposed roads intersecting with existing roadways along portions of the north side of 2e Street NW, excluding 300, from the West Circle Drive/CSAH 22 right-of-way. • Roadway names and types shall be revised and approved by the City and Planning Department GIS Division. • To include the land in the northeastern portion of property, adjacent to West Circle Drive. • Verification that single unit trucks can make right -turn without crossing the centerline and driving on the pedestrian ramps. • Dedicate up to 110' of right-of-way, If necessary, from the Centerline of Valleyhigh Road. 2. Prior to the submittal of the final plat, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, storm water management; park dedication; traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 3. Prior the submittal of a final plat, issues regarding cost contribution towards needed traffic management Improvements, turn lanes and traffic control measures work needs to be worked out. A decision must also be made regarding the timing of these improvement projects along Valleyhigh Road and 50t' Avenue. These decisions will include a determination of whether an Interim upgrade will be constructed or whether programming of the full corridor upgrade should be initiated. This will require the applicant to work with the Olmsted County Engineer, the City Engineer and the Transportation Division of the Planning Department �3Page 24 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 4. A temporary turnaround Is required at the westerly and of "Hamilton Drive NW "Reynolds Drive NW, "Badger Drive NW", and "Shandley Drive NW. Easements for these turnarounds, as well as for any utilities located outside of the plat boundary must be executed with the City prior to be recording of the Final Plat documents. S. Pedestrian facilities are required along both sides of all new public roadways and along existing right-of-ways (10' wide bituminous path along Valleyhigh Road NW and West Circle Drive). Pedestrian facilities must be completed by the owner concurrent with development. If it is determined by the City that it is not practical to construct the required pedestrians facilities concurrent with this development, the owner shall execute a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement with the City to address the timing and responsibility for the future construction of said facilities. 6. Stormwater management must be provided for this development either through on - site detention or participation in the City's Regional Stormwater Plan. Any facilities serving 50 or less developable acres will remain private and will require execution of long tern maintenance agreements and easements. 7. Prior to the submittal of the final plat, the applicant must submit a wetland delineation and receive the necessary approvals from the LGU. 8. The applicant agrees that this subdivision will have an Impact on the need for Parkland and that the dedication of land and cash will meet this need. The applicant agrees to grade 8 acres at a slope of 4% or less. The grading and dedication of the 6 acres plus the dedication of the adjacent more steeply sloped area will meet approximately 16 acres of the dedication requirement. 9. Approved access permits will be required from Olmsted County Public Works Department, including additional lanes, turn lanes and traffic signal revisions. A free flow leg will be required In the SW quadrant of Valleyhigh Road and West Circle Drive. 10. The access to West Circle Drive located 950' north of the south property line be limited to a right-intright-out only. 11. Improved roadway capacity is needed for this development. The City is currently considering the creation of Traffic Improvement Districts to address reconstruction of collector/arterial roadways. The area Included In this subdivision may be included within a TID designated for 5e Avenue NW In the future. If a T1D is approved, an area charge for the future reconstruction of 501h Ave. NW may apply to this property. 12. The applicant must obtain RPU Water Division approval in creating firs flows that meet the Fire Prevention Bureau standards for this development 13. The applicant shall grade the property In a manner that Is consistent and compatible with the Valleyhigh Road (CSAH 4) plan profile and cross sections established by the Page 25 -- City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Y33 Mr. Stever moved to deny Variance #00-06, by Badger Development, LLC, based on staff - suggested findings. Ms. McGowan seconded the motion, which carried 8-0. FINDINGS: EXTRAORDINARY CONDITIONS: There would appear not to be extraordinary circumstance or conditions that would apply to this property that would not apply generally to other properties In the area. The applicant Is requesting a blanket variance to the entire development during the platting stage when all of the proposed lot sizes exceed the minimum lot width and lot size requirements for the zoning districts applicable to the property. REASONABLE USE: The granting of this variance Is not necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property. There are many examples in Rochester that demonstrates that the minimum lots and setback standards indicated in the zoning district accommodate qualitylaffordable building sites. The proposed lot widths exceed. the minimum lot width requirements for the zoning districts applicable to the property. Section 62.280 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual does allow unique yard or setback regulations for certain types of residential developments which could be applied to this development without granting a variance. The applicant has not provided Information to substantiate that the request is the minimum necessary to provide for a reasonable use. ABSENCE OF DETRIMENTAL: The granting of this variance request does not appear to be materially detrimental to the public welfare or to other property In the area. However, the granting of this variance request would be detrimental to the intent and purpose of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual In that the minimum sum of the side yards would be reduced providing less open space. The proposed lots exceed the minimum lot size and lot width of the applicable zoning district standards. Mr. Svenby presented the sta%rltd�a,,ted March 27, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Roches r-Planning Department. Mr. Svenby stated that staff recommends approval with t tMons listed in the staff report. Mr. Stever asked why Mr. l�lgbur's commeXs on grading weren't included in the conditions. Mr. Svenby stated it is prjlbably because the a icant is simply requesting a conditional use permit to allowing filling the floodprone district kallow residential development on the property and staff didn' feel that Public Works' re mendation was necessary to allow the permit to be approved REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 5-10 �� -0 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING c '.;l T ITEM DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase II Conditional Use Permit #00-03 to Excavate Sand PREPARED BY: and Gravel and Type III Conditional Use Permit to place fill and construct a multi- Mitzi A. Baker, family residential building in the Flood Prone District. Senior Planner April 26, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: On April 12, 2000 the City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this request. McGowan moved approval with four suggested conditions on the basis that findings could be made in support of the application. Petersson seconded, the motion carried 7-1, Werven voting nay. 1. Prior to excavation, the applicant shall provide the City with a financial security consistent with Section 62.1108, 1, l of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. Z Failure of the applicant to connect the excavation pond in this application, with the pond(s) located north of the existing sanitary sewer line In the future once the sewer line is abandoned by the City, shall result in the applicant reclaiming the north line of the pond in this application with an undulating shoreline and peninsula. 3. Approval of this permit shall expire five years after the date of final approval by the Rochester Common Council (May _ 2005), unless permit approval is extended as provided In Section 6Z 1110, 7 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. ' No excavation, movement or disposal of buried debris on -site shall occur prior to obtaining approvals and permits required by the MN Pollution Control Agency for the activity or any other agency that may require permits for such activity. if the applicant proceeds with excavation, movement or disposal of buried debris, proof of approvals and permits from other agencies must be riled with the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Council Action Needed: If the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution either approving, approving with conditions, or denying this request based upon the criteria included in the staff report. /1 � - Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated April 17, 2000 V�+ 2. Minutes of April 12, 2000 CPZC Meeting L J `-J Distribution: 1. City Clerk r,�, a aP< M•e �� , 2. City Administrator�..�s 3. City Attorney: Legal Description Attached 4. Planning Department File 5. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on May 1, 2000 in the Council i Board Chambers in the Government Center at 151 4th Street SE. 6. McGhie & Betts, Inc. '� ..,UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: �s t- C E FILL IN A-DESIGNATED.-FIODD.OPRONE A 4 '-LAND LOCATED IN SECTION.734, CASCADE TOWNSHIP RO HESTER, MINNESOTA,,.-. 44" 40 4. 41 4 McGhee Betts, Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors -Planners 1648 Third Avenue S.E., Rochester, MN 55904 507-289-3919 1188 Highway Three South, Northfield, MN 55057 507-645-OVA. FED 2 3 20 TYPE III PHASE If CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SAND AND GRAVEL EXTRACTION IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND TYPE III PHASE III CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO FILL IN A DESIGNATED FLOOD PRONE AREA ON LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 34, CASCADE TOWNSHIP ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA Owner/Applicant Hindermann-Fitzgerald c/o Mr. William Fitzgerald 2505 Lenox Court SW Rochester MN 55902 Prepared by McGhie & Betts, Inc. Consulting Engineers 1648 Third Avenue SE Rochester MN 55904 February 21, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction..................................................................................................................1 2.0 Background..................................................................................................................2 3.0 Project Purpose............................................................................................................3 4.0 Explanation of Application............................................................................................3 5.0 Site Data......................................................................................................................4 5.01 Site Location.....................................................................................................4 5.02 Site Characteristics...........................................................................................4 5.03 Floodplain........................................................................................................4 5.04 Wetlands...........................................................................................................5 6.0 Assessment of Existing/Pre-Alteration Conditions, Section 62.1206(2)........................5 7.0 Grading Plan Information, Section 62.1106(3).............................................................10. 8.0 Plan of Operation, Construction Details and Sequencing and Phasing of the Work ..... 12 8.01 Plan of Operation..............................................................................................12 8.02 Construction Details, Sequencing and Phasing.................................................13 8.03 Equipment and Facilities...................................................................................15 8.04 Operating Hours and Season............................................................................15 8.05 Haul Roads.......................................................................................................15 8.06 Dust Control Plan/Noise Control Plan...............................................................16 9.0 Reclamation Plan.........................................................................................................16 9.01 Phasing of Reclamation....................................................................................16 10.0 Construction Standards in the Flood Prone District — Section 62.860 ..........................17 11.0 Response to Standards for Conditional Uses — Section 61.146 and Findings necessary for Issuance of Conditional Use Permits — Section 62.1105........................17 APPENDIX A — Site Location Map / Haul Road Map APPENDIX B — Soil Boring Logs APPENDIX C — Specification for Seed Mixture APPENDIX D — Wetland Exemption Form APPENDIX E — Land Use Map APPENDIX F — Compliance Letter APPENDIX G — Conditional Use Permit Construction Documents Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION This application combines a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to excavate sand and gravel in a residentially zoned district in accordance with the requirements of Section 62.1100 of the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual and to place fill material in a Flood Prone District as allowed under Section 62.820 of the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual, updated December 27, 1999. Milestone Materials, a division of Mathy Construction Company, (Milestone) desires to expand the existing subsurface sand and gravel mining operation on the northerly portion of the site and Klaxon Properties (Klaxon), developers of the Quarryridge Apartments, will need to place fill on the portion of the site that will contain the proposed apartment structures in order to elevate the units to the applicable Flood Protection Level of 1005 msl. William Fitzgerald and Mark Hindermann are the current owners of the property and are in the process of selling the property to Klaxon for the Quarryridge project and allowing Milestone to mine the northerly portion of the site. A small portion of the site will be retained by Fitzgerald-Hindermann, which lies along the frontage road north of the proposed Quarryridge project. The primary reasons for the expansion of the sand and gravel mining operation are to obtain additional granular material for processing at the existing facility located to the northwest of this site provide pit run sand for various projects, and to provide fill material for the Quarryridge project to elevate this site above the flood protection level and provide suitable foundation material for the spread footing system without having to truck haul this material from off -site. Secondary, benefits of this project will be the water quality treatment of the public (City of Rochester) surface storm water drainage in the ponds created by the mining of the sand and gravel; create additional flood storage; and provide a detention basin for the increase in the surface water discharge of the proposed Quarryridge project on a post development basis. When evaluating a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Staff, Planning and Zoning Commission (Commission) and Common Council (Council) must review and consider Section 61.146 Standards for the Conditional Use Permits and make findings in accordance with Section 62.1105 findings necessary for issuance of conditional use permits of the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual updated December 27, 1999. Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 2 This report, along with the application and plans, provides a detailed explanation of the project and addresses the applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance that must be reviewed and evaluated when considering a Conditional Use Permit. In addition, verbal testimony will be provided at the hearings to address concerns or issues that may arise during the review of this submittal and to respond to any recommended conditions of approval that may be proposed by the public agencies. 2.0 BACKGROUND A portion of this site.has been previously mined by Rochester Sand and Gravel (now Mathy Construction). The balance has been vacant for a lengthy period of time. A major public drainageway running northerly from 2M Street NW on the extension of 1V' Avenue NW divides the property. In 1999, Klaxon Properties requested a Land Use Plan Amendment from low density residential to medium density and a zone change from R-1 to R-3 on the south 16 acres. They also submitted a General Development Plan for a 310-unit apartment complex in three (3) structures with underbuilding and surface parking, community area and swimming pool. The Common Council approved all three (3) requests in October of 1999. A Traffic Report was prepared for the project that addresses the traffic issues prior to the revamping of US 52 by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and on a fully developed basis after the proposed US 52 improvements are completed. Subsequently, a site, grading, utility and landscape plan along with the architectural plans have been completed for the 310-unit Quarryridge Apartment complex. The site plan has been submitted to the Planning Department and the grading plan has been reviewed by Public Works. The proposed grading and filling of the Quarryridge site through the approval of a Conditional Use Permit and the mining of the area north of the Quarryridge project are necessary to construct the Quarryridge Apartments, provide water quality treatment and storm water detention. The CUP'S are the last step in the development approval process. The project has been designed so that upon completion it will be compatible with MnDOTs' proposed improvements to the US 52 corridor. Conditional Use Report - Section 34, Cascade Township Page 3 3.0 PROJECT PURPOSE The applicants, Hind ermann-Fitzgeraid, Milestone, and Klaxon, desire to fill a portion of the Quarryridge project to elevate the site to the Flood Protection Level and provide for granular material for the footings. In addition, the mining operation will provide more granular material for other projects and at the same time provide a storm water detention basin for the Quarryridge project and provides water quality treatment for storm water that currently passes through the site without being treated before it gets to the Cascade Creek. Milestone currently operates a mining and processing operation to the west- northwest of the site. A portion of the area they currently are mining is included in the City's master plan for the Cascade Lake. The material currently being mined and processed at the site is used for base material for public and private roadways, parking lots, bituminous mix, and other similar uses. 4.0 EXPLANATION OF APPLICATION In order to accomplish the applicants' goals two (2) conditional use permits are required. The first CUP is required to place fill in the designated Flood Prone Area and the second CUP is necessary to excavate sand and gravel material in a residential district. The applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance that control these types of uses as CUP are referenced in the introduction of this text. This submittal consists of several plans and reports as required by the recent changes to the Zoning Ordinance. The following is a list of the required reports and plans: Permit Plan Report Sand/Gravel mining Grading/Reclamation Operation / Erosion Control / Phasing Reclamation Site / Landscape (') Fill Flood Prone Grading plan (fill plan) CUP Site /Landscape (1) (1) Entire site The subsequent section of this report will provide information on the existing site, provide an assessment of existing/pre-alteration conditions; operations, construction details, and phasing, address reclamation of the site; address the Standards for Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 4 Conditional Uses (Section 61.146 of the Zoning Ordinance); respond to the findings necessary for issuance of Conditional Use Permits (Section 62.1105 of the Zoning Ordinance); and address Construction Standards in the Flood Prone District (Section 62.860 of Zoning Ordinance). 5.0 SITE DATA 5.01 Site Location The property.is owned by Mr. Mark Nindermann and Mr. William Fitzgerald. The site is located west of US 52 and north of 2nd Street NW on land that has been previously disturbed through sand and gravel mining operation and fill disposal. The property lies in Section 34 of Cascade Township and is currently unplatted. The property has been annexed to the City of Rochester. The area proposed to be mined is zoned R-1 and the area of the site that will encompass the apartment complex is zoned R-3. A site location map is included in this report (Appendix A). 5.02 Site Characteristics The topography of the site is relatively level with elevation ranging from 1014 MSL on the south to 1000 MSL on the north. Site drainage is generally from south to north. An existing public drainageway (open ditch) extends northerly from 2nd Street NW to the Cascade Creek. This drainageway directs storm water from the upstream (south of 2nd Street NW) developed areas to Cascade Creek. The site is currently vacant open -grassed areas. There are no woodlands on the site. 5.03 Floodplain A portion of the site lies within the 100-year flood boundary as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) FIRM map for the City of Rochester, Map no. 27109CO1963E, map effective date of February 4, 1998. The site also is affected by the Flood Prone District (FP) which is an Orderly Zoning District established in the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Rochester. The FP district applies to lands outside the floodway district but within the 100-year flood boundary as mapped by FEMA. Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 5 A mapped 100-year flood boundary by FEMA establishes a base flood elevation that all habitable structures must be elevated to in order to be free of the effects of a flood hazard. A 1.0 foot freeboard is applied to the 100- year flood elevation as a measure of safety. On this site, the Flood Protect Level is 1005 MSL. The lowest level of all structures must be constructed to or above this elevation. The site plan for Quarryridge designates the lowest floor of each building at 1005 MSL. 5.04 Wetlands The applicant, `Hindermann-Fitzgerald, (aka Wilmer Investments, LLC) applied for and received approval of an exemption from the Wetland Conservation Act. The exemption was granted because the off -take drainage ditch that was constructed by Olmsted County caused an incidental Type 3 wetland to form. No replacement is required. A copy of the exemption is included in this report. 6.0 ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING/PRE-ALTERATION CONDITIONS, SECTION 62.1106(2) In accordance with the newly adopted changes to the Zoning Ordinance an assessment of existing conditions shall be submitted with the Conditional Use Permit application. The items that are required to be addressed are 2a through 2v of this section of the Ordinance. This section of the report provides a response to each of these items or they are addressed on the plans based upon the ease of addressing the item. Section 62.1106(2) 2a. Soil types — including soil borings and soils report, depth of overburden, and area to be disturbed; The soil boring report and logs are attached as Appendix B of this report. The boring locations are shown on the excavation plan of the Quarryridge project. 2b. Existing topography (at 2 ft. contours) of the property and 200 ft. beyond the property lines of the site; where there is an existing water body, 2 ft. contours Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 6 for a distance of 20 ft. from the waters edge into the water body shall be included; The various plans as well as the topographic survey map provide contours at 2 foot intervals. The plans also indicate the limits of the existing pond in the northwest comer of the site. 2c. Existing roads and rights -of -way, proposed roads as identified in the Long Range Transportation Plan, including adopted Official Map boundaries; The Long Range Transportation Plan, identifies an upgraded collector road along the west side of US 52 where the existing frontage road is located. This conflicts with the Mn/DOT plan to revamp US 52. MnDOT's plan is to create a frontage road that cul-de-sacs near the Vogel Outdoor Advertising facility. A private driveway connection from Quarryridge Apartments to the MnDOT revamped frontage road is planned to occur after MnDOT finishes the construction of their roadway. All other public roadways along the project site are local streets and are shown on the plans. 2d. An assessment of existing roadway conditions adjacent to the site and proposed to be used for hauling. This assessment is to be prepared in coordination with, and approved by, the City Engineer. A haul road map is included in this submittal. The local street system around the project site is not proposed to be utilized as a haul road. 2e. Existing land use, land cover and structures, including fences and abandoned structures on the site and properties abutting the subject site; identification of the distance to the nearest habitable dwelling; The existing land use on the Quarryridge site is medium density residential use flood prone overlay. The area proposed to be mined is low density residential and flood prone. The land use to the south is also low density residential. Lands to the west are low density residential, recreational and open space and flood prone overlay. Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 7 There are no structures on the site. The approximate distance to the nearest dwelling, which is to the south, is 600 feet from the mining operation. 2f. Boundaries of any previous excavations or excavation activities on the site or on adjacent properties; The boundary of the on -site pond that has been excavated is shown on the plans. The haul route map also shows the limits of the ponds on the adjacent property. 2g. Wells, abandoned or active, on the subject property. Where blasting is proposed, all wells, abandoned or active, within '/s mile of the property; where open water bodies will be created, active or abandoned wells within '/. mile of the property; There are no abandoned or active wells on the site. No blasting is proposed to remove the granular material. 2h. Location of any floodway, I00-year flood fringe, shore land areas and wetland delineation; The plans delineate the applicable 100 year flood fringe limits. 2i. The existence and location of any historic sites on the property; The Environmental Assessment — Phase i that was recently completed indicates that there are no historic sites on the property. 2j. Existing water and/or sanitary sewer lines crossing the site and any existing water or sanitary sewer facilities on the site or on property adjacent to the site; The only public water and sewer lines are located in 2rtd Street NW. They consist of a 12" sanitary sewer and an 8" waterline. There also exists some small diameter storm sewer mains. (Refer to plans for exact sizes and location.) 2k. Existing public facilities on the site or on property adjacent to the site; Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 8 There are no public facilities on the site. A future public park area is planned on the westerly portion of the site and one is also planned on the property to the west of the site. 21. Any schools within 1,000 feet of the outer boundaries of any portion of the site; There are no schools within 1000 feet of the site. 2m. Existing land.use on all adjacent properties and on properties within 1,000 feet of the site; Adjacent property: North — Low density residentiaflflood prone overlay South — Low density residential East — Low density residential (commercial B-4) West — Low density residential / recreational and open space /flood prone overlay Within 1000 feet. See Appendix 2n. If adjacent and nearby properties are undeveloped, the current zoning of such parcels and the land use description of such parcels as shown on the adopted City Comprehensive Plan; North: R —1 Low density residential West: R-1 Low density residentiailrecreation and open spacelflood prone overlay 2o. Any adopted area or specific plans which include the site and surrounding areas; The City of Rochester has developed a master plan of the Cascade Lake area. This is on file with the City and the applicant does not have a copy of it A General Development Plan has been approved by the City for the Quarryridge project. Copies are on file at the City. 2p. Any public facility master plans which indicate the probable future expenditure of public funds for facilities on or adjacent to the site; Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 9 There are no planned public facilities on the site except for a future park area on the west portion of the site. Specific development plans for this park facility as well as the one to the west of the site are not available at this time. 2q. Any proposed or future public improvements on the site or adjacent to the site as indicated in the City's Annual Budget or current Capital Improvement Program; There are no proposed public improvements on site. The Cascade Lake master plan which identifies improvements to the park is planned through 2003. 2r. Any traffic studies including the site,, areas adjacent to the site, or existing or future roads serving the site or adjacent parcels, including traffic counts, levels of service, demand/capacity ratios and other relevant traffic information or analyses. A traffic report was completed for the Quarryridge project and has been previously submitted to the City. 2s. The present use of the site, if any; Mining of the area in the northwest comer of the site is the only present use of the property. 2t. Any previous uses of the site, including a description of the use and when the site was utilized for such use; why the previous use was stopped, if known; Previous uses of the site included fill disposal and mining. The abandonment of using the site for disposal was at the discretion of the owner and due to annexation to the City. 2u. Existing zoning of the site and any previous rezoning; The south 16 acres of the site was recently rezoned from R-1 to R-3 and the balance was zoned R-1 at the time of annexation. 2v. Other information as may be deemed relevant by the City staff, the Planning Commission or the City Council. Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 10 The request to mine a portion of the site is an integral part of the developing Quarryridge. The mining operation will provide granular material for footings/foundation systems, parking lots, and driveway construction without having to haul this material from off -site. 7.0 GRADING PLAN INFORMATION, SECTION 62.1106(3) A grading plan for the Quarryridge project has been submitted to Public Works for review and comment. The grading plan for the mining operation is being submitted with this application (CUP). Section 62.1106(3) of the amended Zoning Ordinance requires the applicant to respond to items 3a through 3k of this section. This section of the report provides responses to these items that are not addressed by the various plans. Section 62.1106(3) 3a. Restoration and stabilization of cut and fill areas Refer to the reclamation plans and typical sections. 3b. Impact on drainage patterns and storm water management facilities, as well as the consistency with the Storm water Management Plan or adopted drainage or storm water policies; The future storm water collection basins that will be created as a result of the mining operation will provide sedimentation control for water quality and storm water detention as is required under the pending Storm Water Management Plan for the City of Rochester. The proposed detention and water quality treatment are integral parts of the plan. Both the drainage from Quarryridge project and the current surface drainage from upstream will be treated in the new basins. 3c. Potential impacts on sinkholes, wells and other features affecting groundwater quality; There are no water wells on the site or the adjacent lands and there are no known sinkholes in the area that would affect the water quality of the storm water basins. Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 11 3d. Impact on wetlands and compliance with the Wetlands Conservation Act; As previously stated a wetland exemption has been issued by the Regulatory Governmental Agency. 3e. The duration of the proposed grading activity. The applicant has indicated that the mining operation will take approximately five(5)years. The filling of Quanyridge should be completed in 2001. 3f. The amount and type of material being removed from, or imported to, the site; The mining activity will excavate topsoil, overburden and granular material. 3g. Compliance with erosion and sediment control standards as set forth in Section 64.321; The erosion control and sedimentation standards are in compliance with the standards of the Storm water Management Plan and the City Engineer's requirements. 3h. Adequate and appropriate surety, approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney, provided to ensure that the site will be restored to a safe condition; The applicant will provide appropriate surety upon approval of the Conditional Use Permits to ensure proper restoration. The City Engineer will need to inform the applicant of the amount of surety. 3i. Visual, noise and dust impact upon public parks, major roadways and residential areas; The visual impact upon public parks will not occur until the City develops the parkland to the west or on the west portion of Quarryridge. This impact will be from temporary stockpiling of material, loading of material, and the operation of equipment. The noise and dust impact will be minimal. These will result from the operation of the equipment excavating and loading material during allowable hours of operation. Dust will be a result of truck travel from the site to the processing area or to 23i° Avenue NW. It will be a minimal impact, if at all, to the residential development 600 feet to the south. Proper treatment of haul roads will minimize this issue. Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 12 The visual, noise and dust impact will be very similar to the current excavation operation north of the proposed Cascade Lake Park that has been permitted by the City. 3j. Impacts of trucks and heavy equipment on the safety and maintenance of roads providing access to the site and adjacent properties; The material will be truck hauled to the processing area on 2P Avenue SW via a haul road across private property. Some material may be hauled across private and public property to 23 d Avenue SW which connects to 2nd Street SW. 2nd Street is a designated truck route. 23'd Avenue SW will provide the access in the future to the public parks north of Shorewood. This roadway does not serve any existing or future residential developments except Shorewood. The majority of the material will be hauled to the existing processing area via a private haul road. The City is planning to signalize 23'd Avenue intersection with 2"d Street SW The developer of Quarryridge has already made a monetary contribution to the construction of the signal. 3k. Compliance with the Uniform Building code, adopted City policies and other state and federal requirements. All grading, excavation, storm water management and restoration, erosion control and permanent seeding will be done in accordance with the grading plan requirements of the City of Rochester and Chapter 70 of UBC. Storm water management will be in accordance with the requirements of the National Pollution Elimination Discharge Permit under Federal law and administrated by the State through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 8.0 PLAN OF OPERATION, CONSTRUCTION DETAILS AND SEQUENCING, AND PHASING OF THE WORK 8.01 Plan of Operation The planned operations shall consist of the following items on each portion of the site: Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Quarryridge • Stripping of topsoil • Removal of overburden/debris • Placement of granular fill material for footings/foundations, driveways, parking lots • Replace topsoil, seed, sod, plant (refer to landscape plan) ■ I nstali erosion control • Install storm sewer pipe • Grade drainageway • Construct structures, parking lots, driveways, etc. • Stockpile materials (temporary) Page 13 Milestone Materials • Stripping of topsoil • Removal of overburden • Excavate granular material • Truck haul granular material • Restore excavated slopes, place topsoil, seed • Install erosion control • Construct haul roads • Stockpile materials (temporary) The total area that will be encompassed by the mining, grading and filling is 26.11 acres. Of this area, approximately 8.6 acres will be mined. It is estimated that there are 30,000 cubic yards of overburden and topsoil and 200,000 cubic yards of granular material to be excavated. The granular material that is not needed to construct the Quarryridge Apartments will be truck hauled to the existing processing area. Some material will be trucked off -site using the haul road to 23`" Avenue SW/2n1 Street SW. The excavated granular material will be used for construction of engineered fill pads for buildings, fill material for parking lots, utility trench backfill, driveway and basement backfill, general site fill, and bituminous mix. 8.02 Construction Details. Sequencing and Phasing The grading of the Quarryridge site and mining of the granular material will occur simultaneously. The material will be excavated by use of a backhoe and dredging equipment. Dozers will be used to strip the site. The material to be removed from the Quarryridge area to the pond area will be loaded into trucks with a front-end loader. Scrapers may be used to strip the topsoil and overburden on a portion of the site. Stripping of the Quarryridge apartments area will occur in the initial phase of the work. Topsoil will be salvaged and stockpiled for use in restoring the site. Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 14 Excess overburden will be hauled to the mining area and used to restore the slope of the existing pond. Reclamation of this pit shore will take place after the slope is stabilized. It is proposed to dispose of the buried construction material on the Quarryridge project in the existing pond area. Erosion control will be installed prior to stripping. Granular fill material along with the soil overburden (clay) and topsoil will be placed over the debris. Granular material will be excavated from the existing basin by use of a backhoe and transported to the Quarryridge project. This material will be used for footing/foundations and general site fill. The drainageway on Quarryridge will be excavated and storm sewer installed. The drainageway will be restored and stripping of the topsoil and overburden on the new pond area will commence. Excess topsoil and overburden material will be stockpiled on the vacant portion of the site that is the future parkland on the westerly parcel of the Quarryridge project. Material will also be stockpiled on the east side of the future pond. Mining of the pond will continue by use of a backhoe and truck hauled away. After the pond is excavated to a depth of approximately 15 feet below the water table a dredge will be utilized to remove material to the full depth as shown on the plans. Upon completion of the mining, the edge of the pond and all other disturbed areas will be restored by use of topsoil and seeding. The Quarryridge project will start in 2000 and be completed in 2002 or 2003. The structures will be built in phases. The last phase is the north building. Upon completion of the north structure, the bufferyard plantings will be installed between the north building and the pond. Reclamation activities will occur concurrent with mining activities. As certain portions of the mining is completed, the pit shore will be properly shaped, topsoil placed and seeded. This phasing shall consist of excavating, grading and site restoration from Quarryridge in Phase I as well as excavation of granular material from the Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 15 existing pond to fill the Quarryridge site. Phase 11 shall consist of mining the pond area and restoration. 8.03 Equipment and Facilities There will not be any facilities, such as a scale, scale house, office, wash plant, screens, or other similar equipment located on the site. However, the following equipment shall be used on the site: • Front end loaders • Scrapers • Semi Dumps • Dredge • Pumps • Backhoe • Tandem Dumps • Portable Lighting Towers (temporary) 8.04 Operating Hours and Season Operating hours will be between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and on Saturday as demand requires. The mining operation will be limited to the months of March through December. Stockpiled material may be truck hauled all year long depending on the demand and weather conditions. It is anticipated that the mining operation will take approximately five (5) years. The demand for this type of material will effect the rate of completion of the mining. Certain times of the season temporary lighting may be necessary for the mining of material. If it becomes necessary to provide lighting portable towers will be utilized. Emergency vehicles can access the site from 2nd Street NW or the west - frontage road of US 52. 8.05 Haul Roads Conditicnal Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 16 There are two (2) haul roads prepared as shown on the location map. One route utilizes a current haul road to the processing site. The second road goes to 2nd Street SW on the alignment of 23`4 Avenue SW. This is an approved haul route. (Refer to Restricted Development Plan 96-17 which amends CUP #95-19). 8.06 Dust Control Plan / Noise Control Plan The haul roads will be kept in dust free condition as much as possible by watering the Toads as necessary or by applying calcium chloride treatment. On -site dust control can be attained by watering the haul routes across the site. Muffler equipment will be maintained in proper working condition. The safety of the employees and others in regards to dust and noise is monitored and regulated by the Minnesota Safety and Health Administration Section of the United States Department of Labor. Their policies will be followed during mining operations. 9.0 RECLAMATION PLAN A reclamation plan has been prepared in accordance with Section 62.1107 (5) of the updated Zoning Ordinance. The plan also includes typical cross -sections of the mined area. The final plan shows the completed pond area that will be located just north of the residential multi -family project called Quarryridge. This pond area, as previously stated, has certain public benefits through the management of storm water drainage. It also is aesthetically beneficial to the residents of the apartment complex as a man- made amenity. The basin as an end -use is compatible with the zoning in a similar fashion to the Cascade Lake project which is zoned R-1. 9.01 Phasing of Reclamation As stated previously mining will start on the west and south and proceed east and north. The first area to be stabilized and restored will be the west side of the existing pond. The balance of the pit shore will be restored as the mining operation progresses. Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 17 After the placement of the overburden, topsoil will be reapplied, and seeded. The specification for seed mixtures are detailed in Appendix C. of this report. It should be noted that a special seed mixture is proposed around the pond shoreline closest to the water level. Stockpiled areas will be restored by placement of topsoil and seeding after the mined material is depleted. 10.0 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS IN THE FLOOD PRONE DISTRICT —SECTION 62.860 This section of the Zoning Ordinance provides the requirements under which fill can be deposited in a Flood Prone District. It requires certification by a registered professional engineer or hydrologist that the project is consistent with Section 62.860. The attached letter addresses the compliance with the three (3) conditions of Section 62.860. 11.0 RESPONSE TO STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES —SECTION 61.146 AND FINDINGS NECESSARY FOR ISSUANCE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS — SECTION 62.1105 The Zoning Ordinance states that certain findings found in Sections 61.146 and 62.1105 must be made in order to approve a Conditional Use Permit. A response to each of the findings is provided to demonstrate compliance. 11.01 Section 61.146 - Standards of Conditional Uses 1. Provisions for vehicular loading, unloading, parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and onto adjacent public streets and ways will create hazards to safety, or will impose a significant burden upon public facilities. Not applicable 2. The intensity, location, operation or height of a proposed buildings and structures will be detrimental to other private development in the Conditionai Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 18 neighborhoods or will impose undue burdens on the sewers, sanitary and storm drains, water or similar public facilities. The only structure will be the Quarryridge Apartments. A General Development Plan has been approved for these structures. 3. The provision for on -site bufferyards and landscaping does not provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development. The Quanyridge landscape plan provides for bufferyard along the south side of the mining operation. This is a permanent bufferyard. 4. The site plan fails to provide for the soil erosion and drainage problems that may be created by the development. An erosion control plan has been prepared to control site erosion. The grading and mining operation will improve the surface drainage in the area as well as improve overall water quality. 5. The provisions of exterior lighting create undue hazards to motorist traveling on adjacent public streets or are inadequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site or such provisions damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties. The only lighting proposed is temporary portable light towers for a short duration during construction. It will not present a hazard to motorist or damage property values. 6. The proposed development will create undue fire safety hazards by not providing adequate access to the site, or to the buildings on the site, for emergency vehicles. Adequate access for emergency vehicles is provided. 7. In cases where a Phase I plan has been approved, there is a substantial change in the Phase II site plan from the approved Phase I site plan, such that the revised plans will not meet the standards provided by this paragraph. Not applicable Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 19 8. The proposed conditional use does not comply with all the standards applying to permitted uses within the underlying zoning district, or which standards specifically applicable to the type of conditional use under consideration, or with specific ordinance standards dealing with matters such as signs which are part of the proposed development, and a variance to allow such deviation has been secured by the applicant. The proposed use is permitted as a Conditional Use Permit in the residential district. 11.02 Section 62.1105 — Findings necessary for Issuance of Conditional use Permits The activity will not result in a danger to life or property due to (1) steep or unstable slopes, (2) unsafe access to the property, (3) excessive traffic, or (4) proximity to existing or planned residential areas, parks and roadways; The mining operation and deposition of fill will be done in compliance with the appropriate adopted engineering standards to ensure stable slopes, safe access, minimal increase in off -site traffic, and will not place undue burden on parks and roadways in the vicinity as the parks are not constructed at this time and the haul road utilizing 2r Avenue has been previously approved. Visual, noise, dust and/or excessive on- or off -site environmental impacts on public parks, roadways and residential areas can be adequately mitigated by the Applicant and a fully detailed plan is submitted to the Applicant to demonstrate the mitigation methods to be used, the cost of such mitigation, the source of funds for such mitigation and adequate legal assurance that all of such mitigation activities are carried out. Noise and dust issues have been adequately addressed in the report. 3. The use of trucks and heavy equipment will not adversely impact the safety and maintenance of public roads providing access to the site, or such impacts will be mitigated; Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 20 The haul road to 2rd Street SW via 2r Avenue SW has been previously approved by the City. Only a portion of the excavated material will be truck hauled via this route. 4. The proposed use will not adversely affect air quality or ground water or surface water quality; The plan provides for storm water detention and improved water quality. 5. The proposed use will not adversely affect the scenic quality of Rochester or the natural landscapes, environment, wildlife and wildlife habitat; or if such effects are anticipated to occur, the reclamation plan provides for adequate restoration of the site following completion of the excavation activity; The reclamation plan adequately addresses restoration. The ponds that will be created is a result of mining will be similar to Cascade Lake. 6. The activity will be compatible with existing development and development anticipated in the future, including other uses as shown in the Comprehensive Plan, including but not limited to: patterns of land use, recreational uses, existing or planned development, public facilities, open space, resources and other natural resources; The mining of the ponds will be compatible with the proposed Quarryridge project and similar to the Cascade Lake project. 7. The activity will not unduly affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties; The mining operation and filling on Quarryridge will not interrupt the enjoyment or use of the adjacent property. a. The site plan provides for adequate buffers and screening year-round from unsightly features of the excavation operation; Refer to plans 9. The reclamation plan provides for adequate and appropriate restoration and stabilization of cut and fill areas; Conditional Use Report Section 34, Cascade Township Page 21 Refer to restoration plan 10. The excavation activity will not result in negative impacts on drainage patterns or storm water management facilities; The treatment and detention of storm water drainage will be improved upon completion of this project. 11. The proposed activity will minimize impacts on sinkholes, wetlands, and other natural features affecting ground water or surafce water quality; A wetland exemption has been secured. There are no sinkholes in the area. 12. The intensity and the anticipated duration of the proposed excavation activity is appropriate for the size and location of the activity; Approximately 5 years for completion of the mining operation is of short duration for this type of use and will coincide with completion of the mining of the site to the west and the MnDOT pond to the north. 13. Permanent and interim erosion and sediment control plans have been approved by the City. An erosion control plan is provided. 14. Surety has been provided that guarantees the site will be fully restored, after completion of the excavation activity, to a safe condition, and one that permits reuse of the site in a manner compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, neighborhood plans, the Land Use Plan and applicable City policies. The City Engineer or City Attorney is required to provide the applicant with the necessary amount of surety. 15. The proposed activity complies with the requirements of the adopted building code. Not applicable APPENDIX A Site Location Map / Haul Road Map Soil Boti'ng Logs w, 4 LOG OF TEST BORING PROJECT: Klaxon Properties - Proposed Housing Complex LOCATION: 2nd Street NW - Rochester, MN DEPTH DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL USCS GEOLOGIC O>0< SURFACE ELEVATION: 1009.9' ORIGIN Fill, mostly Organic Clay, Fill 1 Black, a few pieces of Limestone 2 3 4 5 Sand with Gravel, Medium to SP Coarse 6 Fine Grained, Tan, Moist; Alluvium Medium Dense 7 y Sand with Gravel, Fine to 8 m: Medium Grained, Brown, :X: Water -Bearing, Dense 9: 10 ` }Y Sand with a little Gravel, Fine 11 .ti: to Medium Grained, Reddish y Brown, Water -Bearing, 12 ;� Dense to Medium Dense :v 13 ' 14 $tti 15 .+:: Sand with a little Gravel, <' Medium Grained, Browm, lfi Water -Bearing, Medium Dense 17 END OF BORI\G 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 BORING NUMBER: PB2 CLIENT/MBI a: 1180A/9013 N SAMPLE LABORATORY TEST or CR WL No. TYPE MC I DDTLL FPL QolRQC HSA 8 2 SS 21 3 SB 32 4 SB 17 5 SB 4 6 SS IF-1 7 1 SB WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS START: 01.13-99 DATE I TIME SAMPLED CASINO CAVE-IN I WATER BAILED DEPTHS METHOD DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH LEVEL 01-13.99 1 1:4SPM 16.0- 14.5' ---. 6.5' 3-1/4•HSA0-14.5' END: 01.13-99 CREW CHIEF R. Smith McGhie ` Betts, Inc. �...a rv.... �.. sue.,.. LOG OF TEST BORING PROJECT: Klaxon Properties - Proposed Housing Complex BORING NUMBER: PB7 LOCATION: 2nd Street NW - Rochester, MN CLIENTIMBI R I IonAInn • 1� nEPTH (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL USCS GEOLOGIC N SAMPLE LABORATORY TESTS 0 SURFACE ELEVATION: 999.2' ORIGIN CR WL Na. TYPE MC OD LL PL Q.NQ Fill, a mixture of Silty Sand & Fill I Organic Clay, Brown, Black I HSA 2 Organic Clay, Black, Firm OH Topsoil 3 13 2 SB 4 5 Saad with Silt, Fine to Medium SP•SM Coarse 6 Grained, Reddish Brown, Alluvium 3 3 SB - Moist to Water -Bearing ® 7 6.4% Very Loose _ 8 ti Sand with Gravel, Medium to SP Coarse Grained, Brown, 18 4 SB Water -Bearing, \tedium 9 :} Dense tiff 10 ' k Sand with a little Gravel, I 1 Medium to Fine Grained, 25 5 SB ' Brown, Water -Bearing, 12 '�• ]Medium Dense 13 17 6 SB 14 ti 15 I6 4 16 7 SB END OF BORING 17 is 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS START: 01-14-99 END: 0144-99 DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-tN DEPTH WATER LEYEL BAILED DEPTHS METHOD CREW CHIEF 01.14-99 3:45 PM 16A' 14.5' • - - HSA 0. 14.5' R. Smith McGhie Betts,��e. LOG OF TEST BORING [:PR70JEC7T6:Proposed Quarry Ridge ApartmentsBORING NUMBER: PB11 ochester, Nfinnesota CLIENTIMBI k: 1180A/9 DEPTH DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL USCS GEOLOGIC N PATORY,SURFACE ELEVATION: 1000.6 0Fill, ORIGIN og WL TYPE MC DD DD LL PL Qul mostly sand with a littlegravel, brown, a few pieces ofFill ISAMPLE I asphalt and concreteHSA 2 3 Organic clay, black, soft, a few OL Topsoil roots 7 2 SB 4 5 Lean Clay, gray mottled, very CL Fine soft Alluvium 6 4 3 SB 7 Sand with gravel, medium to SP Coarse fine grained, brown, water bearing, medium dense Alluvium 8 24 4 SB 9 •r 10 X.: ;.: I .r: 20 4 SB :Z: 12 y Sand with a little gravel, fine to medium grained, brown, water 13 bearing, medium dense 20 5 SB 14 15 f: Sand with gravel, medium to coarse grained, brown, water 16 bearing, medium dense 20 6 S8 17 END OF BORING 18 19 20 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS START: 09/09/99 END: 09109/99 DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH WATER LEVEL BAILED DEPTHS METHOD CREW CHIEF 09/09/99 11:15 a.m. 16.0 14.5 • .. 6.2 3.25 HSA 0 - 14.5 R. Smith McGhie Betts, Inc. Cenwhny a^Wun Wa3wvF>• LOG OF TEST BORING PROJECT: Proposed Quarry Ridge Apartments LOCATION: Rochester, Minnesota BORING NUMBER: PB13 rT TFNT/MMT �- 114r1A 10I11'S DEPTH (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL USCS GEOLOGIC N SAMPLE LABORATORY TESTS 0 SURFACE ELEVATION: 998.3 ORIGIN or CR WL No. I TYPE UC DD LL PL Qu/R( Fill, mostly silty sand with gravel, dark brown Fill 1 1 HSA 2 Silty Sand, gray to grayish SM Coarse brown, wet, loose 3 Alluvium 8 2 SB 4 = Sand with a little gravel, SP medium to fine grained, 5 brown, water bearing, medium r dense 6 xr 20 3 SB r�r 7 •:<• 8 19 4 SB 9 r •'r 10 : Sand with gravel, medium to fine grained, brown, water bearing, dense 11 31 5 SB 12 .f Sand with gravel, medium to fine grained, reddish brown, 13 :; water bearing, medium dense 21 6 SB 14 Sand, fine to medium ¢rained, :r reddish brown, water bearing, 15'' medium dense 16 16 7 SB END OF BORING 17 18 19 20 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS START: 09/09t99 END: 09/09199 DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH WATER LEVEL BAILED DEPTHS METHOD CREW CHIEF 09/09/99 9:15 a.m. 16.0 14.5 ... 4.2 3.25 HSA 0 - 14A R. Smith McGhie Betts, LOG OF TEST BORING PROJECT: Proposed Quarry Ridge Apartments LOCATION: Rochester, Minnesota BORING NUMBER: PB15 rT T=X?T!%,, u t 1 0l1 ♦ 'nn I I ` • t n. 110VA17V1 DEPTH (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF :MATERIAL USCS GEOLOGIC N SAMPLE LABORATORY TM O SURFACE ELEVATION: 1005.5 ORIGIN or CR WL No. TYPE MC DD LL PL QWRQ Fill, mostly silly sand with gravel, dark brown, a few Fill 1 pieces of asphalt and concrete 1 HSA 2 Fill, a mixture of lean clay, silty sand and organic clay, brown, 3 dark brown, black 17 2 SB 4 6 KX 6 3 SB 8 Organic clay, black, a few OL roots, soft To soil P 7 4 SB 9 Sand with Silt and a little SP-SM gravel, fine to medium 10 grained, grayish brown, wet to water bearing,at l 1.3', medium I dense 14 5 SB 12 Sand with ¢ravel, medium to SP 13 coarse grained, brawn, water bearing, medium dense 22 6 SB 14 to j:•,'.': Sand with a little ¢ravel, fine to 16 medium grained. brown, water 7 7 SB bearing, medium dense 17 ' 18 Sand, fine to medium grained, 19 water bearing, medium Xbrown, .dense 20 0: :Y 21 rr 14 8 SB END OF BORING 22 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS START: 09/09/99 END: 09/09199 DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH WATER LEVEL BAILED DEPTHS METHOD CREW CHIEF 09/09/99 L45 p.m. 21.0 19.5 ... 11.3 3.25 HSA 0 - 19.5 R. Smith McGhie Betts, ne. X fTJ R7 © co c o a c yCD r N = N N Q _ < 7 N 0 D (D x c f1 o v Q 0 L7 L cn L O COO O O to a TM O M n m CDO F QO' fN cc N C] 7 3 � y 7 tD ( i C-0 D to f0 y tD rD N N N N 7 N n - _ N <-1 CJ7 ��o o =. Gi 0747m D3.d t^ �� Q to y c tD = y m c c+ m N x 5 a m y m o f fD. F a- CD xm ,v c g n d c a m c g'tD o an Q c N� a c 1 0 m d Q �' a f -� m 3 tyo � w v m o c N f. n O 0 a siQ fD� °a -a rD- " a Q > > c f Q J O to O Ln A Qf N N Of O 66600000 CD 7 C n T y m m 0 3 x 1 C m m Z D m m N m m v CITY OF ROCHESTER NOTICE OF WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT DECISION Name of Applicant: Wilmar ?nvestmenzs, LLC Apn'_icaticn Number: #2000-2, Type cf Applicatan (check one) : _X_ Exemption Decision No Loss Decision _ Replacement Plan Decision Banking Plan Decision Date of Decision: January 11. 2000 List of addressees: [Landowner] [Members of Technica'- Evaluation Panel] [Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization, if there is.one] [Commissioner of Nan_ral Resources] [Individual Members of the public who requested a copy] You are hereb,: notified that the decision of the Local Government unit on the above - referenced appiication was made on the date s,a.ed above. A copy of the Local Government Unit's decision is a,tached. Pursuant to Minn. R. 5=20.0250 any appeal of the decision must be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources within fifteen (15) days of the date of the mailing of this Notice. Date of mailing of this Notice: January 11. 2000 xdecn0c(Apn119971 [LOCAL GOVER:\-ME\T UNIT] By: John Hayford •� Title: Senior PIanner -' Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act t'J� APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF NO LOSS OR EXEMPTION' APPLICANT AND PROJECT LOCATION LYFORZ,LTION Wilmar Investments, LLC Name(s) of Applicant =105 East River Rd. NE Street Address Zip (507)254-5436 ( ) N/A LGU: City of Rochester Project Location: T 107N R 8 W S 34, NE 1/4 of S W I/4 UTM Coordinates: X: Y: County Name/Number: Olmsred Major Watershed Name/Number: Zumbro River) Size of entire wetland: acres Wetland type: Circular ; NWI Check one: ■ <50% C 50%-80% or C > 80% Check one: C ■ Nan-ae. land PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION Describe the nature and purpose or the proposed project: develop three apartment buildings with associated irr mnucrt or. t south 16 acres and comolete gmvel extraction on the remaining portion of a 40 acre tract. (attach additional pates it needed) Timetable: project will begin in Sorinz, 2000 (mo'day/yr) and will be completed by Spring. 2006 The wetland activity at the above site qualifies for the following under the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) (check one): No Loss Determination (anach plans) ■ Exemption 5, C (per M.N- Rule Chapter 8420.0122) (.Vote: Applicant is respons:bie for suomirctng the pro necessary to show qualy-ica:ion for the exemption claimed.) Description of Exemption Claimed: A ditch was cons vcted by 01.ms[ed Couan a: the ou:ie: o: a 66' culvert, to „arsvc rormuatr, from asub-bas4i watershed of app:oximacely 100 acres [o Cascade Cteek. (A copy of Sze esemact for the ditch art construction of the ditch is arrached.) The actions by OL-nsred Counry. a public agency, in corse:cting art "off take" ditch art rcutng sto.=wa[e; from c^.e 100-acre sub -basin watershed into the ditch, has caused ar. incidertal. Type : wedand to form. replacement plan should therefore, not be required. APPLICANT SIGNATURE -he information provided for this determination is truthful and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I ensure that, in draining c :filling the subject wetland under an exemption noted above, appropriate erosion conrrol measures will be taken to prever ;edimentation of the water, the drain or fill will not block fish passage, and the drain or fill will be conducted in compliance wit ill other applicable federal, state and local requirements, including best management practices and water resource protecriol equirements established under Minnesota Starures, Chapter 103H. eey Io4v,�1 I /A;ec0 ure of Applicant) ` Date) i t t��-41 i e ��f_kc� �Ul VOVIWF°.�}Ft3 se ru! U-51 =PP-1C . tampaer, roan Vote: An approval is nor effective a; i• acres below are complete. No work st gitt until the D-day appeal window ras lapsed, or, in the event of an appeu., u. the appeal has been fenalieed. -�.) LGU has received adequate documentation for claim of No -Loss or Exemption, and approves this certificate as outlined above. This certificate expires (Date) S1 Is certificate for an exemption under bl.R. 8420.0122, Subpart l or Subpart 2, Item B? LGU sign below. .If not, signature above is sufficient, and certificate is complete. LGU write ANot Applicable= in signature block below. 3.) LGU has received evidence of recording of Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Impacted Wetland Under km- cul.- ai Ere ^ption (BWSR Form B): oun:y where recorded) LGU Ofticiai Si (Date recorded) (Document = assigned by recorder) '4PPROt'4' 0= TN1S CERT/c1Q gT10N ONL}' APPLIES TO ME WC1. Pernurs from local. srare. and rer.'eral agencies near ie recuired. Check Mira: the r.,cpropriare at tinorttzes before conunencing stork in or near wedands. The Combiner.' Projec: 4ADh ::i0nPorn: Cm: be used for:%:is pmroose. Within 10 daNs of the decision. notice of the above decision must be mailed to: _ando%-, ner Aoo .._nt Jf ti'.e-...—.,.^_: E4a: L':::C^, F:he! Resour-es R:£lan_. 0:...- D\R `%'e:!ands Coordir._to, - =coioC:::. Seri:es Se:tan 500 La::vetm Road. Box'_: =ors 0:=n_:n:e-s Pro;act ManagerL Dewa -eht of the A.-c. Corps of Erimneers. St. ?au! District ATTN. CO-R, 190 Fif::. Street Eas: St. Pau!. %rN 44101.163S Nlembe-s of the cubic who have requested to recei. a notice. asmocs.iw OV:m. 1999) cx"cer. tom McGhie Betts, nr. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors Planners 1648 Third Avenue S.E., Rochester, MN 55904 507-289-3919 Fax 507-289-7333 1604 Riverview Lane, Northfield, MN 55057 507.645-0964 Fax 507-645-2842 February 23, 2000 Mr. Steve Beach Mr. Tim Trimble Milestone Materials Klaxon Properties 920 North 101h Avenue 3601 Park Center Blvd., Ste. 210 Onalaska WI 54650 Minneapolis MN 55416 RE: Conditional Use Permit for filling and sand and gravel excavation in Section 34, Cascade Township Gentlemen: We have reviewed the plans and completed earthwork computations for the conditional use permit to allow mining on property north of 2nd Street NW and for filling on the future Quarryridge site adjacent to the mined area. Our computations have been completed to address Section 62.860 of the Land Development Manual of the City of Rochester. Based upon the results of our work and review of the plans, we can make the following statements: Filling within the flood prone area is minimized by the grading plan. A minimum distance from the proposed buildings are to be filled and only the required level portion of the park property is being filled. 2. Based upon our computations, an increase in flood storage will result from completion of these two projects. We estimate the existing flood storage on the site is 64.9 acre feet. Based upon the plans available to us, we estimate the final flood storage will be 72.3 acre feet, an increase of 11%. These quantities are based upon a normal water level for the existing and future pond areas of 995.5', and 100-year flood level of 1004'. 3. The grading activities proposed by plans indicated improvements to the erosion control at the site. Currently, much of the shoreline is unimproved, various stockpiles of non - vegetative material are present, and an open ditch for directing storm water drainage south exists. The grading plans indicate the shoreline will be restored with appropriate vegetation, slopes will be reduced to a maximum of 4:1, and storm sewer system will outlet directly into the ponds to reduce erosion of ditches. Should you have any questions regarding our review, we can be further assistance to you, please free to contract us. Very truly yours, :GScHI : INavid L. Morrill, PE -M/bad i -i:. -.- r,%3-rys:a�J.t:wJ um a d.. .. :;4,,DAY1D f^ M 1Mu Date G,<-i,'77 No. 1271 M. McGhe, PE. LS, 1904,1975 William E. Tainton, CET, President James E, Swanson. I.S. Vice President David L. Morrill, PE. vice President :ouglas N. Bens, PE. LS. Vice President Andrew J. Masterpole. ASLA Larry J. Shannon. LS Micreei E. Gowen. PE. LS .lark E. Severtson. LS canal J. Zemke, PE Gregory R. Bond, PE An EOval nirinner,ininr Fmnln�nr �(3�" ��: 1 1 e Minnesota Pollution Control Agency April 20, 2000 Mr. Bill Fitzgerald Rochester Sand and Gravel, Inc. 4105 East River Road NE Rochester, Minnesota 55906 Re: Quarry Ridge Property - Second Street NW Dear Mr. Fitzgerald: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) received a letter from McGhie & Betts, Inc. (M & B), on April 17, 2000, regarding the Quarry Ridge site adjacent to Second Street NW. M & B was contracted by Mr. Tim Trimble, Managing Partner for Klaxon Properties of Minneapolis, to prepare a site restoration plan in response to a letter sent to you by the MPCA, dated April 11, 2000, (attached). The M & B letter requests that the MPCA acknowledge receipt of the site restoration plan. The MPCA staff offers the following comments: The April 11, 2000, MPCA letter indicates that you must separate all demolition debris from existing soil if encountered during the development of the property, and recycle or dispose the debris at a facility approved by the MPCA. It also states that no demolition material shall be buried on site. However, the M & B letter contradicts the MPCA letter by indicating that excavated material, suitable for fill, including cobble -sized rubble (i.e. <10 inches) will be placed back as fill in non-structural areas at an elevation at least four feet above the existing water level. The MPCA staff understands that it is inherent that some smaller demolition debris may be missed in the process to excavate, remove, and/or recycle. Therefore, as long as the attempt is to remove all material as outlined in the April 11, 2000, MPCA letter, and any such debris that does remain on site is placed at least five feet above the seasonal high water table, MPCA staff finds the site restoration plan acceptable. r. 18 Wood Lake Drive SE, Rochester, MN. 55904; Voice (507) 285-7343; Fax (507) 280-5513; TI'Y (651) 282-5332 St. Paul • Duluth • Brainerd Detroit Lakes • Marshall • Rochester • Mankato • Willmar; Webb Site www.pca.state.mn.us Equal Onportunity Emplover Printed on recvcled paper containine at least 20% fibers from oaner recvcled by consumers MinnesotaCOPY C0PWUjII Pollution Control Agency Y3q April 11, 2000 Mr. William Fitzgerald Rochester Sand and Gravel, Inc. 4105 East River Road Northeast Rochester, Minnesota 55906 RE: March 23, 2000, Request for Information Letter Dear Mr. Fitzgerald: This letter will acknowledge receipt of Mr. William Fitzgerald's (Regulated Party) response dated March 28, 2000, to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Based upon the information received from the Regulated Party, MPCA staff have determined that the pending enforcement action is not appropriate provided the following items are completed: 1. All demolition debris resulting from the demolition of buildings, roads, and other structures including concrete, brick, and bituminous concrete shall be separated from existing soil if encountered and disposed or recycled at a facility approved by the MPCA. No demolition material shall be reburied on site. 2. Provide receipts to the MPCA from the permitted facility that was used for proper disposal or recycling. Please note that the Regulated Parties file will remain on record at the MPCA. Should the above listed actions fail to be completed, the MPCA may reconsider taking enforcement action with respect to the violation(s) listed in the Request for Information Letter. 18 Wood Lake Drive SE, Rochester, MN. 55904; Voice (507) 285-7343; Fax (507) 280-5513; TTY (651) 282-5332 St. Paul • Duluth • Brainerd Detroit Lakes • Marshall • Rochester • Mankato •Willmar; Webb Site www.pca stare.mn.us Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20% fibers from paper recycled by consumers 140 saw. 1.IpI ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GIS(ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 TO: City Planning & Zoning Commission MAPPING HOUSING(HRA 507/286-8224 FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELL/SEPTIC 507/285-8345 DATE: April 7, 2000 -REVISED - FAX 5071287-2275- RE: Type III, Phase II Conditional Use Permit #00-03 to Excavate Sand and Gravel and Type III Conditional Use Permit to place fill and construct a multi -family residential building in the Flood Prone District. Planning Department Review: Applicant(s): Steve Beach Milestone Materials/Mathy Construction PO Box 189 Onalaska, WI W50 Klaxon Properties 3601 Park Center Blvd, Ste. 210 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Owner(s): William Fitzgerald Rochester Sand & Gravel 4105 E. River Road NE Rochester, MN 55906 Engineer/Consultant: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave. SE Rochester. MN 55904 Requested Action: The applicant is requesting a Type III, Phase II Conditional Use Permit to Excavate Sand and Gravel in the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) District and a Type III Conditional Use Permit to place fill and construct a multi -family residential building in the R-3 (Medium Density) District and Flood Prone Overlay District. Location of Property: South of T.H. 14, west of T.H. 52, north of 2nd St. NW and the West Zumbro Addition. Zoning: R-1 (Mixed Single Family) District and R-3 (Medium Density Residential) District. ,.,�P AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER 4 Z Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Public Works (see attached) 2. Rochester Park & Recreation (see attached) 3. MN Pollution Control Agency (see attached) Standards for Approval: Conditional use permits in the Flood Prone district are subject to the same standards as every conditional use (see Section 61.146), and some specific conditions related to the Flood Prone areas (Sections 62.824, 62.834 and 62.860). Excavation activities are regulated by Section 62.1100 at seq. Conditional Uses for Excavation are also subject to 61.146 and some additional standards specific to Excavation found in Section 62.1105. Report Attachments: 1. Excerpts from the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual 2. Referral Comments (3) 3. Location Map 4. Engineers Certification Analysis: This application includes 1) a request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for sand and gravel excavation within the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) district and 2) a request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for filling within the Flood Prone District in the R-1 and R-3 (Medium Density Residential) districts and to allow for the construction of a multi -family building within the Flood Prone District in the R-3 District. Sand & Gravel Excavation: The applicant is proposing to excavate sand and gravel materials on approximately 8.6 acres of land. Some of the material is proposed for use as fill for the Quarry Ridge apartment complex, some to be stockpiled on -site and the remainder to be exported. Exported materials will be transported utilizing haul roads approved with as part of an excavation operation approved on the adjacent property to the west. These haul roads will provide access to 7'" St. NW and to 2n° St. SW, without utilizing local residential roadways. There will not be any processing on -site. The application report states that the excavation is proposed to take approximately five (5) years. Operations are proposed between the months of March through December with operating hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and on Saturday as demand requires. Excavation is proposed to start on the west and south sides of the mining area then proceed east and north. Restoration will proceed concurrent with mining as the operation progresses. This application has been revised to address concerns and questions previously raised by staff. This petition was scheduled for a public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 22, 2000. As recommended by staff, the Commission continued this item to the April 12, 2000 meeting to allow the applicant time to provide additional information to the Planning Department and to modify the application to meet Ordinance regulations. The following is a list of items that needed to be corrected or addressed further. Staff met with the applicant and consultant on March 22, 2000 to review these issues and the applicant later filed a revision to the application. Updated information is provided in bold italics text. (Please see the attached letter from McGhie & Betts, Inc. dated March 28, 2000 that provides responses to each of these issues.) Section 62.1108, 1 includes operation/performance standards for sand and gravel excavation. This application, as filed, does not comply with 62.1108, 1, e, i, j or k. FAr e) The Applicant shall provide signs on the property and along haul routes where deemed necessary to promote the safety and general welfare of the neighborhood and general area. Required signs may include, but shall not be limited to, "No Trespassing," "Danger - No Swimming," and "Trucks Hauling." Other signs may be required if necessary. The applicant should provide the appropriate signs for this operation, including "Danger - No Swimming" and "Trucks Hauling" while the excavation activity is in operation. The application was revised to identify the locations of signs that will be posted on site that will read "No Trespassing" and "Danger- No Swimming". A March 28, 2000letter from McGhie & Betts, inc. states that the contractor will contact the City and County Public Works departments to determine if "Trucks Hauling" signs or other safety signage will be required in the public right -of --ways of 23rd Ave. SIN and 2nd St. SW prior to commencement of hauling. i) A performance bond or other financial security in an amount satisfactory to the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney shall be secured from the Applicant to ensure that all applicable standards are fully met during operation and to ensure that proper reclamation of the site is completed in a timely manner. Prior to any excavation or grading activity on this property, financial security must be provided to the City. The City Engineer will need to provide the amount necessary to meet this criterion. Prior to excavation or grading activity, this financial security will be provided by the applicant. j) A 6' continuous security fence shall be provided around the entire perimeter of the property on which the sand or gravel excavation activity will take place. Additional fencing requirements may be imposed on portions of the site abutting residentially zoned or planned areas, parks, playgrounds, sidewalks, trails, schools, churches and other public facilities and gathering places. The Plans should be revised to identify the required security fence. A revised application/set of plans was provided which identifies a V chain link fence along the south and east sides of the portion of the property that will be included in the sand and gravel excavation. Staff, the consultant and applicant discussed the installation of a fence around the entire perimeter of the excavation pit Since the applicant, Mathy Construction, is operating excavation activities on the adjacent properties to the north and west of this site, movement of materials and vehicles across the north and west site boundaries is likely to occur to promote the efficient use of time and equipment. installation of fence along these property boundaries would serve little purpose since the adjacent properties to the north and west are active excavation operations. k) Required minimum distance of specific on -site activities from adjacent property zoned residential, commercial and industrial, when the proposed activity will exceed 24 months (see attached table). This application proposes a temporary stockpile north of 2"d St. NW that is only 50 feet from the propertyline. This Section of the Ordinance requires a minimum distance of 500' from a vegetated stockpile to an adjacent property zoned residential. Single family dwellings existing directly south of this proposed stockpile, across 2"d St. NW. If this stockpile will not be vegetated, the minimum setback to an adjacent property zoned residential is 750 feet. This setback can be reduced to 250 feet when the stockpile is vegetated and a 6' vegetated berm is r constructed to screen the activity. The applicant needs to identify whether this is a vegetated stockpile and also needs to revise the Plans and application to comply with the required setback. The applicant provided clarification regarding the purpose and use of the stockpile located just north of 2nd St. NW, west of the drainageway. This stockpile will be used to store materials excavated from the footings/foundation areas of the Quarry Ridge apartment complex as well as temporary storage of the granular materials that will be placed under the footings and foundations systems of the structures. These stockpiles will not be used beyond 24 months, and therefore only require a 100 foot setback from the properly line. The application plans have been revised to reflect this 100 foot setback. Section 62.1108, 2 includes reclamation standards for sand and gravel excavation. This application, as filed, does not comply with 62.1108, 2, a or 62.1108, 2, g. Additionally, the consultant should clarify whether the plans, as submitted, comply with 62.1108, d, 1 and 62.1108, d, 2. e) Water Bodies - Shaping and Enhancement. 1) Where water bodies are created in commercial and residential zones, only freeform and natural form water bodies will be allowed. All water bodies shall include variation in shoreline and depth and shall include curvilinear shorelines. The shape of this proposed pond is not consistent with this requirement. Please refer the enclosed drawing for examples of a freeform or natural form water body. This application needs to be revised to include a curvilinear shoreline and pond shape that reflects a freeform or natural form water body. The shape of the pond was modified slightly to include an undulating shoreline along the south and east boundaries of the pond. A sewer line and easement abut the north fine of the pond. When staff (Planning and Park d Rec.) met with the applicant and consultant on March 22, 2000, the future of the sewer line was discussed as it relates to the future plans for Cascade Lake. it is anticipated that this trunkmain sanitary sewer will be relocated in the future to allow for the connection of multiple ponds to complete Cascade Lake. Removal of this sanitary sewer will also allow the pond included in this application to be connected to existing ponds located north of the sewer line. The applicant anticipates that upon removal of the abutting sewer line, additional excavation will occur to connect ponds locate on each side of the sewer line. Since that is the case, the north shoreline of the excavation activity, included in this application, is only a temporary shoreline. The west shoreline will not be connected to other ponds but will abut a future berm and pedestrian trail that are being planned along the east side of Cascade Lake. g) Revegetation. In addition to required seeding, the reclaimed site shall be landscaped. The applicant shall have the flexibility to arrange plant material to best suit the ultimate proposed use and design of the property, provided that: 1) At least 8 deciduous and 8 evergreen trees from the City's approved plant list, and consistent with the requirements of Section 63.150, are planted for each disturbed acre; and 2) At least 25 percent of required trees are planted within 30 feet of the perimeter of the site. J The reclamation plan does not include plantings along the perimeter of the area to be mined. Landscape and bufferyard plantings are shown adjacent to the future apartment buildings, however no planting are shown along the perimeter of the pond, except where it is adjacent to the proposed apartment. The reclamation plan or site and landscape plan needs io be revised to meet this section of the Ordinance. The application plans have been revised to identify plantings required to meet this criterion. Plantings will only be placed along the west, south and east sides of the pond since the north shoreline is only temporary. Placement of plantings was discussed with staff (Planning and Park & Rec.) and will include trees on both side slopes of the drainage channel. Additional Items: The applicant should also provide information related to the truck traffic that will be generated by the sand and gravel excavation. How many trucks per hour and per day will be generated during the operation season? The applicant anticipates that truck traffic will average 4 trips per hour for a 10 hour duration each day they are hauling. Typical and cross -sections should be revised to better define the horizontal and vertical slope restoration. The plans have been revised to provide clarification and identify the side slopes of the end cross -sections of the pond. The application report states that buried construction material on the Quarryridge project is proposed to be disposed of in the existing pond area. The MPCA will not permit the disposal of this material as proposed. This application should reflect the decision of the MPCA. This issue will need to be resolved prior to proceeding with activities on this property that include removal, movement or disposal of buried materials. Two ponds exist to the north of the proposed pond. The Plan sheets should reflect the boundaries of these existing ponds, which fie north of the 20' sanitary sewer easement. The topographic survey, included with the application materials, identities the existing ponds. Fill and Multi -Family Building in the Flood Prone District., A General Development Plan and Zoning District Amendment were recently approved for the portion of this property zoned R-3. The GDP proposes three multi -family low-rise apartment buildings. The northern most building is located, partially, within the Flood Prone Overlay District. Placement of fill or buildings within this Overlay District first requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Fill for the Quarry Ridge Apartment project will come from the proposed mining area. The application report proposes that filling the Quarry Ridge site should be completed in 2001. Staff has reviewed the proposal for placement of fill and a multi -family low-rise building within the Flood Prone District. Staff suggests that the proposal is consistent with the applicable regulations (62.824, 62.834, 62.860). The proposed residential building will be elevated above the flood protection elevation. The proposed fill will be balanced by an increase in flood storage that would be created by the excavation activity north of the construction site. An engineer's certification required in Section 62.860 was submitted with this application. Recommendation: Staff has reviewed the proposal for placement of fill and a multi -family low-rise building within the Flood Prone District. Staff suggests that the proposal is consistent with the applicable regulations (62.824, 62.834, 62.860). The proposed residential building will be elevated above the flood protection elevation. The proposed fill will be balanced by an increase in flood storage that would be created by the excavation activity north of the construction site. An engineer's certification required in Section 62.860 was submitted with this application. Therefore staff supports approval of the request to place fill and also to construct a multi -family residential development in the Flood Prone District. Staff has reviewed the application for excavation activities and for filling in the Flood Prone district and suggest that the application will meet the applicable Ordinances and that the Commission and Council can make findings in support of the application consistent Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual (see attached) Sections 62.1102, 61.146 and, 62.824, if the following conditions or modifications are imposed: 1. Prior to excavation, the applicant shall provide the City with a financial security consistent with Section 62.1108, 1, i of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual, Z Failure of the applicant to connect the excavation pond in this application, with the pond(s) located north of the existing sanitary sewer line in the future once the sewer line is abandoned by the City, shall result in the applicant reclaiming the north line of the pond in this application with an undulating shoreline and peninsula. 3. Approval of this permit shall expire five years after the date of final approval by the Rochester Common Council (May _ 2005), unless permit approval is extended as provided in Section 62.1110, 7 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. 4. No excavation, movement or disposal of buried debris on -site shall occur prior to obtaining approvals and permits required by the MN Pollution Control Agency for the activity or any other agency that may require permits for such activity. If the applicant proceeds with excavation, movement or disposal of buried debris, proof of approvals and permits from other agencies must be filed with the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Oe EXCERPTS FROM THE ROCHESTER ZONING ORDINANCE AND LAND DEVELOPMENT MANUAL 61.145 Matters Under Consideration: The review of a conditional use is necessary to insure that it will not be of detriment to and is designed to be compatible with land uses and the area surrounding its location; and that it is consistent with the objectives and purposes of this ordinance and the comprehensive plan. 61.146 Standards for Conditional Uses: The zoning administrator, Commission, or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a conditional use unless one or more of the following findings with respect to the proposed development is made: 1) provisions for vehicular loading, unloading, parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and onto adjacent public streets and ways will create hazards to safety, or will impose a significant burden upon public facilities. 2) The intensity, location, operation, or height of proposed buildings and structures will be detrimental to other private development in the neighborhood or will impose undue burdens on the sewers, sanitary and storm drains, water or similar public facilities. 3) The provision for on -site bufferyards and landscaping does not provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development. 4) The site plan fails to provide for the soil erosion and drainage problems that may be created by the development. 5) The provisions for exterior lighting create undue hazards to motorists traveling on adjacent public streets or are inadequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site or such provisions damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties. 6) The proposed development will create undue fire safety hazards by not providing adequate access to the site, or to the buildings on the site, for emergency vehicles. 7) In cases where a Phase I plan has been approved, there is a substantial change in the Phase II site plan from the approved Phase I site plan, such that the revised plans will not meet the standards provided by this paragraph. 6) The proposed conditional use does not comply with all the standards applying to permitted uses within the underlying zoning district, or with standards specifically applicable to the type of conditional use under consideration, or with specific ordinance standards dealing with matters such as signs which are part of the proposed development, and a variance to allow such deviation has not been secured by the applicant. 62.824 Conditional Use Permits - Standards for Approval: When deciding on Conditional Use Permits in any of the flood districts, the following factors, in addition to the standards of Paragraph 61.146 shall also be considered: 1) The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments. 2) The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of others. 3) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these systems to prevent disease, contamination, and unsanitary condition. 4) The susceptibility of the_proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner. 5) The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community. 6) The need for a waterfront location for the facility. 7) The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the proposed use. 8) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development anticipated in the foreseeable future. 9) The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and flood plain management program for the area. 10) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles. 11) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site. 12) Such other factors which are relevant to the purposes of Paragraph 62.800. 62.860 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS IN THE FLOOD PRONE DISTRICT The requirements applicable in the Flood Fringe District, as defined in Section 62.840 shall apply in the Flood Prone District and, in addition, the deposition of any fill or spoil from dredging of sand and gravel operations, the construction of any structure, or the grading or paving of any areas shall require certification by a registered professional engineer or hydrologist that the following conditions have been met: 1) Fill deposited in the flood prone area shall be no more than the minimum amount necessary to conduct the use. 2) No net loss of capacity for surface storage of flood waters shall result from the activity. 3) The effect of such activities in the flood prone area shall not result in an increase in erosion potential on the site. 62.1102 FINDINGS NECESSARY FOR ISSUANCE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS (for Excavation Activities): The City shall approve a conditional use permit authorizing an excavation activity only if all of the following findings with respect to the proposed activity are made, in addition to those listed in Section 61.146: 1) The activity will not result in a danger to life or property due to (1) steep or unstable slopes, (2) unsafe access to the property, (3) excessive traffic, or (4) proximity to existing or planned residential areas, parks and roadways; 2) Visual, noise, dust, and/or excessive on- or off -site environmental impacts on public parks, roadways and residential areas can be adequately mitigated by the Applicant and a fully q, 6 detailed plan is submitted by the Applicant to demonstrate the mitigation methods to be used, the cost of such mitigation, the source of funds for such mitigation, and adequate legal assurance that all of such mitigation activities are carried out; 3) The use of trucks and heavy equipment will not adversely impact the safety and maintenance of public roads providing access to the site, or such impacts will be mitigated; 4) The proposed use will not adversely affect air quality or ground water or surface water quality; 5) The proposed use will not adversely affect the scenic quality of Rochester or the natural landscapes, environment, wildlife and wildlife habitat; or if such effects are anticipated to occur, the reclamation plan provides for adequate restoration of the site following completion of the excavation activity; 6) The activity will be compatible with existing development and development anticipated in the future, including other uses as shown in the Comprehensive Plan, including but not limited to: patterns of land use, recreational uses, existing or planned development, public facilities, open space resources and other natural resources; 7) The activity will not unduly affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties; 8) The site plan provides for adequate buffers and screening year-round from unsightly features of the excavation operation; 9) The reclamation plan provides for adequate and appropriate restoration and stabilization of cut and fill areas; 10) The excavation activity will not result in negative impacts on drainage patterns or stormwater management facilities; 11) The proposed activity will minimize impacts on sinkholes, wetlands and other natural features affecting ground water or surface water quality; 12) The intensity and the anticipated duration of the proposed excavation activity is appropriate for the size and location of the activity; 13) Permanent and interim erosion and sediment control plans have been approved by the City; 14) Surety has been provided that guarantees the site will be fully restored, after completion of the excavation activity, to a safe condition, and one that permits reuse of the site in a manner compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, neighborhood plans, the Land Use Plan and applicable City policies. 15) The proposed activity complies with the requirements of the adopted building code. 62.1108 STANDARDS FOR SAND AND GRAVEL EXCAVATION 1) Operation/Performance Standards: The following minimum operation/performance standards shall apply to Sand & Gravel Excavation activities unless otherwise specified: PAGE 9 APRIL 7. 2000 a) Any topsoil removed from the surface and retained on the site shall be removed carefully and stockpiled in a manner to prevent erosion, for re -application to disturbed areas during reclamation. b) Hours of operation shall be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. - 10 p.m, for operational activities including blasting, excavation, dredging, processing and hauling. Hours and days of operation may be restricted by the Council for operations within 1,000 feet of any residential areas or operations that rely on residential roadways for access. c) To the extent possible, designated truck routes shall be used for all hauling as well as for all access to the site. All other routes and access shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to conditional use permit approval. The Plan shall address the compatibility of the proposed use with the County Water Quality Plan and the City Stormwater Management Plan or adopted City drainage or stormwater policies applicable to the area. d) Stormwater runoff, erosion and sedimentation shall be controlled by a plan submitted to the City by the Applicant and approved by the City Engineer, pursuant to Section 64.300 et seq. The Plan shall address the compatibility of the proposed use with the County Water Quality Plan and the City Stormwater Management Plan or adopted City drainage or Stormwater policies applicable to the area. e) The Applicant shall provide signs on the property and along haul routes where deemed necessary to promote the safety and general welfare of the neighborhood and general area. Required signs may include, but shall not be limited to, "No Trespassing," "Danger - No Swimming," and "Trucks Hauling." Other signs may be required if necessary. f) Activities shall be phased to identify the sequence of operation. A new phase shall not begin until at least 50% of an active/current phase is reclaimed as per the reclamation plan, and the City has verified the completion of the reclamation of the phase to the extent that it can be reclaimed. g) Operations shall maintain compliance with local and state standards for noise, dust and vibration. All equipment and machinery shall be operated and maintained in such a manner as to minimize dust, noise, and vibration. Access roads shall be maintained in a dust -free condition by surfacing or other treatment on a regular basis as may be specified by the City Engineer. A water truck for the purpose of dust control may be required on -site. h) Adequate dust control methods shall be implemented. Roadways adjacent to the property shall be swept and cleaned on a regular basis and, in addition, when directed by the City Engineer as being necessary. i) A performance bond or other financial security in an amount satisfactory to the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney shall be secured from the Applicant to ensure that all applicable standards are fully met during operation and to ensure that proper reclamation of the site is completed in a timely manner. j) A 6' continuous security fence shall be provided around the entire perimeter of the property on which the sand or gravel excavation activity will take place. Additional fencing requirements may be imposed on portions of the site abutting residentially zoned or planned areas, parks, playgrounds, sidewalks, trails, schools, churches and other public facilities and gathering places. k) Required minimum distance of specific on -site activities from adjacent property zoned residential, commercial and industrial, when the proposed activity will exceed 24 months: PAGE 10 APRIL 7. 2000 Required minimum distance from Residential Commercial Industrial adjacent property zoned: excavation area with an elevation 500' 100, 50, change of greater than 10 feet to vegetated stockpiles 500, 100, 50, to any non -vegetated stockpiles or 750' 200' 50, loading points to any processing — from a developed 1000, 500, 100, property Provided, however, that if a 5' vegetated berm is constructed to screen the activity, which meets all applicable City standards and is approved by the City Engineer, the required minimum distance of specific on -site activities from adjacent property zoned residential, commercial and industrial, when the proposed activity will exceed 24 months shall be as follows: PAGE 11 APRIL 7, 2000 Required minimum distance from adjacent property zoned: Residential Commercial Industrial excavation area with an elevation change of greater than 10 feet 250' 50, 50' to vegetated stockpiles 250' 50, 50' to any non -vegetated stockpiles or loading points 300' 100, 50, to any processing - from a developed property 1000' 200' 100, If a sound barrier is constructed that is capable of reducing sound levels at the nearest residential lot line to a level meeting the performance standards of Section 63.650, the required distance from residential zones for crushing, processing, and blasting may be reduced to 500 feet. Required minimum distance of specific on -site activities from adjacent property zoned residential, commercial and industrial, when the proposed activity will not exceed 24 months: Required minimum distance from adjacent Residential Commercial Industrial property zoned: excavation area with an elevation change 200' 50, 50' of greater than 10 feet to vegetated stockpiles 200' 50, 50' to any non -vegetated stockpiles or loading 400' 100, 50, points to any processing — from a developed 750' 250' 100' property Provided, however, that if a 6' vegetated berm is constructed to screen the activity, which meets all applicable City standards and is approved by the City Engineer, the required minimum distance of specific on -site activities from adjacent property zoned residential, commercial and industrial, when the proposed activity will not exceed 24 months shall be as follows: Required minimum distance from adjacent Residential Commercial Industrial property zoned: excavation area with an elevation change 100' 50, 50' of greater than 10 feet to vegetated stockpiles 100, 50' 50' to any non -vegetated stockpiles or loading 200' 100, 50' points to any processing — from a developed 750' 100' 100' property If a sound barrier is constructed that is capable of reducing sound levels at the nearest residential lot line to a level meeting the performance standards y5a- of Section 63.650, the required distance from residential zones for crushing, processing, and blasting may be reduced to 300 feet. m) Where a stockpile is visible from an arterial roadway or residential district, the height of a stockpile may be limited by the Council. In any case, the height of a stockpile may not exceed 50 feet for permanent stockpiles and 75 feet for temporary stockpiles in a non-residential district. n) Any lighting or signage, other than security signage, on the property shall meet the standards for the zoning district in which the activity is located. o) No excavation operation shall be conducted in such a manner as to permanently lower the water table of surrounding properties, except in quaternary deposits, nor shall such excavation activity cause the drainage of a Wetland without the applicant first obtaining an approved Wetland replacement plan. p) A weight scale may be required to be located at the site and, if necessary, other restrictions may be imposed if roadways adjacent to the site and operations are not suitable for heavy truck traffic. A record of all truck load weights exiting the site must be maintained for no less than two (2) years as evidence of weight limit compliance and such records shall be available for inspection by the City Engineer or the agents of other applicable road authorities. q) Where applicable, no excavation shall occur within 100 feet of a protected water body unless otherwise permitted by the MnDNR. Where excavation occurs on more than one side of a protected water body, a setback or 50' may be maintained on one side when a setback of 200' or more is maintained on the other, if approved by the MnDNR and the City Engineer. r) A traffic analysis may be required by the City Engineer to determine the impacts of the proposed activity on the traffic flows and service levels of area roadways and intersections in the vicinity of the site. 2) Reclamation Standards: The following minimum reclamation standards shall apply to sand or gravel excavation activities unless otherwise specified. However, the reclamation standards must be consistent with all the Grading Plan Checklist specified by the Public Works Department. a) Toosoil. Topsoil capable of sustaining vegetative growth shall be provided and evenly spread on all disturbed areas. b) Timing. Disturbed areas shall be stabilized and seeded at the earliest possible time or, as specified, and any permits issued for the proposed use shall establish a schedule for stabilization and temporary and permanent seeding for the site. Progressive reclamation practices shall be utilized to continue to reclaim and stabilize disturbed areas prior to moving to a new phase. Seeding and planting shall occur during the appropriate seasons and times of year in accordance with published guidelines for this climate and region (MnDOT, DNR, SWCD guidelines). c) Drainage. Any alteration of the natural drainage system or public waters or jurisdictional Wetlands shall not adversely affect any other adjacent properties or public facilities. d) Slope. i YS3 1) No site shall exceed 3 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical incline over a distance of 30 feet. This angle of repose shall be modified to a flatter angle, but not steeper angle, if it is shown that the site will be unstable at 3:1 ratio or that vegetation cannot be established on the 3:1 slope. This provision may be waived or modified by the Council upon the recommendation of the City Engineer. 2) For all locations where water bodies are created, the slope of the bottom of the lake from water's edge shall not exceed 4:1 for a distance of 20' from waters edge and shall not exceed a depth of 10 ft, beyond that point for a distance of 20 ft. The slope above the water's edge shall not exceed 3:1 for a distance of 20 feet from the water's edge. e) Water Bodies - Shapiro and Enhancement. 2) Where water bodies are created in commercial and residential zones, only freeform and natural form water bodies will be allowed. All water bodies shall include variation in shoreline and depth and shall include curvilinear shorelines. 3) Where practical, the minimum size of water bodies fed by groundwater and not connected to streams shall be five (5) acres, with a minimum average depth of 24-30 feet. Shallow water bodies may be considered where the Applicant can provide evidence that such water body will not result in poor water quality and that it will not result in a nuisance to the area. f) Erosion Control. 1) Use of silt fences, bale checks, sediment basins, and other similar structures and methods which require ongoing maintenance will generally not be acceptable for long-term reclamation. The intent of final reclamation is to leave the site in a maintenance free and stable condition. 2) Seeding shall be done in accordance with NRCS technical standards. 3) All exposed area shall be seeded and stabilized with an appropriate seeding mixture so as to prevent erosion. Sodding or other erosion control methods or materials approved by the City Engineer may be required for highly erodible areas or in areas where seed growth cannot be established in a reasonable time period. 4) All equipment, stockpiles, debris, signs, silt fence and other erosion control structures shall be removed from the site after completion of the activity. 5) Adjacent roadways shall be swept and cleared of loose or foreign materials resulting from the reclamation operation. 6) Erosion control measures shall be kept in place until permanent vegetation has been established on site and erosion is controlled. h) Revegetation. In addition to required seeding, the reclaimed site shall be landscaped. The applicant shall have the flexibility to arrange plant material to best suit the ultimate proposed use and design of the property, provided that: q5q 3) At least 8 deciduous and 8 evergreen trees from the City's approved plant list, and consistent with the requirements of Section 63.150, are planted for each disturbed acre; and 4) At least 25 percent of required trees are planted within 30 feet of the perimeter of the site. h) Final reclamation of each phase of the operation shall be completed within six (6) months of completion of each phase of the operation. Extensions may be granted by the Zoning Administrator should the activity cease after September of any given year. No building permits shall be issued on the property prior to completion of reclamation of the site. i) Post -Reclamation Land Use 1) If the owner proposes to construct structures on the site as part of the post - reclamation land use activities, all of such uses shall be specified. 2) The owner shall submit all necessary documentation for such proposed uses including, but not limited to, a Site Plan, an application for rezoning, an application for a building permit, or other required documentation necessary for approval of the proposed use on the reclaimed site. 3) Where a development is proposed as part of a post -reclamation plan, all applicable City permits and approvals will be required including, but not limited to, Site Capacity Calculation (§ 61.530), Driveway Permit (§§ 61.140 and 61.141) and others. �I I am- �1 3.�m N I NrN+lNl lai-l.... iz I; I x a F ry 1 Z gg=p+i F y Z O �i�i3�m MNI !� U bl Z r fail] H a 1�. itl v ?, d S 3 3 6 r" s s p a s y eal c La 7 W CC Z-�-O—a •WOs �m ~ a CL 'm LLJ CL a Z � W Z VVOJ7 = � WI N Z W mom K LLJ Z ~ U •WOs �m ~ a CL 'm LLJ CL a Z � W Z VVOJ7 = � WI N Z W mom K LLJ Z ~ U D MI � Ofform IIIIIIIIIIIIIII oeeeeee!ee:coeeee MIN 07- Rum Fr r� � � �� a �� � � II'llll i j! �Qp. b� III �'� t l ���' �P �1•;cynbrr�{�rj;�;� pit '! 1 r III ,rll 171: I a ;' 143 t111� MI �rl is►i psi ^l1111121' H: �t J 0 - - McGhie Betts, Inc. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors Planners 1648 Third Avenue S.E., Rochester, MN 55904 507-289-3919 Fax 507-289-7333 1604 Riverview Lane, Northfield, MN 55057 507-645-0964 Fax 507-645-2842 March 28, 2000 Ms. Mitzi Baker MAR Senior Planner Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive S.E. Rochester, Minnesota 55904 Re: Type 111, Phase H Conditional Use Permit to Excavate Sand and Gravel and Type III Conditional Use Permit to place fill and construct a multi -family residential building in the Flood Prone District. Dear Ms. Baker: In accordance with our meeting on March 22, 2000, with the applicants, this letter is intended to assist in clarifying and addressing issues raised in your staff report of March 17, 2000, related to the above referenced applications. The previously mentioned staff report requests additional information on several items related to; (1) the sand and gravel excavation (Section 62.1108 of the Code); (2) reclamation standards (Section 62.1108 of the Code); and (3) general items. Most of these items have been addressed through modifications of the plans which are being resubmitted at this time. However, certain items require some additional explanation and clarification. The following are responses to the requested additional information: Section 62.1108,1. item e: "No -Trespassing" and "Danger -No Swimming" signs are noted on the plans. The contractor will be responsible to install and maintain the signage. The contractor will contact Mr. Dave Rossman of City Traffic and Mr. Mike Sheehan of Olmsted County Public Works to determine if "Trucks Hauling" signs or other safety signage will be required in the public right of ways of 23rd Avenue SW and 2nd Street SW. This will be done prior to commencement of hauling. Section 62.1108. 1, item is Mathy Construction (Milestone Materials) will provide an addendum to the existing bond for the work on the adjoining mining operation. This would be completed after approval of the conditional use permit and prior to commencement of the mining. This will have to be a condition of approval of the permits. K. M. McGhie, PE, LS, 1904-1975 William E. Tointon, CET, President James E. Swanson, LS. Vice President David L. Morrill, PE. Vice President Douglas N. Betts. PE, LS, Vice President Andrew J. Masterpole, ASLA Larry J. Shannon, LS Michael E. Gowin, PE, LS Mark E. Severtson, LS Daniel J. Zemke, PE Gregory R. Bond, PE Page 2 Section 62.1108, 1. item is A 6 foot high chain link security fence has been shown on the plans along the south and easterly sides of the excavation as discussed at the March 22, 2000, meeting. It was agreed that fencing along the north and west was not applicable because on -going mining operations exist on the adjoining properties. Section 62.1108.1. item k: The two stockpiles shown on the plans in the original submittal are necessary to store materials excavated from the footing/foundation areas of the apartment complex as well as temporary storage of the granular materials that will be placed under the footing and foundation systems of the structures. The stockpiles will not be used beyond 24 months. The plans also note an additional horizontal separation from the south property line of Quarryridge (100 feet) for the southerly stockpile and a note indicating that these areas will be used as staging areas for the construction of the apartments. Section 62.1108.2. item e: The shape of the shoreline being created by the mining has been modified along the south and east pond limits to create an undulated shoreline. The north and west shoreline will not be modified "- • because it eventually will be connected to the lake being mined -to the north. It is anticipated that the trunkmain sanitary sewer will be relocated in the future to allow for this connection. Section 62 1108.2. item e: The plans have been changed to add additional plantings per the code and Mr. Stotz's comments at the March 22, 2000, meeting. Plantings are designed for the area along the shoreline that will contain the native vegetation based on Mr. Stotz's comments that "this area will never be burned off, it will be mowed". Mr. Stotz indicated that it was acceptable to plant on both side slopes of the drainage channel immediately north of 2nd Street N.W. Only the south, west, and east shorelines will be planted and the north shoreline will be eventually connected to the other fake to the north. Additional items: (1) According to Mr. Steve Beach of Mathy Construction, they anticipate that truck traffic will average 4 trips per hour for a 10 hour duration each day they are hauling. (2) The plans have been modified to indicate the side slopes of the end cross -sections of the pond. (3) The land owner is currently working on resolving the issue of beneficial reuse of the buried materials on the Quarryridge site. A condition will be placed on the approval of the conditional use permit that will require this issue to be satisfactorily resolved before the permit can be issued. (4) An exhibit in the report submitted with the plans depicts the location of the two water bodies lying to the north of the proposed mining operation. i Page 3 The revised plans along with this letter provide the additional information requested in the staff report dated March 17, 2000, and from the meeting between the applicants and the Planning Staff of March 22, 2000. Yours very truly, McGHM & BETTS, INC. i*f96.: f o7,-r, William E. Tointon WET/bad enclosure PC: Mr. Tim Trimble Mr. Don Staley Mr. Steve Beach Mr. Bill Fitzgerald Mr. David Morrill LkD ROCHESTER PARK ANC .tLtiREATION DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: March 2, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning FROM: Denny Stolz SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit #00-03 Mathy Construction To date the submitted grading plan for the Quarry Ridge Apartment complex which is referenced in this mining permit application has not been approved. The submitted Quarry Ridge grading plan does not indicate the removal of buried construction rubble from the park site prior to the site being deeded to the City. The applicant had previously stated to City staff that the rubble would be removed prior to deeding the property to the City. Park Department recommendation is that until the grading plan is changed to reflect this condition or the Council agrees to accept the site with the rubble, it should be assumed that the property identified as parkland on sheet 6 will remain private. N:\PARK\DSTOT2\2000\DEDICATION\NN 2R98\QUARRY RIDGE MINING.DOC r. park 8 recreation DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: ROCHESTER PARK AND P'"CREATION DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM April 11, 2000 Stevan Kvenvold Denny Stotz �r Quarry Ridge GDP / Parkland Dedication On November 1, 1999 the Council approved the Quarry Ridge GDP. The 5.2 acres in the SW corner of the development were to either be restricted via deed restriction as a no build open space area or donated to the City for development as a neighborhood park. On November 17, 1999 park staff met with the developer and began discussions regarding the 5.2 acre parcel. Staff requested and received the geotechnical report for the area. The boring logs indicate over 11' of rubble fill consisting of silty sand, clay, limestone pieces, limestone slabs, steel fencing, concrete slab and asphalt on the 5.2 acre parcel. The developer initially indicated that the fill would be removed from the site, the site graded and covered with topsoil and seeded prior to deeding the property to the City. it was ar -d that the developer would receive 2.5 acres of parkland dedication credit with the balance of the dedicat a be in the form of cash in lieu of land. The property was to be deeded following completion of the development construction as the 5.2 acres was to be used as a construction staging area in the interim. The recently submitted grading plans for the area do not indicate that the rubble is to be removed from the 5.2 acre site. The park area is proposed to be graded, covered with 4" of topsoil and seeded. The developer has recently indicated that he cannot afford to remove the rubble and that if removal of the rubble is to be a requirement of dedicating the land to the City, he would be better off keeping the land, restricting the use of the land via deed restriction and meeting the parkland dedication requirement by paying cash. We are not sure that the Council was aware that the 5.2 acre open space area is a demolition fill site. Neither Roy nor myself are comfortable accepting this parcel until we are sure that the Council was aware of the rubble and potential problems that could occur. The minutes of the Council meeting do not indicate that the issue was ever discussed. Public Works is working on a development agreement for the project. The development's parkland dedication requirements are generally included in this agreement. Unless you feel that the Council was aware of the condition of the site and we should just accept the property, the issue should probably be brought to their attention prior to their consideration of the development agreement. While not directly related to the Quarry Ridge parkland issue there is conditional use permit public hearing for the mining of the pond directly north of Quarry Ridge scheduled to be before the Council —probably on the May 1" Council agenda. Cc: Roy Sutherland, Parks Mike Nigbur, Public works Mitzi Baker, Planning xocxESTEx Minnesota 3/10/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur N3 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 2010 Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for CUP #00-03 on the Mathy Construction property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: Long term maintenance and ownership of the pond that will be created as a result of the mining activity must be addressed. 2. Documentation should be required to indicate authorization to utilize the proposed haul roads through the adjoining property by their respective owners Typical and cross -sections should better define the horizontal & vertical slope restoration. 4. The Public Works Department has significant reservations relating to the disposal of construction debris into the bottom of the stormwater pond. The remaining soil borings of the project areas should be provided for review by Public Works. C:ITEMPICUP#00-03.doc w�v Minnesota Pollution Control Agency March 9, 2000 Mr. Donald R. Staley DeveloEer's Realty Service, Inc. 937 37 Avenue Northwest Rochester, Minnesota 55901 Re: Quarry Ridge Apartments — 2"a Street Northwest • Buried Solid Waste Debris Dear Mr. Staley: On February 24, 2000, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) received your request to utilize buried debris as bank stabilization on the ponds being created by a mining operation adjacent to the proposed Quarry Ridge Apartments on 2nd Street Northwest. We also met, along with Mark Hugeback, MPCA, on March 2, 2000, to discuss the proposed project verbally. The solid waste debris was determined through preliminary onsite investigation of the proposed property. The buried material that was encountered in soil borings include concrete, bituminous, steel, and brick. Also known to be buried onsite are two concrete bridge beams. Upon review of the written proposal, MPCA staff determined that the proposed reuse for the buried debris does not constitute reuse, but would be considered disposal. The MPCA does allow clean concrete for beneficial reuse, but does not consider reburying solid waste material that is already located in an unpermitted disposal area as a beneficial reuse project. If MPCA were to authorize you to bury any excavated material, you would need to obtain either a permit or a permit -by -rule as required by Minn. R. 7001.3050. However, according to Minn. R. 7035.2555 and 7035.2825, you will not meet the locational restrictions as outlined below: A. on a site with karst features including sinkholes, disappearing streams, and caves; B. within wetland areas; C. within a floodplain area; D. within a shoreland area (i.e. 300 feet of a stream or river, or 1,000 feet of a lake or pond); E. with a water table within five feet of the lowest fill elevation; and F. within 50 feet of the property line. r 18 Wood Lake Drive SE, Rochester, MN. 55904; Voice (507) 285-7343; Fax (507) 280-5513; TTY (651) 232.5332 St. Paul • Duluth • Brainerd Detroit Lakes • Marshall • Rochester • Mankato •Willmar; Webb Site www.pcastate.mn.us Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20% fibers from paper recycled by consumers Y65' Mr. Donald R. Staley Page 2 March 9, 2000 Therefore, MPCA will not authorize you to rebury solid waste debris excavated at the 2nd Street Northwest location. Additionally, you indicated on March 2, 2000, that you do not yet own this property, and that you had intended on leaving the solid waste debris in areas where excavation is not necessary for the proposed construction project However, because the site was not previously permitted, MPCA is considering enforcement action for the improper disposal of solid waste against the responsible parties. Therefore, until we have obtained additional information regarding the past disposal activities, MPCA staff recommends that you do not start construction activities, since enforcement could involve the removal of all buried material on site. If you have any questions, please contact me at (507) 280-2997. Sincerely, Sherri M. Nachtigal, P.E. Senior Engineer Regular Facilities Unit South District/Rochester "i 1 cc: Matt Hinderman, Rochester Sand and Gravel Mike Nigbur, City of Rochester Dave Kramer, City of Rochester Denny Stotz, City of Rochester John Harford, Olmsted County Mark Hugeback, MPCA, Rochester MITZI ER BAKER PLANNER LAN PLANNER FULL PACKET MINUTES OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER PLANNING COMMISSION 2122 CAMPUS DRIVE SE ROCHESTER MN 55904 MI utes of the regularly scheduled meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission held on Nednesday, April 12, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council/Board Chambers of the Government Cent 151 4th Street SE, Rochester, MN. MembeIN Present: Mr. Jim Suk, Chair; Ms. Mary Petersson, Vice Chair; Mr. Michael Quinn; Mr. Jame urke; Mr. Ardell Brede; Mr. Randy Staver; Mr. Gerry Werven; Ms. Diane McGowan Ms. Christine Schultze Staff Present: Mk. Suzanne La Palm; Mr. Brent Svenby; Ms. Theresa Fogarty Mr. Mike Nigbur Ms. Petersson made motion to approve the minutes of March 22, 2000. Mr. Burke seconded t motion. The minutes from March 22, 2000 were approved unanimously. Ms. Petersson moved to table 'nal Site Plan #00-01, by Wal-Mart to the April 26, 2000 meeting, at the applica 's request; and to table Preliminary Plat #00- 12, to be known as Northern Trail to the April 26, 2000 meeting due to an error in the notification process. Ms. cGowan seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Ms. Petersson made a motion to appr a the agenda with the above changes. Ms. McGowan seconded the otion, The motion carried unanimously. CONTINUED ITEM: i� Type III, Phase It Conditional Use Permit #00-03 by Mathv Construction to allow for sand / and nraval oytrnrtinn in n racirlantlal 7nninn Aictrirt nnri clan to nlinw fnr fill within the Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated April 7, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Svenby stated that staff recommends approval with the four conditions listed on page A-6. He referred to the diagrams showing the site after it is developed and explained the location of the pond that will be created by excavation activities. i Page 2 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 Ms. McGowan asked if condition number 4 addresses Mr. Stolz' concerns listed on page A-18. Mr. Svenby answered yes. Representing the applicants, Bill Tointon of McGhie & Betts, Inc., addressed the Commission. He stated that applicants Steve Beach and Don Staley are also in attendance. Mr. Tointon presented a drawing of the plan and explained the property location. He explained they are combining an application for a conditional use permit to excavate sand and gravel materials and to fill the building pads for the proposed buildings on the Quarry Ridge Apartment site. He explained the route of the stormwater and pointed out there will an additional 7.4 acre feet in increased flood storage. Mr. Tointon reviewed the haul roads and pointed them out on the plan, explaining the access, which will not travel through the existing neighborhood to the south. He reviewed the post -development reclamation plan which will include landscaping, security fencing, signage, along with seeding and mulching. He noted they are in agreement with the conditions, and pointed out they have received the Wetland Exemption on the site and they will be designing the site in accordance with Mn/DOT's plan for Highway 52. Mr. Tointon made himself available for questions. Ms. Petersson asked about the buried solid waste on the site. Mr. Tointon explained there was some confusion with the MPCA, but it has been worked out. Rochester Sand and Gravel had a permit to bury concrete over a period of time on this portion of the site, and the permit was finally located in the MPCA office. He stated they are currently working with the MPCA regarding the excess materials that will be excavated and that issue is included in one of the conditions. Mr. Brede asked the depth of the pond and whether it will connect to the west. Mr. Tointon explained they are not intending to connect to the water to the west, but will connect to the north. He noted the depth is about 30-35 feet. Ms. McGowan moved to approve Conditional Use Permit #00-03 by Mathy Construction, with the four staff suggested conditions and finding could made in support of the application. Ms. Petersson seconded the motion. The motion carried 7-1, with Mr. Werven voting nay. Conditions: 1. Prior to excavation, the applicant shall provide the City with financial security consistent with Section 62.1108, 1, 1, of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. 2. Failure of the applicant to connect the excavation pond in this application with the pond(s) located north of the existing sanitary sewer line, in the future, once the sewer line is abandoned by the City, shall result in the applicant reclaiming the north line of the pond in this application with an undulating shoreline and peninsula. 3. Approval of this permit shall expire five years after the date of final approval by the Rochester Common Council (Mayes 2005), unless permit approval is extended as provided in Section 62.1110, 7 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. �47 r L'b Page 3 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 a+ 4. No excavation, movement, or disposal of buried debris, on site, shall occur prior to obtaining approvals and permits required by the MN Pollution Control Agency for the activity, or any other agency that may require permits for such activity. If the applicant proceeds with excavation, movement or disposal of buried debris, proof of approvals and permits from other agencies must be filed with the Rochester -Olmsted Mr. Svenby presented the staff report, dated April 4, 2000, to the Co ion. The staff report is on file w h the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. / Mr. Svenby s ted that staff recommends approval and suggests ' be put into the "H" (Holding) zone because is likely to be rezoned in the future. Ms. Petersson m ed to approve Annexation Petition 0-04 by Seneca Food Corporation and th be placed in the "H" zone. Staver seconded the motion, which carried 8-0.tit . Mr. Svenby presented the staff rep is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Mr. Svenby stated that staff Mr. Suk asked if the GDP Mr. Svenby responded revised has been. April 4, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report Department. this piece of property. Mr. Burke made a m on to approve Annexation etition #00-06 by Olmsted County and Badcier Developmeot. Mr. Brede seconded the m 'on, which carried 8-0. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING M ' DATE: 05-01-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. TBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING S_. 5 ITEM DESCRIPTION: City Initiated Text Amendment #DO-01 to amend Section 60.327 of the PREPARED BY: Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual, relating to reviewing Theresa Fogarty development proposals and amending approved site / development plans within a SO Special Planner District. April 25, 2000 City Planning and Zonino Commission Recommendation: The Council first discussed establishing specific criteria for reviewing applications within a SD Special District at their January 10, 2000 Committee of the Whole meeting. At the February 7, 2000 City Council meeting, Ms. Marcoux moved, Senjem seconded, to initiate the process to amend Ordinance 2247 to establish criteria for evaluating projects in the Arboretum Special District. The motion carried 6-0. At the April 12, 2000, City Planning and Zoning Commission meeting: Ms. Petersson moved to approve Text Amendment #00-01, based on staff -suggested findings. Ms. McGowan seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0. Findings: 1. There would appear to be a public need for this amendment developing a procedure to amend an approved site I development plan be reviewed under Section 61.148 and Section 62.708, 1) and 62.708 2) if a two phase review is required. 2. The proposed amendment may serve to accomplish purposes of this ordinance in that it requires amendment requests to an approved site / development plan be reviewed under Section 61.148 and Section 62.708, 1) and 62.708, 2) if a two phase review is required. 3. The proposed amendment would be lawful. a c o o D Council Action Needed: If the Council wishes to proceed with this amendment, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare an Ordinance which can be adopted to amend Section 60.327 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. Attachments: 1, Staff Report dated March 28, 2000. 2. Minutes from the City Planning & Zoning Commission meeting of April 12. 2000. 3. Copy of the proposed amended ordinance. Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 3. City Attorney 4, Planning Department File COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: i Proposed Amendment Ordinance May 1, 2000 60.327 SD Special Districts: Existing Special Districts approved under Ordinance #2726, #2516 and #2247 of the previous zoning ordinance are recognized as separate zoning districts and the plans and procedures established for each Special District will continue in force. When a Special District Ordinance does not specify the procedure or criteria to amend an approved site / development plan, the proposed amendment will be reviewed under Section 61.148. When a Special District requires a specific site / development plan review process, but does not specify the criteria by which to review the site / development plan, the development will be reviewed under Section 61.148. When a Special District Ordinance requires a two phase review, the development will be reviewed under Section 61.146 and Section 62.708, 1) for preliminary plans or Section 62.708, 2) for final plans. i TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner DATE: March 28, 2000 ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-B232 MAPPING HOU31NG/1-119A 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 507/285.8213 WELUSEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: City Council Initiated Text Amendment 00-01 to amend Section 60.327 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual, relating to reviewing development proposals and amending approved site/development plans within a SD Special District. Background: The Council first discussed establishing specific criteria for reviewing applications within a SD Special District at the January 10, 2000 Committee of Whole meeting. On January 19, 2000, the City Council initiated a study of the Arboretum SQand directed staff to prepare a study and recommendations relating to the land use for the commercial area lying north of 415t Street, east of Arboretum Drive NW and south of the single family homes along the southern portion of the Arboretum. At their February 7, 2000 Council meeting, Ms. Marcoux moved, Senjem seconded, to initiate the process to amend Ordinance 2247 to establish criteria for evaluating projects in the Arboretum Special District. The motion carried 6-0. Staff Review: The Planning Department staff, along with the City Attorney's Office has drafted revised language to Section 60.327 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and the Land Development Manual. The proposed revisions relate to amending an approved site/development plan within a SD Special District. A minor amendment request of an approved site/development plan in a SD Special Tb��'7n �+. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER J District will be reviewed using the criteria listed in Section 61.148 Staff Authorized Changes to Approved Conditional Use Permits. When a SD/Special District Ordinance does not specify criteria by which to evaluate a request for Site or Development Plan approval, or an amendment to an approved Site or Development Plan, the Standards for Conditional Uses, Section 61.146 will be applied. When a two phase review is needed, criteria listed in Section 62.708, 1) and Section 62.708, 2) Criteria for Type III Restricted Developments will also be applied. This draft, if approved, will address the amendment request for the Aboretum Special District. Following is the draft of the ordinance amendment with the changes indicated in bold and italics: 60.327 SD Special Districts: Existing Special Districts approved under Ordinance #2726, #2516 and #2247 of the previous zoning ordinance are recognized as separate zoning districts and the plans and procedures established for each Special District will continue in force. When a Special District Ordinance does not specify the procedure or criteria to amend an approved siteldevelopment plan, the proposed amendment will be reviewed under Section 61.148. When a Special District requires a specific site/development plan review process, but does not specify the criteria by which to review the siteldevelopment plan, the development will be reviewed under Section 61.148. When a Special District Ordinance requires a two phase review, the development will be reviewed under Section 61.146 and Section 62.708, 1) for preliminary plans or Section 62.708, 2) for final plans. Staff Clarification: if an approved Special District Ordinance includes a procedure for an amendment to the siteldevelopment plan, the proposed text amendment would not apply. If an approved Special District Ordinance does not include an amendment procedure or criteria for evaluating an amendment or a new siteldevelopment plan, such as the Arboretum, the proposed text amendment would apply. The criteria listed in Section 61.148 Staff Authorized Changes to Approved Conditional Use Permits allows staff to approve limited and minor amendments to approved conditional uses. All other changes are subject to the same procedure by which the original approval was obtained. In the case of the Arboretum SD, this would require an application to go before the Planning Commission and City Council. 03 Criteria and recommended findings: In reviewing a proposed text amendment the Commission and Council must consider the provisions of Paragraph 60.338(2) as follows: Section 60.388(2) of the zoning ordinance states that in the case of an amendment to the text of the ordinance the CPZC and City Council must determine: A. whether there is a public need for the amendment; B. whether the amendment will accomplish one or more of the purposes of this ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan or other adopted plans or policies of the City of Rochester. C. whether adoption of the amendment will be lawful. The staff suggests the following findings: There would appear to be a public need for this amendment developing a procedure to amend an approved site/development plan be reviewed under Section 61.148 and Section 62.708, 1) and 62708, 2) if a two phase review is required. The proposed amendment may serve to accomplish purposes of this ordinance in that it requires amendment requests to an approved site/development plan be reviewed under Section 61/148 and Section 62.708, 1) and 62.708, 2) if a two phase review is required. The proposed amendment would be lawful. The Planning staff recommend this amendment be approved as written. 414 0 consideration, or with specific ordinance standards dealing with matters such as signs which are part of the proposed development, and a variance to allow such deviation has not been secured by the applicant. 61.147 Conditions on Approval: In considering an application for a development pen -nit to allow a Conditional Use, the designated hearing body shall consider and may impose modifications or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance with the criteria of Paragraph 61.146. ----� 61,148 Staff Authorized Changes to Approved Conditional Use Permits: It is the intent to permit the zoning administrator to authorize minor, routine changes to approved conditional use permits 9 necessitated by engineering factors, changing economic conditions, or other circumstances unforeseen at the time the plan was approved. Such changes may Include modification in building locations, building height, the amount of floor area, exterior facades, landscaping materials and placement, the design of public landscaping materials and placement, the design of public facilities, lot coverage, and the addition, deletion or change of accessory structures or uses, including mailboxes, storage areas and signs. In making a determination to approve a change, the zoning administrator shall find that the proposed change will not adversely impact any adjacent property, will not result in the project exceeding any ordinance standards, and will not result in: 1) A change in use of the property, or, In the case of residential development, an increase in the number of approved dwelling units; 2) An increase in the floor area ratio which will result In more than ten (10%) percent Increase In building coverage on the lot; 3) Creation of potential problems associated with traffic circulation on -site and at access points; 4) Potential problems In the provision of public facilities and utilities; 5) A reduction in off-street parking and loading spaces, unless accompanied by concurrent reduction in dwelling units or (in the case of non-residential development) floor area; 6) A change in building locations which would result in distance separations between structures In the development and on adjacent lots to fall below the normal separation that would be required under conventional zoning. All changes other than those listed above shall be subject to approval by the same type procedure by which the original approval was obtained. 61.151 Purpose: PAGE 85 DECEMBER 27, 1999 1b5 final dqvelopment plan, or a modification for unmet criteria s n granted as provided Paragraph 62.712. 62.707 Standards for Approva , De ment Plan: The Council shall grant final approval to a Type III ct velopment if it finds that, in addition to satisfying the Prelimi evelopment Pla ards for Approval listed in the precedin graph, the development has satin ie Nth as splicable criteria i' in Paragraph 62.788{2) or a modification for any unm6teRtetaa� h een granted as provided for in Paragraph 62.712. '"— 62.708 Criteria for Type III Developments: In determining whether to approve, deny, or approve with conditions an application, the Commission and Council shall be guided by the following criteria. 1) Preliminary Development Plan Criteria: a) Capacity of Public Facilities: The existing or future planned utilities in the area are adequate to serve the proposed development. b) Geologic Hazards: The existence of areas of natural or geologic hazard, such as unstable slopes, sinkholes, floodplain, etc., have been identified and the development of these areas has been taken into account or will be addressed in the Phase II plans. c) Natural Features: For developments involving new construction, the arrangement of buildings, paved areas and open space has, to the extent practical, utilized the existing topography and existing desirable vegetation of the site. d) Residential Traffic Impact. When located in a residential area, the proposed development 1) Will not cause traffic volumes to exceed planned capacities on local residential streets; 2) Will not generate frequent truck traffic on local residential streets; 3) Will not create additional traffic during evening and nighttime hours on local residential streets; e) Traffic Generation Impact: Anticipated traffic generated by the development will not cause the capacity of adjacent streets to be exceeded, and conceptual improvements to reduce the impact of access points on the traffic flow of adjacent streets have been identified where needed. f) Height Impacts: For developments involving new construction, the heights and placement of proposed structures are compatible with the surrounding development. Factors to consider include: PAGE 239 DECEMBER 27, 1999 1) Will the structure block sunlight from reaching adjacent properties F1 during a majority of the day for over four (4) months out of the year, 2) Will siting of the structure substantially block vistas from the primary exposures of adjacent residential dwellings created due to differences in elevation. g) Setbacks: For developments involving new construction, proposed setbacks are related to building height and bulk in a manner consistent with that required for permitted uses in the underlying zoning district. h) Internal Site Design: For developments involving new construction, the preliminary site layout indicates adequate building separation and desirable orientation of the buildings to open spaces, street frontages or other focal points. i) Screening and Buffering: The conceptual screening and bufferyards proposed are adequate to protect the privacy of residents in the development or surrounding residential areas from the impact of interior traffic circulation and parking areas, utility areas such as refuse storage, noise or glare exceeding permissible standards, potential safety hazards, unwanted pedestrian/bicycle access, or to subdue differences in architecture and bulk between adjacent land uses. j) Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development includes adequate amounts of off-street parking and loading areas and, in the case of new construction, there is adequate landscaped area to meet ordinance requirements. k) General Compatibility: The relationship of the actual appearance, general density and overall site design of the proposed development should be compared to the established pattern of zoning, the character of the surrounding neighborhood and the existing land forms of the area to determine the general compatibility of the development with its surroundings. 2) Final Development Plan Criteria: a) Public Facility Design: The design of private and public utility facilities meet the requirements and specifications which the applicable utility has adopted. b) Geologic Hazard: Engineering means to deal with areas of geologic hazard have been incorporated Into the development plan or such areas have been set aside from development. c) Access Effect: Ingress and egress points have been designed and located so as to: PAGE 240 DECEMBER 27, 1999 q71 1) Provide adequate separation from existing street intersections and adjacent private driveways so that traffic circulation problems in public right-of-ways are minimized; 2) Not adversely impact adjacent residential properties with factors such as noise from accelerating or idling vehicles or the glare of headlights from vehicles entering or leaving the site. In addition, where the preliminary development plan identified potential problems in the operation of access points, plans for private improvements or evidence of planned public improvements which will alleviate the problems have been provided. d) Pedestrian Circulation: The plan includes elements to assure that pedestrians can move safely both within the site and across the site between properties and activities within the neighborhood area, and, where appropriate, accommodations for transit access are provided. e) Foundation and Site Plantings: A landscape plan for the site has been prepared which indicates the finished site will be consistent with the landscape character of the surrounding area. f) Site Status: Adequate measures have been taken to insure the future maintenance and ownership pattern of the project, including common areas, the completion of any platting activities, and the provision of adequate assurance to guarantee the installation of required public improvements, screening and landscaping. g) Screening and Bufferyards: The final screening and bufferyard design contains earth forms, structures and plant materials which are adequate to satisfy the needs identified in Phase I for the project. h) Final Building Design: The final building design is consistent with the principles Identified in preliminary development plan relative to Height Impact, Setbacks, and Internal Site Design. i) Internal Circulation Areas: Plans for off-street parking and loading areas and circulation aisles to serve these areas meet ordinance requirements in terns of design. j) Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development is consistent with the requirements of the underlying zoning district for similar uses in regards to signage and other appearance controls, and with general standards such as traffic visibility and emergency access. 62.709 Status—BrApprQved Type III Restricted Development wing Council approval of a final d#velcament plan, t a mimstrator may issue a zoning certificate for the�v�i ent consistent with the approved plan. The procedure for nag changes to proved plan shall be the same as for Con ses, which is identified in Pa h 61.148. PAGE 241 DECEMBER 27, 1999 - ' Page 6 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 4. Storm water management must be provided for this development. The preliminary plat indicates a public detention pond being constructed by the developer (Outfot A). This detention facility must be constructed and sized to meet City requirements. Outlot A, containing the pond, shall be dedicated to the City. 5. Pedestrian facilities are required along both sides of all public roadways, including the west side of 50'" Ave. NW. Since 50' Ave, is being planned for reconstruction in the near future, execution of a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement will be required prior to recording the final plat Said agreement will address the developer" obligation for the future construction of pedestrian facilities along 50e Ave. NW. 6. The applicant agrees to meet parkland dedication requirements via deferred land dedication. Land to be dedicated is identified as a 8.5 acre park on the approved Weatherstone GDP. Dedication is to occur when either park area is platted or the Park Department is ready to begin development of the park. 7. Prior to submittal of a final plat application for this property, the applicant shall provide the LGU with additional information related to wetlands, including detail of the wetland area and boundary, and shall obtain any required permits from the LGU that may be necessary for this plat to proceed. S. Prior to final plat submittal, the applicant shall execute a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, stormwater management, park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure for the Weatherstone GDP and this Plat. 9. The development must be phased so that 50" Ave. NW, north of 55'h St. NW, does not exceed approximately 3,000 average daily trips unless the Council has approved a public improvement project to upgrade 50t" Ave. NW. A contribution will be required for the reconstruction of 500 Ave. NW, and 65th St NW. The City is currently considering a Traffic Improvement District in this area for improving 501 Ave. NW, and 65h St. NW, and establishing the developers proportional share of the cost. City Council Initiated Text Amendment 00-01 to amend Section 60.327 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual relating to reviewing development proposals and amending an approved siteidevelopment plans within a SD Special District. (public hearing) Mr. 9venby presented the staff report, dated March 28, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. He stated that staff has suggested findings, and, based on those findings, recommends approval. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Suk closed the public hearing. Ms. Petersson moved to approve City Council Initiated Text Amendment #00-01, based on staff -suggested findings. Ms. McGowan seconded the motion, which carried 8-0. Findings: A Page 7 City Planning and Zoning Cotnrnission Minutes Hearing Date: April 12, 2000 1. There would appear to be a public need for this amendment developing a procedure to amend an approved site/development plan be reviewed under Section 61.148 and Section 62.708, 1) and 62708, 2) if a two phase review is required. 2. The proposed amendment may serve to accomplish purposes of this ordinance in that it requires amendment requests to an approved site/development plan be reviewed under Section 611148 and Section 62.708, 1) and 62.708, 2) if a two phase review is required. 3. The proposed amendment would be lawful. Mr. Svenby prese d the staff report, dated April 4, 2000, t he Commission. The staff report is on file at the Roch ter -Olmsted Planning Department. a stated that staff recommends approval with the four donditions listed in the report. Representing the applicant, ill Tointon of McGhie & etts, Inc., addressed the Commission. He presented a map of the G and explained the ovation. He stated the density is 3.1 units per acre and that it meets alit equirem to the conditions and indicated th are in provided their own stormwater dete ion. contributing to the construction of 7" ea they would have preferred condition nurN be required between the applicant and t Joel Krueger, 4558 Manor Park Public Works statement -that no and straight and he feels a stop Connie Dalzell, 474 45'" Lane been a lot trees destroyed dur' be given to preserving as m y With others wishing to eak, is of a Land Development Manual. He referred_ Iment and pointed out that the applicant has I .0 pointed out that the applicants are W, which will be done this fall. Mr. Tointon stated 2 simply says that a development agreement will ity of Rochester. yNW, ad2kessed the Commission. He is concerned about : signs_areheeded._ He noted the road will be very steep is needed at Ne bottom. .7 g development of this are trees as possible as furthe Mr. Suk closed the public Ion. She stated that there have _. and she asked that consideration eveiopment occurs.. . he ing.-zvc,%.:c cr:::'i:7 " mai Mr. Burke moved to Oprove Preliminary Plat #00-11, to be kno"111rn as Manor Woods West 12'", with staff-suggjisted conditions. Ms. Petersson seconded the motion. r a Ms. Petersson su ested the developer attempt to preserve as many tre%asssible. - Mr. Brede aske for staff comments on traffic signs: Mr. Nigbur explained that stop signs have a specific requirement for when and where they can be placed. He noted this will be looked at, and if traffic warrants, a stop sign would be required, REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING YS DATE: 5/1/00 ' AGENDA SECTION: Reports and Recommendations ORIGINATING DEPT: Police REM NO. f �-- I t. _M DESCRIPTION: Authorized execution of contract addendum with New world Systems for PREPARED BY: Software and Hardware related to Phase Two fo the Public Safety system replacement plan. Chief Peterson On December 12, 1998, the Council approved the implementation of Phase I of the Public Safety system replacement plan, and authorized the execution of a contract with New World Systems for the replacement of several components of the Public Safety automated system. The components replaced include the Public Safety Computer - Aided Dispatch and Mobile Computing systems, the Law Enforcement Records Management system, the jointly -owned Corrections Management system and some parts of the Fire Records and Reporting system. All of these components have been replaced and are currently in operation. Phase Two of the Public Safety system replacement plan allows for the automation and/or enhancement of functions currently performed by the Police and Fire Departments. The components in this phase include hardware, software and equipment for an integrated Mugshot/Photo Imaging system and an integrated Bar Coding system for property, evidence and equipment tracking, Mobile Computing hardware for 12 Fire units and 8 Police units, Field Investigations software to allow Law Enforcement to better document citizen contacts, and additional training and other services from New World Systems. Phase Two total costs are estimated at $311,567. The City's share of this amount is estimated at $203,409. The City's share is greater than 50% because of the cost of the Mobile Computing hardware and software needed for the Fire Department. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed, amended and accepted the contract addendum. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the implementation of Phase Two of the Public Safety system replacement plan. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the Phase Two contract addendum with Ne�w� World Systems. I�1'T IJNCIL ACTION: Motion by Second by,.- to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING Y b 3 / DATE: 5/1/2000 / AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. 30LUTIONS AND ORDINANCES CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE G ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES TERRY ADKINS G. 1. RESOLUTIONS G. 2. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES, as appropriate. G. 3. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES (for adoption). a) An Ordinance Rezoning Certain Property From the H District to the R-2 District, and Amending n jI Ordinance No. 2785, Known as the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual of the City of Rochester, Minnesota. Said Property Located on the East Side of 401' Avenue Southeast — East of Eastwood Hills Second Subdivision. b) An Ordinance Amending and Reenacting Subdivisions 2 and 3 of Section 95.13 of the Rochester Code of Ordinances Relating to Taxicab Rates. G.4. MISCELLANEOUS %,vJNCILACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: q85 ' 5/1/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. TABLED ITEMS Public Works 9 � I T ri EM DESCRIPTION: PROJECT HEARING: 'Improve 50th Ave NW and Extend Sanitary PREPARED BY: iq Sewer & Water Service to undeveloped lands along 50th D. Nelson Ave NIJAPI (1057g) This is a Hearing to consider the following local improvement project: Project No. 63604-99 J-9578 "Improve 50th Ave NW and Extend Sanitary Sewer & Water Service to undeveloped lands along 50th Ave NW" The estimated costs for this project are: Roadway $1,218,500 Sanitary Sewer 4,000 Watermain 7,000 Engineering, Interest & Contingency $365,500 TOTAL: $1,595,000 For the project to move forward, we are recommending contributions from the benefiting property owners. This project is proposed to be funded with Developer Contribution and tax levy funds. The property owners of The Weatherstone, The Ripley, The Seeger, and The Hypoint properties will enter into a contribution agreement covering their proportional share of the project construction costs as defined by the Northwest Transportation Improvement District substandard street reconstruction and capacity charges and dedicate the additional right-of-way necessary to construct the project. Development / Contribution Agreements are being prepared for each owners signature. UNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution ordering the project to be made, upon receipt of Development / Contribution Agreements from the owners of The Weatherstone, The Ripley, The Seeger, and The Hypoint properties. A,� ?�.-r, '�. Attch: Feasibility Report Budget and Assessment Schedule Map .. UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: l0(4p REPORT ON THE FEASIBILITY OF A PROPOSED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMNTS TO 50THAVE NW, FROM 55T" ST NW AND 65T" ST NW March 17, 2000 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota A resolution proposing the following project: Widen and improve 5& Ave NW from 55' St NW to 651" St NW. Additionally, provide for watermain and sanitary sewer crossings to facilitate development on the west side of 50' Ave NW. Petitions have been filed with the City Clerk and approved by the City Council on November 15, 1999 and February 7, 2000. Feasibility Report We report that this project is feasible. However, the construction should take place only with contributions from the developers for their proportional share of the project costs. The location of this project is within an area proposed for residential development. Development of the area has been very fast, outpacing the public infrastructure to this area. This project would allow for the upgrade to 50' Ave NW to adequately handle the anticipated traffic increases as a result of new development. Additionally, sanitary sewer and watermain service connections are needed to serve the properties lying to the west side of 50' Ave NW. This project has NOT been budgeted for in the City's Capital Improvement Program. The costs of this project should be paid from contributions from the abutting developing property owners and from the City's Street Reconstruction Program Fund,1-9470.